Background: The primary aim of our systematic scoping review was to explore the factors influencing team function and performance across various industries and discuss findings in the context of the high-performance sport support team setting. These outcomes may also be used to inform future research into high-performance teamwork in sport.Methods: A systematic scoping review of literature published in English since 2000 reporting team-based performance outcomes and included a performance metric that was ‘team outcome based’ was conducted using search of the Academic Search Ultimate, Medline, Business Source Ultimate, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Military database (ProQuest) using the terms: ‘team’, ‘function’ OR ‘dysfunction’, ‘Perform*’ OR ‘outcome’.Results: Application of the search strategy identified a total of 11,735 articles for title and abstract review. Seventy-three articles were selected for full-text assessment with the aim to extract data for either quantitative or qualitative analysis. Forty-six of the 73 articles met our inclusion criteria; 27 articles were excluded as they did not report a performance metric. Eleven studies explored leadership roles and styles on team performance, three studies associated performance feedback to team performance, and 12 studies explored the relationship between supportive behaviour and performance. Team orientation and adaptability as key figures of team performance outcomes were explored in 20 studies.Conclusions: Our findings identified 4 key variables that were associated with team function and performance across a variety of industries; (i) leadership styles, (ii) supportive team behaviour, (iii) communication, and (iv) performance feedback. High-performance teams wishing to improve performance should examine these factors within their team and its environment. It is widely acknowledged that the dynamics of team function is important for outcomes in high-performance sport, yet there is little evidence to provide guidance. This inequality between real-world need and the available evidence should be addressed in future research.

Agility requires change of direction speed (CODS) and also perceptual and decision-making skills and reaction speed. The purpose of this study was to develop a reliable and valid agility test for rugby league, which stressed all those dimensions. Players from a subelite rugby league team were tested twice on a sport-specific reactive agility test (RAT) and CODS test. Data were analyzed for reliability. For validity results from the subelite groups, first test was compared with data from an elite group. The RAT required participants to run toward an unpredictable life-size video of an attacking opponent and react to that video by changing direction. The CODS test required the same movement patterns however direction changes were preplanned. The subelite group's mean time to complete the CODS test and RAT on their first test was 1.67 ± 0.15 and 1.98 ± 0.16 seconds, respectively, and 1.62 ± 0.14 and 1.91 ± 0.17 seconds, respectively, on their second test (results are ± σ). Statistical analyses revealed no significant difference in means (p < 0.05) and good correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.87 and 0.82, respectively). The elite group's mean time to complete the tests was 1.65 ± 0.09 and 1.79 ±0.12 seconds, respectively. Statistical analyses revealed a significant difference in mean RAT time between the elite group and the subelite group (p < 0.05). The RAT was reliable and valid. Performance differences on the RAT were attributed to differences in perceptual skills and/or reaction ability. Testing and training agility should therefore stress those dimensions of agility and not just CODS.

Agility is an open motor skill; requiring change of direction speed (CODS) and perceptual and decision-making ability. The aim of this study was to determine whether the perceptual and decision-making component of agility can be trained. Fifteen rugby league players were tested on a sport-specific reactive agility test (RAT) and a CODS test. Players were then allocated to a training group (n = 8) or a nontraining group (n = 7). The training group underwent 3 weeks of reactive agility training that was designed to enhance perceptual and decision-making ability. After 3 weeks, all players were tested again. The training group's mean reactive agility time was 1.92 ± 0.17 seconds preintervention and 1.66 ± 0.14 seconds postintervention. The nontraining group's mean reactive agility time was 1.89 ± 0.16 and 1.87 ± 0.15 seconds, respectively. Mean CODS time for the training group was 1.64 ± 0.15 seconds preintervention and 1.66 ± 0.14 seconds postintervention. The nontraining group's mean CODS time was 1.61 ± 0.12 and 1.62 ± 0.12 seconds. Mean perception and response time for the training group, measured on the RAT, was 0.33 ± 0.33 seconds preintervention and 0.04 ± 0.22 seconds postintervention. The nontraining group's values were 0.34 ± 0.20 and 0.27 ± 0.28 seconds, respectively (results are ±σ). Differences in mean reactive agility time and perception and response time from pre to postintervention for the training group were statistically significant, as were differences in those values between the training and nontraining group post intervention. All other comparisons were not. Results from this study suggest that the perceptual and decision-making components of agility are trainable. Coaches should incorporate some open motor skills training in their programs when training agility.

The ‘stiffness’ concept originates from Hooke's law which states that the force required to deform an object is related to a spring constant and the distance that object is deformed. Research into stiffness in the human body is undergoing unprecedented popularity; possibly because stiffness has been associated with sporting performance and some lower limb injuries. However, some inconsistencies surrounding stiffness measurement exists bringing into question the integrity of some research related to stiffness. The aim of this study was to review literature which describes how vertical, leg and knee stiffness has been measured in adult populations while running, jumping or hopping. A search of the entire MEDLINE, PubMed and SPORTDiscus databases and an iterative reference check was performed. Sixty-seven articles were retrieved; 21 measured vertical stiffness, 51 measured leg stiffness, and 22 measured knee stiffness. Thus, some studies measured several ‘types’ of stiffness. Vertical stiffness was typically the quotient of ground reaction force and centre of mass displacement. For leg stiffness it was and change in leg length, and for the knee it was the quotient of knee joint moments and change in joint angle. Sample size issues and measurement techniques were identified as limitations to current research.

Background: Performance analysis in rugby union has become an integral part of the coaching process. Although performance analysis research in rugby and data collection has progressed, the utility of the insights is not well understood. The primary objective of this review is to consider the current state of performance analysis research in professional rugby union and consider the utility of common methods of analysing performance and the applicability of these methods within professional coaching practice. Methods: SPORTDiscus electronic database was searched for relevant articles published between 1 January 1997 and 7 March 2019. Professional, male 15-a-side rugby union studies that included relevant data on tactical and performance evaluation, and statistical compilation of time-motion analysis were included. Studies were categorised based on the main focus and each study was reviewed by assessing a number of factors such as context, opposition analysis, competition and sample size. Results: Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of these studies measured performance through the collection and analysis of performance indicators. The majority did not provide context relating to multiple confounding factors such as field location, match location and opposition information. Twenty-nine performance indicators differentiated between successful match outcomes; however, only eight were commonly shared across some studies. Five studies considered rugby union as a dynamical system; however, these studies were limited in analysing lower or national-level competitions. Conclusions: The review highlighted the issues associated with assessing isolated measures of performance, lacking contextual information such as the opposition, match location, period within match and field location. A small number of studies have assessed rugby union performance through a dynamical systems lens, identifying successful characteristics in collective behaviour patterns in attacking phases. Performance analysis in international rugby union can be advanced by adopting these approaches in addition to methods currently adopted in other team sports.