Group development: Extending tuckman's theory

Maples, Mary Finn

doi:10.1080/01933928808411771

Cited by 35 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eben (1979), Maples (1988), Caouette (1995), Miller (1997, McGrew et al (1999), Chang et al (2003), and Benfield (2005) did not validate the Tuckman model-none had a methodology that could associate a level of confidence with their results. Only one study (Miller 1997) had results that showed any appreciable support (36%) of the Tuckman model.…”

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most research has historically depended upon qualitative assessments of team behavior by a few trained individuals-a process that has a tendency to introduce bias (Tuckman 1965). Much of the contemporary research has tried to fit the collected data to a given model, rather than develop a model that fits the collected data (Maples 1988;McGrew et al 1999). Such an approach is susceptible to interpretive bias and calls into question the objectivity of the results.…”

Section: E a Scarcity Of Empirical Data To Validate Team Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The teams under study had life spans ranging from less than a year to 9 years. Similar to Maples' (1988) study, this study started with the assumption that teams in general follow the Tuckman model of development. The teams fit into the Tuckman (1965) definition of work teams.…”

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Miller (1997) did not define her population settings in terms of the Tuckman (1965) definitions. Like Maples' (1988) population, Miller's teams were in an academic setting. Miller developed these teams from students enrolled in college courses in organizational theory.…”

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, he was unable to validate the Tuckman model and recommended that a larger sample size be studied. Maples (1988) built on Tuckman's research to generate an extended version of the model. According to Maples (1988, p. 17) "graduate students in group work find Tuckman's theory of the stages of group development too limiting."…”

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Small, Short Duration Technical Team Dynamics

Knight¹

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. ABSTRACTHow to build effective teams is one of the most significant management questions of the day. Small, short duration technical teams drive critically important decision-making processes in a broad range of organizations in all sectors of the economy. Thus, gaining a better understanding of how small, short duration technical teams develop is of critical importance to contemporary managers.There has been much theorizing about how teams function, and many theoretical constructs have been proposed to define a general model of team development. The Tuckman (1965) four-stage sequential model of team development (Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing, or FSNP) may be today's most widely used model. However, the Tuckman model is a conceptual statement that was suggested by the data and has not been empirically validated (Tuckman 1965). Hadyn et al. (1997, p. 118) state that, "despite increasing interest in teamwork, much of the literature on the subject is inconclusive and often derived from anecdote rather than primary research."It was the intent of this study to develop empirical evidence to determine whether or not the Tuckman model or some variant thereof provides an appropriate model to explain the development of small, short duration technical teams. A validated survey instrument of 31 questions was administered to 368 small, short duration technical teams within the Department of Defense, Defense Acquisition University (DAU). The resulting data were analyzed with scientific rigor to determine if these teams followed the Tuckman model or a variant of that model. This research has discovered a new general model of team dynamics (called the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) model) that applies to technical teams. It is a variant of the Tuckman model with a new twist that better fits the data. A technical team is defined as a group of individuals with specific expertise who are assembled to complete a task, which results in a product. This research demonstrates that not only do technical teams generally follow the DAU model; but that teams following the DAU model produce better products than teams that do not follow this model. It may, therefore, be possible to significantly improve producti...

show abstract

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: E a Scarcity Of Empirical Data To Validate Team Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contemporary Studies Of the Tuckman Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Small, Short Duration Technical Team Dynamics

Knight¹

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Therapeutic Groups

Forsyth¹

2001

Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Group Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Group counseling in the schools: Legal, ethical, and treatment issues in school practice

Crespi

2008

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

School psychologists are interested in providing effective and efficient direct services to children. With a wide spectrum of psychological problems impacting children, group counseling represents one viable and valuable intervention. Given the complexity of group counseling, many schools and school psychologists are interested in legal and ethical issues impacting group interventions. From the attainment of appropriate consents for counseling to ethical dilemmas, the challenges involved in direct services are large. This article reviews mental health issues transforming children's mental health, considers differing group counseling models and stages of group development, and examines contemporary legal and ethical dilemmas inherent in school practice. Uniquely, a question‐and‐answer format is used to highlight legal issues for practice. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Group development: Extending tuckman's theory

Cited by 35 publications

References 5 publications

Small, Short Duration Technical Team Dynamics

Small, Short Duration Technical Team Dynamics

Therapeutic Groups

Group counseling in the schools: Legal, ethical, and treatment issues in school practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About