This was a group project that we five classmates took on two months back. It was a student project and was a course requirement for our finance course. The project asked to select any financial institution or market, and prepare a detailed analysis of it. This report was to have 10% weightage in our final grade. The development of the team started with the forming stage but this stage quickly merged with the second stage of storming since we were all acquainted with each other and knew what to expect. Then, we proposed ideas as we agreed and disagreed on certain issues, but managed conflict and reached a consensus. Hence, in the third stage of norming, we had a clearly defined leader in me, as I had the most expertise in this area. As our deadline grew closer, we quickly ascended in to the performing stage. Our emphasis was on solving the problems and accomplishing our task of finishing this report in due time. We interacted frequently and directed discussion and influence toward achieving team goals. Finally, after we submitted the report, we adjourned as we wrapped up and parted ways (Daft, 1997).

Our group was not really following the punctuated equilibrium model because we did not suddenly start working at the last minute when the deadline loomed closer. The punctuated equilibrium model focuses on very little team activity in the initial stages and increased activity towards the end as time starts running out. In our case, we worked consistently throughout the span of the time given to us. It is the five phase model which does the best job of describing how our team had evolved (Griffin, 1990)