A Framework for Safe Storming

Of the stages of Tuckman's development sequence for small groups, Storming is probably the least suitable for resolving problems. The atmosphere just isn't yet conducive to creative collaboration. More important, though, is that some group members don't yet see themselves as sharing the benefits of having the group find solutions to its problems. [Tuckman 1965] [Tuckman & Jensen 1977] Indeed, some group members can't even agree about what the problems are. Storming is instead a stage for discovering and acknowledging disagreements about problems — for registering objections and expressing disagreement.

And that's a difficult situation to accept. Most of us want to get on with problem solving. We've been taught that solving is progress, and that debating priorities or problem definitions is less than progress. But long experience teaches us that developing consensus about a clean, elegant problem statement is a wise investment. Maybe the wisest. For a brief review of Tuckman and Jensen's model, see "Tuckman's Model and Joint Leadership Teams," Point Lookout for January 18, 2023.

Examples of focal points for the Storming stage

A group has done well if it can convince its members that Storming is a time for airing objections, frustrations, concerns, and troubles. With that in mind, here are ten examples of topics to work on in the stage we call Storming. A word of caution, though: addressing some of these topics might require a level of psychological safety that isn't yet available in your organization.

Assessing the degree of psychological safety

We can restate the objective of a Storming stage simply: Uncover the nasty truths. The extent to which this objective is attainable depends on the willingness of group members to speak freely, without fear or favor. And that depends on their sense of psychological safety. There are ways to assess the level of psychological safety using anonymous polling. Knowing how safe the group feels at the outset can help you focus attention where it's needed. For more, see "Contrary Indicators of Psychological Safety: I," Point Lookout for December 13, 2023.

Training for participating in a Storming stage

Educate group members as to the benefits of the Storming stage of small group development. The main benefit of the Storming stage is its ability to encourage disclosure of beliefs, biases, agendas, and practices that might threaten the effectiveness of the collaboration — either professionally or personally. For example, Storming is the stage in which we register our discomfort with the group's inability to conduct civil, respectful debate. When the time comes to debate matters of substance, we don't want to be debating how to debate.

Identifying candidates for group leadership

Some group members have ambitions to become effective leaders; some have the leader's talent and skills; and some have the leader's disposition. Trouble comes when ambitions, talent, skills, and disposition do not all reside in the same person. In Storming we can assess the ambitions, talent, skills, and dispositions of all members. We can then determine how to begin aligning them.

Creating and training Curmudgeon Teams

Long experience teaches us that
developing consensus about a clean,
elegant problem statement is a wise
investment. Maybe the wisest.

The Curmudgeon Team is a subgroup of a larger team. Their job is to strengthen the team's conclusions and results by raising thorny issues that cause the team to examine the path it's about to take, so it can possibly make adjustments. In this way the Curmudgeon Team helps the group avoid dead ends and disasters. More

Identifying feuds

Organizational feuds differ from more typical conflict in three ways: (a) the feuding partners repeatedly engage in intense, personal attacks, usually out of all proportion to the issues of the moment; (b) even though the issues of the moment might vary from incident to incident, the feuding partners almost always sort out along the same dividing lines, because the issue of the moment isn't the real issue, which is a matter so highly charged that the feuding partners dare not discuss it openly; and (c) agreement on any issue whatsoever is rare. Feud lifetimes of months or years are typical. Because the issue of the moment isn't the real issue, feuds cannot be resolved in the context of any issue the feuding partners are willing to discuss openly. More

Identifying feuds-by-proxy

A feud-by-proxy within a group is a feud in which at least one of the principal feuding partners is absent. Absentees are represented by proxies. Because one of the principals is absent, there is no hope of resolving a feud-by-proxy in the group Storming context. All that can be done for the moment is to recognize the problem (tacitly) and determine the extent of its effects. Possibly the group will need to redesign its task activity around the feud. More

Identifying bullying behavior

Workplace bullying is any aggressive behavior, associated with work, and primarily intended to cause physical or psychological harm to others. It creates risk for organizations in several ways, the most costly of which occurs when bullies coerce people into committing to produce what they cannot produce with the resources and time available. In the Storming stage we have opportunities to identify bullying, bullying-by-proxy, and bullying-by-proxy on behalf of an absentee. This last form is the most insidious. If bullying in any form is afoot, all commitments must be considered questionable. An anonymous poll is a good first step toward assessing the risk that bullying might have produced impossible commitments. More

Conducting premortems

Premortems are simulated retrospective examinations of future events, conducted as if those future events had already occurred. [Klein 2007] By combining the benefits of psychological safety with a shift in temporal perspective, premortems offer advantages for planners, because they can expose risks that might otherwise go unacknowledged. For more, see "Premortems," Point Lookout for March 23, 2022.

Developing a statement of task goals

A statement of task goals consists of two parts. First is a collection of descriptions of candidate goals, unranked as to priority or feasibility. Second, for each description, the statement includes the coordinates of the candidate goal in terms of the Eisenhower Matrix (Urgency by Importance), on a scale of 0 to 9 for each of the two coordinates. [Eisenhower 1954] If the group cannot agree on the description of one of the goals, the statement of task goals includes multiple competing descriptions. If the group cannot agree on the coordinates of one of the goals, multiple competing coordinate pairs are included. In this way, everyone feels heard and the disagreements are all made clear.

Identifying indirectly obstructive behavior

Indirectly obstructive behavior prevents the group from making progress toward Norming. Because these behaviors are indirect, they're deniable, which makes for difficulty addressing them. To identify a behavior is to describe it. To attribute a behavior is to name the person who exhibited that behavior. The former is helpful to anyone intent on helping the group come together and make progress toward Norming. The latter is helpful to anyone intent on blaming someone for the group's failure to come together and make progress toward Norming. Attribution is unnecessary if the description is clear. Attribution of obstructive behavior is itself obstructive and often toxic. For more, see "Covert Obstruction in Teams: II," Point Lookout for August 31, 2022.

Last words

The items above are merely possibilities for focusing sessions conducted during the Storming stage of a small group. They might work well for your group. But every organizational culture is unique. Another way to use these items is to regard them as examples of what you can do in your group if you were trying to plan sessions that would be more likely to uncover the kinds of frustrations and degrees of disagreement in your group that have caused problems for your group in past efforts. Whatever you uncover during Storming becomes less likely to trip you up during Performing.   First issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Occasionally we have the experience of belonging to a great team. Thrilling as it is, the experience is rare. In part, it's rare because we usually strive only for adequacy, not for greatness. We do this because we don't fully appreciate the returns on greatness. Not only does it feel good to be part of great team — it pays off. Check out my Great Teams Workshop to lead your team onto the path toward greatness. More info

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Conflict Management:

The High Cost of Low Trust: II

Truly paying attention to Trust at work is rare, in part, because we don't fully appreciate what distrust really costs. Here's Part II of a little catalog of how we cope with distrust, and how we pay for it.

Stonewalling: I

Stonewalling is a tactic of obstruction used by those who wish to stall the forward progress of some effort. Whether the effort is a rival project, an investigation, or just the work of a colleague, the stonewaller hopes to gain advantage. What can you do about stonewalling?

Managing Non-Content Risks: II

When we manage risk, we usually focus on those risks most closely associated with the tasks at hand — content risks. But there are other risks, to which we pay less attention. Many of these are outside our awareness. Here's Part II of an exploration of these non-content risks, emphasizing those that relate to organizational politics.

Surviving Incompetence: I

When your organization decides to undertake an effort that will certainly fail, you have options. Continuing to oppose the decision probably isn't one of them. How can you respond to this incompetence and emerge with your career intact?

Additive bias…or Not: II

Additive bias is a cognitive bias that many believe contributes to bloat of commercial products. When we change products to make them more capable, additive bias might not play a role, because economic considerations sometimes favor additive approaches.

See also Conflict Management and Conflict Management for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info