Sport And Exercise Psychology: A Critical Introduction

trained assistants, if necessary. Box 7.5 presents examples of the various team-building
exercises advocated by Carron et al. (1997).

Box 7.5 Theory and practice of team-building (based on Carron et al,

1997)

Team-building objectiveStrategy

Enhance team

distinctiveness

Design special team t-shirt or sportswear

Increase team togetherness Organise social outings for team-mates Design team drills in the lead-

up to matches

Clarify team goals and

norms

Set goals in consultation with team-members Encourage “goals for the

day” exercise

Facilitate team

communication

Arrange regular meetings for team-members Alternate “social

organiser” role within team

Evaluating team-building interventions

How effective are the direct and indirect team-building interventions described above?
Unfortunately, only a few studies have been conducted in this area and they have
produced inconclusive results. For example, Prapavessis, Carron and Spink (1996)
assigned soccer teams to one of three conditions: a team-building intervention condition,
an attention-placebo condition, or a control condition. The attention-placebo condition
consisted of an intervention strategy which involved soccer-specific information (e.g.,
nutrition) rather than team-building information. The soccer players’ perceptions of team
cohesion were evaluated before the beginning of the season and also after an eight-week
intervention period. Surprisingly, results indicated no significant difference in
cohesiveness between the players in the various conditions. In other words, the team-
building intervention was not effective in this study. By contrast, similar team-building
interventions have been shown to be moderately effective in exercise settings (Carron and
Hausenblas, 1998). One possible reason for this discrepancy between team-building
effects in sports teams and exercise groups is that a “ceiling effect” may be at work. To
explain, the cohesiveness among sport team-members is probably greater than that among
exercise group members and so interventions designed to enhance cohesion may produce
less change in the former than in the latter participants. Thus, as Carron and Hausenblas
(1998) speculated, the “opportunities for increased cohesiveness through team building
are greater in exercise groups” (p. 342).
How do athletes themselves react to team-building interventions? Although little or no
research data exist on this issue, some relevant insights can be gleaned from athletes’
autobiographical accounts of their experiences of team-building. For example, Jeremy
Guscott, the former England international rugby player who travelled on a seven-week
tour of South Africa with the British and Irish Lions in 1997, was very wary of the
management consultants who were hired to engage in team-building exercises with the
squad prior to its departure. In particular, he revealed that “rugby players are not the most
receptive audiences to new-fangled ideas... I shared the scepticism. I’m a bit old-
fashioned about these things and, as far as I’m concerned, a quick drink down the pub
would have been enough for me to get to know everyone” (Guscott, 1997, pp. 19–20).

Exploring team cohesion in sport: a critical perspective 205