Trainers: We don’t need to micromanage every movement.
For those unfamiliar, before becoming a personal trainer, I worked as an occupational therapist in rehabilitation. I’ve spent over a decade now studying and working with human bodies, focusing on assessing and improving motor skills and movement quality. My experience ranges from working with individuals with chronic pain, physical disabilities, and neurological impairments to healthy individuals.
Nothing frustrates me more than seeing personal trainers try to play physical therapist, consistently underloading their clients with “corrective exercises” aimed at fixing “imbalances,” “asymmetries,” or “faulty movement patterns”—especially when those clients aren’t even reporting any pain.
How did we get here?
I think a lot of this stems from a framework known as the Kinesiopathological Model (KPM). The KPM, a somewhat older rehabilitation model, made its way into the fitness world some time ago. It suggests that deviations from neutral movement patterns, body asymmetries, or prolonged extreme postures can lead to pain or injury. The idea is that by identifying and correcting these “faulty” patterns—like excessive spine flexion during lifting or knee valgus during squatting—we can reduce the risk of injury. I think there is a bit of a false dichotomy here, but many people view the KPM model as opposite to the Biopsychosocial Model (BPS) of pain and injury.
A commonly used tool aligned with the KPM model is the Functional Movement Screen (FMS). The FMS is designed to identify movement patterns that are believed to increase injury risk, operating on the belief that “suboptimal” mechanics should be corrected to maintain ideal form and prevent musculoskeletal problems.
Here’s why I’m not a fan of the KPM or the FMS:
They Underestimate the Body’s Ability to Adapt: I say this all the time—the human body is resilient and adaptable. When we obsess over correcting every perceived flaw, we overlook just how well our tissues can adjust to various movement patterns and positions.
They Ignore Biopsychosocial Factors: Pain and injury aren’t just mechanical issues. While mechanics can be a factor, other elements like stress, sleep, nutrition, and mental outlook also play huge roles in how our bodies respond to physical demands. By overemphasizing perfect form, we often miss the bigger picture.
They Pathologize Normal Asymmetries: Asymmetry is a normal part of human anatomy. I shift into my right hip every time I squat. I also have more internal rotation in my right hip than my left. I have half a pound more muscle in my left arm than my right, and my right tricep will always hit failure before my left. These aren’t things that have ever caused me pain or limited by ability to progress in the gym though. Many athletes—and everyday people—thrive with asymmetries and perform at high levels without injury. By labeling these natural variations as problems, we often create unnecessary fear and limitations.
They Instill Fear: Most people are already under-muscled and underdosed when it comes to resistance training. Many have a fear of lifting weights and need encouragement to try, not warnings that they’re at risk of injury if they don’t move perfectly. In my opinion, we should create as much psychological safety with movement as possible. Telling people they need perfect form is gatekeepy if you ask me.
While I’m not married to a single framework, I do lean toward the Biopsychosocial Model and the Movement Optimism approach. Both challenge the idea that we must always correct deviations from “neutral” positions. Instead, they emphasize the importance of load management and creating a supportive environment for the body to thrive. For years, people have been told that lifting with a flexed spine increases the risk of injury. Movement Optimists argue that, in some cases, these postures might actually be functional and beneficial for certain individuals.
The point I’m really trying to make is that as personal trainers and rehabilitation professionals, our goal should be to empower our clients by focusing on what their bodies are capable of, rather than nitpicking their form into oblivion. As much as I love some good looking reps, I also recognize that by overemphasizing the correction of every small deviation, we risk underloading our clients in the name of “injury prevention.” The irony is that if anything is truly protective against injury, it’s strength. Most people have a very finite amount of time to devote to their physical development, and they’re not going to achieve strength adaptations when they spend half of their workout session on correctives at 5% of their one-rep max.
A good personal trainer will spend minimal time on low-level drills because they know how to simultaneously improve movement quality while producing actual adaptaions.
Load people up. Show them what they are capable of.