You are on page 1of 5

CASE ANALYSIS BY GROUP D1

THE ARMY CREW TEAM


Introduction
Colonel Stas Preczewski, the coach of the Army crew team was frustrated because the Varsity
team which he had coached was losing frequently against the Junior Varsity (JV) team during
practice races. Now it was just one week before the culmination of National championship race
and the coach had to make a decision.
Primary Issues
The Varsity team kept frequently losing to the JV team during practice races. The primary issues
are
Lack of Leadership: There was no clear leader but some disrupters in the team. The players and
positions were selected strictly based on physical strength and capabilities, not on psychological
factors.
Lack of Goal: There was no team spirit .The team did not have clear direction. They all wanted
to win the race but they were not clear about how to work together to accomplish this. They were
more focused on individual goals of person success rather than teams success.
Lack of communication: The rowers worked as an individual rather than a team. There was no
proper communication during the conflicts. The team members critique each other individually.
They preferred to mail the coach instead of resolving the conflicts in person.
Lack of trust: They were merely eight members with no cohesion. There was no sense of trust
among the rowers. They did not want to admit their mistakes.

Problem Statement
How can the coach Preczewski improve the performance of Varsity Team either by intervening
or switching up the individual members between the two boats?

Reasons:

The Varsity Team was performing badly against JV team during practice and in some
races because the rowers were working as an individual and not as a group.
The players were recruited based on their physical performance and not on
psychological factors which is the one of the most important aspect of a successful team.

There was no clear leadership in the team as none of the rowers trusted their peers in
order to follow them.
There was a communication barrier between the rowers. They did not speak to each
other directly instead they chose to mail. Thus, there was a lack of cohesion among the
rowers.
The JV team had better team result rather than individual. The JV members wanted to
remain with their JV members rather than promoting them to varsity boat. This shows
that it was a truly cohesive team. The team had no disrupters.

Contextual and Cultural analysis:


A team is only as strong as its weakest link, is rightly suited in this case to relate to the
performance of the Army crew. The Junior Varsity and Varsity crew greatly differ from each
other in terms of physical as well as psychological attributes. The positive and never say die
attitude of the Junior varsity teams is clearly visible from their team performance. By making
good use of their complementary skills and team spirit they keep on getting the better of the
Varsity teams lack of trust. If we take a critical analysis of the case we can observe a huge
difference in how the two teams prepare, participate and perform against each other. The
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats differ a lot. Lack of chemistry seems to be the
deciding difference between the more talented Varsity team and the upbeat junior team. Key
issues to be tackled by Coach P are those of trust, conflict, motivation and team identity. "In
every team, the end result can be no greater than that of the weakest members, whatever may be
the strength of the rest."
1. If we consider the Five-Stage Team Development Model stages: forming, storming,
norming, performing, and adjourning, the Varsity team is still in its storming phase,
while the JV team is in the performing stage.
2. The Varsity boat is suffering from internal and external attribution problems and
members face lack of trust.
3. Some expressed lack of leadership as the depicted resentment towards the coach for
making them compete against the JV boat.
4. The delineation between the Varsity and JV teams created a negative environment that
caused the conflict.
5. The JV team developed a positive attitude and believed that each member was equally
important and talented-We will succeed together, we will fail together. This clearly
indicated that the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
6. Coach P, an experienced master level coach, failed to focus and reach out to the Varsity
team on a psychological level. While the JV team developed it by its own team spirit and
interior bottom leadership.

The SWOT analysis is shown below:


Strengths:
Physically prepared varsity team
Psychologically united and positive
JV team
Individually skilled members

Weakness:
Social loafing
Lack of cohesion, adaptability
Lack of a leadership and team spirit
amongst varsity team members.
Perception of personalities.

Opportunities:
Threats:
The varsity team can still develop
Lack of trust and team identity
team spirit and individual talents can
Shortage of time before the
be leveraged fruitfully to perform as
competitions
a team.
Unwillingness to swap teams
JV team can work on their individual
Ego and attitude problems for some
performances.
members
Coach P can have two good
Loss of confidence before the
physically and psychologically
competition for the varsity team
prepared teams to participate.
Areas of Concern:
1. The Varsity boat is suffering from internal and external attribution problems and
members face lack of trust and identity.
2. The JV team may be psychologically superior but that may not guarantee performance in
the competition where physical performance counts a lot.
3. Unwillingness of the JV team members to swap teams.
4. Internal conflict and negative attitude amongst varsity team members.
5. Loss of confidence in the varsity team and faith in performing.
6. Individual skills are not complemented by the team members.
7. Social loafing and lack of cohesion.
8. Lack of time before the competitions start.
9. No bottom leadership.

Evaluations:
Options available to Colonel Stas Preczewski, coach of the Army Crew team are:

1. Promote the whole Junior Varsity team to the Varsity boat for this race:
Coach P. is highly reluctant to take this extreme step since the data he had confirmed the
fact that the Varsity boat had the strongest rowers. During mid 1990s, this strategy was
followed and both the Varsity team and Varsity team won Eastern Championships that
year.
2. Switch a small number of individual members of the two boats:
The viability of this option was limited by the Junior Varsity members preferences to
remain in the JV boat. Some of them had even expressed serious concern regarding
switching places.

3. Improve the performance of the Varsity team:


After a proper analysis of what problems the members of the Varsity Team are facing,
Coach P. can give suitable suggestions regarding their performance.
Reasons for the success of Junior Varsity team are:
1. Team spirit
2. Togetherness
3. Confidence
The key elements necessary for the success of the Varsity boat are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Strength and conditioning


Speed
Rowing technique
Coordination among team members synchronize rowing and trust each other

These factors help in judging each of the alternatives. Though the Junior Varsity team has higher
degree of coordination, the Varsity team consists of all the strong members.

Recommendations:
We recommend Coach P. to try and intervene to improve the performance of the Varsity
Team. To win the competition, the team requires strong rowers. So, Coach P. should trust the
data collected which clearly states that the Varsity Boat had the strongest rowers. He should help
each member to find his own personal motivation as this would help in the long run also. He
should also focus on improving trust among the team members through various team building
activities. And, finally before the competition begins, he should give a highly motivating speech
that will automatically compel each member to give his best.

You might also like