0 saved
9.4K views
This model has persisted for over half a century and continues to inform the development of high performing teams — plus it rh ...
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Primum quid tu dicis breve? Qua ex cognitione facilior facta est investigatio rerum occultissimarum. Nam adhuc, meo fortasse vitio, quid ego quaeram non perspicis. Idemque diviserunt naturam hominis in animum et corpus. Ergo hoc quidem apparet, nos ad agendum esse natos. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Superiores tres erant, quae esse possent, quarum est una sola defensa, eaque vehementer. Respondent extrema primis, media utrisque, omnia omnibus. Atque hoc loco similitudines eas, quibus illi uti solent, dissimillimas proferebas. Si quicquam extra virtutem habeatur in bonis.
Quid enim de amicitia statueris utilitatis causa expetenda vides. Dic in quovis conventu te omnia facere, ne doleas. Videamus animi partes, quarum est conspectus illustrior; Hanc quoque iucunditatem, si vis, transfer in animum; Hoc loco discipulos quaerere videtur, ut, qui asoti esse velint, philosophi ante fiant. Aeque enim contingit omnibus fidibus, ut incontentae sint. Illa sunt similia: hebes acies est cuipiam oculorum, corpore alius senescit; Haec mihi videtur delicatior, ut ita dicam, molliorque ratio, quam virtutis vis gravitasque postulat. Quam si explicavisset, non tam haesitaret. Tum ille: Tu autem cum ipse tantum librorum habeas, quos hic tandem requiris?
Quamquam id quidem, infinitum est in hac urbe; Occultum facinus esse potuerit, gaudebit; Aliter enim nosmet ipsos nosse non possumus. Nec lapathi suavitatem acupenseri Galloni Laelius anteponebat, sed suavitatem ipsam neglegebat; Fatebuntur Stoici haec omnia dicta esse praeclare, neque eam causam Zenoni desciscendi fuisse. Ex ea difficultate illae fallaciloquae, ut ait Accius, malitiae natae sunt.
-
Kick off project teams with a focus on connection and clarity.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Quae fere omnia appellantur uno ingenii nomine, easque virtutes qui habent, ingeniosi vocantur. Verum tamen cum de rebus grandioribus dicas, ipsae res verba rapiunt; Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Facile est hoc cernere in primis puerorum aetatulis. An dolor longissimus quisque miserrimus, voluptatem non optabiliorem diuturnitas facit? Verba tu fingas et ea dicas, quae non sentias? Morbo gravissimo affectus, exul, orbus, egens, torqueatur eculeo: quem hunc appellas, Zeno? Ut aliquid scire se gaudeant?
Collige omnia, quae soletis: Praesidium amicorum. Urgent tamen et nihil remittunt. Nonne odio multos dignos putamus, qui quodam motu aut statu videntur naturae legem et modum contempsisse? Vide, ne etiam menses! nisi forte eum dicis, qui, simul atque arripuit, interficit. Ad corpus diceres pertinere-, sed ea, quae dixi, ad corpusne refers? Primum in nostrane potestate est, quid meminerimus? Cum id quoque, ut cupiebat, audivisset, evelli iussit eam, qua erat transfixus, hastam. Bona autem corporis huic sunt, quod posterius posui, similiora.
Quorum sine causa fieri nihil putandum est. Ut id aliis narrare gestiant? Modo etiam paulum ad dexteram de via declinavi, ut ad Pericli sepulcrum accederem.
Tuckman himself provided a criticism of his model, pointing out that it emphasised a “therapy-group setting” and did not consider broader types of teams. That said, many teams have found the model useful and applicable.
Perhaps a more substantial critique was best captured by this study from the US Military in an Acquisition Research Program. They looked at 321 “small, short-duration technical teams within the Acquisition Community.” They found a 95% confidence level that Tuckman’s stages only applied to about 2% of the teams, but discovered that a modified version which viewed storming as an ongoing process throughout the team duration, as opposed to a defined stage, did apply to over 70% of the teams.
In other words, the criticism consists of viewing these categories as linear stages — particularly the storming stage — rather than a part of a team, no matter what it’s developmental level. This might be more apparent in Agile based teams, though the evidence is still lacking to make a definitive call there.
Proponents for the model might counter saying that conflict in a ‘storming’ stage plays out totally differently to the conflict in a ‘performing’ stage, with the latter being managed more constructively and not interrupting performance outcomes.
Tuckman applied to sports teams.
This article outlines the experience of sporting teams going through Tuckman’s stages. It provides examples of the formation of State or Olympic teams doing things such as stopping participants from wearing their team colours, instead quickly creating a new team identity in the forming stage. The article also advocates using profile assessments to provide athletes with self-awareness during the storming phase.
.
This model was first proposed by Bruce Tuckman in 1965 as a necessary framework to describe team development. Tuckman teamed with Mary Jensen in 1977 to write a paper titled Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited, which added a fifth stage of ‘adjourning’, often referred to as ‘mourning.’
My Notes
Oops, That’s Members’ Only!
Fortunately, it only costs US$5/month to Join ModelThinkers and access everything so that you can rapidly discover, learn, and apply the world’s most powerful ideas.
ModelThinkers membership at a glance:
“Yeah, we hate pop ups too. But we wanted to let you know that, with ModelThinkers, we’re making it easier for you to adapt, innovate and create value. We hope you’ll join us and the growing community of ModelThinkers today.”
You Might Also Like:
- Actionable summaries of the world's most powerful ideas.
Subscribe now and download this practical guide to transform your thinking, plus recieve one short, powerful and actionable idea in your inbox each month.