Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited
TL;DR: The authors examined published research on small-group development done in the last ten years that would constitute an empirical test of Tuckman's (1965) hypothesis that groups go through the stages of "forming," "storming," "norming," and "performing".
Abstract: The purpose of this review was to examine published research on small-group development done in the last ten years that would constitute an empirical test of Tuckman's (1965) hypothesis that groups go through the stages of "forming," "storming," "norming," and "performing." Of the twenty-two studies reviewed, only one set out to directly test this hypothesis, although many of the others could be related to it. Following a review of these studies, a fifth stage, "adjourning," was added to the hypothesis, and more empirical work was recommended.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This review examines research and theory relevant to work groups and teams typically embedded in organizations and existing over time, although many studies reviewed were conducted in other settings, including the laboratory.
Abstract: This review examines research and theory relevant to work groups and teams typically embedded in organizations and existing over time, although many studies reviewed were conducted in other settings, including the laboratory. Research was organized around a two-dimensional system based on time and the nature of explanatory mechanisms that mediated between team inputs and outcomes. These mechanisms were affective, behavioral, cognitive, or some combination of the three. Recent theoretical and methodological work is discussed that has advanced our understanding of teams as complex, multilevel systems that function over time, tasks, and contexts. The state of both the empirical and theoretical work is compared as to its impact on present knowledge and future directions.
1,879 citations
Cites background from "Stages of Small-Group Development R..."
...Several stage models of team development have addressed finishing processes, calling the end-stage adjourning (Tuckman & Jensen 1977), decay (Worchel 1994), or termination (van Steenberg LaFarge 1995)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors address issues of diversity within organizational groups by discussing and summarizing previous approaches and by introducing a new variable called faultlines, which depends on the alignment of individual member characteristics.
Abstract: In this article we address issues of diversity within organizational groups by discussing and summarizing previous approaches and by introducing a new variable—faultlines—which depends on the alignment of individual member characteristics. By analyzing a group's faultlines, we focus attention on the underlying patterns of group member characteristics, which can be an important determinant of subgroup conflict, particularly when the group's task is related to one of its faultlines. We discuss the dynamics of faultlines from the early to later stages of a group's development and show how they may be strongest and most likely when diversity of individual member characteristics is moderate.
1,726 citations
TL;DR: Work teams are defined as interdependent collections of individuals who share responsibility for specific outcomes for their organizations as discussed by the authors, and they have been used in many applications, such as advice and involvement, production and service, and action and negotiation.
Abstract: \" This article uses an ecological approach to analyze factors in the effectiveness of work teams--small groups of interdependent individuals who share responsibility for outcomes for their organizations. Applications include advice and involvement, as in quality control circles and committees; production and service, as in assembly groups and sales teams; projects and development, as in engineering and research groups; and action and negotiation, as in sports teams and combat units. An analytic framework depicts team effectiveness as interdependent with organizational context, boundaries, and team development. Key context factors include (a) organizational culture, (b) technology and task design, (c) mission clarity, (d) autonomy, (e) rewards, ( f ) performance feedback, (g) training/consultation, and (h) physical environment. Team boundaries may mediate the impact of organizational context on team development. Current research leaves unanswered questions but suggests that effectiveness depends on organizational context and boundaries as much as on internal processes. Issues are raised for research and practice. The terms work team and work group appear often in today's discussions of organizations. Some experts claim that to be effective modern firms need to use small teams for an increasing variety of jobs. For instance, in an article subtitled \"The Team as Hero,\" Reich (1987) wrote, If we are to compete in today's world, we must begin to celebrate collective entrepreneurship, endeavors in which the whole of the effort is greater than the sum of individual contributions. We need to honor our teams more, our aggressive leaders and maverick geniuses less. (p. 78) Work teams occupy a pivotal role in what has been described as a management transformation (Walton, 1985), paradigm shift (Ketehum, 1984), and corporate renaissance (Kanter, 1983). In this management revolution, Peters (1988) advised that organizations use \"multi-function teams for all development activities\" (p. 210) and \"organize every function into tento thirty-person, largely self-managing teams\" (p. 296). Tornatzky (1986) pointed to new technologies that allow small work groups to take responsibility for whole products. Hackman (1986) predicted that, \"organizations in the future will rely heavily on member self-management\" (p. 90). Building blocks of such organizations are self-regulating work teams. But University of Tennessee University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire University o f Tennessee far from being revolutionary, work groups are traditional; \"the problem before us is not to invent more tools, but to use the ones we have\" (Kanter, 1983, p. 64). In this article, we explore applications of work teams and propose an analytic framework for team effectiveness. Work teams are defined as interdependent collections of individuals who share responsibility for specific outcomes for their organizations. In what follows, we first identify applications of work teams and then offer a framework for analyzing team effectiveness. Its facets make up topics of subsequent sections: organizational context, boundaries, and team development. We close with issues for research and practice. A p p l i c a t i o n s o f W o r k T e a m s Two watershed events called attention to the benefits of applying work teams beyond sports and mih'tary settings: the Hawthorne studies (Homans, 1950) and European experiments with autonomous work groups (Kelly, 1982). Enthusiasm has alternated with disenchantment (Bramel & Friend, 1987), but the 1980s have brought a resurgence of interest. Unfortunately, we have little evidence on how widely work teams are used or whether their use is expanding. Pasmore, Francis, Haldeman, and Shani (1982) reported that introduction of autonomous work groups was the most common intervention in 134 experiments in manufacturing firms. Production teams number among four broad categories of work team applications: (a) advice and involvement, (b) production and service, (c) projects and development, and (d) action and negotiation. Advice and Involvement Decision-making committees traditional in management now are expanding to first-line employees. Quality control (QC) circles and employee involvement groups have been common in the 1980s, often as vehicles for employee participation ( Cole, 1982 ). Perhaps several hundred thousand U.S. employees belong to QC circles (Ledford, Lawler, & Mohrman, 1988), usually first-line manufacturing employees who meet to identify opportunities for improvement. Some make and carry out proposals, but most have restricted scopes of activity and little working time, perhaps a few hours each month (Thompson, 1982). Employee involvement groups operate similarly, exploring ways to improve customer service (Peterfreund, 1982). 120 February 1990 • American Psychologist Copyright 1990 by the American Psyc2aological A~mciafion, Inc. 0003-066X/90/$00.75 Vol. 45, No. 2, 120-133 QC circles and employee involvement groups at times may have been implemented poorly (Shea, 1986), but they have been used extensively in some companies
1,516 citations
TL;DR: Wethenus the findings from the CoI framework's literature review are examined to identify potential pathways for research and the opportunities for identifyingfactor moderate and/ororextend the relationship between the framework's componentsandonline course outcomes.
Abstract: Since its publication in The Internet and Higher Education, Garrison, Anderson, and Archer's [Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W.(2000). Critical inquiry in atext-based environment: Computer conferencing in highereducation.TheInternet andHigher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.] community of inquiry (CoI) framework has generated substantial interest among online learning researchers.Thisliteraturereviewexaminesrecentresearchpertainingtotheoverallframeworkaswellastospecificstudiesonsocial, teaching,andcognitivepresence.Wethenusethefindingsfromthisliteraturetoidentifypotentialfuturedirectionsforresearch.Some oftheseresearchdirectionsincludetheneedformorequantitatively-oriented studies,theneedformorecross-disciplinarystudies,and theopportunitiesforidentifyingfactorsthatmoderateand/orextendtherelationshipbetween theframework'scomponentsandonline course outcomes. © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1,233 citations
Cites background from "Stages of Small-Group Development R..."
...Participants need to connect to the group, and collaborative decision-making proceeds along four hypothesized stages — forming, norming, storming, and performing (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977)....
[...]
TL;DR: The early research in the area of online communities of inquiry has raised several issues with regard to the creation and maintenance of social, cognitive and teaching presence that require further research and analysis as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: This paper explores four issues that have emerged from the research on social, cognitive and teaching presence in an online community of inquiry. The early research in the area of online communities of inquiry has raised several issues with regard to the creation and maintenance of social, cognitive and teaching presence that require further research and analysis. The other overarching issue is the methodological validity associated with the community of inquiry framework. The first issue is about shifting social presence from socio-emotional support to a focus on group cohesion (from personal to purposeful relationships). The second issue concerns the progressive development of cognitive presence (inquiry) from exploration to resolution. That is, moving discussion beyond the exploration phase. The third issue has to do with how we conceive of teaching presence (design, facilitation, direct instruction). More specifically, is there an important distinction between facilitation and direct instruction? Finally, the methodological issue concerns qualitative transcript analysis and the validity of the coding protocol.
678 citations
Cites background from "Stages of Small-Group Development R..."
...Participants need to connect to the group and collaborative decision making proceeds along four hypothesized stages—forming, norming, storming, and performing [32]....
[...]
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1970TL;DR: Yalom as mentioned in this paper described the course of therapy from both the patient's and the therapist's viewpoint in Encounter Groups: First Facts (1973) and Every Day gets a Little Closer: A Twice-Told Therapy (1974).
Abstract: This book first appeared in 1970 and has gone into two further editions, one in 1975 and this one in 1985. Yalom is also the author of Existential Psychotherapy (1980), In-patient Group Psychotherapy (1983), the co-author with Lieberman of Encounter Groups: First Facts (1973) and with Elkin of Every Day Gets a Little Closer: A Twice-Told Therapy (1974) (which recounts the course of therapy from the patient's and the therapist's viewpoint). The present book is the central work of the set and seems to me the most substantial. It is also one of the most readable of his works because of its straightforward style and the liberal use of clinical examples.
4,235 citations
"Stages of Small-Group Development R..." refers methods in this paper
...For example, Yalom (1970) presented a four-stage model, including an initial phase of orientation and hesitant participation; a second phase of conflict, dominance, and rebellion; a third phase of intimacy, closeness, and cohesiveness; and a final phase of termination (differing from Tuckman)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, 50 articles dealing with stages of group development over time are separated by group setting: therapy-group studies, T-Group studies, and natural and laboratory group studies.
Abstract: 50 articles dealing with stages of group development over time are separated by group setting: therapy-group studies, T-group studies, and natural- and laboratory-group studies. The stages identified in these articles are separated into those descriptive of social or interpersonal group activities a
4,052 citations
118 citations
"Stages of Small-Group Development R..." refers background in this paper
...Mann (1967) offered a third variation to the four-stage model....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, a comparative study of two self-analytic groups meeting over a period of nine months is presented, which employs a computer system of content analysis which reads verbal text and categorizes words and phrases into a set of psycho-sociological variables specified by the investigator.
Abstract: This paper describes a comparative study of the development of two self-analytic groups meeting over a period of nine months. Methodologically, the study employs a computer system of content analysis which reads verbal text and categorizes words and phrases into a set of psycho-sociological variables specified by the investigator. This method is applied to brief reports written weekly by group members. Analysis of variance and factor analytic methods are applied to the output of the computer system to develop a model of change in the social structure and culture of the groups. This model demonstrates that the groups passed through similar phases which were strongly influenced by the emergence of nonrational role specialists and given an underlying common meaning by an integrating group mythology.
96 citations
"Stages of Small-Group Development R..." refers background or methods in this paper
...discussion are Lundgren (1971), Liebowitz (1972), Tucker (1973), and Adelson (1975)....
[...]
...However, Dunphy’s model does not include any stage resembling &dquo;performing.&dquo; Dunphy acknowledged that his results might not be generalizable to all self-analytic groups and that further testing was needed to establish the extent of their validity. A study by Heckel, Holmes, and Salzberg (1967) examined whether distinct verbal behavioral phases occur in group psychotherapy....
[...]
...Dunphy (1968) conducted an empirical study of the developmental process in self-analytic groups (therapy and T-groups)....
[...]
49 citations
"Stages of Small-Group Development R..." refers methods in this paper
...As a reflection of the recent appearance of studies postulating a life cycle approach (Mann, 1971; Gibbard & Hartman, 1973; Spitz & Sadock, 1973; Lacoursiere, 1974; Braaten, 1975), the Tuckman model is hereby amended to include a fifth stage: adjourning....
[...]