Tuckman's Group Development Cycles

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.

Remember the Titans movie presents an opportunity to look at the development stages of leadership over the course of a season. The movie takes place at a high school in Virginia in 1971. The school replaces its current Caucasian football coach – Bill Yoast with an African American coach – Herman Boone. Herman Boone as the head coach and Bill Yoast as the assistant coach form a successful football team through struggles and racial issues between team members and the people of the town they lived in.

Using Tuckman’s (1965) model of group development, our first session can be considered as our “forming stage.” This was on the basis that it involved introducing ourselves to one another and to quote Price (2001): “we created and negotiated an

The Performing stage was the last stage of Bruce Tuckman's four stages of group development until the 70's when Tuckman felt the importance to create an additional fifth stage to his model the "adjourning" which became the last stage. A group (shift) reaches the performing when all it members solves the conflict in the Norming stage therefore had establish the norms of the group and the members are operate as one. Thus, the group identity is finalized, in our experience it was a unique one.

Our group was brought together for a purpose of making a presentation. We were strangers to each other but expected commitment in terms of attendance, communication, meetings and quality of work. It can be argued that individuals can be demotivated by group project if they feel their success depends on others who do not share this views and which might lead to discrimination and oppression (CMU, 2015). However this might be resolved by a professional organisation of working process, high motivation and personal responsibility of each group member indicating a successful group development. This project was a valuable experience for developing our teamwork skills and in this essay, I will discuss our group process and theories which can apply

However, there were numerous people who were giving their opinions and I believed they would’ve been bettered suited for the role. I also felt frustrated that we took long to build some decisions that could’ve taken half the time. I believe as a group managed to accomplish the forming stage of Bruce Tuckman’s team development theory, as we formed the group and members became familiar with one another (Russ and Dickinson, 1999). During the next phase, which is storming, is where I believe we stagnated. During this phase we should’ve seen each other styles, ideas, goals and resolved any conflict (Russ and Dickinson, 1999). However, this is where I believe we went wrong, as having no leader meant conflict wasn’t resolved.

Over the past two decades, it seems that teamwork has become increasingly important and more companies have formed different teams and groups for various purposes (Samson & Daft, 2012). It is proved that good teams can be highly productive, however, not every team is successful (Samson & Daft, 2012). Forming a team can be time consuming and there are many problems related to teamwork, for example, social loafing might reduce the effectiveness of a team. Therefore, it is crucial to know how to develop a good team with less time and less effort. Bruce Tuckman in 1965 developed the popular model for effective team building. This model identifies four stages of team building which are forming, storming, norming and performing (Tuckman, 1965). Later on, Tuckman added a fifth stage: adjourning to the model (Samson & Daft, 2012). The five-stage team development model provides a guideline on how team works by using simple and easily understandable words. However, there are some limitations of this theory as well. This paper in the following will discuss both the utility and the limitations of Tuckman’s team development stage model. Then it will provide some suggestions based on the limitations of the model.

Tuckman's first stage of group development is forming, “during this ice-breaking stage, group members tend to be uncertain and anxious about such things as their roles, who is in charge, and the group's goals.” (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013) Other characteristics of the forming stage may include low levels of mutual trust, and possible hesitation in groups to see who will take the lead. (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013) Team members in this stage often spend their time adjusting with their tasks, and with one another. (Bonebright, 2010). It is important to note that the outcomes in this stage set the tone for success or failure in a team, in the case of Group 3, the stage was set for a successful summit of Mt. Everest.

The Tuckman Model (1965) is a five-stage model which identifies five stages of team development; forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. In order to obtain the team’s optimal productivity and outcomes, it is suggested that the team goes through the stages of development which the facilitator must oversee. The stages help the facilitator to develop the groups and to better manage the participants should any conflict arise. The following report describes a small group of carers who are caring for someone who has post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and how the stages of development were used within the group work. Forming is the first stage where group members begin to become oriented with each other and the facilitator (George Mason University, 2017). The storming stage follows where conflicts and competition arise between group members as they have often not become comfortable or familiar with each other (George Mason University, 2017). Norming is the third stage of Tuckman’s Model which involves group member’s feeling which enable them to contribute to the group’s development resulting in group cohesion (Wilson, 2010). Performing is the fourth stage of group development where group members can work interdependently, within subgroups or as a whole and are the most productive in developing as a group and as an individual (George Mason University, 2017). Adjourning is the last stage of Tuckman’s model which involves dissolving the group and

Tuckman proposes that groups develop via five stages; forming, storming, norming, performing and finally adjourning (Archee, Gurney, & Mohan, 2013a). The first stage, known as forming, involves clarifying the task and purpose of the group, and identifying boundaries of both the task and interpersonal behaviour (Archee et al., 2013a). For the presentation task we were randomly allocated into groups. This worried me greatly as I have struggled in the past with group members who do not contribute equally or see the task as important as other group members. To avoid this problem, the group collectively determined and agreed upon a number of ground rules. For example, we decided that all group members were expected to contribute equally to the presentation, all group members were expected to attend and contribute at all group meetings, and all group members would adhere to agreed upon deadlines. Having failed to do this in previous group assignments, this clarification stage

Teams pass through numerous stages for example the forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning stages. This particular case places the team within the storming

The Tuckman Model of Group Development has 5 stages: Forming, Storming, Norming, and Adjourning (Maples, 2008). During the first session of MOP, everyone was tasked with forming their own small project team. The very first class workshop activity involved meeting two new people and introducing one of them to the entire class. The aim of the activity was to indirectly assess who we would want to be in a team with, based on our perceptions of a person’s behaviour, values, and work ethic. Most people would want to be in a team with people similar to them on a surface level (age, gender, ethnicity) and on a deeper level (personality, attitudes, believes, values) (Liang, Shih, & Chiang, 2015). We were free to choose whoever we wanted in our team under the condition that the team we form is diverse.

My feelings about the group process was a little mix at first but, at the end I felt like we actually brought it together. Beginning of the group member were all over the place and had no direction, when we were able to take a breather in just think ideas started to flow. I felt like that took the communicator to make it happen. By reinsuring the other group members that everything will go smoothly if we just don’t overthink everything.

In this research paper the exploration of group work will be examined. This paper will take an in-depth look into the process of formulating groups by creating a social concern that can be addressed in a group setting. This process of constructing a group will be exposed through planning which is a critical step to group success like: defining a purpose, determining if group is open or closed, size of the group, space, meeting times, and obtaining participants. Throughout this paper understanding phases of groups like beginning, working, termination, and roles of the leader play a vital role in formulating groups. With the aid of evidence based practice this paper will show how all elements of groups when intertwine with one another, and implemented at appropriate time help groups to reach their maximum potentials.

First and foremost, thank you for your service. Additionally, your discussion board post was very educational. I would like to further examine the storming stage of Tuckman's Stages of Group Development. Our textbook states the following about the storming phase of Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development, “ Individuals test the leader's policies and assumptions as they determine how they fit into the power structure” (Kinicki & Fugate, 2016, p. 265). At this stage, it is imperative for group leaders to maintain control of the group.