Leading People and Teams (MGTS7810)

MGTS7810 Leading People and Teams - Personal Case Discussion Brief – for Day 3

Value:             0%

The major individual assignment in this course (see Assessment 2) requires you to analyse and critique a work group or team in which you have been or are currently a member. 

The course requirement described here is formative and does not attract any marks towards your final grade. However, the course process is designed to assist you (1) in deciding the group or team, and (2) identifying the key issues that are/were in play in the group (using the Input-Process-Output - IPO) tool to draft up the initial Appendix A table, and at this early stage, (3) begin to think of the three to five Input, Process or Output factors that may be the basis for the longer analysis in the final Assessment 2 report.

The initial work you undertake in preparing this IPO Appendix A brief for discussion will be integrated into the final Assessment 2 report as a more refined version of Appendix A. To share with your peers and seeking feedback, be prepared to talk through a general description of the group or team and the context in which it operates, focusing on key issues, past or present, that have arisen in the group. The description should at least partly reflect your own involvement and interactions in the group.

The incorporation of academic terms at this early stage to describe the work group is important to adding depth and credibility to the interpretation of your group experiences and observations.  See the IPO Appendix A examples that are provided on Blackboard, and the supporting articles.  

In summary, this IPO Appendix A described here does not attract any marks towards your final grade. However, the process is designed to assist you in deciding the focus of your analysis for the final Assessment 2 report, as well as identifying the key issues (3 to 5 max) that you will analyse in more depth in that Assessment 2 report. The work you undertake in preparing this IPO Appendix A will be integrated into the final report. Your peer feedback should also assist you to apply key insights from the course content to your own case.

Come prepared on Day 3 to discuss your initial draft Input-Process-Output Appendix A in small groups of your peers. In preparing this IPO Appendix A, please look at past IPO examples on Blackboard under Learning Resources and read at least the article on Blackboard under Assessment 2 by:

• Susan Mohammed & Katherine Hamilton (2007), from Steven G. Rogelberg, Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chapter Title: "Input–Process–Output Model of Team Effectiveness".

MGTS7810 Leading People and Teams - Case study presentation - Assessment 1

Content: PowerPoint presentation, Day 5 (20 minutes + questions)

• This case study assessment 1 requires you to conduct research into a specific case of interest, in small teams of 4-5 people.
• Your team will then prepare a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation designed to share your learning and insights from the case.
• More details about the process and requirements for the presentation will be provided in class on Day 1 with past examples.
• Examples of previous topics and presentations will be talked through on Day 1. 
• Teams will be assigned on Day 1 of the course.
• The team presentation will be on the afternoon of Day 5.

Peer Review: Group members are expected to contribute equally, fulfilling the tasks agreed on. If there are disagreements in relation to team members' contributions that cannot be resolved, students must bring the problem to the attention of the lecturer as early as possible. Students can elect to undertake a Peer Review process, which can influence the marks of those who do not contribute to group work.

The focus of the case study presentation is to assess and analyse a case of your choosing (with lecturer approval). The purpose is to reflect on the concepts, frameworks, and models discussed in the course, and to apply them to a particular case. Ideas for the case to be analysed should be discussed with the lecturer for suitability and scope. Past cases analysed by groups have often been talked about in the business or public communities so that a wide range of general and more academic information is accessible to all group members. Topics should also fit in well with the topics in this course and also be suitable for analysis using the existing academic literature. Past topics have included the Challenger space shuttle disaster, responses to various Australian natural disasters (e.g. bush fires, Queensland floods), various corporate scandals (Enron, Sony, AMP, Volkswagen emissions) or in particular the performance of well-known leaders or leadership teams (Prime Ministers, high profile Australian or international CEOs). Examples will be given in class on Day 1.

The presentation should focus on the various issues that arise in the case, the assessment you made about what happened in the group/context, and the insights you derived that reflect learning from the situation. The presentation to be delivered in depth, but also in the 20-minute time frame, should focus attention, as a guide on three factors, so allowing 5 minutes per factor, with the other 5 minutes allowing an introduction to the case and an insightful wrap up with recommendations.

The 20-minute presentation of 12 slides (excluding a title page and references used) should touch on the following (although you may decide on your own creative way to present your analysis)

• An introduction to the case and its context (details should be evident on the slides) - suggest 2-3 minutes max
• An analysis of the case, discussed in relation to the ideas, concepts, frameworks, models, and/or theories covered in the course - three key themes to be managed in the time allowed - suggest 15 minutes max
• Key insights and learnings/recommendations from the case as a summary - suggest 2-3 minutes max.

The presentations will be delivered face to face, but, if required due to circumstances, some or all can be delivered virtually (over Zoom).

Please Note: The presentation will be recorded for marking purposes.

On the due date, you should provide the lecturer with a copy of all materials used in the presentation, including all references in the prescribed manner (APA format or similar format) as the final slides of the presentation. There are 12 slides only, but this excludes a cover slide with topic name and list of team members, and a set of final PowerPoint slides (1-2 pages in smaller font as they are not presented) with the references used in developing the presentation.

The presentation criteria (rubric) is available on Blackboard.

AI Statement

This task has been designed to be challenging, authentic and complex. Whilst students may use AI technologies, successful completion of assessment in this course will require students to critically engage in specific contexts and tasks for which artificial intelligence will provide only limited support and guidance. A failure to reference AI use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct. To pass this assessment, students will be required to demonstrate detailed comprehension of their written submission independent of AI tools.

MGTS7810 Leading People and Teams - Assessment 2:  Final Essay – Individual Case Analysis

Length:          3000 words (±10%)            

Overview

Assessment 2 follows from the in-class discussion on Day 3 of the Input-Process-Output (IPO) model. 

The purpose of Assessment 2 is for you to analyse your personal case of a team reflecting on the concepts, frameworks, theories and models discussed in a selection of course topics and readings. The insights you gain from the course and your readings should be applied to your analysis of this group or team and your involvement in it. The focus is on 3-5 maximum factors described at play in the IPO analysis that you will start on Day 3.

A more detailed description of the task is available below and on the course Blackboard site. Again this Assessment with previous examples will be talked about on Day 1.

In more detail

The purpose of this Assessment 2 is for you to analyse your personal case of a team or group experience, reflecting on the concepts, frameworks, theories, and models discussed in a selection of course topics and readings. The insights you gain from these readings should be applied to your critique of this work group or team and your involvement in it.

Again, it is expected that peer reviewed academic readings will be incorporated to add depth, evidence or additional support for the interpretations you make in this personal case. Try to avoid the major use of less valid evidence such as web sites, but some use is understandable for giving contextual evidence or information.

The essay should analyse and/or critique the group or team from your point of view. The essay should focus on insights from the course readings and other readings. As you go through the course, you will be reminded of your experiences in the group that reflect the discussions and issues raised in course sessions and the readings. More importantly, the course content may prompt you to make new sense of your experience and to develop fresh insights into the dynamics involved.

Select the key insights that were particularly salient for you and build your essay around these. 

1. Use the IPO analysis that will form Appendix A in your submitted Assessment 2. The IPO will give a more detailed analysis of all of the factors operating in this work group or team. The Individual Case Analysis will only report in depth on 3-5 of the factors described in the IPO.
2. Browse through the Course PowerPoint slides and Course Readings available through Blackboard for the possible 3-5 themes.
3. Please dig deeper than the lecture notes and look for additional sources through the UQ library to explore a particular issue beyond the discussions in the course and the listed course readings. You will need to do your own research. High performing students typically go beyond the reading lists and use the most up-to-date research in journals. See the guidance provided by the marking rubric.

Use the academic journal readings that provoke insights for you in making sense of your team experience. The word limit means that you should focus your attention on key insights about the group and its effectiveness. Three to five is the suggested number. Do not try to ‘unpack’ all of the dynamics in the group. You will need to be judicious in your choice of issues to explore in depth.

Three to five areas of focus are usually more than enough in the word limit specified. 

The final essay should contain the following elements:

• A brief but informative introduction (use the subheading Introduction and brief overview) that includes a description of the group and its context
• A discussion of your key 3-5 key factors at work in your case that demonstrate your learning and application of the ideas drawn from the course and relevant academic readings. We suggest that each factor is a sub-heading.
• A reference list containing all and only the references cited in your essay formatted in the prescribed manner (APA or AMJ format)
• End the essay with a set of learnings/recommendations about what might have occurred/can occur to resolve or better manage the 3-5 key factors that have been the focus on the case analysis.
• Appendix A of the Input-Process-Output (IPO) analysis of your case, following the ideas on Blackboard of what can be included under each of the I, P and O using the reading on Blackboard by Susan Mohammed & Katherine Hamilton (2007), from Steven G. Rogelberg, Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chapter Title: "Input–Process–Output (IPO) Model of Team Effectiveness".
• Do not provide an abstract or executive summary; only provide the one IPO appendix; provide a word count on page 1 with your student name.

Formatting recommendations:

• In-text author/date referencing style; for example, (Smith, 2008, p. 112) or (Smith, 2008), and not (M. Smith 2008, p. 112) or (Smith: 112). CHECK THE REFERENCING GUIDE PROVIDED BY ARTICLES IN JOURNALS AS A GUIDE; OR SEE THE GUIDES TO WRITING PROVIDED FOR MBA STUDENTS UNDER THE LEARNING RESOURCES TAB FOR THIS COURSE
• Size 12 font with 1 inch or 25mm margins all round
• Double or 1.5 spacing
• Word limit does not include title page, references, IPO analysis Appendix A
• See marking criteria sheet for further details on the assessment criteria.
• Put the word count (excluding references and Appendix A) on the front page.

AI Statement

This task has been designed to be challenging, authentic and complex. Whilst students may use AI technologies, successful completion of assessment in this course will require students to critically engage in specific contexts and tasks for which artificial intelligence will provide only limited support and guidance.

A failure to reference AI use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.

To pass this assessment, students will be required to demonstrate detailed comprehension of their written submission independent of AI tools.