Tuckman's Theory
Tuckman's theory focuses on the way in which a team tackles a task from the initial formation of the team through to the completion of the project. The developmental stages that teams commonly go through are the Forming stage, Storming stage, Norming stage, Performing stage and Adjourning stage which was to mark the end of the group (Priestley, 2015). Tuckman’s Theory fits with my project management experience although the forming stage didn’t quite correlate. The forming stage is the period where relationships are built and members get to know each other; however my group had a good relationship already since we were initially friends. Every other stage in the theory fit with my experience since in the storming stage participants of the group
were more comfortable to express opinions. In the Norming stage the team was positive and every member acknowledged and respected each other’s knowledge. As for the performing stage individuals knew there role in the team and had a clear vision on how to complete the task. Finally the adjourning stage where the team parted ways when the task was completed occurred (Bonebright, 2010). Evidence of this was members of the team leaving the WhatsApp group chat which was created for the project once the assignment was over.
According to Belbin’s theory on ‘team roles’ a typical team usually consists of a Resource Investigator, Team worker, Co-ordinator, Plant, Monitor Evaluator, Specialist, Shaper, Implementer and Completer Finisher (Belbin, 1993). Whilst I endured my group project I played the role of Monitor Evaluator in addition to the Completer Finisher. Belbin describes the Monitor Evaluator position as individuals who are best suited to analysing problems, evaluating ideas and suggestions. I was a Completer Finisher because I was the member of the group who examined everyone’s rough presentation slides and gave ideas and suggestions on where they went wrong and how they can improve. For example, after analysing Mustafa’s work, I suggested that he should change the structure to make it look more developed and consistent. Furthermore, after observing the entire presentation, I found many spelling mistakes which I corrected to make the PowerPoint look more professional.
were more comfortable to express opinions. In the Norming stage the team was positive and every member acknowledged and respected each other’s knowledge. As for the performing stage individuals knew there role in the team and had a clear vision on how to complete the task. Finally the adjourning stage where the team parted ways when the task was completed occurred (Bonebright, 2010). Evidence of this was members of the team leaving the WhatsApp group chat which was created for the project once the assignment was over.
According to Belbin’s theory on ‘team roles’ a typical team usually consists of a Resource Investigator, Team worker, Co-ordinator, Plant, Monitor Evaluator, Specialist, Shaper, Implementer and Completer Finisher (Belbin, 1993). Whilst I endured my group project I played the role of Monitor Evaluator in addition to the Completer Finisher. Belbin describes the Monitor Evaluator position as individuals who are best suited to analysing problems, evaluating ideas and suggestions. I was a Completer Finisher because I was the member of the group who examined everyone’s rough presentation slides and gave ideas and suggestions on where they went wrong and how they can improve. For example, after analysing Mustafa’s work, I suggested that he should change the structure to make it look more developed and consistent. Furthermore, after observing the entire presentation, I found many spelling mistakes which I corrected to make the PowerPoint look more professional.