Barriers to strength training for runners, viewed through the lens of Systems Theory

Introduction 

The learning outcomes I identified for this module were to 1) identify the barriers faced by runners, including marathon runners, in relation to strength training, 2) to view these issues through the lenses of various theories, including systems theory, and 3) to create a resource which could help runners identify and overcome the barriers that prevent them from engaging in strength training.

As my research progressed, it became clear there were numerous theories which explain the thoughts and behaviours of individuals, and that systems theory itself was far more general than I had realised. McLean et al. (2025) explain complexity and systems thinking in more depth as it relates to sport. Sporting capital theory (Rowe, 2015) and expanded versions of the Health Belief Model by (Janz and Becker (1984) from concepts originally devised by Hochbaum et al. (1958) for instance, more accurately represent the experiences and actions of my clients. 

Additionally, theories and models which identify psychological, psycho-social and other external and internal factors as additional influencers of behaviours and outcomes related to sport and athletic transitions, such as the developmental model put forward by Wylleman et al. (2004) further supports the interconnectedness of the life of athletes, which does link back to systems thinking (McLean et al., 2025) more broadly.

Experience hours were undertaken in my running coaching business where services include strength training tuition. I had discussions with clients to understand their position and reflected on these sessions as well as my professional practice within the sessions and subsequent resource provision. I chose to focus on strength training as I have found that many runners either do not understand its benefits, and have physical and/or psychological barriers to engaging with strength training, in line with the findings of Luckin et al. (2017) and Iverson et al. (2021). Furthermore, participation is often limited as shown by Altinger et al. (2024) who found that adherence to home-based exercise programmes can be as low as 30%. This can be the case even when people do understand the benefits and claim to have no barriers to participation, where a lack of awareness of their attitude towards performing strength exercises, or perceived lack of control interferes with the intentions as described in the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991).

My role as a coach is to better understand my clients and improve my ability to help them to achieve their goals, in this case utilising strength training, which is why I chose this area as a focus for professional development.

Whilst research often has inconclusive findings for many of the goals that runners aim to achieve through strength training, this can depend on the specificity of the research interventions as detailed by Llanos-Lagos et al. (2024). A lack of appropriate training interventions in research may be misleading and consequently could result in fewer runners performing strength training. There is evidence that suitable strength training can help with improving lower limb power which reduces race times, increases muscular endurance and running economy (Šuc et al., 2022) and reduces the risks of injury (Taylor-Haas et al., 2014). This is particularly important for marathon runners, given that Li et al. (2026) found injury rates of 46.5% in a 6-month period for marathon runners in their cross-sectional study. There is, however, on-going research and discussion related to the precise mechanisms of injury-prevention and pain reduction (Powell et al., 2025). Notwithstanding, Saragiotto et al. (2014) suggest that runners misunderstand the importance of strength training regardless of the reasons for the reduction in injury risks that it seems to create. This likely has an impact on some elements of the Health Belief Model (Janz and Becker, 1984) which discussed “perceived susceptibility”, “perceived severity” and “perceived benefits” as part of the core constructs.

There are numerous benefits of strength training which allow better performance over longer distance events such as the marathon, therefore, I will explore the strength training challenges runners face, relating the personal experiences of my clients to relevant theories and research, before reflecting on how I can take this learning forward to better serve marathon runners and runners in general.

Learning incidence 1

C.A. is a fifty-seven year old male, focusing on marathon improvements. C.A. wanted to make changes to training due to a lack of progress, which would be classified as a non-event by Wylleman et al. (2004), where assumptions about oneself changes. Consequently, C.A. asked for a training plan to prepare for his next marathon. C.A. failed to complete the majority of strength training sessions, not meeting the guidance of two strength training activities per week (Piercey et al., 2018). I suggested removing the running aspect of coaching to instead focus on strength as C.A. claimed to value the benefit but was poor at managing his time and struggled to know what to do without in-person guidance, a common barrier also identified by Luckin et al. (2017). Although Liu et al. (2026) found no significant difference in the effectiveness of home-based vs guided rehab exercises when performing low intensity and low complexity exercises, C.A. required higher intensity and more complex training, which has been shown to negatively impact pleasure (Lind et al., 2008) which in turn could negatively impact adherence.

A further non-event (Wylleman et al., 2004), occurred when C.A. ran his slowest marathon. He felt the benefit of strength training however, so we continued coaching strength to aid performance, with an understanding that strength training is important to reduce or even reverse age-related muscle loss known as sarcopenia (Pereira et al., 2025). Although C.A. experienced strength and speed improvements, injuries began to appear. Improved running economy from strength training allows runners to continue running at pace for longer (Šuc et al., 2022), and after conversing with C.A. we established reduced performance-limiting quadricep tiredness, allowing C.A. to now load his Achilles and calves more, which likely resulted in pain here instead. Research by Kakouris et al. (2021) found that Achilles tendinopathy was the most common injury in runners at 10.3% and Sargeant et al. (2025) showed that appropriate strength training can help to reduce injury risks for runners, highlighting the continued need for C.A. to perform strength training.

Having experienced this injury and recovering from it, C.A. had gained a further appreciation of strength training and its use in preventing injuries, C.A. was more consistent with at-home strength work for a period of time. There were, however, periods of inconsistency or abstinence. 

Time was again cited as an issue by C.A. further reinforcing his experience of the aforementioned common barriers found by Luckin et al. (2017). C.A. explained that he also did not think as much strength training was needed once the Achilles tendon pain was gone, signifying a reduced “perceived susceptibility” as described by the Health Belief Model (HBM) by Janz and Becker (1984). 

The HBM provides a framework for explaining the lack of participation related to health behaviours, including barriers to access, self-efficacy, clear cues to take action, and the person’s understanding of the benefits, risks, susceptibility and severity of engaging or not engaging. C.A. verbalised that he no longer saw the injury as a risk, that any risk was low and that it wouldn’t be severe if it did become a problem, and as such felt less need to engage in strength work at home. Having this conversation allowed me to reframe it from a performance standpoint instead, working with C.A. ‘s desire to continue running personal bests, which in turn could stabilise his sporting capital within running, and have a more positive effect on self-efficacy in general for him, thereby increasing the likelihood of C.A. completing the prescribed strength training. C.A. repeatedly called himself a “fun runner” but has added the caveat that he is taking it more seriously now, indicating a form of normative transition described by Wylleman et al. (2004), who although focusing or professional rather than recreational athletes, explained that athletes experience various changes or transitions over time within an athletic career depending upon external and internal factors. C.A.’s recent declaration of wanting to train more seriously to increase performance comes as an opportunity to seize upon this transition point, and make strength training behaviour change utilising the “perceived benefits” detailed in the HBM (Janz and Becker, 1984). 

Even looking only at the factors mentioned here for the specific circumstances of C.A. such as the developmental model of  Wylleman et al. (2004), the Health Belief Model (Janz and Becker, 1984), and the physical and psychological research around strength training, it is clear to see that many factors overlap and influence one another, emphasising the interconnected nature of systems thinking proposed by McLean et al. (2025).

Learning incidence 2

I.B. is a male in his late-forties who has competed for England as a Masters athlete. Despite this success he had recently experienced “non-events” in his athletic life, having not achieved race times he had been targeting. Such “non-events” or “non-normative transitions” have been described by Wylleman et al. (2004), as times related to the ending or change of a pathway. Part of I.B.‘s strategy for improving his outcomes was to identify inefficiencies in running gait and muscle weaknesses to target with exercises in order to improve running performance which was seen earlier as possible in the work of Šuc et al. (2022). I.B.’s goals indicated a level of understanding of strength training benefits for runners, but also supported the idea that a lack of knowledge of what exercises to do can be a barrier as found by Luckin et al. (2017). 

After assessing I.B.’s strength and running gait, we created a realistic programme together to raise the level of autonomy for I.B., increasing the chances of adherence as suggested by Altinger et al. (2024) and Walsh (2012). This was supported with digital resources which were shown to have a statistically significant positive impact on adherence in 70% of studies in a systematic review by Lang et al. (2022). I.B. was contacted at two and eight weeks post-strength training introduction to check his consistency and progress with the exercises. I.B. was initially consistent, but later missed several strength sessions, stating that his legs felt fatigued and that he was struggling to reach the paces in running sessions with his club mates, which had been explained as a possible short term outcome of strength training. With his status as an age-group international athlete, I.B. has shown an aptitude and dedication to training consistently, therefore his lack of consistency with strength training was surprising. It appeared that I.B. was experiencing a degree of anxiety related to his performance in training, explored by Ford et al. (2017), and avoidance of this was prioritised above long-term goals and progression. I.B.’s actions may demonstrate a loss of sporting capital from the social domain (Rowe, 2015), as his standing within the training group diminished slightly, either in perception or in reality. It is possible that I.B. then experienced a corresponding reduction in self-efficacy, contributing to the limited engagement in strength training which was seen as a causal factor.

With reflection and research for this essay, it became clear that teaching and communication methods may have been a potential contributor to I.B.’s lack of strength training participation. The assumption was that by giving a range of repetitions for each exercise and verbal confirmation that I.B. could reduce this as needed, he would follow that advice. A lack of clear guidance to I.B. illustrated a cognitive bias known as the curse of knowledge (Camerer et al., 1989) by which a professional or other person overestimates the knowledge of other people or a learner, which may therefore result in a lack of clear communication. 

If we apply the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), it would be reasonable to assume that I.B. felt a lack of “perceived behavioural control” when the guidance to adjust the amount of strength training had not been considered. The consequences of doing too much strength training for his body at that stage, could then lead to a negative “attitude toward the behaviour” which was already different from the “subjective norm” of I.B. undertaking no strength training. These three elements of Ajzen’s theory create the degree of intention for a behaviour to occur, and ultimately lead to the behaviour taking place or not. 

Conclusion

Systems theory and systems thinking (McLean et al., 2025) underpin every aspect of what has been discussed in this essay. I have spent less time directly referring to systems thinking as it is arguably too broad to be useful when discussing the experiences and actions of my clients, and envisioning how to better serve them through improved professional practice. The fact that so many nuanced theories, models and research have been discussed does however serve as evidence that the concept of systems theory does indeed apply to runners’ experiences of strength training.

Whilst I had a degree of understanding of many of the barriers my clients faced, applying theories and models gave me a deeper level of comprehension. Equally, there were issues that I was unaware of, or had underestimated, further evidencing the curse of knowledge (Camerer et al., 1989) that people can be susceptible to in both personal and professional capacities. 

The changes that I will implement can be broken down into systems changes to improve initial consultations, and the improvement of resource provision.

Consultations and systems changes

Ford et al. (2017) suggest mental health screening to help assess thoughts around health behaviours, anxiety and stress. Whilst I am not qualified to attempt to form diagnoses, the inclusion of basic mental health questions to consultation questionnaires may afford me the opportunity to gain a better understanding of my clients to predict future behaviours and improve interventions.

The common reduction in sporting capital shown by (Rowe, 2015) for men aged thirty-five years and older, is especially important for me to be mindful of, and necessary to address considering that a large proportion of my clients are men in their late thirties to late fifties.

Improvement of resource provision

Having gained a more accurate picture of my clients and their needs, the provision of additional resources, improved accessibility of resources through clearer communication, and my own increased understanding of clients via the expanded questioning in the consultation phase, will create the opportunity to better support clients psychologically during transition phases, highlighted as important by Wylleman et al. (2004).

For instance, Saragiotto et al. (2014), in their conclusion suggest that education of actual prevention strategies should be targeted due to the beliefs of runners being incongruent with research and best practices surrounding strength training benefits as they relate to injury prevention. This is of particular relevance for marathon runners when considering the 46.5% injury rates seen by Li et al. (2026).

Whilst Lang et al. (2022) showed the benefit of resource provision for home-based exercise, and Liu et al. (2026) demonstrated that simple exercises can be performed at home, Altinger et al. (2024) illustrated that adherence is often low. The increased effort and complexity of exercises that many marathon runners will need, could make this a barrier (Lind et al., 2008), (Luckin et al., 2017). The higher quality and clarity of resources I will create will aim to instill higher levels of self-efficacy that Rowe (2015), saw as beneficial for athletes when investigating sporting capital theory. In line with a greater focus on self-efficacy, where barriers such as costs and accessibility are not prohibitive, I will shift from a focus on home-based interventions to in-person strength training, at least until self-efficacy is high according to my clients. 

In turn, this should create a cycle of high self-efficacy leading to long term participation in strength training, higher sporting capital and the results that many runners desire from strength training, such as better running economy (Šuc et al.., 2022), and lower injury risks (Taylor-Haas et al., 2014) and reduced pain (Powell et al., 2025).

These cascading and multifaceted effects serve to highlight the relevance of systems thinking that McLean et al. (2025) discussed. Each change, from improving my understanding of clients’ sporting capital (Rowe, 2015) via new questionnaires, to increasing client autonomy and self-efficacy within exercise (Walsh, 2012), and more clearly communicating the benefits of strength training to reduce misunderstanding of its importance for injury risks (Saragiotto et al., 2014) will act together to create better results for my clients.

Limitations and future research

Having explored client experiences, viewed through the lens of various theories and models, backed up by numerous research articles I reflected, as stated in learning outcomes one and two. The resource outlined in learning outcome three covers the common barriers that runners may face when implementing strength training, as well as methods to overcome them. Since initially creating and amending the document soon after preliminary research for this essay, I have read numerous pieces of research and theories which will change the content of that document in the long term. I have unfortunately been unable to add to this to date, due to time constraints during the weeks-long writing process. As I continue to develop and learn, I will make further improvements, for instance including suggestions of workout formats and timing in line with the work of Iverson et al. (2021).

There are limitations to what I have been able to find in research and implement thus far. Much of the research surrounding transitions, such as the work of Wylleman et al. (2004), revolves around professional athletes or high level student-athletes rather than the recreational athlete, who nevertheless experiences transitions and changes to their circumstances, and are often highly engaged in the sport of running. Wylleman et al. (2004) did also describe how it is necessary to understand the demands of various transitions in order to be able to provide the requisite resources and assistance for the individual experiencing that transition in their sporting career. As a non-specialist, this may mean greater levels of inference which will inevitably lead to errors on my part. Future research by experts could focus on non-professional or non-elite level athletes and how changes to their circumstance impact upon their participation in sports. 

Whilst I intend to engage more deeply with clients, people may have limited financial resources or a desire to simply be told what to do, meaning it will be hard to implement the autonomy-boosting effects of programme self-selection or co-creation which Altinger et al. (2024) and Walsh (2012) found to increase adherence.

Reference list

Ajzen, I. (1991) ‘The theory of planned behavior’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 50, Issue 2, Pages 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Altinger, G., Maher, C.G. and Traeger, A.C. (2024) ‘Using behavioural economics to improve adherence to home exercise programs’, Journal of physiotherapy, 70(3), pp. 161–163. doi:10.1016/j.jphys.2024.03.003.

Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G. and Weber, M. (1989) ‘The Curse of Knowledge in Economic Settings: An Experimental Analysis’, Journal of Political Economy, 97(5), pp. 1232–1254. Available at: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=62740dfe-120b-311c-8ab1-bec96fecaa77 (Accessed: 28 April 2026).

Ford JL et al. (2017) ‘Sport-related anxiety: current insights’, Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, 8, pp. 205–212. Available at: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=57cdbe69-f2fe-3b5b-8b4a-be6793a84a8c (Accessed: 27 April 2026).

Iversen, V.M. et al. (2021) ‘No Time to Lift? Designing Time-Efficient Training Programs for Strength and Hypertrophy: A Narrative Review’, Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 51(10), pp. 2079–2095. doi:10.1007/s40279-021-01490-1.

Janz, N.K. and Becker, M.H. (1984) ‘The Health Belief Model: A Decade Later’, Health Education Quarterly, 11(1), pp. 1–47. Available at: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=bfe5c3f2-59d4-355a-a13f-d3a01241ac84 (Accessed: 18 April 2026).

Kakouris, N., Yener, N. and Fong, D.T.P. (2021) ‘A systematic review of running-related musculoskeletal injuries in runners’, Journal of Sport and Health Science, 10(5), pp. 513–522. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2021.04.001.

Sabine Lang et al. (2022) ‘Do digital interventions increase adherence to home exercise rehabilitation? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials’, Archives of Physiotherapy, 12(1), pp. 1–12. doi:10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z.

Llanos-Lagos, C. et al. (2024) ‘Effect of Strength Training Programs in Middle- and Long-Distance Runners’ Economy at Different Running Speeds: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis’, Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 54(4), pp. 895–932. doi:10.1007/s40279-023-01978-y.

Li, X. et al. (2026) ‘Risk factors for running-related injuries among Chinese Marathon runners: A cross-sectional study’, Preventive Medicine, 204. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2026.108510.

Lind E, Ekkekakis P and Vazou S (2008) ‘The affective impact of exercise intensity that slightly exceeds the preferred level: “pain” for no additional “gain”’, Journal of Health Psychology, 13(4), pp. 464–468. doi:10.1177/1359105308088517.

Liu, Y. et al. (2026) ‘Home-based exercise for chronic ankle instability: A systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness and program characteristics’, Physical Therapy in Sport, 78. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2026.101890.

Luckin, K.M. et al. (2017) ‘Breaking Down the Barriers: Strength Training in Long Distance Triathletes’, Journal of Australian Strength & Conditioning, 25(6), p. 20. Available at: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=f377d9c2-3524-3efb-8237-95f3f2e62cf1 (Accessed: 18 April 2026).

McLean, S., Robertson, S. and Salmon, P.M. (2025) ‘Complexity and systems thinking in sport’, Journal of Sports Sciences, 43(1), pp. 1–5. doi:10.1080/02640414.2024.2388428.

Pereira, M. et al. (2025) ‘Strength Training and Nutrition Help Prevent Sarcopenia in Older Adults’, International journal of environmental research and public health, 22(7). doi:10.3390/ijerph22071118.

Piercy, K.L. et al. (2018) ‘The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans’, JAMA, 320(19), pp. 2020–2028. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.14854.

Powell, J. et al. (2026) ‘It is not all about strength: rethinking mechanistic assumptions in exercise-based rehabilitation for musculoskeletal pain relief’, British journal of sports medicine, 60(6), pp. 407–409. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2025-110372.

Rowe, N.F. (2015) ‘Sporting capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis of sport participation determinants and its application to sports development policy and practice’, International Journal of Sport Policy & Politics, 7(1), pp. 43–61. doi:10.1080/19406940.2014.915228.

Saragiotto, B.T., Yamato, T.P. and Lopes, A.D. (2014) ‘What do recreational runners think about risk factors for running injuries? A descriptive study of their beliefs and opinions’, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy, 44(10), pp. 733–738. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.5710.

Sargeant, J., and Romano, V. (2025) ‘Achilles tendinopathy prevention: An evidence-based approach’, Journal of Sports and Physical Activity, 1(1), pp. 1–12. doi:10.64268/jospa.v1i1.3.

Šuc, A. et al. (2022) ‘Resistance Exercise for Improving Running Economy and Running Biomechanics and Decreasing Running-Related Injury Risk: A Narrative Review’, Sports (2075-4663), 10(7), p. N.PAG. doi:10.3390/sports10070098.

Taylor-Haas, J.A. et al. (2014) ‘Reduced Hip Strength Is Associated with Increased Hip Motion during Running in Young Adult and Adolescent Male Long-Distance Runner’, International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 9(4), pp. 456–467. Available at: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=a68d7a7e-75bf-3e5a-bdd8-6619398997aa (Accessed: 16 February 2026).

Walsh, A. (2012) ‘Exercise Intensity, Affect, and Adherence: A Guide for the Fitness Professional’, Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 3(3), pp. 193–207. doi:10.1080/21520704.2012.674629.

Wylleman, P., Alfermann, D. and Lavallee, D. (2004) ‘Career transitions in sport: European perspectives’, Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 5(1), pp. 7–20. doi:10.1016/S1469-0292(02)00049-3.