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

  • Cognitive Resource Theory

    Cognitive Resource Theory

    The cognitive resource theory states the influence of the leader's resources on his or her reaction to stress. The cognitive resources of a leader are experience, intelligence, competence, and task-relevant knowledge. Stress is common in resource managing situations, and this cognitive theory emphasizes how intelligence and experience are each best under different stress situations. This theory is the reconceptualization of the Fiedler model.

  • Reciprocal Influence Approach

    Reciprocal Influence Approach

    Reciprocal influence theory also known as reciprocal determinism is authored by Albert Bandura and states that an individual's behavior influences and is influenced by both the social world and personal characteristics. Three factors that influence behavior are the environment, the individual, and the behavior itself. Certain leader behaviors can cause subordinate behaviors and reciprocal influence on the leader by the group.

  • Charismatic Theory

    Charismatic Theory

    Charismatic leadership is a trait-based leadership theory where the leaders act as visionary driven by their convictions and motivate their followers to work towards common vision using their charm and persuasiveness. These charismatic leaders act as role models and exhibit extraordinary characteristics that inspire devotion and motivation in followers to persuade change. Leaders are able to cultivate a profound sense of trust with the group of followers.

  • McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y

    McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y

    McGregor created Theory X and Theory Y of human work motivation and explained two styles of management known as authoritarian (Theory X) and participative (Theory Y). Theory X management assumes most people will attempt to avoid work whereas Theory Y managers trust their people to take ownership of their work.

  • 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.

  • Bass's Transformational Leadership Theory

    Bass's Transformational Leadership Theory

    Bass Transformational Leadership Theory is based on performance beyond expectations approach which defines four elements of transformational leadership. The 4 elements described by Bernard A. Bass in 1985 are Idealised Influence, Intellectual Stimulation, Individualised Consideration, and Inspirational Motivation. This study highlights four key insights about performance beyond expectations and associated criteria to measure it.

  • Strategic Contingencies

    Strategic Contingencies

    Strategic Contingencies Theory is a theory of intra-organizational power. The power of a subunit or individual depends on a few contingencies and that the more contingencies are controlled by a subunit, the greater is its power. The theory focuses on tasks that need to be done in the form of problems to be solved, thus de-emphasizing personality.

  • Multiple Linkage Model

    Multiple Linkage Model

    The multiple linkage model states that leadership effectiveness is based on six variables. Multiple variables of a leader's behavior and situation have a linkage to the performance of the individual follower and work unit performance. The theory is based on the notion of the link between the organization process and managerial influence.

  • Leader Member Exchange Theory

    Leader Member Exchange Theory

    The Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX), also called the Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory is a relationship-based approach that focuses on the two-way (dyadic) relationship to get the best from all team members. How leaders maintain their position in groups and develop an exchange with each of their subordinates. How leaders and members develop relationships that can contribute to growth or hinder development.

  • Michigan Studies

    Michigan Studies

    Michigan Leadership Studies led to behavioral Leadership Theory as a result of a leadership study conducted at the University of Michigan. Michigan studies identified three important behaviors of leadership called task-oriented behavior, relationship-oriented behavior, and participative leadership. Two leadership styles associated with studies are employee orientation and production orientation.

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

Subscribe to Our Newsletter


© 2023 TechnoFunc, All Rights Reserved