1.) Why does the Varsity Team lose to the JV team?

Because a crucial element in the sport of rowing is the performance of the team as a whole, there must be a high level of trust and confidence among the team members in order to enhanced personal and group confidence. A tremendous amount of harmonized collaboration of individual efforts is required to reach synchronization in rowing. Therefore, winning teams are those that are the most synchronized, exhibiting exemplary collaboration among their rowers. The Varsity boat consistently loses to JV because its members don’t work together as a team. Coach P did not sufficiently facilitate the kind of team building necessary for success: discussing team goals, establishing a sense of trust or leadership, and recognizing the potential for disruptive behaviour and conflict.

According to the Five-Stage Team Development Model, groups develop into effective teams through a sequence of stages: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Applying this model to the progress of the Army crew boats makes clear that while the Varsity team is still storming and has yet to create structure or norms, the JV team demonstrates the clear communication and mature problem solving associated with a team in the performing stage. Contrary to expectations, JV members would rather remain with their teammates than be promoted to the Varsity boat, evidence of a truly cohesive team.

The Varsity boat is suffering from internal and external problems and members blame themselves and others for the team’s poor performance. Some expressed resentment towards the coach for making them compete against the JV boat while others blamed the river on which they practiced. The negative attitude of the Varsity team members is evidenced by accusatory emails and behaviour during team meetings. Analysis of the Varsity team indicates that none of its members possessed leadership abilities; instead, they accused each other for the team’s failure. It is evident that while monitoring the performance of the two teams Coach P should have intervened earlier to improve the group dynamic

2.) What should Coach P have done earlier in the season to resolve this problem? At exactly what point should he have intervened differently?

There are several things that coach P could have done differently earlier in the season in an effort to resolve the problem. The army Varsity Crew was a dysfunctional group. One example occurred during the Atlanta retreat, where he conducted a series of intense ‘seat races’ to figure out who would be on the varsity and junior varsity squad, Instead of focusing solely on individual skills. Coach P could have focused on team compatibility and technique with the strongest rowers. They never reached to the ‘Norming’ phase where trust among the members is usually achieved. This would have strengthened the group cohesion that they lacked. Younger team member felt discouraged by older team members who would not listen to them, signifying coach P should have focused on team building rather solely on individual strength and conditioning. Team building could have included a team trip, volunteer work as a team, and various other activities to help the team avoid any faultiness from developing. Doing this is very important because on the water, there is too much pressure and not enough structure in the event for the team to work as a proper team building exercise.

By not allowing the team to spend enough time in the forming phase of team development and thus unable to move out of the storming phase, the team was a great extend hindered. By returning to the forming phase, Coach P could have seen drastic change in the team outcomes. He should have taken action when he could clearly interpret why the junior varsity team performance was better than the Varsity. The team moral, goals, and overall outlook of the junior varsity team was in clear contrast to the varsity team. The junior varsity acted collectively while varsity team had an individual approach.

3.) At the end of the case what action should coach P take on Tuesday? How should he implement his action? Please be specific.

On Tuesday coach P had only three options:
1.) Switch Varsity and Junior Varsity Boats – It does not make sense, Since Varsity team has clear and documented Physical advantage over the Junior Varsity boat, and could still beat the JV boat.
2.) Switch individual boat members – JV team members do not want to switch, hence this is no option.
3.) Intervene to improve Varsity boat’s performance – This only realistic and feasible option. Because V boat has objectively better physical competencies and still Coach P should try to build a team.

At the moment there is an unsolved conflict, which has been revealed within (a) e-mail correspondence (2) latest V boat conversation. Coach P needs to help the team to splash out it aggression via physical activities such as paintball, and other team games.

After anger is gone conflict can be resolved via discussion, negotiation, brainstorming of ways of improvement and finally common agreement as a result.

Next task is to give V boat team spirit: set common goal and values, Team building session with focus trust building exercise.

Last but not the least rowing on the water as a team. 4.) How would you compare the Army Crew Team to other kind of organizational teams. What are the key similarities and differences? What lessons can we learn from the Army Crew Team?

The army crew team can be compared to organizational team such as Cricket, basketball, Football, and Field Hockey. The key similarity of this is that you are as strong as your weakest link. A collective group effort must be stronger than the individual effort. Another similarity is that you need to be able to rely and trust your other team members. When there is no foundation for a trusting relationship on a team, they are more likely to experience a loss in their process and outcome. The better the teamwork is, the more they achieve. The key difference from organizational team is that on a boat, the smallest mistake creates an imminent impact on the team. Because this immediate relay of information is available, Rowers are more likely to become extremely dissatisfied with the efforts of their own team while trying to complete their objectives.

One Important lesson that can be taken away from the army crew team is how having poor attitude and lack of leadership can be disastrous to the group’s outcomes. This was evident by the varsity team having established leader and the way they mercilessly critiques each other after practice or race. Another lesson that can be taken away from this is the need for group cohesion in order to be successful. Without, group cohesion team is more likely to fall apart and this result in a snowball effect, Which can be ultimately ruin a team that is comprised of exceptional individual. The foundation of group cohesion occurs during forming stage for teams, and neglecting to spend adequate time in this phase can render the team’s future outcome subpar to their capabilities.