The Tuckman Model and the Nadler and Tushman ModelBruce Tuckman first developed the Tuckman model of formation, storming, norming, and performance in 1965. Later, in 1977, Tuckman and Mary Ann Jensen jointly added the update phase. Tuckman's theory is a useful and elegant illustration of team behavior and development. The model explains that as the team's capabilities mature, relationships are forged and the leader changes leadership style. The leader begins with a direct style, moves to coaching, then to participation, ends up with delegation and finally becomes almost detached. At this stage, the team can produce another leader and the previous leader can move on to create a new team. Tuckman argues that the four phases are necessary and inevitable for the team to grow, plan work, manage problems, find solutions, and deliver results. This article aims to discuss, compare and contrast the Tuckman Model and the Nadler and Tushman Model. Team formation is the first phase of the model. A person's behavior is driven by the desire for acceptance and to avoid conflicts or disputes with other people (Judge & Bono, 2000). Severe feelings and problems are avoided, with people focusing on keeping busy with routines such as task assignments, team organization and meeting locations during this period. In this stage, individuals gather impressions and information about each other, the group's goals, and how to advance toward them. This phase is comfortable, but avoiding conflict results in little that can be done. The team learns about the opportunities and challenges, reaches a consensus on the objectives and begins to manage the task. The team may be motivated, but they are usually... in the center of the card... the leaders of the change, of the ripple effect that will result from any change from one part of the organization to the rest. These models are suitable for study for various reasons. The main reason is that they provide a broad and comprehensive range that covers issues experienced at both organizational and group levels. Another reason is that the materials needed for their study are easily available and well detailed. By comparing and contrasting these two models, you gain a great deal of knowledge to help you understand how similar models work because they form the basis of other models. References Burke, W. W. (2003). Organizational change: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Judge, A., & Bono, E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751-765.