Every project team goes through a predictable journey. People arrive as near strangers, clash over priorities, settle into a shared way of working, hit their stride, and eventually move on to their next assignment. The Tuckman Ladder Model maps this journey in five stages: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Once you know which stage your team is in, you know what kind of leadership it needs right now.
- The Tuckman Ladder Model has five stages: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. Bruce Tuckman described the first four in 1965 and added adjourning with Mary Ann Jensen in 1977.
- Storming is a normal stage, not a sign of failure. Teams get through it faster when people feel safe to disagree.
- Match your leadership to the stage: directing, coaching, supporting, delegating, then recognizing the work at the end.
- Teams slide back down the ladder when new members join, the scope changes or the leader changes. The free Tuckman Team Builder below shows where your team stands today.
This matters because team development is about much more than putting skilled people on the same project. It means clarifying roles, agreeing on how the team communicates, building trust, and managing performance as the work moves forward. In this guide, you’ll learn what each stage looks like, how to lead through it, and how Tuckman’s model compares to COG’s Ladder. You can also use the free Tuckman Team Builder to check which stage your team is in today, then play with the ladder to see how real events push a team up or down.
Free Tuckman Team Builder
The Tuckman Team Builder opens with an example project team already filled in, so you can see a result right away. To check your own team:
- Enter your team or project name, the project phase and any recent change, such as new members or a new sponsor.
- In the Team check tab, rate the 10 statements for your team today. The tool shows your most likely stage, the leadership style to use and your next three moves.
- Click the button under the result, or open the Ladder simulator tab, to see your stage on the ladder.
- Throw an event at the team, such as a scope change, to see how it would push the team up or back down. Copy or print the summary for your next team meeting.
Tuckman Team Builder
Check which Tuckman stage your project team is in today, then play with the ladder to see how real events push a team up or back down. You get the leadership style to use and your next three moves.
How true is each statement for your team today? The stage with the most signals is your most likely stage.
Loading the team check…
Click a stage to see what it looks like and how to lead through it.
Throw an event at the team and watch what happens:
Runs in your browser. Nothing you enter is stored or sent. Teams rarely move in a straight line, so use the result as a conversation starter with your team.
Key Elements of Team Development
Effective team development includes several structured activities that shape how a group functions from day one. Project managers must focus on member selection, role definition, communication protocols, and performance management. When these elements are addressed early and intentionally, teams are far more likely to move quickly past early friction and into productive, high-performing collaboration that drives meaningful project outcomes.
Building a functional team requires attention to foundational components that influence how members interact and perform:
- Role Definition: Each team member must have a clearly assigned role with defined responsibilities, ensuring accountability and reducing overlap that can lead to confusion or duplicated effort. A RACI matrix makes these roles visible to everyone.
- Communication Channels: Teams need reliable, agreed-upon methods for sharing updates and resolving issues, whether through scheduled meetings, project management tools, or direct messaging platforms.
- Goal Alignment: Leaders must ensure every team member understands the project’s objectives and how their individual contributions connect to the broader outcome, keeping the group focused and motivated.
Real-life example
Mars Climate Orbiter: one team used English units, the other metric
In September 1999 NASA lost the Mars Climate Orbiter. A preliminary JPL review found that an error in information passed between the spacecraft team in Colorado and the navigation team in California was never caught: one team used English units and the other used metric units for a key spacecraft operation.
Source: NASA JPL, Mars Climate Orbiter Team Finds Likely Cause of Loss
For project managers: agree on shared standards, handoffs and who checks what during forming, before the work starts. Unclear roles and unstated assumptions are cheapest to fix in the first weeks of a project.
From the source
“The problem here was not the error.”
Edward Weiler, NASA Associate Administrator for Space Science, in the JPL news release
By the numbers
- 46%of U.S. employees clearly knew what was expected of them at work in 2024, down from 56% in March 2020.Gallup
- 56%of the money at risk on projects is at risk because of ineffective communications, according to PMI.PMI Pulse of the Profession
The Tuckman Ladder Model Explained
In 1965, psychologist Bruce Tuckman introduced a four-stage framework describing how teams evolve over time. Known as the Tuckman Ladder Model, it outlines the progression teams follow as they move from initial introductions to high-level performance. The model became one of the most widely referenced tools in organizational psychology and project management because it reflects the natural arc of team dynamics across industries and contexts.
The framework was later expanded to include a fifth stage, adjourning, which addresses what happens when a team completes its work and disbands. This addition made the model even more practical for project-based environments where teams form around specific deliverables and dissolve once those goals are met. Together, the five stages provide managers with a clear roadmap for guiding their teams through every phase of the collaborative process.
Real-life example
Tuckman built the model from 50 articles, not from project teams
Bruce Tuckman based his 1965 article on a collection of 50 articles on group development, many of them studies of therapy groups and training groups. In 1977 he and Mary Ann Jensen reviewed 22 newer studies, which largely supported the four stages and suggested a fifth: adjourning.
Source: infed.org, Bruce W. Tuckman: forming, storming, norming and performing in groups
For project managers: treat the stages as a guide, not a law. The model was not built from project teams, so check what you see in your own team before you act on a label.
From the source
“a fifth stage for which a perfect rhyme could not be found”
Bruce Tuckman (1984) on adjourning, quoted by infed.org
By the numbers
The 5 Stages of the Tuckman Ladder Model
Understanding the 5 stages of the Tuckman Ladder Model helps you recognize how teams develop through forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. For project managers, that means choosing the right leadership approach at the right time, reducing unnecessary conflict, and building a team that collaborates effectively to deliver results.
Stage 1: Forming
The forming stage marks the beginning of a team’s journey, characterized by introductions, orientation, and the establishment of initial expectations. Team members are typically polite and cautious as they assess one another’s strengths and working styles. Conflict is minimal at this point because individuals are focused on making a positive impression. Project managers play a critical role here by facilitating clarity around roles, objectives, and communication norms from the outset.
Kickoff meetings are a common and effective tool during the forming stage. They give team members a shared starting point and create space for early questions to be addressed. Managers should use this time to set the tone for collaboration, establish ground rules, and ensure everyone understands both their individual responsibilities and how their work fits within the team’s broader mission and project timeline.
Stage 2: Storming
The storming stage is when interpersonal tensions begin to surface as team members assert their perspectives and push against established boundaries. This phase can feel disruptive, but it is a natural and necessary part of team development. Disagreements over direction, workload, or decision-making authority are common. Without thoughtful leadership intervention, storming can stall a team’s progress and damage working relationships before they have a chance to solidify.
The most effective managers treat this stage as an opportunity rather than a setback. Encouraging open dialogue, addressing conflicts directly, and reinforcing shared goals helps teams navigate storming more efficiently. Promoting psychological safety, where team members feel comfortable expressing concerns without fear of judgment, is essential during this phase. Teams that work through storming constructively tend to emerge stronger, more aligned, and better prepared for the work ahead. If tensions keep rising, learn to recognize the 5 conflict levels before they escalate.
Stage 3: Norming
During the norming stage, the team begins to find its rhythm. Roles are better understood, communication improves, and members start to trust one another more consistently. The friction of the storming stage gives way to a greater sense of cohesion as the group develops shared norms and practices. Team members become more willing to collaborate, offer feedback, and support each other in achieving collective goals.
Managers should take an active role in reinforcing positive behaviors during this stage. Team-building activities, structured feedback sessions, and recognition of individual contributions all help deepen the bonds forming within the group. The norming stage is also an ideal time to revisit goals and processes to ensure they remain aligned with project requirements. A team that norms well sets a strong foundation for the high performance that follows.
Stage 4: Performing
The performing stage represents the peak of a team’s development, where collaboration is seamless and output is consistently high. Members understand their roles deeply, trust each other’s judgment, and are able to resolve issues independently without frequent managerial intervention. The team operates with a shared sense of purpose and a clear understanding of how to achieve its goals efficiently. This is the stage every project manager works toward enabling.
At the performing stage, leadership shifts from directive to supportive. Managers focus on removing obstacles, providing resources, and offering strategic guidance rather than managing day-to-day tasks. Honest, timely feedback remains important to sustain momentum and prevent complacency. Teams in this stage are largely self-organizing, which frees managers to focus on higher-level project concerns while the team continues to deliver strong, reliable results.
Stage 5: Adjourning
The adjourning stage, sometimes called the mourning stage, occurs when a team completes its project and prepares to disband. This phase is often overlooked in practice, but it carries real significance for team morale and individual professional development. Members may experience a sense of loss or uncertainty as familiar structures dissolve. Acknowledging the transition openly helps ease the emotional weight that can accompany project closure.
Celebrating accomplishments during this stage reinforces a culture of recognition and respect. Project managers should take the time to acknowledge both collective achievements and individual contributions before the team separates. Conducting a structured retrospective or lessons-learned session ensures that insights from the project are captured and carried forward. Teams that close well tend to carry positive experiences into future collaborations, which benefits the broader organization over time.
Real-life example
Google studied 180 teams and found that psychological safety mattered most
Google’s Project Aristotle studied 180 teams, 115 project teams in engineering and 65 sales teams. Of the five dynamics it found in effective teams, psychological safety came first, ahead of dependability, structure and clarity, meaning and impact.
Source: Google re:Work, Guide: Understand team effectiveness
For project managers: storming goes better when people can disagree without fear. Ask for objections in meetings, thank people who raise risks and deal with conflict early.
From the source
“team psychological safety is associated with learning behavior”
Amy Edmondson, Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams (1999), via Harvard DASH
By the numbers
- 180teams were studied by Google to find what makes a team effective.Google re:Work
- 51work teams in a manufacturing company were studied by Edmondson in her 1999 paper.Harvard DASH
The Importance of the Tuckman Ladder Model in Project Management
The Tuckman Ladder Model gives project managers a structured way to interpret team behavior at every stage of development. Rather than viewing conflict or slow starts as signs of failure, managers can contextualize these experiences as predictable parts of a defined process. This perspective reduces reactive decision-making and encourages more thoughtful, strategic leadership that actually supports team growth rather than inadvertently disrupting it.
Understanding where a team sits within the model also allows managers to apply the right interventions at the right times. A team in the storming stage needs conflict resolution and open communication, while a team in the performing stage needs autonomy and support. Matching leadership style to team stage is one of the most valuable applications of the model, and it consistently produces better outcomes than applying a single management approach regardless of where the group currently stands.
Real-life example
Gersick: project teams changed course at the midpoint of their deadline
Connie Gersick followed eight naturally occurring teams and did not find the gradual sequence of stages. Instead, each team worked in one pattern until about the midpoint of its allotted time, then made a major transition, a pattern she called punctuated equilibrium.
Source: Gersick, Time and Transition in Work Teams, Academy of Management Journal, 1988
For project managers: plan a midpoint review on every project. It is a natural moment for a team to rethink its approach, so use it to reset goals, roles and ways of working on purpose.
From the source
“alternating inertia and revolution”
Connie Gersick, describing team progress in Time and Transition in Work Teams
By the numbers
- 8teams were followed in Gersick’s 1988 study of group development.Academy of Management Journal
- 1969is when Hersey and Blanchard published the Life Cycle Theory of Leadership, which moves leader behavior as followers mature.Training and Development Journal
Benefits of Using the Tuckman Ladder Model
Applying the Tuckman framework provides several practical advantages for project managers and team leaders:
- Stage Awareness: The model gives managers a clear lens for identifying where their team currently stands, making it easier to choose appropriate interventions and avoid responses that may prolong or worsen existing friction.
- Targeted Leadership: Understanding each stage allows leaders to adapt their management style dynamically, applying closer guidance during early stages and stepping back to enable autonomy as the team matures.
- Strength and Gap Identification: The framework helps managers recognize which team members or dynamics are advancing progress and which areas may need additional support, training, or structural adjustment.
- Improved Communication: By normalizing the stages of development, the model creates a shared language for teams to discuss challenges openly, which reduces misunderstandings and builds a culture of transparency.
- Team Cohesion: Recognizing that cohesion develops over time encourages patience and deliberate investment in relationship-building, which leads to stronger long-term collaboration and more consistent performance.
Real-life example
Gallup’s 2024 meta-analysis of 183,806 business and work units
Gallup’s 2024 Q12 meta-analysis covered 3,354,784 employees in 90 countries. Work units in the top quartile of engagement outperformed bottom-quartile units on profitability, productivity and absenteeism.
Source: Gallup, Q12 Meta-Analysis 2024
For project managers: the habits the Tuckman model encourages, such as clear roles, honest feedback and recognition, are the same ones that drive engagement. Track them as part of your project health checks.
From the source
“more about how the team worked together”
Google’s team effectiveness research, in the re:Work guide
By the numbers
COG’s Ladder vs. Tuckman Ladder
COG’s Ladder and the Tuckman Ladder Model are both widely used frameworks for understanding team development, but they differ in focus and structure. COG’s Ladder, developed by George Charrier at Procter and Gamble in 1972, emphasizes the social and interpersonal dynamics of group behavior through five stages: Polite, Why We Are Here, Bid for Power, Constructive, and Esprit. Tuckman’s model, by contrast, focuses on the progressive development of team function and performance over the course of a project.
So which model is better? Start with how their stages line up:
| Tuckman stage | Matching COG’s Ladder step | What the team is doing | What the project manager does |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forming | Polite, then Why we’re here | Getting acquainted, then learning why the group exists and what it must deliver | Run the kickoff, share the charter, define roles |
| Storming | Power (bid for power) | Competing for influence and pushing for their own ideas | Bring conflict into the open and agree on decision rights |
| Norming | Cooperation (constructive) | Accepting other views, team spirit replaces self-interest | Write down team norms and recognize contributions |
| Performing | Esprit | High cohesion and mutual acceptance | Delegate, remove obstacles, protect the team |
| Adjourning | No matching step | Finishing the work and disbanding | Run lessons learned, celebrate, release people well |
Sources: Cog’s ladder (Wikipedia) and infed.org on Tuckman.
Both frameworks offer value depending on what a manager needs to address. COG’s Ladder is particularly useful for analyzing interpersonal dynamics and understanding how group members relate to one another. Tuckman’s model is better suited to tracking overall team progress and aligning leadership strategies with developmental stage. Used together, they provide a more complete picture of how teams grow, and managers who understand both are better equipped to respond to the full complexity of team behavior.
Tuckman Ladder Model Quiz
10 questions on the Tuckman Ladder Model
Check what you learned. Pick an answer, then open the explanation.
Which stage did Tuckman and Mary Ann Jensen add in 1977
- AStorming
- BNorming
- CAdjourning
- DPerforming
Show answer
Answer C. Tuckman described four stages in 1965. Adjourning was added in the 1977 review with Mary Ann Jensen.
In which stage do disagreements over direction, workload and authority usually surface
- AForming
- BStorming
- CNorming
- DAdjourning
Show answer
Answer B. Storming is when tensions surface as people assert their views and push against boundaries.
Which leadership style fits a team in the forming stage best
- ADirecting
- BDelegating
- CRecognizing
- DHands-off
Show answer
Answer A. A forming team needs clear goals, roles and ground rules, so the project manager directs more.
A team is performing. What should the project manager mostly do
- AAssign every task in detail
- BRemove obstacles and give the team autonomy
- CRestart the kickoff
- DDisband the team
Show answer
Answer B. Performing teams are largely self-organizing. Leadership shifts to support and removing obstacles.
Two new developers join a performing team. What usually happens
- ANothing changes
- BThe team moves to adjourning
- CThe team can slide back to an earlier stage
- DThe team skips to norming
Show answer
Answer C. New members reset the dynamics, so teams often drop back to forming or storming for a while.
What was Tuckman’s 1965 model based on
- AA survey of project managers
- BA review of 50 articles on group development
- CA study of NASA teams
- DGoogle’s team research
Show answer
Answer B. Tuckman reviewed 50 articles, many about therapy groups and training groups.
Which COG’s Ladder step matches Tuckman’s performing stage
- APolite
- BPower
- CCooperation
- DEsprit
Show answer
Answer D. Esprit is the high-cohesion step, which matches performing. COG’s Ladder has no adjourning step.
In Google’s study of 180 teams, which dynamic mattered most
- ATeam size
- BPsychological safety
- CSeniority
- DWorking in the same office
Show answer
Answer B. Psychological safety came first of the five dynamics, ahead of dependability and structure and clarity.
What is the best way to close a project team in the adjourning stage
- ASend a short email and move on
- BRun a lessons learned session and recognize contributions
- CSkip it if the project went well
- DStart a new kickoff
Show answer
Answer B. Capturing lessons and recognizing people helps the team close well and carry insights forward.
Gersick’s 1988 study of eight teams found that teams often changed course
- AAt the start only
- BNever
- CAround the midpoint of their deadline
- DOnly after a new leader joined
Show answer
Answer C. Gersick found a major transition around the midpoint of each team’s allotted time, a pattern called punctuated equilibrium.
Video About the Tuckman Ladder Model
This video breaks down the Tuckman Ladder Model’s five stages of team development, offering a clear visual guide for project managers. Watch to see how forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning play out in real team scenarios and how to lead effectively through each phase.
Video by Perrine Pasleau on YouTube: Tuckman Model: understanding the stages of team formation.
Facts Worth Checking
A lot of what is written about the Tuckman model online gets the history or the details wrong. Here are 10 common claims, checked against the original sources.
Each claim is checked against the original source where one exists.
| Claim | Verdict | What the source says |
|---|---|---|
| Tuckman created all five stages in 1965. | Partly true | The 1965 article had four stages. Adjourning was added in 1977 with Mary Ann Jensen. infed.org |
| Tuckman built the model by studying project teams. | False | It was based on 50 articles on group development, many about therapy groups and training groups. infed.org |
| Teams always move through the stages in a fixed order. | False | Gersick’s study of eight teams found sudden shifts around the midpoint instead of gradual stages, and teams can slide back after changes. Academy of Management Journal |
| COG’s Ladder was created by George Charrier at Procter and Gamble. | True | Charrier published it in a company newsletter in 1972. Wikipedia |
| COG’s Esprit step is the same as Tuckman’s adjourning stage. | False | Esprit is the step of high cohesion, closest to performing. COG’s Ladder has no closing step. Wikipedia |
| Psychological safety was the most important dynamic in Google’s study of effective teams. | True | It came first of five dynamics in a study of 180 teams. Google re:Work |
| Fewer than half of U.S. employees clearly know what is expected of them at work. | True | Gallup measured 46% in 2024, down from 56% in March 2020. Gallup |
| Highly engaged teams are more profitable. | True | Gallup found a 23% median difference in profitability between top- and bottom-quartile units. Gallup |
| Matching leadership style to team maturity was Tuckman’s idea. | False | That idea comes from Hersey and Blanchard’s Life Cycle Theory of Leadership (1969), later called Situational Leadership. Project managers often combine the two. Training and Development Journal |
| Poor communication puts more than half of project money at risk. | True | PMI found 56% of the money at risk is at risk due to ineffective communications. PMI |
Checked November 14, 2026.
Conclusion
The Tuckman Ladder Model remains one of the most practical and enduring frameworks in project management because it reflects how teams actually develop rather than how we wish they would. By understanding the five stages, managers can lead with greater confidence, apply the right strategies at each phase, and create environments where teams are genuinely supported through every challenge they encounter. The model transforms unpredictable group dynamics into a recognizable and manageable process.
Applying this framework consistently leads to stronger communication, higher trust, and more reliable team performance over time. Organizations that invest in understanding team development through models like Tuckman’s tend to experience fewer project failures and better cross-functional collaboration. As teams continue to evolve in structure and complexity, having a clear developmental roadmap is not just useful but essential for any project manager committed to building teams that consistently deliver results.
FAQs About The Tuckman Ladder Model
What are the five stages of the Tuckman Ladder Model?
The five stages are forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Each stage represents a distinct phase in a team’s development, with its own challenges and characteristics. Teams move through these stages progressively, though it is possible to cycle back to an earlier stage if significant changes occur, such as the addition of new members or a major shift in project direction.
Who created the Tuckman Ladder Model?
The model was originally developed by psychologist Dr. Bruce Tuckman in 1965. At the time, it included only four stages. The fifth stage, adjourning, was added by Tuckman and Mary Ann Jensen in 1977 to account for the process of team dissolution. Since its introduction, the model has become one of the most widely adopted frameworks in organizational development and project management worldwide.
Why is understanding team development stages important for project managers?
Understanding team development stages allows project managers to respond appropriately to group behavior rather than misinterpreting normal friction as dysfunction. Each stage requires a different leadership approach, and recognizing the current stage helps managers provide the right level of direction, support, or autonomy. This awareness leads to more effective interventions, faster progression through challenging stages, and stronger overall team performance.
What is the difference between COG’s Ladder and the Tuckman Ladder Model?
COG’s Ladder focuses on the interpersonal and social dynamics of groups, tracking how members relate to one another across five stages. The Tuckman Ladder Model tracks the functional progression of team development and performance over time. Both frameworks are complementary and can be used together to give managers a fuller understanding of both the relational and operational dimensions of how teams grow and evolve throughout a project.
Can a team move backward through the Tuckman stages?
Yes, teams can regress to an earlier stage when significant disruptions occur. Common triggers include the departure or addition of team members, a major change in project scope, leadership transitions, or unresolved interpersonal conflict. When regression happens, managers should recognize it as a normal response to change rather than a failure, and apply the appropriate strategies for the stage the team has returned to in order to help them move forward again.
How long does each Tuckman stage last?
There is no fixed length. A small team that has worked together before may move through forming in days, while a large new team can stay in storming for weeks. Research by Connie Gersick found that many teams make their biggest change around the midpoint of their deadline, so a midpoint review is a good moment to check the stage again.
Which leadership style fits each Tuckman stage?
A common pairing is directing for forming, coaching for storming, supporting for norming, delegating for performing and recognizing for adjourning. The pairing comes from situational leadership (Hersey and Blanchard, 1969), not from Tuckman himself, but project managers often use the two models together.
Suggested articles:
- 5 Ways to Build Cultural Accountability in Your Team
- 15 Game Changing Agile Collaboration Team Techniques
- 5 Steps for Establishing Team Norms
- 5 Conflict Levels in the Workplace: How to Recognize Them
- Free Lessons Learned Templates
Shane Drumm, holding certifications in PMP®, PMI-ACP®, CSM, and LPM, is the author behind numerous articles featured here. Hailing from County Cork, Ireland, his expertise lies in implementing Agile methodologies with geographically dispersed teams for software development projects. In his leisure, he dedicates time to web development and Ironman triathlon training. Find out more about Shane on shanedrumm.com and please reach out and connect with Shane on LinkedIn.