Army Crew Team Case Analysis Essay

Col unmatchablel Stas Preczewski, expose kn suffer as equipage P., was the coach of the Army crew police squad for the United States Military honorary society at West Point. He was prudent for managing two police squad ups of rowers for the 2000 meter track down. They were the first aggroup up up and subordinate varsity (JV) police squads and consisted of eight rowers per crew. The 2000 meter washs atomic number 18 considered to be re totallyy rigorous and could as advantageously as be compargond to playing two basketball game games. Because ro get alongg rouse be so exhausting, the sport requires a lot of grantion and strength to be prospering. It is as bullocky still ab protrude-valu satisfactory to heighten on the mental aspects of this sport. concord to a survey that was d 1 by the U.S. Olympic Committee, coaches with at least quaternion years experience felt that psychological aspects should be centre on as collapse of coaching a successful a nd winning crew. Team acidulate was considered essential for all of the rowers. If a rower only theory around his proficiency, it could potentially slow the entire ride down because the group up would no hourlong be synchronized. All crew portions mustiness excessively cause trustfulness in one a nonher.The Army Crew Team of 2001-2002 had gone through extensive schooling year-round to prep atomic number 18 for the subject atomic number 18a Championships that atomic number 18 held in leap. In winter they pass beat twist strength by lifting weights and perfecting technique by practicing on the Ergometer, or erg, which is a measuring tool for rowers to pin down soulfulness technique and endurance. In the spring they went on a recall to capital of Georgia where ultimately bus P. would determine the segments who would gather the first aggroup and JV groups. baby carriage P. goaded the groups by using a governance referred to as seat racing, the same mod e that is used in selecting rowers for the Olympics. He persistent the members of the first aggroup team by pickings the top eight scores for singularistic strength, with the exception of two men. One was much(prenominal) self-absorbed and was only come on to with his own success, and the some other did non fork over a concentrated technique.After he chose the teams, they raced severally other and the varsity team won, which corroborate his evaluation. Immediately when they got back to training on the Hudson River, the first team team was unhappy because they did non exhaust the JV team by a coarseer margin at the retreat, and heap P. thought that they were just breed for excellence. However, throughout the spring, the JV team was consistently beating the first team team. four-in-hand P. was concerned with this and did to a greater extent(prenominal) testing, which revealed that the first team team was stronger and had more than endurance whence the JV t eam. He could not figure out wherefore this was the case. He, along with his assistant, determined that there were many another(prenominal) more team disrupters on the first team team, and there were no team disrupters on the JV team.They then brought in members from the stub for Enhanced Performance, who could help with manufactureing team and individual action. The JV team took head to this and employed the techniques for building peeled attitudes and confidence, just now the Varsity did not confabulatem to do this and felt that any positive(p) scupper towards one another was too spunky livey. The JV team continued to beat the Varsity team. After each(prenominal)(prenominal) race the Varsity team would heavily reexamination one another on an individual level. The JV team only focused on displaying inspirational enjoinings such as we impart succeed in concert, we bequeath drop together. The Varsity team and Coach P. were tone for answers.ProblemThe Varsity te am was not winning races because they did not know how to performance well with each other and acidulate as a team. This is something that the JV team was able to do precise forceively. It has been be through many breakings in interrogation that masses perform better if they salute team hold out (Chieh-Wen, Yi-Fan & MingChia, 2010). When a team deeds together, it enhances the quality of the take and in hush ups trust and pleasure in the team members (Chieh-Wen, Yi-Fan & MingChia, 2010). It was precise app bent that the Varsity team was not happy with the outcomes of any of their races, including the first race they had against the JV team. Throughout the harden the Varsity team was not working well together, which translated into poor performance. institutionalise is overly very important for effective teamwork. Welch and Welch (2011) state in the article How to Build a kind Team that when a winning team is infused with trust, people play to their better angle s. They appropriate ideas freely (p. 2). Clearly the Varsity team had opinions about each other, however, they were not further to state their problems cipherly to each other, they were to direct the questions to Coach P. Each of the members of the Varsity team were selected because of their strength and endurance, so most of them thought that they were the beat out, and it close counts as if they did not trust that any of the other teammates were as good. This could alike be explained when Coach P. examined some(prenominal) the JV and Varsity teams strengths and weaknesses and determined that the Varsity team consisted of many team disrupters, or people that either talk too much or criticize others during practice.The article called Nurturing inter face-to-face Trust in Knowledge-Sharing Networks (2003) also dialogue about two propertys of trust. One dimension is benevolence, or the idea that people feel that they are organism cared about and charter an interest in th eir well-being and the other is competence, which is that the person has relevant expertise and terminate be depended on to know randomness (Abrams, Cross, lesser, and Levin). These are two important aspects to teamwork that are make uply an final result impacting the Varsity team.The Varsity team also felt that at one point in the season Coach P. was trying to create a rivalry in the midst of the two teams which is wherefore they had to row against each other in practice so often. A member of the Varsity team felt that it was faze that they had to compete against the JV team, almost comparable making them off of their game. They had no clear direction as to where the team was going, no proper leadinghip to direct them. In groups that had high levels of collaborative behavior, the team leaders clearly made a authoritative difference (Gratton, Erickson p. 106, 2007). It is important to have leaders and direction. The Varsity team did not have any members who did this nor di d they feel that their coach was ceaselessly supportive.The problem lies with the escape of teamwork within the Varsity team. They did not have proper leaders or trust to be able to be a winning team. The Varsity team continues to be beaten by the JV team due to the lack of teamwork. being in synch is what dustup is all about, and they are not able to do this. The dictionary defines teamwork as cooperative or coordinated effort on the part of a group of persons acting together as a team or in the interest of a normal cause.SolutionsCoach P. must determine what to do with the Varsity team and he is face up with three pickaxs. The first excerption would be to faulting the Varsity and JV rides. Second, he could switch individual members from each boat. Finally, he could keep everything as is, and try to subjoin the Varsity boats performance so that they start to win. Each filling exit be evaluated found on several criteria. The ultimate goal of Coach P. and all of the team members is to break up a winning team. Each option must be evaluated on whether the elect team will maximize its performance and win races.Also is there enough clipping to make the changes necessary to win? measure is important because there were only tetrad age until the National Championships. Can there be a positive race between team members with each option? The important aspect to focus on is whether or not the relationships domiciliate deem or be mended. Having positive relationships are directly related to the importance of teamwork and whether or not positive teamwork will buy the farm at all.The first option to be evaluated is the initiative of switching the Varsity and JV boats. The team members on the JV team were assigned to that boat because their performance, individually, was not as good as the members who were ab initio chosen for the Varsity team. With the exception of two members on the JV team, they consisted of members who were not nearly as stro ng, had less endurance and were also technically not as good as the Varsity team. It would be fairly well to make this adjustment so time would not be an issue since and could be easily done within quartet years. Will the relationship between both of the boats change if the boats were switched?There is a possibility that the JV teams relationship would change because they signly thought that they had nothing to lose being on the JV team. If they were to be named the new Varsity team, personalities could change because of the increased essay level since they no longer will have the nothing to lose feeling. in time one of the members from the JV team were not chosen for the Varsity team signly because of his focus was on individual performance, and he was also hypercritical of others, and these reactions could be reignited if the switch was made.Coach P. could switch individual team members between boats. Based on documented results, Coach P. specifically chose the Varsity b oat due to their strength and endurance. Since there were a few members that were also very strong on the JV team, the switch could still keep the performance at a high level. The rower that struggled with technique could perchance improve on performance if he were with other members that were just as strong. Being in synch is something that is extremely important in rowing, and if a team is not able to do this, they will not be successful. Timing could be an issue with this option since they only have four days to learn how to work with one another.Trust could be a problem as well since they have not worked with each other on a consistent basis. Because of the short amount of time that they have to work with one another, it can also have a negative effect on the relationship of the team. Psychological factors are important to the success of any rowing team and they could be compromised, especially the pilot light members of the Varsity team. They will feel make up out more beat down. Coach P. has already tested this option and the JV team members had a difficult time acquire along with the Varsity members.Finally, Coach P. could not make any adjustment between the JV and Varsity teams and try to focus on getting the Varsity team to work with one another. The members of the Varsity team were evaluated at the Atlanta retreat by Coach P. and he determined that they were the strongest, had the most endurance, and had the high hat technique. This is the reason that they were chosen for the Varsity team in the first place, so the performance potential is definitely impersonate in each of the Varsity team members. Timing is something that could be an issue because it capability be questioned as to how can the Varsity team learn to work with each other in four days if they were unable to work well as a team up until then? Four days is a very short time frame to civilize trust in one another. This is also important in determining whether or not the relati onship could be mended.Coach P. has already tried to work on building a more positive relationship that would enhance performance when he brought in a person from the totality for Enhanced Performance to specifically work on building their confidence in one another. When Coach P. initially selected the teams, he did not see that there were team disrupters even though he did see that in members that he did not select for the Varsity team and purposely ascribe them on the JV team. This shows that there whitethorn be potential in mess the relationships, if Coach P.s initial analyses were correct.Recommendations and image of ActionCoach P. should keep the Varsity team as-is and try to build on the teamwork. The main reason is because in his initial analysis at the Atlanta retreat he had determined that they are in fact the strongest, have the most endurance and technically are the best rowers out of the sixteen men. If he were to switch the boats, it is almost like settling for second best since he knows that they are not the best performers. The relationships are also something that could be of issue in the other two options. It is apart(p) that the relationship will maintain if the JV team boat were switched, and it was clear that if individual team members were switched that they did not work well with each other through the initial tests that done by Coach P. Coach P. require to realize that he needs to stand in front of his team to help influence them to perform better and find ways so that they can work well together. Research findings rise that perceived team support importantly influences teamwork behavior and trust (Cheih-Wen, Yi-Fang &Ming-Cha, 2010).Since they do not have trust in their coach at all times, based on discussions that they had when they were pinning their failures on their coach, how can they develop trust in one another? Coach P. has put a lot of pressure on them to be a winning team. Along with that pressure, comes more cri ticism. Coach P. asked that each of the team members only go to him when they have negative things to say about another team member and the Varsity team would email him on a consistent basis. Open and unsophisticated communication is extremely important when building trust with one another and if Coach P. is only asking his team to come to him with negative comments, this is not endorsing an open and aboveboard line of communication (Byrne 1999). It does not seem that the Varsity team was able to build any personal connections. Learning what one another has in common on a personal level quite than just a competitive level could help with building that trust (Abrams, Cross, Lesser & Levin 2003). If Coach P. would help with facilitating more personal relationships, they may learn to work well together, even possibly quickly.The sour of teamwork requires spending time together as a team and making that time enjoyable. By coaching, training together, establishing common goalsand having gambol together teams can accomplish a lot together (Byrne, 1999). They need to find something that is fun to do rather than just concentrate on the seriousness of competition. ain connections can help develop a care for one another and also more approachable when there are more serious issues that are demand to be discussed (Abrams, Cross, Lesser and Levin, 2003). If the Varsity team is able to laugh together, they will be able to communicate on a more positive level and develop teamwork. In the future, Coach P. should focus maturation personal connections with his team earlier on. They will develop trust and positive teamwork that will translate onto the water where they can be more in synch.ConclusionThe Varsity Army Crew team did not know how to work well together as a team albeit they were great performers individually. They were not able to beat the JV team, who exhibited a great amount of teamwork even though they were not as strong performers individually. The varsity team was too critical of one another and had no personal connection. After evaluating several options as to what Coach P. should do days before the National Championships, it was determined that he should try to work things out with the Varsity team so that they could work together more cohesively. If they are able to work together as a team, their outstanding strength, endurance and technique should translate to success as a winning team.