MGT 3218 & MGT 3202

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
GROUP ASSIGNMENT
MAY 2016
INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS
1. This assignment contains only ONE (1) question that is set in the language of the printed module
for the course.
2. Group of 5 students.
3. Answer in English.
4. Your assignment should be typed using 12 point Times New Roman font and 1.5 line spacing.
5. Your assignment should be between 2000 to 3000 words excluding references. The number of
words should be shown at the end of your assignment. Do not copy the assignment question
and instructions to your answer.
6. You must submit your printed assignment. You are advised to keep a copy of your submitted
assignment for personal reference.
7. You can submit your assignment ONCE only.

8. You should not copy another persons assignment. You should also not plagiarise another
persons work as your own.
EVALUATION
This assignment accounts for 20% of the total marks for the course and shall be assessed based on
the Rubrics attached.
PLAGIARISM: MARKS DEDUCTION
Warning: The submitted assignment will automatically undergo a similarity check. If plagiarism is
detected, marks would be deducted as follows:

Assignments with 10 - 30 % overlap with others: 20% deduction from the total marks scored.
Assignments with more than 50% overlap with others: Zero mark would be given.

QUESTION

Objective:
1. Show how the understanding of teams differs in a global context;
Outcomes:
1. Describe best practices for utilizing groups and work teams in organizations;
Introduction:
As you might suspect, researchers have paid a great deal of attention to the differences
between individualists and collectivists in terms of team orientation. As we learned from
Chapter 5 on personality and values people from collectivist societieslike those found in
much of East Asia, Latin America, and Africaare generally more prone to look toward
group goals as important and to emphasize collaborative processes. Individualist cultures like
the United States, Canada, and the UK, on the other hand, emphasize individual achievement
and performance.
Individualist cultures may have greater difficulty implementing team-based work processes
for a variety of reasons. Collectivists appear more sensitive to the moods of their coworkers,
so the motivation and positive mood of one group member is likely to spill over to increase
motivation and positive moods in others. Collectivist teams also already have a strong
predisposition to work together as a group, so theres less need for increased teamwork. Other
research suggests that collectively oriented teams are better able to pool resources and correct
one anothers errors than are individually oriented teams.
Whats the lesson for managers? Managers in individualist cultures may need to work harder
to increase team cohesiveness. One way to do this is to give teams more challenging
assignments and provide them with more independence. Alternatively, managers may find it
useful to promote a collectivist orientation for team processes even when working with
groups of individualists.
Sources: Based on R. Ilies, D. T. Wagner, and F. P. Morgeson, Explaining Affective
Linkages in Teams: Individual Differences in Susceptibility to Contagion and IndividualismCollectivism, Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 4 (2007), pp. 11401148; E. C.
Dierdorff, S. T. Bell, and J. A. Belohlav, The Power of We: Effects of Psychological
Collectivism on Team Performance over Time, Journal of Applied Psychology 96, no. 2
(2011), pp. 247262; and J. E. Driskell, E. Salas, and S. Hughes, Collective Orientation and
Team Performance: Development of an Individual Differences Measure, Human Factors 52,
no. 2 (2010), pp. 316328.

Your Tasks:
1. Ask student to read:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Managing_Groups_and_Teams/How_Do_You_Manage
_Global_Virtual_Teams%3F
2. Assign groups of five students to create a plan for a multinational organization to
expand into an Asian (China, Vietname, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and etc)
3. The groups first step should be to create a virtual team to develop the expansion
plans.
4. They could use resources such as the CIA Factbook
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/region/region_eur.html
and WIKI (example, Poland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland )
5. Students should identify cultural differences between the U.S. and the selected
country. Other differences should be noted such as work environments, and other
issues identified in the WIKI paper in number 1.
6. Students should give some thought as to how they would identify a company or
individuals in the target country. For example resource see
http://www.buyusa.gov/poland/en/doing_business_in_poland1.html.
7. The students should complete a presentation to the class that details:
a. What are the potential markets like in target countries?
b. What are the cultural differences that could lead to difficulties in working with
a planning team in the target country?
c. How will the selection process of virtual team members in the target country
proceed?
d. What is the assessment of probability or success in the expansion?

INTI INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

MGT 3218 & MGT 3202 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
GROUP ASSIGNMENT EVALAUTION RUBRIC
Component

Alevel qualities
(75-100)

Blevel qualities
(74-60)

Clevel qualities
(59-50)

Dor F level qualities

(49-0)

Teamwork
(10 points)

The team worked well

together to achieve
objectives. Each member
contributed in a valuable
way to the project. All data
sources indicated a high
level of mutual respect and
collaboration

The team worked well

Together most Of the
time, with only a few
occurrences of
communication breakdown
or failure to collaborate
when appropriate.
Members were mostly
respectful of each other.

Team did not collaborate or

communicate well. Some
members would work
independently, without
regard to objectives or
priorities. A lack of respect
and regard was frequently
noted

The group failed to

work well among
members based on the
work presented.

Contribution
(30 points)

All requirements and

Objectives are identified,
evaluated and competed.
The deliverable offered new
information or approach to
the topic under discussion.
Likewise, the application is
based on stated criteria,
analysis and constraints

All requirements are

identified and evaluated
but some objectives are
not completed. The
deliverable offered some
new information or
approach to the topic under
discussion. The application
is reasonable; further
analysis of some of the
alternatives or constraints
may have led to a different
recommendation.

Many requirements and

objectives are not
identified, Evaluated and/or
completed. The deliverable
offered no new information
or approach to the topic
under discussion. Few
application considerations
are analyzed and other
factors were ignored or
incompletely analyzed.

Incomplete in most
respects; does
not reflect requirements

Score

Subject
Knowledge
(30 points)

The deliverable
demonstrated knowledge of
the course content by
integrating major and minor
concepts into the response.
The deliverable also
demonstrated evidence of
extensive research effort
and a depth of thinking
about the topic

The deliverable
demonstrated knowledge
of the course content by
integrating major concepts
into the response.The
deliverable also
demonstrated evidence of
limited research effort
and/or initial of thinking
about the topic.

The deliverable Did not

demonstrate knowledge
Of the course content,
Evidence of the research
effort or depth of thinking
about the topic.

Demonstrates an
inadequate
understanding of the
topic(s)
and issue(s)

Supporting
Material
(20 points)

All Relevant information

was obtained and
information sources were
valid. Analysis and design
considerations were well
supported by the
information

Sufficient information
was obtained and most
sources were valid.
Analysis and design
considerations were mostly
supported by the
information

Insufficient information was

obtained and/or sources
lack validity. Analysis and
design considerations were
not supported by the
information collected.

All non-related and nonrelevant information

provided. Failed to
meet responsibilities.

Composition
(10 points)

The deliverable Was well

organized and clearly
written. The underlying logic
was clearly articulated and
easy to follow. Words were
chosen that precisely
expressed the intended
meaning and supported
reader comprehension.
Sentences were
grammatical and free from
errors.

The deliverable was

organized and clearly
written for the most part.
In some areas the logic
and/or flow of ideas were
difficult to follow.
Words were well chosen
with some minor
expectations. The text
sentences were mostly
grammatical and /or only a
few spelling errors were
present but they did not
hinder the reader.

The deliverable lacked

overall organization.
The reader had to make
considerable effort to
understand the underlying
logic and flow of ideas. with
the text grammatical and
spelling errors made it
difficult for the reader to
interpret the text in places.

The deliverable was

unfocused, rambling, or
contains serious errors;
lacks detail and
relevant data and
information; poorly
organized