Bruce Tuckman's Theory Analysis

734 Words2 Pages

(Theory 1)In 1965, Bruce Tuckman publishes a first model for group behaviour and development compounded of four stages: forming, storming, norming and performing. This model is the result of thorough research where groups were found to meet and find out why they were put in such a group in the first stage. In the second, storming, the individuals forming the group are found to have their first disagreements, where everyone gives ideas and suggestions: it is the occasion for the team to put every thought down and discuss it. The next stage which is norming, is supposedly the stage where the group is supposed to find a common agreement, make concessions, and agree with each other at last. The last stage of the first model published by Tuckman …show more content…

Indeed, Tuckman realised an important stage was missing from his model, stage which the group’s life comes to an end. The authors tried to explore the different outcomes possible of the group splitting; whether it was sadness, happiness, relief… (Add reference)

(Theory 2)This theory applied to our own experience in the sense that we were put into a psychological and formal group which could be defined as a group that is formed for a specific aim, which has a limited lifetime, and can’t work in another way than in a group: each member has an undeniable importance and the task could never be completed without the assiduous cooperation of one of the team members.

(Theory 3) Kurt Lewin, known to be an important figure of modern social, organizational, and applied psychology and who looked more particularly at group developments and group life, found that “Conceiving of a group as a dynamic whole should include a definition of group which is based on interdependence of the members (or better, of the subparts of the group” (Lewin, 1939). Lewin’s theory is based on the idea that a group needs every member to be an active participant in order to assure the well operation of the group as a whole in order to fulfil the task it is given …show more content…

How were these theories applied to our case?

Two of the three activities we underwent were “The Paper Planes Corporation” and “Fab Sweets”. During the first activity, our group was formed, and we were told what our task would be. We then had to take a decision to split roles, where we needed a manager, who supervised the “production” process, an inspector, who would check the planes and verify that they flew alright, and an employee, who would build the paper planes. This step could be considered the storming phase of a group behavioural development, as the group members made suggestions about who would get each role, and why.
Because of the lack of arguments during this activity, we could say that the norming phase of our group development declared itself as a recap of what we had decided previously, making sure everyone understood the stake of the activity and their role in it.
The performing stage was also present as planes started to get built, the inspector checked any flaws, and the manager was there to supervise the whole process.
During the “Fab Sweets” activity, we were exposed to a whole other problematic: the group analysed was found to have issues coexisting as individuals part of a given team. The interdependence of all the group members is undeniably essential in order for the company to successfully achieve their goals, and the case study showed an absolute failure of this core

Open Document