Army Crew Team Case Analysis

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.

26 December 2021

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

Get custom essay

94 writers online

Colonel Stas Preczewski, higher known as Coach P., was the coach of the Army Crew Team for the United States Military Academy at West Point. He was answerable for managing two teams of rowers for the 2000 meter race. They have been the Varsity and Junior Varsity (JV) teams and consisted of eight rowers per crew. The 2000 meter races are thought of to be very rigorous and could additionally be in comparability with playing two basketball games. Because rowing can be so exhausting, the sport requires lots of endurance and strength to obtain success.

It can be important to focus on the psychological elements of this sport. According to a survey that was carried out by the us Olympic Committee, coaches with at least 4 years’ experience felt that psychological aspects should be focused on as part of teaching a successful and successful crew. Teamwork was thought-about essential for the entire rowers. If a rower only thought about his approach, it might doubtlessly sluggish the entire boat down because the staff would now not be synchronized.

All crew members must even have belief in one another.

The Army Crew Team of 2001-2002 had gone through in depth training year-round to arrange for the National Championships which might be held in spring. In winter they spend time constructing strength by lifting weights and perfecting method by practicing on the Ergometer, or ‘erg,’ which is a measuring device for rowers to find out particular person technique and endurance. In the spring they went on a retreat to Atlanta the place finally Coach P.

would determine the members who would fulfill the Varsity and JV teams. Coach P. determined the groups by utilizing a system known as ‘seat racing,’ the same technique that is utilized in selecting rowers for the Olympics. He decided the members of the Varsity staff by taking the highest eight scores for individual strength, with the exception of two men. One was extra self-absorbed and was solely involved together with his own success, and the other did not have a robust method.

After he chose the groups, they raced each other and the Varsity team received, which confirmed his evaluation. Immediately once they obtained again to training on the Hudson River, the Varsity team was sad because they did not beat the JV staff by a higher margin on the retreat, and Coach P. thought that they were just striving for excellence. However, throughout the spring, the JV team was constantly beating the Varsity group. Coach P. was concerned with this and did extra testing, which revealed that the Varsity group was stronger and had more endurance then the JV staff. He could not figure out why this was the case. He, alongside with his assistant, determined that there were many more staff disrupters on the Varsity team, and there have been no group disrupters on the JV group.

They then brought in members from the Center for Enhanced Performance, who might help with building group and individual efficiency. The JV staff took well to this and employed the strategies for constructing new attitudes and confidence, however the Varsity didn’t appear to do that and felt that any positive show in the direction of one another was too ‘touchy feely.’ The JV staff continued to beat the Varsity group. After each race the Varsity team would heavily critique one another on an individual stage. The JV team solely centered on displaying inspirational sayings corresponding to “we will succeed collectively, we are going to fail together.” The Varsity group and Coach P. were looking for solutions.


The Varsity team was not successful races as a outcome of they did not know tips on how to work well with each other and work as a staff. This is something that the JV staff was able to do very successfully. It has been proven through many findings in research that people perform higher in the event that they exhibit teamwork (Chieh-Wen, Yi-Fan & MingChia, 2010). When a team works together, it enhances the quality of the work and instills trust and satisfaction in the group members (Chieh-Wen, Yi-Fan & MingChia, 2010). It was very obvious that the Varsity staff was not pleased with the outcomes of any of their races, together with the primary race that they had towards the JV staff. Throughout the season the Varsity group was not working well together, which translated into poor efficiency.

Trust can be very important for efficient teamwork. Welch and Welch (2011) state within the article “How to Build a Winning Team” that when a profitable staff “is infused with trust, people play to their better angles. They share ideas freely (p. 2).” Clearly the Varsity team had opinions about each other, nonetheless, they were not inspired to state their issues instantly to one another, they were to direct the questions to Coach P. Each of the members of the Varsity staff were chosen because of their power and endurance, so most of them thought that they have been the most effective, and it nearly seems as if they didn’t trust that any of the other teammates have been as good. This could additionally be defined when Coach P. examined both the JV and Varsity teams strengths and weaknesses and determined that the Varsity group consisted of many group disrupters, or people that both discuss an extreme amount of or criticize others during apply.

The article referred to as “Nurturing Interpersonal Trust in Knowledge-Sharing Networks” (2003) additionally talks about two dimensions of belief. One dimension is benevolence, or the concept that folks feel that they are being cared about and have an curiosity in their well-being and the other is competence, which is that the individual has relevant experience and may be depended on to know data (Abrams, Cross, Lesser, and Levin). These are two necessary elements to teamwork which are clearly an issue impacting the Varsity team.

The Varsity staff also felt that at one level within the season Coach P. was trying to create a rivalry between the two groups which is why they had to row towards one another in practice so typically. A member of the Varsity staff felt that it was unnerving that they needed to compete against the JV team, nearly like making them off of their sport. They had no clear course as to where the team was going, no proper leadership to direct them. “In groups that had excessive ranges of collaborative conduct, the team leaders clearly made a significant difference (Gratton, Erickson p. 106, 2007).” It is essential to have management and course. The Varsity staff did not have any members who did this nor did they really feel that their coach was always supportive.

The problem lies with the lack of teamwork within the Varsity team. They did not have correct leadership or trust to have the power to be a successful team. The Varsity team continues to be crushed by the JV team due to the lack of teamwork. Being in synch is what rowing is all about, and they are not ready to do that. The dictionary defines teamwork as “cooperative or coordinated effort on the part of a gaggle of individuals acting collectively as a staff or within the curiosity of a typical trigger.”


Coach P. should decide what to do with the Varsity group and he is confronted with three options. The first possibility could be to change the Varsity and JV boats. Second, he could swap individual members from every boat. Finally, he might maintain every little thing as is, and try to increase the Varsity boat’s efficiency in order that they start to win. Each choice shall be evaluated based on a quantity of standards. The ultimate aim of Coach P. and all of the group members is to develop a successful team. Each option should be evaluated on whether the chosen group will maximize its performance and win races.

Also is there enough time to make the adjustments necessary to win? Timing is important as a result of there were solely 4 days till the National Championships. Can there be a positive relationship between team members with every option? The important facet to concentrate on is whether or not or not or not the relationships can preserve or be mended. Having positive relationships are instantly associated to the significance of teamwork and whether or not or not constructive teamwork will occur at all.

The first option to be evaluated is the potential of switching the Varsity and JV boats. The team members on the JV team were assigned to that boat as a end result of their performance, individually, was not pretty much as good as the members who had been initially chosen for the Varsity staff. With the exception of two members on the JV group, they consisted of members who were not nearly as robust, had less endurance and were additionally technically not so good as the Varsity staff. It would be pretty straightforward to make this adjustment so timing wouldn’t be an issue since and could presumably be easily carried out within 4 days. Will the connection between each of the boats change if the boats have been switched?

There is a possibility that the JV groups relationship would change as a outcome of they initially thought that that they had nothing to lose being on the JV team. If they have been to be named the new Varsity group, personalities could change because of the elevated stress stage since they no longer will have the ‘nothing to lose’ feeling. Even one of the members from the JV group were not chosen for the Varsity team initially due to his focus was on particular person performance, and he was additionally important of others, and these reactions might be reignited if the switch was made.

Coach P. may change particular person team members between boats. Based on documented results, Coach P. particularly selected the Varsity boat because of their strength and endurance. Since there have been a couple of members that were additionally very strong on the JV group, the swap may nonetheless maintain the performance at a excessive degree. The rower that struggled with approach might maybe improve on performance if he had been with other members that had been just as robust. Being in synch is something that is extremely necessary in rowing, and if a team just isn’t in a position to do that, they received’t be successful. Timing could be a problem with this option since they only have 4 days to learn how to work with one another.

Trust could possibly be a problem as properly since they haven’t labored with one another on a constant basis. Because of the brief amount of time that they have to work with each other, it could even have a unfavorable effect on the connection of the team. Psychological factors are important to the success of any rowing team they usually might be compromised, especially the original members of the Varsity staff. They will feel even more beat down. Coach P. has already tested this selection and the JV group members had a difficult time getting together with the Varsity members.

Finally, Coach P. could not make any adjustment between the JV and Varsity teams and try to give consideration to getting the Varsity staff to work with one another. The members of the Varsity team were evaluated on the Atlanta retreat by Coach P. and he decided that they had been the strongest, had the most endurance, and had the best approach. This is the explanation that they had been chosen for the Varsity team within the first place, so the performance potential is unquestionably current in every of the Varsity staff members. Timing is something that could presumably be an issue as a end result of it might be questioned as to how can the Varsity group be taught to work with one another in 4 days in the occasion that they were unable to work well as a staff up until then? Four days is a really quick time-frame to develop trust in one another. This can additionally be essential in figuring out whether or not or not the relationship could be mended.

Coach P. has already tried to work on building a more constructive relationship that might enhance performance when he introduced in a person from the Center for Enhanced Performance to particularly work on constructing their confidence in one another. When Coach P. initially selected the teams, he didn’t see that there have been ‘team disrupters’ despite the actual fact that he did see that in members that he didn’t select for the Varsity staff and purposely put them on the JV staff. This shows that there could also be potential in mending the relationships, if Coach P.’s initial analyses had been right.

Recommendations and Plan of Action

Coach P. should keep the Varsity team as-is and try to build on the teamwork. The main purpose is as a result of in his initial analysis at the Atlanta retreat he had decided that they are in reality the strongest, have essentially the most endurance and technically are the most effective rowers out of the sixteen males. If he had been to switch the boats, it’s almost like settling for second best since he is conscious of that they aren’t the best performers. The relationships are also something that might be of problem within the other two options. It is unknown that the relationship will preserve if the JV group boat were switched, and it was clear that if particular person team members had been switched that they didn’t work nicely with one another via the preliminary exams that carried out by Coach P. Coach P. wants to understand that he needs to stand in entrance of his staff to assist influence them to carry out better and find methods in order that they will work properly collectively. “Research findings demonstrate that perceived group support considerably influences teamwork conduct and trust (Cheih-Wen, Yi-Fang &Ming-Cha, 2010).”

Since they do not have trust of their coach at all times, primarily based on discussions that that they had once they have been pinning their failures on their coach, how can they develop belief in a single another? Coach P. has put a lot of pressure on them to be a successful group. Along with that strain, comes more criticism. Coach P. asked that every of the group members only go to him after they have adverse things to say about another group member and the Varsity staff would email him on a consistent basis. Open and trustworthy communication is extremely essential when building belief with each other and if Coach P. is only asking his group to return to him with negative feedback, this isn’t endorsing an open and honest line of communication (Byrne 1999). It doesn’t seem that the Varsity team was able to construct any personal connections. Learning what each other has in widespread on a personal level rather than only a aggressive degree might assist with building that belief (Abrams, Cross, Lesser & Levin 2003). If Coach P. would assist with facilitating extra private relationships, they may learn to work properly collectively, even presumably rapidly.

The strategy of teamwork “requires spending time collectively as a staff and making that time gratifying. By teaching, coaching collectively, establishing common goals…and having fun together” groups can accomplish so much together (Byrne, 1999). They want to find something that’s fun to do rather than just think about the seriousness of competition. Personal connections might help develop a look after one another and likewise more approachable when there are more severe issues which would possibly be needed to be discussed (Abrams, Cross, Lesser and Levin, 2003). If the Varsity staff is prepared to snort together, they will have the ability to communicate on a extra positive degree and develop teamwork. In the longer term, Coach P. ought to focus creating private connections along with his staff earlier on. They will develop trust and positive teamwork that will translate onto the water the place they are often extra in synch.


The Varsity Army Crew team didn’t know how to work well collectively as a group albeit they had been great performers individually. They weren’t capable of beat the JV staff, who exhibited a large amount of teamwork although they weren’t as robust performers individually. The varsity team was too crucial of each other and had no personal connection. After evaluating several choices as to what Coach P. ought to do days before the National Championships, it was decided that he should try to work things out with the Varsity staff in order that they might work collectively more cohesively. If they’re ready to work together as a team, their excellent energy, endurance and method ought to translate to success as a successful group.

Cite this page

Army Crew Team Case Analysis. (26 December 2021). Retrieved from

"Army Crew Team Case Analysis" StudyScroll, 26 December 2021,

StudyScroll. (2021). Army Crew Team Case Analysis [Online]. Available at: [Accessed: 2 October, 2023]

"Army Crew Team Case Analysis" StudyScroll, Dec 26, 2021. Accessed Oct 2, 2023.

"Army Crew Team Case Analysis" StudyScroll, Dec 26, 2021.

"Army Crew Team Case Analysis" StudyScroll, 26-Dec-2021. [Online]. Available: [Accessed: 2-Oct-2023]

StudyScroll. (2021). Army Crew Team Case Analysis. [Online]. Available at: [Accessed: 2-Oct-2023]

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay..

get custom paper

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.