Stages of Team Development
Most materials discuss the four primary distinct phases of team development. These phases include forming, storming, norming and performing (McDonald, 2005). Looking further into the stages it becomes clear that teams progress through these four stages possibly multiple times (Holpp, 1999), before entering a fifth stage which is referred to as adjourning (Scott, 2005). Analyzing the progress of an actual team it is clear the team progresses through all of these stages through the course of it’s existence.
The Team
Limited Brands is a large organization with many teams. Over the course of seven years, the Limited Brands‘s Victoria’s Secret eCommerce development team progressed through many iterations of the stages of team development. The team formed in the late 1990’s as a small group of individuals focused on developing a website for the predominantly catalog based organization. This loose team had no strict governance or guidance. In the early 2000’s the site had been established as a leader in internet commerce. The team was in the spotlight within the organization as the business shifted toward digital commerce. New members were added, new skills were learned and the team grew and reformed. Around 2005 the organization began to restructure, separating the traditional clothing side of Limited Brands from the Intimates and Fragrances. Leadership saw a new vision for the ecommerce division. This new vision positioned the Intimates division as a center for not only multi-brand commerce but also as a service for other companies looking to sell online. At this point leadership sought out high end vendors to create a new site architecture and ecommerce platform that would supplant the existing one. The plans for the new site were not widely known. Within the original team however word got around as team members began to consult on the new platform. Slowly members of the original team were moved to the new platform or left the company. The result was a skeleton crew left maintaining the original site.
The stages
This team represents a typical case, common in many organizations where teams are built for a project then dismantled once the project has been completed. The journey these teams progress through is also similar across organizations. Understand the stages and the needs of each stage enables leaders to position their teams for success.
Forming
In the forming stage the team is founded and members tend to share an optimistic view (McDonald, 2005). There is seldom conflict as the group looks to see who fits where. Leaders can facilitate progress through this stage by clarifying the objective of the team, soliciting strengths and weaknesses, identifying roles and defining conflict resolution systems (McDonald, 2005).
The development team at Victoria’s Secret progressed through this phase similar to most organizations. The group came together with a clear focus, create an ecommerce website. The team also waited for roles and responsibilities to be resolved. Over time team member skills began to surface and the team began to organize.
Storming
The storming phase is often one of the most critical phases for a team. It is at this stage that the team begins to understand the true scope of the tasks at hand as well as the nature of the various team members. While this phase is typically credited as one that exhibits personality clashes, and team conflict (McDonald, 2005), more commonly these elements are not readily visible. Frequently the storming phase is hidden in civility and expressed through sarcasm and innuendo (Scott, 2005). Professionals are trained to be polite and civil to each other. It is important to note however that if the team progresses through this phase without resolving differences there may be long lasting liabilities for the team and project (Scott, 2005). This is the phase where the team really learns how to work together. The storming phase results from team members trusting each other enough to say what they honestly feel regardless of the risks (Patnode, 2003). The storming process improves ideas, challenges assumptions and obstacles (Patnode, 2003). While this phase is typically the most uncomfortable it is also the most important and should be encouraged rather than quickly passed over.
The development team experienced many episodes of storming over the project lifecycle. After the initial forming stages as well as after new members joined the team, eventually personalities would reset and voices would be heard. These conflicts were productive and ranged from meeting attendance to application design principles. This team understood the storming phase well.
Norming
Finally in the norming stage, the team begins to work together. Fighting and bickering reduces (Scott, 2005) while communication becomes open and honest (McDonald, 2005). At this point leaders should focus on progress and encouragement. Managers should celebrate progress but continue to foster communication (McDonald, 2005).
Looking at the Victoria’s Secret development team there is evidence of multiple norming stages coupled to each storming phase. Through this phase management did in fact continue to encourage communication and worked to improve the team even more.
Performing
Here in the performing stage, clear stable structures appear and the team is able to work toward a shared goal (Scott, 2005). At this point the team works with a high degree of mutual support and respect (McDonald, 2005). Leaders at this stage may feel 
a sense of relief and may be tempted to relax, however there are still activities that will promote continued success in the team. Leaders should work to celebrate the teams successes, recognize the achievements an continue to challenge the team (McDonald, 2005). In most long lasting projects and teams, the progress through these phases tends to be more cyclical where teams slip back into previous stages (Holpp, 1999), managers should be mindful in this stage to watch for team regression to a previous stage (McDonald, 2005).
The development at Victoria’s Secret was no different than those in other organizations. The performing stage was clearly recognizable as the team gelled and produced many successes. Leadership was always ready with praise and additional challenges.
Adjourning
Often neglected in texts is the adjourning stage. The adjourning stage is when the team disbands and the project is ended (Scott, 2005). Many projects end and teams disband with little to no intervention by management. Team members are sent to other teams where their accomplishments and hard work may not be recognized. Management needs to take time and care to integrate these displaced members into the organization. These stars can fade if not transplanted with care.
Thus was the case in Limited Brands. The organization had placed the majority of the attention on the new project yet left the existing team with no means. Team members were left to find their own way to new teams in the organization, while others simply left the company. The adjourning stage of the process can be the most risky. Organizations spend lots of time and money training and building individuals talent and knowledge into business critical assets. Poor execution in the adjourning phase can have significant effects on these investments.
Conclusion
While teams and organizations all will differ, there are core aspects that are universal. These phases of team development are critical to the success of all teams. Individuals in leadership or on the front lines can impact a team’s development and performance by taking these stages into account. Planning for and encouraging the various stages of team development will lead to high performing teams and organizations.
References
Holpp, L. (1999). Managing Teams. New York: McGraw-Hill.
McDonald, T. (2005, Nov). Building an Effective Team. Health Care Registration: The Newsletter for Health Care Registration Professionals , Vol. 15 (Issue 2), pp. p3-4.
Patnode, N. H. (2003, Mar/Apr). Can’t Get To Performing Without Storming. Program Manager , Vol. 32 (Issue 2), p. p42.
Scott, J. T. (2005). Chapter 10: Managing Teams and Work Groups. Concise Handbook of Management: A Practitioner’s Approach , p79-84.
