Content uploaded by Alex Jones
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alex Jones on Aug 15, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/index.asp 23 editor@iaeme.com
Journal of Management (JOM)
Volume 6, Issue 4, July– August 2019, pp. 23–28, Article ID: JOM_06_04_005
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/issues.asp?JType=JOM&VType=6&IType=4
Journal Impact Factor (2019): 5.3165 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com
ISSN Print: 2347-3940 and ISSN Online: 2347-3959
© IAEME Publication
THE TUCKMAN’S MODEL IMPLEMENTATION,
EFFECT, AND ANALYSIS & THE NEW
DEVELOPMENT OF JONES LSI MODEL ON A
SMALL GROUP
Dr. Alex Jones
Professor of Leadership, College of Business Administration
American University in the Emirates (AUE)
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a practical overview of the implementation of Tuckman model
created by Bruce W. Tuckman in 1965 and revised by Tuckman and Mary Ann
Conover Jensen in 1977. The model reflects the stages of forming, storming, norming,
performing, and adjourning on group dynamics on a small group of graduate students
studying business major at the American University in the Emirates. The stages reflect
the impact of the model while students conducting a negotiation role-play in a class
setting composed of young leaders. The findings reflect the practicality of such a
model to academia and practitioners in the workplace. The outcome of this study has
revealed a new Jones LSI model that has a significant value to organizations facing
the increasing today’s challenges.
Keywords: Tuckman Model, Jones LSI model, Groups, Negotiation
Cite this Article: Dr. Alex Jones, The Tuckman’s Model Implementation, Effect, and
Analysis & the New Development of Jones LSI Model on a Small Group. Journal of
Management, 6(4), 2019, pp. 23-28.
http://www.iaeme.com/jom/issues.asp?JType=JOM&VType=6&IType=4
1. INTRODUCTION
The complexity of our world today is increasing. Organizations are going through lots of
changes. Some of which are transactional and others are transformational. The structure of
organizations varies from one to another. Regardless of such the use of a certain model can
impact the process of implementation to certain extents. Therefore, a use of a specific model
can play a major role in the organization of such tasks.
The Tuckman’s Model has become one of the most influential and well recognized. It was
first published in the year of 1965 and has become the most predominantly referred to and
most widely recognized in organizational literature (Miller 2003). The focus of it was on
group work, collaborative efforts among group members, and group development process.
Dr. Alex Jones
http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/index.asp 24 editor@iaeme.com
This was established essentially through the four stages of forming, storming, norming, and
performing where the fifth was added as a result of research development in the field
(Bonebright, 2010).
The research in this article was conducted on small group of graduate students studying
business major at the college of business administration at the American University in the
Emirates. The focus of this study was to explore the implementation and effect of the
Tuckman’s Model on a small group.
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The study of group dynamics has become the attention of scholars and practitioners.
Organizations across the world has become interested in the development of groups.
Therefore, there was a need to develop a model that can study groups and team dynamics.
There are plethora of resources in the literature talked about groups and group
development. One of the most cited across was the Tuckman’s model. Most popular was the
Tuckman (1965) and Tuckman and Jensen (1977). The research of google scholars has shown
over 20 thousands sources referencing the model between the year of 2015 and 2019 at the
time of conducting this research.
The model itself was described as a mean describing and studying groups, group
dynamics and teams (Rickards & Moger, 2000). The focus of the model is on group
development. It is widely used by educators and practitioners in training programs and group
analysis across organizations (Cassidy, 2007). It was a result of a therapy program from a
meta-analysis study conducted on 50 studies of group development research of sequential
development therapy groups (Tuckman, 1965; Cassidy, 2007).
In the year of 1969, there were data collected from groups of 174 meetings and 12 poverty
programs in Topeka, Kansas over a period of nineteen months resulted of seven stages of
development (1) orientation, (2) catharsis, (3) focus, (4) action, (5) limbo, (6) testing, and (7)
purposive (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). It was suggested later that Tuckman reduce it to four
stages (Zurcher, 1969).
The result of a thorough literature review concluded with a proposed model that focused
on two dimensions: group development which included the dimension of 1) testing and
dependence, (2) intragroup conflict, (3) development of group cohesion, and (4) functional
role relatedness, and task activity which included the dimensions of (1) orientation to task, (2)
emotional response to task demands, (3) open exchange of relevant interpretations, and (4)
emergence of solutions. It was later summarized as “forming,” “storming,” “norming,” and
“performing,” and a fifth stage “adjourning” was added later as a result of research
development (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).
3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The aim of this study was to answer the following questions:
1. How can the Tuckman Model be implemented in a class setting?
2. What are the implications of it on students on micro scale small groups?
3. Would it be possible to develop a new model out of this study?
4. RESEARCH METHOD
Data was collected on small group of graduate students studying a negotiation course at the
college of business administration at the American university in the Emirates. Participants’
age group ranged from 20 – 35 years old composed of a mixture of males and females. The
sample size was relatively small and there was totally of 25 students composed of 17 males
The Tuckman’s Model Implementation, Effect, and Analysis & the New Development of Jones
LSI Model on a Small Group
http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/index.asp 25 editor@iaeme.com
and 8 females. The highest percentage was Emirati students and the rest from different parts
of the Middle East region. This study was sufficient with the demographics provided and no
other information was required at the time of this study.
Participants in class were divided into small groups. Total number of groups was 5 and
each group was composed of 5 participants. There was no specific instruction given to form a
mixed group of females or males. Participants rather were given the liberty to choose their
own members of the group.
Students were asked to perform a negotiation role-play simulation adopted from (Lewicki,
Barry, & Saunders, 2015). The title of the simulation is called The Used Car. Participants
were asked to negotiate selling/purchasing a used car and were given 30 minutes for
completion of a task. The description of the car is as follows: 2011 Volkswagen Jetta S sedan,
2.5L five-cylinder engine, automatic transmission, power steering, air conditioning, front-
wheel drive, dual air bags, cruise control. Black with gray interior, power door locks, heated
seats, power windows, and AM/FM/CD stereo. Mileage: 51,000 miles; radial tires expected to
last another 30,000 miles. Fuel economy: 24 mpg city, 31 mpg highway; uses regular (87
octane) gasoline. No rust; dent on passenger door barely noticeable. Mechanically perfect
except exhaust system, which may or may not last another 10,000 miles (costs $650 to
replace). Blue book values: retail, $12,100; trade-in, $9,850; private party, $10,500. Car has
been locally owned and driven by one owner (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2015). Both
buyers and sellers live in the same city.
5. OVERVIEW OF THE MODEL
Tuckman Model is a development model created in 1965 by Bruce W. Tuckman and modified
in 1977 in collaborative efforts of Tuckman and Mary Ann Conover Jensen. The new model
is referred to as Tuckman and Jensen of 1977 revised model of small group development
(Bonebright, 2010). The original model started with four stages: forming, storming, norming
and performing. The fifth stage was added in the revised model: adjourning. The overall focus
of the model is on group functioning within two dimensions: interpersonal relationships and
task activity (Bonebright, 2010). The model was described as “to be used to describe
developing groups for the next 20 years” (Tuckman 1984, 14).
6. ANALYSIS OF THE MODEL
6.1. Forming
The first stage of the model is forming. During this stage participants try to form their own
group choosing their own members into 5 members in each group in this research paper. The
number of participants in each group can vary depends on overall size of the participated
group. This gives students a freedom of choice. It also encourages them to socialize with each
other, getting to know one another, and introduce themselves to new members in the class
they have not met previously. The forming is the initial and important stage in this model.
This is simply because it can lead to create a success and harmony among team members or
leads to the other direction of failure to achieve the desired outcome of the negotiation.
Therefore, a great emphasis should be giving to this stage assuring participants that they are
about to have fun while learning something new that can help them in their practical side of
life. In this stage participants will experience a great deal of dependence through experiencing
a task that has a value to their learning process. This stage develops participants’ interpersonal
skills, measures their behaviors, and enables their leadership skills.
Dr. Alex Jones
http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/index.asp 26 editor@iaeme.com
6.2. Storming
This is the second stage of the model. During this stage participants will experience the agent
of change of experiencing something new. This is due to the nature and complexity of the
task. In this case, the negotiation case study plays the role of the agent of change due to the
nature of it based on the description provided. The storming part happens in this stage is
associated with emotions and behavior and conflict might arise as a result of such. This is
simply because at first students trying to familiarize themselves with each other. That’s what
we refer to as self-understanding. Second, students try to figure out how to work with each
other and work with the case. That’s what we refer to as self-skill abilities. Third, students
might come to agreement and mostly disagreement. That’s what we refer to as the
experienced agent of self-change. Here where the storming happens finding group members
resisting each other. In this case, it can also be a process of stimulating their intellectuality.
Tuckman (1965) stated that ‘group members become hostile toward one another and toward a
therapist or trainer as a means of expressing their individuality and resisting the formation of
group structure’.
6.3. Norming
This is the third stage of the model. This is where group members find ways to create
harmony among each other. At this stage, group members try to accept each other’s opinions
and suggestions. The agent of time limitations plays a major role in this part. This is where
you find a member of the group jumps out of nowhere and settles any issues happening
among each other reminding them that time is passing by and a solution should be presented.
That’s where we notice the best effective ways to work with each, coming up with the best
strategies and seal the deal of the case negotiated. There is less conflict happening in this
stage and more mind streamlining of thoughts and ideas. That’s where cohesion and harmony
prevails.
6.4. Performing
This is the fourth stage of the model. In this stage group members start the actual act of
negotiation trying to come up with the win-win situation. The actual work of implementation
happens in this stage. It is referred to as ‘functional role relatedness’ (Tuckman 1965). This is
where participants get energized supporting each other trying to win and seal the deal. You
would find interaction among participants in this stage is infused with actions and positivity.
Group members tend to bend the roles during this stage for the benefit of all. The focus of all
is channeled towards achieving the ultimate desired goal with the involvement and
participation of all. However, you would find that participants assign one or two members in
the group to negotiate on behalf of the group supported by all group members. That’s where
you find the whole group acting as problem solvers and wear their negotiation hats. That’s
because a robust structure was established in place based on putting personal benefits aside
and success of the whole is the main goal. This is the stage of functionality, flexibility and
performance.
6.5. Adjourning
This is a developed stage in the new Tuckman model of 1977. It is the fifth stage of the
model. The focus of this stage is on the development of the team. Although you would find
the usability of such a stage is less on a class level, but quite popular in an organizational
level. This is where things are taken into the next stage after achieving the desired goals and
objectives of the allocated task to the group. This is pretty much in use during restructuring in
organizations. During this stage it is highly recommended celebrating the success of groups
The Tuckman’s Model Implementation, Effect, and Analysis & the New Development of Jones
LSI Model on a Small Group
http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/index.asp 27 editor@iaeme.com
for their accomplishments, perseverance and hard work. That’s where you make the group
feel that they have achieved the overall success. In this scenario, celebrating the group
negotiation would give a boost of confidence to the group. This, in turn, makes them even
more motivated to negotiate another deal. It, sometimes, referred to as a mourning stage. This
is simply because there is a lot of insecurity and ambiguity associated with the finishing of the
task. Therefore, a transition plan is recommended during this stage to give sense of security
and assurance to group members of the next stage. That, in turn, may reduce the sense of
insecurity and ambiguity that might arise from this stage.
Figure 1 Tuckman and Jensen (1977) revised model of small group development.
7. CONCLUSION
The answers to the proposed questions in this study were discovered. The three questions
were 1) how can the Tuckman Model be implemented in a class setting?, 2) what are the
implications of it on students on micro scale small groups?, and 3) would it be possible to
develop a new model out of this study? It was found that the Tuckman Model can be
implemented in a class setting with the stages except the last stage, adjourning, that might not
be applicable in a negotiation role-play setting when conducted in class. However, it is highly
relevant to corporate level and its implication can add a significant value when implemented.
The implication that was found from the use of this model is that it is a great aid in
monitoring student progress, skills, behavior, emotions, flexibility, adaptability and
adjustability to different circumstances, different interaction with different cultures, and
different case scenarios. It is, on a micro level, a tool to observe student’s behavior, problem
solving skills, critical thinking skills, management skills, and leadership attributes.
On a practical side, the analysis of this model come with a proposed new Jones LSI model
that could be much more efficient when used on a smaller scale students or employees. The
new model can be the new phase of group development of this century and the next era. The
proposed new model depicted in the following:
Figure 2 Jones LSI Model.
The new proposed model based on three essential elements: leading (L), structuring (S)
and implementing (I). The beginning part of the simulation starts with the leading. The
leading part includes preparing students to the negotiation case. The orientation part with
introduction to the case is happening during this stage. The leader of the activity, during this
stage, is setting a goal to the group and time frame for accomplishing the task. The focus on
this stage is on two dimensions: goals, tasks and time frame. The second part of this stage is
the structuring. During this stage groups are formed randomly or by choice. This stage
involves getting to know each other through proper introduction and socializing. It can act as
Forming Storming Norming Perfroming Adjourning
Leading Structuring Implementing
Dr. Alex Jones
http://www.iaeme.com/JOM/index.asp 28 editor@iaeme.com
a factor of developing social skills of individuals of the same group interacting with each
other as well as with other groups. The third part is the implementing stage. During this part,
the actual implementation is happening. There are some challenges faced during this stage.
Some of the most popular ones are conflicts among team, resistance to change, different
opinions, different points of views, different perspectives, clash of thinking and point of
views, emotional attitude, and change in behavior. Therefore, the first stage can eliminate
most of these challenges through proper timely orientation taking into consideration that
ample time might be needed to address most issues arise or might arise in the last stage. That
being said setting goals, tasks, and time can play a significant role in speeding up the process
of achievement and reducing conflict among participants.
The Jones LSI model can be implemented on a corporate level. It serves organizations that
are experiencing a status quo where change is almost difficult to achieve. It can also be
implemented on organizations that are experiencing losses in revenues. The model when
implemented strategically and systemically it can create a paradigm shift in positioning
organizations to the next level to even being able to compete on a larger scale from a macro
and micro level. This model requires further testing. The aim of this new model when
implemented is addressing the macro and micro layers in organizations: improving leadership
in organizations, setting clear vision, reducing ambiguity, focusing on strategic thinking,
improve critical thinking skills, problem solving skills, negotiation skills, reducing conflict,
investigate the current structure, evaluate restructuring, and focus on implementation process
achieving the desired mission. The ultimate goal is saving time, money and efforts addressing
the main issues faced in organizations precisely and concisely.
REFERENCES
[1] Bonebright, D. A. (2010). 40 years of storming: a historical review of Tuckman's model of
small group development. Human Resource Development International, 13(1), 111-120.
[2] Cassidy, K. (2007). Tuckman revisited: Proposing a new model of group development for
practitioners.
[3] Lewicki, R., Barry, B. & Saunders, D. M. 2015. Negotiations: Readings, exercises and
cases (5th ed.). NY: McGraw Hill Higher Education.
[4] Miller, D. (2003). The stages of group development: A retrospective study of dynamic
team processes. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 20, no. 2: 121–43.
[5] Rickards, T., and S. Moger. (2000). Creative leadership processes in project team
development: An alternative to Tuckman’s stage model. British Journal of Management
11, no. 4: 273–83.
[6] Tuckman, B.W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin
65, no. 6: 384–99.
[7] Tuckman, B.W., and M.A. Jensen. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited.
Group and Organization Studies 2, no. 4: 419–27.
[8] Tuckman, B.W. (1984). Citation classic: Development sequence in small groups. Current
Concerns 34: 14. Retrieved July 23, 2008, from
http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1984/A1984TD25600001.pdf
[9] Zurcher, L. A., Jr. (1969). Stages of development in poverty program neighborhood action
committees. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 5(2), 223-258.
