You are open to this level of criticism ...
Posted in Program Design & Theory on April 7, 2016
Feedback is obviously a valuable part of any business. Negative feedback can be even more valuable. It gives owners and managers an honest look into our clients experience. And it is a realtime gut-check that forces you to ask yourself difficult questions.
These points alone are strong enough to see the value in feedback ...
My favorite thing that feedback and criticism provides is a unique window of opportunity to educate the consumer. It allows me to explain our company's passion and vision by reinforcing the why.
Below is a recent email exchange that I want to share with our supporters and also ones who may question or even doubt us.
Since the introduction of the 4-week static programming in 2015, I've been unhappy with MADabolic. Had I not missed my window to cancel my contract devoid of penalty over last summer, I would have cancelled my membership months ago. My intent is to cancel membership when the time comes this summer, as from what I can tell, there are no changes to the current schedule in sight.
If anything you will see the design become more structured through evolution. Variety is largely overrated when it comes to fitness, training, eating habits and anything health related. The math is fairly simple, use what works, use it often and repeat. I am actually a little surprised about this comment simply because variety is the #1 thing we receive the most positive feedback about. Although we do follow specific patterns, variety from day to day is exactly what we are known for.
I strongly dislike the 4-week programming as its written for a variety of reasons; the paramount being that it has removed variety from the equation and as a result, workouts are predictable and redundant. The scheduling suggested to maintain any variety in "intentions" is unrealistic for those with standard jobs, children, or both. The pattern delineated when MADabolic opened enabled a variety in workouts with ease.
Every movement within each interval has a specific place in the program and its design. This means a ‘certain’ level of consistency should exist quite simply because ‘certain’ movements compliment ‘certain’ time domains. Does that make sense?
Furthermore, the "intention" pattern would have it seem that there's a culminating event or competition every 12 weeks. As there is not, and in fact, the programming is created so inflexibly that someone training has to work around the gym’s schedule, it seems like it just made it easier to write workouts in advance rather than prepare members for any sort of fitness competition or to benchmark growth in any way.
The 12 week structure is only in place for the client who is looking to take their fitness to the next level. In order to do this, routine becomes crucial. In all honesty this truly only accounts for about 20% of our clients. In fact a recent poll showed us that 91% of our clients pick their workouts solely based on their personal schedules. We consider all of this insight when creating each day and the entire 12 week cycle as whole. We program (in a way) so the person coming at random 2x per week and the person coming consistently 5x per week both have great individual days but also balanced weeks, months and complete cycles. But most important, any quality fitness program should always follow cycles not necessarily for future events or competitions but for adequate recovery and progression.
You are open to this level of criticism because of the high premium for membership or class packs. I sincerely hope you consider outside resources and reverting back to the structure that provided greater variety in workouts.
Criticism is a good thing and I do want to thank you. I also ask you to trust me. Focus on the ‘quality’ not some unnecessary 'variety'. I appreciate your honesty and do hope this helped you in someway.
Founder of MADabolic Inc.