W1_AlShehhi_Tuckman Assessment

1. Problem Definition.
A PMI competency development course commenced at Muscat on May 2015, with 25 participants from Oman. The course is broadly divided into face to face sessions as well as 12-week distance learning mode.
This first blog post is about using Bruce Tuckman “Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing” module, to which adjourning phase was added years later, to decide the leadership style appropriate for the team, since about 50% of the course consists of team based assignments.
2. Identify the Feasible Alternative.
In his article “Development Sequence in Small Groups”, published in 1965, Dr. Bruce described the path that most teams follow on their way to high performance. The model consists of four stages. These are Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing.
Team Forming Stage Leadership Style
Forming * Leader to play a dominant role because members don’t have clear roles and responsibilities * Detached task-directing
Storming * Managerially-involved stages of explanation
Norming * Participation
Performing * Delegation of authority and focus on developing team members
Table 1: Tuckman’s phases and leadership styles
Leadership style of strategies of each one these stages are illustrated in Table1 above.
3. Development of the Outcome for Alternative
The team members assessed themselves, in terms of what stage or phase of Tuckman’s module they think they are, by answering 32 questions developed by Donald Clark. Survey results processed via PERT analysis and results are shown in Table2.
Forming Storming Norming Performing
Min 8 8 10 22
Average 21 20 23 28
Max 33 29 30 35
Mean 21 19 22 28
Sigma 4 4 3 2
Variance 17 12 11 5
P(95) (z=1.65) 28 25 27 31
Table 2: Team survey analysis using PERT
4. Selection of the Acceptable Criteria.
A confidently level of 95% was selected as it is vital for team leaders to identify exactly what sort of management style they should implement and spot any flaws in the team’s performance sooner rather than later.
5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative.
As it is clear from the table above team is 95% in performing stage and merely a probability of 5% that it is in any other stage/phase. Despite the short period of five days, the team could pass through most difficult part, storming, relatively quickly. This could be attributed to the fact that al team members come from the same country and have common background which formed concrete firm basis of a good performing team.
6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative.
As it is clear from Table 2, team leaders should delegate authority and focus on developing team members as a preferred alternative.
7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result.
Although team is in performance stage, it requires continuous monitoring and periodic evaluation of its performance. It is suggested team performance to be evaluated every three weeks.
8. References:
1. Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing: Understanding the Stages of Team Formation. (n.d.). Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing. Retrieved June 8, 2014, from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_86.htm

2. Stages of Group Development: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing and Adjourning, Retrived on June 8, 2014, from http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/stages-of-group-development-forming-storming-forming-performing-adjourning.html#lesson

3. Tuckman Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing Model, Retrieved June 8, 2014, from http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s