Recently I wrapped up a two-year implementation project that included a large team made up of at least one member of each department throughout the company. As I was watching the video of Tuckman’s Model: Fight Right, some of the problems we encountered came to light. Of course through the years I have been familiar with the stages of forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning; however the reforming stage was new to me. (PSU WC, L.9, 207)
Having a project that lasts two years creates some obstacles, one of which is turnover. With each person that left and was replaced a new issue ensued; getting the new person up to date, making sure they knew what tasks they were responsible for, dealing with incessant questions that had already been worked through, and having someone have to try and fit into the group with little to no time to acclimate them. Each of these changes ensued with hiccups along the road, things falling through the cracks, people holding information that they didn’t realize should be shared, and a lack of continuous performing from the team as a whole.
Knowing now that we should have anticipated repeated storming processes we may have been able to eliminate some of the chaos. Had we had foresight into the issues we would have been on the look out for them and had a better understanding. Moving forward I can spearhead the process and help eliminate some of the storming issues by handling them accordingly, it is not a step back necessarily but a part of the process and remembering the benefits of the storming process will help to keep our eye on the prize.
Here’s to storming, reforming, and storming some more!
Work Cited
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2017). PSYCH485. Lesson 9: Team Leadership.
Retrieved https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1848444/modules/items/22449207
Michael Diclemente says
Your post was relevant to me because you mentioned working on a team that was assigned to a project that lasted two years. On the topic of team formation and its stages of development, forming, storming, norming, and performing, you mentioned that the fifth phase can be considered adjourning (PSU L5, 2017). At first, I didn’t see adjourning as a significant part of the process, but you’ve pointed it out that it is and I think you’re right. As attrition occurs, new people must assimilate into the team. The team needs to go through the stages of development again with the new person to develop (PSU L5, 2017). According to the PSU Lesson 5 (2017), “if only part of the group has left, the process may pick up in another stage; often going through the storming or norming stages again as the new members need to learn how they fit into the group.” I recently left an organization where I was part of a closely-knit team and hadn’t thought about exactly how that would impact the team. I’m sure that they will be fine in the long-term, but based on the lesson I think they will have a minor setback as they integrate with the new person that replaces me. That’s a significant aspect to remember when forming a team that spans such an extended timeframe, such as the two-year project in your example.
References
PSU L5. (2017, 11 12). Lesson 9: leadership in work settings. Retrieved from PSYCH 485: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/fa17/21781–14749/content/09_lesson/printlesson.html
Joshua John Bustos says
Hello DXT5155,
Great post. I feel for you on having to lose colleagues in the middle of a project. It must have made it difficult to finish on time. I agree with you about having to storm all over again every time an old employee left and new one came in to take his or her place. Don’t you think that that you and your existing team and the new employee actually had to go through all of the group stages in some shape of form every time an old member left and a new member came in? That new guy had to come in and start from the beginning with you all. So forming, characterized by information gathering about fellow members, had to happen as he was the new guy and didn’t know any of you. Of course as you mentioned storming had to happen each time, which is characterized by group conflict. I think norming had to occur, which is seen in the emergence of a leader and development of group norms because maybe your group had previously developed but it didn’t completely develop because it was missing a member of the group. Lastly the performing stage, is reached when group members play functional, interdependent roles focused on the performance of group tasks. This step also had to be repeated to a certain extent when the new member arrived to the team because he had to get in that same groove everyone else was already probably in. I partly agreed with you assessment. I think the new employee would have had to go through all the stages again.