Analysis of the group’s development
Analysis of the group’s development
Introduction
The first “High performance Teams” class by Dr. Bright’s High was really different from any first class of any course I have ever attended. Professors usually concentrate on getting to know the students and providing them with the basic notion about the course they are going to attend during semester, its objectives, contents, requirements etc. In short, tutors seldom use lots of in-class activity during the fist class of the course. However at the very first calls of the course by Dr. Bright’s High we were split into teams and started to work together.
The most important challenge with respect to the course lies in the fact that each of the teammates is dependent on others in terms of reaching high performance rates, so it is necessary to learn to work together and, what is most important, to listen to each other. Moreover, participations in this course is a good opportunity to get more understanding of the way you perform within the team, your strengths and weaknesses, and the way to cope with them. It has undoubtedly helped the students to enhance their communication and leadership skills.
In the following essay I would like to reflect on my participation in the “High performance Teams” class. I will apply Tuckman’s theory of group development to consider the experience I got during the course.
The theory of group development, worked out by Tuckman (1965) is also called “Forming-Storming- Norming-Performing” model. According to the opinion of Tuckman (1965), aforementioned steps are inevitable in terms of group’s appearance, growing, facing first challenges, solving them, planning work and delivering necessary results. I chose this model as it is the basic one in comparison with other group’s development models, introduced later by other scientists. To my mind, particularly this model will help me provide the reader with a science-based reflection on my personal experience.
- Forming
The first stage of teambuilding is called forming. In terminology of o other researchers it is often referred to as getting together. At this stage of group’s development no group actually exists as a set of people, who will form the group, slightly know each other in terms if group work, they have lots of questions and issues to share with other group members, however, tend to lack trust to do it. The start situation is also characterized by lack of safety and the desire to do something to change the situation. Additionally, this stage involves strong emphasis on differences between the members of a future team.
So, the situation at the class was exactly the same as described by Tuckman (1965) in his article “Developmental sequence in small groups”. We gathered together as a class for thevery first time at the first week of the semester. After Dr. Bright provided us with the opportunity to break the ice by introducing ourselves and providing some short personal data, the class was split into several small groups, so that we can discuss and start up with class activity. As we did not know each other before, each of us had lots of questions and concerns. Moreover, vast majority of my group’s members were reluctant to ask questions and communicate concerns, so it was even hard to understand whether there are any issues. However, at the very end of the first step of the group’s formation we managed to start to speak to each other quite frankly, establish basic trust and sense of a group and, therefore, got ready to clarify the role for each of the members of the team.
The real opportunity to establish trust and distribute roles was reached with the help of two important tools. First of all, it is necessary to mention that we had a chance to break the ice at the beginning of the class by introducing ourselves and getting to know basic facts about each member of our future teams. During the introduction lots of participants mentioned their credos, life goals and interests, so we got the chance to find out that in fact we have lots in common. For instance, lots of us had similar life objectives and were interested in similar kinds of music and fiction.
Secondly, during the second and third weeks of our group’s work we got to know each other better and came up with common activities. Furthermore, what really united us was our first group quiz. For me such an experience was new and challenging. However, after the quiz we felt that we really needed such an event to unite us and become more involved in the work, aimed at reaching common goals.
Furthermore, the quiz really helped me to have more trust to my team members in terms of their ideas about the answers. For me it is sometimes hard to do the quiz by myself, because I can have several different ideas simultaneously. However, it is far more challenging to do a quiz in the group, where each member has his/her own ideas and the way to support them with arguments. Sometimes we had absolutely different opinions about the answer, so we had to discuss each idea and learn all related pros and cons.
The first stage of our teamwork helped me to get several important lessons. First of all, each newly formed group really needs ice-breaking sessions, which helped not only to get to know each other, but to become more relaxed and get more trust. Sometimes ice-breaking can be really helpful in terms of understanding teammates’ interests and characters, so results of these sessions can make an important contribution into distributing the roles within the team.
- Storming
The next stage of group’s development, singled out by Tuckman is called storming. At this stage of group’s development different ideas, spoken out by team members are being discussed and , actually, compete for being considered. To be more precise, people compete for getting their ideas noticed.
It is worth mentioning that in his basic theory Tuckmann misses (or includes into ‘forming’) one important stage, which was named ‘standstill’ by other researchers. To my mind, our group first experienced a standstill and only thereafter went through large-scale storming. During the standstill it was really frightening for all of us to move ahead and offer ideas for consideration. It even seemed to me that almost all of us were busy with waiting for someone, who will be the bravest one and be the first to express some idea.
The ‘let go’ moment was the hardest one for each of us as we still did not know each other very well, but had to start to trust each other, so that we get a practical ability to cope with the tasks, put forward before our group.
After a few weeks of meeting my teammates in class and communicating with them I started to feel more confident and comfortable. It was far harder for me to assume that the class was really different from all those I ever attended at first meetings. The standstill, which preceded the real storm, let me understand that I need to be more open-minded and ready to listen to people and express my own opinion, not waiting for somebody to say something, so that I can either agree or disagree with what he/she says.
Moreover, the standstill phase helped me understand that I really need to be more ready to open new things for me and get acquainted with new styles of learning and working. It is critical to understand that almost all new experiences help those, who receive them, to develop themselves and become more aware about preferences you can get using different styles of learning or working. Here let me come back to the storming, which seems to be an inevitable consequence of every standstill.
At the storming stage we approached problems and tasks we really had to solve. Particularly at this stage team leader has to be extremely attentive to use appropriate leadership style, so that all members of the team can feel comfortably and work productively.
Otherwise there is a threat that some members of the team will never become really involved in the common work. Sometimes it is hard for teams to leave storming stage and start to develop some common solutions as debates is one of those things, which can last forever. If the team is mature, it will necessarily come up with some idea or solution, which will satisfy the team as a whole, not everyone individually.
I cannot help mentioning that the experience I got let me understand that sometimes storming phase can be really unpleasant and even painful as it is always hard to accept the fact that your idea was not approved by the team. It is also difficult to refrain from conflicts in case they arise.
Moreover, the stage under study is really hard for the leader as it is characterized by increased level of experimentation, group cohesion, distribution of leadership and even real fight for ideas and, therefore, for leadership.
The storming phase was really insightful for me. First of all, I got a fascinating chance not only to participate in the activities of the groups, but watch them. My attempt to reflect on everything I watched provided me with an invaluable opportunity to get a new understanding of the way different people perform when they work within the team and even to tackle some important things I should remember to make my further teamwork more successful and less painful.
First of all, at storming stage it is critical to act in a more cohesive way and actually not to try to protect one’s ideas if there are valuable alternatives. For instance, when we elaborated on the activity related to the circuit, we all had different ideas about what the game should be and how we will play it. Deciding on the contents of different parts of the game, we were obliged to work together, listen to each other and come to common conclusion, which will be acceptable for each of the team members. We got similar experience while elaborating on the activity “12 Angry Men”.
In the future I will try to pay extra attention to developing my listening skills and considering my language and body language. I also need to become less shy to be able to submit my ideas and support them in a more confident way.
- Norming
After storming stage teams, which find forces not to become busy with conflicts forever, manage to pass to the next stage, which is norming. At this phase of group’s development a group starts to act in a more united way. Participants start to experience the feeling of unity, support, nurturance and getting away from previous ways of behavior. Additionally, team members can feel something like a rebirth and awareness about moving to the new territory.
Around fourth and fifth weeks of the semester our team started to look like as a more unified set of people than it was before. Moreover, we even started to support each other and approve of the ideas of one another while elaborating on our assignments.
The most important thing, which helped us to get away both from standstill and storming, and to find a golden mean was doing Kolb Learning Style Inventory exercise. Particularly this exercise helped each of us to understand himself/herself and his/her role in the team.
I am really happy that in the future I will be able to apply the results of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory exercise, while participating in teamwork. Firstly, it is important for me to know how I learn best and try to adhere to these learning methods, while working in a team. Secondly, the course helped me to get a important insight into my preferred role in the team and things I need to master to make my participation in teamwork more effective and useful both for the team and myself.
- Performing
Now, when our course is close to its end, I can claim that our team was quite a successful one as it was able to reach performing stage. According to the theory by Tuckman, not all teams can develop in a way, which allows it performing smoothly and effectively without wasting time and resources for extra conflict. By the time the team reaches performing stage, it becomes far more unified and used to working together than during all other stages, even in case the norming stage was quite a consistent one. At performing stage team members know each other way and have considerable experiential grounds to conduct distribution of roles and work. At performing stage team members can choose to perform roles, different from those they usually performed, dependently on the tasks they are going to elaborate on.
Reaching performance stage manifests itself through the fact that participants are now able to make common decisions both quickly and effectively, independently on participation of their supervisors. To my mind, our decisions were well-designed and effective, when we elaborated on our last (and most complicated assignments).
Other theories of group development recognize that the teams can experience return after norming stage. Return means that the team tends to go back to disorder, some members can leave the team, whereas newcomers may join it. Or team managed to avoid the return by meeting each other before each class to reflect on the way we work and changes we would like to impose into our performance. Moreover, we tried to maintain the atmosphere of integrity and frankness, so that each of team members could feel comfortably and listened to. Last weeks of our group’s performance helped me realize the importance of atmosphere in the group for avoiding return and maintaining high level of performance.
Conclusion
Participating in the course “High performance Teams” class by Dr. Bright’s High was a highly insightful experience, which helped me to enhance my teamwork skills and get practical lessons concerning the way the team functions and develops, challenges it faces and the ways to tackle them. Moreover, I got a more profound understanding of my won role within the team and my strengths and weaknesses related to working in a team. In the future I will necessarily try to apply the lessons I learnt to either working in a tem or supervising a team. The course also helped me to get to know my classmates with respect to working together and developing common vision and goals. Coming to the need of my reflection paper, I would like to once more stress the importance of team work, called forth by practical need to establish cooperation of people with different backgrounds and knowledge, while developing large-scale projects.
References
Tuckman, B.(1965). Developmental sequences in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), pp.384-399
