D. André Dhondt wrote:
> George wrote:
>> Just because they're storming, it doesn't mean they'll proceed to norming
>
> I agree. Apparently only 6% of teams are currently in a performing status (
>
http://www.stevedenning.com/High-Performance-Teams/creating-high-performance-tea\
ms.aspx
> ).
>
> Still, I don't see how this detracts from Tuckman's model. On a cursory
> analysis, I see a lot of similarities between Tuckman's model and the
> Drexler-Sibbet model, but I suppose that breaking out Forming into
> Orientation and Goal Clarification, then Storming into and Commitment and
> Trust, etc., helps clarify how to direct a team through the phases. Is
> there something else about Drexler-Sibbler that is significant for you?
>
> In a larger sense, do you think I'm off-base in asserting the following?
>
> You can't do effective teamwork without a team that has at least reached the
> norming (Tuckman) / implementing (Drexler-Sibbler) phase.

I don't think you're off-base with that assertion.

My difficulty with the Tuckman model is that, as a team facilitator, I
find little guidance in to to help me help the team reach the
norming/implementing stage. (And I've read Bruce Tuckman's
Developmental Sequence in Small Groups.)

I get more such guidance looking at the picture
(http://hp-strategies.com/images/tpm.jpg) of the Drexler-Sibbet TPM.
There are clues as to what you might see if the questions of a stage are
resolved or unresolved. You can also work backwards from your
observations to make inferences about the completeness of the stages.

This is an example of how Drexler-Sibbet provides me with more analysis
and thinking tools than does Tuckman. And I've barely scratched the
surface with Drexler-Sibbet.

- George

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------