T E A M D Y N A M I C S

The Team DevelopmentLife Cycle

A New LookTom Edison

Understanding how teams function and whatmakes teams more effective can be meaningfulin the classroom and in the workplace. Much hasbeen studied and written about the traditionalmodel of team development since Dr. Bruce

Tuckman's 1965 study of small groups, which identifiedthe traditional five phases experienced by project workteams: forming, storming, norming, performing, andadjourning. These phases help us to understand and in-terpret the changes and developmental stages that occurwithin teams, and they facilitate analyses of team behav-ior and aid in developing what are the necessary traits orbehavior patterns for a team to become high-per-forming. The phases I introduce in this articlego beyond Tuckman's traditional phasesand will. I hope, help in understandinga team's "complete" developmentallife cycle.

The Traditional TuckmanModelTuckman's traditional modelis very useful for understand-ing a team's basic functionalstages, but his model needsto be expanded for greaterunderstanding of team de-velopment, especially dur-ing a team's dysfunctionalphases. Many people thinkthis model is very useful, butother research has shown itis not applicable to all teamsor situations. This article willidentify some new charac-teristics or phases of teamdevelopment that comple-ment the classic five phasesdeveloped by TUckman.

To save or transform aproject team, it is neces-sary to understand and

review the dysfunctional phases or negative forcesthat a team encounters so that appropriate correctiveactions can be taken to aid a team in becoming high-performing. It is also meaningful to understand othercharacteristics that can enhance teamwork and teamperformance. Dr. Pamela Knight, a Defense Acquisi-tion University professor, has conducted a similar studybased on Tuckman's model. This research can be foundat < www,dau/pubs/misc/Duration_TechnicaLTeam_Dynamics.asp >. Significant data were gathered from over

To save or

transfor

^ and review the dy

negative forces that

appropriate correcti

ionai phases or

..terssothat

ban be taken.

Edison is currently academic chair for life cycle logistics at DAU. San Diego. Calif. He has a doctoral degree from Alliant ¡nCernaiional University.

Defense AT8cL: May-June 2008

300 teams. Knight's results highlighted that Tuckman'smodel is useful for general understanding of the teamdevelopment, but teams do not all follow Tuckman's de-velopment or growth throughout their life.

To begin understanding how teams become dysfunc-(ional, it is relevant to create an extension to Tuckman'smodel. The figure below highlights the classical functionalstages as introduced and explained by Tuckman and fur-ther discussed in "Leading Project Teams" by Dr OwenGadeken in Defense AT&L's predecessor publication Pro-yram Manager (July-August 2002). The additional teamdevelopment phases described in this paper and shownin the figure are informing, conforming, transforming,and deforming. It should be stressed that these team ormphases are based on work I conducted during dissertationresearch at Alliant International University and personalexperiences working with teams as a Defense Acquisi-tion University professor, especially in DAU's six-weekProgram Management Office Course {PMT 352B). whichuses a team environment throughout the curriculum tosolve problems and facilitate key learning and retentionof acquisition and program management concepts. Noempirical data currently exist to support these theories,all of which are conceptual.

Functional versus DysiunctionalThe development of this new model with its additionalstages beyond the traditional Tuckman model should pro-vide insights into those stages that are positive (functional)and those that are negative (dysfunctional). The followingphases of a project team (illustrated in the figure) occurin the dysfunctional stage of a team: conforming and de-forming. It's difficult to predict when those stages willoccur, but they need to be acknowledged by those whowork with or are on teams so they can keep the teamfocused on the functional track of team development andon becoming high-performing. Additionally, this under-

TEAMPERFORMANCE

standing is critical so that a dysfunctional team can beplaced or "transformed" back into the functional stagesof its developmental life, which are norming. perform-ing, informing, and perhaps back again to transforming,if needed.

An effective team must be able to transform from dys-functional to functional stages by accomplishing self-as-sessment or transformational activities that help identifythe reasons and potential causes for the team's dysfunc-tion.

Inlorming: The Tipping PointThe stage of informing ar the top of the life cycle curve(or the tipping point of team development) highlights thatone of the positive roles of the high-performing team is toinform others about positive team results and conclusions.As Gadeken explained in his article, many teams get hungup in the storming and norming stages and never make itto the high-performing stage. He also highlighted that JohnR. Katzenback and Douglas K. Smith, in their 1993 bookThe Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Or-ganization, explained that many teams deteriorate duringstorming and norming and do not progress to performingand especially not to the high-performing stage. Gadekenstressed that it is the exception rather than the rule formost teams to make it to high-performing. But if they do,then it becomes paramount that they "inform" or com-municate their accomplishments to others so that boththe challenges and successes resulting from their effortscan be used by the organization they were chartered byto determine the capability of other similar teams to ac-complish similar successes or identify the need to adjustthe team.

More resources may be needed to ensure continued "sur-vival" or functioning of the team. Informing is still part ofthe functional phases and should continue throughout a

INFORMING

Project Team Performance CurveTIME

1 5 Defense AT&L; May-June 2008

We likehappy readers!

That's whyto

know what you think aboutthe magazine. Are there subjects you enjoyreading more than others? Are there anytopics you'd like to see more of? , • .

Then take the Defense ATSeL survey, located at

http://siirveyor.datt.mil/wsb.dlV5/DefenseATLSttrvey.htm

It'll take just 5 minutes of your time. Yourfeedback will ensure we continue to producea magazine that is interesting and relevantto your job. All responses are anonymous andwill be used only to improve Defense ATSeV^services, " *- - ^

We'll also accept feedback sent via e-mail to themanaging editor: datl(at)dau(dot)mil.

We want tohear from you!

Transformation of a Team in aClassroom Environment

An example of a team that transformed occurred dur-ing week three of a six-week program managementcourse (PTM 352B). The team had performed ade-quately together for the first two weeks of the course,developing innovative solutions to complex acquisi-tion challenges presented by the instructors. Duringweek three, the team members began to conform;they started to think alike and, in particular, to agreeconsistently with the ideas and solutions of the seniormember of the team, who dominated team conver-sations. The other members had lost their originalityand innovation. They needed to be transformed intoa more creative, innovative team, generating new ordifferent ideas independent of their "leader."

Transforming meant the team needed to change itsways of thinking. The event that triggered that changewas the illness and absence of the dominant mem-ber for two days of class. The team had to transformits normal process of decision making. It could notdisband—the course had three more weeks to runand the team would stay together For the remainingtime. So the team members challenged each other tofill the void of their absent leader. They had to thinkand create on their own. They began to discuss ideasand debate solutions and to realize the value of think-ing and challenging each other This modus operandicontinued when the leader returned. The team hadtransformed itself.

team's life. It is relevant that this additional orm develop-ment function be considered a critical or positive phase ofthe developmental life of a functioning, high-performingproject work team.

Coniorming: The Danger oí GroupthinkOne dysfunctional characteristic a team may developis becoming too conforming in how members think orbehave. Conforming is a phase in which the thinking ordecision making of the team is lacking original, creative,and/or innovative ideas. The members have begun tothink alike, and any of the unique yet appropriate ideasand solutions that originated from the team are lost ordecreased because the team members are beginning todevelop the characteristics of groupthink (a term coinedby psychologist Irving janis in 1973). Groupthink. orconforming, is a phase that reduces the creativity andinnovation of the team because the individuai membershave become uninspired to think independently or toconsider ideas or solutions that run counter to thosesupported by the majority of the team. While there is

Defense AT&L: May-June 2008

Transformation enables a teamto get back on track and againbegin foilowingthe traditionalTuckman stages of norming[and performing (and even

storming if needed).

a sense of cohesiveness that can be reassuring to theindividuai team members (especially if they are look-ing for uniformity and stability of thinking), the creativejuices have stopped flowing and the team is stagnant.Conforming will have a negative impact if it continues,and it can contribute to team's deForming (disbanding)and eventually adjourning.

Deforming: The Team in DangerOnce the team has become entrenched in the conform-ing stage, it has become dysfunctional. It v*/ill start to dis-band or deform. Deforming manifests itself in membersstarting to miss team meetings, not contributing to therequired activation energy needed to sustain the team'seffective performance, and not focusing on vital teamgoals or objectives. A deforming team begins to lose Itsmembers, and those who stay are no longer effective. Nonew ideas are being created, and the team has outlived itsuseful life. The team needs to be transformed or realignedto become a normal functioning—or better yet, a high-performing—team .

Transforming: Turning the Team AroundTransforming is considered a transitional stage betweena functional and dysfunctional team. It is critical that ateam understand the need to transform once it recognizes

it has become dysfunctional. The objective of any teamis to identify not only the positive functional phases asthey progress so as to achieve high-performing stature,but also to identify the negative or dysfunctional phasesearly in the life cycle so they can be detected, studied, andcorrected and reversed before they become too serious.Transforming is necessary if a team is to avoid disband-ing or deforming

The transformation stage involves adding more activationenergy by overcoming the conformity of the team mem-bers or their ideas. Transforming a team is a challenge andcalls for unique skills. The team leader needs to bring innew members; energize the current members with new.innovative, or creative techniques; or even bring in anoutside facilitator. Transformation of a team is necessaryif the team has not accomplished its overall goals and/orobjectives and still has a useful life.

Transformation enables a team to get back on track andagain begin following the traditional Tuckman stages ofnorming and performing (and even storming if needed).It can even eventually become a high-performing team ifproperly resourced and motivated.

Transforming a team from dysfunctional to functional canoccur at any time during the downward slope of the curvehighlighted in the figure. The concern, however, is that theteam not spend too much time in a deforming or disband-ing phase to the point of no return or recovery.

On Track to High PerformanceTeams need lo realize that they should be able to inform (apositive function), especially if they are high-performing.Informing is a natural transition phase for teams. Theycan also find themselves transitioning to the conformingphase (a negative function). They begin to experiencegroupthink. and their effectiveness is reduced.

The insights in transforming project work teams allowsteam members, team leaders, and management/lead-ership in general to understand the need to overcomeconforming and—even more serious—negative thinkingso that teams can more effectively evolve or transformthemselves and better transition into Tuckman's normingstage, after which—ideally—they will evolve into high-performing teams, back on track to being functioning,positive, and productive influences on the organizationsthey support. No empirical data have been collected onthese theories, and 1 encourage others to investigate fur-ther and try to empirically prove them.

The author welcomes comraents and questionsand can be contacted at tom.edison@dau.mil.

1 7 Deiense AT&L; May-June 2008