I've had the pleasure of being a part of many successful teams in my lifetime; however, one sticks out over the rest. The 2014-2015 men's tennis team was the greatest team, not only results wise, but culture wise that I have ever been on. We had countless good wins, experiences, memories and won the BIG 10 title that year. Unfortunately we had a weak run at the NCAA tournament, but nevertheless, it was a great and successful team.
Our program is unique in the sense that our coaches really aren't our bosses even though the general public sees it that way. Our team does not have captains either. Our program is focused around getting our individual players to the ATP tour. Therefore, we, as individual tennis players are in charge of our progress and future. Sure, our coaches and teammates are a major part in making these dreams a reality, but ultimately, we can utilize these resources the way we want to in order to be the most successful players possible.
With this in mind, I would say that our team that year would be best represented by the all-channel network. As it says in the book "it creates multiple connections so that each person can talk to anyone else" (Boleman and Deal, pg 102). We can talk to any player, any coach or any trainer at any time we want. Boleman and Deal also state that this sort of network works best when team members enjoy participation, embrace diversity and are able to manage conflict. This could not describe our group of guys any better. A big reason as to why we were so successful, is because we enjoyed the countless hours of practice, weights and conditioning. Teams that dreaded that part of being successful would not be able to last during the big moments, when it really mattered. Secondly, a big part of playing successful tennis and sports as a whole is embracing diversity. No one ever feels 100% when they walk out to the tennis court. They could have just failed a midterm, they could have pulled a hamstring muscle, they could be playing the worst tennis of their lives, but still they must face their opponent and do whatever they can to come out on top. Finally, we managed conflict better than most. We actually had a pretty major inner-team conflict that year. One of our best players was lazy, undedicated and overall disrespectful and selfish. No one really wanted him off the team since he was getting some incredible wins, yet his culture was detrimental to this program. We handled this conflict without the coaches, just amongst players, and in the end, he changed his ways and went on to have better senior year than anyone imagined.
Moving over to Katzenbach and Smith's distinguishing features of high functioning teams, we utilized two of the six features very well. First, we were manageable in size. Tennis teams range from about 8-12 players and it says in the book that optimal teams range from 2-25 people, so we had that going for us. On top of that, and a more importantly, we held ourselves collectively accountable. This came extremely easy for us as we had a group of guys that were driven by a common goal. We wanted to be the best in the nation. If anybody stepped out of line, others would be all over them, reminding them of why we worked so hard and what was waiting for us at the end of the season. Sometimes more extreme measures had to be taken in order to get certain individuals on track, like the one teammate I mentioned earlier, but again, we all knew exactly what we wanted to achieve and we would hold each other accountable this. It's clear that the structure of the successful team I was on will hopefully allow me to become a key part of the organization I work for some day.
Please put a title in this post and go back to your old posts and put titles in for them as well. There is a title bar in the editor where the title should go.
ReplyDeleteYour story about the player who was selfish is the sort of thing that should be amplified on. It is experiences like these that help us to understand what teamwork is about. Can you describe what it is that your teammates did to bring that player around? How long did it take? Was there uncertainty that it would eventually happen? All of that could be discussed further.
The other thing you could really elaborate on is how much preparation goes into a match. You talked about practice and conditioning. How much time is spent on that versus how much time is spent on the actual matches? I gather the teamwork comes in much more in the preparation. Is there any teamwork at all during the matches - simply from rooting for teammates? Or are you all playing at the same time, so there isn't much of that.
You minimized the role of the coaches in what you described but maybe you should consider some aspect of what they do as quite important and something that the players either can't do at all or are limited in their role. One of those, obviously, is recruiting players. Central Illinois is somewhat unlikely as a place to have a top men's tennis team, but who the coach is obviously matters. Back when I went to grad school Marty Reissen's name was on the walls where you played tennis at Northwestern and I think his dad had been the coach there. Craig Tiley coming to Illinois was definitely a big deal, though many people didn't realize it at the time. It is interesting that Illinois has been able to continue with high performance since his departure. You might comment on why that is.
Had the team success been a direct reflection of this all-channel organizational style, or do you feel the individual playing ability is a bigger factor? I ask simply because of the somewhat individual effort that this particular sport requires. While working as a team in practice, contributes to the playing ability, I feel that many of your prior experiences in playing the sport must have a significant impact on the overall success of the organization.
ReplyDelete