Theories of Team Development
The development of teams is an ongoing process because the composition of the team may keep on changing. The new members may join and the old members may leave the team. The team members pass through several stages for the development of the team and there has been a lot of research to identify these stages. In this article, we discuss the common theories of team development.
Team is formed as a result of interactions and influence of members who strive for the achievement of common goal. After the formation the teams take time to develop and usually follow some easily recognizable stages, as the team-members transition from being a group of strangers to becoming a unified integrated team chasing a common goal. In this process, the team members try to understand others behavior, realize the appropriateness of the behavior and the roles of the team members. A team is not formed merely by declaring some individuals as a team. A lot of research has been done on group formation and development, and different theories of group development have been suggested. Given below is a list of commonly known theories on team/group development:
- Bennis & Shepard, 1956;
- Bion, 1961;
- Gibb, 1964;
- Schutz, 1958, 1982;
- Tuckman, 1965;
- Tuckman & Jensen, 1977;
- Yalom, 1970;
- Tuckman, 1977;
- Kormanski & Mozenter, 1987;
Now we will discuss some popular theories on team development in detail:
Tuckman’s Five Stage Team Development Model:
Psychologist Bruce Tuckman first came up with the memorable phrase "forming, storming, norming, and performing" back in 1965. The “Forming – Storming – Norming – Performing” model of group development maintained that these phases are all necessary and inevitable in order for the team to grow, to face up to challenges, to tackle problems, to find solutions, to plan work, and to deliver results. This model has become the basis for subsequent models. He used it to describe the path to high-performance that most teams follow. Later, he added a fifth stage that he called "adjourning." Let us learn the five stages briefly:
Forming: This is the first stage of team development. In this stage the members try to explore and understand the behavior of the team members. They make their efforts in understanding the expectations of the team members. At this stage they are polite and try to find out how to fit into the team.
Storming: In the second stage, members start competing for status, leadership and control in the group. Individuals understand others behavior and assert their role in the group. As a result inter-personal conflict starts. Members try to resolve the issues related to the task and working relations. They also resolve the issues related to the role of the individual in the group.
Norming: The members start moving in a cohesive manner. They establish a balance among various conflicting forces. They develop group norms and consensus for the achievement of the group goal. At this stage, cooperative feelings develop among the team members.
Performing: In this stage, the team makes effort for the performance of task and accomplishment of objectives. The established pattern of relationships improves coordination and helps in resolving conflicts. Members trust each other and extend their full cooperation for the achievement of the group goal.
Adjourning: As you must be aware that the team is formed for some purpose. When this purpose is fulfilled, the team may be adjourned. Thus, the breaking up of the team is referred to adjournment.
Kormanski & Mozenter (1987) Stages of Team Development:
Kormanski & Mozenter (1987) integrated the various theories and suggested the following stages of team development. These stages are sequential (each stage is followed by the next one). Each stage has a task outcome and a relationships outcome. Kormanski and Mozenter have identified following stages of team development :
- Awareness
- Conflict
- Cooperation
- Productivity, and
- Separation
1. Awareness: At this stage individuals get to know each other. By knowing the goals of the team they commit themselves to the goals. The members get to know and accept to work together for a goal about which they have enough knowledge.
2. Conflict: At the first stage (awareness) the members know the team goals and accept to work together; but this is at the surface level. At the second stage they search and begin to ask questions. As a result several matters are clarified. They also fight with each and in this process of interaction resolve any hostilities they may have, resulting in the feeling of belonging to the group.
3. Cooperation: In the third stage the members own the team goals and get involved in those goals. Having resolved feelings, they also support each other.
4. Productivity: This is the stage of real achievement of the goals/outcomes, and the team members achieving these objectives feel proud of their achievement.
5. Separation: Having accomplished the goals or the outcomes, some task-specific teams may decide to get dissolved, or a time-bound time comes to a close. The excellent work done by the members is recognized, and the team members have a high sense of satisfaction of working with each other. This is the stage of closure of the team, or closure of one task on which the team was working.
The following table provides a summary of task outcomes and relationships outcomes at each stage as defined in the model:
|
A Model of Team Building |
|||
|
Stage |
Theme |
Task Outcome |
Relationship Outcome |
|
One |
Awareness |
Commitment |
Acceptance |
|
Two |
Conflict |
Clarification |
Belonging |
|
Three |
Cooperation |
Involvement |
Support |
|
Four |
Productivity |
Achievement |
Pride |
|
Five |
Separation |
Recognition |
Satisfaction |
Related Links
You May Also Like
-
Participative Leadership Theories
Participative leadership theories rely on the involvement of different participants and suggest that the ideal leadership style is one that takes the inputs of others into account. Participative leaders encourage participation and contributions from group members and involve them in the decision-making process. Participative leadership tries to achieve through people, teamwork and collaboration.
-
Have you ever resonated that there seem to be as many different ways to lead people as there have been great leaders? When we recall the success of Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Abraham Lincoln, Napoleon Bonaparte to Steve Jobs and Jack Welch, we also notice that they all used different approaches that were suitable to their specific situations and circumstances. Over the last century, researchers and psychologists have developed simple ways to describe the “Styles of leadership” and in this section, we will explore these commonly known leadership styles.
-
Communication has as its central objective the transmission of meaning. The process of communication is successful only when the receiver understands an idea as the sender intended it. How does a message or an idea travel from one person to another? To transmit our message, we engage in a sensitive and complex process of communication, with different elements like sender, message, channels, receiver, noise, and feedback.
-
The Systemic Approach to Leadership
The systemic approach to leadership looks at the organization as a whole and focuses on the understanding of the organization as a system. Moving to systems thinking demand managers to view organizations as organic systems. Leaders are also part of this complex system which is constantly undergoing change and evolving. The leaders need to manage the relations and networks within these systems by acting with systemic awareness.
-
Jung first introduced his personality theory and explained that all humans have a natural impulse to relate meaningfully to the world through productive work and people through significant relationships. He used four psychological functions - thinking and feeling (rational functions) and sensation and intuition (irrational functions). He also used introversion and extraversion and its impact on appropriate leader behaviors.
-
Burns Transformational Leadership Theory
Transformational leadership theory has been defined by James MacGregor Burns as a process where both leaders and followers mutually raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation. The concept of transforming leader works with teams to garner trust, respect, and admiration while reaching to higher moral positions. The transformational theory of leadership was developed while studying political leaders and how they use charismatic methods to attract people to the values.
-
Authentic leadership is a new approach to leadership in which leaders are genuine, self-aware, transparent, build honest relationships, and work on an ethical foundation. Authenticity is one of the core values of leadership. Authentic leaders have truthful self-concepts and they inspire by promoting openness by acting in a real, genuine, and sincere way. Authenticity requires self-awareness and the ability to act in accordance with one's true self.
-
The four theory of leadership was formulated after studying hundreds of leaders and the model includes four basic dimensions of effective leadership - support; interaction; facilitation; goal emphasis, and work facilitation. This model was tested as a predictor of an organization's effectiveness.
-
Management theories are the recommended management strategies that enable us to better understand and approach management. Many management frameworks and guidelines were developed during the last four decades.
-
The open systems model of leadership acknowledges the influence of the environment on organizations. An open system regularly exchanges feedback with its external environment. The environment also provides key resources that are necessary to sustain and lead to change and survival. Leadership in an open system should focus on influence, open communication, and patterns to control expanding the number of variables created by external dynamics.
