Group Development Stages

12 Key excerpts on "Group Development Stages"

• 

  eBook - PDF

  Empowerment Series: Social Work with Groups

  Comprehensive Practice and Self-Care

  • Charles Zastrow, Sarah Hessenauer(Authors)
  • 2018(Publication Date)
  • Cengage Learning EMEA

    (Publisher)

  All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. CHAPTER 1: Groups: Types and Stages of Development 20 been made are his major tasks. Acceptance of termination is facilitated by active guid-ance of members as individuals to other ongoing sources of support and assistance. 32 Tuckman Model Tuckman reviewed more than 50 studies, primarily of limited-duration therapy and sen-sitivity groups, and concluded that these groups go through the following five predictable developmental stages: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. 33 Each stage will be briefly described. Forming Members become oriented toward each other, work on being accepted, and learn more about the group. This stage is marked by a period of uncertainty in which members try to determine their places in the group and learn the group’s rules and procedures. Storming Conflicts begin to arise as members resist the influence of the group and rebel against accomplishing their tasks. Members confront their various differences, and the management of conflict often becomes the focus of attention. Norming The group establishes cohesiveness and commitment. In the process, the members discover new ways to work together. Norms are also set for appropriate behavior. Performing The group works as a unit to achieve group goals. Members develop proficiency in achieving goals and become more flexible in their patterns of working together. Adjourning The group disbands. The feelings that members experience are similar to those in the “separation stage” of the Garland, Jones, and Kolodny Model described in the previous section.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

  Evidence-based Lessons for Creating Sustainable Organizations

  • Steve M. Jex, Thomas W. Britt, Cynthia A. Thompson, Cynthia A Thompson(Authors)
  • 2024(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  Ultimately, though, the uncertainties Forming Storming Norming Performing Adjourning FIGURE 11.1 Tuckman’s (1965) Model of Group Development Stages of Team Development 573 that accompany membership in a new team gradually dissipate over time as team mem- bers acquire information and feel more comfortable being part of the team. After issues associated with being in a new team are resolved, the next stage in team development is labeled storming. As one might guess from its name, this stage is char- acterized by conflict over a number of issues. For example, team members may disagree over important team norms, or perhaps over who should assume leadership responsibili- ties. This stage may be rather unpleasant, but it is also necessary if the teams hope to ultimately function effectively. If team mem- bers never acknowledge their disagreements, these may ultimately come out in more sub- tle ways and prevent the team from ever per- forming effectively. It should be noted, however, that it is also possible for team members to be too vigorous in airing their differences. If conflicts are too intense and personal, team members may simply be unable to work together and never move past this stage. It is perhaps not surprising that teams containing people with agreeable personalities experience less conflict than teams with people prone to be disagreeable (Graziano et al., 1996). Assuming that the conflicts identified during the storming stage can be resolved, the team next moves into the norming stage. In a very real sense, this is the point where a “collection of people” becomes a “team.” Some level of role differentiation in team members’ behavior occurs, and the behav- ior of the team develops some consistent patterns. For example, different team mem- bers may serve different functions, and the team may develop norms with regard to meetings, modes of communication, and, perhaps, the way team members are expected to dress.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Management

  • John R. Schermerhorn, Jr., Daniel G. Bachrach(Authors)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  39 Have you ever been on a team that was too large or too small? How did the members interact? And, how well did the team perform? Stages of Team Development Although having the right inputs is critical, it doesn’t guarantee team effectiveness. Team process also plays an important role. This is the way that the members of a team actually work together as they transform inputs into output. Also called group dynamics, the process aspects of any group or team include how members develop norms and cohesiveness, share roles, make decisions, communicate, and handle conflicts. 40 Importantly, teams experience different process challenges as they pass through the stages of team development—forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. 41 Forming Stage The forming stage involves the first entry of individual members into a team. This is a time of initial task orientation and interpersonal testing. When people first come together, they ask questions: “What can or does this team offer me?” “What will I be asked to contribute?” “Can my needs be met while I serve the task needs of the team?” In the forming stage individuals begin to identify with other members and with the team itself. They are concerned about getting acquainted, establishing relationships, discover- ing what behavior is acceptable, and learning how others perceive the team’s task. This may also be a time when some members rely on others who appear “powerful” or especially “knowledgeable.” Prior experience with team members in other situations and personal impressions of organization culture, goals, and practices may affect emerging relationships between members. Difficulties in the forming stage tend to be greater in more culturally and demographically diverse teams. Storming Stage Figure 17.4 shows the storming stage as part of a “critical zone” in team development. It is a period of high emotionality and can be hard to pass through success- fully.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Social Groups in Action and Interaction

  2nd Edition

  • Charles Stangor(Author)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Chapter 8 , members of groups that experience no conflict at all may be unproductive because the members are bored, uninvolved, and unmotivated, and because they do not think creatively or openly about the topics of relevance to them. In order to progress, the group needs to develop new ideas and new approaches, and this requires that the members discuss their different opinions about the decisions that the group needs to make. The approaches the group uses to be creative and productive must be developed through conversation and interaction, which may be accompanied by some conflict.

  NORMING AND PERFORMING

  Assuming that the storming does not go too far, the group will move into a stage in which norms and roles are developed, allowing the group to establish a routine and effectively work together. At this stage the individual group members may report great satisfaction and identification with the group, as well as strong group cohesion. Groups that have reached this stage have the ability to meet goals and survive challenges. However, in some cases the optimal stage for effective performance takes a long time to develop, and groups often do not reach this stage until near the end of the group’s proposed time period.

  In one interesting observational study studying the group development process, Connie Gersick (1988) observed a number of teams (ranging from student study groups to community fundraising committees) as they worked on different projects. The teams were selected so that, though they were all working within a specific time frame, the time frame itself varied dramatically—from four to 25 meetings held over periods ranging from 11 days to six months. Despite this variability, Gersick found that each of the teams followed a very similar pattern of norming and performing. In each case, the team established well-defined norms regarding its method of attacking its task in its very first meeting. And each team stayed with this approach, with very little deviation, during the first half of the time it had been allotted. However, midway through the time it had been given to complete the project (and regardless of whether that was after two meetings or after 12 meetings), the group suddenly had a meeting in which it decided to change its approach. Then, each of the groups used this new method of performing the task during the rest of its allotted time. It was as if there was a sort of an alarm clock that went off at the halfway point that led each group to rethink its approach.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The ASQ Certified Quality Improvement Associate Handbook

  • Grace L. Duffy, Sandra L. Furterer, Grace L. Duffy, Sandra L. Furterer(Authors)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • ASQ Quality Press

    (Publisher)

  This alliance with the team leader helps the minority members be respected and allows for their ideas to be heard. It is critical that the ground rules include openness to new ideas and learning among the team members. TEAM STAGES Describe the classic stages of team development: form- ing, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. (Understand) CQIA BoK 2020 II.C.3 The Tuckman model identifies the stages that teams typically progress through during their life cycle. Teams move through four stages of growth as they develop maturity over time. 9 Each stage may vary in intensity and duration. Stage 1: Forming In the forming stage, the cultural background, values, and personal agenda of each team member come together in an environment of uncertainty. New members won- der, What will be expected of me? How do I, or can I, fit in with these people? What are we really supposed to do? What are the rules of the game, and where do I find out about them? Fear is often present but frequently denied. Fear may be about personal acceptance, possible inadequacy for the task ahead, and the consequences if the team fails its mission. These fears and other concerns manifest themselves in numerous dysfunctional behaviors: • Maneuvering for a position of status on the team • Undercutting the ideas of others • Degrading another member • Trying to force one’s point of view on others • Bragging about one’s academic credentials • Vehemently objecting to any suggestion but one’s own • Abstaining from participation in discussions • Distracting the work by injecting unwanted comments or trying to take the team off track • Retreating to a position of complete silence 88 Part II Team Basics Because of the diversity of some teams, there may be a wide variety of disci- plines, experience, academic levels, and cultural differences among the members. This can result in confusion, misunderstanding of terminology, and language dif- ficulties.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  CIM Coursebook 08/09 Marketing Management in Practice

  • Tony Curtis, John Williams(Authors)
  • 2012(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Valuing other types. People feel part of the team and realize that they can achieve work if they accept other viewpoints. Norming is characterized by acceptance. The group needs to establish norms and practices. When and how it should work, how it should take decisions, what type of behaviour, what level of work, and what degree of openness, trust and confidence is appropriate. Whereas in the storming stage, people were apt to rebel very quickly; this is not the case now and if someone has a grievance, complaint or suggestion then the proper processes are used. Goals are understood and roles are clarified. The rules and regulations are being adhered to and people are working together positively. Relationships become stronger as people are more aware of each other.

  Performing

  Flexibility from trust. The team works in an open and trusting atmosphere where flexibility is the key, and hierarchy is of little importance. Not every team makes it to this stage. Many get stuck at norming and although everything appears normal, there is a lack of momentum and motivation towards achieving all the important team goals. At the performing stage, team members are focused on team goals and are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the team. Only when the three previous stages have been successfully completed, will the group be at full maturity and be able to be fully and sensibly productive.

  Some kind of performance will be achieved at all stages of the development but it is likely to be impeded by the other processes of growth and by individual agendas. Tuckman’s 5th Stage Adjourning

  Bruce Tuckman refined his theory around 1975 and added a fifth stage to the Forming Storming Norming Performing model – he called it Adjourning, which is also referred to as Deforming and Mourning. Adjourning is arguably more of an adjunct to the original four stage model rather than an extension – it views the group from a perspective beyond the purpose of the first four stages. The Adjourning phase is certainly very relevant to the people in the group and their well-being, but not to the main task of managing and developing a team, which is clearly central to the original four stages.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Make That Grade Organisational Behaviour

  • Michele Kehoe(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Gill Books

    (Publisher)

  Groups are not static, but dynamic. They form, develop, mature and disband. It is not until a group is mature that it is fully efficient and effective. The four stages of group development were first described in 1965 by Bruce W. Tuckman, a respected educational psychologist. Having examined the behaviour of small groups in a variety of settings, Tuckman identified the distinct phases they go through. He proposed that groups need to experience all four stages of development before they achieve maximum effectiveness. The model was further developed in 1977 in conjunction with May Ann Jensen, and a fifth stage was added.

  Tuckman and Jensen described the distinct stages that a group experiences as it comes together and starts to operate. This process can occur subconsciously, although an understanding of the stages can be of great benefit to a group in reaching effectiveness more quickly.

  Forming

  Individual behaviour is driven by a desire to be accepted by others and to avoid controversy or conflict. Members share background information about themselves, but serious issues and feelings are avoided. Individuals are gathering information and impressions about each other and about the scope of the task and how to approach it. Even though individuals may experience some anxiety about joining a new group, this is a comfortable stage to be in. If members know each other already, this will be a brief stage. It has also been referred to as the stage of mutual acceptance.

  Storming

  As members get to know one another and are more secure and self-assured, they begin to discuss feelings and opinions openly. Issues for consideration may relate to the work of the group itself or to roles and responsibilities within the group. Some members will be pleased to be getting into the work of the group, while others will long for the comfort and security of the previous stage. This stage is characterised by conflict and may be uncomfortable for some members. Members begin to identify what they want individually and from the group as a whole. The culture of the organisation and individuals will influence the degree to which conflict, and hostility are demonstrated or suppressed. To manage the conflict, individuals will search for structural clarity and rules to prevent the occurrence of ongoing conflict. This stage is also termed the communication stage.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  Available until 5 Dec |Learn more

  Organizational Psychology

  A Scientist-Practitioner Approach

  • Steve M. Jex, Thomas W. Britt(Authors)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  If team members never acknowledge their disagreements, these may ultimately come out in subtler ways and prevent the team from ever performing effectively. It should be noted, however, that it is also possible for team members to be too vigorous in airing their differences. If conflicts are too intense and personal, team members may simply be unable to work together and never move past this stage. It is perhaps not surprising that teams containing people with agreeable personalities experience less conflict than teams with people prone to be disagreeable (Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, & Hair, 1996). Assuming that the conflicts identified during the storming stage can be resolved, the team next moves into the norming stage. In a very real sense, this is the point where a “collection of people” becomes a “team.” Some level of role differentiation in team members' behavior occurs, and the behavior of the team develops some consistent patterns. For example, different team members may serve different functions, and the team may develop norms with regard to meetings, modes of communication, and, perhaps, the way team members are expected to dress. Once the norming stage is reached, the team is capable of functioning as a collective body, rather than simply as a collection of individuals. After a team has reached the norming stage and is capable of working as an integrated unit, the next stage in team development is performing. This is the point at which a team accomplishes the major task or tasks for which it was formed. For example, if a team was formed to develop a strategic plan for an organization, this would be the point at which the team would actually come up with that plan. As Tuckman (1965) and others (e.g., Hackman, 1992) point out, not all teams reach this stage in team development. Problems during the earlier stages of team development (e.g., unresolved conflicts) may prevent a team from accomplishing its major tasks

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Encyclopedia of Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

  • John M Levine, Michael A. Hogg, John M. Levine, Michael Hogg(Authors)
  • 2009(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications, Inc

    (Publisher)

  This can pose a threat to oppressive regimes and organizations, which may actively counter the tendency of people to join forces by limiting opportunities for unsupervised assembly. Formation as a Stage of Group Development Group formation creates a new collective entity with a boundary that distinguishes outsiders from members. Because standing groups interact repeat-edly, they change over time, developing structures not available to newly formed or ephemeral groups that enable them to handle a broader range of projects, to coordinate more effectively in larger groups, and to tackle more complex and difficult tasks. The duration and difficulty of the formation process depends on the nature, purpose, composi-tion, and expected lifetime of the group. Some new groups hit the ground running. Others require more time to sort out structure and process issues before members are capable of working together effectively. Groups that are small, with a clear goal and a mix of appropriate skills but limited demo-graphic diversity, can form more quickly than groups that are larger, more demographically diverse, and have a poorly defined task. Diversity in background, culture, and associated expecta-tions for behavior can be good for group perfor-mance in the long run, but culturally diverse groups take longer to form. The first systematic observations of group for-mation as a stage in group development—systematic change over time in groups—began appearing in the late 1940s and 1950s. In 1965 Bruce Tuckman integrated the findings of 50 studies into what is still the most well-known model of group develop-ment, with “forming” as the initial stage. Forming involves testing and dependence. Group members seek information on what is socially appropriate and what their own position in the group will be. If the group has a leader, others depend on him or her to provide guidance; if not, a member who shows early initiative may emerge as a leader.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Facilitating with Ease!

  Core Skills for Facilitators, Team Leaders and Members, Managers, Consultants, and Trainers

  • Ingrid Bens(Author)
  • 2017(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  Even when a group isn't destined to become a team, it's a good idea to take some tips from rudimentary team building and get members to at least act like a team while they're working together. This can be achieved by incorporating the following key team-building activities right into the agenda. These activities include:

  1. ____ getting people to participate in creating a clear goal for the session or topic being discussed
  2. ____ creating a set of norms or rules to guide conduct, posting these rules, and encouraging members to use them to maintain effective behaviors
  3. ____ clarifying roles and responsibilities for all action plans generated by the group
  4. ____ clarifying all accountabilities to ensure that everyone is clear about expected results
  5. ____ training members in effective behaviors such as how to handle conflict and make decisions
  6. ____ conducting process checks, building in feedback loops and other evaluation mechanisms so that members can take responsibility for improving how the group functions

  Understanding Team Stages

  If you're working with a true team, you need to know that teams develop through four distinct stages. Each of these stages has unique characteristics and must be facilitated differently.

  Forming—The Honeymoon Stage

  Forming is the first stage of team development. It starts when members are first brought together. In the forming stage, members tend to be optimistic, and expectations are usually high. At the same time, there's also anxiety about fitting in and being able to achieve the task. Despite these early anxieties, forming is generally a honeymoon for most teams.

  Members of forming teams are usually shy. They hold back until they know each other better. People are guarded with their comments. No one is sure exactly how he or she fits into the new team. This stage is also characterized by an overdependence on the leader. Members want to be given a clear mandate, structure, and parameters.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Autonomous Vehicle Groups in Urban Traffic

  • (Author)
  • 2018(Publication Date)
  • Cuvillier Verlag

    (Publisher)

  From the agent perspective, the Storming stage decides roles and proper-ties of the agents, which is done by the design and modeling of agents. This phase is regarded as minorly important and included in the preparation phase, which combines the first three phases of Tuckman [349] [350]. The only decision agents have is whether to join the group, depending on their utility function and preferences, or to decline the group goal and mission. Dieses Werk ist copyrightgeschützt und darf in keiner Form vervielfältigt werden noch an Dritte weitergegeben werden. Es gilt nur für den persönlichen Gebrauch. 192 Chapter 5. A Model for Vehicle Group Formation Norming During the Norming stage of group development, members begin to adapt to conflicting expectations and create a group reality for proceeding with the group process. If the group is successful in setting more flexible and inclusive norms, then accepting others in the group leads to increased group cohesion where + expectations of members are met. Exchanging information and recognizing the variety of opinions and experiences makes the group stronger and its result richer. During the Norming stage members make a conscious effort to resolve problems and achieve group harmony. There might be more frequent and more meaningful communication among group members, and an increased willingness to share ideas or ask group members for help. Members refocus on established group ground-rules and practices and focus on the group’s tasks. Thus, they shift their energy to the group’s goals and for individual and collective work the productivity increases. The group may find that this is an appropriate time for an evaluation of group processes and productivity for effective joint work. The agent design needs to set rules and the criteria for groups, as well as group benefits.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The Practice of Facilitation

  Managing Group Process and Solving Problems

  • Harry M. Webne-Behrman(Author)
  • 1998(Publication Date)
  • Praeger

    (Publisher)

  If the earlier experiences have not resulted in the development of tools to handle such crises, as in the XYZ team, the group will lack the capacity to respond effectively. On the other hand, if the group's previous work has resulted in a strong sense of efficacy and a foundation of respectful communication, this ground work will support them in addressing important issues of disagreement. This foundation was readily apparent in the ABC team. From these examples, we see further demonstration of Rachel's strong facilitation skills. She recognized that the group was entering a crisis, and she responded with powerful, facilitative leadership on the issue. She did not exercise this power by grabbing authority from the group; rather she used her influence to empower the group by reminding its members of their own capacity to succeed. Her credible affirmations of their efforts, coupled with her ability to name the problem and frame the issue concisely, helped the group navigate its way through a powerful storm. As well, her ability to use the issue as an instructive opportunity to prepare for future issues helped them find solutions that became more far-reaching and useful. Stages of Group Development 157 Phase Four: Performing The fourth stage of group development eludes many work groups, for they disband without ever achieving it and experiencing it together. Performing is the phase when all members of the group are operating as a team in its best sense (see earlier discussion of teams in Chapter Seven), interacting in a synergistic manner to bring their resources toward a common goal. The performing group exists in a state similar to that described by the situational leadership model as it relates to a stage four employee; these are people who set their own agenda, who are personally driven to achieve and who utilize leadership as a guide within the big picture of the organization (Hersey and Blanchard 1988).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book