What’s in a name? Pt 3 – Will a name change save you?

In the 1970s, at least in the Western world, there was very little title variation.  In sport in America there was the title strength coach, but there were so few of them employed that the title was relatively unknown. In you were to get work physically training people it would be in the fitness industry – and even that was relatively small cohort – and your title was ‘gym instructor’.

Since that decade the names options have not only gone through a degree of evolution, but there has also been a growth in diversity.   Here’s the interesting aspect of this – due to relative youthfulness of this ‘profession’[1] (I suggest it’s about 50 years old), combined with a relatively unregulated environment (compared with more established professions), individuals are free to adopt whatever title or name they wish. And the last fifty years has shown the propensity of individuals to do just that.

In more established professions, a title or name is controlled by strict regulations. Take the title ‘Doctor’ for example.  I would imagine that someone was not a doctor on Monday, and without any change in their professional training, chose the title or name ‘Doctor’ on Tuesday, would be quickly subjected to regulatory enforcement.

Or if a person with the regulatory approval to describe themselves as a psychologist on Monday woke up on Tuesday and chose to title themselves as a ‘psychiatrist’ on Tuesday – without any change in their professional training.

Contrast that with the physical training ‘profession’ – A person could call themselves a ‘Gym’ or ‘Fitness Instructor’ on Monday, wake up on Tuesday and decide to change their title to ‘Personal Trainer’, wake up on Wednesday and decide to change it again to a ‘Strength & Conditioning Coach’, wake up on Thursday and decide to change it again to ‘Physical Preparation Coach’, and on Friday choose to revert their title back to ‘Personal Trainer’.  All without any change in their professional training, and with no fear of regulatory enforcement.

The question can be posed – why individuals change their title or name, and is that working out for them. In other words, is the name change achieving the goal or reason they change their name?

A brief historical observation journey

To start to understand the habit within our ‘profession’ for changing one’s title, I will share my half a century observation on evolution and diversity in names.

I am going to focus on paid roles, not volunteer positions, and speak of my personal observations. Yes, someone may have been guiding Milo as he carried the calf on his shoulder in 2000 BC, but I can’t say for sure (I wasn’t there) and I don’t know if anyone can confirm if a coach or advisor existed, where they a volunteer or a paid professional?

1970s: As I commenced with above, the 1970s saw a small number of ‘strength coaches’ in the (US) sport industry and ‘gym instructors’ in the fitness industry.

1980s: The term ‘strength & conditioning coach’ was formalized by the American organization the National Strength & Conditioning Association (formerly the ‘National Strength Coaches Association’) or NSCA in the US in 1981 and began to grow in use from a very small based as that decade continued. In the fitness industry, the title ‘Personal Trainer’  grew in the US but did not spread out of the US until the 1990s.

1990s: The term ‘strength & conditioning coach’ began to grow from a very small base outside of the US, for example in Australia.  I began publishing the term ‘physical preparation coach’ in this decade, and this was picked up on by a few Australians. In the fitness industry, the NSCA expanded their reach by introducing a ‘Personal Trainer’ Certification.

2000-2020: The term ‘strength & conditioning coach’ continued its global expansion including in Europe. The term ‘physical preparation’ coach grew from a small base in the US and around the world following the promotion of my 1990s works internationally.  And the PT market firmed up as a large part the NSCA membership base.

2020s: Following the 2010s, which I have labelled the ‘Decade of Dysfunction’ or ‘Decade of Injury’[2] and I have provisionally called the 2020 decade the ‘Decade of Injury Rehabilitation’.[3] It is no surprise we now see a new addition to the name options, with names such as ‘Injury prevention & rehabilitation specialist’.

So why do some change their name?

As an observer and student of this ‘profession’ I have formed certain opinions about the relatively rapid rate of new name adoptions. For example, why did so many fitness ‘professionals’ in the late 1990s and post 2000 change their title from ‘Personal Trainer’ to ‘Strength & Conditioning Coach’?

I have concluded that sport is generally seen in the eyes of most to be a more significant segment than the general population segment.  Which is why I suggest that this name change occurred at the rate it did, in the absence of any real change in client base. I believe these individuals were seeking significance in the first instance, and as second consideration, the hope (or wish?) that this would result in the attraction of the higher valued athlete clients.

In the next evolution or more accurately reincarnation, I then observed some post 2000 transition a second time to the title ‘Physical Preparation Coach’.  Again, I suggest that the desire to be appeared to be more aligned with sport and athletes as the primary motivator, and the wishful hope that a name change might attract athlete clients.

I have also witnessed a ‘regression’ in perceived social significance of title. For example in one case I witnessed a name change from Personal Trainer to Physical Preparation Coach, and then a few years later a revert back to Personal Trainer.

A case study

What I have described is well illustrated in this case study. The following titles have been used by this case study in a 10-year period from 2015-2025:

2015 – 2018

Personal Trainer

Diet and Exercise Coach

Nutrition Coach

Nutrition and Exercise Coach

2018+

Physical Preparation coach

Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation Specialist

Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation Pro

That’s a minimum of seven title changes/choices over ten years.

Is it working?

If a professional gained a new qualification you might expect them to change their title. However, when you see the change in the absence of educational change the conclusion I have reached in many cases is that there is a hope that by changing the name of the title, there will be a different / better outcome in client attraction and or social significance.

Now if this theory was accurate, it remains subjective and difficult to measure at to the impact of these name changes.

However, having watched this habit appear and accelerate since about 1995, I have not seen the weight of evidence in the last 30 years to support that this strategy is effective in achieve the goals. And less so in the long term.

Conclusion

From the 1970s to the mid 1990s there was little change in the title a physical coach would assign themselves. Since the mid 1990s, there has not only been a evolution in terms, there has also been a ‘fluidness’ in the use of those terms. Whilst the physical coaching ‘profession’ retains it unregulated and immature status, individuals retain the ability to change the title of their services at will.

The question remains – why is this occurring, and is it achieving its goals?

I’m not convinced that changing your name/title is going to save you, compared to say an upgrade in qualifications and or competence.

It matters less what you call yourself. It matters more the impact of your service, the value you bring to the market.

References

[1] You will note the presence of quotation marks or inverted commas around the word ‘profession’.  The message is the question mark about whether the term is accurate or applicable. In other words, is this ‘profession’ professional? Compared to other more established professions, I suggest not.

[2] “I have labelled the 2010-2020 decade as the Decade of Dysfunction (i.e. the Decade of Injury), as during this time the scoreboard of injuries was clear – the incidence, severity, and reduction in age serious injuries were occurring had increased exponentially”—King, I., 2025, Legacy 2^nd Ed., Vol. 1 – Injury prevention and performance enhancement, Theory #17 – The dominant focus by decade

[3] “We are only halfway through the 2020s decade however if I was to call it now, I would label this decade as the Decade of Injury Rehabilitation based on the growing number of individuals, I see marketing themselves or seeking to become ‘experts’ in this space, including in the absence of any formal training.”—King, I., 2025, Legacy 2^nd Ed., Vol. 1 – Injury prevention and performance enhancement, Theory #17 – The dominant focus by decade

——-

King Sports International (KSI) is the original global provider of physical coach education, since 1999.  KSI introduced the ‘professions’ first professional development ‘Boot Camps’, circa, 1999, and the ‘professions’ first ‘Coach Mentoring Program’ in 2003. Prior to that, Ian King wrote and taught the curriculum for Australian Strength and Conditioning Coaches from 1989 to 1998. Prior to that, Ian wrote and presented Australia’s first state-based fitness industry strength training accreditation course in Queensland from approx. 1983-1988.  KSI content is original content, based on the tested results from half a century of training elite athletes in large samples sizes in a wide range of sports through a diverse range of countries and cultures.

You can learn more about KSI Coach Education Program here or by emailing us at question@kingsports.net.