Cog’s Ladder – Another framework for team development stages

Cog’s Ladder

Cog’s Ladder is framework used to explain how teams develop over time and to help leaders and managers accellerate teams towards high performance. The framework was designed by George O. Charrier while he was working at Procter & Gamble in 1972. The name “cog” is his initials in reverse, and the word ladder captures the developmental nature of the framework. As with other individuals who have tried to understand team effectiveness, Charrier uses a model that captures different stages that teams go through over time. Again, as with different models, Cog’s Ladder proposes that teams and team members experience different emotions and exibit different behaviours and types of interactions in each of the stages. The model proposes five stages which are: Polite, Why We’re Here, Power, Cooperation, and Esprit.

1 – Polite Stage

When a group of unconnected people first come togehter, everyone is really polite and on their best behaviour. Individuals don’t understand the dynamics of the group or the personalities of those around them. At this stage people sort of keep their cards close to their chest, giving away little of their real views, engaging in little conflict, avoiding contentious issues and topics and generally gaining information about others. They want to learn about those around them and to manage how others perceive them. This is often done by being polite.

2 – Why We’re Here Stage

Once the team has established initial polite connections, people are aware that they don’t really know what’s going on, why they are there or what they’re reason for being is. Charrier argues that at this stage team members try and fill these gaps by seeking to understand the groups purpose and goals. There is a lot of questioning at this stage as members try to clarify why the team exists and as they work to form a common understanding of the team’s purpose. The overall focus of the team at this stage is on aligning the shared understanding of the team’s directions and goals and what good looks like within the team. This stages also helps team members understand perspectives of value within the team, and the potential role they can play in helping the team achieve its goals.

3 – Power Stage

Once the team have a sense of why they are there, they move on to stage 2 and have a bit of a power stuggle. Now that they know where they are trying to get to, team members try and figure out where they are in the pecking order and claim as much power as they can. They do this by trying to gain influence and control over what the team is doing by promoting their ideas, pushing for their views to be heard, exerting dominance over others, disagreeing over best next steps, witholding of resrouces, critical actions and behaviours, and so on. This stage might be a bit uncomofortable (more for some than others – see the dark triad), but it’s a key stage of team development as it helps the team clarify the (potentially unoffical) hierarchy and leadership struture tht exists within it. This definitely can be a tense stage, but things settle down once everyone knows where they sit in the social group. By the end of this stage teams should feel more settled, should have ironed out some of their underlying issues, should be in a more cohesive state and should have members who are clearer and more accepting of their positions within the group (reducing the liklihood of ongoing unhelpful conflict).

4 – Cooperation Stage

Now that the team has been through that stage of conflict and social ordering, they can move towards more open and collaborative working practices. People know who each other are, know where power sits, have a better sense of how to interact with each other and have more certainty over the roles everyone really holds, so it’s easier to navigate the social context. At this stage team members are typically more supportive of one another and start to work more effectively towards a common goal. There is a bit of a shift from individual power struggles towards mroe collective efforts to succeed as a team. Ideally team goals are put ahead of individual goals at this stage. Ideally, trust and shared respect are also more at the forefront of working bhaviours and sentiment at this stage.

5 – Esprit Stage

Like other models of this nature, Cog’s Ladder ends in the green and pleasant lands of high performance. At this stage Charrier explains that teams are synergystic, that they are cohesive and that they are high performing. They know what they are doing, why they are doing and have fully embodied how to work together well to make that happen. This is the pinacle of a team, the place where high performance dwels.

To learn more about team development stages you might look at  Tuckman’s team development model (forming, storming, norming, performing, etc) and Lencioni’s five dysfunctions of a team. Psychological Safety is also worth learning about. From a personal level, it might be interest to read a bit about the role of the ego and to explore how individuals experience change, potentially wiht Bridges model. It might also be worth exploring some work on wellbeing and what makes a good experience at work, such as the PERMA model.

It all sounds pretty good to us, and in line with other models that aim to capture the steps that teams go through over time. We often say that we are highly social beings, and all the social factors that are playing out in models like this are really important. It can sometimes feel frustrating to be going through them as a leader or manager, but they really matter. It might feel like we are not doing any “work” when our teams are forming, but core work at this stage is the creation of a team. That’s a hugely valuable thing to be doing in itself, and that is a large part of the actual role of leaders and managers. Increasingly we do wonder about th role of personal development in giving individuals the tools to navigate these moments of social forming more effectively. As with many things, we think self awareness and the ability to gain some distance from our thoughts is hugely helpful in doing this well.

This article is based on general reading and delivery of workshops, so we have few sources. Please let us know if you know any source materials we should review and reference here.

We’re a small organization who know we make mistakes and want to improve them. Please contact us with any feedback you have on this post. We’ll usually reply within 72 hours.