HRM263 Team Dynamics – Team Effectiveness, Power & FinTech Solutions

Section A

Select a recent team from a workplace, volunteer or academic context that existed for at least three months, long enough to move through the stages of team development from forming to adjourning. This team is the basis for Questions 1 to 4.

Question 1

Briefly describe your chosen team and the specific project involved. Your description must include:

• The team’s core purpose and intended outcomes.
• The number of members and their key roles.
• A preliminary assessment of whether this was a high-performing or struggling team.

Teams that faced significant friction often provide the richest material. Include specific evidence of the group dynamics observed during the project.

Question 2

Use the Team Effectiveness Scale (Appendix 1) to rate your team’s performance across the five core characteristics: Coordinated Interaction, Compelling Purpose, Interlocking Interdependence, Adaptive Structure and Cohesive Alliance. Identify the TOP TWO highest-rated dimensions and explain how they are linked to your experiences. Include a screenshot of your completed scale as a figure, and focus on analysis rather than repeating the definitions.

Question 3

Select ONE lowest-rated dimension. Using decision-making concepts covered in the course (for example Groupthink, the Ringelmann Effect or Steiner’s Process Model), examine how the team’s decision-making processes contributed to lower team effectiveness. Show how the theoretical mechanics of the chosen concept explain the performance gaps observed.

Question 4

Develop TWO actionable solutions that you personally could have implemented as an individual member to improve the lowest-rated dimension, including the implementation steps. Explain why each step would be effective by applying course concepts such as Identity, Formation, Development and Structure, Power or Influence.

Appendix 1: Team Effectiveness Scale

Ten items rated from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree), two per dimension:

• Coordinated Interaction: the team works as a single coordinated unit; members structure the work process and assist one another.
• Compelling Purpose: a common purpose and goal; commitment and accountability for achieving it.
• Interlocking Interdependence: members are interdependent; no member can determine his or her own outcome.
• Adaptive Structure: roles, norms and relations are defined; the structure is reviewed and revised to improve functioning.
• Cohesive Alliance: the team is unified with strong relations; it remains intact over difficult times.

Section B (50 Marks): FinTech Solutions And CreativePay Case

Two years ago, FinTech Solutions, a structured and traditional financial services firm, acquired the start-up CreativePay to launch a digital wallet. The project is now six months behind schedule because of friction in the ten-member Integration Team, made up of five “Legacy” FinTech staff and five CreativePay “Innovators”.

Team Lead Marcus, a former FinTech executive appointed by upper management, insists on strict compliance protocols and formal documentation, views the Innovators as reckless, refuses alternative views and often shows anger. He told the team that “the FinTech way is the only way”, warned that those who do not align have an uncertain future on the project, and promised a bonus to those who follow him. The CreativePay members have since withdrawn, rarely speak in meetings and discuss ideas in private chat groups.

Sarah, CreativePay’s former lead architect, was not promoted in the merged structure but is liked and respected by both groups. Members seek her advice, she is usually the only person able to fix critical technical bugs, and she runs informal Q&A sessions that break down complex code and often bring the two groups to consensus.

Question 5

Assess the distinct Bases of Power held by Marcus and Sarah. Define each base of power identified and provide clear evidence from the case study.

Question 6

Define Power Tactics and evaluate the types of tactics deployed by Marcus and Sarah to influence the team members.

Question 7

Formulate TWO specific management strategies that Marcus, Sarah or upper management can execute to rebuild the team’s shared identity and foster long-term structural cohesion. Describe exactly how each strategy should be rolled out, the behaviours or interventions required, and how each leverages at least one relevant course framework or concept.

Want Help Structuring Your Answers

Professional Singaporean Experts

All Subjects Covered

Professional Guidance

HRM Assignment Help

Experts Answer on Above HRM Questions on Team Dynamics

Team selected

The team comprises 6 members university students completing a 12 week business strategy project. The main focus of the team was to develop a market entry strategy and this is led by important members including project coordinator, research lead, financial analyst, marketing analyst, presentation lead and data analyst. There were issues noted with respect to theme performance initially in terms of completing the project on time, and was lacking behind as compared to a high performing team.

Team effectiveness scale

The two important dimensions considered are compelling purpose and cohesive Alliance. With respect to compelling purpose, the emphasis of the members was on completing the financial strategy presentation even though there are disagreements within members. The cohesive alliance revealed that the members maintained the walking relationships especially when the deadlines became tight.

Lowest rated dimension – adaptive structure – Ringelmann Effect

With the increase in the workload of the team, the responsibility of individual members became less visible. Some of the members had a belief that other members would complete the research and editing tasks and this has resulted in unequal effort. This is best explained by the Ringelmann effect whereby the effort from individual members reduces as the group size increases, and this is mainly because the personal contributions become less identifiable. It leads to duplicacy in some areas and gaps in others.

Two individual solutions

The first one is to create a clearly owned task by clearly allocating the responsibility to each member. That will help in improving the structure and make the responsibility visible and thereby reduce diffusion of any kind of responsibility.
The second solution is to introduce weekly role reviews to evaluate whether the roles and workloads remained appropriate and make redistribution of tasks wherever necessary. This particular approach indicates the application of development and structure and allows the team to adapt to project requirements change easily.

FinTech Solutions and Creative Pay

Bases of Power
Marcus – legitimate power – he was the team lead and has formal authority, as he was appointed by the upper management.
Marcus – reward power – bonus was announced to members who followed his approach.
Marcus – coercive power – the threat of negative consequences was evident in his warning of an uncertain future to non aligned members.
Sarah – expert power – she has strong architectural expertise and resolves technical bugs easily.
Sarah – referent power – She has a strong personal credibility that leads to legacy and innovative members seeking her advice.

Power tactics

Power tactics are utilised by members in order to influence the behaviour of others. In the given scenario, Marcus makes use of pressure through threats with respect to members’ futures, And reward based influence through the promised bonus. Sarah utilises consultation through a question and answer system, and personal appeals based on her credibility to help groups reach consensus.

Two management strategies

The two management strategies can be to create a shared integration team identity whereby Marcus and Sarah should establish digital wallet objectives and shared performance targets. The success of the team should be recognised rather than individual performance. The second management strategy to consider is to redesign decision making and team roles. The upper management should be responsible for defining decision right and Sarah can facilitate technical decisions while Marcus emphasizes on agreed governance requirements.

Want a Full Worked Out Answer with References?

The analysis on team effectiveness, decision making, power bases and influence tactics above indicated their importance in a business strategy project. With our business strategic management experts in Singapore, getting an assignment done is easy. Simply visit our HRM assignment help page to get a professional expert for your assignment today you can explore the expert written assignment to know more about HRM concepts and writing styles and standards of our expert.

Submit Your Request Here

Explore Samples on HRM Assignment Written by Experts