Theories of Team Development

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 :

  1. Awareness
  2. Conflict
  3. Cooperation
  4. Productivity, and
  5. 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

  • Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (SFP) Leader Theory

    Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (SFP) Leader Theory

    Pygmalion theory of Leadership is a model of SFP at work involving supervisory expectancy based on the pygmalion effect. This effect is a type of self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) in which raising leader's expectations regarding subordinate performance boosts the group's performance. Managers who are led to demand more from their team, lead the team to better performance. There is some evidence that the SFP effect does exists.

  • Open Systems Model

    Open Systems Model

    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.

  • Fiedler Model of Leadership

    Fiedler Model of Leadership

    The Fiedler Model of leadership is a contingency theory and states that a leader's effectiveness is based on the situation. There is no one best style of leadership and the effectiveness of a leader in an organization depends on matching the leader to the situation. Leaders should determine the natural leadership style and assess the situation to flex the style.

  • Transformational Theories of Leadership

    Transformational Theories of Leadership

    Transformational leadership theories focus on the leadership approach where the leader encourages, inspires employees to innovate and create positive and valuable organizational change. A transformational leader works towards “transforming” the culture to one that cultivates trust, mutual admiration, loyalty, and respect with the end goal of developing followers into leaders. Transformational leaders are known to be visionary, inspiring, daring, risk-takers, and thoughtful.

  • Transactional Theory of Leadership

    Transactional Theory of Leadership

    Transactional leadership theory is based on the concept of rewards and punishments. The transactional management approach assumes that the desires of the leader and follower are different and leaders give followers something in exchange for getting something they want. Transactional leaders expect followers to be compliant and focuses on structure, instruction, monitoring, organization, or performance to get tasks completed on time.

  • Kolb Learning Cycle & Change

    Kolb Learning Cycle & Change

    David Kolb produced this popular model for learning in 1984. The model suggests four stages of learning which most learners go through in order to learn effectively. Leaming is itself a process of change. Something is added to our perception and prepared us for the next impression, which will change our understanding yet more, however minutely. The Kolb contribution is a significant one because it practically equates change and learning.

  • Situational Leadership Model

    Situational Leadership Model

    The Hersey and Blanchard Situational Theory model suggests that a leader must adapt his leadership style based on task and relationship behaviors appropriate to the situation. Leadership style is dependent on the maturity level and abilities of followers. Under this model, successful leadership is both task-relevant and relationship-relevant.

  • Four Factor Leadership Theory

    Four Factor Leadership Theory

    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.

  • Behavioral Theories of Leadership

    Behavioral Theories of Leadership

    Behavioral Theory of leadership is a big leap from Trait Theory, as it was developed scientifically by conducting behaviour focused studies. The theory emphasizes that leadership capability can be learned, rather than being inherent. This theory is based on the principle that a leader's behaviors can be conditioned in a manner that one can have a specific response to specific stimuli.

  • Social Identity Theory

    Social Identity Theory

    The social identity theory of leadership views leadership as a group process. Social identity is a person's sense of who they are based on their group membership. Social identity theory sets agendas and goals generated by social categorization, defines who we are based on processes associated with social identity, and motivates to conduct ourselves based on what followers think of the leader.

Explore Our Free Training Articles or
Sign Up to Start With Our eLearning Courses

Subscribe to Our Newsletter


© 2023 TechnoFunc, All Rights Reserved