Teams

Several team development models have been formulated. In this course we have chosen to introduce you to Tuckman's model (1965), which describes five stages of development: Forming, Storming, Norming,Performing and Adjourning. Tuckman proposed the model for small groups, but the model has since been applied to teams (Berlin et al., 2012) and we can certainly verify that teams follow his stages.

Before we run through the detail, you should know that teams are not static with respect to the stages. It's usual for new teams to move sequentially through the stages but circumstances may push them back to earlier stages. For example, if a member of a Performing team is replaced, the remaining members will find themselves back at the Forming stage as they get to know their new team member (and the new team member gets to know them).

Forming - an orientation stage  

Members need to know and understand the:

• aims and objectives of the team,
• the team plan and how their contributions will be used, and
• rules and expectations of the team.

The types of things the team should be asking in this stage are: Who are we?; Why are we here?; What is the task?

Something that you might be asking yourself at this stage is: Will I be accepted?

If, over time, a team is not able to move to the 'Norming' stage it may be that it:

• has a high turnover of members,
• holds infrequent meetings (either face to face or online), and/or
• suffers from a lack of team leadership and direction (Giesen & Osborne, 2008).

Storming - a stage of friction and conflict

This stage is perhaps an early test of whether the team has the ability to be a high performing one. Giesen and Osborne (2008) believe that teams that can effectively manage conflict at this stage move on to a 'good' norming stage. Teams that do not effectively manage conflict here move into a 'bad' norming stage where team development stalls and dysfunction may set in.  

The types of things that the team might ask at this stage are: Who is in charge?, How will we do this?

You might be asking yourself at this stage: Will I be respected?

During this stage team members need to know that:

• their team leader is not afraid to address team conflict,
• there are processes to address and resolve differences within the team,
• the team is committed to creating and maintaining a work environment that fosters teamwork and allows for open communication,
• support will be provided to help any team member who needs to develop their skills to allow them to work more effectively within the team, and
• all members will be held to the same expectations of behaviour and work standards (Giesen & Osborne, 2008).

If a team has difficulty moving from this to the 'norming' stage it may be that:

• the team has a a conflict-averse leader,
• there are too many 'hot-button' issues that have been left unaddressed for too long and the unresolved nature of these is harming interpersonal relationships between team members, and/or
• team members lack the ability to talk through conflict (Giesen & Osborne, 2008).

Norming - a stage of fitting in

Norming is where the team members take responsibility, agree on and commit to team goals and processes, and accept other team members as they are. Giesen and Osborne (2008) divided this stage into two: good norming and bad norming.

Examples of bad norming are where:

• a team member talks about a team member and not to that team member about an issue,
• the team leader refuses to handle a problem within the team,
• team members break into two or three cliques which do not cooperate effectively with each other, and/or
• team members avoid raising issues because they are apprehensive about how their fellow team members would respond (Giesen & Osborne, 2008).

Teams that fall into a bad norming stage either (1) stay stuck in this stage and eventually have to be replaced, or (2) address the issues that are holding them back and go back to the storming stage before (hopefully) progressing to a good norming stage (Giesen & Osborne, 2008).

Examples of good norming are where:

• team members are able to raise issues and address disagreement and conflict, and
• the team leader's level of trust and confidence in the team grows, leading to team members taking on greater roles and responsibilities within the team (Geisen & Osborne, 2008).

The type of thing that a team might say at this stage is: This is what we do.

You might ask yourself at this stage: How can I help the team?

Performing - the stage where the work gets done efficiently and effectively

During the performing stage, members work so effectively at sharing responsibilities that it is increasingly difficult to tell who the actual team leader is. On the outside, this team may look like well functioning teams in any of the previous stages but this team will be able to tell stories about how they moved from each of the previous stages to get to where they are now. They will have learned from experience and are able to draw on this to address new issues as they arise.

Adjourning - the ending stage

This fifth stage describes the stage where a team has completed their project task, or alternatively the team may be disbanded.

In this stage, teams should have the chance to:

• understand why the ending has occurred,
• celebrate successful completion of a project and/or achieve closure to the end of the team, and
• feel that the team's contributions were appreciated by the organisation (Giesen & Osborne, 2008).

REFERENCES

Berlin, J.M.,  Carlström, E.D., & Sandberg, H.S. (2012). Models of teamwork: ideal or not? A critical study of theoretical team models.  Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 18(5/6), 328 - 40.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13527591211251096 

Giesen, G., & Osborne, L. (2008).  Tuckman tweaked: A revised model of group development.  Greg Giesen & Associates, Inc.  http://www.GregGiesenAssociates.com.

Tuckman, B.W.  (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63 (6), 384-99.