BUS272 TB

216 Part 2 Striving for Performance
Phase 1
As both a team member and possibly a team leader, it’s important that you recognize
that the first meeting sets the team’s direction. A framework of behavioural patterns and
assumptions through which the team will approach its project emerges, sometimes in
the first few seconds of the team’s life.
Once set, the team’s direction becomes “written in stone” and is unlikely to be
re-examined throughout the first half of the team’s life. This is a period of inertia—that
is, the team tends to stand still or become locked into a fixed course of action. Even if
it gains new insights that challenge initial patterns and assumptions, the team is incapable
of acting on these new insights in Phase 1. You may recognize that in some teams,
during the early period of trying to get things accomplished, no one really did his or her
assigned tasks. You may also recognize this phase as one where everyone carries out the
tasks, but not in a very coordinated fashion. Thus, the team is performing at a relatively
low state. This does not necessarily mean that it’s doing nothing at all, however.
Phase 2
One of the more interesting discoveries made in work team studies was that teams
experienced their transition precisely halfway between the first meeting and the official
deadline, whether members spent an hour on their project or six months. 46 The
similarity occurred despite the fact that some teams spent as little as an hour on their
project, while others spent six months. The midpoint appears to work like an alarm
clock, heightening members’ awareness that their time is limited and that they need to
“get moving.” When you work on your next team project, you might want to examine
when your team starts to “get moving.”
This transition ends Phase 1 and is characterized by a concentrated burst of changes,
dropping of old patterns, and adoption of new perspectives. The transition sets a revised
direction for Phase 2, which is a new equilibrium or period of inertia. In this phase,
the team executes plans created during the transition period. The team’s last meeting is
characterized by a final burst of activity to finish its work. There have been a number
of studies that support the basic premise of punctuated equilibrium, though not all of
them found that the transition in the team occurred exactly at the midpoint. 47
Applying the Punctuated-Equilibrium Model
We can use this model to describe typical experiences of student teams created for doing
group term projects. At the first meeting, a basic timetable is established. Members size
up one another. They agree they have nine weeks to do their project. The instructor’s
requirements are discussed and debated. From that point, the group meets regularly to
carry out its activities. About four or five weeks into the project, however, problems are
confronted. Criticism begins to be taken seriously. Discussion becomes more open. The
group reassesses where it has been and aggressively moves to make necessary changes. If
the right changes are made, the next four or five weeks find the group developing a firstrate
project. The group’s last meeting, which will probably occur just before the project is
due, lasts longer than the others. In it, all final issues are discussed and details resolved.
In summary, the punctuated-equilibrium model characterizes deadline-oriented
teams as exhibiting long periods of inertia, interspersed with brief revolutionary changes
triggered primarily by their members’ awareness of time and deadlines. To use the
terminology of the five-stage model, the team begins by combining the forming and
norming stages, then goes through a period of low performing , followed by storming , then
a period of high performing , and, finally, adjourning .
Several researchers have suggested that the five-stage and punctuated-equilibrium
models are at odds with each other. 48 However, it makes more sense to view the models
as complementary: The five-stage model considers the interpersonal process of the
group, while the punctuated-equilibrium model considers the time challenges that the
group faces. 49