This post is a direct-copy of a paper I did during my Master’s thesis, investigating the processes by which personal trainers attempt to influence their clients, and how individuals in the general populace choose personal trainers to train with.
My research question was – What are the processes by which personal trainers (“fitness professionals”) attempt to influence their clients and/or change their behavior? Through a qualitative analysis of my interview data of two trainers in San Francisco (both also owners of personal training studios) – Paul, and Bob (pseudonyms) – and through observation of 20 trainers in studios, I identified three main themes around ways in which trainers attempt to influence and/or change their clients’ behavior. – Authority, Humor, and Partnership. I took those themes, and applied them to an analysis of my observations of those two trainers, and of other trainers within the two personal training studios I visited. What ended up being most fascinating to me were very common backgrounds between the two trainers’/gym owners’ personal paths to training (and my own), and the difficulty they had in directly answering questions about the ways in which they attempt to influence their clients’ behavior.
I will first discuss my own personal background, and ways in which it has influenced my choice of research topic, the ways in which I did my research, and possible shortcomings due to my personal lens(es). I’ll then discuss the backgrounds of the two trainers I interviewed. In the third section I will go over the themes I found in my research, and in the conclusion discuss the hidden aspect of the attempt to influence mentioned above.
Personal Background
I have been a personal trainer for the past nine years. I have worked in corporate gyms, in private studios, in people’s homes, and in schools and other areas. This past experience informed and directed my research. I am a white male in my late-thirties, from a middle-class Christian upbringing. Prior to my becoming a personal trainer (and again, after having become a trainer) I worked in corporate America as a sales rep.
Interviewee’s Backgrounds
Both Paul and Bob had histories of physical activity in high school and college. They are both white males in their mid 40’s with life-partners/spouses. Both Paul and Bob were raised in middle-class white households, and had jobs in corporate fields (Paul did marketing for a magazine, and Bob was a computer programmer) prior to becoming personal trainers, and note the same theme in their choice of profession change – the desire to “find something that reinforced [their] own lifestyle.” Both mentioned concerns over money – both of being able to make enough money to surive as a trainer, and also of being able to be “successful” monetarily (to exceed their needed income levels and make profits). Both trainers see their future paths and future success linked to more education – for Paul, in workshops, and for Bob in anatomy studies.
Utility
Both Paul and Bob use a type of operational utility in their interactions with their clients, that I believe masks their efforts to influence or control their clients’ behavior. I’ll discuss this in detail at the end of this paper, but it is worth remarking on their very different, yet very similar, methodologies here.
Paul revealed a very vague protocol that he uses with his clients:
“So, I’ve got a pretty small protocol, but I think pretty effective one that I run people through, to ah show me if there are any problems, and then from there, ah, then I plug them into…ah, I wouldn’t say plug them into, but then basically ah, run them through, um, ah, ah, kind of a program of movement, dynamic movement, stability, ah, endurance strength power, and not exclusively. I think a lot of people get caught up kind of in okay, this is this phase and I have to stay exclusively in that. My training I guess is kind of, it’s not kind of black and white…”
Paul also stated that if you “put the body in the right environment…it will correct itself.” Thus, in his training, he attempts to use “functional movements” and simply get the clients moving more. His discourse is full of very passive attempts at getting people to perceive physical activity as normal, and inactivity as abnormal and harmful – often through critiques of modern culture – “we sit all the time…that’s why people get out of shape.”
Bob really has the opposite approach from Paul. Bob’s methodology is firmly rooted in the teachings of personal training guru Paul Chek, who has created an in-depth and highly medicalized and measurement-oriented method of assessing and “treating” personal training clients. Bob, therefore, uses an extensive intake form that includes life-history in all aspects – personal/emotional, economic, physical.
Both trainers are attempting to attract and gain new clientele, to influence and change those individuals, and to maintain ongoing business relationships with them, via their outwardly opposing methods. These methods have more in common than the surface might suggest, however.
Theme 1 – Authority
The most predominant theme in my research was the creation of authority in the persona of the personal trainer. This is done through the use of forms and structured interactions that put the client in a position of subordination to the trainer, and through the ways trainers speak with their clients. Authority is a concomitant aspect of professionalization – the process of the standardization of a field – which the personal training industry has been undertaking for the past twenty years or so (Maguire 2008). Maguire (2008) identifies authority as and authority as different from the authority used in traditional professions – “rather than the binding authority of the state or the rational authority of traditional professions such as medicine and law, cultural intermediaries employ appearances, attitudes and images to legitimate their advice and exercise influence over others” (Maguire 2008, pg. 214). Maguire further expands her argument to state that professionalization processes must reflect governmental processes within which that professionalization occurs, “in which the social order rests increasingly on individuals’ self-management” (Maguire 2008, pg. 220).
Paul owns a smaller studio in the Richmond district of San Francisco. While his interview revealed that he likes to attempt to influence clients more from a personal level, by creating friendships or “partnerships” with his clients, his methodology is very highly reliant on the acquiring and display of education and expertise. He used physical training and exercise jargon, words such as “multiple planes of motion,” “hinge joint,” and “endurance, strength, and power,” frequently in his interview, and used similar types of language while training his clients.
This expertise, is one method of creating the appearance of authority, which puts the client in a dependent position with regard to the trainer. Paul’s training method is very fast-paced, and he speaks almost continuously through his training sessions, reminding clients to focus on particular areas of their body, technically describing movements as they’re being performed, or relating on a personal level. His clients will often say “what next” if they’re done with a certain exercise, and Paul hasn’t already moved on to the next movement. They are relying on his leadership and expertise.
Bob owns a larger studio in the SOMA/Potrero Hill area of San Francisco. In his interview, he discussed the lengthy intake forms that he has his clients fill out, which detail everything from past history and past goals, to physical activity and diet behaviors, to future goals and outcomes in the light of those previous experiences. Bob feels that this type of perspective gives the client an ability to see their own behavior and to be responsible for their own level of participation in activity.
Bob’s intake process also involves extensive physical measurements, including resting heart rate, blood pressure, weight, posture, and movement analysis. This puts him in a medicalized role, which automatically gives him authority, simply when the client agrees to be measured.
Neither trainer overtly exerts their authority over their clients – neither one tells their clients explicitly what they should be doing with their lives. Rather, they seem to use their authority to create a relationship of dependency.
Theme 2 – Humor
Humor was so prevalent, both in my interviews with my participants, and in my observations, that it deserves a highlighted place in this paper. No other emotive type of behavior exceeded humor, and it was present on some level in every training session I observed. This is in line with Madeson’s (2010) findings, that the overarching theme in their interviews was the desire for a “positive experience” in personal training. Madeson’s interviewees explicitly mentioned humor in their descriptions of their trainers:
“Another participant, JD, described her trainer as being highly energetic and funny when she said, ‘[She’s] very, very lively. She cracks me up. She’s actually quite hilarious’” (Madeson, et al. 2010, pg. 162).
The interviewees for the current research did not mention humor as a method of influencing their clients’ behavior. In fact, they did not mention personality factors at all. However, the participants and other trainers observed for this research all used humor frequently in interactions with their clients, to such a degree that it was impossible to leave this factor out. This could range from humorous stories about their personal lives, to laughter and jokes when clients could not perform a particular movement, or became exhausted very quickly.
Often, the trainers use humor to keep their client on-task, but more often the use of humor was non-specific, ranging in its source and subject matter. It may be that this use of humor is an attempt to create a personal bond between client and trainer.
The question arises as to whether or not the trainers observed and interviewed are “using” humor to motivate and influence their clients, or whether humor is a natural facet of their personality. Further research is needed to understand this issue.
Theme 3 – Partnership
Madeson, et al., (2010) asked women about their experiences with personal trainers. They found four themes – relationships, trainer qualities, outcomes, and motivation. All of these were grounded in an overarching theme of “positive experience” (ibid., pg. 160). Reading Madeson’s account, the concept of a “partnership,” which is the theme found in the present research, appears to adequately describe their thematic findings as well.
Both trainers interviewed for this research have clients that roughly match their own demographics and backgrounds. Paul is a 42 year old white man from a middle-class background, and is of Jewish ethnicity. His clients are predominantly white, middle- or upper-middle class, and Jewish, and in their early-to-mid 40’s. Bob is a 40 year old white man from a middle- to upper-middle class background, and is homosexual. His clients are predominantly white gay males in their late 30’s to early 40’s who are in the middle- to upper-middle class socioeconomic strata. They are attracting clients who can see themselves in their trainer. This is important, because social groups follow demographic lines, and Madeson, in particular, mentions “gender and how important it was to have women training other women” (ibid., pg. 167).
Paul sees the formation of a partnership or personal bond with clients as the central way both to attract and maintain clients and as the best way to influence them over the long term. He sees the primary role of the trainer as being that of a therapist, with physical goals coming second. As he related to me:
“…a good trainer is more, uh, therapist, uh, and life coach, than they are physical. The physical basically is, kind of, uh, the catalyst, it’s the thing that gets us in, it’s the key. Uh, it’s important, for sure, people want to get physical results, but psychologically, uh, we need to kind of disseminate the riddle, uh, they come in with. ‘I’m overweight, I’m out of shape’ okay so there we go, what are the symptoms, they’ve got an achey back, what caused it?”
Bob mentioned the creation of partnerships and friendships with clients less than Paul, though he did mention that these bonds do arise naturally through working with people. Bob didn’t use the term “therapist,” but instead called himself a “coach,” saying – “Good trainers become coaches. They’re there guiding these people [clients] along, through their lives.”
Sometimes this connection occurs at the beginning of a relationship with a client. Paul described the initial intake process as consisting of an interview, in which the client is asking how far they can trust the trainer. As Paul said – “You know, ah, I think it’s two fold. One is, it it’s the psychology, it’s the vibe of how you’re going to help the person then it’s a few minuets of, you know, am I going to trust this guy, will I follow this guy, do I believe this guy.”
In either instance, the “partnership” of the training/client relationship is based upon an exchange of money, and so, is one-sided in either direction. As Melton, et al. (2010) point out, trainers have to present certain characteristics in order to keep clients on board. Ultimately, clients have the final say in continuing to work with a particular trainer.
Conclusion/Discussion
Melton, et al. (2008), list four categories of skills or attributes that trainers use to maintain client loyalty – motivational skills, individuality, empathy, and social skills. While their data is somewhat suspect, because it represents what qualities trainers themselves thought were most important in maintaining client loyalty, and not what qualities the trainers’ clients stated as most important, it is a place to start. As you can see, actually attaining goals is not anywhere on the list (Melton, et al., 2008, pp. 885-886).
Melton, et al.’s discussion (ibid.) does mention credentials and education as an aspect of the professional persona that is seen to be critical in attaining and maintaining clients for trainers. My trainers didn’t mention or practice any of the above on a regular basis (except for in the very broad categories of “motivational skills” and “social skills”). Madeson’s research fills that research gap, interviewing the clients themselves, and finds similar results, with an added focus on outcomes (Madeson’s third theme, Madeson, et al. 2008, pg. 164).
Neither trainer in my study mentioned their physical appearance as playing a part in drawing, affecting, or keeping clients. While Maguire (2008), and Melton et al. (2010a and b), make a case for the “physical capital” of the trainers’ own bodies and appearance, I would tend to personally disagree with the stance of any one motivational factor having prominence over another. I’ve personally seen more than a few trainers who look thoroughly “out of shape” attract a very large and loyal clientele.
“Shape” is a matter of perspective, and very physically fit trainers often intimidate and/or alienate some clients. Again, similarity of appearance and background may have more to do with whether or not a client hires a particular trainer over another. This is a good question for further research. Similarly, neither trainer mentioned their own selection process of their clients. Though the question was not asked explicitly, neither trainer hinted at any instance in which a potential client would be turned away.
There is a strong, underlying theme, throughout my interviews, of the hegemonic nature of trainers’ attempts to influence their clients’ behavior. Trainers more frequently used terms that emphasized subtle or hidden coercion, than discussing overt, structured paths of influence that openly stated and/or revealed their intentions to the client.
One of the driving questions of this research was – “is personal training a created culture?” While it most certainly appears to be a created culture – with its own set of values, beliefs, behaviors, and customs – personal training appears rather to be a culture in the process of being created.
As Melton et al. (2008) mention “there are 19 different personal training certifications available to the public” (pg. 884). While there is an effort at standardizing and creating a national certification process for personal trainers, the industry is extremely diverse and difficult to classify or delimit, which makes it difficult to create standards. The driving question may be “where, exactly, does personal training belong in the health spectrum?” It is a service somewhere between or among physical therapy, coaching, and psychology.
Personal trainers influence their clients through standard social communication forms, predicated on a pre-existing (and culturally-mediated) authoritarian role relationship. Expert levels of knowledge are less important than appealing to social cues of expertise, that usually rely on individually constructed notions of “fitness expertise” which can be fueled by media, personal disposition, and/or referral/social-proof. Trainers who assume a certain “niche” position appeal more obviously to specific personality types, making getting clients seemingly more simple for these trainers (their niche is either popular/attractive or not).
References
Madeson, M.N., Hultquist, C.N., Church, A., & Fisher, L.A. (2010). A Phenomenological Investigation of Women’s Experiences With Personal Training. International Journal of Exercise Science, 3(3), pp. 157-
Maguire, J.S. (2008). The personal is professional: Personal trainers as a case study of cultural intermediaries. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 11, pp. 211-229.
McClaran, S.R. (2003). The Effectiveness of Personal Training on Changing Attitudes Towards Physical Activity. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 2, pp. 10-14.
Melton, D.I., Dail, T.K., Katula, J.A., & Mustian, K.M. (2010a). The Current State of Personal Training: Managers’ Perspectives. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(11), pp. 3173-
Melton, D.I., Katula, J.A., & Mustian, K.M. (2010b). The Current State of Personal Training: An Industry Perspective of Personal Trainers in a Small Southeast Community. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 22(3), pp. 883-889.
Ratamess, N.A., Faigenbaum, A.D., Hoffman, J.R., & Kang, J. (2008). Self-Selected Resistance Training Intensity in Healthy Women: The influence of a personal trainer. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(1), pp. 103-111.