Is "TEAM" a four-letter word? "Losing tends to exacerbate conflicts that may be simmering, but remain dormant while a team is enjoying success." - Athletic Arena

FOR MANY PEOPLE, memories of team experiences are positive ones. For others, though, they bring "four-letter words" to mind.

The word "team" can be defined (Webster's Unabridged Dictionary) as "a number of persons associated in some joint action, esp. one of the sides in a game or contest." This definition doesn't come close, however, to capturing the richness and complexities involved in team sports. One of the fascinating aspects of athletics is the variety of individual skills and personality differences involved in the working of teams.

Although children and adults are doing many things individually these days, from surfing the net to watching television, there are probably more leagues and teams--amateur and professional--across a variety of sports than ever before.

In Philadelphia, to pick just one example, there are numerous examples of ways in which individual players can affect a team's chemistry. The concept of team chemistry is a nebulous one, and sports psychologists prefer to talk about team cohesion, which can be defined as the set of forces that act upon members of the team to help them reach a common goal. Why do individuals want to be a member of a team? In some cases, they may not act as one would hope or expect.

A classic case in point is National Basketball Association Most Valuable Player Allen Iverson of the Philadelphia 76ers and his ongoing tense relationship with coach Larry Brown. Although many of these conflicts were toned down as Iverson led his club to the NBA finals in 2001, he has had an extensive record of lateness. During the 1999-2000 season, he missed a number of practices, which resulted in his being suspended for a game. Brown, with a long record of success at the collegiate and professional levels, expects his players to be on time and attend practices as well as games--hardly a radical idea. Iverson, however, has apparently not yet bought into this philosophy. Perhaps he feels that superstars should be allowed to follow their own rules. Iverson's teammates have encouraged him to act professionally in coming to practices and games on time, but he has largely ignored their pleas, though his actions have not impacted on his outstanding performance.

Coaches often say there is no "I" in team (although there are the letters for the word "me"!). This saying is predicated on the importance given to team cohesion. This can be seen as being comprised of two dimensions: task and social cohesion. According to Robert S. Weinberg and Daniel Gould, in Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology, task cohesion "reflects the degree to which members of a group work together to achieve common goals." These goals are often winning a game or a championship. However, they could also focus on a particular accomplishment, such as running a race in a specific time or performing in an error-free manner during a game.

Social cohesion "reflects the degree to which members of a team like each other and enjoy each other's company," Weinberg and Gould suggest. Some clubs have players who hang out with each other before and after games, socialize, and go to dinner together. Others have members who come to practices and games from their separate lives, then depart afterwards, not socializing or interacting much at all outside the (task-oriented) work environment.

There are, of course, many factors that affect social cohesion--marital status, whether one has children, etc. A player would, of course, be less likely to socialize with teammates if he or she had a family to return to than if that individual were single and his or her friends might be found among one's teammates.

Is social cohesion necessary for success, with success being defined as being a winning team? The answer is no. There are many cases, some as famous as the New York Yankees and Oakland Athletics of the 1970s, where social cohesion was low. Conflicts among teammates, and with management, may have made for low social cohesion, but those teams were quite successful, winning a combined five World Series. The answer to why probably lies in task cohesion.

Whatever the social conflicts that may have been present, those teams had talent and exceptionally strong task cohesion. They worked hard with one goal in mind--to win! For the most part, they left their social conflicts outside the playing field and focused all their energy on victory. Their ability to do this, combined with the talent on the teams, provided a recipe for success. High social cohesion was certainly not necessary for success.

A good role model as a team player is Donovan McNabb, the gifted third-year quarterback of the National Football League's Philadelphia Eagles. A high first-round draft choice in 1999, McNabb comes early, stays late, and works exceptionally hard at physical conditioning and practice. This includes extensive film study to allow him to learn the complex offense mn by coach Andy Reid and his staff. McNabb's skills have him approaching the superstar Status of Iverson, and his behavior, directed so intensely towards the goal of winning, is vital to the team's success. There appears to be a good element of social cohesion as well among the Eagles, with many younger players working together with their coach to help the franchise return to past playoff successes.

What factors affect the development of cohesion in sport settings? As one might imagine, the development of team chemistry, or team cohesion, is complex, involving environmental, personal, leadership, and team factors. Environmental factors are often organizational characteristics of the sport, including contractual issues within the professional ranks. Personal factors include individual characteristics, such as reasons for participating. Some athletes may be in it for individual statistics, others looking to make money without working hard, etc. These players are less focused on the team and winning, and more focused upon their own performances and "what's in it for me?"

Leadership factors include style (generally autocratic, democratic, or laissez-faire). Team factors refer to task characteristics (team vs. individual sports), stability of personnel, etc. One can certainly see the complexity of elements that go into team cohesion, and how changing some of them potentially can dramatically change how a team performs.

Another excellent example of team dynamics would be the Philadelphia Flyers of the National Hockey League. Eric Lindros, the former star of the Flyers, since traded to the New York Rangers, had a series of concussions which raised the possibility that he would not play professionally again. He criticized the medical staff of the team in public for their handling (or mishandling, he maintains) of his injuries, and for this he was severely criticized by management and stripped of his team captaincy. (Being team captain is a considerable honor in hockey, much more so than in most other sports.) Personal issues arose in the relationship of the team's general manager, Bob Clarke, and Lindros' father, who served as his son's agent. This relationship became quite personal and reached an exceptional level of conflict.

In spite of the absence of their star and the level of acrimony that developed between Lindros and Flyers management, the team was able to remain focused on their task and reached the Eastern Conference finals of the playoffs, just a goal away from playing in the Stanley Cup Finals in 2000.

What does research suggest about the relationship of cohesion and performance? Perhaps not surprisingly, task cohesion is positively linked with performance, more so than social cohesion. Additionally, performance is more likely to affect cohesion than cohesion is to affect performance--winning is, again not surprisingly, likely to generate a more-cohesive team. Losing tends to exacerbate conflicts that may be simmering, but remain dormant while a team is enjoying success. When a team wins, everything seems to be smoother and it is more likely that players get along better.

What do sport psychologists think enhances team cohesion? Here are some suggestions from Weinberg and Gould for coaches and leaders: Communicate effectively; explain individual roles in team success; develop pride within subunits; set challenging group goals; encourage group identity; avoid formation of social cliques; curb excessive turnover; conduct periodic team meetings; be aware of the team climate; and know something personal about each group member.

In Championship Team Building: What Every Coach Needs to Know to Build a Motivated, Committed and Cohesive Team, Jeff Janssen identifies seven "C's" of championship team building: common goal, commitment, complementary roles, clear communication, constructive conflict, cohesion, and credible coaching.

Weinberg and Gould have some additional suggestions for group members to enhance team cohesion: Get to know members of the group; help group members whenever possible; give group members positive reinforcement; be responsible; communicate honestly and openly with the coach or leader; resolve conflicts immediately; and give 100% effort at all times.

The answer to the question in this article's title is that "team" is indeed a four-letter word, but generally not the type that might come initially to mind. Teams are very powerful entities, and anyone who has had the pleasure of coaching or playing on cohesive ones, whether task or socially cohesive, can attest to the magic that can come from that type of competitive involvement.

Michael L. Sachs is a sports psychologist in the Department of Kinesiology, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa.

COPYRIGHT 2002 Society for the Advancement of Education
COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group