Teamwork: making the dream work

The previous edition of this column explored some of the psychology and sociology of groups and teams. This time, we focus more on team development and some aspects of leadership. Team development normally takes time and a considerable amount of effort from all concerned to become effective and fully functional. The Tuckman model One of the most well-known models of team development, especially for “task and finish groups”, was propounded by Bruce Tuckman more than 60 years ago. This simple but appealing model identified five distinct stages. i) Forming This stage is characterised by greetings and introductions where individuals check out their perceptions. Members may or may not reveal a lot of information about themselves and, at the same time, seek information and views from others, as well as wondering whether they will get on with each other. Members should at this stage be concerned with confirming the overall purpose of the team/group and its more specific objectives. Some have described this stage as “ritual sniffing”, in much the same way as dogs often approach each other and try to get acquainted, though not always successfully. ii) Storming This next stage involves cooperation, but also competition and possibly conflict in sorting out tasks and who does what, how, when and why. The outcome should, hopefully, see a team emerge with a realistic view of its task, proposed strategies and tactics, along with its strengths, opportunities, threats and weaknesses. Developing a team ethos might also include parallel team-building exercises through “play” or competition in some form of game-based activity. This, however, doesn’t often happen in university-based group work before embarking on a particular task. iii) Norming The “norming” stage aims to provide a consensus on how the team is to function as regards agreed norms of appropriate and effective behaviours and actions. iv) Performing If the earlier stages have been successful, the team is now ready to perform a given task. Sadly, not all teams progress to be fully functioning and effective. They may have become stuck at earlier stages. If this is the case, then going back to the storming and norming stage will be necessary and the role of a leader or facilitator clearly will be important to help resolve a situation. In terms of student-based groupwork, it is sometimes also helpful to have a dispute resolution mechanism built in to a coursework brief, which may include a red card dismissal if all else fails. v) Mourning The final stage may sound dramatic but I think Tuckman was thinking of the little sadness sometimes felt when teams have reached their goal, are disbanded and have to move on. A final celebration of some sort is one good way of providing closure. At this final stage, there should be a commitment to clear up any unfinished business and then critically reflect on achievements, as well as any disappointments. This is more often than not an assessment criteria of student groupwork – but similarly, is standard practice in industry and sport. In addition, if things didn’t work out, always remember that failure is experience and brings learning for another day. As Irish writer Samuel Beckett wrote in Worstward Ho: “Ever tried. Ever Failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail Better.” Individual team roles (and individual differences) Charles Handy, the social philosopher and prolific business management writer, passed away just before Christmas. An absolute giant in his field, Handy set out four crucial characteristics of teams: they are collections of differences; they are not committees; they have a life of their own; and they can become too cosy. He also argued that, in building a team, no one would, for example, put together a football team made up of 11 goalkeepers (however good Matz Sels of Nottingham Forest is). Organisations and teams within them must, he thought, be made up of people with different skills that combine in a harmonious and productive way. Thus, in terms of problem solving, creativity and innovation in the workplace, the evidence of successful companies is that they often result from the work of mixed-disciplinary teams. Don’t forget, there is a RICS mandatory competence that addresses Diversity, Inclusion and Teamwork, covering “how team members interact, their behaviour and communication” and “how to build a diverse and inclusive team and the resulting benefits for both the individual and the team”. Past table tennis champion, now journalist and writer Matthew Syed was one of Sir Gareth Southgate’s non-football advisers in his approach to managing the England football team. In his 2021 book Rebel Ideas, Syed explored the added value of teams that are drawn from cognitively different people, which helps them avoid falling foul of “group think”: ie safe, “it works so we don’t have to change or do things differently” type of thinking. A much earlier study by Meredith Belbin in the 1970s, which has nevertheless stood the test of time, identified eight key roles for successful business based teams. These are: chair, company worker, shaper, plant, resource investigator, monitor evaluator, team worker and finisher. Only when a team has an appropriate balance of these roles performed by the most appropriate people can it deploy itself to the best advantage. Belbin suggested that each member might also have a secondary role (students, take note). These would be called on if others were unable to act in the role allocated. It is important to remember that a balanced successful team needs all eight roles represented and it is emphasised that no one role is superior or inferior to another. If anyone has watched the comedy-drama television series The Bear, about a restaurant in Chicago, all staff in the kitchen are referred as “chef”, no matter what cooking role they undertake, including the head and sous chef. The role of leaders in teamwork The role of leaders may often be crucial in making things happen. They may also take on differing roles depending on a whole host of factors, eg the maturity of a team, the complexity of goals, the geography and discipline base of a team, timescales and team size. A useful conceptual framework for a leader’s role in teamwork was set out by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard in 1993, in terms of “defining”, “involving”, “clarifying” and “empowering”. Defining: the leader being in charge and defining strategically what has got to be done, by when and why. Involving: the leader getting practically involved with tasks in a very active hands-on sense. Clarifying: the leader further supporting, explaining and making clear the what, who and how. Empowering: the leader is confident that the team can look after a task on their own and make their own more tactical decisions. The leader can then monitor and encourage progress more strategically. Whatever happens, and whatever the role, a team leader must try to ensure a real and effective balance and harmony between the team, the individuals within it and the tasks to be completed. On this, try watching the football comedy drama Ted Lasso, the titular manager embodying the belief that, with the right approach, things can get better. It is important to underline that team building is a process, not an event, and things need working at, together. It needs effort, patience, trust, a willingness to embrace difference, turning up, and giving real support to each other. In the words of an African proverb: “If you want to fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” Belbin’s eight team roles Chair Clarifies group’s objectives Sets group’s priorities Co-ordinates and motivates Dominates Good communicator Company worker A practical organiser Turns ideas into manageable tasks Strong character and disciplined Not easily discouraged Likes stable structures Shaper Unites team efforts Full of nervous energy Impulsive, impatient and easily frustrated Intolerant of vagueness Plant An ideas person Very imaginative Very creative Lacks attention to detail Resource investigator Enthusiastic relaxed, sociable and gregarious Goes outside of the group and brings back information, ideas and developments Can lose interest quickly Monitor evaluator Assimilates and evaluates large amounts of information Analyses and criticises actions Keeps team focused on objectives Can lack warmth Team worker People person and a good listener Sensitive to individuals’ needs and worries Counterbalances any friction between shaper and plant Manages conflict Finisher Checks details and maintains urgency Worries about what might go wrong Can be intolerant of casual team members May get over concerned about detail Image © iStock Paul Collins is Mainly for Students editor and a lecturer at Nottingham Trent University