John:
Much to agree with in your 3 notes. The social overhead in this model can
be consciously managed so that the stages leading up to successful and
measureable performance are quite lean.
In point #2, the words "well-designed process" and "buttress" imply for me
that there is a groundwork laid over which teams move forward. Iterations
of the Tuckman model, improved within any organization dedicated to
continous improvement, shorten the period of time up front taken with the
"soft stuff", so that quicker, positive reaction to the "hard stuff"
(data) becomes common.
One of the positive aspects of the application of Tuckman's initial model,
as you certainly know, is that in an interative improvement process
employees become more "agile". This benefits the customer in quicker,
more productive ways.
It's so interesting how models can fall prey to a "snapshot" mentality:
we think of them as static models applied to an initial and unchanging
"first cause" situation. Actually, some models are best, are they not,
when they can be applied to a broad range of starting behaviors in team
work; and then these models themselves undergo synthesis as a result of
environmental changes in an organization.
Thanks for your observations.
Best regards and a Happy New Year to you, John,
Barry
-- Barry Mallis bmallis@markem.com