TEST 2 (10%)

AUGUST 2021 SEMESTER

COURSE : ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
COURSE CODE : PMS2123
DURATION : 1 HOUR
FACULTY : BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTANCY
LECTURER : MDM FAZILAH BINTI TAMSIR

NAME : PUNITA A/P VASU

STUDENT ID : 4 2 0 3 0 0 1 9 4 1

2
GROUP :
Course Learning Outcome
QUESTION MARKS

CLO 3: Analyse the situation of Malaysian organization

Q1 system in terms of teamwork, power and communication. /5

CLO 3: Analyse the situation of Malaysian organization

Q2 system in terms of teamwork, power and communication. /5

CLO 3: Analyse the situation of Malaysian organization

Q3 system in terms of teamwork, power and communication. /10

TOTAL /20

1
 QUESTION 1 (5 MARKS)

Your company has recently signed a contract to design and manufacture a prototype of high
efficiency harvesting device for agriculture industry. As a leader for design team, you know it will
be a very complex project that requires much different type of skills.

Construct and explain the FIVE (5) development stages for your team.

This process of learning to work together effectively is known as team development. Research has
shown that teams go through definitive stages during development. Bruce Tuckman, an educational
psychologist, identified a five-stage development process that most teams follow to become high
performing. He called the stages: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Team
progress through the stages is shown in the following diagram.

1. The forming stage of group development

- The forming stage is the first stage in Tuckman’s stages of group development and is a similar
experience to your first day on a new job or at a new school. In this phase, most group members
are overly polite and are still extremely excited about what their future may hold. Since the
group dynamics and team roles aren’t yet established, the team leader will often take charge to
direct the individual members. During Tuckman’s forming phase, new team members may
discuss team goals, ground rules, and individual roles, but since this stage of development
prioritizes people over the actual work, it’s unlikely the team will be high-performing at this
time.

2. The storming stage of group development

- The storming phase is like when you reach that point with a new roommate where you begin
to notice their small idiosyncrasies that get on your nerves. For teams, the conflict often arises
due to clashing working styles between team members. Some people may start to even doubt
the team’s goals discussed in the earlier stage and will stop performing their necessary jobs
altogether. This has a negative and stressful effect on those who keep up the hard work since
the pre-established group processes no longer function smoothly. Some project teams think
they can skip this stage, but it’s better to acknowledge conflicts now and work them out rather
than avoiding them until they explode.

3. The norming stage of group development

- The next of Tuckman’s stages is the norming phase. This is when the team moves past their
previous quarrels and begins to recognize and value their teammates’ strengths. During this
stage, team members increasingly respect those who are in leadership roles. Now that everyone
has begun to bond and familiarize themselves with the team processes, teammates feel
comfortable giving each other constructive feedback as they work toward accomplishing new
tasks. Since these new tasks often come with a high degree of difficulty, it is not uncommon for
groups to regress back into the storming phase. Even if a group slides back into old behavior,
members’ new decision-making skills will make conflicts easier to resolve than they were
during the initial storming phase.
 4. The performing stage of group development

- The performing phase is the happiest of all the stages of development. In this stage, your
team performance is at an all-time high. This high-performance level means all team
members are self-reliant and confident enough in their own problem-solving skills that they
can function without oversight from the leaders. Everyone is working like a well-oiled
machine, free of conflict and moving in sync toward the same end goal.

5. The adjourning stage of group development

- The fifth stage of Tuckman’s development sequence is the adjourning phase. This final
stage actually wasn’t added to the Tuckman model until 1977, and it is the most melancholy
of all the stages of team formation. The adjourning phase assumes that project teams only
exist for a set period of time; once the team’s mission is accomplished, the team itself
dissolves. You can equate this stage to a breakup since team members often find it difficult
to separate from people with whom they’ve formed close bonds. In fact, this phase is also
sometimes known as the “mourning phase” because it is common for team members to
experience a feeling of loss when the group is disbanded. (5 marks)

QUESTION 2 (5 MARKS)

Organizations typically form groups to accomplish work-related tasks. Sate FIVE (5) factors that
motivate individuals to join groups.

One important factor that helps groups to outperform individuals on decision-making tasks is the type
of interdependence they have. In general, positively interdependent (cooperative) groups tend to make
better decisions than both negatively interdependent (competitive) groups and individuals, particularly
in complex tasks. These process gains come from a variety of factors. One is that when group members
interact, they often generate new ideas and solutions that they would not have arrived at individually.
Group members are also more likely than individuals to notice and correct mistakes that can harm
sound decision making . They additionally have better collective memory, meaning that many minds
hold more relevant information than one, and superior transactive memory, which occurs when
interactions between group members facilitate the recall of important material . Also, when individual
group members share information that is unique to them, they increase the total amount of data that the
group can then draw on when making sound decisions. Given these obvious advantages, are there ever
times when groups might make less optimal decisions than individuals? If you have ever sat in a group
where, with hindsight, a fairly foolhardy decision was reached, then you probably already have your
own answer to that question. The more interesting question then becomes why are many heads
sometimes worse than one? Let’s explore some of the most dramatic reasons.
Then, security--reduce the insecurity of "standing alone"; feel stronger, fewer self doubts, and more
resistant to threats. After that, status is inclusins in a group viewed by outsiders as important; provides
recognition and status Morever, self-esteem is provides feelings of selfworth to group members, in
addtiion to conveying status to outsiders. Affiliation is fulfills social needs, enjoys regular interaction;
can be primary source for fulfilling need for affiliation. Power is what cannot be achieved individually
often becomes possible; power in numbers. Finally, goal achievement is some tasks require more than
one person; need to pool talents knowledge or power to complete the job. in such instances managment
may rely on the use of a formal group.

(5
marks)
QUESTION 3 (10 MARKS)

Depending on their intentions in a given situation, the behavior of conflicting parties can range
from full cooperation to complete confrontation. Depending upon the degree of each intention
involved, there are several types of conflict.

Briefly discuss FIVE (5) conflict-resolution behavior.

Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann developed five conflict resolution strategies that people use to handle
conflict, including avoiding, defeating, compromising, accommodating, and collaborating.
This is based on the assumption that people choose how cooperative and how assertive to be in a conflict. It
suggests that everyone has preferred ways of responding to conflict, but most of us use all methods under
various circumstances. It is helpful to understand the five methods, particularly when you want to move a group
forward.

Conflict Resolution Strategy : Avoiding

Avoiding is when people just ignore or withdraw from the conflict. They choose this method when the
discomfort of confrontation exceeds the potential reward of resolution of the conflict. While this might seem
easy to accommodate for the facilitator, people aren’t really contributing anything of value to the conversation
and may be withholding worthwhile ideas. When conflict is avoided, nothing is resolved.

Conflict Resolution Strategy : Competing

Competing is used by people who go into a conflict planning to win. They’re assertive and not
cooperative. This method is characterized by the assumption that one side wins and everyone else
loses. It doesn’t allow room for diverse perspectives into a well informed total picture. Competing
might work in sports or war, but it’s rarely a good strategy for group problem solving.
Debra wrote an illuminating article on how conflict resolution failure can lead to revolution. It’s what can
happen when people feel like they aren’t being listened to and sta rt being assertive.

Conflict Resolution Strategy : Accommodating

Accommodating is a strategy where one party gives in to the wishes or demands of another. They’re
being cooperative but not assertive. This may appear to be a gracious way to give in when one figures
out s/he has been wrong about an argument. It’s less helpful when one party accommodates another
merely to preserve harmony or to avoid disruption. Like avoidance, it can result in unresolved issues.
Too much accommodation can result in groups where the most assertive parties commandeer the
process and take control of most conversations.

Conflict Resolution Strategy : Collaborating

Collaborating is the method used when people are both assertive and cooperative. A group may learn
to allow each participant to make a contribution with the possibility of co-creating a shared solution
that everyone can support. A great way to collaborate and overcome conflict is to reach out and touch
them.
Conflict Resolution Strategy : Compromising
Another strategy is compromising, where participants are partially assertive and cooperative. The
concept is that everyone gives up a little bit of what they want, and no one gets everything they want.
The perception of the best outcome when working by compromise is that which “splits the difference.”
Compromise is perceived as being fair, even if no one is particularly happy with the final outcome.

(10 marks)

- END OF QUESTION PAPER -