Bài tập nhóm môn Organizational behavior| Đại học kinh tế quốc dân

lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF
ADVANCED EDUCATION PROGRAMS
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR
GROUP ASSIGNMENT REPORT
Group: 08 Class: POHE Marketing Communication 65 Students: Trần Khánh An 11231626 Ngô Ngọc Anh 11231629 Nguyễn Thế Anh 11231632 Trần Anh 11231634 Trần Ngọc Hương Giang 11231641 Hoàng Phương Linh 11231656 Lê Hồng Nam 11231667 Nguyễn Thị Quý Phú 11231675 Nguyễn Ngọc Việt 11231691
Lecturer: Dr. Tran Huy Phuong Ha Noi, April 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 3
1. Size ............................................................................................................ 3
2. Role ........................................................................................................... 3
3. Norm ......................................................................................................... 5
4. Cohesiveness ............................................................................................. 5
II. DEVELOPMENT OF TEAM COOPERATION .................................... 6
1. Bruce Tuckman’s Five-Stage Model ......................................................... 6
1.1. Forming .............................................................................................. 7
1.2. Storming ............................................................................................. 7
1.3. Norming ............................................................................................. 8
1.4. Performing ......................................................................................... 8
1.5. Adjourning (Final Stage – Dissolution) ............................................. 8
2. Communication in Team ........................................................................... 9
III. THEORY OF MOTIVATION ............................................................... 10
1. McClelland's Theory of Needs ............................................................... 10
2. Leadership theories ................................................................................. 12
2.1. Assessing Team Members' Readiness .............................................. 13
2.2. Task and Team Assignment .............................................................. 13
2.3. Flexibly Adjusting Leadership Style ................................................ 14
2.4. Achieved Outcomes ......................................................................... 14
IV. REFLECTION AND EVALUATION TEAM....................................... 14
1. Individual differences ............................................................................. 14
2. Empowerment ......................................................................................... 17
V. FACTORS THAT MAKE THE TEAM EFFECTIVE
ORINEFFECTIVE ....................................................................................... 18
1. Factors supporting effectiveness ............................................................. 18
2. Factors hindering effectiveness ............................................................... 18
3. Overall performance ............................................................................... 19
VI. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ............. 19
TEAMWORK AND GOAL ACHIEVEMENT .......................................... 19 lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
VII.CONTRIBUTION OF EACH MEMBER ........................................... 20
1. Critical Thinking Group .......................................................................... 20
2. Idea Generation Group ............................................................................ 21
3. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 22
VIII. CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 22
IX. REFERENCES ....................................................................................... 22 lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 I. INTRODUCTION
Group 8 consists of nine members who had never previously collaborated or
worked in the same team for any other course. This group was formal group,
established by the course instructor to complete the final group assignment, thus
classifying it as a formal group. It also falls under the category of a task group, since
members, though enrolled in the same OB class, were randomly gathered, the group will disband.
To ensure high performance in this type of group, our team leader, Quy Phu - a
female member nominated and approved unanimously - closely monitored each
member’s task progress. Members were required to publicly report their weekly output
to maintain transparency and accountability. 1. Size
With nine members, our team qualified as a small group, especially in the
context of in-class discussions. A small size facilitated quick meetings, easier
consensus building, and faster decision-making. It also allowed more individual
contributions, thus increasing personal effectiveness. However, a limited number of
members may reduce the diversity of perspectives available to the group. 2. Role
According to Meredith Belbin’s (2010) team role theory, individuals tend to
exhibit specific patterns of behavior and contribution in group settings. Belbin
categorized team roles into three broad clusters: thinking/problem-solving roles,
social/interpersonal roles, and action-oriented roles. Although no one behaves exactly
like a role prototype all the time, Belbin’s model provides a reliable framework to
recognize general behavioral patterns in teams.
In Group 8, we applied Belbin’s framework to identify each member’s role
based on their behavior and contribution throughout the project. The table below lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
reflects our consensus after multiple rounds of observation and team reflection. In
many cases, individuals assumed more than one role as the project progressed. Name Role Explanation Monitor Evaluation
Identified goals, delegated tasks, and made Completer-Finisher decisions. Displayed leadership and organizational Quy Phu capabilities.
Detail-oriented, quality-driven; ensured final output met standards.
Reliable and practical; translated ideas into Implementer
executable actions. An takes the advantages of Khanh An Plant
her critical thinking and creativity to produce the
seed and excellent ideas for the team.
Provided in-depth theoretical knowledge and Specialist
critical viewpoints. They give many new Ngoc Anh Plant
directions and solutions to solve many problems of the group. Team Worker
Fostered harmony, encouraged collaboration,
and supported others. He has the ability to The Anh
cohesive and solve the conflicts arising in the group.
Appearing with new ideas, outlining directions Tran Anh Plant
that few people think of. They do not like what is stereotyped or rigid.
She holds the duty of the person who takes notes
in class, searching for related information and Phuong Linh Team Worker
helping others in referencing suitable knowledge sources for each task
Accepted delegated tasks and converted group Nam Implementer ideas into outcomes. Giang Implementer
Task-focused and dependable in execution. She Plant
not only completed his task but also checked
other people’s assignments together with the
leader, showing that he has a strong awareness of how work should be done lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
He also does not mind to suggest changes in Shaper Monitor
assigning tasks, creating necessary debates to Viet Evaluation
drive the team. He is the most enthusiastic and
ambitious members in the group
Overall, all members significantly influenced group effectiveness, especially
those who shared similar goal orientations. Each member contributed distinct strengths
that enhanced group synergy. As a result, we achieved a final performance that aligned
well with our team’s objectives. 3. Norm
From our first meeting, Group 8 established clear group norms, which played a
crucial role in maintaining order, fairness, and productivity within our diverse team of students. Key norms included:
- Punctuality & commitment: Emphasized timeliness in meetings and strict
adherence to deadlines to prevent work delays.
- Goal orientation: The leader clearly articulated shared objectives and quality
expectations, encouraging each member to take responsibility and actively contribute insights.
- Work method: Tasks were assigned and tracked in Google Sheets. Members
updated their progress accordingly. Communication took place via Messenger,
while meetings and final discussions were held on Google Meet.
- Output standards: Members were expected to understand their assigned
content, focus on core requirements, and avoid excessive reliance on
AIgenerated content, only using it for reference.
Early challenges such as miscommunication or overlapping tasks, partly due to
unclear timelines and holiday schedules, helped us realize the importance of
welldefined roles and responsibilities. These incidents reinforced our commitment to
group norms and paved the way for smoother collaboration. 4. Cohesiveness
The cohesiveness within our group is generally good, with members
collaborating positively and creating a comfortable working environment. High
cohesiveness strengthens mutual trust and commitment to collective goals, leading to
better cooperation, communication, and performance.
In our case, several factors enhanced group cohesiveness: lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
- The small group size, consisting of members from the same class- some of
whom had previously worked together and understood one another - facilitated
casual sharing and created a cheerful atmosphere.
- The presence of a member who flexibly handled multiple tasks, combined with
a peer double-checking mechanism among members, helped strengthen group
cohesiveness and encouraged communication.
- Additionally, the effective leadership of the team leader clearly shaped the
group’s motivation and reinforced collaboration among members.
However, since this was the first time most of us had worked together, there
was still a noticeable sense of hesitation and formality in interactions. Some members
were shy or reluctant to express their opinions openly, especially in early meetings,
which limited deeper discussion and idea exchange.
We recognized the importance of sustaining and improving cohesiveness.
Strategies that could be applied include clarifying the group’s mission, fostering
informal interactions, developing communication skills, recognizing contributions,
assigning roles based on strengths, and managing conflicts constructively. Such
approaches would not only strengthen relationships but also enhance team
performance in future collaborations.
II. DEVELOPMENT OF TEAM COOPERATION
1. Bruce Tuckman’s Five-Stage Model
Our team development followed Bruce Tuckman’s Five-Stage Model (1965),
which explains how teams evolve through the stages of Forming, Storming, Norming,
Performing, and Adjourning. Below is an analysis of our team’s progression through each stage. lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 1.1. Forming
The team was initially formed one week after the group assignment was
announced, with four members: Phu, Ngoc Anh, Tran Anh, and Giang. Due to an
insufficient number of members, we recruited An and Phương Linh, along with three
others, Viet, Nam, and The Anh, who requested to join. The final team of nine members
was officially established on April 5, and a group Messenger chat was created. Phu
was nominated and agreed upon by all as the team leader.
During this stage, communication was minimal until April 13, when the leader
shared a comprehensive Google Sheet. This included two main tabs: (1) assignment
requirements, group objectives, working rules, and strategic direction, and (2) an
action plan with a timeline and task allocation.
The first task was for each member to study course slides and textbook content
from Chapters 2 to 9, and then summarize their assigned chapter. Longer chapters were divided between two members. 1.2. Storming
Conflict began when the leader asked the group to vote on a suitable time for
the first meeting. Due to the national holiday and the end-of-semester workload, it took
a long time to schedule the meeting. Eventually, the group held its first meeting at 11
PM with full attendance. The agenda included briefing each other on the theories and
choosing the assignment topic - planning a “3 days 2 nights” trip.
Tensions emerged when Ngoc Anh expressed confusion just two hours before
the report’s first draft deadline, stating she did not understand her exact role. The
leader, who was traveling, could not respond immediately. Viet, frustrated by the delay,
tagged the leader and requested an urgent meeting for clarification.
The situation escalated when Phu questioned whether Viet had read the
reference materials and group instructions that had already been shared. He also
criticized the last-minute questions and emphasized the importance of earlier
communication. When asked to vote for a meeting, only Việt agreed, while the rest
declined, intensifying the conflict.
This stage highlighted a clash in working styles. Phu preferred structured,
proactive work using shared documents, while others like Viet and Ngoc Anh needed
direct interaction to clarify confusion. Emotional responses and poor communication
exacerbated the tension. At this point, the leader’s role in emotional regulation and
group cohesion was crucial to prevent further division. lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 1.3. Norming
Despite initial resistance, Phu called for a brief but critical meeting to address
the ongoing confusion. After consulting with peers, he proposed a change in the
project’s approach, using the team’s working process itself as the subject of the report.
He clarified the professor’s expectations and received group consensus.
New group norms were established:
- Members must carefully review task instructions and raise questions early in
the group chat, not near the deadline.
- Constructive feedback was encouraged, and personal criticism discouraged.
The team began to work more cohesively. Members like An, Giang, Nam, and
Tran Anh proactively took on tasks and offered support to others. A more collaborative
atmosphere emerged, signaling the transition to the next stage. 1.4. Performing
Once roles and group norms were clarified, the team entered the Performing
stage, where productivity and cooperation significantly improved. Examples of high performance:
- Members proactively completed their tasks: Khánh An and Phương Linh
initiated task breakdowns, while Nam regularly reminded others of deadlines.
- Peer support increased: When Phương Linh struggled, An immediately helped without needing delegation.
- Group discussions became more focused and efficient, with decisions made
quickly thanks to mutual trust and understanding.
At this stage, the team shifted from merely completing tasks to striving for
excellence. The group exhibited creativity, commitment, and shared responsibility. 1.5.
Adjourning (Final Stage – Dissolution)
- Evaluating the outcome: The team held a final meeting to review the results
of the group assignment. Along with this, preparations were made and
responsibilities were assigned for the upcoming presentation. The team
submitted the assignment on time via LMS, and all members were satisfied with the result.
- Recognizing contributions: The team leader acknowledged and expressed
gratitude for each member's contributions. Everyone was appreciated for their lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
unique efforts and roles in making the project a success. Some individuals were
specifically praised for exceeding expectations.
- Reflecting on lessons learned: Members discussed the lessons they had
learned throughout the teamwork process. They recognized the new skills they
had developed, such as conflict resolution, planning, and effective team collaboration.
- Maintaining connection: Although the group officially disbanded after
completing the assignment, the members agreed to keep the group chat open to stay in touch.
=> Outcomes of the Adjourning stage:
- The trip planning and implementation task was successfully completed.
- Team members developed stronger friendships and closer personal bonds.
- There is potential for future collaboration on other projects among some or all members.
2. Communication in Team
According to Lengel and Daft (1988), "media richness" can be used to
explain organizational behavior. The choice of communication channel
plays an important part in analyzing group behavior. This is an illustration
of the model from low to high:
After a period of brainstorming on theories by each individual member,
our group moved into the discussion phase. However, due to the national holiday
on April 30th – May 1st, all members returned to their hometowns, and we were
unable to hold a face-to-face meeting to discuss, ask questions, and contribute
ideas. The meeting had to be conducted online via Google Meets. Although the lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
content remained the same, the change in format significantly affected the meeting’s effectiveness.
While online meetings offer flexibility in terms of time and location, in our
group’s experience, this format was far less effective than meeting in person.
The main reason lies in the lack of real-time interaction among members; some
did not turn on their cameras and contributed minimally. This resulted in a dull
meeting atmosphere, a lack of emotional connection, and reduced team spirit.
Additionally, technical issues such as weak internet, echoing, or disconnection
disrupted the meeting, prolonging decision-making or making it inconsistent.
The absence of face-to-face interaction also made it difficult for the team leader
to gauge each member's engagement, leading to situations where some would
agree superficially without truly understanding the discussion.
To address these challenges, the team leader made efforts to manage closely by
clearly outlining detailed tasks on a Google Excel Master Sheet and turning it
into the group's main working tool. All members were required to confirm and
update their task status on the sheet, and the leader regularly kept track of
everyone's progress to ensure efficiency.
Furthermore, the leader created a Messenger group to foster more convenient
and comfortable communication, allowing members to exchange ideas and ask
questions freely. However, other issues still arose—for example, disparities
between active and inactive members, or cases where some members didn’t read
all messages or failed to respond, causing delays in group assignments. To
resolve these issues, the group established alternative communication methods
for urgent situations, such as direct phone calls. III. THEORY OF MOTIVATION
1. McClelland's Theory of Needs
Developed by psychologist David McClelland, this theory suggests that human
motivation at work arises from three core needs: achievement, power, and affiliation,
with varying levels depending on the individual. Three core needs: - Need for Achievement - Need for Power - Need for Affiliation lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
In Group 8, which consists of eight members, motivation levels can be divided into three different categories: Group
Members Characteristics Achievement Power Affiliation Need Need Need 1. High- Quy Phu, - Highly High - High - Moderate - motivation group
Ngoc Viet, dedicated to group demonstrated expressed by shown by Ngoc Anh assignments through encouraging, actively setting high monitoring, participating - Contributed goals (e.g., and in group valuable ideas and excellent interactions coordinating perspectives grades, good evaluations) other - Actively and striving to members participated in achieve them group activities - Monitored and motivated others 2. Phuong - Focused on Moderate -
Moderate - Fairly High Mediummotivation Linh, sharedgroup motivated to no clear - expressed group Khanh An, objectives achieve group desire to by Giang, goals but not influence or willingness Tran Anh -
Completed as determined control to help assigned tasks on others others and as time and followed collaborate group protocols Group 1 3. Low- The Anh, -
Aimed only Low - focused Low - Low - did motivation group Nam for passing grades only on showed not actively meeting the no interest engage in - Passive minimum in team participation in
requirement to influencing interaction discussions pass the group - Rarely gave feedback on others’ work
- Interaction between groups:
How the groups compensated for one another: lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
+ High-motivation group compensating for low-motivation members:
■ Team leader and high-motivation members encouraged and tracked group progress.
■ They contributed more ideas to offset the lack of input from Thế Anh and Nam.
■ Their high need for power (nPow) drove them to guide and direct others.
+ Medium-motivation group as the “bridge”:
■ Helped balance the group atmosphere between highly active and passive members. ■
Their need for affiliation (nAff) helped maintain group
cohesion. ■ Their compliance with quality standards supported group goals.
- Strategies to motivate the entire group:
+ Motivating through clear shared goals: The team set two main
objectives: high grades and deeper theoretical understanding. These
common goals met the achievement needs (nAch) of most members to varying degrees.
+ Effective task delegation and monitoring: The leader, driven by a
strong need for power (nPow), helped distribute tasks and track
progress, ensuring even low-motivation members fulfilled their minimum responsibilities.
+ Fostering mutual support among members Conclusion:
Despite significant motivational differences among members, the group’s
structure, with three levels of motivation, created a balance that helped achieve
common goals. The high achievement and power needs of the leadership team
compensated for the lack of motivation in some members, while the middle group
played a key role in maintaining cohesion and support. As a result, the group sustained
above-average motivation and successfully worked toward the shared objectives. 2. Leadership theories
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT) is a leadership
model that suggests there is no single best style of leadership. Instead, effective
leadership depends on the situation at hand, particularly the maturity level of the lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
followers. This theory emphasizes the flexibility of leaders in adjusting their
leadership style based on the readiness and capabilities of their team members.
Here's a breakdown of the key component in case of group 8 – leader Quy Phu 2.1.
Assessing Team Members' Readiness
Before determining the appropriate leadership style, the team leader (Quy Phu)
assessed each member's level of readiness, including their ability and motivation for
the assigned tasks. Below is how the team categorized its members: Level Explain Member Style can apply R1 New to group tasks or have The Anh Apply the Telling style, (Low ability limited experience in which involves providing and low teamwork, difficulty in clear guidance and closely motivation) accessing knowledge and supervising their work. professional working style R2 They may lack skills or Nam Apply the Selling style,
(Low ability but experience but are eager to continuing to provide high
learn and engage in the tasks. guidance and supervision motivation) while also encouraging and motivating these members R3 They may possess skills but Giang Use the Participating style, (High ability might lack motivation or An encouraging members to but low confidence, not proactive in Tran Anh engage in decision-making motivation) work, not contributing much
Linh processes and share their ideas and building opinions, helping them feel development team valued and connected to the team. R4 hese are the members who Ngoc Anh Apply the Delegating (High ability have the necessary skills and Viet style, giving these and high motivation to complete tasks members the authority to motivation) without close supervision. carry out their tasks independently and responsibly. 2.2.
Task and Team Assignment
Based on the assessment of each member's readiness level, the team leader will assign
appropriate tasks. For example: •
Members with strong writing skills and high confidence, who have a solid
understanding of the content, will require minimal guidance and can be
assigned independent tasks. These members will be entrusted with both content lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
creation and assisting the leader in reviewing and giving feedback on the group's work. •
Members with good knowledge but low motivation will participate in
researching, exploring theories, writing content, and providing peer feedback. •
The remaining members will be assigned tasks according to their capabilities
and will have the opportunity to choose responsibilities that match their
strengths, while also supporting other members as needed. 2.3.
Flexibly Adjusting Leadership Style
The team leader demonstrates flexibility in adjusting leadership styles as members
progress or face challenges during the working process. For example, Nam who
initially belongs to the R2 group move to R3 after improving their skills. In such
cases, the leadership style should shift from Selling to Participating to better support their development. 2.4.
Achieved Outcomes
By appropriately applying the Situational Leadership Theory, the team was able to
create a flexible, creative, and efficient working environment. Members felt more
responsible and confident in carrying out their tasks, which in turn enhanced group
performance and collaboration. The team leader could optimize their leadership by
adjusting styles to match the needs and development levels of members, thereby
enabling the team to function effectively and achieve its goals. IV.
REFLECTION AND EVALUATION TEAM
1. Individual differences
MBTI was founded in 1920 after 20 years of research by mother and daughter
Myers and Briggs based on previous research by Carl Gustav Jung. The purpose of
this tool is to shape the right career group for each individual, so that everyone can
focus on developing their own strengths. Team 8 took full advantage of the MBTI so
that every team member could be assessed. Capabilities and limitations are what allow
team leader Nguyen Thi Quy Phu to assign tasks. Below is the table of MBTI results of group 8: Members Personality types Description Quy Phu Logican - Extraverted: 79% - Intuitive: 66% lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 - Thinking: 80% - Prospecting: 75% - Turbulent: 54% Khanh An Turbulent Mediator - Feeling: 52% - Prospecting: 53% - Turbulent: 51% - Intuitive: 70% - Introverted: 75% Tran Anh Analyst - Extraverted: 59% - Intuitive: 55% - Thinking: 52% - Judging: 60% - Assertive: 61% Ngoc Anh Debator - Assertive: 63% - Prospecting: 58% - Thinking: 54% - Intuitive: 55% - Extraverted: 59% Nam Advocate - Introverted: 77% - Intuitive: 81% - Feeling: 74% - Judging: 66% - Turbulent: 59% Huong Giang Logician - Introverted: 84% - Intuitive: 63% - Tthinking: 55% - Prospecting: 82% lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 - Turbulent: 58 Phuong Linh Adventurer - Extraverted: 60% - Sensing: 72% - Feeling: 68% - Perceiving: 77% - Assertive: 56% Ngoc Viet Debator - Extraverted: 81% - Intuitive: 77% - Thinking: 69% - Prospecting: 85% - Assertive: 61% The Anh Defender - Judging:52% - Turbulent: 57% - Observant: 57% - Extroverted: 71% - Feeling: 51%
According to the request of the team leader, each member in the group took the
MBTI test and sent the results to the group chat. From there, team leader Nguyen Thi
Quy Phu assigned tasks to each member based on their suitable personalities. Khanh
An was chosen to be the one to voice a common ground when disagreements arise
among members, as she is a turbulent mediator. Quy Phu was elected by the team as
leader because her MBTI result shows leadership, goal orientation, and process observation.
Nam, Phuong Linh, and The Anh are part of the artistic, creative group, good at
connecting people, so their task is not focused on arguments—they are assigned to
design the slide. Tasks related to debating and counter-argumentation will be handled
by Viet, Ngoc Anh, Tran Anh, and Huong Giang. They will carry out the final parts of
the project, adding arguments to previous sections completed by other members. Each
member in the group feels that the tasks assigned are extremely reasonable, and no one has any disagreement. lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 2. Empowerment
Empowerment has been emphasized as a process of distributing power and
authority to subordinates in order to enhance their confidence and work efficiency
(Eileen B., 2000). In the context of Group 8, this approach was actively implemented
by our team leader, Quy Phu, who understood the importance of promoting autonomy
and shared responsibility. Since the team members were randomly assigned and had
never worked together before, it was essential to build trust and motivation. According
to Kenneth et al. (2009), one of the greatest challenges leaders face is how to
effectively leverage empowerment to increase team members' capabilities and
commitment. Phu took several strategic actions to foster a sense of ownership within the group.
- First, instead of centralizing all decision-making power, Phu encouraged
members to propose tasks they wanted to undertake and to actively contribute
ideas during discussions. Any concerns or perceived unfairness were addressed
appropriately. This participative management style not only helped members
feel heard but also boosted their motivation to complete their work more effectively.
- Responsibilities were allocated based on each member’s strengths and
motivation levels. The team was also divided into smaller sub-groups (e.g.,
Content team, Slide team, Presentation team), where each individual had the
opportunity to lead or play a crucial role. Through this structure, Phu helped
members feel more competent, confident, and strengthened their self-efficacy.
- Members who demonstrated strong knowledge and leadership skills were
delegated sub - lead roles (Viet, Ngoc Anh) , becoming responsible for
reviewing final outputs and reminding others to meet deadlines.
- In addition, task progress was regularly updated on a shared Google Sheet. The
team leader required members to confirm and update their individual progress,
which helped reinforce accountability.
As a result, the team operated more efficiently, with members taking greater
initiative - such as proactively giving feedback. Ultimately, effective use of
empowerment not only improved work performance but also fostered a confident and
committed team that aligned with the contribution culture concept (James R. F., 1997). lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236 V.
FACTORS THAT MAKE THE TEAM EFFECTIVE OR INEFFECTIVE
1. Factors supporting effectiveness
- Goals were set during the very first meeting, with the objective of receiving a
high evaluation from the lecturer for the group assignment. In addition,
members were expected to understand the course theories through practical
application to serve the final exam. The team demonstrated determination to
achieve that goal, which led to earlier task distribution compared to other teams.
Even before meetings, we would set KPIs to be achieved during the session and
specify the time required to maximize effectiveness.
- The team had a clear task distribution that suited each member’s capabilities.
As a result, the workflow ran smoothly, and members clearly understood the
tasks they were assigned and the necessary steps to complete the tasks in the correct sequence.
- The team leader’s leadership ability was the most critical internal factor
influencing team performance. The leader provided direction for the whole
team, closely kept track of progress to ensure output was completed and met
quality standards, and helped team members clarify any uncertainties.
- Communication among team members: As a small team, activities were
implemented more quickly. We practiced democracy in decision-making; all
opinions were heard and taken into account. Members actively contributed ideas and provided feedback.
2. Factors hindering effectiveness
Besides the positive aspects, there were still several distinct negative elements
that affected the overall team effectiveness.
- Objective factors: The last-minute rush during the April 30th - May 1st holiday
period posed a challenge, as each member had their own schedule. Some went
on trips with their families or returned to their hometowns to help their parents,
and a few were not able to keep track or be available in time during the working
process. Meetings and progress were affected to some extent, making it difficult
to schedule meetings and causing some members to miss out on information.
- Subjective factors: Some members were not truly committed to the team’s
goals, lacked responsibility for their assigned tasks, missed deadlines, and
produced low-quality output, relying heavily on AI and requiring frequent reminders.
- Additionally, due to many final course assessments, members could not fully
concentrate on completing the group assignment, resulting in a lack of lOMoAR cPSD| 58591236
enthusiasm in expressing opinions and merely doing what was required. This
was attributed to individuals not managing their time well and being passive in their learning. 3. Overall performance
Nevertheless, positive factors outweighed the negatives and maintained the
team’s overall performance at a good level.
Overall, the team operated effectively due to setting common goals from the
first meeting and assigning tasks logically based on individual strengths. The
workflow was coherent, clear, and followed the planned schedule. The team leader
played a key role in both direction and supervision, as well as providing timely
support, thus ensuring the quality of the team’s output. Internal communication was
positive, and all ideas were respected.
In the early stages, the team encountered challenges and was less effective due
to obstacles such as conflicting individual schedules, difficulty in setting shared
meeting times, and missed information. Moreover, some individuals failed to show
responsibility, relied on AI tools, missed deadlines, and were not proactive in contributing ideas.
However, once these issues were identified and addressed, the positive elements
prevailed and ensured that the team’s overall effectiveness remained good. VI.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
TEAMWORK AND GOAL ACHIEVEMENT
The relationship between teamwork effectiveness and achieving goals is close
and causal. We recognize this as a two-way relationship.
(1) A highly effective team not only helps achieve goals more quickly but also
ensures better output quality.
For example, in the activities of Group 8:Reasonable task allocation based on
individual strengths allows each member to maximize their capabilities.
A meticulous and detail-oriented person handled content checking; a creative
and aesthetically minded person contributed to slide design; someone with strong
theoretical knowledge worked on content. This increased work interest, accelerated
task completion, improved quality, and boosted overall team productivity.