What are the 5 stages of the team performance curve?
|
If your team uses Agile methodology, you’re likely familiar with how transformative it is for development. And yet, while Agile is an ingenious way to develop solutions for fast deployment, it’s not a management tool. Teams are left to their own devices to work inside Agile parameters, and unfortunately that can mean inefficient, slow outcomes, even if the Agile methodology is being utilized. Show
One way to coach teams toward high performance is to use a team performance model. Agile expert Lyssa Adkins recently conducted a webinar on the benefits to using team performance models and how you could choose a model as a guide toward higher performance. We’ll give you some examples of team effectiveness models—as well as pros and cons for each—so you can select the right one for your team. The pros and cons of high performance team modelsThere are plenty of examples of teams that are composed of the best and brightest and simply aren’t as effective as they could be. And that has, according to research, very little to do with the personalities of the people on the team. Instead, it’s about the cohesiveness of the team; in other words, how well the team is structured. Team performance models can be the key to providing that necessary structure that allows your team to better work together. The downsides are that high performance team models aren’t prescriptive. You’ll likely need to choose the model you think may be best for your team, then tweak it as you go or choose a different model altogether down the road. High performance, as Adkins says, is a journey, not a destination. The upside is that performance models can increase the effectiveness of a team and generate a wealth of ideas and output. Examples of team effectiveness models1. Tuckman’s FSNP (FSNPA) ModelBruce Tuckman published his theory on “Tuckman’s stages of group development” in 1965 that included four phases of group development. The model eventually added a fifth phase, and is now known as the FSNPA model—forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Pros:
Cons:
2. GRPI ModelThis simple model prioritizes goals, roles, processes, and interpersonal relationships, and was developed by Rubin, Plovnick, and Fry in 1977. Pros:
Cons:
3. The Katzenbach and Smith ModelJon Katzenbach and Douglas Smith developed this team effectiveness model in 1993 in their book, “The Wisdom of Teams.” This triangular framework describes the main tenets of teamwork: personal growth, collective work products, and accountability. Pros:
Cons:
4. The T7 Model of Team EffectivenessMichael Lombardo and Robert Eichinger developed this team effectiveness model in 1995. It includes five internal factors of a team that impact how effective that team is: thrust, trust, talent, teaming skills, task skills. Itt also identifies two external factors that impact a team: team leader fit and team support from the organization. Pros:
Cons:
5. The LaFasto and Larson ModelThis newer model was developed in 2001 by Frank LaFasto and Carl Larson after studying more than 600 teams across a wide array of organizations. They found that the most effective teams consisted of five primary elements: individual team members, team relationships, team problem solving, team leadership, and organization environment. Pros:
Cons:
6. The Lencioni ModelThis model was developed in 2005 and is detailed in the book “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team." Interestingly, this model develops on the deficiencies of a team that cause inefficiencies instead of on the beneficial assets of a team that cause efficiencies. Pros:
Cons:
7. The Drexler-Sibbet ModelThis model was developed by Allan Drexler and David Sibbet after 10 years of refining. This model says that team development encompasses seven stages: four to build a team and three to keep the team performing. The concept is that a team begins with a great amount of freedom to ideate and create and then progresses to stricter parameters as it gets closer to implementation. The seven steps are:
Pros:
Cons:
8. The Salas, Dickinson, Converse, and Tannenbaum ModelThis model was developed in 1992 and is a revised version of the Hackmann model, which was developed in 1983. The primary difference is that the Salas, Dickinson, Converse, and Tannenbaum model looks at the context of the group and says that a team’s success depends largely on the environment in which it exists. What are the 5 stages of team development?These stages are commonly known as: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, and Adjourning. Tuckman's model explains that as the team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.
What are the stages of team performance?The most commonly used framework for a team's stages of development was developed in the mid-1960s by Bruce W. Tuckman. Although many authors have written variations and enhancements to Tuckman's work, his descriptions of Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing provide a useful framework for looking at your own team.
What is a team performance curve?"The 'team performance curve' (Figure II-1) illustrates that how well any small group of people performs depends on the basic approach it takes and how effectively it implements that approach." "... working groups rely on the sum of 'individual bests' for their performance.
What is the most important stage in the 5 Stages Model?The storming stage is the most difficult and critical stage to pass through. It is a period marked by conflict and competition as individual personalities emerge.
|
