Tuckman’s Model and the Nadler and Tushman Model
Bruce Tuckman first developed Tuckman’s forming, storming, norming and performing model in 1965. Later on in 1977, Tuckman and Mary Ann Jensen jointly added adjourning stage. Tuckman’s theory is a helpful and elegant illustration of team behavior and development. The model explains that as team abilities mature, relationships are forged and the leader changes the style of leadership. The leader starts with a straightforward style, moves on through coaching, then participation, finishes delegation and finally becomes almost detached. At this stage, the team can produce another leader and the previous leader can move on to create a new team. Tuckman maintains that the four phases are necessary and unavoidable for the team to grow, to plan work, to handle problems, to find solutions and to deliver results. This paper aims at discussing, comparing and contrasting Tuckman’s Model and the Nadler and Tushman Model.
The formation of the team is the first stage of the model. A person’s behavior is driven by the desire for acceptance, and to avoid conflict or controversy with other people (Judge & Bono, 2000). Grave feelings and issues are avoided, with people focusing on keeping themselves occupied with routines such as duty allocations, team organization and the venues of the meetings during this period. At this stage, individuals gather impressions and information about each other, and the aims of the group and how to advance towards them. This stage is comfortable, but the avoidance of conflict translates to little being done. The team learns about opportunities and challenges, reaches a consensus on goals and starts to handle the task. The team may be motivated, but usually, they are equally uninformed of the objectives and the issues of the team. This stage is important because team members get to familiarize with each other. It also provides an opportunity to evaluate how each team member works individually and their response to pressure.
Storming is the second stage. In this step, reaching a concrete decision is very difficult because team members strive for superiority in an attempt to firm themselves with the leader and other team members. The purpose of the team now becomes clearer in this step though there is persistence of multiple uncertainties. Formation of cliques and factions characterize this stage, thus the team needs to focus more on its aims to avoid getting distracted by emotional and relationship issues. To facilitate progress, compromises among team members may be required.
In the norming stage, which is the third stage, there is formation of consensus and agreement among the team members, who respond well to the facilitation of the leader. Roles and responsibilities are distinct and accepted. Important decisions are reached through group agreement while less important decisions are delegated to team members. Generally, the leader is more respect than before and some of the...