Q 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 dont 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 behavior 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 attribution
problems and members blame themselves and others for the teams
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
behavior during team meetings. Analysis of the Varsity team
indicates that none of its members possessed leadership abilities;
instead, they accused each other for the teams failure. It is evident
that while monitoring the performance of the two teams Coach P
should have intervened earlier to improve the group dynamics.

Q2. What should Coach P. have done differently earlier in the

season to resolve this problem?
The Army Varsity Crew is a dysfunctional group. We can see that
they are stuck in the Storming phase of team development. That is,
theyve not yet reached the Norming phase where trust among the

members has largely been achieved. The coachs efforts to identify

the weak link do nothing to for the destructive conflict brewing in
the group. As conflict causes personal frustration and loss of
efficiency - as demonstrated by Army crew -- some researchers
suggest counseling or simply listening with understanding.
Letting a person vent his or her feelings may relieve the frustration
and help to promote problem-solving. Unfortunately the problem
with the Varsity team was confronted too late to be solved before
Nationals.
From the very beginning, Coach P did not address the concept of
team building. His focus was in identifying the best eight instead of
creating the best 16. This delineation between the Varsity and JV
boats created the environment that caused the conflict. Instead of
the focus on the individuals and the individual Varsity/ JV groups, he
would have been better served to provide the environment that
would sustain a complete team effort. In separating the Varsity
and the Junior Varsity he planted the seed of separation between
individuals identifying themselves as Good Athletes or the Less
Good Athletes. This turned out to be a destructive concept for the
entire team. In developing the Army Crew, Coach P could have
abandoned the labels of Varsity and Junior Varsity in favor of
labels that would characterize either team as the Good Athletes. A
team building event could have included all crew members at any
time during the season, where the best rowers are those that row
best together.
The JV team clearly developed a team focus. In all of the
interactions between each other there was never a question about
the abilities of any other rower, but only the positive view of the
entire team as a whole.
JV developed a companionship and
believed at a very fundamental level that each member was equally
important and talented. This attitude was articulated by the JV
maxim, We will succeed together, we will fail together. This clearly
indicated that the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
The Varsity team did not develop this team focus but continued to
critique individual efforts, never once attributing success or failure
to the entire team. Coach P had several opportunities to counter
this during the Atlanta Retreat by focusing more on the entire
teams successes and that all team members contributed to
whatever outcome was realized. He should have appointed a
captain instead of placing all leadership on himself. The continual
focus on individual strengths and techniques severely weakened the

dependence and trust Varsity members felt for each other.

Q3. What action do you recommend for Coach P. and why?
We recommend that the JV boat be selected to compete at
Nationals. The JV boat has done a better job of working together as
a team and is currently the best performing boat. Although it is
possible that Varsity can improve their teamwork in the future, the
fact that Coach P, an experienced master level coach, has already
tried to reach the Varsity team on a psychological level and failed
makes it unlikely that he will be able to achieve the necessary
results in the four days available. Rearranging the crew members
on the boats is also not a viable choice in the time frame given the
JV members unwillingness to adjourn from their team and the risk
involved with trying to form a functional new team in four days. By
promoting the JV team to Varsity, Coach P can tap into the
established high performing team psychology and spend the next
four days fine-tuning their performance. This will put Junior Varsity
in the optimal position to succeed at the championships.