Tuckman stages of group development

Background

Bruce Tuckman was born in New York City, USA. He lived and worked primarily in the United States throughout his career as a psychologist and researcher. He spent part of his professional life at various American universities, including Princeton University and Ohio State University

Tuckman's model, also known as Tuckman's Stages of Group Development, is a model that describes the typical stages a group goes through as it develops and matures. 

Introduced by Bruce Tuckman in 1965, it originally included four stages, but a fifth stage was added later in 1977. The model is often used in the context of team development and group dynamics. 

About the model

This model helps to understand the natural developmental stages teams go through, which can be useful for managers and project managers who want to facilitate effective team collaboration.

The aim of the teamwork style is to promote efficiency, well-being, ownership and self-management. The basic assumption is that the team can plan, decide and solve most of their tasks themselves.

But it can be a big challenge to get the individual teams to function as intended. The manager often lacks concrete tools that can contribute to creating more effective and sustainable teams in practice. 

Here, Bruce W. Tuckman's development stages are a useful tool for the manager, because they contribute to an understanding of the theme's development and how the manager can then adapt his management to the stage the team is in.

The five stages in the model are:

•Forming (called the formation stage in Danish)

•Storming (also called the conflict stage)

•Norming (translated to the norm formation stage)

•Performing (called the execution stage)

•Adjourning (which is the last stage – also called the shutdown stage)

Forming 

Here the group is formed, and members get to know each other and the task at hand. What are everyone's strengths and weaknesses? When can they be relied upon and when not? What quirks do our fellow team members have? What are we working towards and why?

At this stage the members avoid conflict and "play nicely" with each other because they want to be accepted into the group. The group is learning about the objectives and goals - getting a feel for the work that must be done together. 

The second stage is Storming (the conflict stage):

As people begin to feel safer, they will push the boundaries set up by the team in the forming stage—and conflicts may begin to erupt.

Clashes occur due to different personalities and differences in working styles—the ways things get done. Resentments and irritations that were buried in the last stage erupt and negatively effect the team's performance.

The third stage is Norming (the norm formation stage) – here a common identity is formed

Things calm down and fixed rules are being established. Both the written and unwritten rules. The group agrees on how things should be done. Roles are assigned – formally or informally – and tasks are assigned. After the conflict stage, the group begins to find common ground.

The fourth stage is Performing (the execution stage) – the team must be challenged

In short, the team is now performing. The team is stable, and the goals are clear. This is when the team has developed processes that work for the team and people follow them.

People are motivated and competently get things done. Conflicts are no longer threatening, and different perspectives are seen as valuable

The fifth and final stage is Adjourning (the dissolution stage) – here the team break up

When the task or project comes to an end, the group must be disbanded. In general, the stages are about interpersonal relationships and behavior in relation to task solving.

Criticism

Tuckman's team model is popular but has also met criticism. Here are some of the main points:

The model is set up as a linear progression: The model assumes that teams go through the stages in a linear and predictable order. Groups may jump back and forth between stages, especially when changes in group composition or external factors affect the work.

There is a lack of dynamics in the model: the model does not consider the complexity of group dynamics. In practice, teams can have several conflicts (storming) at different times, or experience norming and performing at the same time. Tuckman's model assumes a "one-size-fits-all" approach, which does not necessarily reflect real teams, which are more dynamic.

There is an excessive focus on conflict: the Storming stage can seem like an inevitable and negative stage. But not all teams necessarily experience an intense conflict stage, or they may have conflict resolution strategies that make storming less significant.

However, Tuckman's model can be useful for understanding certain group dynamics, especially for new teams, but its limitations mean that many organizations are also looking to other models and frameworks to understand and support teams in a more nuanced way.