Team Chemistry—Science or Debate Necessity?

It’s Saturday morning, and instead of sleeping in, I’m rapidly pacing around a bathroom stall willing myself not to cry. A knock on the door sends me scrambling to look presentable, and as I reach for the stall’s knob I’m stuck thinking one question: How did everything go so wrong? 

My bathroom stall breakdown occurred at one of my very first World Schools Debate tournaments. I’d had various speeches horrifically crash and burn, but surprisingly, that wasn’t the cause of my anxiety. 

It was my team.

Now, let me be clear, this situation wasn’t unique to me or my team. Rather, this was a common consequence of participating in a debate forum where teens are constantly working together in stressful situations. But this doesn’t always have to be our reality- especially when we acknowledge the importance of team chemistry. 

Firstly, what is team chemistry?

It’s a general term for a team’s ability to function with one another, and how it looks varies from team to team. For example, think of how teammates communicate on the bench, outside of debate, and while prepping. 

A way to measure your team’s chemistry is as simple as asking the question: “do I like my team?” If the answer is yes, there’s a high chance your team functions just fine. But even if you answered no, perfect team chemistry isn’t a necessity to still be an amazing team. However, for me, it helped immensely.

What is my experience with team chemistry?

I’ve been on both ends of the spectrum, a suffocatingly toxic team, and super supportive team.

The former had been built up of friends, but instead of tournaments being a big hangout, they became a huge point of stress and drama in my life.

But what is the issue with forming teams of best friends? 

Friendship is often something that occurs naturally. So sure, someone may be an amazing friend, but that doesn’t mean you know how they act under stressful circumstances, and they may not know how you act either.

This hurts, especially when you dislike your friend’s work ethic or compatibility but fear saying something because you think it would hurt your friend’s feelings or even ruin your friendship. This can force you to try to work past issues, and while that might mitigate harm in some cases, more often than not drama only leads to more drama.

You could also face the opposite wherein your friendships stay strong but your ability to stay on task doesn’t. I’ve been in situations where prep calls turned into gossip hour, or free time in class was used to chat over work. Similarly, a senior confessed to me they’d often valued having fun at tournaments over the grind as their team was close friends, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but definitely set them back at times when they needed to focus. 

That being said, I don't think it’s impossible to succeed with a team of best friends. I’ve seen individuals on the circuit break one day and post HoCo pics together the next. Personally, I think it’s much more likely to leave debate with new friendships rather than continue with old ones.

So what worked for me?

In my second year in debate, I had little choice in the formation of my team. This can be risky for your team’s chemistry, especially in a format where you’re forced to put so much trust in the next speaker, but in my case, it worked the best. 

My team started off as a simple reorganization of three sophomores who’d volunteered off the fly for a last-minute tournament and led to a solidified team when we broke to finals, despite never debating together.

Not every team clicks instantly, especially with new individuals, but I’m grateful mine did. This was partly because we had no history or gripes with each other, but also because we were so willing to learn. If someone dropped an important piece of refutation, spoke too fast, or made a mistake, we simply told them and they tried their best to fix it without taking it to heart. 

When our relationship was solely debate-based, we were much more likely to take criticism, leading to the growth and development of all of us individually as well as a team.

Is good team chemistry essential?

In my experience, yes, because when we don’t value positive team chemistry, it’s easier to slip into toxic environments. This is because you can end up looking at the results over how you actually get there, such as sticking with teammates who berate your performance and devalue you solely because you’ve decided chemistry isn’t as important as the positive result of winning.

Even if it isn’t that extreme, being with teammates you inherently dislike- whether it’s when you’re prepping or debating- can build up into conflicts long term when one bad loss leads to an explosion of all the resentment you or anyone else had built up.

While you can and should work past roadblocks and faults within your team, you should also trust yourself when you realize you're unable to work with an individual, rather than forcing both of you to constantly compromise in hopes that you won’t slip back into toxicity.

Despite the value I put on team chemistry, I’ve still seen amazing teams made up of people who rarely talk outside of debate. Another senior I interviewed remarked on how although their team wasn’t necessarily best friends outside of debate, their bench cohesion was surprisingly top-notch and even round-winning. 

Similar to them, you might have a completely different experience with team chemistry than I do, but it simply shows there isn’t a singular formula for a perfect team bond. Instead, by being aware of the variety in team chemistry, you can mix a solution that’s best for your team!