Widely misunderstood across all quarters but often quoted; Bruce Tuckman’s remains an iconic figure in understanding group management. His brilliant and detailed descriptions of fundamental stages of group development are a simple model that is easy to understand and apply. Do not forget that this simple model helps reverse and examine what’s hidden behind each stage. A renowned educational psychologist who fist developed this model in 1965 immediately after graduating from the University of Princeton, Tuckman was able to keenly examine the general behavior of small groups under different environmental situations and detail the distinct phases that these groups undergo. Towards this, he developed the four stages that small groups need to undergo before they achieve their ultimate goals. The model was developed and refined in 1977 with the important assistance of Mary Anne Jensen.
Described by many as genius, Tuckman was able to describe the four stages in explicit manner by demonstrating that the process of group development in most instances is subconscious, but knowledge on the understanding of this role can effectively assist a group to achieve its objectives with ease and speed. Tuckman described the first stage as the forming stage. Our social desire as human beings rests on the fact that we are accepted within a given group and that controversy and conflicts are minimized to aid group development. In this stage, serious issues and intense feelings are often not expressed but always remain avoided. This stage also involves individuals adjusting to their routines and analyzing the various aspects of team organization. It is a stage compounded by collection of information and impressions. Tuckman defined it as comfortable stage to be in the process of group development.
The second stage is the storming stage. According to Chimaera Consulting Limited (2001), “individuals in the group can only remain nice to each other for so long, as important issues start to be addressed and some people’s patience will break early, and minor confrontations will arise that are quickly dealt with or glossed over”. The adjustment process continues into this stage but minor differences are as a result of conflicting roles and responsibilities. The ability to suppress the conflict will depend largely on the culture of the organizations. Individuals will have a feeling of either winning or losing and will search for adjustment mechanisms to do away with the conflict or minimize its effects.
The last two stages are norming and performing respectively. The norming stage involves the establishing of the rules of engagement. “Having had their arguments, they now understand each other better, and can appreciate each other’s skills and experience. Individuals listen to each other, appreciate and support each other, and are prepared to change pre-conceived views; they feel they’re part of a cohesive, effective group”( Rowe, 2006).
The performing that is rarely reached my many groups. It is “characterized by a state of interdependence and flexibility in that everyone knows each other well enough to be able to work together (Basu, 2004). Roles and responsibilities continuously shift in line with the demands of the group. Basu (2004) succinctly state that this stage is defined by “Group identity, loyalty and morale are all high, and everyone is equally task-orientated and people-orientated”. This level of comfort points to the fact that the achievement of the objectives is close and attainable. Tuckman’s model has managed to survive for so long because it defines the evolving of groups in the real world in the most practical and simple manner. It recognizes the real value of a group and its process of development and as such has been widely embraced by a number of institutions to achieve group objectives.
References
Basu, R. (2004). Implementing quality: a practical guide to tools and techniques: enabling the power of operational excellence. Cengage Learning EMEA
Chimaera Consulting Limited (2001). Famous Models: Stages of Group Development. Web.
Rowe, S.F. (2006). Project Management for Small Projects. Management Concepts.