Phase 3: Normalization ( Norming )

[ayeshshiddika11]

Phase 1 : Forming
At this stage, of initiation or immaturity, the objectives are usually not entirely clear. No one dares to oppose ideas. There is fear on the part of the group, which depends largely on its leader to overcome this lack of knowledge.

Phase 2: Confrontation / conflict ( Storming )
This phase is one of orientation or fragmentation. Objectives become clearer, but with divergences. There is no agreement with the person who is leading and each person wants to impose their ideas, forming subgroups that fight for power and come into conflict. There is hardly any sense of belonging, motivation declines and frustration appears.

This is the stage in which group cohesion is strengthened. Objectives and roles are clarified, problems are resolved by consensus, and group competence increases. The team's cohesion increases, and each member likes to belong to it and identifies with it.

Phase 4: Performance
In this integration phase, the team functions effectively and efficiently. Problems are solved and constructive efforts to finish the job appear. Energy is directed toward effective work.

Phase 5: Termination/Dissolution ( Adjourning )
At this stage, the group considers its dissolution. Its members can undertake new tasks or projects, feeling good about what they have achieved.



Leadership
Whenever there is a group, leadership singapore phone data appears. Often, the leader is someone imposed by the position, but this does not imply leadership. “Leading is having the ability to influence people in order to achieve a common goal” (Acosta, 2017). This does not reside so much in what is done as in the way of doing it: directing emotions in a positive direction, with optimism and enthusiasm (resonance).

You can manage without leading, but leadership without direction is unsustainable. Management “brings down to earth” the ideas and aspirations of leadership. The main differences between the two are reflected in the following table (Guilera, 2016):

People who run: People who lead:
They control when something should be done, how it should be done, and how much it will cost. They define what needs to be done and why.
They guide the day-to-day, seeking results and efficiency. They are interested above all in the long term.
They prefer a stable and predictable context. They prefer flexibility and innovation to stability and control.
They have the ability to solve problems. They have divergent thinking and creativity.
They base their decisions on rigorous data analysis and diagnostics. They base their decisions on intuition and vision.
They calculate the risks assumed. They take calculated risks.
They take advantage of opportunities and alliances within the organization. They seek external opportunities and alliances.
They satisfy their superiors. They motivate in an individualized way.
They reward or punish. They are natural motivators.


There are several types of leadership, with very diverse classifications, depending on different authors. None of them is better or worse, but there are types of leadership that are more or less appropriate depending on the circumstances; in addition, the person who leads must adapt to the conditions of his or her collaborators (situational leadership). In this table you can see one of these classifications of the types of leadership (Acosta, 2017):

Leadership styles and their consequences on the work team