The process of team or group development is a long drawn process. It goes through different stages beginning with collecting of strangers to coming together as a group. Bruce Tuckerman, an acclaimed psychologist, came up with following steps “forming, storming, norming, and performing”. Elaborating on each of these stages,
Forming
At this stage most members are positive and polite, though some may be anxious. There may be a few who are even excited. This is due to the fact that they haven’t fully understood what the team will do. This stage can last so long as members get to know each other.
Storming
At this stage, the members try to push against the established boundaries; therefore it is at this stage that most teams fail. At this stage may such things may happen; members have their own individual work style; they threaten the authority of the leader; they may resist taking on tasks; and may feel overwhelmed by their workload.
Norming
At this stage the members resolve their differences, and tend to appreciate each other’s strengths and weaknesses. They may socialize, provide each other with constructive feedback, and develop a stronger commitment towards work.
Performing
The team is said to have reached a performing stage when their hard work bears results. To develop a high performing team, leader should delegate tasks and projects as far as possible. One the team gets going; the leader should try to keep only as light touch with them. This will allow leader to concentrate on other goals and objectives.
In context of the case study
It is essential to form credible teams to avoid recurrence of accounting errors and other fraudulent practices. Measures are also required to document controls, and it’s testing by external auditors. This requires a great amount of teamwork, such that there is reasonable amount of trust between them. In such sensitive issues, trust matters a lot. So, it is imperative that team members are beyond the norming stage.
The case study talks about how the company does well for its long-term employees. They believe that the trust they develop in the company will strengthen the company itself. This kind of atmosphere helps managers keep things under control. In spite of great team effort, then need measure to keep accountability. The case study cites example of indelible in machine, pre-numbered check to keep fraudulent activity at bay, and measures to prevent cash from lying around. Such measure doesn’t demonstrate failure of their great trust in their long-term employee. Rather, such accountability measures reinforce trust among team members. With such measures in place, they are more likely to trust each other.
Their protocol of screening of new employees and doing their background check ensures their teams have smooth sailing from forming and storming stage to norming stage. With their background impeccable, they are more likely to take less time.
Their step to divide the responsibility of treasurer and controller among two persons speaks volume of their accountability measure. This segregation of duties is critical for maintain effective internal control. This approach of making different individuals responsible for related activities increases accountability. So, avoiding any kind of erroneous and inappropriate actions, the two persons can then work as a team with great amount of trust. This has cascading effect on overall trust among the rest of the team members.
Bibliography
Mind Tools. Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing: Understanding the Stages of Team Formation. n.d. Web. 23 01 2014. <http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_86.htm>.
