The dynamics of team formation is a common challenge in all workgroups. It is especially of concern in engineering project teams, which have to reformulate regularly due to high turnover. Below are some tips to help cope with this constant cycle of renewal.

Student project teams are in many ways similar to other workgroups and teams. Although the tasks and immediate rewards are different from those of professional workgroups, student teams nevertheless develop in similar ways and can often exceed traditional work groups in intensity and commitment to their task.

A commonly cited and effective theory of group development is Tuchman’s (1950) model of group development. She outlines four stages of team formation: forming, storming, norming, and performing.

Forming: In the initial stage, the team is being created. Administrative structures and informal roles, norms and expectations are still largely undefined as team members meet each other and get a feel about what they can expect from their colleagues. The adage "first impressions create lasting impressions" fits well here. This phase generally lasts for two to four weeks in a year-long project team.

During this stage, it is important to:

• Allow ample time and opportunity for team members to meet socially and discover one another’s capabilities.
• Try to foster effective interpersonal relations and mitigate any negative or hostile interaction.
• Identify those who may initially appear to be peripheral and react by trying to integrate such team members early.
• Try to build connections with new members, who might find it challenging to integrate into the existing social networks of experienced team members. A formal mentoring and training program can be an effective means of doing so.
• Avoid excessive focus on or commitment to the core task of the group at this point.

Storming: In this phase, formal and informal leadership roles are being determined, and the group’s social network begins to take a rudimentary shape. From initial impressions, team members will informally evaluate team members, noting who is strong and weak, and orient themselves accordingly. In this phase, informal team leaders emerge, and weaker team members can recede into the background. Initial signs of interpersonal and task conflict will begin to show in this phase. In a year-long project team, this phase can last from three to six weeks, depending on the team’s timeline and early goals.

During this stage, it is important to:

• Identify and capitalize on the contributions of strong informal leaders, giving them more and more complex responsibilities and tasks.
• Continue to target peripheral members and redouble efforts to get them involved in team activities.
• Identify and try to resolve potentially damaging or severe interpersonal conflicts early while maintaining tolerance for debate, discussion, and minor disagreements.
• Note that this is one of the last opportunities to propose and implement fundamental change in team dynamics, so make the most of all opportunities to do so.

Norming: In this phase, team structures and networks begin to solidify. Team members and subgroups develop some consensus around minor disagreements and debates, and interpersonal relationships and cliques begin to take shape. Disagreements are never fully eliminated, but team members will learn effective coping strategies to deal with future disagreements during this phase and should know what will and will not be tolerated by the team and/or specific team members. Any major disagreements should be dealt with by this point; if not resolved, they threaten to stall team development and frustrate performance. This is most likely when peripheral members and those who do not fit into the overall consensus may quit the team. In a year-long project team, this phase should last until the end of the research and design phase. Problematic teams might find it extending well beyond that and, unfortunately, never fully reach a conclusion.

During this stage, it is important to:

• Encourage and develop consensual solutions for minor disagreements.
• Give positive and honest critical feedback on team member development.
• Determine what to do about those who remain peripheral or counter-productive to team performance.

Performing: In this final stage, team members have addressed most potential interpersonal issues and can perform at optimum levels to accomplish the task at hand. They can engage emergent problems constructively without falling prey to common problems like bickering, turf wars among subgroups, or communication breakdown. Although it it best to maximize the time spent in this phase, the team will be stronger if earlier stages are not rushed. A false consensus can quickly break under stress.

It is important to note that this is not a linear progression. Teams can go through these stages cyclically—for example, when new members are recruited or new subteams are formed. Some parts of a larger team may also be farther advanced than others. Team leaders should try to make sure that all subgroups in a larger team are progressing at a relatively even pace, particularly if the subgroups must collaborate. Team leaders should also pay special attention to members who appear to be regressing into earlier stages due to new challenges and crises and work to get them back on track.

Resources

Notes from Applied Systems Engineering I on Team Development

PowerPoint notes regarding Tuchman’s Stages of Group Development. Also some good notes on different types of organizational structure, negotiating and facilitating team debates, and holding effective meetings.