The Army Crew casestudy

The Army Crew Case Study Prepared by Group #1 The Chartered Institute of Marketing Kiev

BACK GROUNG The Junior Varsity ( JV ) crew boat frequently beat the Varsity ( V ) boat during practice One week left to culmination of season – National Championship race Coach P. coaching the Army Crew Team needs to make a decision

ONE: Why is it happen? Coach P. lack a leadership, thus he: Caused a rift between JV and V teams Established a higher status for V boat. They had nothing to gain through competition, whether JV has nothing to lose Considered solely physical performance of individuals, not psychological while team selection Strived to recruit top talent for V boat with a blind eye toward team performance Did not sufficiently facilitate the kind of team building necessary for success V boat : V boat is rather group of individuals then team - “the whole less than sum of the parts” No sense of trust No leader in team but several team disrupters. No team spirit Communication barrier: most individuals do not want to admit to their mistakes (“I’m the one who is carrying the boat.”) JV boat : JV members would rather remain with their JV teammates than be promoted to the varsity boat; evidence of a truly cohesive team . Has no team disrupters.

ONE: Why is it happen? V boat Slowing down because of placing individuals in the boats (“the whole less than the sum of the parts”). No one was a leader while several were team disrupters. Sceptical perception of CEP training (don’t want to change anything). Disrupters: “I never thought I would be the weak link, but on this race, I am sure of it.” V members critique each other individually. Neutral slogans: “row hard,” “never die,” and “finish clean.” Members feel themselves alone: “ I’m the one carrying the boat” JV boat Better team result than individual. Had no team disrupters. Positive perception of CEP training (tendency to improvement, study) One for all: “ we’re rowing for every guy in that boat because we don’t want to let him down ”. JV members made global comments about details that everyone needed to practice. Positive slogan: “nothing to lose”. Team spirit: nobody wants to V boat.

Option #1 Switch V and JV boats? Option #2 Switch individual boat members? Option #3 Intervene to improve V boat’s performance ? TWO: What to do?

TWO: What to do? No! Since the Varsity team had a clear and documented physical advantage over the Junior Varsity boat, and could still beat the JV boat. No! Since JV team members do not want to switch. Yes ! Because V boat has objectively better physical competencies and P. should try to build a team. Implementation could be following…. Option #1 Switch V and JV boats? Option #2 Switch individual boat members? Option #3 Intervene to improve V boat’s performance ?

STEP #1 : WRESTLING At the moment there is an unsolved conflict which has been revealed within (1) e-mail correspondence (2) latest V boat conversation . Coach P. need to help the team to splash out its aggression via physical activities such as wrestling , paintball , other team games. STEP #2: SPEAKING After anger is gone the conflict can be resolved via discussion, negotiation, brain-storming of ways of improvement and finally common agreement as a result. STEP #3: TRUST BUILDING Next task is to give V boat team spirit: set common goal and values. Team building session with focus trust building exercises . STEP #4: ROWING Final step - Rowing on the water as a team! TWO: What to do? Implementation

THREE: the Army Crew team =organizational teams? Yes? The Army Crew team structure could be compared with Mintzberg’s five organizational components Seats Placement of Rowers in a Crew Boat - Description Elements of Organization Structure 1 & 2 Bow seats. “Place kickers” who are removed from the action. Described as “self-motivated” and “loners.” They rarely speak. Techno structure, Support function 3 & 4 Similar to 5 and 6 but better technique, less strength. Good transition to the bow pair. With 5 and 6, they comprise the “Engine Room” for the boat. Middle Line (and rarely support function) 5 & 6 Strongest members with generally poorer technique. The team captain sits in the 6 seat. Operating Core 7 & 8 (7) Good follower of 8, almost a perfect pair with him. 7 leads the starboard side of the boat. (8) Stroke seat. Crucial for setting the rhythm. Not as strong, but most consistent with solid technique. Should possess a “never quit” attitude. Strategic Apex

THREE: the Army Crew team =organizational teams? No? Boat Seats Organization Inability for quick substitution of each team member. High risk of failure. Ability for quick substitution of each team member with no risk to final result Mistakes are crucial & lead to whole team loose – no chance for recover Mistakes are not crucial & could be easily corrected One task is done by all team members at once Each team member responsible for its own task – all tasks are done one by another

Notes for Oral Presentation: Coach P. should pay his attention on the main problem: the fact is that V team members are acting as individuals, rather than as a team. He need to originate a team building session: discussing team goals, establishing a sense of trust or leadership, and recognizing the potential for disruptive behavior and conflict. Creation an environment for effective group development Individual competencies should not be ignored, but rather, need to be assessed against the type of “team personality” that individual possess. Recognizing that each individual will only truly succeed by working with, and relying on one another is a key milestone for any team. The teams’ context needs to be changed from blame to responsibility. The type of honest, straight dialogue that took place that last meeting, must continue. All of the issues that every crew member has must be shared with the group. Trust building exercises May be switch positioning of V boat members

The Army Crew casestudy

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to The Army Crew casestudy (20)

The Army Crew casestudy