This is a group-based assignment. You should form a group of a maximum of SIX (6) members from your tutorial group (T/TG Group). Each group is required to upload a single report to CANVAS via your respective tutorial group.
Each group will need to nominate a group leader. The responsibility of the group leader is to upload the report on behalf of the group and inform the various group members after the group assignment has been submitted. The group leader is advised to keep the acknowledgment receipt of submission as evidence that the assignment has been submitted. Submission receipt is the ONLY proof of submission, especially in the event of technical failure. Submission via Canvas mobile app is not supported.
Multiple submissions are allowed before the cut-off date. All assignments are to be submitted via T/TG group in CANVAS. Please ensure that you have submitted the assignment to the correct folder. Re-submission is NOT allowed after the cut-off. Only the latest submission copy will be considered for grading. Any appeals for re-submission after the cutoff date will not be entertained.
The university’s prevailing mark deduction scheme will apply to all late submissions.
Please include a cover page with the following details:
• Title of this course, Group leader name & PI number, followed by names and PI numbers of the team members.
• Tutorial group.
• Academic Integrity Declaration Statement:
“I declare that:
1. This assignment is my own work, unless otherwise acknowledged or credited by appropriate referencing.
2. I have/have not used* generative artificial intelligence (AI) in this assignment. Any use of generative AI tools must be reported reported using Table A and placed in the reference section with proper citations and references.
3. I have read and abide by the SUSS Honour Code and I am aware of the penalties associated with plagiarism and collusion listed in the SUSS Student Handbook.”
* Delete where appropriate
In accordance with the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), please DO NOT include other personal particulars.
To facilitate your submission into Canvas, name your document file strictly to this format –
CourseCode_AssignmentCode_UserID_FullName.
For example, ABC123_TMA01_Sally001_TanMeiMeiSally (omit D/O, S/O).
Academic Integrity
All written work is required to be referenced. That is, formally acknowledging the source of ideas, quotes, or facts gained from other authors and which are used directly or indirectly in the text of your papers. The American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style must be used for all in-text citations, references, figures, and tables. For more information, you may refer to https://libguides.suss.edu.sg/apa. Honesty and integrity are the foundations of all forms of academic work, including at SUSS.
Direct lifting of texts without acknowledgment is plagiarism, and disciplinary action will be taken. Students are advised to synthesise and rephrase ideas in your own words. If you use generative AI in your assignment, please be sure to cite it properly and attribute it with tables. For formats of proper citation and attribution of generative AI generative response, please refer to https://rise.articulate.com/share/GlQuywqm9MmZkxbaGig0HjjFA73k7aBr#/ .
Please be aware that all submissions will be automatically screened by the Turnitin, which contains plagiarism detection through a similarity index. Similarity index is NOT, by itself, an indicator of whether you have (self) plagiarised or not. A responsible way of drawing on external sources is citation and attribution. Review https://www.suss.edu.sg/aboutsuss/centres/teaching-and-learning-centre/learning-support for guidelines and tips to avoid plagiarism and guidance on the use of generative AI (See Section 5.1 Part K).
You are reminded that the penalties for academic dishonesty are severe and may include expulsion from the programme or referral to SUSS’ Student Disciplinary Group. Details on the academic dishonesty can be found in your student handbook. Please refer to Section 5.2 Academic Matters of the University Student Handbook on academic integrity and plagiarism.
Software application tools that use generative AI or similar CANNOT be used to write or answer your assignments. These tools are non-exhaustive and includes ChatGPT, Qwillo, Grammarly, Microsoft Co-pilot, Gemini, Quillbot, and others. If you have declared the usage of generative AI in the academic integrity declaration statement in the cover page of your assignment, declaration, you will need to complete the Generative AI Attribution Table as shown in Table A. Please include Table A in the references section of your assignment. Late marks deduction may apply if resubmission of completed declaration and table is required.
Table A
Attribution Table
| SN | Tool | Purpose | Exact Prompt Used | Output Used |
| 1 | Name of Application Tool | Provide purpose | Provide the full prompt used. | In-text citation must be provided that includes the SN in this table and retain the output with timestamp included. |
| 2 | ||||
| 3 |
a Purposes are non-exhaustive but can include brainstorming, researching, generating outlines, improving grammar.
b Students must provide documentation of the results of prompts used. If tool is used to improve grammar, students must save the original file as evidence of original work.
c Students must provide appropriate in-text citation and references in the assignment.
Please note the following:
The use of software application tool with Generative AI is a learning aid. These tools are non-exhaustive and includes ChatGPT, Qwillo, Grammarly, Microsoft Co-pilot, Gemini, Quillbot and others These tools CANNOT be used to write or answer your assignments and are NOT a substitute for critical thinking or original work. All students must complete this table if any such tools were used during the research and writing of the assignment.
Failure to provide complete information will be sufficient grounds for academic dishonesty and penalties will be awarded.
Formatting Instructions
The assignment is to be submitted in Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) with the following format:
• Font type: Times New Roman
• Font size: 12 point
• Line spacing: 1.5 lines
• Margin: 1” all round
• Paragraph Alignment: Justified
The total word count (excluding the cover page and references) should not exceed 2,000 words without extra buffer. Please include figures and tables only when necessary and provide supplementary information to your assignment. In-text citations are included in the word count. References and appendix (e.g., transcripts and interview questions) are not included in the word count.
Assignment Details
1. Background
Flexible work arrangement request (FWAR) has come into legislature in December 1, 2024. This allows employees to formally request for flexible work arrangements. While most companies have some flexible work arrangements in place such as flexi-time, flexi-place, and flexi-load, this has presented several team dynamic challenges for teams.
As a group of team dynamics consultants, your task is to assist a team struggling with the challenges arising from this situation. Your mission is to develop TWO (2) solutions based on concepts learned from this course.
Hire a Professional Essay & Assignment Writer for completing your Academic Assessments
Native Singapore Writers Team
- 100% Plagiarism-Free Essay
- Highest Satisfaction Rate
- Free Revision
- On-Time Delivery
2. Objective
The objective of this GBA is to deepen and apply your understanding of team dynamics in organisations by addressing real-world problems related to overcoming team dynamics challenges resulting from flexible work arrangements. Your task is to interview an employee who meets the following criteria: a) s/he works in a team that has encountered team dynamics problems resulting from the situation presented in the background; b) s/he is not enrolled in the Team Dynamics class.
You must complete the following tasks:
a) Identify the problems of team dynamics encountered (i.e., the problem must be resulting from the situation presented in the backgroud);
b) Develop TWO (2) solutions to solve these problems;
c) Explain why the solutions will be effective by applying team dynamics theories or concepts;
d) Identify the boundary situations in which these solutions may not work;
e) Present this report in a video recording, as a group of Team Dynamic Consultants; You should apply and relate theories and concepts learned in the course throughout your report.
3. Steps
This assignment comprises THREE (3) main steps.
a) Identify a Suitable Case Subject. To help the group deliver a better GBA, this project description will be released one week before the semester starts, such that the group may start to brainstorm together on identifying the right interviewee via your networks and make a proper group decision as your case study.
b) Develop and Conduct a Structured Interview. The group is to draft out a set of questions for a 30-minute interview with the case subject. The purpose of the interview is to identify the problems resulting from flexible work arrangement, develop solutions to solve these problems, and explain why the solutions will be effective.
c) Report Findings. Draft a 2,000-word report together with a video group
presentation that conveys the key points of the report and demonstrates collaborative team skills. All group members must participate in the group presentation.
4. Additional Task Information
a) Developing a Structured Interview. The structured interview should cover the following areas:
i. Problems faced by the team resulting from flexible work arrangements;
ii. Sufficient information on the situation and examples for developing the potential solutions to solve these problems and analysing why the solutions will be effective (i.e., the theoretical reasons for their potential effectiveness).
Please prepare more questions to make sure you have explored all areas.
b) Conducting the Structured Interview. As with any qualitative study, it is important for researchers to enter the interview with an open mind with no preconceived ideas of what problems the team may face. Take on an exploratory mindset and elicit the individual’s perceptions and feelings without prejudice. The group is to record the interview for transcribing after the interview or use ZOOM’s automatic transcription. Please seek permission from your interviewee before the start of the interview. Explain the informed consent form to your interviewee and ask your interviewee to sign the informed consent form found in Appendix 2. Please select another interviewee if your current interviewee is not comfortable with this.
c) Analysing the Structured Interview. After the interview, transcribe the interview for analysis. Please remove any identifiers of the company and interviewee (e.g., names) to ensure confidentiality. You should replace the identifiers with a code (e.g., Person A from Company X). Examine the transcribed interview to look for themes and apply at least TWO (2) theories/concepts taught in class to explain the experience of the case subject. The list of theories/concepts is as follows:
• Virtual Team
• Culture
• Identity and Formation
• Development and Structure
• Decision Making
• Conflict
• Influence
• Power
• Leadership
• Performance
You are encouraged to be theoretically creative by combining different topics to richly identify the problems faced by the team resulting from flexible work arrangements and sufficient information of the situation and examples for developing the potential solutions to solve these problems and analysing why they will be effective. Support your analysis with recent academic publications on team dynamics.
To help you draw relevance between your observation and the theory, you can consider the sample interview questions below (but you need to come up with your own interview questions):
a) Decision Making
• How are decisions made in the team? Is this method ineffective, and why?
• Could you describe the situation when this occurred?
• What did the team do in the decision-making process?
b) Conflict
• How are disagreements managed in the team?
• Could you describe the situation when this occurred?
• What did the team do in the conflict resolution process?
c) Virtual Team
• After all employees are allowed to return to the office, is virtual team still adopted?
• What are the disadvantages of virtual team in your company?
• Could you describe the situation when this occurred?
d) Preparation of the Report. This is a professional report and should (but not necessarily) comprise the following sections:
• Team Problems
• Solutions Developed
• Analysis of Why the Solutions will be Effective
• Boundary of These Solutions
• References
• Appendices (e.g., interview questions and transcripts, separately)
In the report, there is no need to include an abstract, executive summary, methodology, or conclusion. You can include the background information in the main sessions.
To help you reflect critically on theories/concepts/models, here are some guiding questions for you to reflect on when you analyse the transcripts of the interview and draft your report:
1) Do the relevant theories or models (e.g., ODDI model, Vroom’s Normative Model, Contingency Leadership Theory, Tuckman’s Theory of Group Development, escalation and de-escalation of conflict, Moscovici’s Conversion Theory, French and Raven’s power bases, Social Identity Theory, Social Comparison Theory, Social Exchange Theory, etc.) make sense or apply in the applied case study? (Note that there are other theories or models that could be focused on, these are only examples.)
2) Based on the interview, where or in which parts do they make sense?
3) Where or in which part could the theory not be applied, or do not make sense?
4) In what condition do the relevant theories contradict real-life observation?
e) Video Team Presentation. Prepare video recording of a team presentation focusing on the essential points in the report (including the introduction, problems, solutions, justifications, and boundaries). Ensure your video file conforms to these technical requirements:
• Duration: Within 10 minutes
• Content: Shows all team members and presentation slides (you may project the slides on a TV, laptop, or any suitable device; you may also use ZOOM)
• File Size: No more than 500MB for upload
• Video Format: .mp4 for upload
• Submission: Submit on Canvas in the “Video” folder by the cut-off deadline
• The recording should have NO post-recording edits or touch-ups
5. GBA Assessment Rubric
The assignment will be assessed on the following components based on the respective weightage.
| Components | Marks | |
| Video team presentation | 15% | |
| Written language and structure | 5% | See the marking rubric below |
| Interview questions | 10% | See the marking rubric below |
| Problems | 10% | See the marking rubric below |
| Solutions developed | 20% | See the marking rubric below |
| Analysis of why the solutions will be effective | 20% | See the marking rubric below |
| Boundary of the solutions | 10% | |
| Blind Peer Evaluation rating | 10% | Computed from the survey result |
| Total | 100% |
Buy Custom Answer of This Assessment & Raise Your Grades
a. Video team presentation (15%)
The video presentation will be evaluated on the dimensions such as clarity, conciseness, and fluentness, to what extent the presentation allows your audiences to follow easily, and to what extent the presentation demonstrates strong collaborative team skills.
b. Written presentation and structure (5%)
This portion of the marks is concerned with presenting your report in a fluent, coherent and logical manner, the English quality (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc.), and adhering to APA and formatting guidelines.
c. Interview questions (10%)
You are required to develop a comprehensive and proper list of relevant interview questions with high quality.
d. Problems (10%)
The analysis and theory proportion of the marks is allocated based on the “substance” of your report. This sub-session expects a high-quality and very clear discussion of each team dynamics problem encountered resulting from the situation presented in the background.
e. Developed solutions (20%)
Based on your analysis and theory, you should be able to develop practical solutions for your clients (i.e., the interviewee’s team) to solve the problems identified. This part will be evaluated on the soundness and feasibility of the practical solutions. Novel recommendations that are not from the textbook or academic articles will be welcome as well.
f. Analysis of Why the Solutions Will be Effective (20%)
This sub-session is supposed to include insightful, correct, appropriate and sophisticated analysis of why your developed solutions will be effective, as well as demonstration of good understanding and deep application of course concepts and theories with excellent critical thinking ability.
g. Boundary of the Solutions (10%)
You should identify the boundaries/limitations of your developed solutions, that is, in which condition the developed solutions may not work. Your critical thinking ability will be evaluated.
h. Peer Evaluation (10%)
Each group member will evaluate the preparation, contribution, effort, and teamwork of every other member on a scale of 1 to 10. These evaluations will be done blindly to ensure fairness and honesty. Those who fail to submit the blind peer evaluation by the deadline will automatically forfeit all points for this component, even if their peers have provided ratings for them.
The scoring scale is defined as follows:
0 = No contribution (did not participate in any tasks or activities, entirely disengaged from the group work).
2 = Did not meet expectations (no meaningful contribution, absent from tasks).
4 = Seldom meets expectations (minimal effort or sporadic participation).
6 = Meets expectations (completed assigned tasks satisfactorily).
8 = Exceeds expectations (proactively contributed beyond assigned work).
10 = Far exceeds expectations (demonstrated exceptional effort, leadership, or additional contributions).
To ensure accountability, each group member’s average peer evaluation score will determine their final marks for the peer evaluation component. The peer evaluation marks for each individual will be calculated as follows:
Individual Peer Evaluation Marks = Average Peer Evaluation Score
Note: Groups should raise any concerns about non-contribution of group members early in the GBA process to the instructor. Students with persistently low peer evaluation scores may have further marks deducted from the overall GBA score.
Assessment Rubrics
| Exceptional | Proficient | Sufficient | Needs Improvement | ||
| Video presentation (Total: 15%) | Clarity & conciseness | The video is presented in a clear, concise and fluent manner. | Majority of the video is presented in a clear, concise, and fluent manner. | Majority of the video is somewhat presented in a clear, concise, and/or fluency manner. | Majority of the video is not presented in clear, concise, and fluent manner. |
| Content flow | Produces content that allows audience to follow easily | Produces most of content that allows audience to follow easily. | Produces some content that allows audience to follow easily. | Did not produce content that allows audience to follow easily. | |
| Collaborative skills | Transitions between speakers are smooth with good coordination and sufficient time allocated for each member’s presentation. Team members appear engaged and attentive to one another’s parts (e.g., appropriate reactions or acknowledgments). The showcases cohesive messaging. | Transitions between speakers are mostly smooth, with minor gaps in coordination, and sufficient time allocated for each member’s presentation. Members engage with each other’s parts in some visible way (e.g., visual cues, responses, or thematic consistency). The presentation shows mostly cohesive teamwork. | Transitions between speakers are somewhat smooth but feel slightly disconnected. Some members were not allocated sufficient time to present. There is limited visible interaction or engagement between members. The presentation shows somewhat cohesive teamwork. | Demonstrates poor collaborative team skills. One or a few team members dominate the presentation, with limited or no noticeable coordination or interaction. There are no transitions or introductions between speakers, and minimal non-verbal collaboration. The presentation feels fragmented and lacks a sense of teamwork | |
| Written presentation and structure (Total: 5%) |
Presented in a fluent and logical manner. Excellent English quality. Adhere to all APA’s formatting guidelines. |
Present mostly in fluent and logical manner. High quality of English. Adhere mostly to APA’s formatting guidelines. |
Present somewhat in fluent and logical manner. Average English quality. Adhere somewhat to APA’s formatting guidelines but with evident mistakes. |
Did not present in a fluent and logical manner. Poor quality of English. Adhered to few APA’s formatting guidelines. |
|
| Interview questions (Total: 10%) | Comprehensive list of interview questions; high-quality and relevant questions. | Mostly complete list of high-quality interview questions. | List of interview questions are of average quality; has a few gaps. | Incomplete list and/or low quality interview questions. Many gaps. | |
| Problems (Total: 10%) | Problems were comprehensively discussed with relevant linkages to the appropriate team dynamic concepts in a clear and concise manner. | Problems were discussed with relevant linkages to the appropriate team dynamic concepts. | Problems were somewhat discussed with mostly relevant linkages to the appropriate team dynamic concepts. | Problems were not or vaguely discussed with few relevant linkages to the appropriate team dynamic concepts. | |
| Solutions developed (Total: 20%) | For each solution | Solution is well-linked with the case analysis and clearly addresses the identified problems. Provides impactful, practical, and feasible solutions, showcasing their applicability to the case scenario. | Solution is somewhat tied to the case analysis but might need more depth in connection or insight. Demonstrates a degree of practicality but could benefit from more depth in real-world applications. | Solution is loosely linked or does not fully address the identified problems from the case analysis. Shows limited understanding of the case dynamics and lacks depth in real-world application. | Solution is unrelated or inadequately linked to the case analysis, failing to address the identified problems. Solution is not relevant and showcases a lack of understanding of the case dynamics or theoretical concepts. |
| Analysis: why effective (Total: 20%) | (If the analysis is integrated for both solutions, it is also accepted.) | Provides a highly insightful and sophisticated analysis of why the solutions will be effective, using relevant theories or frameworks to explain their effectiveness. Clearly justifies the causal relationship between the solutions, the case problems, and the expected outcomes. Describes key definitions, concepts, or theories in a clear and concise manner. The analysis includes appropriate references where needed, demonstrating strong theoretical and practical understanding | Analysis is mostly appropriate and accurate but lacks depth in explaining why the solutions will be effective. Theories or concepts explaining the effectiveness are included but not fully explored. Mostly describes key definitions, concepts, or theories in a clear manner. Links between the solutions, case problems, and outcomes are generally clear but could be more detailed. References are mostly included. | Analysis is limited, with weak or unclear links to explain why the solutions will be effective. Theoretical concepts or frameworks are vaguely used or poorly applied. The connection between the solutions and case problems is unclear, and key theories or concepts are misapplied or underexplained. References may be missing or irrelevant. | Analysis is missing or does not explain why the solutions would be effective in addressing the case problems. Fails to demonstrate an understanding of relevant theoretical concepts or frameworks, with no application to the case. No or incorrect definitions/understanding s of key concepts or theories. The analysis lacks any connection between the solutions, the case problems, and the outcomes, offering little to no insights. References are absent or inappropriate. |
| Solutions’ Boundary (10%) | Boundary for each solution | Provides an insightful and thorough consideration of the boundaries and limitations of the solution. Demonstrates advanced critical thinking by clearly identifying key conditions and scenarios where the solution may not work effectively, supported by relevant concepts or frameworks. | Provides adequate consideration of the boundaries and limitations of the solution. Identifies most key conditions where the solution may not work effectively, but the explanation lacks depth or full application of concepts. | Provides limited consideration of boundaries and limitations. Identifies few or unclear conditions where the solution may not work effectively. The reasoning is weak, and the application of concepts is minimal or not fully developed. | No consideration of boundaries and limitations. Does not identify any conditions where the solution may not work effectively. The analysis is either missing or fails to explain why the solution may not work in certain contexts.
|
Stuck with a lot of homework assignments and feeling stressed ?
Take professional academic assistance & Get 100% Plagiarism free papers
The post HRM263 Group- Based Assignment 01 SUSS January 2025: Team Dynamics appeared first on Singapore Assignment Help.
