W1_nunug_Tuckman Analysis Assessment

1. Problem Definition

Emerald Team 2017 has been formed during five days class, consist people from different culture, background and experience. Now, we enter long distance learning as the second stage to achieve our main goals ; Pass AACE certification on first attempt and generate Return on Training Investment (RoTI).  To achieve project goal, it is important to establish strategy of leadership to keep Team solid and to achieve main goal efficiently.

2. Development of feasible alternatives

According Professor Bruce Tuckman in 1970, there are 4 stages for teamwork development :

  1. Forming
  2. Storming
  3. Norming
  4. Performing

Those five stages seem to be sequence that Team must be passed to build cohesive team. From Forming stages, where Team members must deal with interpersonal issues, to Performing stages, where team members already comfortable with each other and group normed have been accepted.

3. Possible Solution / Alternative

Survey was conducted for  each team member by filling 32 question. Using Tuckman’s model we can understand and identify what stage of team work Emerald Team is operating in. The group can be either in Forming phase, Storming Phase, Norming Phase or Performing Phase. Delphi technique with P70 used to analysis the data.

4. Selection of Criteria

Summary result of the survey data using Delphi technique with P70 as follow :

Tabel 1: Team Survey Result

Tabel 2: P70 Result with Delphi Technique

As shown on the table 2, the team position is in Performing Stage.

5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternatives

As shown on the table 2, Final result is in Performing Stage. The reason behind this stage because most of the member come from same Company, they already have same code of conduct, working environment and working ethic. Another reason structural issues have been settled by making project charter.

6. Selection and Preferred Alternatives

Table 2 show that the Team has the highest score at Performing Stage. In this stage, Team is performing at high level, and the matching leadership style for this stage is Delegating. Leader will able to focus more of energy on leadership activities and less on supervisory.

7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

Periodic monitoring and survey is needed to conduct, for the leader to monitor team performance and check the team member perception change over time.

 

References

  1. Team Work Theory : Stage of Group Development (2017, August).
    Retrieved from http://www.project-management-skills.com/teamwork-theory
  2. Scoring the Tuckman Team Maturity Questionnaire Electonically (2013, August).
    Retrieved from http://www.phf.org/resourcestools/Documents/Electronic_Tuckman.pdf
  3. W1_APE_Tuckman Analysis Assignment (2013, September).
    Retrieved from https://simatupangaace2014.wordpress.com/2013/09/03/w1_ape_tuckman-analysis-assignment/
 

W1-ABM-Tuckman Assessment

1. Problem Definition

Following the completion of the initial 5 day face to face programme and the formation of a working team called Emerald 2017, an assessment of the  group will be performed using the Bruce Tuckman 4 stage model in order to understand what stage the group is currently operating in.

Tuckman’s model explains that as the team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and the leader changes leadership style. Beginning with a directing style, moving through coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached. At this point the team may produce a successor leader and the previous leader can move on to develop a new team.

2. Identify the Feasible Alternative

The Group will be assessed for the following stages of teamwork development;

  1. Forming
  2. Storming
  3. Norming
  4. Performing

Each Phase is characterized by the following;

3. Development of the Outcome for Alternative
The assessment of the team will be performed through the administration of 32 question survey containing statements about teamwork. Each team Member scores each of the 32 questions using a scale of 1-5 (Almost never to Almost always) to indicate how often their team displays each indicated behavior.

4. Selection Criteria

Following the completion of survey questions from the Emerald 2017 group members and the classification of responses in accordance with Tuckman scoring model, the results are summarized within table 1.0 below;


5. 
Analysis and Comparison of the AlternativeFrom the above results, the current maturity of the group is regarded as PERFORMING based on a highest average score of 27.4.

In analysing the above results, the score may be influenced by the factors such as the sharing of scores with other team members, reducing willingness to provide negative feedback or low scores or overstatement of positive scores.

With these factors in mind and on the basis that the group is only 1 week old and is yet to face major challenges with respect to member interaction, work load and leadership, a more appropriate ranking of the group is that of the “Forming” stage (Rank 2).

Furthermore, the lowest score received for the group was for the Stage of “storming”. This is considered appropriate.

A statistical analysis of the teams survey results was not performed as it was not considered relevant to assessing the groups current development or stage of maturity.

6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

Whilst the survey has produced a result indicating that the group currently operates within the “PERFORMING” stage, based on reasoning stated under section 5 above, the Preferred alternative is considered to be the FORMING stage. 

7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

It is recommended that the survey be repeated at week 10 and Week 20. It is also recommended that the survey be undertaken in a manner where respondents score are not disclosed to other team members to ensure that all scores truly reflect the opinions of the respondents.

References

  1. Team technology – Leadership using the Tuckman Model.                        Retrieved from  (http://http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/tuckman.htmlf)
  2. Scoring the The Tuckman Team Maturity Questionnaire Electronically. retrieved from (http://www.phf.org/resourcestools/Documents/Electronic_Tuckman.pdf)
  3. Alan Chapman (2013) – Tuckman forming, storming performing model –  Retrieved from (http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm)