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:
Now we will discuss some popular theories on team development in detail:
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) 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 :
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 |
Leadership traits refer to personal qualities that define effective leaders. Here are the major leadership qualities that can make someone a good leader. Five key traits that are common in leaders can be learned and sharpened with time.
Transactional Analysis also is known as the theory of human personality was proposed by Eric Berne in the 1950s. This theory of transactional leadership defines three different ego states in a person who engages in transactions with another person's ego states. These three ego states refer to major parts of an individual's personality and reflect an entire system of thought, feeling, and behavior.
Rensis Likert studied the patterns and styles of managers and developed four management systems known as Likert's management systems. These styles developed by him are known as Likert management systems. System 1 - Exploitative Authoritative; System 2 - Benevolent Authoritative; System 3 - Consultative and System 4 - Participative.
Life cycle theory of Leadership
Situational Leadership Theory was first introduced in 1969 as the life cycle theory of leadership. This theory suggests that type of leadership style appropriate in a given situation depends on the maturity of the follower. As per life cycle theory, leader need to match the leadership style according to the situation and leader behavior varies as the group matures.
According to the three-skill approach of Katz, the individual's leadership abilities vary depending on where leaders are in a management hierarchy. The practical implication of skills approach to leadership is that leaders can improve their capabilities in leadership skills through training and experience.
The style approach emphasizes that one style of leadership behaviour cannot be effective in all situations. Earlier theories treated leadership exclusively as a personality trait and behavior approach has widened the scope by including the behaviors of leaders and what they do in various situations. Explore how you can benefit from the concepts to understand your own behaviors and what are some of the leadership tools based on the style approach to leadership.
Lewin’s Change Management Model
Lewin's change management model is a framework for managing organizational change. Lewin's methodology of different Leadership Styles recognizes three distinct stages of change - creating the perception; moving toward the new desired level of behavior and, ensuring new behavior as the norm.
Situational Leadership - Application
Situational Leadership Theories are well known and frequently used for training leaders within organizations. Practical application is how to choose the right leadership approach for the situation. The theory emphasizes leader flexibility and advises leaders to flex their style based on the followers' needs. Leaders must adapt their leadership style to fit the prescribed task, understanding given situation/maturity of followers.
Substitutes for leadership theory is based on understanding the context within which leadership occurs. Different situational factors can enhance, neutralize, or substitute for leader behaviors like under certain circumstances, situational factors may substitute for leadership. These substitutes are of two types - substitutes and neutralizers. Substitutes take away from the leader's power and help group members increase their performance. Neutralizers only remove influence from the leader.
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.
© 2023 TechnoFunc, All Rights Reserved