How can you use Tuckman's stages of group development for effective teamwork?

Take a look at the literature to really understand Bruce Tuckman's ideas: ⚡ TUCKMAN, B. (1965) Developmental Success in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin. Volume 63. Number 6, pages 384-399. Washington: American Psychological Association. ⚡ TUCKMAN, B. AND JENSON, N. (1977) Stages in Small Group Development Revisited. Group and Organizational Studies. 2, pages 419-427. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. He posits a theory which is essentially about teamwork. Using the approach can help us analyse our team and help us plan better team integration. Focus on looking at people's behaviours and feelings at each stage: ⚡ Forming (orientation happens) ⚡ Storming (conflicts ensue) ⚡ Norming (co-operation begins) ⚡ Performing (motivation grows)

I love an analogy, it helps me familarise. So think of Tuckman's stages as a sports team's season. 'Forming' is like preseason training, where players meet, learn the playbook, and understand their roles. Next is 'storming', similar to early season games where the team faces challenges and conflicts, testing their strategies and teamwork. The 'norming' stage resembles mid-season, where the team starts to find its rhythm, solidifying tactics and strengthening team cohesion. Finally, 'performing' is the playoff phase, where the team operates at its peak, efficiently executing strategies with a strong sense of unity. This sporting analogy illustrates how each stage is essential for a team's journey towards peak performance.

This is group dynamics...that is, the influence of the group on the individual. Pay attention the next time you are in a new group situation...even a party...and you will notice the dynamics: the tendency to start by trying to figure out how to fit in...how to connect...the anxiety (perhaps subtle) about how this will be for me. The focus on whoever is leading the group or event and the hope that they handle things and treat you in a way that you prefer. That is the dynamic of being an individual in a group while "forming."

Some form of goal-setting is crucial in the forming stage, to give direction to the storming that will happen afterwards. Once the energy starts building up, conversations happen and things get figured out, it will be more difficult to guide how the group is supposed to be moving forward. The danger of a lack of direction from the start is that stronger personalities in the group will take control and may steer the group away from your goals, or frustrations arise if it's unclear what you are working towards. A common goal on the other hand will serve as a great tool to harmonize discussions and focus on ways of achieving a good result rather than figuring out what desired result to agree on in the first place.

As a team leader, I would like to add the selection part. It's your responsibility as a team leader to know what disciplines and skills are required for a certain task and select team members that complement each other and have the needed skills and experience. After all, it is your responsibility to deliver the end result.

Now you have been together long enough to shift from fitting in to noticing differences. Differences are inevitable. Whatever comfort was found in fitting in is challenged as differences surface. If I speak about differences in this group, what will happen? The word "storm" is easily misunderstood here. The way that differences emerge initially is more likely to be subtle. "Storm" implies open conflict, but that need not be the case to be in Tuckman's storming phase. It just rhymed with form, norm, and perform, but it only means a shift from seeking commonality so as to fit in and connect, towards a more balanced dynamic which includes differing.

Norms are established during the first two phases. The question now is whether they are helpful to performance of detrimental. If conflict is avoided like the plague to extend artificially the pleasant experience of "fitting in" sought during forming, or if conflict is only handled through open fighting (debate, blame, etc.) then the norms will decrease productivity. If the group figures out how to acknowledge differences and act on them in way that is understandable to the members, then the "storming" norm will be conducive to high performance.

Celebrate early wins, emphasize the team effort and give constructive feedback. Make sure the team understands that it is okay to make mistakes, as long as they learn from it, deal with it and don't repeat it. Open communication is key.

Or there lowest level...the AI version of Tuckman presented here is too simplistic. The level of performance is determined by the norms set in the earlier phases.

Kurt Lewin's social science is the best guide for group dynamics and productivity. Let the people facing the problem come up with their own solutions. That can quickly move them through all the stages of Tuckman's model.

Understanding that these stages exist in every team effort is key. That way you can start recognizing a certain stage and know what to expect and how to deal with it. The sooner you know in what stage the team is, the better.