Bạn cho rằng GPA điểm trung bình trên lớp của người đồng đội đó ảnh hưởng như thế nào đến thành tích của nhóm?. Bạn cho rằng số điểm mong muốn đạt được đối với dự án này của người đồng đ
FOREIGN TRADE UNIVERSITY HO CHI MINH CITY CAMPUS ……***…… MID-TERM REPORT Subject: Econometrics CRITERIAS OF TEAMMATE SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR CLASS PROJECTS IN FOREIGN TRADE UNIVERSITY Authors: Tran My Linh (2212155117), Trinh The Minh (2212155124), Le Hoang Ngan (2212155138), Nguyen Mac Phi Nga (2212155133) Class: K61CLC5 Intake: 61 Instructor: PhD Le Hang My Hanh Grade (in number) Grade (in words) Examiner 1’s signature Examiner 2’s signature Invigilator 1’s signature Invigilator 2’s signature Ho Chi Minh City, March 2023 TABLE OF CONTENT I.Abstract .1 II.Introduction III Literature review .3 General background information .3 1.1 Competence: .5 1.2 Warmth: 1.3 Bonding capital: 1.4 Bridging capital: Research questions and objectives IV Methodology .7 Participants .8 Research design 2.1 Demographic information: 2.2 Competence: .9 2.2.1 Technical skills 2.2.2 Previous experience 2.2.3 Communication skills 2.3: Warmth: 2.3.1 Social skills 2.3.2 Psychological collectivism: .10 2.3.3 Creativity 10 2.3.4 Personality 10 2.4 Bonding Capital .12 2.5 Bridging Capital .12 Data collection procedure .12 Data analysis 13 V Results .13 Cronbach’s alpha: 13 OLS Assumptions Verification 15 2.1 Assumption 1, and 4: 15 2.2 Assumption 3: No Perfect Multicollinearity 15 2.3 Assumption 5: No Heteroskedasticity 16 2.4 Assumption 6: Normality Assumption 17 Findings 18 3.1 Results: .18 3.2 Individual Significance: 19 3.3 Overall Significance: 19 3.4 Linearity restriction: 20 VI Discussion, Limitation, and Recommendations 20 Discussion 20 Limitations and Recommendations 25 VII Conclusion .26 APPENDIX 27 Phần 1: Người Đồng Đội Sự Thành Công Của Dự Án 27 Phần 2: Năng Lực Của Đồng Đội 27 Phần 3: Kinh Nghiệm Của Đồng Đội Trong Những Dự Án Tương Tự .28 Phần 4: Kỹ Năng Xã Hội Của Đồng Đội 28 Phần 5: Mindset Làm Việc Nhóm Của Đồng Đội 28 Phần 6: Tính Cách Của Đồng Đội .29 Phần 7: Đời Tư Xã Hội Của Đồng Đội 29 REFERENCES .30 CRITERIAS OF TEAMMATE SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR CLASS PROJECTS IN FOREIGN TRADE UNIVERSITY I Abstract As employers are putting more emphasis on teamwork skills, student teams sprang up as a way to practice as well as to achieve greater goals both inside and outside the classroom All teams start from the selection process and this study aims to analyze factors that impacted this process and therefore suggest ways for students to improve as potential teammates This study aims to see if previous literature still holds up in classrooms of Foreign Trade University in Ho Chi Minh City We conduct an online survey asking undergraduate students of all majors of Foreign Trade University in Ho Chi Minh City to rate one specific past teammate on how much their competence, warmth, bonding capital and bridging capital influence the satisfaction after working with their partner We anticipated that the results will be consistent with previous literature in that social capital will be greatly valued yet competence and warmth will be the deciding factors that affect the overall team experience II Introduction Strong teamwork skills are valued by employers as teams in organizations today are more independent to perform increased tasks (Hernandez, as cited in Hansen, 2006) Workplaces have always required teamwork from the employees both in projects as well as the day-today tasks because of its benefits Teamwork allows employees to work more productively, creatively, and focused Research has shown that teamwork allows the team to make more accurate decisions (Bamber, Watson, & Hill; Hackman; as cited in Hansen, 2006) as it allows team members to take in, consider, and build off each other’s ideas, resulting in a product that is more than all of their efforts working individually combined Companies are expanding the number of teams inside the organization (Applebaum & Blatt; Taninecz; as cited in Hansen, 2006) and therefore employers consistently have the most demands for graduates with great teamwork (Tarricone & Luca, as cited in Hansen, 2006) Furthermore, teamwork governing is an essential ability for any future managers (Ashraf; Chen, Donahue, & Klimoski; as cited in Hansen, 2006), which is part of career advancement since managers have to spend up to 90% of their time in team affairs (Chapman, Meuter, Toy & Wright, as cited in Pearlstein, 2019), and in fresh talented university graduates (McCorkle et al.; Tarricone & Luca; Thacker & Yost; as cited in Hansen, 2006) Due to its significance, teamwork is greatly implemented in both classroom and project context of university students (Johnson, Johnson & Smith, as cited in Pearlstein, 2019) by professors who are fully aware of its future benefits (Pearlstein, 2020) The use of classroom teams projects have been increasing over the years (Alexander & Stone; Ashraf; Bolton; Kunkel & Shafer; as cited in Hansen, 2006) Students are given assignments and projects that require being done in groups to enhance those skills more (Antonioni; Chapman et al.; Swaim & Henley; as cited in Pearlstein, 2020; Hansen, 2006) Due to its significance, it is unsurprising that students themselves use a variety of ways to improve their ability to work together and to get along well with each other The first step to any satisfied teamwork is selecting the team itself Using a hastily assembled team would be detrimental as research shows ad hoc teams are the source of countless problems such as disharmony, unclear goals, conflicts, unequal participation, unbalanced skills levels, (Cox & Bobrowski, McCorkle et al., McKendall, Rau & Heyl, as cited in Hansen, 2006; Suzanne T Bell, Elizabeth Mannix & Margaret A Neale, Mathieu et al., as cited in Gómez Zará et al., 2019) In fact, CBInsights (2021) suggests that 14% of startups' failure is contributed to not finding the right team while 7% is due to team disharmony While empirical researches have thoroughly explore the mechanism of team formation through the more generalized human and social capital as well as controlled research on how students would form their teams using a computerized system or multiple offline presentations sessions which provide clear information about others’ capabilities, we believe more should be done in the case of students’ team formation with the ambiguity of information Markaki et al (2011) did research on selection procedures employed by laboratories project managers to overcome this ambiguity suggesting that CV is the preferred method but students, especially in the earlier years, have little experience and knowledge in evaluating another’s capabilities without experiences with the mentioned individual This paper contributed to the literature by examining students' team formation processes in the old classroom context This paper will categorize new items as measurements to old variables to test which factors affect the overall satisfaction teamwork and which items make up more in each factor while keeping everything else unchanged and much understood by the literature We would like to specify that for the purpose of this study, we will only examine self-assembled teams without any intervention from professors as a way to structurally form teams III Literature review General background information These days, as corporations and companies value graduates with strong teamwork skills, students are given assignments and projects that require being done in groups to enhance those skills more (Antonioni; Chapman et al.; Swaim & Henley, as cited in Pearlstein, 2020; Hansen, 2006) It is also the case of the majority of classes for Foreign Trade University students where they are assigned projects that require them to work in teams In such projects, students have a tendency to choose their partners based on prior collaboration and seat proximity (Connerly & Mael, as cited in Pearlstein, 2020) Despite that, there is no guarantee such methods will result in satisfaction and overall team success Thus, in order for the team to perform and students to have a good time, they need to find potential teammates to form a good team A team is generally considered as a group of individuals working towards a common goal Bercovitz & Feldman (2011, as cited in Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017) considered a team to be “a collection of individuals who share responsibility for an outcome.” In previous research, teams have been classified in multiple ways depending on the context of the teams and the studies itself but teams can always be classified into self-assembled and appointed teams (Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017) These classifications are dependent on how the team is formed, which can determine a team’s structure (Pinto, as cited in Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017) According to Hackman (1987, as cited in Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017), there are three types of team structures: manager-lead work teams, self-managing work groups, and self-designing work teams A manager is responsible for tracking the work and performance of the team in a manager-lead team while self-managing groups take accountability for the manager’s work among one another Self-organizing teams are teams where members mutually agree on the structure of the team itself, which fits our desired context as most classroom teams are allowed to work in their preferred style Another thing to note about these teams is that they fall into Document continues below Discover more from: Econometrics Trường Đại học Ngoạ… 418 documents Go to course Apparel and Footwear 74 in Vietnam(Full Market… Econometrics 97% (29) ON TAP KINH TE Luong 13 revision Econometrics 100% (12) Kinh tế lượng - AAA 46 Class Econometrics 100% (6) Ethics - SDaa 31 Econometrics 100% (5) A collection of past 17 exams Econometrics 100% (5) Tut 9.1 trm Econometrics 100% (4) the category of project teams, in which their existence is only temporary and will be disbanded after the project is finished (Zhu, Huang, & Contractor, as cited in Bailey and Skvoretz, 2017) In our study, we are only interested in self-organized project teams, as this is the type of teams in the occasional projects in the classroom context Selection procedures “is a process that has a specific systematic methodology where the selector understands the differences of people, identifies needs and expectations, sets standards, evaluates them and decides selection methods” (Markaki, Sakas, & Chadjipantelis, 2011) From a structural social psychological perspective (Sell & Kuipers; Lawler, Ridgeway, & Markovsky, as cited in Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017), teams are like microcosmic societies They represent a process of social cohesion through interaction “Previous studies have acknowledged that ad hoc team formation processes lead to disharmony among members, lack of cohesion, organization, and diversity” (Gómez-Zará et al., 2019) In institutions, one major reason for why it is hard for both students and professors to form a good team is that “they lack information about each of the students in the class to make sound choices” (Pearlstein, 2020) That is, collaborating with other parties without knowing their strengths, weaknesses and other things like that could lead to poor teamwork experience Mello’s study (as cited in Bacon, Stewart & Silver, 1999) states that self-selected teams will be more responsible for group problems, including solving conflicts arising within groups This helps the team to overcome the second phase of Tuckman’s stages of group development - storming, more easily Storming is the stage when personal opinions and personalities come into view, they start to have disagreements about the oriented goals, division of work and missions Therefore, when the team is more capable of tackling team’s conflicts, it can get to pass the storming stages more quickly and move on to the third stage - norming Many previous researches have carefully examined in multiple ways as well as suggest different methods to improve the in-class team experience Despite that, we would want to confirm the results as well as focus more on new items that can be added as new measurements to old variables When selecting partners in general, students can choose who they would like to work with based on several attributes Our study shall classify factors including human capital and social capital in which human capital consists of competence and warmth, social capital includes bonding capital and bridging capital that serve as either interpersonal criteria or data that enter into the process of assessing and selecting the best member(s) for a team while under various constraints and pressures such as lack of skill and quality information about others, In other words, these factors are the social psychological mechanisms that frame the partner‐selection process of team formation as a qualification assessment activity Thus, they are used to qualify (or disqualify) the selection of individuals as team members 1.1 Competence: These days, competence has proved to be a vital tool in human resource management, vocational training and performance management (Lachance; Lucia and Lepsinger; Sanghi; Hoge et al.,; Otto, as cited in Sampson & Fytros, 2008) According to Spencer and Spencer’s study (as cited in Sampson & Fytros, 2008), competence is defined as “an underlying characteristic of an individual that is causally related to criterion-referenced affecting and/or superior performance in a job situation Competences can be distinguished into essential competences which serve as the foundation of knowledge and skills needed by everyone and differentiating competences, which are used to distinguish superior performance from average performance and they may include characteristics such as self-concepts, traits and motives.” Therefore, people who are seen as competent are welcomed to any teams, organizations and projects Competence is not only about the characteristics of an individual but also how others perceive it as in the context of teammate selection According to Bailey & Skvoretz (2017), perceived competence can either be status expectations or reputational information, both of which stems from the expectation state theory The theory states that there will be inequality between members despite members being collectively-oriented This favoring is the result of stereotypes, assumptions accompanied with achieved status characteristics The general belief held about a group regarding their competence is referred to as diffuse characteristics (Berger, Ridgeway, & Zelditch, as cited in Bailey, 2017) while achieved status refers to more specific characteristics in relevant specific social and technological abilities (Knottnerus & Greenstein, as cited in Bailey, 2017) These expectations have the ability to impact one’s values as a potential teammate (Berger, Cohen & Zelditch, as cited in Bailey, 2017) yet can be forcefully connected with specific jobs despite being applicable or not (Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017) One’s information on competence can be gathered from the words of others (Bailey & Skvoretz, 2017) to use as a sign of a potential teammate in the teammate selection process (Hinds et al., as cited in Bailey, 2017) According to the literature, information about one’s performance can be shared among the society which dictates one’s value and competence 1.2 Warmth: One of the major factors affecting the selection of team members is warmth “Warmth captures traits that are related to perceived intent (e.g., friendliness, helpfulness, sincerity, trustworthiness, and morality) A person’s warmth portends trustworthiness and allows a degree of predictability in a relationship” (Gómez-Zará et al., 2019) 1.3 Bonding capital: In addition to warmth, bonding capital is another outstanding factor affecting team selection procedure “Bonding capital characterizes the quality of a connection between two people People choose close friends (strong ties) or strangers (weak ties) for different purposes Working with prior collaborators increases the certainty of working styles, communication, and outcomes Working with weak ties increases access to novel information” (Gómez-Zará et al., 2019) 1.4 Bridging capital: Last but not least, the factor that has a huge impact on the selection of who the students want to work with is bridging capital “Bridging social capital is characterized by occupying an advantaged position in social networks (e.g., a high popularity, brokerage, or closeness value) People who are brokers fill the structural holes between disconnected individuals, allowing more access and control over information and resources” (Gómez-Zará et al., 2019) In our study we will not treat these two as separate variables but instead as a whole in social capital since we are more focused in competence and warmth than in social capital These also serve the function later in our study as a way to present multicollinearity to prevent the correlation between independent variables and the error term