Case Study : Building A Coalition

Tuckman in his "Stages of Development' model identified 5 stages of team formation: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (CIPP, Unit 1). Based on his analysis and characteristics of each stage it becomes possible to recognise that the team has reached the stage of 'Performing'. According to Tuckman it is the final stage of development when a team is fully functioning and produces its 'best work'. The main features of the ‘Performing’ stage are (CIPP, Unit

50 years have passed since the Tuckman's classical model of Small Group Development was presented to the world. Tuckman’s model has become "the most predominantly referred to and most widely recognized in organizational literature (Miller, 2003, p. 122)" (Bonebright, 2010, p. 111). Established by Bruce W. Tuckman in 1965 and revised by Tuckman and Jensen in 1977, the model presents the well- known stages of forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning.

A useful theory to explain our processes and development as a group is Tuckman’s theory of group working which explains the stages that a group will progress through in order to achieve an objective, including the Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing and Adjourning stages (Mindtools, 2016). The forming stage was pre-established for our group because we had been allocated together prior to the task and we had already managed to build relationships with one another. It was at the storming stage we began to establish our roles within the group and allocate tasks for

Whether groups are formed for social or task oriented purposes, the ability to produce and maintain a sense of affiliation, peer support and collaboration is important for overall group functioning. The cohesion of a social group is produced through the establishment of a set of group norms, which are later defined as a guide for conduct accepted within a group of individuals. However, in order for a group to perform and produce results, the team leader should guide his/her team through the proper stages of group development, which includes the following steps: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. Although teams should follow all these stages of group development, the forming and the norming stages are the most important,

Tuckman (1965) suggests that understanding is required in order for teams to reach maturity. Tuckman phases of team development are:

The five stage Tuckman’s theory (1965) namely forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning focuses on the way in which a group handles a task from the beginning to completion. The main group work approaches are cognitive behaviourist, feminist, psychoanalytic and humanistic approaches. Knowledge of theory enhances effectiveness of group work.

Tuckman (1965) proposed that when developing teams, groups proceed through four general stages of development, namely: Forming, storming, norming and performing.

The team is assembled and the task is allocated. Team members behave independently, with anxieties about inclusion and exclusion. Their time is spent planning, collecting information and bonding, with an apparent willingness to conform. This can happen whenever new circumstances occur within a group, or when new challenges or projects are set within established

Bruce W Tuckman (1965) developed a model to describe the differing stages of team development. He gave us a way of interpreting the various stages groups pass through into making an effective team. As you can see from the illustration below, teams go

Work Team development is a dynamic and often difficult process. Most teams find themselves in a continuos state of change and development. Eventhough, most teams never reach full stability, there is a general pattern that describes how most teams evolve. There are five stages of team development, the first stage is forming. In this stage there is a great deal of uncertainty about the teams purpose, structure and leadership. Members are testing the the waters to determine what types of behaviors are acceptable. This stage is complete when members began to think of themselves as part of the team. The second stage is called storming. In this stage there is much intragroup conflict.Team members accept the existence of the team, but there is resistance to the control that the team imposes on individuality. Conflict can arise from numerous sources within the team setting but generally falls into three categories:communication, factors, structural factors and personal factors (Varney, 1989/Townsley). In addition, there is conflict over who will control the team.

This balance is often observed difficult to achieve, especially within the solution teams. This is mainly attributed to the team formation stages as described by the Bruce Tuckman’s model (1965). According to Tuckman, the team formation goes through the forming, storming, norming and performing stages in progression. In the forming stage, there is a high dependence on leader for guidance and direction. In the storming stage, team members vie for position as they attempt to

The Tuckman’s stages of team development (Levi, 2007) will be used as lens to evaluate the work of the group presentation. The Tuckman’s stages of team development consist of five stages of forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Levi, 2007). In the forming stage we tend to know each other and figure out how we are going to run the presentation. At this stage, there was discomfort due to unfamiliarity together with confusion on how we will function together. The solution for that case was, everyone had each member contact detail, had a clear ground rules, as well as planned how we will accomplish our tasks. In addition, we also experienced the storming and norming stage. Levi (2007) says that the in the storming phase there are often

Coalitions and partnerships are a popular strategy for engaging stakeholders from a wide array of community sectors to address complex social and health issues (Mizarahi & Rosenthal, 2001). In public health, it is argued that coalitions are often better positioned than individuals, organizations, or sectors to influence broader systems-level change required to realize and maintain health improvements within a community (Butterfoss, 2007; Minkler & Wallerstein, 1999; Siegal, Siegal, & Bonnie, 2009). Previous studies by a group of authors have explored the successes and challenges of collaborative groups in promoting active living in their communities. For example, Litt and colleagues (2013) found that

This study of LWOK aimed to identify potential strategies to improve coalition formation practices for facilitating community action and intervention to improve healthy weight in children. Previous studies by a group of authors have explored the successes and challenges of collaborative efforts in promoting active living at the community level. For example, Litt and colleagues (2013) found that investing in community and policy engagement activities represents important levers for achieving structural and policy changes, while Gustat and colleagues (2013) found that the main challenges experienced by collaborative groups were funding and personnel changes. However, the actual processes to forming an effective coalition have not been

The Woodson foundation needs to understand all five stages in order to be successful. The stages are a useful framework for understanding group development (274). If they understand the five stages they eventually achieve their goal. Each stage plays an important role in the project. A understand of these stages promotes cohesiveness and measures progression. Once they look back from stage 5 to stages 1&2 they realize how the differences became similarities for the common goal.