UAS Management Group
Organizer:
- Organized by
-
UAS Management – Case #1
UAS Management – Case #1
Post your results from Case #1 to this forum. Be sure to leave a minimum of two comments on other postings.
- 11 Replies
Workshop 3
1. Why does the Varsity Team lose to the JV Team?
The Varsity Team loses to the JV Team because the Varsity boat does not have any leaders on it, as well as too many disrupters. While the crew of the Varsity boat had the best metrics for strength, Coach P. failed to account for the chemistry of the crew, and how well they worked together. Quite accidentally, the coach also created a great crew for the JV boat, who bonded together and consistently worked to improve their strength and technique. The fact that the JV crew started beating the Varsity crew on a regular basis only served to reduce the Varsity’s morale further, allowing the disrupters on the boat to reduce spirits even further.
2. What should the Coach P. have done differently earlier in the season to resolve this problem? Exactly what point should he have intervened differently?
Coach P. should have placed his rowers differently. He selected only based off of individual performance data, but when operating in a team sport, individual strength is not the only thing that matters. The coach should have observed how different crews worked together for a longer amount of time instead of stopping his decision making process once he figured out who the strongest rowers were. He should have found the strongest leader to be the crew captain regardless of strength, and placed the disrupters on the JV boat even if they were among the eight strongest rowers.
3. At the end of the case, what action should Coach P. take on Tuesday? Why do you recommend this action? How should he implement this action?
It was a bit disappointing that the results from the Nationals weren’t included in this case study. If I were in Coach P.’s shoes, I would have swapped the JV and Varsity titles before the big race. After their picnic table meeting, it was clear that no amount of coaching was going to undo a whole season of morale rot on the Varsity team. They likely still would have done well at the JV level, seeing as they were still the strongest rowers overall. Meanwhile, the JV team continued to improve their skills and morale throughout the season. If the Varsity team was finishing the middle of the pack in their races, and the JV team was commonly beating the Varsity, then they certainly would have done well at the Varsity level instead.
Great points made here Phillip. To many headstrong individuals that all think they know they are the boss and this definitely creates a rift among them all. Its quick for this to escalate to the downward spiral they are feeling and cohesion as a unit goes right out the window as blaming will inevitably raise its head and create even more of a rift.
Assignment Questions for the Army Crew Team case.
1. Why does the Varsity Team lose to the JV team?
They thought they had the JV licked from the get just in the fact that they were picked as first stringers. They lost from the beginning in just their mindset.
2. What should Coach P. have done differently earlier in the season to resolve this problem? Exactly what point should he have intervened differently?
He should have put them into the field to see how they all performed and made his decision from that. Coach should have done this at the very beginning instead of relying on objective data.
3. At the end of the case, what action should Coach P. take on Tuesday? Why do you recommend this action? How should he implement this action? Please be specific.
Depends on if he wants the better rowers to try and win. Odds are 66% in favor of the JV team being the better team to compete, and if the Varsity team is feeling the downward spiral, they most likely won’t be bringing their “A” Game and the JV team wants to prove themselves. He should have them row against each other again and best two out of three goes on to the real event. This gives everyone something to fight for, might bring the varsity out of their funk and would probably be viewed as fair.
4. How would you compare the Army Crew team to other types of organizational teams? What are the key similarities and differences? What lessons can we learn from the Army Crew Teams?
Its easy to get locked into a certain way of doing things and by thinking you are at the top and not keeping an open mind, it can be easy to get passed by. This applies to all avenues that we may find ourselves in in life. If we aren’t careful, we will reap the rewards of Hubris.
Giving the Varsity team a two out of three challenge is a better option than just switching the team titles outright. It gives everybody a chance to redeem themselves before the big race. Having an open mind in any situation is key to avoiding situations like Coach P. found himself in.
1. Why did the varsity team lose to the JV team?
The varsity team had little cohesion. There were too many strong personalities that approached the team event more as an individual endeavor. By the coach’s own admission there were no real leaders on the varsity team. A leader is typically a motivator, and responsive communicator. There are even two positions on the boat, the coxswain and seat 6 (team captain), meant specifically leaders. Without solid leadership or trust in the leader a team does not do well. There were ill-feelings among the team members and resentment for the performance of others. All varsity members were competitive to a fault, so much so that they were competing with the other members of their crew instead of solely competing against other boats to win races. Additionally, the varsity crew had many “disrupters” who made their grievances known and continually demoralized the team.
2. What should the Coach P. have done differently earlier in the season to resolve this problem? Exactly what point should he have intervened differently?
Perhaps making boat assignments on physical metrics alone was not the way to do it. Throughout the long fall trial season and the winter conditioning season Coach P. should have also been tracking individual personality traits and general affinities/social relationships among teammates. Starting earlier with the CEP training and teambuilding may have proved just as important or more so than solely focusing on the intense workout regimen with “Satan”.
There was something inherently wrong with the psychological makeup of the varsity team. Those 8 people together were not going to be successful. When they were in smaller groups of 2,4, or 6 they did better, but could not pull it off as 8. When they switched members between the varsity and JV boats, the JV boat did even better. This illustrates the prevailing teamwork, attitude and motivation of the JV boat, but shows that it could also be improved with more power/stronger rowers. I would argue that what the coach should have done early in the season is switch out 2 or 3 of the rowers between the boats. Doing this would perhaps make the well-functioning JV boat faster and might also improve the cohesion of the varsity boat by providing it with leadership. After those new teams trained together and went head-to-head it could be determined which boats would actually be the varsity and JV boats. This would have needed to be done early in the season while in Atlanta and just after returning to New York before it felt like a demotion to either the varsity rower going down to the JV boat or a JV rower not wanting to leave his thriving boat.
3. At the end of the case, what action should Coach P. take on Tuesday? Why do you recommend this action? How should he implement this action? Please be specific.
As I see it, Coach P. has two options, and both include keeping the teams as they are:
A. Let the teams and the varsity/JV designations stay as they are. The JV team is doing well and is ready to compete, the coach can be hopeful about their prospects at nationals and for the next season. The varsity team is going to need the ultimate motivational/inspirational speech from the coach and perhaps a trip to the ropes course or escape room to try a last-ditch effort at team-building and working together while having some sort of shared experience unrelated to rowing.
B. Switch the varsity and JV boat designations making the JV team the varsity team and the varsity team the JV team. This option would be predicated on knowing the average times the teams achieve and how that compares to other teams that they would be competing against. If the JV team is good enough to have a chance of beating other varsity teams the coach should put them in. In this scenario the original varsity team may place higher in the tournament if they are competing against JV teams.
Great points, I definitely agree that leadership at the Team Captain level is imperative to overall success. Channeling that leadership, motivation and dedication collectively instead of individually would push this team a long way.
I too thought it was interesting that smaller groups of two or three of the varsity members performed well together, but as a group of all eight boat members, they did not perform well.
My heart is with electronics… it’s what I teach and it’s what I enjoy. I sometimes conceive of group dynamics as being like an electronic circuit. A group of a couple of components behaves one way, but, add another component, and it changes the behavior of the circuit entirely. All components within a circuit interact to produce a certain outcome. I believe human teams are similar, in that adding or removing one person from a team can alter group dynamics significantly.
Army Case Study
1. Ultimately, I feel that teamwork, morale and the ability to work together and remain positive hindered the Varsity Teams ability to progress. They appeared to care more about individual success, winning and lacked the ability to function as a cohesive team. Perhaps, ego and status had implications as well.
2. The coach could have identified some scenarios to play out building on team cohesion and strategy. Provided or pushed open non-confrontational communications to reflect and learn from shortcomings in training and competitions. Focused more on identifying short- and long-term goals and ensuring tunnel vision didn’t present itself. Physical conditioning is an important aspect in a training program; however, more focus could have been directed at team dynamics and mental conditioning on how to collectively get to the win.
3. Switch the JV/Varsity roles for program success and to ensure positive representation of the Army team. Ample opportunities seemed to present themselves prior to the nationals. Perhaps, an outside coach or mentor could have helped motivate the group and gain momentum in the right direction. I’m hesitant to believe the Varsity Team would have been in the mindset to win and overcome the obstacles within that short of a timeframe.
4. How would you compare the Army Crew team to other types of organizational teams? What are the key similarities and differences? What lessons can we learn from the Army Crew Teams?
Overall, I feel there are similarities to most competitive sports teams. However, I believe coaching staff involved in any competitive field should ensure they don’t get tunnel vision. Team dynamics, individual skill sets, and morale are different from season to season, and if you don’t think outside the box, utilize metrics that judge physical and mental aspects, the results may be the same as the Army Team.
You touch on status which has a unique manifestation in this case. One thing that is different about this team than other rowing teams that they compete against is that this team are all Army cadets of various rank. Communication on the boat may have been hindered by the differences of hierarchy on the boat and in the Army.
I agree that Coach P. got “tunnel vision.” He seemed so baffled by the fact that the JV team outperformed the V team that he was more consumed by trying to figure out why this surprise occurred than trying to apply creative solutions toward improving the V team’s performance, morale, and teamwork.
Coach P. seemed somewhat to be trying to solve a mystery instead of experimenting with new mix-ups, drills, team-building, or other exercises that may have improved the situation. It’s almost like his primary focus was putting his finger on the answer to the debacle, when all along his primary focus could have been trying new things to see what worked.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by
Kalie.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by
Log in to reply.
