TEAM BUILDING AND COLLABORATION - PART 1

This week I have learned about the five stages of team development: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Abudi, 2010).  Two group involvements that I recall from my past would be my involvement with a theatre group from New York, and my involvement with the local Head Start Policy Council.  The team with the clearest established norms was the group I worked with during the forming of a theatrical play at an area civic center.  Team rules, sharing information, conflict resolution, and an understanding about the tools and processes used to accomplish our goal of putting together a very successful theatrical presentation were clearly understood.  Everyone had an enormously vested interest in the production of a positive presentation; therefore the performing stage was a huge success due to the proficient interdependence that the team shared (2010). 

On the other hand, the Head Start Policy Council group was one of many hardships.  This group constantly found itself in the storming stage due to the power struggles that would frequently arise.  This made for difficult performing; as the team moved forward with progress it kept falling back into unproductive conflict.   Although norms were established in the way of By-Laws, the group kept losing track of project focus by letting personal feelings and ideas get in the way of creating cohesion (O’Hair & Wiemann, 2009, pp. 242).  This group never seemed to establish an atmosphere of trust and respect, which hampered the effective accomplishment of any of the other team development stages (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011).

Considering both groups, I would have to say that high-performing groups are the hardest to leave due to the cohesive relationships formed throughout the group’s interaction.  Constant bickering and arguing throughout a project task can wear a person’s tolerance very thin.  In these types of group involvements, it is a very happy day to see the conclusion of the group’s interaction—to finally be rid of the stress.  However, when high performance has been achieved through the effective progressions of team development stages, it is a bittersweet encounter—glad to see the conclusion of a successful project, but sad to see the group’s dissolve at the culmination of the task. Adjourning then becomes a welcome time of re-grouping and determining the new task of how to keep in touch with each member in a new dimension of shared identity (O’Hair & Wiemann, 2009, pp. 228-229).

Some of the adjourning rituals I have experienced have been anything from debriefing meetings to formal dinners and lively parties.  I imagine that I will adjourn from my current group of colleagues that I have formed while working on my master’s degree in the early childhood studies program by hopefully meeting them face to face at the graduation ceremony.  Reading about a person and hearing their expressions through written communication somehow leaves much to be desired; it is my hope that putting the rest of the communicative elements together with the written communication—non-verbal, gestures, facial expressions, body language, and such (O’Hair & Wiemann, 2009, 102-104)—will aid in a better understanding of the people with whom I have shared this journey of educational development.

References

Abudi, G. (2010). The five stages of team development: A case study. Retrieved from http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/the-five-stages-of-team-development-a-case-study.html

Laureate Education, Inc.  (Producer). (2011). EDUC 6165: Communicating and Collaborating in the Early Childhood Field [DVD].  Team Building Strategies: Dr. Randi Wolfe. Baltimore, MD: Author.

 
O’Hair, D., & Wiemann, M. (2009). Real communication. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.