The Successful EP (Exercise Physiologist) Podcast
Welcome to the Successful EP Podcast! Every week we interview a different successful Exercise Physiologist and they share their story of how they got into the Ex Phys space, what they are doing now and how they did it!
The Successful EP (Exercise Physiologist) Podcast
Building High Performance Systems with Kurt Vogel
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
In this episode, I’m joined by Kurt Vogel, a high-performance leader who has built and directed performance systems across professional and elite sport — particularly within women’s programs.
Kurt currently leads high performance within professional football and has delivered strength & conditioning and sport science programs across state and national women’s teams in rugby league, basketball, football, and boxing. His experience spans the full athlete pathway, from junior development through to State of Origin and international representation.
He is also the Founder and Director of Revolve Athletic, where he has scaled performance services across multiple clubs, integrating strength & conditioning, rehabilitation, sport science technology, and athlete development into cohesive high-performance models.
In this conversation we unpack what it actually takes to build effective high-performance environments — exploring leadership, culture, and the systems that allow teams of practitioners to operate effectively. We also discuss the growing role of AI and technology in performance environments, and how practitioners can integrate data and tools without losing sight of coaching and athlete outcomes.
A deep dive into the intersection of performance, science, and leadership, where EPs will gain a clearer understanding of how elite performance systems operate, how science is translated into practice, and how practitioners can elevate their role within high-performance environments.
Guest handles:
Instagram - kurtvogel.coach
LinkedIn - Kurt Vogel
Email - kurt@revolveathletic.com
Advance your practice - explore our EP courses here
Stay connected - join our EP community here
Welcome to the Successful EP, the podcast where we talk to leading exercise physiologists and other health professionals about building successful, impactful careers, running thriving businesses and advancing the profession. I'm your host, Lenny Hazelwood, founder and exercise physiologist at Adapt Movement Physiology and Growth Specialist at EPCBD. On this show, we dive into stories, strategies, and lessons from EPs and other health professionals doing exceptional work and spark conversations that EPs should be having but often aren't. Today's guest is Kurt Vogel, a recognized leader in high performance sport with extensive experience building and directing performance environments across professional and elite pathways, particularly within women's sport. Kurt is currently head of high performance within professional football and has led strengthening, conditioning, and sports science programs across state and national women's programs in rugby league, basketball, football, and boxing. His work spans from junior development through to state of origin and national representation with a consistent focus on building structured, data-informed, athlete-centered systems. He's also the founder and director of Revolve Athletic, where he has scaled performance services across multiple clubs, leading teams of coaches and integrating strength conditioning, rehabilitation, sports science technology, and athlete development into cohesive high performance models. Academically, Kurt recently completed a master's of research investigating how menstrual cycle phases influence maximal strength characteristics in female team sport athletes, positioning him at the forefront of applied female performance science. Combined with his MBA and innovation leadership, he brings both research depth and strategic oversight to the environments he leads. Kurt operates at the intersection of performance, science, and leadership. And today we're unpacking what it really takes to build high performance systems that elevate athletes and the professionals working alongside them. Kurt, welcome to the successful EP.
SPEAKER_00Thanks for having me, Larry. It's good to be uh good to be part of it and uh thanks for the overview. It's uh it's always interesting to see what different people have to say.
SPEAKER_01Kurt, you've been um involved in performance environments for quite a number of years. I think you were saying before on um LinkedIn, it's like 50 years of experience are condensed into 20. What initially pushed you into the field?
SPEAKER_00Um I kind of stumbled in it, to be honest. So I actually wanted to be an architect since I was like 10. And then uh when I got to choosing preferences, at the time I was kind of sick of maths, to be honest, and uh and the amount that goes on with architecture, I chose physical education and IT teaching. And then I met um a lecturer, Tony Attridge, who thought I was good at coaching part of it and suggested uh exercise science as well, because we had good chats about teaching and um where I wasn't really happy to be um part of where the curriculum was going at the time. And so I changed exercise and uh through him I did S and C as well. Uh and so yeah, and then just kind of went from there. So, like I said, kind of stumbled upon it or stumbled into it um because of Tony. Uh, and then my I lived on college at Griffith University, and when I mentioned that to my head of college at the time, Martin Unicom, he got really excited because he studied exercise sports science degree back in the day as well, and so he kind of then provided advice and any kind of direction that I needed as well. Uh yeah, it it's just an industry I stumbled into, funnily enough, and then here I am 20 years later.
SPEAKER_01Well, it's definitely uh taken taken off from a stumble into it, that's for sure.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, definitely.
SPEAKER_01So I guess early in your career, and this is going back a number of years, how did you initially see yourself when you were first entering the field? Was it more of a a coach, scientist, mentor, or something else?
SPEAKER_00I think more of a learner and problem solver. So rather seeing myself as a coach or sports scientist, I've always kind of wanted to solve problems and learn about what I'm doing. So even as an example, I started my extra science degree the same time I got my Cert 3 and for a fitness and my le ask a level one. So for me, it was just about learning everything I could. And and so when I coached people, when I I guess studied more, it was more about okay, what can I understand more about the body? How can that adapt to what I'm doing? And then obviously being mentored by some pretty good people and fortunate enough to be in some good programs early, I was able to kind of I guess excel where I feel I could solve the the problems I wanted to solve really.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, that makes sense. Looking back at your first three to five years of learning and being in that field, was there anything that you were getting it's a good way to put it.
SPEAKER_00It's it's one of those, I guess, words wrong isn't probably the way way to put it. Uh so it's more about, I guess, where is the learning curve in that space early on? Because I think every every coach goes through uh a phase of a f phase of learning where it's not that they're doing wrong, but it's I guess how can they improve what they're doing. And so even in the early days, uh I did things which wrote programs for people, and like I worked at Toys Russ as well at the same time, and I I worked with this kid that was playing lacrosse, but he only ever liked bodyweight programs. And I remember writing a program for him which I called Around the World, which was literally going from like handstand push-ups all the way around through chin-ups and just changing your angles of of movement in like a big sup set. If I look at that now, I I'd never write that program, but it wasn't that it was wrong, it was just there's better programs for that because I mean he he excelled in that, he was able to do it all, but I mean there's definitely better ways that uh it could have been done. I think it's I guess what I needed to learn more about was what really created the foundations to to build an athlete to where they need to be. But I guess in the early days I was also working with a lot of the general public and I I learnt a lot around communicating with different people. Um particularly, I guess if you go into athletic environments, the biggest thing is being able to talk to to athletes about things that aren't their sport or aren't a part of the environment they're in because they need to be able to switch off from that as well. So yeah, long-winded answer, but I think it was just learning how to apply the appropriate foundations rather than just adapt or try and adapt programs exactly to what people wanted, uh, where it doesn't necessarily lead to long-term change, but more so immediate change.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, that question of the way I phrased it could have been better. More so what could have been better rather than what was necessarily wrong. Yeah. Okay, that makes sense. Was there a moment or environment that really helped you or accelerated your growth and or how you change your view on certain things such as performance?
SPEAKER_00I think there is um a couple different moments uh across time periods. I guess first and foremost, uh I worked across a couple different environments that wasn't just sport. So I think that really helped my career in the communication side of things. So working as a social sport coordinator means I had to actually manage all different types of sport programs and the people involved with them. So you became a manager and a stakeholder in a different way. Um I was president of a rugby league club, so you got to see the management from top down and and everything you did there. Uh so I did little things like that across a time period as well. I think two big moments was when I opened my own facility. So I had my own facility uh for a few years with a business partner at the time, Lyle Rogers. He's unfortunately past um now. So um I always like to make mention of Lyle because he kind of got me started in that direction. I went to high school with him. We never touched base after school until he had a back injury and he saw the stuff I did. I worked with him and he kind of wanted to back a few things I was doing. That I guess allowed me to really focus on just one thing, which was what we do in performance. Really, so manage facility but also manage performance rather than like I said, I did a couple different things and over the sh over the uh and we closed because of um flooding and uh the the amount of time it took to I guess get insurance to kind of pay for what was damaged already. Um so I was a bit unfortunate during that time. I was this kind of leads to the next part is so the studio was really important and spending time in uh Sydney with New South Wales Institute of Sport uh was also another pivotal moment. People like Steve Adams, Steve Smith, David Young, uh Jacques Jumbo. So those people have been really kind of influential in how I then continued to practice. And and then I think the next part was when I closed the studio, I got a chance to be a tech officer at Unisq. And I think the work that I did at Unisq really changed how I operated because I decided to step out of performance for a little bit, and then um I was able to, I guess, work with and through UniSQ for a couple different uh aspects. It wasn't just the tech support, the lecturing, and then I went back into performance. Being in the kind of university environment allowed me to kind of accelerate um the I guess the focus on the the team environments and semi-professional environments after I kind of close my studio. So there's like a couple different pivotal moments, and it might not seem that clear, but I'll say early directions of diverse populations to going full-time with my own studio, leading into uh working with one of the NIN networks into uh a university space. So a couple different spaces there, and I think they all helped me evolve and accelerate my career in different ways.
SPEAKER_01Could you give some examples of how the uni, um I'm actually curious how the uni changed your perspective or accelerated your growth? Like what are some what were some practical or key takeaways from that?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, good question. So being a tech first, a lot of that was the actual technology. I I had to set up the labs. So to begin with, we uh we basically had no labs because it was the start of an excise science program. I was the first tech officer to be involved. Uh so it was initially setting up all the technology within a university system for excise and sports science um to begin with, and then uh we moved campuses, so then resetting that up, setting up overall I set up five different labs, uh which is I guess a feed in itself. Um that was of obviously in collaboration with everyone else, trying to make sure we got what we needed equipment-wise and making sure we could teach in the right spaces and and teach in the right ways, make sure the flow works, all those types of things. So um I think because I was always tech inclined, jumping in a tech role allowed me to really build out what I liked about tech within sports science. So I get a bigger handle of it. I then got to understand more of it. So because of that, I was able to um test and trial some things I was building with Queensland Ballet, and that really kind of took off in regards to what I was doing with IMU technology, and essentially now having my own product in about a month to kind of launch using, I guess, IMU's as well. That's kind of changed my trajectory a little bit, but I've always been tech inclined and and that kind of allowed me to be passionate about the tech integration again.
SPEAKER_01So, did you just say you had some of uh your own products that you've invented or commercialised or something as well?
SPEAKER_00Yes, so it's gonna be launched basically early April. So I haven't advertised uh much about it. Uh so it's a it's a wearable device, but it's focused on the the movement patterns of what we do in sport. So we're trying to really level the playing field and making sure that wearable, I guess, devices aren't just accessible to the elite in sport. So they're available to everybody. Send me pro and below.
SPEAKER_01Is that part of what the shirt says? Kivo Motion?
SPEAKER_00Yep.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, nice. Absolutely. Very cool. I I'm definitely curious to learn a little bit more about that. So you mentioned um it is being produced as not just for uh high performance, but available for the general public as well. What exactly does it measure?
SPEAKER_00So you might think of it as a classic kind of GPS wearable device. So when you think about tracking location and and getting data from there where you get distance high-speed meters, things like that. But we use IMUs, so inertial measurement units, and and what they measure is acceleration and rotation. Now other devices have them, but they just don't utilize them as much. And and part of my original research with Queensland Ballet was looking at how we could create a training load monitoring system in a sport that doesn't run basically. And so we well, I developed a IMU with the help of a um hockey player I was working with. He was a robotics engineer, um James Mount. And then and we tested what we could find. Uh so we tested the ballet athletes in different movements, and what we could find that was consistent, and we could actually see all the movement patterns that they're going through. So we can kind of analyze what that looked like, um, get some out insights from it, and uh and then I started doing that across like uh triple jump, pole vault, um, I see rules, kicking actions, so a couple different sports, and then kind of left the idea for a little while and um and came back to that when my wife kind of heard me complaining about the fact that these systems still didn't exist and the fact I've had an idea in the back pocket for about eight years. So um, so in the last couple of years, I really kind of pushed that forward, coming back to what an IMU is, yeah, it measures acceleration and rotation. So you can actually see the movement patterns that occur in different sports. So I've used it in boxing, ballet, different sports like football. You can actually see where different actions occur. I think like uh Jason Weber from Speed Seek is doing a really good example of current using current devices to analyze speed data. There's more PhDs coming out using inertial measurement, I guess, data, but it's still not really used effectively within the devices itself. It's everyone starting their own software to use a current device that exists on the market. So we're bringing all of it in to one device. So it doesn't matter what sport you play, now you can start to analyze those sports as well. And if we haven't looked at the sport, we then work with you to analyze the sport and then make sure that's on our radar. So then if you play a sport that hasn't been assessed before, then we can get that data. So that's kind of I guess what what we do in it in a nutshell.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I guess two follow-up questions I have from that is the first one is is that because let me give it a bit of context first. A lot of the time, general population seems to follow behind what is first invented in the sporting or high performance environment. Like we saw that with vowed and other technologies where they were used firstly with athletes and now they're being converted to general population, even clinical populations and rehabilitation. Do you think there's any applicability there?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, definitely. Uh so there's a couple different, I guess, potential relationships that I've always already got with some physios. So they want to be able to use this device because we'll have, apart from the GPS tracking where you could look at the outdoors information, uh, you can actually use it for velocity-based training in the gym. You can look for range of motion testing, so you can actually use a device for a couple different use uh cases. On top of that, we won't be using this doing this to begin with, but essentially we've looked into this because of a few suggestions and um with I guess people at government level are looking to use this with uh older adults and being able to engage people with technology because older clientele actually love getting their hands on technology if it's easy to use. Um yeah, and so I think that's our biggest thing is we're we're making this as intuitive as and easy to use as possible. Like I've worked with all the different systems in the last decade and I've seen all the issues that that occur. And as soon as you go to a level below elite where you don't have a sports scientist, you don't have the hours, like how can that work and be as simple as possible to use? So we build this around being mobile first and then making sure that all the data is automatically trimmed and accurate in that space as well. So we make sure it's as easy to use as as you can possibly think of.
SPEAKER_01Mate, I guess um, yeah, I'm I I'm excited for the launch. You said in April.
SPEAKER_00Yep. Yep.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, this is uh essentially an advertisement in itself. I hope you I hope you wasn't confidential on DevAps or anything.
SPEAKER_00Uh no, it's like not confidential. We've we've I guess released a little bit of information about it, but we haven't gone out and fully advertised just yet.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, awesome. I guess on following on from that, how do you make sure, and this is not just for the device that you're um hoping to release in in April, but for any any technology that you use with um athletes, how do you make sure the data you collect actually influences decisions when it comes to to programming and rehabilitation outcomes and performance outcomes rather than just sitting there on a report?
SPEAKER_00I think it's a great question because we tend to sit in this uh space of having a lot of data and not being usable uh most of the time. I think the key part of that is making sure you actually have data that you know is going to be helpful. So rather than just collecting all these things, it's like is there an insight that you can produce from this data? Yes, awesome, then use it. No, then then scrap it. Like so you're not gonna use too many different uh, I guess, insights um in what you're doing because then it becomes too complex. Um if there's a lot of research on it and it's valid and reliable, yes. If there's limited research, then you need to be able to collect the data, see if it's usable to be able to then say, yes, we can provide an insight. So it's not to say scrap all the data that doesn't have research behind it, but be cautious about where that might sit and can it actually provide a valuable insight if you have enough data around it. And I guess an example of that would be when when in Netball I started to use heart road monitors to assess intensity in what they did, and we started to use a multiplier for different zones to provide an example of what loading might look like. So we actually used a multiplier on going, okay, if it's zone five, then multiply by five. A really simple calculation. If it's zone one, multiply by one, two, zone two, two. And we actually came up with a really effective intensity um I guess calculation that sat really closely to the physical outputs as well. So looking at the acceleration data and the density of data, it seemed to match really closely to that too. So now we haven't looked at putting or publishing that anywhere because it's literally one team, one season, and we found there's a relationship. But whether that's just a correlation versus any kind of underlying factor and if it's gonna be valid and reliable is another situation in itself because you just use random multipliers rather than a specific value to say, is this actually effective to use? And is it valid, is it reliable?
SPEAKER_01And this question may be a little oversimplified, but what do you use or any of your coaches use as the most common test parameters or common tests with technology when it comes to strength and conditioning? What are your go-to tests?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I think it does change depending on the sport, but there are some consistency across the sports, right? So I think number one is looking at speed. So now that's not necessarily the technology that is being used in itself, but to assess speed properly, we either use video or timing gates, so either one, and then we use some form of force plate, so uh measurement. So it could be IMT and counter move and jump, it could be counter moving jump, it could be hop tests, so depending on what we're trying to look at and how much time we have. Like with something like a professional sporting team, you have more time to do more tests. With a semi-professional sporting team, you have less time, so what do you what do you go to? And so uh I find just getting simple power measurements and throwing force plate data and and getting your contraction time, flight time can be important, and looking at a few different metrics through your jumps, even if you don't have time for mid-type pulls, because something as simple as looking at speed and then your power and jumps is going to become pretty prevalent on the field. Everything else you can kind of integrate to training, like your strength work. If you don't have time, you can get strength work and strength assessment by looking at what they're doing in the gym, how much they're actually putting on the bar their RPE. So we try and utilize technology that works and is effective rather than just I guess overcomplicating the whole process.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I think that's that's a big one I uh was going to follow on about is yeah, what separates the ones that are cost and time effective from the ones that are complex, and I think you've uh just answered that.
SPEAKER_00Yeah. Um yeah, I think and just to add tiny bit more to that as well, I guess, is the other thing is um rather than just the complexity, is is it affordable uh for the amount of time you're gonna test as well? So um something like timing gates, they're getting used once every nine months, I mean, or six months, like depends if you're really gonna find that useful. Um whereas you could just use a video and then go through scrubbing on a thing like MySprint or or Dartfish for far less and and get your exact moments of of what that looks like. Plus you get the S mass when you start to look at technical things as well. So you get two in one if you're just using a video. So it's like depends what you're gonna use. One's more time heavy, one's less time heavy, one costs more, one costs less. So what are your budgets? How often are you gonna use it? Does it work for what you want to get out of the program?
SPEAKER_01Yeah. And I guess for people or EPs, clients, etc., in fiber patches without elite budgets and maybe don't have access to some of those technologies much, what sort of simple monitoring frameworks, just like the one you suggested around the speed, uh do you think provide the most leverage?
SPEAKER_00I think when we look at monitoring frameworks, there can be a couple different, I guess, layers to it. So I think the biggest one is using RPEs, but I guess in a way, if you're in private practice, is you're talking to your client a lot. So it's understanding what they're going through. And so you'll kind of understand what RPEs are like once you spend enough time. With them, but you can then allow them to understand RPEs even more. So I guess using RPEs as a monitoring tool is really powerful without a budget at all. Just chuck it in an Excel spreadsheet or a Google Sheet. Um, because I think Microsoft Excel costs now. Uh and then you have a way of monitoring load. Same as even if you're adding weight, classic uh way of just adding load and looking at total tonnage is a really effective way to improve performance and improve outcomes for clinical population, whether it's if you're looking clinical population or if you're looking at athletes. But I think if you're trying to go down the route of a little bit more professional, then looking at something like velocity-based training, you can use something like metric VBT, so really a simple app on your phone. So you don't have to buy a VBT device, you can just use an app. It does cost to get uh, I guess, better outputs and being able to track that uh data more. It saves rather than buying something like a Jimmerware, which can cost$3,500 a piece. Um, in private practice, you might just have that set up on one station. Same as like uh perch catapult purchases now, catapult recently bought perch. So looking at visual systems that can track velocity-based training. Again, sometimes a higher cost, really effective to use, but depends on the I guess cash you have, if it's getting used all the time as well, and is if it's going to be effective in that space. So the only other things I'd say is if you're in private practice, if you are working with people outdoors and looking at any type of running metrics, I do think getting some sort of wearable tracker is important. People can use their watches for a lot of these types of basic things, but when you're starting to delve into a little bit more and talk to physios a little bit more about different high-speed running, then I guess the watches don't necessarily capture all that information either. So you're looking at a GPS wearable type device, and that kind of helps that. And it depends if there are ones that are cheap enough on the market as well. So I guess there's some of the suggestions if you look at something simple as RPE, just tracking total tonnage, uh, because they're really simple monitoring systems or frameworks. And then from there is if you want to use technology, something like metric VBT as an app is a really simple tool for velocity-based training. And then if you're looking at more advanced metrics, then I do think a GPS wearable is is worth investing into. But that's as simple as it gets.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_00I think it in private practice, force plates are definitely handy because of all the data you can actually get from them, particularly even just using it for basic squat assessments all the way through to your power power assessments as well. Like they're super handy. The same as even like a dynamometer, really effective for what you're doing in private practice to to assess force in different different movements and different positions too.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, no, absolutely. I was just thinking, I guess the main the main variables there really are just in individual biclinician. But I was also thinking there are some examples I've heard of where you know EPs wouldn't even be using things as simple as it sounds as RPE across the program and tracking that. I know there's certain circumstances I've heard from clients or patients that would be given a program with repetitions and sets without any progressive overload with well not necessarily progressive overload, but progression with the intensity regarding RPE, or they would have no education provided around using RPE. So it I just I guess what you just said, Joe's to show that even some of those simple things like RPE can be really powerful if you don't have the elite budget for some of those other technologies.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, absolutely. And I'll add one more example to that too, is I've worked with a physio in the past where working went through ACL injuries and um and every time they got cleared to go to the next stage, I found out the physio did no testing whatsoever. They just asked, Did you do this? Yes, okay, cool, cleared to go to the next stage. And that was it. I was like, Whoa, okay, let's do some testing ourselves because I'm not comfortable with just having a tick list rather than having some objective data to look at and see where we're at. Um so yeah, as you mentioned, like it's not just EP clinics, it's it's physios as well. The fact that that's a clearance stage and ACLs and there's no objective data, it's just did you do this, yes or no? Next stage. So it's uh it's I guess it's uh it can be concerning on on one level considering the amount of data we can use nowadays, particularly with the amount of information we know about coming back from something like an ACL as well.
SPEAKER_01Do you think that stems from a lack of awareness or from ignorance?
SPEAKER_00It could be either. It could also be um so it could be their experience going, well, I've been experienced enough to know that's okay to go the next stage. And because they go, Well, my experience counts could be, I guess, the ignorance on new methods because they go, Well, I've had success this many times doing this, so I'm going to keep on doing it.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, no one don't carry tricks.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, exactly. So and so sometimes you could call it, I guess, ignorance, but it could be to a certain extent, for lack of a better term, arrogance. Because you're going, well, I'm I'm not gonna bother learning something new or delving into it. So yeah, so it could be could be so many different uh ways. And um, but yeah, I guess I won't um pinpoint what could be a behavior concern of not wanting to learn or jump into it, or or they might have learned it. Yeah, they they might have learned and go, nah, I prefer my way better.
SPEAKER_01So zooming out a bit, Kurt, and aside from the technology side of things, which yeah, I think's really interesting. Um I'm also curious around the systems and the system level thinking that you have some um certain things because you scaled from essentially individually coaching to how many clubs or coaches do you have now?
SPEAKER_00This year we've actually dialed back a little bit just because with um with a young family with two young kids and stepping away from a few programs, which changed a little bit, but over the last few years it's been seven program, roughly seven programs a year. And so at the peak of that was 32 coaches across that period. So last year we had less coaches because the extent of the programs, but seven programs doesn't mean seven teams, it means like a program of a club. Uh so that might mean we have okay, just your men and women, senior teams for the club, but it could actually mean we have your juniors all the way through to your seniors, uh men and women uh as well. Uh I think at the uh at the peak of that as well, um, we had I think it was similar, the amount of coaches to teams we had at the same time was around that 30 mark as well. So it becomes a lot in that kind of space.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, so I'd love to know a bit more about how how you went around building that. I guess first and foremost, you also mentioned around like the junior and the junior versus school versus elite levels. What fundamentals um of well firstly before we delve into this the systems and the scalability, what fundamentals of performance across those different levels never change?
SPEAKER_00Question. I I think one is um movement quality. So the fundamentals of performance never change around movement quality. So because it doesn't matter if you're young or too old, the better you can move, uh the more effective and efficient you're gonna be, the more, the better you can express force, the fast you're gonna be. So I think that's a big fundamental is movement quality. I think the other thing is, and this doesn't necessarily relate to what we can do, but is exposure to skill. So exposure to skill is really important, particularly when you look at sport, uh sporting athletes. So being exposed to the skill enough times, but not too many times, you're gonna get overloaded and miss the actual physical quality part. But to be good at your sport, you've got to practice your sport. Uh so I think that's a big fundamental component too, which I think we sometimes miss. Uh, and the other thing, uh other two, is pretty much strength and fitness. Fitness is one of the global metrics which shows how quickly you recover, which shows how much you can repeat sprint efforts, it shows how much you can repeat acceleration efforts. Fitness is a fundamental that will never will never change. It is the baseline of everything you do. And you might see that people talk about threshold and lactic threshold being something that's a predictor of performance. Just because something's a predictor of performance doesn't necessarily mean it's a fundamental of performance that's never gonna change. Because to have a good lactic threshold, you need a good base fundamental, uh, fundamental of aerobic capacity. Um and then and then strength, it's being strong enough to handle the demands of the sport. So I think they're four key key elements. Um and I'm not gonna say fast, I'd like to say fast is another one, but fast comes with everything else that you're doing within these fundamentals. Because when you're doing conditioning, you should also be doing speed training because that's part of conditioning, in my opinion. So it covers that part is like to be better in your fitness, you also need to be fast. Um, so you've got to make sure you're doing fast work too. So conditioning, strength, skill work, and then movement quality.
SPEAKER_01Just to delve a little deeper into that term fitness or conditioning, what are the key elements that make up that?
SPEAKER_00So I guess the way I talk about it, I talk about um fitness as just a whole uh metric of your maximal oxygen uptake capacity, right? You go okay, what actually attributes to that? There are so many different uh factors. Um so you've got to start to dive into the physiology of um what that means. But when we start to look at uh methods and and what uh couples with under the fitness banner, that's where you're looking at speed, where you're looking at repeat speed efforts, uh you're looking at small side of game efforts, so that comes into the skill component. You're looking at being able to achieve movement quality under fatigue, so there are other components within that. Um agility, um change of direction, and again, that kind of comes down to small side of games, is that repeat component. Uh, and then obviously being able to uh I guess run, box, swim, row, uh at a continuous pace as well. Um so that way you cover your different ranges or zones in that um in the I guess the heart rate capacity as well. So um but and then there's obviously conjecture in regards to where you should focus those zones as well.
SPEAKER_01There's a lot of moving parts as sounds.
SPEAKER_00Definitely, yeah.
SPEAKER_01Yeah. When you um step into a new performance environment for the first time, what do you look at first before making any changes?
SPEAKER_00Uh I look at what they're currently doing first and foremost. So I want to understand, okay, what are you doing? What have you done? Is that where has that gotten you so far? And the reason why I look at what has been done first and foremost and what it where it's gotten them is going, okay, well, you've done this so far, either being successful or not successful. And uh where are those results from a physical uh landscape, from injury landscape, uh from a cultural landscape. And then once you kind of assess that, you can go, okay, where we where can we make changes now versus later? Because if you try and change everything in one go, it's not gonna happen. So you need to be able to do this over time. And and when I come into clubs and I talk to them about different scenarios, I go, I'm I'm not looking to change everything. I want to make sure we do this over a long time period. So even though we're talking about a single-year contract most times, we're look-I'm always looking at five years in the future about what we can change long term rather than short term. Uh so it can be again a broad question, and you I guess using a broad brush across, I guess, this statement. But regardless of if you're successful or not successful, it's what has the current physical performance program done for your athletes and has it helped them get to where they need to be rather than performance of a program overall? Because you can have talented players that don't succeed, but you can also have talented players that don't succeed.
SPEAKER_01And so it's I'm changing performance, I'm not changing um the I guess the one of the things you mentioned there when you first stepped in as well was like the trajectory and the results. Has that been like a an association with I think one of the things you mentioned was like, is it a cultural association, is it something else? Could you like delve a little bit into that? So you mentioned like cultural is one thing versus physical is another. Like, do you get your hands dirty with changing some of that cultural side of things and and other potential um barriers to success?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, definitely. And I think it depends on the program you're in in regards to how much say I get in that as well. So I do always try and I guess refer on where I can for the for cultural work because even I guess that's one of those things you could say early in my career, but I guess mid-career, I've gone, I I I also can do cultural work, and then when I try to do it, I was like, well, I'm not as good as I at this as I thought. So you learn the hard way, but but I guess some of what we do as physical performance coaches is also changing the culture as well, so and what we do. And so I've I had a history, and I'm gonna use an example here, is had a history of helping low-level resource clubs um to become successful, I guess, and make sure we had a high standard, make sure we um uh work together. Uh it's all about making sure this team first, and a lot of that can come from the SNC and even the the performance coach, but depending on the environment, because uh say a sport like football, a lot of it comes from the head coach. And so um when I came into Lions FC, a very successful program already, um I had to look at what they were doing and and how it can improve that. And and I actually brought someone on from a cultural perspective uh as well. Um but things that I saw which I could change culture-wise was like I asked the question, I said, okay, they come in Monday, what's the first thing they actually do? And they go, Oh, um, they end up just going straight to field um and we just start. I was like, okay, so there's no meeting, nothing? They're like, nah. I was like, okay, cool. Uh so when we look at uh gym work, what if they did gym work? They go, oh, they just jump in a gym with um Nick, the guy that was doing it, uh, and they come out and go into field. I said, okay, cool. So do they meet with Nick at all? No, they just jump into training and say, okay, cool. Like for me, that's a really simple thing to go, let's chat first, build something there. And so something really simple that I wanted to change was was that. And so yeah, I started telling them about what we're doing each time. This is what we're aiming for, this is what we're gonna do going forward. And then I started adding things in when they started getting used to the program is like Fun Fact Thursday or um to joke Tuesday or something. So that way it kind of just lightened the the mood before we even started and it brought everyone together. So uh and then something as simple as that can can create very powerful results. And yeah, sometimes it doesn't work because people just don't want to bar of it and they go, I just want to get in and get the work done. And but when you play little games as well, like little games I think make a big difference as well. Like I love to play little reactive games uh within warm-ups or communication games within warm-ups as well, so that way you get people to communicate more. Um, and depending on the sport, uh depending on how much they communicate in their environment, I think that's one thing which you could nearly go back to the previous question about fundamentals, is I think communication is at the forefront of every successful team. And so when I see uh teams in warm-ups, I can tell when it's not going to be a good game pretty much 98% of the time. So a lot of that resolves around communication and intent on what they're doing. So I think communication is really paramount, and I try and integrate a lot of that into what I do.
SPEAKER_01That answers my question around what's the difference between a good training program and a hybrid performance system, I think.
SPEAKER_00Part of it. It definitely answers part of it. So um I do think there is a key difference in the fact that a good training program is the one that someone does, not necessarily what is the best pre training program they've they've been given. So if it's engaging enough, it's gonna get done, which means you're gonna get the best results. And I have this question from a lot of people that say, Wow, I got a lot of results from CrossFit, but didn't get a lot of results from my PT. I said awesome, how often did you go to the PT? And they go, Oh, like once a week. And I go, and what else did you do? They go, Oh, I just went in a couple times a week and did um some bike work or some treadmill work. It's like awesome. How often do you train train at CrossFit? Oh, three to five times a week. I was like, cool. Purely volume of training has changed your output. So it's because their training program was something that engaged you. Previous program was not, and then when you c start to step into a high performance system, I think it's similar on a certain uh avenue, but I also think it's is something where it becomes uh athlete-led and everyone knows their role. And so I think that's the best part of a high performing system is everyone knows their role and can hold each other accountable. If you have a system where no one can hold someone accountable, or if you raise a concern and it's pushed away and and forgotten, there's certain aspects around that communication which need to be improved. So I think training program versus high performance system are two different things, but both involve level of engagement and both result in a certain level of accountability as well. So I think that's I guess my simplest uh answer in in that space.
SPEAKER_01Yeah. Um no, that makes that makes sense. I guess um one of my follow-up questions from that was when you identify that there are certain conversations that aren't very beneficial or positive to the overall engagement of the team, how do you go about rectifying that? And this is probably going to be on a case-by-case scenario, but is there any particular, I don't know, introduction or certain perspective that you have before going in and directing or addressing that that issue?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, definitely. And like you said, it's case by case. Uh, it's also depending on the team I'm in as well. So I have a bunch of three different standards that have kind of been developed with athletes, coaches, stakeholders across the last um like 10 years, and I've used them across different clubs. If essentially the head coach or the people in charge will allow me to kind of take that on board. Uh, and and essentially part of those is making sure that we're accountable to each other. So when I introduce what we do and our standards, so we always talk about earning your stripes, so making sure the work you do is the output that you get. So that's a real big one. So that's one of the standards we try and uphold because if you're not putting in the work, then you can't expect the result, right? So um, and then going on to a few more, uh essentially like uh help a brother out, help a sister out is is another one. So it's like always making sure you support or back the people around you. So it doesn't matter what they're going through, um, whether they're struggling or whether succeeding, we can celebrate or we can hold each other to account. And I think that's one of the biggest ones is I talk about it doesn't matter if you're new or if you're experienced, anyone can hold each other accountable if they see something. You've got to accept that it's not personal, it's someone has seen something you haven't. And one of the best analogies I've got from someone is from Holly Ransom, and she talks about a die. So if you roll a die at a table and you've got four people sitting around a table, what are the numbers you're seeing? And you might see a four on top, and everyone can see the four, and that's what everyone sees. But then on your side, you might see a six, you might see a two, you might see a three, and you might see um a one. And so we all see different perspectives, even though overall everyone sees the same picture on top. So um, and so I kind of use that analogy to explain that doesn't matter how experienced you are, someone raises something that they think you're not holding to standard. We can then have a conversation. At the time, it might not be worth bringing it up because it's not the right time for it. But afterwards, and after a training session, after a game, we can chat to each other and go, okay, what happened? Where can we improve? What did you see? What did I see? Uh, and move on from there. And and uh I think even from an athlete perspective, like I had a had a squad where um we had some experienced people, people that weren't actually finishing even a warm-up over the line, and we had some of the young girls, like I I just finished this chat in the sheds, and some of the young girls pulled up the senior girls and were a little bit quiet about it. I'm like, can you say that louder for everyone? And they did, and and the senior girls were like, Yep, sorry, my bad, and then continued on. You end up having the peers hold each other accountable rather than a coach because they're gonna listen to the peers more they're gonna listen more than they're gonna listen to you.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_00And so that's how I kind of prefaced it. And so when you have a situation where people aren't following that, then you go, okay, this needs to be a bigger situation. So hopefully you have a player group. You mentioned to the to the leadership group in that, I guess they're the player group as well. They need to start to raise those concerns. So again, it becomes peer-led. And if it's still not uh working, then you go to uh the high-level coaches and they need to start to have that conversation because it becomes a a bigger issue if the peers can't work out that situation.
SPEAKER_01That's fantastic. I'm already starting to see how these jigsaw puzzles fit together. And I think it starts with communication, like you were saying, you identified when you went into a club that they weren't having meetings prior to going on the field. And so even just something as simple and as simple but as powerful as that then transfers that information or those standards or values. If they don't have the meeting in the first place, then that's not possible. And then it sort of sounds like you're building it out to be more of like a hierarchical system so that like you said, it can be peer-led and it's autonomous. That's really interesting. I I I like that. So I guess I just really find it interesting. Um, so what I guess do you have any formal systems in what's the word? Do you have any formal systems in place aside from that sort of hierarchical, peer-led approach that help to formalise or maintain quality?
SPEAKER_00I think this is a is a hard one because I think there's so much we can do with systems and go, this is what's written down, this is what we have to follow. Um, the biggest issue I've seen with coaches is they don't commit on the little things, or essentially they decide to go their own direction when you're trying to provide them their input. And so when I start to look at going, okay, can we formalize some of these systems? It's more about from my side is I want to trust the person's experience, I want to trust their what they've seen before, but I provide them here's my minimums, and outside of that, you can use your, I guess, experience, and then we go from there. So Rather than saying, here's my system, my system is here are my minimums that exist in a program. You need to follow these. They're non-negotiables. The next part is I trust you to do this. So I want you to do this. I just want you to check in with me and make sure that we are on the right track. And I'll provide any further questions, any kind of feedback. I might just say that's awesome. Let's keep moving. Um and then from there on in is I guess making sure there's further follow-up or feedback, which I kind of mentioned briefly then as well. So I think that's kind of as simple as I am with a lot of my systems because I want to give people ownership and of the program. And so when I I guess take over programs, my job is, in my opinion, to make me redundant overall. So I'll step in, I'll help out, and then each year then I'll have less responsibility and give that to that same person, and then they start to mentor someone. And then so essentially you build this system of people. And so it's not your your detailed systems, but it's your I guess systems in providing non-negotiables and then trust. So you're going, they're helping me this much, but then they're also giving me ownership of my knowledge and my experience. So you get this, I guess, really trusting system that works with each other. And sometimes I think when you try and I guess formalize that, it can be pretty hard. So it's more about having just these three steps and and then you look at how that works based off everyone's background as well. Because I think there's so many different ways to skin a cat. I think we probably should use a different analogy nowadays with uh all the concerns about analogies we use. But I never think there's the there's the right way or the wrong way, there's just more effective ways we can do things, and um and I'll use a quick example because I like examples, uh, is the difference between rugby league and soccer is you can do a strength str strength session before going on field, but because of the kicking actions you want to take in something like even Aussie rules, Aussie rules and and and soccer, football, you need to generally, in my experience, reduce the reps in that pre-training so they feel like they can still actually get what they need to out on field. Whereas if you start to look at capacity work prior to a session, that ends up impairing their ability to kick more. So you can add volume after training, but you can't add it before training in the gym. So that's a non-negotiable that I have with coaches, is if our session is before training in soccer, football, reps stay low, but your volume and uh volume in sets can actually be higher. So then you still get you get increased rate of force development, you get the same volume that you would with your higher reps, but you end up getting a greater strength output rather than uh essentially a capacity output there, and then then you do your capacity post-session as well.
SPEAKER_01Some would argue not doing that is the wrong way to do it, not necessarily an inferior or superior spectrum, but it's just well, I I guess that comes back to standards as well if if we know that that's gonna increase rate of force development and that won't fatigue them in their game as much. Wouldn't it be wrong if you weren't doing it that way? But um that's a debate.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, well, and I'll jump into that one quickly, is like well, depending on how you program, right? Because you can say early on, fundamentally, we want some capacity, so we can then use the capacity to build our rate of force development, essentially. But I think there's a lot involved around like cluster sets and that now and the research that exists that shows you can still get the same benefit out of or improve benefit out of this as well. And I think it definitely changes depending on the environment, if it's before or after training, if you've got sessions that are back onto each other, or you can get do it the next day as well. So there's so many different ways to do things, right?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, no, very true. So following on from on that and you and your how you go about, I guess, bring that it really comes back to some sort of those values and those and that communication, um, that connection. At what point, because for a lot of people listening, some people may still be in that mindset of I'm the coach, they're gonna listen to what I say. They may even get certain joy in in being the leader on that aspect. Whereas it sounds like you had that identity shift of changing from a coach to a leader, and that means making yourself as redundant as possible. At what point did that identity shift occur?
SPEAKER_00Good question. I'll reframe this slightly because I think I guess I've learned a lot around identity because of the work that my wife does specifically outside of outside of insider sport as well. But when we kind of kind of look at identity, I go, well, technically I'm me, not a coach or a leader. I'm me, and then I'm also a coach and leader, right? So it's like so. I guess I'll I'll kind of say like rather than shifting from a coach to a leader, I've always been a problem solver. And so across this whole time period, all I solve is just different levels of problems. Um so I've seen a problem and I want to solve it. Depends on what problem I'm going to get involved in and how deep I'm going to get involved. Uh on a coaching level early on, I only got to see the athlete, I got to see the problems they were having. When I started to even say this is where I mentioned being a president of a rugby league club, I actually got to see all the different systems that existed from uh from like a treasurer to a vice president to a president to um to your secretaries, to um the stakeholders, students, a sport organization. So I get to see a whole different level, and I think that kind of shaped how I saw what you can do as a coach as well, because there is so much more that we can do to just help the person depending on your environment, but also help other coaches. And so rather than just help the athlete, I think this is where a shift was instead of just helping the athlete, if I help the coach, you then help more athletes. So I can get a I guess a greater spread of help if I can improve the environment to allow more coaches to come into it, because then they get more attention, the athletes get more attention from those coaches because then I can focus on helping more coaches, and if I have more coaches, they help more athletes, and then you have a a bigger spread. And for lack of a better term, it looks like a pyramid scheme. But so let's avoid the word scheme, it just looks like a pyramid of of more people that can help. Not it doesn't actually earn me more money by any means, because I actually shift pretty much as much cash as I can to the coaches, and then all I do is pay for resources and any time I guess I try and put towards programs as well.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, that's a that's a good way of putting it. Reframing it as you've always been a problem solver, and then it's just uh identifying the bigger problem and having greater impact at the end of the day.
SPEAKER_02Yep.
SPEAKER_01I think some some DPs may even do themselves a disservice by potentially playing smaller, and that's not necessarily say it's that's a bad thing, like people can make a fantastic, a drastic change with helping a small group of people significantly. Um it just I think it maybe comes back to can you have a bigger impact on less people or a smaller impact on more people, but that can cascades into bigger impacts in general. That's to get philosophical on you.
SPEAKER_00No, absolutely. I'll um I'll kind of add to that as well by going some people don't always want to run programs because there's a lot of things you do behind the scenes. Um I know physios, as an example, they've taken over programs as a head physio compared to being a physio, and they go, actually, I don't want to do all the extra stuff. I I just like to being a physio.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_00So it's like some people don't want to be that, and I love coaching as well. So sometimes I go, Oh, do you want to step away from it? And then I start trying to do more coaching specifically, and I go, I just see problems I can solve, and if I can solve it, why not?
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_00So I end up jumping back into the same kind of situation. So I think I'm drawn towards those situations where I can problem solve on a greater level because I guess I have the capacity or ability to do so.
SPEAKER_01Awesome. On the topic of problems, which problems is harder? Building athlete performance or building coaching culture?
SPEAKER_00I think it depends on how much say you get from a program. So a lot of what I do is in teams. Uh, so it's easy to build athlete performance, it's easy to build coaching culture, but it depends on the buy-in you get from the people around you. So, and that might say you might go, well, that's coaching culture, but if you essentially can't get people on board to begin with, you can't build the athlete either. So um so I think it's nearly like a chicken egg situation to a certain extent. So I think it's it's how engaging can you be to the people in front of you to build what you want to build? And so, and that becomes a little bit of a question on culture, but it's really about how engaging you can be to that person in front of you or the team in front of you or the organization in front of you that gets the I guess the bigger outcome.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, that's a that's a good point. Is it more is it the results that drive the engagement though? Isn't is the next question, or is it something else?
SPEAKER_00Uh in my opinion and in my experience, people want to play their sport, they don't get in the in the sport to do all the extra things, they get in the sport because they love the sport. So if you can find a way to engage them and connect to their sport and everything you do, you're gonna get a better output. Because if people aren't doing things at an AMS, they just don't care, they're not gonna give you what you need. So uh so if it connects back to their sport, you're gonna get a better output. Exactly. Which you probably see in talking about EPs, right? You essentially find the why and what what drives people outside of just coming back from rehab is I guess in the clinical sense, or if they go to an EP for another reason, is the why behind what they're doing and then keeping them on board, I guess, long term, because they found something they enjoy and and what is it that they enjoy then you can engage them with.
SPEAKER_01If you had to summarize what you do in terms of stepping into like an environment and then escalating that to improve the outcomes of that team or that particular individual, how would you summarize what it is you do with that just really quickly?
SPEAKER_00Question. That one, that's a good question. So I guess uh how I I guess summarize what I do is still I guess physical performance uh enhancement because everything I still do relates to physical performance. Uh there's just different levels of what that involves. So I I do sometimes talk about uh building teams and building systems effectively uh to improve performance. So you could say in real simple terms is um I I build performance systems to improve uh outcomes for teams or individuals. Yeah. So yeah, but I still put it back to its physical performance enhancement because it still still comes back to physical performance because I can't I still can't influence the skill set. I can influence the drills that a coach might do and talk to them about that, which can influence that, but that still comes from the physical performance knowledge that I have as well.
SPEAKER_01The main reason I asked that is, and I guess I'll just word it plainly, is if you were teaching EPs how to build these environments and these systems or or values that outperform the individual coach or clinician, what would the core pillars be for teaching that EP?
SPEAKER_00It's a good way to frame it. So I think one of the core pillars is teaching communication, because I come back to that a lot. One is trust. So even though you think of okay, building these environments is you've got to trust the people around you and trust the people in front of you. If you don't trust them, then there's a breakdown. So how can you teach someone to trust not just the other EPs or the other coaches in front of you, but the people you're actually giving something to to run, um, to do what they need to do. And then I'll try and keep it to three. I'll actually say the other thing is is standards. It could be standards, it could be behaviors, it could be a pillar and a pillar, right? So, so and what I mean by that is having a set standard to go, we actually need to raise the standard what we're doing. We tend to come back to I guess what we see is normative data because we have normative data, but normative data doesn't mean we we shouldn't be held to a higher standard. So whether it's our fleet performance or whether it's uh we see normative data as a clinician, we go, we want to hit these normative values. Do we want to hit normative values or do we want to actually exceed normative values to hold a higher standard? If we can hold a higher standard, the normative values come up, and now we hold everyone to a high level of physical fitness, capacity, and then obviously that leads to longevity as well.
SPEAKER_01Curse, I love it. I think, yeah, I definitely um are on board with those last three. Where do you think um performance in sports science are heading in the next five years?
SPEAKER_00Great question. Initially, I think backwards, but it's also forwards in a positive direction. So I think we go in cycles, right? So I think we're at a tipping point where technology, even though I'm about to launch a tech company, technology is at a point where people are people have seen data long enough without people finally giving insights um effectively, that they're starting to go back to go, we just need people to deal with people because coaching is people facing. And so you get the best response out of people connecting with people. And so I think we're going back a little bit to go, we need people to operate with people rather than we need sports science to drive our decisions. And I think there was actually a really good paper that came out a couple years ago, or maybe it was even last year, that showed there was um they surveyed what was it, the the board or the high-level stakeholders, CEO and stuff like that, um, or people like that. They surveyed the performance staff and then they've surveyed the head coaches. And when you look at sports scientists, as an example, the CEO and the board, they all and I'm sorry, every sta every person involved surveyed or said the head coach was the most important, right? So head coach said head coach is most important. Performance staff said head coach is still most important because you've got to be able to coach the athlete. The board members said just tell it to have the head coach as the most important. Second was sports scientists from the the board members. I think it was sports scientists was maybe third from the performance staff. Um and for the head coach, sports science was last in regards to the level of importance. Right. So in that, in what it shows a big disconnect in what boards think versus the people running the team on the um on the coal face, right? So because of that big disconnect, I see people probably going back to people facing, I guess, recruitment rather than recruiting the people that just provide data, and and so we're looking for better insights, and we commonly see that from coaches on the ground, not from people that are sports scientists, because we go, how can we convert this data until it's tell us it's good for people in front of us? So I think there's a bit of a shift right now, and I think if we get the connect right in the next five years, then we're gonna see an explosion again coming out of those five years. But I think in the next five years, there's gonna be a slight change in ensuring we are people facing and user-facing because it hasn't been done for so long that people are sick of it and just providing data without an insight, that it's gonna go down to user-facing, and then we're gonna go back to more data being used again. And there is an explosion in AI, so data is still gonna be used, but I think recruitment is gonna be focused on people facing because head coaches are sick of just getting data without anything else.
SPEAKER_01I I definitely, yeah, just to add my own story there, I definitely see that, even though I don't work in in sport, I definitely see that in private practice where I I practice in a community-oriented area, and it's that community, it's like people have gotten so sick of seeing technology all the time that they're now wanting more of that human connection, and I think that data at the moment, like you just said, is sort of yeah, it seems to be maybe not as well or I'm not sure the what what the right word would be, maybe not necessarily important, as astonishing as it maybe was when we were on the curve upwards. Um, but yeah, you're I think it'll be really interesting to see what the next five years looks like, and then after that, what that in entails with um yeah, technology further. Because I think it does blend itself really well with certain certain areas, including results oriented and results results orientated approach, which we're all hopefully aiming for. Yeah, like you said, in terms of the recruitment, maybe maybe yeah, more human connection side of things, and yeah.
SPEAKER_00And I'll and I'll add to that just one more thing. And I think it's come a lot of a lot of time from the amount of apps we have to download because every business has a thing you need to download an app to get data, and then everyone's going, there's an app for this and an app for that, and up for that, and they go, Can you just tell me what to do? Thanks. So yeah, and so um, and that's it's not meant to be a plug, but that that's kind of the foundation of what we've built Kiva Motion off is making sure everything is connected. So we'll have a Kiva Connect app that sits in there, so pretty much like a Strava for sports that aren't ledger sports that people can connect with each other. It won't be for another six months or so. But when you get data, you get insights to that data, and you actually have research that backs that inside as well, which you can actually connect to, so you can tap into it and go, where does this come from? So you know where the insights come from, so it's not just someone giving you data without a background to it, but so every part of data you have has an insight to it. It's not just here's data for the sake of data.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, awesome.
SPEAKER_00So we're trying to drive that and trying to reduce the amount of apps you use. Data can be shared um between organizations, so all that kind of stuff. So that way you don't have to worry about oh, you need to connect to this app or that app, it's just it's one app, connect with each other, um, and it makes it really simple and easy to use.
SPEAKER_01Mate, it sounds like you're on the forefront with um with that. That's that's really in shield of thinking. Before we um before we wrap up, we have a uh closing tradition on the podcast. Bit of a broad question, but just take your time to um answer it. What's one topic or issue you think EPs should be talking about more openly with each other?
SPEAKER_00Great question. So what's one topic EPs should be talking about more with each other? Yeah. Yeah. I think overall it's how to collaborate to get the best outcome for the person in front of you, rather than thinking my system is better than your system, which is better than this system. So I think all the systems that we tend to use work. And as much as we're business people, I think it's being able to collaborate for the user in front of you and not just collaborate for your own business prospects. And I think I think that's one of the biggest ones I've seen because obviously we still need a profit as a business, right? So I think that's important. If there is someone in front of you and you aren't getting the outcome you want, it's being able to collaborate with another EP. Um, and you might go, okay, our EPs can't see that. I want to talk to another EP business to see what they're like to see if they can see something different. Uh so sometimes we need to get out of our own space. So that might be uh literally a a working group of EPs that can come together and solve issues that we've found are tough, or um, and then we go, oh, we can take that away for our own businesses and um or like we talk about different systems that works at that business. Awesome, I know that's your IP. Can I uh look to use that? And and like I I saw Lumen Sports, they had a really good feedback system initially when they when they kicked in uh a couple of years ago. I mean they've been operating for a while, but and I said to them, I messaged them, I said, mate, can I use the same feedback system you guys did? Like I I've got a different system technically, I'm not an AMS, but I really liked how that worked. So can I pretty much rip that from you guys? Um, and they said, Yeah, go for it. Like if we can help uh someone else provide a better user experience, then uh I'm all for it. So that that's kind of I guess what I what I see. And there are some EPs that obviously collaborate well and some that collaborate less, but I think most EPs are okay with it, but I think it's separating the business from the helping the user first and foremost.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, no, that's a really good point. Um, Kurt, if if anyone wants to find you or wants to be chat, where where can people find you?
SPEAKER_00Uh so a couple different ways. So I tend to respond on Instagram more than anything. Um Kurtvogel.coach on Instagram. Uh or email is Kurt at revolverathletic.com. But I guess uh with uh a new venture, you could also find us at Kivomotion or Kurt at Kivomotion.com. So a real easy one. Um not to plug.
SPEAKER_01I mean plug it in the plug in the description.
SPEAKER_00So yeah, so I've started to use that email a little bit more as well. So yeah, but uh that's probably the easiest way to kind of touch base with me. So I respond quicker on Instagram than I do in email because email I don't like using sent from my iPhone, so I respond quicker on Instagram, so it's more personal as well. I guess you can also just find me on LinkedIn. So on a professional uh level, a LinkedIn, happy to answer any messages on there as well. Just simply Kirk Vogel and you'll be able to see me. Uh if you see my face here or heard my voice, you can find me pretty quickly on LinkedIn.
SPEAKER_01Awesome. Thanks, Kirk, for coming on.
SPEAKER_00Appreciate the time, uh Lenny. And I've probably taken away too much time. Uh I can chat uh sometimes. But uh yeah, thanks for having me on. I really appreciate it. Um appreciate the uh That's all been insightful.
SPEAKER_01Thanks.