UPI Study › Courses › Principles of Management › Free lessons › Lesson 8.1 Free with a free account
How Teams Come Together: Tuckman's Five Stages of Group Development
Principles of Management · Chapter 8: Team Dynamics: Building, Bonding, and Managing ConflictSection 8.1 · lesson 41 of 11711 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Principles of Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Principles of Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Stronger Together: Team-Building Strategies That Enhance Group Cohesion →← Mechanistic vs. Organic: Two Opposing Ways to OrganizeNext lesson: Stronger Together: Team-Building Strategies That Enhance Group Cohesion →
In this lesson
From a group of people to a team that performs.
- Distinguish a team from a group
- Describe the 5 stages of group development
- Explain what each stage requires of a manager
- Identify the stage a described team has reached
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,606 words). Read along, or search it.
Team Dynamics: Building, Bonding, and Managing Conflict
How Teams Come Together: Tuckman's 5 Stages
Putting people together doesn't automatically make a team. This section starts by separating a team from a group, and looks at five common team types. Then it walks through Bruce Tuckman's five stages of group development. For each stage, we'll ask what a manager should do, and what error keeps a team stuck. We'll look closely at storming, the stage managers most often get wrong. And we'll finish with norms, regression, the model's limits, and how to diagnose a team's stage.
Group or Team?
A Team Has 3 Properties a Group Lacks
Start with the difference between a group and a team. A group is a collection of people who share a context, like a department, a floor, or a manager. They don't necessarily depend on one another to accomplish anything. A team has three additional properties. The first is interdependence. Each member's work genuinely depends on what the others do. The second is a common goal. Members work toward the same defined outcome, not separate individual outcomes that just happen to sit near one another. The third is mutual accountability. Members answer to one another for the team's collective result, not only to a manager above them. Here's the practical point. Calling something a team does not create the interdependence a team requires. An org chart can label a collection of people the marketing team. But if they still work on separate accounts, with no shared goal and no accountability to each other, nothing has changed. In substance, it's still a group wearing a team's name.
Team Types
5 Forms, 5 Characteristic Difficulties
Teams take several recognizable forms, and each has its own characteristic difficulty. A functional team works within a single department, with shared expertise and an established reporting line. Its difficulty is the narrow, sometimes insular perspective a single function can develop over time. A cross-functional team draws members from different functions to work on a shared problem. Its difficulty is coordination across specialties and reporting lines, the cost Subchapter seven point four tied to departmentalization. A project team is assembled for a defined task, with a planned end. Its difficulty is building real cohesion when everyone knows from the start that the team is temporary. A self-managed team holds substantial autonomy over its own work, linking to the team-based structure in Subchapter seven point seven. Its difficulty is that genuine self-management needs a real shift in decision rights, not just a name change. A virtual team works together without being consistently co-located. Its difficulty is the communication-follows-proximity effect. When interaction is mediated rather than face to face, the ordinary work of building a team gets measurably harder.
Tuckman's Model
5 Recognizable Stages
The psychologist Bruce Tuckman's model of group development was first proposed in nineteen sixty-five. It describes five recognizable stages. Forming comes first. It's marked by politeness, and uncertainty about roles and purpose. Members depend heavily on whoever leads the group, because they haven't yet built enough shared understanding to work without direction. Storming is marked by conflict over role, influence, and approach. Members test one another, and the group works out, often uncomfortably, how decisions will get made and whose view will carry weight. Norming is marked by shared expectations emerging, and rising cohesion. The group settles into agreed working patterns, though they're often unstated. Performing is when the team works on the task itself, rather than on its own internal dynamics. The earlier questions about role and process are settled enough to stop consuming attention. Adjourning is the disbanding of a temporary team once its task concludes. It applies fully only to teams with a defined end, not to standing functional teams.
Figure 8.1.1
Performance Across the Stages
Figure eight point one point one plots team performance over time, for a project team at a fictional firm, Harborline Manufacturing. The curve's shape is illustrative. What matters is its pattern. Performance starts modestly during forming. It dips during storming, as conflict over roles and approach takes up the team's energy. Then it climbs through norming, and levels off high in performing. Beneath each stage sits the manager's task. Structure and direction. Tolerate and surface conflict. Reinforce norms. Step back. And finally, recognize and capture. Above the curve, a dashed arrow marks a regression. A new member arrives while the team is performing, and pulls the team back toward storming. We'll come back to that regression shortly.
Table 8.1.1
The Manager's Task, and the Error That Keeps a Team Stuck
A manager's task differs at every stage. And applying the wrong stage's task to a team at a different stage tends to backfire. At forming, the task is to provide structure and direction. The group depends heavily on its leader, so without direction, members genuinely don't know how to proceed. At storming, the task is to tolerate and surface conflict, not suppress it. At norming, the task is to reinforce the emerging norms, rather than assume they'll persist on their own. At performing, the task is to step back. Continued close direction now can crowd out the autonomy the team has earned. At adjourning, the task is recognition, and knowledge capture. That means acknowledging the team's work, and capturing what was learned before the team's knowledge disperses with its members. Each stage also has an error that keeps a team stuck there. Too little direction at forming. Suppressing disagreement at storming. Assuming norms will hold at norming. Over-directing at performing. And letting a team disperse with no recognition and no captured learning at adjourning.
The Most Mishandled Stage
Storming: Don't Suppress It
Storming is the stage managers most often mishandle. The characteristic mistake is suppressing conflict, rather than tolerating and surfacing it. Suppressing conflict does not remove it. It drives the same disagreement underground. There, it keeps acting on the team's actual working relationships, without ever being addressed. A team whose storming was suppressed doesn't advance cleanly to norming. It carries an unresolved, submerged version of the same conflict forward. And that blocks the genuine shared expectations that norming requires. Surface calm, in other words, is not the same thing as resolution. This is exactly the mechanism behind the case at the end of this section.
Norms
The Actual Rules of a Team
Norms are the actual operating rules of a team. They're the shared expectations that genuinely govern behavior, as distinct from any formally stated policy. In most teams, norms form without anyone stating them. They emerge from repeated behavior that goes unchallenged, until it becomes the group's default expectation. That includes norms nobody would endorse if asked directly. For example, a norm of never raising disagreement with one particular senior member. Or a norm of quietly tolerating missed deadlines from one team member. Those norms can operate just as powerfully as any positive, endorsed norm. And that's true even though no one on the team would defend them openly, if the question were put plainly. That's why a manager at the norming stage has to watch which behaviors go unchallenged.
The Non-Linear Reality
Teams Regress When Things Change
The five stages are often presented as a clean sequence. The non-linear reality is that teams regress whenever membership, task, or context changes significantly. Take a new member joining an established, performing team. The team goes back to an earlier stage, typically something closer to forming or storming. That's because the shared understanding the team had built didn't include the new arrival. Some of it has to be rebuilt, or renegotiated, to include her. The same is true of a significant change in task or context. A team performing well on one problem doesn't automatically carry that functioning into a substantially different problem. It usually needs some renewed passage through the earlier stages. So a dip after a change isn't necessarily failure. It may just be regression.
The Model's Limitations
A Useful Description, Not a Law
Tuckman's model should be read with its real limitations in view. It's best understood as a useful descriptive framework. It is not a rigorously validated sequence that every team has been shown to pass through, in order. In practice, not every team passes through every stage. Some teams never genuinely storm. Sometimes that's because the task never surfaces any real disagreement. Sometimes it's because underlying conflict is avoided, rather than worked through. And some teams disband before ever reaching performing at all. So use the stages as a lens for reading a team, not as a timetable it must follow.
Diagnosing the Stage
Read Behavior, Not the Calendar
How do you tell which stage a team is in? Diagnose it from observable behavior, not from how much time has passed since the team formed. Picture a team that has met for months, but still shows the politeness and uncertainty of forming. It hasn't advanced past forming, whatever the calendar says. Now picture a team only weeks old that's already working productively on its task, with no unresolved role conflict. That team may genuinely have reached performing quickly. In many teams, elapsed time correlates loosely with stage. But it's the behavior itself, not the duration, that shows where a team actually stands.
Case Vignette
A Team That Never Finished Storming
Here is a composite case, constructed for instruction. Rohan assembled a new cross-functional team at Harborline Manufacturing to redesign a customer onboarding process. In early meetings, two members disagreed sharply, and repeatedly, over which of two approaches to take. Uncomfortable with the visible tension, Rohan redirected the conversation each time the disagreement came back. Rohan steered the group toward safer, more agreeable topics, and treated the surface calm as a sign the team was working well. Four months later, the team still hadn't reached a genuine shared decision on the redesign's core approach. Meetings stayed polite on the surface, but concrete progress had essentially stalled. Decisions the team seemed to reach in meetings were quietly not followed afterward, by the same two members. Their original disagreement had never actually been resolved. The team had never really advanced past storming. It had simply been prevented from storming visibly. The disagreement hadn't disappeared. It had gone underground, still shaping decisions, but no longer discussed openly enough to resolve.
About Principles of Management at UPI Study
Principles of Management (Business 101) is a self-paced online course of 117 video lessons in 17 chapters, from the classical schools and the four management functions to leadership, motivation, change, human resources, strategy and ethics. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Principles of Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Principles of Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About How Teams Come Together: Tuckman's Five Stages of Group Development
What is the difference between a group and a team?
What are Tuckman's stages of group development?
What should a manager do at each stage of team development?
Why is it a mistake to suppress conflict in the storming stage?
About the Principles of Management course
How many college credits is Principles of Management?
How much does Principles of Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Principles of Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Principles of Management.
117 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →