Time Trial #1: After being given cursory instructions about this game, and paddling techniques, your 4 subgroups were given an embarrassingly few minutes to immediately develop a strategy for propelling three narrow and loosely-connected flat boats down a waterway and back without tipping over, banging into water hazards, or getting your paddles tangled. Since high-performance teams are known to quickly overcome task ambiguity, you had an opportunity to immediately fail or succeed. You picked the latter.

Each group scrambled to get organized, determine who would paddle or fish, and select a flat boat configuration that matched your team's temperament, confidence, and presumed boat handling skills. Within the first few minutes your team's true colors started to appear. People were positive, responsive, and assertive in establishing a mutually acceptable strategy for configuring the team, the boat, and even the paddles to be used for propelling the flat boats. Leadership quickly emerged in each team; roles became differentiated, and responsibilities were clarified. And teammates quickly dealt with inherent problems presented by this game - like how to stay upright, paddle hard, and steer at the same time.

For example, when 3 of your four teams decided to leave the boat configuration as a connected raft, rather than a train of 3 separate boats, you were also faced with the problem of having 1/3 of your group not paddle. As you quickly surmised, there was a huge trade-off in retaining the raft configuration, since it necessarily prevents paddlers situated in the middle of the raft from being able to place their oars in the water. If they couldn't paddle, how could they contribute? Each team quickly came up with unique and different strategies for using all of your talent to garner team points, including teammates who elected to fish rather than paddle. There was little apparent indication that teammates were left out of the game, intentionally or otherwise.

On the initial time trial, only the GREEN team dared to reconfigure the flat boats into a train rather than raft. Since a more streamline train configuration is likely to go faster, in spite of its inherent instability, the GREEN team placed speed over stability. This group also had to deal with uncertainty by limiting the number of teammates who could propel each potentially sinkable flat boat. The BLUE, WHITE, AND RED teams all opted for the more stable raft configuration, in hopes that you might win through increased stability, easier coordination, and potentially faster turning. In the process of quickly developing team strategies, each subgroup of 11 participants did a terrific job of stating individual preferences, listening to diverse ideas, negotiating differences, and buying into decisions once made. There appeared to be no hesitation to come together with a workable plan, even though most participants had little prior experience with paddling or reconfiguring boats on the water.

On the Water: When it was time to go on the water, the BLUE and the GREEN teams went first. The blue team appeared careful, cautious, and nervous. People were quiet, pensive, and resourceful. They appeared to be thinking and reacting, rather than ìgoing for it.î The Green team was almost the opposite. They quickly separated the boats to form a chain of 3 separate but tethered flat boats, each capable of propelling themselves - and flipping over. However, their chain or train approach also resulted in fewer paddlers and therefore fewer team points. Neither boat hurried down the racecourse since the first time trial did not count toward team victory in the final race. Both boats successfully returned to the docks with new information and insights about how to position talent on the boats, better ways to steer, and a method for turning the boat around at the halfway point in the race. The Green team showed remarkable communication and coordination skills by quickly and smoothly turning their tethered boat configuration.

In the second preliminary time trial, the RED and WHITE teams donned flotation devices for action. Both teams appeared tentative and cautious although these participants were much more animated and synchronized than the first 2 groups. They were loud and synchronized with team cheers and stroke counting - the booming sound of ìstrokeî, ìstrokeî could be heard 3 blocks away. Neither of your teams appeared nervous about the tasks, but definitely depended on teammates to hold your ships together, especially during the mid-race turn.

Perhaps most interesting were the discussions that occurred immediately following each of the initial time trials. Your group members quickly huddled together. New ideas and strategies were offered. Rather than buying expensive consulting tips from the experts, each team relied on your own resources and team wisdom to renegotiate configurations of boats, paddlers, and equipment. In preparation for the ìreal raceî participants cinched up boat tie lines, developed creative techniques for spider crawling across the flatboats in unison to minimize set-up time, and connected the half-paddle kayak blades to form stronger and more efficient kayak paddles. These strategies not only improved individual performance, but steerage and turning for other teammates. Participants became much more involved and animated about methods and strategies for being successful. Attention quickly turned to metrics - how could each team maximize points without putting themselves at risk.

Was Effective Teamwork Demonstrated in Time Trial #1? Absolutely, given the definition of teamwork offered by the staff of Pull Together, which includes ìChoosing to work together to manage resources and opportunities.î For each of the four subgroups teammates did actively: