DREXLER/SIBBET

Team Performance Model

OVERVIEW

The arc-shaped layout of the Model elements represents the constant Models as Maps
movement of developing teams from freedom to constraint and At one time, people in companies all came from the same towns and
back toward freedom, as constraints are mastered over time. (This backgrounds, so process maps were built into their culture. People
is illustrated as going down to the “bottom line” realities, then in today’s diversified organizations need process maps to guide their
moving up toward the “top line” awareness.) All group process is work together.
an up-and-down journey, in which we imagine options, encounter
The Drexler/Sibbet Team Performance Model ® is a “map” to creating
constraints, and eventually surmount the constraints with discipline
and sustaining high performance in all kinds of teams. Like a real
and practice, thereby regaining freedom through learning and con-
map it is comprehensive, but doesn’t contain all of the details. The
sciousness. The freedom/constraint pattern reflects the concrete or-
actual journeys teams take through this map follow many routes.
ganizational realities inherent in team process as well as the role of
vision and imagination. Mastering realities while remaining inspired
is a key to achieving the higher order freedom of the later stages.
Features of the Model
The Model focuses on seven primary issues that teams have to come
to grips with as they move through the formative stages of team
Model as Framework development to high performance and beyond. The questions repre-
The Model provides a language and framework for using other Team senting each of the seven stages are always present, but each comes
Performance tools. Together they enable teams to create many ap- into focus at particular points in a team’s development over time.
proaches, much the way a musician would use a keyboard to create Each stage builds on prior ones in an inclusive way, so a team that
different compositions. Using them, teams are able to find the har- handles earlier stages well
monies they need to reach for high performance. Four color version is better prepared to resolve
DREXLER/SIBBET

Team Performance the later issues.

Team Performance System team
DREXLER/SIBBET/FORRESTER

p e r f o r m a n c e™ RI
ENTATIO
N 1–Resolved
Model ® 7–Resolved RE
NEWAL
For each stage of perfor-
The Drexler/Sibbet/Forrester Team Performance ™ • Purpose • Recognition & celebration

O
1. • Team identity • Change mastery
7.
• Membership • Staying power
mance, the Model contains
System is a widely used suite of tools for creating and WHY WHY

indicators that the issues of

am I here? continue?
2–Resolved 6–Resolved
1–Unresolved • Mutual regard • Spontaneous interaction 7–Unresolved

sustaining team performance, each of which is based on • Disorientation

• Uncertainty
T B U I L DI
• Forthrightness • Synergy
RFORM
• Boredom
• Burnout

that stage are resolved or

• Reliability • Surpassing results
• Fear
US PE
system

AN
NG

H
the Model. Developed by Allan Drexler, Russ Forrester 2.

TR
6.

HI G

CE
WHO
3–Resolved
• Explicit assumptions
5–Resolved
• Clear processes WOW! not. The dimensions listed
and the founder of The Grove Consultants International, David Sibbet,
are you? • Clear, integrated goals • Alignment
• Shared vision • Disciplined execution

for each stage under the

2–Unresolved 6–Unresolved
ARIFI C MENTAT
• Caution • Overload
• Mistrust
CL A LE • Disharmony

these tools provide team leaders and members with clear, visual frame- • Facade

P
L

IO
3. 5.
heading “resolved” define

TI
G OA

IM

N
ON
works for developing teams, building leadership skills and implement-
4–Resolved
WHAT • Assigned roles WHO, does

what it means to master

are we doing? • Allocated resources WHAT, WHEN,
• Decisions made WHERE?
3–Unresolved 5–Unresolved

ing practices that lead to high performance. Components of the System

• Apathy • Conflict/confusion
• Skepticism M I T ME • Nonalignment
OM
• Irrelevant competition

4.
N • Missed deadlines
that stage. Under the “un-

T
include, in addition to the Model, the The Grove Team Performance 4–Unresolved

resolved” heading are listed

• Dependence
• Resistance HOW
(415) 561–2500
T (415) 561−2500 will we do it?

Online Survey™, the Team Leader Guide: Strategies and Practices, and a
(800) 49–GROVE
T (800) 49−GROVE
symptoms indicating that
F (415) 561–2525
host of support materials and guides. Complete information about each
1000 O’Reilly Avenue
CREATING SUSTAINING the team hasn’t successful-
1000
San O’Reilly Avenue
Francisco, CA 94129 of these Team Performance System tools can be found at The Grove’s
San Francisco, CA 94129 ly come to grips with the
website: [Link].
12.6 TPModel ©1990–2019 Allan Drexler and David Sibbet.
[Link]
[Link]
issues involved.

© 1990–2019 The Grove Consultants International. All Rights Reserved.

 DREXLER/SIBBET

Team Performance
RI
ENTATIO
N 1–Resolved
• Purpose
Model ®
7–Resolved
• Recognition & celebration
RE
NEWAL

O
1. • Team identity
• Membership
• Change mastery
• Staying power 7.
WHY WHY
am I here? continue?
2–Resolved 6–Resolved
1–Unresolved • Mutual regard • Spontaneous interaction 7–Unresolved
• Disorientation • Forthrightness • Synergy • Boredom
• Uncertainty
T BUILD • Reliability • Surpassing results
RFORM • Burnout
• Fear
US I PE

AN
NG

H
2.

TR
6.

HI G

CE
3–Resolved 5–Resolved
WHO • Explicit assumptions • Clear processes WOW!
are you? • Clear, integrated goals • Alignment
• Shared vision • Disciplined execution
2–Unresolved 6–Unresolved
ARIFI C EMENTAT
• Caution • Overload
• Mistrust
• Facade
CL A L • Disharmony

P
L

IO
3. 5.

TI
G OA

IM

N
ON
4–Resolved
WHAT • Assigned roles WHO, does
are we doing? • Allocated resources WHAT, WHEN,
• Decisions made WHERE?
3–Unresolved 5–Unresolved
• Apathy • Conflict/confusion
I T ME
• Skepticism
• Irrelevant competition
O MM N
• Nonalignment
• Missed deadlines

4.

T
4–Unresolved
• Dependence
• Resistance HOW
will we do it?

CREATING SUSTAINING

1. Orientation 2. Trust Building 3. Goal Clarification 4. Commitment 5. Implementation 6. High

12.6 Performance
TPModel [Link]
©1990–2019 Allan Renewaland David Sibbet.
When teams are forming Next, people want to know The more concrete work of At some point discussions Teams turn the corner when When methods are mas- Teams are dynamic. People
everybody wonders WHY WHO they will work with— the team begins with clarity need to end and decisions they begin to sequence work tered, a team can begin to get tired; members change.
they are here, what their their expectations, agen- about team goals, basic as- must be made about HOW and settle on WHO does change its goals and flexibly People wonder “WHY con-
potential fit is and whether das and competencies. sumptions and vision. Terms resources, time, staff— WHAT, WHEN, and WHERE respond to the environment. tinue?” It’s time to harvest
others will accept them. Sharing builds trust and a and definitions come to the all the bottom line con- in action. Timing and sched- The team can say, “WOW!” learning and prepare for a
People need some kind of free exchange among team fore. WHAT are the priorities? straints—will be managed. uling dominate this stage. and surpass expectations. new cycle of action.
answer to continue. members. Agreed roles are key.

12.6 TPModel ©1990–2019 Allan Drexler and David Sibbet