The case study on M4D1: Team Building of various behaviors&assume different roles which can make conversation useless

Home, - M4D1: Team Building

M4D1: Team Building

Group Discussion Models

Groups are dynamic which means that they contain different people who are engaged in a single conversation. The people involved in a group discussion are of various behaviors and assume different roles which can make a conversation ineffective. Apart from ordinary groups, business environments currently have several groups which discuss the issues under consideration. Also, there are several people who have developed various theories that examine group characteristics and ensure their effectiveness. Hence, the work focuses on the description of Tuckman’s team development model, its application in working with a group, and justification on whether teams can be formed without the use of the theory as well as an explanation of other alternative frameworks.

Tuckman observed that groups start from an unproductive initial stage before developing continuously to a self-reliant unit. Therefore, as a psychological profession, he identified four stages of development that every group experiences before reaching the final phase. The steps include forming, storming, norming, and performing, however, he added a fifth phase that is known as adjourning or mourning. Forming is the initial stage in the development and it represents a period where the team is just beginning to come together and is characterized with uncertainty and anxiety (Betts & Healy, 2015). At this stage, members are careful about their behavior which is motivated by the urge to accept every person in the team. Also, the group members start to understand what the team will do together and start to avoid personal opinions, conflicts, and controversies. The aim of this stage is to enable members to understand each other and the activities done at this phase include choosing the group leader, familiarizing themselves with the team objectives, and discussion of the major milestones.  

The second phase is storming which is the phase where competition and conflict are highly experienced. The reason for the conflict and competition is that the group members now have a better understanding of how the team is run and its goals. Hence, they will start to discuss important issues that surround the objective of the group (Tuckman, 1965). The discussions may include personal roles, group tasks, and the responsibilities of the team members. Moreover, power struggle can be experienced at this stage which may require the team members to be more focused in meeting their objectives and accept compromises to enable progress and avoid emotional issues that may ruin relationships in the team. 

The third stage is norming and it is where consensus and agreement is greatly achieved and the members are well facilitated by their leader. The roles and responsibilities of the group and every individual are clear at this stage and big decisions are made within the group by agreement among the members. However, smaller decisions may be delegated to small teams or individuals within the group and it is associated with strong unity and commitment (Tuckman, 1965). Further, the group members may engage in social activities and fun. Additionally, the team members develop the working styles and processes and there is general respect to the group leader and some of the leaderships are shared among the members of the team.

The fourth stage is performing where there is high cognizant-ability among the team members as they clearly know what they are doing and why they are being done.          The team tends to operate on its own without much participation and interference from the leaders. Moreover, the group members have a shared vision and they focus on over-achieving objectives as well as they decide on several things without much help from their leader (Fiore & Georganta, 2017). There is great autonomy and any disagreement that may arise is effectively solved within the team as well as any possible transition in structure and processes are made within the group.

The final stage is adjourning which is the breakup of the group and hopefully it happens when the group’s objectives have been achieved. The final step is also relevant to the team member just as any other stage for the people well-being (Betts & Healy, 2015). Unluckily, its main task is different from that of the other phases which was developing and managing the group. Hence, it is the stage where every member abandons the group and pursues their normal activities in life.

The stages can be applied in working with a group in that the first stage will help in explaining the function of the group to every person involved. The stage will enlighten people about the reasons why the group has been formed and its mission and vision. The people will also have a chance to choose their leader and know every member of the team through introduction. However, the second stage is where those who did not understand the objectives of the group and people involved with start to know them better through continued interaction. People will disagree and the leaders that were chosen before may be removed if they are not effective. Also, every person will know their role and the function of the group and its responsibly. Moreover, some people who are less satisfied will leave the group and those who remain will understand their objectives and start to work towards achieving them.

However, the third stage is where people are working normally and there are fewer chances of conflicts taking place and in such situations, they are easily solved by identified authorized persons for conflict resolution. The team members will work harmoniously with much focus on achieving the goals and even surpassing them if possible. Further, the fourth stage can be used in a managing a team by allowing individuals to be independent on whatever they are doing. There is an assumption that every person knows what is expected of them and they will need little help from their leader to achieve the set objectives. Finally, the fifth stage will be applied in dissolving the group where a party may be organized and everyone is wished good luck in their future endeavors.

I think that it is possible to form a group without using the Tuckman’s model as justified by other alternative theories that show a different perspective of a group. The first theory that justifies my opinion is the time, interaction, and performance theory that was developed by McGrath’s. The theory emphasized the belief that various teams might follow different paths for development to reach an equal outcome. Further, McGrath’s suggested four modes of group activities that teams may engage in which include inception, solving of technical problems, resolving conflicts, and execution. Also, the justification is supported by punctuated equilibrium model which explains that groups are not developed in a standard series of phases as described by Tuckman (Uotila, 2017). Gersick who came up with the framework explains that teams actually change and form just like the way work is greatly consistent. Finally, the opinion is supported by team process theory that was developed by Marks, Mathieu, and Zacarro. The people focused their theory on the definition of a process which they defined to be a multistage episodic framework associated with goal achievement. Further, they argued that groups are multitasking units which perform several processes at the same time and sequentially to orchestrate objective oriented taskwork.

To sum up, Tuckman just like other people developed a theory that tends to explain how a group is formed and managed. He suggested five sequences of stages that are followed in developing a team. However, his theory is can be applied in forming and managing a group just as the other frameworks which make it not the only procedure to be used in starting and controlling a group effectively.

Leave a comment


Related :-