Essay About Coach Of The Army Crew Team And V Crew Boat

The Army Crew Team Analysis
Jake BurdenB 321The Army Crew TeamCase AnalysisIntroduction-Coach Preczewski (or Coach P.) was the coach of the Army Crew Team for the United States Military Academy at West Point. In May of 2002 he faced a situation he had never seen before in the nine years he had been coaching the sport. He was the coach for both the Varsity (V) and Junior Varsity (JV) crew boats. (2)The JV crew boat had been frequently beating the V crew boat during practice throughout the year. Now the team is down to the culmination of the season, which is the National Championship race. Coach P. at this point must make a decision on what to do in preparation for the championship race. Problem Analysis-Coach P and his Leadership- Coach P trained and molded these crews into great rowing teams, individually through objective tests both during the season and during the off season. He really focused on the objectivity of these training regiments and the physical and mental development of each individual but not a lot of development as a team. Then Coach P pitted the V and JV crews against each other during practices which drove a separation between them. He established a higher status for the V crew and they had nothing to gain through competition with them pitting against each other. The JV because of this had nothing to lose because of the pitting and individual development.Varsity Crew- The V crew through the individual development not the team development were just a team of individuals, trying to put the letter “I” into the word “TEAM”, which you cannot do. They had no sense of trust as Stephen M.R. Covey says is so crucial in every organization. (1) The V crew had no leader to bring them together, but had disrupters amongst them. They could not communicate effectively, and instead of taking responsibility for their personal actions they would blame others, “I’m the one who is carrying the boat.”(2) The V Crew were skeptical to the team building training. They had no team spirit.Junior Varsity Crew-Mutual feeling of nothing to lose attitude, in fact the crew motto was just that, “nothing to lose” each time the boat parted from their huddle. They also did not criticize one another individually and addressed issues as a team. The JV crew had no disrupters and had a leader amongst them. They would also prefer to remain with each other than move up to the V crew. The JV crew was positive to the team building training, unlike the V crew. These are all evidences of a cohesive team.Solutions-Coach P had three options mentioned in the case. 1st option was to switch the Varsity and Junior Varsity crews out for the National Championship. I do not believe this would be a good choice, because the V crew had a very clear physical advantage over the JV crew and can still beat them. This was proven when he broke the two crews down into smaller groups and would race them, the V crews always beat the JV crews.Coach P’ 2nd option was to switch out the individual crew members. This is not a good option either, because of the subjective areas of teamwork, coming together for a common cause. Separating one’s personal desires for the betterment of the entire team, was a priority for the JV crew, because of the having nothing to lose attitude. When it came down to it, the JV crew did not want to switch either.Coach P’s last option is the one I would resolve to do. He should intervene to improve the V crew’s performance. He should try to build the team. He will need to resolve the apparent conflict that was pointed out in the emails between the V crew and their conversation from the last practice. A great idea for that is by having the V crew participate in other team games or events that will let them take out some of their aggression. As the V crew gets the frustration out it will be easier to bring them together and talk about and come up with ways to improve their teamwork. Then as an organization have the team set some common goals and participate in trust building exercises. (1) Then practice, practice, practice.