Team Life Cycle

 

If you’ve done any kind of management or team training, you are likely to have come across the Tuckman and Jensen model of team development.  Created in 1977 it still holds water today, although I have a couple of points or caveats that I would add to it.  I’ll give an overview of the model first, then I’ll get to those points.

The model starts when our team is formed.  Maybe this is a short life working group and the members are being brought together, or maybe you’ve just started a new role and you’re joining a team.  Either way is the same process of team members coming together.  Following this there is a storming phase.  This is where people are getting to know each other and working out how they can work together.  Understand people’s strengths and weaknesses and how they go about things (see our DISC series for more on this aspect).  Inevitably performance can dip at this stage as we are more concerned with working things out rather than getting things done.

Following the storming phase comes the norming phase.  This is where a group or team establishes how they will work together, what operating norms will be effective for them as a collective.  When these norms are established and people know how to work with each other, then performance starts to evolve and improve.  Ultimately, once a group has completed its function, the team adjourns.

I’m sure you’re reflecting on your own team experience at this point and saying to yourself ‘it’s not that simple’.  And you’re right, it’s not.  But the model gives us a framework to build on.

Thins brings me to the points I wanted to make.  And the first is this, in my experience this is a circular process.  It’s fairly rare to be part of a ‘pure’ team.  One that comes together for a particular task, completes this, and then disbands and moves on.  In most circumstances our teams are more of a living organism.  In terms of team members (components) some parts move away, and new parts are developed.  What’s more the demands and tasks that a team needs to complete are constantly evolving, so there is a requirement for new norms and ways of operating.  The four-pronged fork at the end of the model is an addition which reflect this.  Rather than adjourning a group often gets to a performing stage and then a new requirement or component is introduced, and the team revolves back to an earlier stage in order to rebuild.

Onto my second point, which is that there is a macro and micro dimension to this.  Some teams work in harmony, but many don’t.  They are not a homogeneous mass, and some sections (or individuals) will work well together, and others won’t.  What’s more small changes can affect a groups performance.  A bad phone call or poor nights sleep can knock a team member off their game, which might mean the team gets bumped back to a bit of storming before they can start to operate again.

The Tuckman and Jensen model helps us understand the overall team process and life cycle, but we need something more sophisticated to help us get into the inner working of a team.  A tool that helps us to develop, maintain and repair our teams so they operate effectively.  And this is just what we will get into next time.

 

🔷 RESILIENT SKILLS PROGRAMME – Our programme for SMEs that want more effective teams that work better together, solve problems and build resilience.

🔴 LASTING IMPACT ACADEMY – Our training platform for third sector organisations with no training budget. Support your team to build resilience, reduce overwhelm and deliver effective outcomes.

     CONTACT ME

 

 

 

 

CONTACT US

Lasting-Impact.com

© Copyright lasting-impact.com - all rights reserved.
Cookie Policy | Privacy Policy

Website Design by Speedypancake