Group Case Study - Organisation Behaviour

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.

Bruce Tuckman has a theory which contains of four stages; these are forming, storming, norming and performing. His theory is about group development. The first stage is forming, this is when a group is reliant on one particular leader, if the leader is not there and someone else tries to take charge then the confusion starts. The leader makes sure every individual is aware of their role, if the leader does not make them aware, then their roles and responsibilities are unclear. For example in a class room everyone will be speaking to each other, when the teacher comes in and tells everyone to settle down then they will do so. The second stage is storming, at this stage everyone hasn’t

The next time the group met they were in the storming stage (Tuckman 1965). This stage is where any conflict happens, the group member explore their roles within the group. Within this stage there can often be a struggle for power, status and control. Even though conflict

Throughout the film the stages of group development (forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning) are observable. The first stage

In a previous class, we learned about a theory on group dynamics called the Tuckman stages. This theory states that in order for a team to effectively produce at its highest potential, there are four phases that are indispensable and unavoidable. Without giving attention to these phases, Tuckman believed that most teams would concentrate almost solely on content and virtually ignore the process, explaining why outwardly strong teams produce underwhelming results. Summarizing these four phases, Tuckman named them forming, storming, norming and performing. While reflecting on the dynamic for my most recent group collaboration project for this class, it is helpful to consider the Tuckman phrases and whether or not they were

Stage one is typically known as the forming phase, in which the group tends to look towards the leader for guidance, in an attempt to keep things simple and avoid controversy. Mostly throughout the beginning,

Forming is when a group comes together for the first time and everyone tries to get to know each other. This is the first stage. No roles are placed within the team and many members are feeling multiple feelings like anxiousness, nervousness, and some might be clueless on the work. I have experienced forming when I played softball for the Mooresville Recreation Department in my town. The rec department would blindly place girls

Tuckmans stages of group interaction is a 4 stage process involving forming, storming, norming and performing.

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.

At the beginning he was told to report to Jenkins, however, once he got to the site he was assigned to Jeff Hardy.  After the company reorganization, he found himself wondering whether he should report to Knight or Hardy. However, despite the confusion, he never brought up this question to Hardy, Jenkins or Knight. He perhaps then fell into the trap of a “boss­subordinate relationship” and went with the structure he felt was assigned without truly understanding its reasoning. ii. He didn’t take enough time to understand HQ’s perspective on various issues a. Replacing the chief engineer, rejecting frequency reuse patterns, or failing to get sign off on agreements for GMCT cell sites indicate failures in managing upward management relationships. Problem #2: Employee Dynamics Strengths 1. Peterson was committed to building an empowering environment for employees. i. Peterson called weekly construction meetings, which invited all to report on the company’s weekly progress and issues. Shortcomings 2. He failed to consider alterations in team dynamics when making hiring and salary decisions. i. He hired Trevor at a higher salary rate to the resentment of other employees, causing significant damage to the trust and respect between employee and manager.

Motivation and theories -------------------------- 2.1. Definition and theory framework ------------------------------------ Motivation can be described as the driving force of individual behaviour to fulfill needs or achieve goals. Mitchell defines motivation as 'the degree to which an individual wants and chooses to engage in certain specified behaviours' (Mullins 2002:418). In terms of this definition, various theories have been developed around.

One of the most important is that this supervisor’s employees were completely denied the opportunity to learn and grow. This definitely breeds resentment among the employees, as the entire staff begins to feel that shortness in opportunity is preventing them from moving forward professionally (Walker, 2002). Furthermore, a lack of learning and developing leads to low self-esteem, motivation, and moral. It was very obvious that the entire team felt this way, as they were not trusted to take on these situations. This, in turn, negatively affected the entire company, as talent was not being properly developed.

Bauer, T. (2012). Motivation Theories. In B. Erdogan, An Introduction to Organizational Behavior (pp. 393-450). New york.

4. 3 Major Types of Motivation Theories  Content Theories of Motivation WHAT motivates us  Process