The Big Cat Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing A very good friend of mine is presently studying the application of the forming-storming-norming-performing theory of team development and others like it; and I'm curious to see if anyone else here finds it applicable to the development of The Bills in the Jauron era. I know it's the popular trend to flame anything that even HINTS at being pro-DJ, but to my knowledge there has yet to be a post which incorporates this sort of academia in order to evaluate Jauron and progress of the team he has helped assemble. I'm making the effort to apply the current Bills regime to this theory because I think that having the coaches and and the majority of the current players coming to the organization at the same time creates a unique situation, and one which is paramount to the application of this theory. Again, I understand that most of the people who come here are Jauron skeptics, no matter HOW the information is conveyed, but try to read through with an open mind. It's not all pro-Jauron anyways, and in some places the theory does point out his potential short comings. For the sake of this theory, a "team" is defined as the following: A small number of people with complimentary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and a common approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. Stage 1: Forming The team meets and learns about the opportunity and challenges, and then agrees on goals and begins to tackle the tasks. Team members tend to behave quite independently. They may be motivated but are usually relatively uninformed of the issues and objectives of the team. Team members are usually on their best behavior but very focused on themselves. Mature team members begin to model appropriate behavior even at this early phase. Supervisors of the team tend to need to be directive during this phase. The forming stage of any team is important because in this stage the members of the team get to know one another and make new friends. This is also a good opportunity to see how each member of the team works as an individual and how they respond to pressure . During this stage, interaction with other team members is usually positive or "polite." The stage is also marked by feelings or behaviors of excitement, optimism, anticipation, or pride. *Because there is so much going on to distract members' attention in the beginning, the team accomplishes little, if anything, that concerns its projected goals. This is perfectly normal I believe everything mentioned above applies, almost universally, to the 2006 team. One aspect of the team's play- especially the play of the defense- was the heart and motivation each player exerted. Furthermore, one of the praises of Jauron early on was his ability as a "teacher," that he was a good coach to have in place when assembling a young team. That year we had rookies and first-time Bills all over the field- at least one per unit (Whitner, Simpson, Ellison, Pennington, Williams, Royal, Fowler, and to certain extents, Losman and Price), so the idea that they played beyond their abilities can be attributed to this idea of positive, motivated behavior throughout the forming stage. What's really tricky about the different phases is identifying when one ends and when the other begins. Given the lack of continuity brought about by the orgy of injuries in 2007, it's my belief that we stayed in the forming stage through most of 2007, but that certain goings on boosted us into the second, and hardest phase to move beyond: Stage 2: Storming Every group will then enter the storming stage in which different ideas compete for consideration. The team addresses issues such as what problems they are really supposed to solve, how they will function independently and together and what leadership model they will accept. Team members open up to each other and confront each other's ideas and perspectives. In some cases storming can be resolved quickly. In others, the team never leaves this stage. The maturity of some team members usually determines whether the team will ever move out of this stage. Some team members will focus on minutiae to evade real issues. The storming stage is necessary to the growth of the team. It can be contentious, unpleasant and even painful to members of the team who are averse to conflict. Tolerance of each team member and their differences needs to be emphasized. Without tolerance and patience the team will fail. This phase can become destructive to the team and will lower motivation if allowed to get out of control. Supervisors of the team during this phase may be more accessible but tend to still need to be directive in their guidance of decision-making and professional behavior. The Storming stage spawns behaviors of resisting quality improvement approaches suggested by other members, sharp fluctuations in attitude about the team and the project's chance of success, defensiveness, competition, and choosing sides, questioning the wisdom of those selected and appointed by the other members of the team, establishing unrealistic goals, increased tension, and jealousy. Here is where the application to the Jauron regime ends, because it's quite clear that we're knee deep in the 'storming' stage. What's nice is that we're not the kind of team with a sharply divisive locker room, in fact, one would argue quite the opposite. However, from my point of view, the storming stage began amidst the JP v Trent controversy last season, especially when players like Evans were vocal about their own preference. Also, one can't help but think of Donte's guarantee when "unrealistic goals" are mentioned as part of the storming phase. Looking at the schedule I (admittedly a newcomer fan in comparison to some of you older guys) thought there was no way we'd finish worse than 10-6, and was baffled that most folks projected the team to finish in the range of 7 to 9 wins. Perhaps you all were subconsiously aware of the forming-storming-norming-performing theory! I think that the Peters hold-out plays into this stage as well. Clearly, his work habits and not on par with the rest of the team's, at least not publicly. As someone playing a position which doesn't allow or encourage him to be on an island, it's a deficit to the team's development when he's simply not present. I also have to believe it caused some (unpublicized) tension amongst everyone on the roster. Folks will cite Bruce Smith as a player who continually pulled the same kinds of shenanigans but to little consequence, but let's face it, even if you ignore the fact that the duties of their position are starkly opposite, Jason Peters is no Bruce Smith. As for Jauron, according to the theory, it was in his better interest to be more 'directive' and under the guidance of rookie OC Schonert, it's likely he tried to take it a step too far- the second NYJ game comes to mind, as does the decision to abandon the run during the Niners game- a decision which welcomed criticism from the players AS WELL as the fans. However, one thing which lends itself to hope, is the "high character" guys with whom they've filled the roster. As the theory mentions, some teams never get themselves out of this phase, but with the intelligent, goal oriented players we've brought on board, it's unlikely this will be the case. Working against the team's progression, obviously, is the hellish schedule they'll be up against next year, and I fear that the storming stage will prolong itself through (at least) the latter portion of 2009. One thing's for certain (to me, at least), a changing of the guard while the team is struggling through this phase would NOT be the way forward. I think in these terms, it's clear how immature the team remains, and how much work is required to get them to the next stage: Stage 3: Norming -For the sake of seeing where the team has yet to go, to see what other teams this might apply to, and to flush out the theory- Team members adjust their behavior to each other as they develop work habits that make teamwork seem more natural and fluid. Team members often work through this stage by agreeing on rules, values, professional behavior, shared methods, working tools and even taboos. During this phase, team members begin to trust each other. Motivation increases as the team gets more acquainted with the project. Teams in this phase may lose their creativity if the norming behaviors become too strong and begin to stifle healthy dissent and the team begins to exhibit groupthink. Supervisors of the team during this phase tend to be participative more than in the earlier stages. The team members can be expected to take more responsibility for making decisions and for their professional behavior. Other types of behavior exhibited in the norming stage include: bragging up the team concept to others who aren't in the team and an overall abundance of positivity regarding their role within the group, an ability to express criticism constructively, establishing and maintaining team ground rules and boundaries. It's also not abnormal for teams to revert back to storming, but these regressions become fewer and fewer as the team matures. The 'natural' leaders at this stage may not be the ones who were visible in stages 1 & 2. A team that immediately comes to mind is the Patriots, especially how they (sometimes to a nauseating extent) comment publicly about this idea of the importance of team and their own roles within it. BUT, I think that there are some very basic, but immensely important tenets are already in place with the team we have now which suggest we're close to achieving the next stage. They may have already reached the norming stage, but are nascent enough still that they're regressing as repeatedly as young teams evidently do. Stage 4: Performing Some teams will reach the performing stage. These high-performing teams are able to function as a unit as they find ways to get the job done smoothly and effectively without inappropriate conflict or the need for external supervision. Team members have become interdependent. By this time they are motivated and knowledgeable. The team members are now competent, autonomous and able to handle the decision-making process without supervision. Dissent is expected and allowed as long as it is channeled through means acceptable to the team. Supervisors of the team during this phase are almost always participative. The team will make most of the necessary decisions. Even the most high-performing teams will revert to earlier stages in certain circumstances. Many long-standing teams will go through these cycles many times as they react to changing circumstances. For example, a change in leadership may cause the team to revert to storming as the new people challenge the existing norms and dynamics of the team. It seems to me that in the game of football, having a wily, proven veteran at QB is one of the few components which makes the performing progression possible. Like the theory says, some teams achieve this stage. I believe that up until this point in time, our players essentially lack the experience necessary to make it to this level, and insofar, the only teams I've observed playing with this high level efficiency are the ones led by guys with names like Manning or Brady. Hopefully someday we can add Edwards to that list. Here's to hoping! -------------------------------------------- Like I already mentioned, I think the strife experienced by the team in 2008 can be attributed to the "growing pains" outlined in the storming phase. Collectively, our team is still very young, and I still believe we lack the key veterans at certain positions which can supplement for our team's lack of experience. Abandoning the philosophies and personnel which have been put together over the last three years would only begin the process anew. Sure, there are anomalies- like the 2008 one-and-out Dolphins and Falcons- but they're just that, anomalies. Probably the best example of a team emerging from the storming stage was the 2007 Giants. It practically falls lockstep with the theory. We can only hope to be so fortunate. I'm really glad we didn't shake things up THIS year. And with Poz entering his (red-shirt) year two, Edwards and Lynch their third years, Hardy entering his all important second year, and hopefully with an influx of talent in the right places during the off-season, I'm really hopeful we'll see the dividends of continuity in 2009. It's a royal shame that we have such a difficult schedule coming up, and that we squandered the chance at such an easy one this year, but if we DO rise to the occasion, I think we have the potential pieces in place to play with and beat any team in the NFL. Go Bills! The theory was originally set forth by Bruce Tuckman in 1965, and has been improved upon and used as the model for the progression of team ever since. For more information, and for the sources which were used here please visit: A PDF Presentation provided by Glen Allerman The Wikipedia overview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 great post cat. have only made it through the first half or so, skimmed the rest for now. will finish reading after work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing Go Bills! Long is a bit of an understatement .... will need to get back to this later when I can focus on it. Was interesting to scan it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Long? DEFINITELY. But very interesting. I just don't know if this is really applicable to our team because it seems like DJ and the rest are, for the most part, unprepared 80% of the time. Continuity is good for sure. But there is a HUGE difference between continuity and complacency. We look complacent alot of the time out there. "Just another 'ho-hum' day at the office and make sure I'm there early to pick up my check," seems to be the attitude. We'll see if year 4 equals the performing phase, but I doubt it. Not with our play callers and decision makers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing A very good friend of mine is presently studying the application of the forming-storming-norming-performing theory of team development and others like it; and I'm curious to see if anyone else here finds it applicable to the development of The Bills in the Jauron era. I know it's the popular trend to flame anything that even HINTS at being pro-DJ, but to my knowledge there has yet to be a post which incorporates this sort of academia in order to evaluate Jauron and progress of the team he has helped assemble. I'm making the effort to apply the current Bills regime to this theory because I think that having the coaches and and the majority of the current players coming to the organization at the same time creates a unique situation, and one which is paramount to the application of this theory. Again, I understand that most of the people who come here are Jauron skeptics, no matter HOW the information is conveyed, but try to read through with an open mind. It's not all pro-Jauron anyways, and in some places the theory does point out his potential short comings. For the sake of this theory, a "team" is defined as the following: Stage 1: Forming I believe everything mentioned above applies, almost universally, to the 2006 team. One aspect of the team's play- especially the play of the defense- was the heart and motivation each player exerted. Furthermore, one of the praises of Jauron early on was his ability as a "teacher," that he was a good coach to have in place when assembling a young team. That year we had rookies and first-time Bills all over the field- at least one per unit (Whitner, Simpson, Ellison, Pennington, Williams, Royal, Fowler, and to certain extents, Losman and Price), so the idea that they played beyond their abilities can be attributed to this idea of positive, motivated behavior throughout the forming stage. What's really tricky about the different phases is identifying when one ends and when the other begins. Given the lack of continuity brought about by the orgy of injuries in 2007, it's my belief that we stayed in the forming stage through most of 2007, but that certain goings on boosted us into the second, and hardest phase to move beyond: Stage 2: Storming Here is where the application to the Jauron regime ends, because it's quite clear that we're knee deep in the 'storming' stage. What's nice is that we're not the kind of team with a sharply divisive locker room, in fact, one would argue quite the opposite. However, from my point of view, the storming stage began amidst the JP v Trent controversy last season, especially when players like Evans were vocal about their own preference. Also, one can't help but think of Donte's guarantee when "unrealistic goals" are mentioned as part of the storming phase. Looking at the schedule I (admittedly a newcomer fan in comparison to some of you older guys) thought there was no way we'd finish worse than 10-6, and was baffled that most folks projected the team to finish in the range of 7 to 9 wins. Perhaps you all were subconsiously aware of the forming-storming-norming-performing theory! I think that the Peters hold-out plays into this stage as well. Clearly, his work habits and not on par with the rest of the team's, at least not publicly. As someone playing a position which doesn't allow or encourage him to be on an island, it's a deficit to the team's development when he's simply not present. I also have to believe it caused some (unpublicized) tension amongst everyone on the roster. Folks will cite Bruce Smith as a player who continually pulled the same kinds of shenanigans but to little consequence, but let's face it, even if you ignore the fact that the duties of their position are starkly opposite, Jason Peters is no Bruce Smith. As for Jauron, according to the theory, it was in his better interest to be more 'directive' and under the guidance of rookie OC Schonert, it's likely he tried to take it a step too far- the second NYJ game comes to mind, as does the decision to abandon the run during the Niners game- a decision which welcomed criticism from the players AS WELL as the fans. However, one thing which lends itself to hope, is the "high character" guys with whom they've filled the roster. As the theory mentions, some teams never get themselves out of this phase, but with the intelligent, goal oriented players we've brought on board, it's unlikely this will be the case. Working against the team's progression, obviously, is the hellish schedule they'll be up against next year, and I fear that the storming stage will prolong itself through (at least) the latter portion of 2009. One thing's for certain (to me, at least), a changing of the guard while the team is struggling through this phase would NOT be the way forward. I think in these terms, it's clear how immature the team remains, and how much work is required to get them to the next stage: Stage 3: Norming -For the sake of seeing where the team has yet to go, to see what other teams this might apply to, and to flush out the theory- A team that immediately comes to mind is the Patriots, especially how they (sometimes to a nauseating extent) comment publicly about this idea of the importance of team and their own roles within it. BUT, I think that there are some very basic, but immensely important tenets are already in place with the team we have now which suggest we're close to achieving the next stage. They may have already reached the norming stage, but are nascent enough still that they're regressing as repeatedly as young teams evidently do. Stage 4: Performing It seems to me that in the game of football, having a wily, proven veteran at QB is one of the few components which makes the performing progression possible. Like the theory says, some teams achieve this stage. I believe that up until this point in time, our players essentially lack the experience necessary to make it to this level, and insofar, the only teams I've observed playing with this high level efficiency are the ones led by guys with names like Manning or Brady. Hopefully someday we can add Edwards to that list. Here's to hoping! -------------------------------------------- Like I already mentioned, I think the strife experienced by the team in 2008 can be attributed to the "growing pains" outlined in the storming phase. Collectively, our team is still very young, and I still believe we lack the key veterans at certain positions which can supplement for our team's lack of experience. Abandoning the philosophies and personnel which have been put together over the last three years would only begin the process anew. Sure, there are anomalies- like the 2008 one-and-out Dolphins and Falcons- but they're just that, anomalies. Probably the best example of a team emerging from the storming stage was the 2007 Giants. It practically falls lockstep with the theory. We can only hope to be so fortunate. I'm really glad we didn't shake things up THIS year. And with Poz entering his (red-shirt) year two, Edwards and Lynch their third years, Hardy entering his all important second year, and hopefully with an influx of talent in the right places during the off-season, I'm really hopeful we'll see the dividends of continuity in 2009. It's a royal shame that we have such a difficult schedule coming up, and that we squandered the chance at such an easy one this year, but if we DO rise to the occasion, I think we have the potential pieces in place to play with and beat any team in the NFL. Go Bills! This post is worthy of Pyrate Girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Nice post.... I dont know what to think of the team. Ralph Wilson says we dont have the talent to win in the league, then he says we are close? From my stand point, we have the talent to win. Hell we started 5-1 and should have made the playoffs. I think we have plenty of talent on the team to win. Miami Dolphins are proof you dont need a team loaded with talent to win. Miami has just as many athletes we do, we might even have more. They won the division and made the playoffs. Thats cause the players bought into the team and what the coaches were selling. Of course they have the upper hand having Bill Parcells. But he hired the right people. Ralph Wilson didnt do any of that. He didnt hire the right people. If Parcells was handed the Buffalo Bills, I gurantee he would have us in the playoffs in 09. He would get the right staff in here for this team and make key additions to help the team. Buffalo's biggest problem is the owner. He rarely gets guys that help the team turn things around instantly, we need that one or 2 players that come in here and give the team an attitude. Who that is, I dont know, I do know that they will be out there during FA in 09. But Buffalo and the front office dont make moves to fix the team they make moves to sell the product enough to sell tickets. Its like patch work with the front office, instead of getting a new tire, they just keep patching it up, this method wont work much longer. I look at our schedule for 09, I look at the team as is right now, Look at the staff, I look at the owner, and I see a team on the brink of a 5-11 season before it even begins. Can that change? Sure it can! But like I said it takes the right people to get it done. We cant keep doing patch work with this team. We have the money to get things done, the people are out there to get it done.....SO DO IT! I mean if the owner dont care, why should the front office, why should the staff, why should the players? Action reflect leadership. With an owner saying they dont have talent to win, thats spitting in the players faces for working their asses off. As an owner Id never say that to my team. Id get my wallet out and try to make the team better with the right guys....... Honestly, if Parcells come we would make the playoffs in 09 or even Cowher. Either guy would have this team in the playoffs in 09 with the current roster we have.....Folks Jauron is not the answer, neither is the people backing him on the coaching staff...... Otherwise, great post Cat, I really enjoyed that! Long indeed but well well worth it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing Like I already mentioned, I think the strife experienced by the team in 2008 can be attributed to the "growing pains" outlined in the storming phase. Collectively, our team is still very young, and I still believe we lack the key veterans at certain positions which can supplement for our team's lack of experience. Abandoning the philosophies and personnel which have been put together over the last three years would only begin the process anew. Sure, there are anomalies- like the 2008 one-and-out Dolphins and Falcons- but they're just that, anomalies. Probably the best example of a team emerging from the storming stage was the 2007 Giants. It practically falls lockstep with the theory. We can only hope to be so fortunate. I'm really glad we didn't shake things up THIS year. And with Poz entering his (red-shirt) year two, Edwards and Lynch their third years, Hardy entering his all important second year, and hopefully with an influx of talent in the right places during the off-season, I'm really hopeful we'll see the dividends of continuity in 2009. It's a royal shame that we have such a difficult schedule coming up, and that we squandered the chance at such an easy one this year, but if we DO rise to the occasion, I think we have the potential pieces in place to play with and beat any team in the NFL. Go Bills! First off, I can't think of one player from the Buffalo Bills other than Evans and McGee that would be a starter on the Giants. With that being said, our head coach is an f'ing moron. Though the team does not come near the Giants talent wise, Jauron did have an average roster of NFL talent with the advantage of playing the easiest schedule in 2008. You could have a hundred steps to success and all would mean nothing when the head coach has the football instincts of a monkey. Two steps... Step #1. Fire Dick and hire a SMART head football coach with the passion to get the most out of a roster of 53 players. Step #2. Acquire big, strong and nasty players to replace the skinny and weak players with high motors which were the moron head coach's preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 First off, I can't think of one player from the Buffalo Bills other than Evans and McGee that would be a starter on the Giants. With that being said, our head coach is an f'ing moron. Though the team does not come near the Giants talent wise, Jauron did have an average roster of NFL talent with the advantage of playing the easiest schedule in 2008. You could have a hundred steps to success and all would mean nothing when the head coach has the football instincts of a monkey. Two steps... Step #1. Fire Dick and hire a SMART head football coach with the passion to get the most out of a roster of 53 players. Step #2. Acquire big, strong and nasty players to replace the skinny and weak players with high motors which were the moron head coach's preference. Firstly, they're not steps to success. They're stages of progression that most teams, companies, couples, et al go through before they embody what it takes to be a "team." So, secondly thanks for reading someone's else post and responding with more of the same. The point of this thread was to look at things differently. If you're incapable of doing so, please don't insult the research and time put into offering another point of view by offering up recycled tripe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Other types of behavior exhibited in the norming stage include: bragging up the team concept to others who aren't in the team and an overall abundance of positivity regarding their role within the group, an ability to express criticism constructively, establishing and maintaining team ground rules and boundaries. This right here explains the statement, "I'm Ko Simpson of the Buffalo Bills, I am worth millions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 This right here explains the statement, "I'm Ko Simpson of the Buffalo Bills, I am worth millions." It's interesting you mention "preparation" prior to this. Personally, I think that you can apply the theory to inform a team's collective ability to learn, retain, and cooperatively perform what's been taught to them throughout the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelso_Helmet Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I'd like to share the optimism exhibited in the post...and I hope that continuity does bear fruit. Interesting application of the Forming, Storming, Norming, Peforming construct. Living in the DC Beltway area, I see this process quite a bit...usually by intergovernmental or public-private entities that are put together (either willingly or per Government mandate) ostensibly for the purpose for improving delivery of a service or establishing an enduring community that oversees a shared mission space. As we'd imagine, there are multiple inhibitors of success in such a group dynamic. Leadership is an obvious one. As others have indicated, there is a considerable constituency in Bills Nation who feel that Jauron is so woefully inadequate, that he impedes or offsets the attempts of the Bills to develop into a strong team. If you had a chairperson and secretariat for a committee embarking on a forming, storming, norming, performing process...and the chairperson couldn't schedule meetings in a timely fashion, would forget to invite people, would not follow through on action items, did not adapt to circumstances mandating change, or just lacked any idea of how to run a meeting, the group would be doomed. Or if the group chair had such a preponderence of experience in a single aspect of the group's charter (e.g., Jauron and running a defense), then it might be to the detriment of the other things the group had to accomplish. Or if we look at leadership at an even higher level, if Mr. Wilson has priorities that were unstated (e.g., profit or moving the franchise) and were inconsistent with the stated goals of the group (e.g. winning) then the whole process is a charade. (note, I said "if" not that I know with any certainty that's what he's doing) So while I agree that there are benefits to continuity, I am in the camp that says improvement won't happen on Jauron's watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 I'd like to share the optimism exhibited in the post...and I hope that continuity does bear fruit. Interesting application of the Forming, Storming, Norming, Peforming construct. Living in the DC Beltway area, I see this process quite a bit...usually by intergovernmental or public-private entities that are put together (either willingly or per Government mandate) ostensibly for the purpose for improving delivery of a service or establishing an enduring community that oversees a shared mission space. As we'd imagine, there are multiple inhibitors of success in such a group dynamic. Leadership is an obvious one. As others have indicated, there is a considerable constituency in Bills Nation who feel that Jauron is so woefully inadequate, that he impedes or offsets the attempts of the Bills to develop into a strong team. If you had a chairperson and secretariat for a committee embarking on a forming, storming, norming, performing process...and the chairperson couldn't schedule meetings in a timely fashion, would forget to invite people, would not follow through on action items, did not adapt to circumstances mandating change, or just lacked any idea of how to run a meeting, the group would be doomed. Or if the group chair had such a preponderence of experience in a single aspect of the group's charter (e.g., Jauron and running a defense), then it might be to the detriment of the other things the group had to accomplish. Or if we look at leadership at an even higher level, if Mr. Wilson has priorities that were unstated (e.g., profit or moving the franchise) and were inconsistent with the stated goals of the group (e.g. winning) then the whole process is a charade. (note, I said "if" not that I know with any certainty that's what he's doing) So while I agree that there are benefits to continuity, I am in the camp that says improvement won't happen on Jauron's watch. Jauron probably gets flamed the most for his in-game management of the offense. Without trying to skew the theory in favor of Jauron, I indicated that the performing stage seems to rest heaviest on the quarterback's shoulders. Eventually, Trent has to let his training wheels come off and take matters into his own hands. Does this mean he must TRANSCEND leadership? Perhaps. To my knowledge, getting plays in on time has little to do with Jauron, but falls instead on the head of the OC. BUT, when time's running out in the first half, and you can't get a play in, you're inside the 20 yard line and the play clock is running out, at some point the QUARTERBACK (see quarterback description in my signature) has to say F--- IT!, get to the line and spike the ball, coach's call be damned. HERE'S SOMETHING INTERESTING ------------------------------------------------ Talking to my friend just now, the theory also holds that team's that go through the worst 'storms' often have the most dramatic recoveries. I guess this would apply to the Vick distraction in 07 for the Falcons, and the 1-15 season for the Dolphins. My friend likens it to fighting with a guy in the trenches- the worst of times culture the best of relationships. EDIT: You can add the post-Katrina Saints to the above list of teams to overcome tumultuous 'storm' conditions- no pun intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I think Tuckman's model is an oversimplification of real-world team dynamics and leadership. But, that said, the "everybody loves Dick" comments suggest that this team is not in the storming stage at all (excluding Jason Peters and the departed Losman). At least publicly, it looks like there was a jump made straight from forming to performing, with coaches just delegating responsibilities and players free to self-organize and figure out how to perform their jobs. Since everybody is their own expert and things are delegated for consensus all the way down the command chain, there is no accountability and nobody takes any blame -- we're all doing our best and working hard, bad performance is out of our control. For example, quotes like: "Well, it wasn't a breakdown in any particular area; we just seem to have a variety of breakdowns and we'll work on fixing them." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 I think Tuckman's model is an oversimplification of real-world team dynamics and leadership. But, that said, the "everybody loves Dick" comments suggest that this team is not in the storming stage at all (excluding Jason Peters and the departed Losman). At least publicly, it looks like there was a jump made straight from forming to performing, with coaches just delegating responsibilities and players free to self-organize and figure out how to perform their jobs. Since everybody is their own expert and things are delegated for consensus all the way down the command chain, there is no accountability and nobody takes any blame -- we're all doing our best and working hard, bad performance is out of our control. For example, quotes like: "Well, it wasn't a breakdown in any particular area; we just seem to have a variety of breakdowns and we'll work on fixing them." For sake of argument, we'll set aside your claim that the model is an oversimplification (though I would turn right around and say footing all the blame Jauron is equally oversimplified): It's not an individual theory- it's a theory of team dynamic. Therefore, you can't say that one person (Peters) is in the storming stage. Nor can you say that the Peters' distraction- being the singular negative impediment within the team dynamic -doesn't result in a 'storming' of the team. If one other person is distracted by Peters' performance, or doesn't have trust (a key, perhaps THE key element of the model) in Peters because of his (in)actions, then Peters' behavior alone can create a storming environment. Plus, more specifically to football- having the riff in team dynamic come from you LEFT TACKLE -of all positions -has far more negative repercussions than say if it was the fullback being a turd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 For sake of argument, we'll set aside your claim that the model is an oversimplification (though I would turn right around and say footing all the blame Jauron is equally oversimplified): It's not an individual theory- it's a theory of team dynamic. Therefore, you can't say that one person (Peters) is in the storming stage. Nor can you say that the Peters' distraction- being the singular negative impediment within the team dynamic -doesn't result in a 'storming' of the team. If one other person is distracted by Peters' performance, or doesn't have trust (a key, perhaps THE key element of the model) in Peters because of his (in)actions, then Peters' behavior alone can create a storming environment. Plus, more specifically to football- having the riff in team dynamic come from you LEFT TACKLE -of all positions -has far more negative repercussions than say if it was the fullback being a turd. We really have no indication thats what has happened here, though. There's no reason to think anyone on the team held Peters accountable...there's no reason to think anyone on the team got in Evans' face over his criticism of the QB switch. Everybody on the team keeps a smile on their face while they fail, but don't fail badly. There's no unrest, and no dissention within the locker room that the theory claims is key for growth and progression. The healthy conflict you get in the storming stage just doesn't seem to be there. Your buddy said the teams that "storm" the most violently are the ones who pull through...well we seem to have a pretty light storm on our hands, unfortunately. Everybody smiles, everything is ho-hum, everybody loves the coach and doesn't say a negative word about any of their teammates...after all, we're always 7-9, so it always seems like we're close. We'll "just keep working harder" instead of figuring out whats really wrong here. Great post though, it was a very interesting read and it was awesome to see someone on here look at things from a different perspective. I've been staying away because I can't take much more of the same bland 'Jauron is da suxorz lolz' garbage, but this was refreshing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Is there going to be a test on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 For sake of argument, we'll set aside your claim that the model is an oversimplification (though I would turn right around and say footing all the blame Jauron is equally oversimplified): If you can't follow that a theory that tries to wrap up group dynamics in 4 (or 5) words is an oversimplification then there is nothing more to discuss. Also, if you can't see from reading posts here that Jauron is far from the only bearer of all blame, well, what can one say? Finally, Tuckerman's model is over 40 years old. It's not a revelation to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Excellent post, Cat! Best of the year -so far. Sadly, I tend to side with BBB that there doesn't seem to be any unrest with team that would perpetuate a major re-focus. Even the Bills have seen this in their history. From 1-13 in '69 to contender and dual 2-14's to Super. The stagnation that comes with multiple 7-9's is just enough 'success' to stay the course.. 'Sadly', -that's the pervasive emotion anymore.. Outstanding perspective though, Cat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKillerRobots Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Good stuff Big Cat. I think Tuckerman's model is definitely applicable to what's happening with the Bills or any other team to a certian extent. It's interesting to think about football like that. Most people look at the players abilities and times and the schemes the teams runs without really thinking about how the guys play together. when you are on a team it seems like sometimes it goes really well and soemtimes it goes terribly, but it rarely depends on who is in the group and what they can do well and almost always depends on how everyone gets along and is able to fit together. You can say that they are all getting paid and should work together no matter what, but you cannot force chemestry. I know that there are people I work with better than others, even though we all get paid to work together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 We really have no indication thats what has happened here, though. There's no reason to think anyone on the team held Peters accountable...there's no reason to think anyone on the team got in Evans' face over his criticism of the QB switch. Truuuuuuuuuuuue. Although, in 2007 Evans was public his about his preference for Losman, and any dissension, regardless of how stormy it is, is dissension- it's simply not an optimal environment. Applying that logic, one HAS to believe- HAS to believe that during training camp- arguable a players' least favorite time of year by most accounts -there was some resentment from Peters' teammates regarding his absence. And what's worse, nowadays (unlike when Smith used to pull the same crap) with IM, texting, cell phones, skype, email, you name it, to not hear a WORD from the guy, there had to have been some eyebrows raised. I'll make the point again that especially on the offensive line- a team within a team -this sort of behavior has GOT to be harmful. Everybody on the team keeps a smile on their face while they fail, but don't fail badly. There's no unrest, and no dissention within the locker room that the theory claims is key for growth and progression. The healthy conflict you get in the storming stage just doesn't seem to be there. Your buddy said the teams that "storm" the most violently are the ones who pull through...well we seem to have a pretty light storm on our hands, unfortunately. Everybody smiles, everything is ho-hum, everybody loves the coach and doesn't say a negative word about any of their teammates...after all, we're always 7-9, so it always seems like we're close. We'll "just keep working harder" instead of figuring out whats really wrong here. You are ABSOLUTELY correct about this. Part of me wishes that the real storms are kept away from the public, and that there IS some locker room tension from time to time, but the prevailing consensus, by ALL media reports indicates that everything is always just hunky dory (spelling?). I tried to look at this optimistically, thinking that perhaps the intent of bringing in high-character guys was to forgo the storming stage, but having spoken again to my friend, I realize now how crucial of a stage it is. What's worse, the idea that teams never get beyond this phase, and the notion that all our storms are just drizzles would lend itself to the prevailing TSW theory that we're forever locked in mediocrity. Again, I try to be optimistic. And I want to believe that these guys are rough and tough men's men- that they DO get pissed, that they take this sh*t seriously- guys like Jackson, Reed, and McKelvin come to mind, and according to the theory, as a team progresses, it's the unlikely heroes that always emerge... Great post though, it was a very interesting read and it was awesome to see someone on here look at things from a different perspective. I've been staying away because I can't take much more of the same bland 'Jauron is da suxorz lolz' garbage, but this was refreshing. Haha, thanks. I'll admit, my green ass first heard of this theory the other night ( ) and the wheels started turning right away as my beloved Bills came rushing to mind. Putting the work into posting it here was almost entirely self-therapeutic because, like you mention, this place was getting mighty boring, and as the last surviving Jauron supporter, I had no way of really expressing ANOTHER way to look at things- a way that actually lend itself to optimism -without getting e-stoned in the TSW square! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts