Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Autoethnography
Emily Huttner
I. Introduction
Research question: How does an existing interpersonal relationship with someone become
romantic and professional. Sometimes our professional relationships can become intertwined in
our personal relationships as well. Typically in a friendship, the individuals in the relationship
are viewed and valued as equals, this autoethnography hopes to understand how our friendships
can become affected once in a superior-subordinate context; specifically a relationship I had with
a coach that started as a friendship. This autoethnography hopes to help understand how our
interpersonal relationships are affected based on the context they exist in.
different ethnic and employment backgrounds to find out if the intersection of race and gender
identified four key themes in the interviews; socialized with them (their boss/superior) outside of
work or considered them friends, had previous connection as family members with their
supervisors which made interaction easier, felt like their bosses treated them with respect or
recalled special favors their bosses had done for them that enhanced the quality of their lives at
work. For those who view their relationship with their superior as friends they felt that the
Kelly and Kingsley Westermans (2014) article explores the impact of perceived
superior immediacy on work motivation and satisfaction as well as empowerment and burnout.
Autoethnography 3
Kelly and Kingsley Westerman had 364 participants respond to an online survey to measure
indicated that perceived immediacy does mediate the relationship and the more immediacy felt
Interdependence Theory and aims to find the moderators of the relationships between coach-
competition level will moderate the association between interdependence and satisfaction as
these variables will be more strongly related for dyads at higher levels than lower levels of
competition, relationship length will moderate the association between interdependence and
satisfaction. A stronger correlation will exist for dyads with longer, compared to shorter,
relationship length, and gender composition will moderate associations between interdependence
and satisfaction such that associations between the two measures will be stronger for the same
gender dyads than for mixed-gender dyads. Findings in their research supported their hypotheses,
III. Methods
The relationships we hold with individuals vary and placed in different contexts. The
relationship I hold with my sister and the relationship I hold with supervisor will be different.
The role we have in each relationship differs and they hold different value. But how are
relationships affected when they begin to overlap into different contexts and the way we
communicate.
Autoethnography 4
better understand a cultural event and is usually written as journals or stories. By reflecting
on my personal experiences as a friend and athlete to a coach I will review our relationship
before, during and after our relationship in a coach- athlete context to better understand how
relationship I hope to find points in our communication and relationship where the dynamics
remember before our relationship as coach-athlete because there was a point where after they
were my instructor, we became friends. Being friends, to me, was interacting outside of the
time spent together outside of the superior-subordinate context. We had gone to social
gatherings together but the social gatherings were initiated by one of their follow colleagues
and not as a result of myself or them making the plans but we did bond through having
drinks, socializing and playing games. We then decided to connect through social media,
over the summer and supported each others fitness goals and would check in with each
Once classes were back in session we began navigating our friendship and superior-
subordinate relationship as they were again my instructor for a semester. During one of the
first class sessions, we had gotten to discussion and they used our relationship as a way to
begin a conversation with the entire class. Since no one had begun participating and they had
not yet learned everyones name I was selected to begin discussion because they knew me
and even said that to the class. This was perceived immediacy by me, by taking the
Autoethnography 5
opportunity to point out that we knew each other and discuss our relationship showed me that
they cared and valued our relationship. After each class period we would have small chats
about our social lives and then the possibility of joining the speech forensics team was
encouraged. They are one of the coaches for the speech forensics team at the university.
From the encouragement to join the team, because I would be a good fit and would benefit
from it socially, I decided to join. Before joining, I had sat in on coaching sessions the
previous semester to see what the events looked like and I was interested. I was not excited
about the idea of speaking in front of others but the opportunity would allow us to spend
Once joining the team, the event I decided to begin working on required me to work with
that events head coach which was my friend. At first there was a lot of encouragement,
support and excitement in joining the team. Again this was me entering their domain. My
department. Not only had I joined the team, they just recruited a new member. I wasnt being
pushed to sign up for coaching sessions when starting and there was an understanding that I
just wanted to try out performing before becoming competitive. The students striving for
nationals filled more coaching sessions. At this stage in the relationship I was open about
trying to manage classes, memorizing my speech and working on my performance and I felt
as though our relationship was strong. Because I was more of a low risk competitor the
amount of time invested in our relationship was less than those competing more frequently or
We continued to share personal details of our lives with one another between classes and
coaching and there were never any hard feelings. Once I began competing I was able to
Autoethnography 6
travel with my coach, in other settings with my friend I felt that we were close but it was
never around other speech forensic students or competitors. While traveling, I had entered
their domain. Now it was not just me and my friend, but my teammates, other competitors
and in this context my coach. Our time spent together while traveling was not important.
There were other students on the team that were higher-risk, they were not only competing
in multiple events but also breaking into final rounds and placing at tournaments where I was
just performing.
Once traveling with my coach I started to see where the overlap of our pre-existing
friendship was getting used to their advantage as a coach. Like all relationships ours was
mediated. While one of my teammates completely ignore myself and a fellow teammate
while at a tournament I opened up to my coach as a friend about how I felt and how I was
fitting in on the team. My coach/friend said they would have a conversation with that
teammate about inclusion and remembering to create a positive, supportive team atmosphere
while competing. Later I found out that they publically called this individual out about their
behavior. Not only did this embarrass that student, it embarrassed me as well. I wasnt
expecting that situation to be handled that way. I still dont know if that event was handled
that way because they had the authority as a coach and were upset as my friend or if that is
After returning from my first traveling tournament I was scheduled for a coaching session
but instead in turned into a discussion of other teammates behaviors and how the
competition went, my coach used our interpersonal relationship as a way to find out more
about the team. I opened up to them because I felt it would help the team out and felt as
though they cared about my well-being. It was more so used as leverage and evidence to hold
Autoethnography 7
against fellow teammates. Not only had my coaching session has been used for venting it was
By the time the State competition had come I had nationally qualified both of my events
and my coaching sessions became more frequent and more time was investing in amping up
my events. I was even asked to take on an additional event to help the team earn points. That
event ended up taking 4th at State and the response from my coach after breaking was now
think about what we can do now to get it ready to do well at nationals. The more successful I
was the more invested my coach became. Not only did I place and do well but this benefitted
how my coach looked. When returning from state I took a week off from speech to get
caught up in my classes. The following week I decided that it might be time to take a step
back from speech but I was apprehensive about talking with my coach because I didnt want
to disappoint them especially after qualifying for nationals, which I hadnt even considered
upon joining the team. My coach found out from a fellow colleague that I was considering
leaving the team. In less than 6 hours I had gotten a message from my coach stating
I really don't care if you quit. I have no interest in convincing you this activity is worth your
time. I would just really like if you could stop signing up and then canceling because it takes
away time and effort I could be spending with people who do want to be here. I get that
speech is overwhelming, I get that it's a lot, I feel like we've been really accommodating, but
if it's not for you it's not for you. These comments to me did not feel supportive or
understanding it felt like an attack on my character and as a teammate. Within the context of
being a coach or a friend they seemed unexpected and harsh. This was the fall out of our
relationship. Having decided that I was no longer invested in speech forensics, they were no
Autoethnography 8
longer invested in our relationship. The dialogue exchanged ended up not only questioning
my dedication to the team but a question of our friendship. Since I had not come to them first
upon considering quitting they were insulted. Though my position on the team, in my eyes
should not have affected our friendship. Our friendship existed within their domain, their
space, and surrounded by community of speech forensic competitors they were very
passionate about.
IV. Results
All relationships take place within a context, and are motivated. They are influenced by
relationship was reliant on more interactions that took place within the superior-subordinate
context then outside of it. The immediacy of the relationship was affected by interactions on
campus, during coaching or during speech forensic related events. The length of our
relationship to me did not seem short until I realized our relationship was much shorter than
the relationships they held with other speech forensics colleagues. Our friendship was more
dependent on our involvement with the university and activities than on its own and as a
result our friendship fell apart when our coach-athlete relationship did. The themes found in
Gates (2005), Kelly & Kingsley Westerman (2014) and Jowett & Nezleks (2011) studies I
was able to find in my own relationship. If my coach had still been one of my instructors I
am sure our relationship would look different as well. They would have been still required to
have some investment as me as a student but since I have left the team and they are no longer
one of my coach or instructors, our paths will hardly cross especially now that our social
media connections no longer exist. Sometimes friendships are more so a result of proximity
than of interest.
Autoethnography 9
V. Discussion
I have had multiple coach-athlete and superior-subordinate relationships but this one was
unique. I had not gone from having an instructor become a friend, to them then becoming a
coach before. A factor that I have not analyzed was age. My coach and I only had a 3 year
age difference so although I may have seen our friendship as being equal my perception
compared to theirs could be completely different, I could have always been seen as
subordinate because I was younger. If my coach was older maybe our interactions and
immediacy would have been perceived differently if there was a larger age gap or if we were
different genders.
Though the research I had looked focused on existing relationships of coaches and
athletes I could have benefitted from looking at the communication between coach-athlete
relationships when the athletes decided to leave their sport or team. I think that having an
existing relationship caused there to be bigger fall out because my choice to the leave the
team could have been seen as personal rather than just an individual choice. Regardless it is
important to be aware of our relationships and what motivates them. Relationships require
investments and learning with whom to invest and to what degree can be beneficial in many
contexts.
Autoethnography 10
References
and Latino/a American. Subordinates: benefits of being buddies with the boss.
287-301.