follow the requirement to finish
2000 words
due in 3 days
follow the example
make sure to include the template in the paper
Newcastle Business School
ASSESSMENT 1 – ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Trimester 3, 2022
GSBS6001: Managing Under Uncertainty
This assessment is for NCLE_CITY Students.
Due Date: Sunday – Week 6 at 11:59pm AEST
Weighting |
30% |
Submission Method |
Turnitin and Discussion Forum |
Assessment Criteria |
Marking Rubric (Uploaded on Canvas) |
Feedback Provided Length |
Online and in Class Five (5) Pages (2000 Words) |
Purpose: The purpose of this assignment is to provide students with the skills to locate, select, reference, and interpret scholarly articles.
Description: Each individual is to select and annotate three (3) academic journal articles related to the broad theme: A Rational Approach to Managerial Decision Making Under Conditions of Deep Uncertainty. Each annotation is one page and completed on a template. In addition, an introduction and conclusion to the annotations is required. The introduction and conclusion should be no more than one page each.
Note:
1. Articles considered for annotation should be published in the period 2012 – 2022.
2. Posting assignment drafts on the discussion board for feedback is OPTIONAL. However.
a. Students are encouraged to post their first draft annotation for feedback along with a link to the annotated article in the Assessment 1: Inquiries, Online Discussions & Feedback discussion forum in Canvas.
b. Students are encouraged to post a draft of their completed Annotated Bibliography for feedback in the Assessment 1: Inquiries, Online Discussions & Feedback discussion forum in Canvas.
Further details are available in the assessment folder in Canvas.
End of Assessment
image1.png
,
ANNOTATED BIBLIPGRAPHY Trust in Teams
It has becoming more apparent to organisations worldwide the importance that trust brings to an organisation. This collection of scholarly articles defines the importance that trust brings to workplace teams effectiveness. Further to this, with the current global financial situation which most organisation face, combined with increasing pressures from shareholders, financiers and other stakeholders to become more efficient and more productive. In order to achieve this organisation must recognise the importance of trust in workplace teams. The purpose of the annotated bibliography is to provide insight and reflection on the importance trust will have in improving organisations workplace team effectiveness. The following six annotated bibliographies provide various empirical studies in support of this statement.
First, Dirks (1999) describes that trust how to effects on work cooperation. Whilst showed that trust effective variable which connected goals and reward systems which are significant influence group process and performance. By examining a sporting team the research completed by Dirk (2000) provides an empirical study with much more clearly defined goals (i.e. winning each game) creates reduced variables and provides a fresh perspective of teams performance other than those in the workplace. Second, Erdem, Ozen, and Atan (2003) discusses the issue of team work as a crucial success factor for most companies and studied the relationship between trust of team members and the performance of that team. Third, although many organisations rely on teams to function, Ereden (2003) argues there is little research that clearly establishes the connection between teamwork and improved performance. Although the success of teams depends on the environments in which they operate, Ereden (2003) argues that organisations need to plan, structure and support the use of teams. Considering the right questions and issues in planning, primary researches and experience, to create a work team planning guide, that identifies the topics and critical issues companies need to identify to support effective teams. Fourth, Bijlsma and Koopman (2003) reviews six empirical studies over the past decade on trust within and between organisational relationships to emphasise the importance of common understanding and trust. Fifth, Costa (2003) provides a unique perspective giving further insight into the definition of trust and the important role on monitoring individuals behaviours. In the final article, Tan and Lim (2007) build a specific model on the relationship between colleagues and organisations in relation to trust.
Reference |
Dirks, K. (1999) The Effects of Interpersonal Trust on Work Group Performance, Effects of Interpersonal Trust, Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 84. pp 445-455 |
Article Type |
Research |
Aim/Purpose |
The purpose of this article is to describe the influences of trust on work cooperation. |
Method |
Sample: 3 people who from 42 people became a group to attend tower building task. The method of data collection: self-report survey after task. Analysis: the results of survey showed low-trust groups did efforts by themselves, but if want to get higher performance should be high-trust groups struggled together. |
Findings |
The research displayed trust as a important result of group, directly effects group performance, and the researchers think that trust indirectly effects interpersonal relations and group process and performance. |
Significance |
The research showed trust as an effective variable which connected goals and reward systems which is significant to the main topic of all articles which is trust. This article not only indicates importance of trust in cooperation, but also describes which situation leads to people to make difference choices which are whether work together. Most of examples from this research that employees trust each other to work together in order to more reward which is not found in other researched articles. |
Strengths |
The author indicated his point very clearly and gave many examples to support significance of trust in group work. Further more also bring forward disadvantages based on trust, sequentially, better to explain the significance of the trust. |
Weakness |
Although the author expounded both sides of the trust, not distinct how to build good interpersonal relations and how to avert distracter. |
Reference |
Dirks, K. (2000) Trust in Leadership and Team Performance: Evidence from NCAA Basketball; Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85. No. 6, pp. 1004-1012 |
Aim/Purpose |
The writer outlined two objectives for this article being; i) examining the assumptions found in several literature relating to the topic and; ii) Using an empirical study to prove/disprove the hypothesis made by examining the relationship between trust & team performance. |
Article Type |
Research |
Method |
The study uses a sample of men’s college basketball team, divisions 1-3. A total of 30 teams, consisting of 355 individuals located in the Midwestern & western United States were involved in the study. One hour interviews were completed with players and coaches over a five year period. |
Findings |
1. The study found that trust in the coach did not vary between divisions 2. Trust in the coach by players had a considerable impact on the teams percentage of wins 3. There was a relationship between trust and past performances (i.e. the coaches or team winning percentage or history) 4. Other correlations included team talent, past team performance and trust among team mates. |
Significance |
It is important to consider teams other than those in work groups, in this case a sporting team, for additional scope. A sporting team has clearly defined goals and the objectives are generally common to all teams surveyed. Further to this it is relevant to examine a second article by K.Dirks to compare the style, research and findings. |
Strengths |
By using highly competitive sporting teams the goals are the same (i.e. winning), unlike organisations and workplaces where individual goals may affect the organisations “overall” goals with a more significant impact. All teams and player abide by the same rules in competition in missing variables. Finally, the sample size is quite large. |
Weaknesses |
The empirical study, which supports the hypothesis, uses sporting teams not the performance of workplace teams. More research relating to the trust among individual team players not just players and coaches would be relevant. The use of research statistics jargon can be off putting when reading. |
Reference |
Erdem, F and Ozen, J. (2003) Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust. Team Performance Management. Vol.9. No.5/6; pp. 131-135 |
Article Type |
Research |
Aim/Purpose |
The aim of this study is to relationship between cognitive and affective dimensions of trust and the performance of team .Than analysis the result through empirical study |
Method |
The author uses through research ten companies which applying total quality management choosing fifty teams from these companies representing 279 teams members as a sample .Questionnaires designed for research to be answer by the sample six relating to cognitive trust, five relating to affective trust, and four relating to team performance |
Findings |
Strong social interaction between team members or team work in organisation department will produce trust (cognitive trust and affective trust ).This trust will develop and protect team work .Therefore performance and outcomes of organisation will increase as trust increase among team members |
Significance |
The development of modern organisation needs trust on team work. Also increasing trust among team members depend on or organisational department. The significance of this article was that it surveyed within an organisation and its departments which is different from the other articles which used different organisation in their method. |
Strengths |
The author explores how to describe and Appling the affective trust and the cognitive trust to increasing the performance |
Weakness |
The authors focus on some by the questionnaires teams and forget all environment of teams |
Reference |
Costa, A. (2003) Work Team Trust and Effectiveness; Section of work and organisational psychology. Personal Review, Vol. 32. No. 5. pp 605-622. |
Aim/Purpose |
This article looks at the functions and effects trust will impact on workplace team’s performances. The links between performance and trust are explained and expanded. Hypotheses are tested by using a survey study. The article also looks to define trust. |
Article Type |
Research |
Method |
The survey is completed on three different organisations within the same sector. Team comprised of three to six members which scores were aggregated. Four hypotheses were tested using the Structured Equations Modelling (SEM). Teams are surveyed in areas including; trust, perceived trust, perceived task performance, team satisfaction, and attitudinal commitment and continuance commitments. |
Findings |
1. There is a high correlation between perceived trustworthiness and actual workgroup trust 2. More emphasis is required on monitoring behaviours of individuals and teams 3. Trust is important in workplace teams performance and effectiveness 4. Trust is a crucial factor in a teams ability to function |
Significance |
The article uses first hand data to test its hypotheses. Although based in the Netherland the two countries (The Netherlands and Australia) are highly comparable. The article is clearly in relation to workplace teams, as opposed to sporting or social teams. |
Strengths |
The article concentrates on workplace team. The importance of monitoring behaviour is recognised. The sample size of the survey is relatively large (112 teams). The diagrams used are effective, non-complicated and not overbearing. |
Weaknesses |
Several sections of the article became difficult to read, resulting in the whole paragraph becoming confusing. Further to this, research jargon used is hard to understand without statistics knowledge. The research is based on the social care sector only, which the author acknowledges. The majority of references are no longer current, that is older than 10 years. |
Reference |
Bijlsma, K. and Koopman, P. (2003) Introduction: Trust Within Organisations, Personal Review, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp 543-555. |
Aim/Purpose |
To critically review of six empirical studies over the past decade on the issue of trust within and between organisational relationships. |
Article Type |
Literature review |
Approach |
Starts with the reason of study trust and the common understanding of trust based on three directions: trust as a phenomenon, consequences of trust and building trust. Three questions are discussed in the review: Antecedents of trust, how to determine antecedents of trust and relationships between trust and control. |
Conclusion |
This study presents the common understanding, mirror standing and emerging points of discussions. The authors suggest the future research directions. One way is to discuss the relation between trust and control may also be explained by systematic risk. Another way for future research is to need more models of antecedents of trust. The last suggestion for future research is to obtain more systematic comparisons. |
Significance |
The review presents issues on trust within and between organisations. Compared to Weibel (2002) whose argument is trust is the way to absorb risks and control is a way to reduce risk. This article is valued because it is the only literature review and as such does not complete research but offer control measure which is highly beneficial. |
Strengths |
The article presents many themes which is relevant to the study of trust with clear structure and also gives many promising suggestions for future research. It would be a good recommendation and prediction for the further relevant study. |
Weakness |
There is no quantitative data on each study to establish the relation between trust and control. Moreover, the discussion on the relation between trust and control is limited without full attention. There is also no systematic comparison with many relations to find the main topic. |
Reference |
Erdem, F. and Ozen, J. (2003) Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust. Team Performance Management. Vol. 9. No.5/6. pp. 131-135 |
Aim/Purpose |
Research |
Article Type |
The aim of this study is to relationship between cognitive and affective dimensions of trust and the performance of team .Than analysis the result through empirical study |
Method |
The author uses through research ten companies which applying total quality management choosing fifty teams from these companies representing 279 teams members as a sample .Questionnaires designed for research to be answer by the sample six relating to cognitive trust, five relating to affective trust, and four relating to team performance |
Findings |
Strong social interaction between team members or team work in organization department will produce trust (cognitive trust and affective trust ).This trust will develop and protect team work .Therefore performance and outcomes of organization will increase as trust increase among team members |
Significance |
The development of modern organization needs trust on team work. The result of this research show positive relation between the team performance and trust. This article is significant because it clearly illustrates the positive implications of trust in teams better than must articles. |
Strengths |
The author explores how to describe and Appling the affective trust and the cognitive trust to increasing the performance |
Weakness |
The authors focus on some by the questionnaires teams and forget all environment of teams likes team leader, level of trust on team members also the objective of team members which is main factor |
Reference |
Erdem, F., Ozen, J. and Atan, N. (2003) The Relationship Between Trust And Team Performance, Work Study, Vol. 52, No.7, pp. 337-340. |
Aim/Purpose |
To investigate the relationship between trust of team members and the performance of that team. |
Article Type |
Research |
Method |
The study selected 148 members of 28 teams in four organisations. Questionnaires are used to send to the organisations though mail. The SPSS 10.0 was used in the analysis of reliability is at an acceptable level. Correlation was used to establish the relationship between trust and performance. |
Findings |
One of the main findings that perceptions of trust among team members form different organisations was found to be positive. Another finding is related to performance-related items, perceptions were positive as well. However, these findings did not show a consistent relationship – findings for each organisation were different. The first one has the strongest relationship between trust and performance. The second organisation is the positive as well. However, a limited correlation was found for the third and fourth organisations. |
Significance |
The research focuses on the relationship between trust and team performance. This article is unique as it has the data digitalised in SPSS, which all group members are familiar with it use. |
Strengths |
The research is clearly written with the good structure. Using questionnaires and SPSS 10.0 statistical program to analyse data and get the result of the relationship between trust and performance. |
Weakness |
The research uses a small sample and doesn’t consider the important factor of the time of people working together. Moreover, this study only determine the observations of team member, it doesn’t consider other people’s perspective. |
Reference |
Tan ,H., H. and Lim, A. (2007) Trust in Coworkers and Trust in Organisations, The Journal of Psychology. Vol. 143 No. 1 pp. 45-66 |
Article Type |
Research |
Aim/Purpose |
The purpose of this article is how to build a model which is relation between colleagues and organisations. |
Method |
The sample included agents who come from a life insurance agency company in Singapore. The method of data collection: individual agents’ work schedules. Finally, the analysis: variance which from agencies were greater than 70% on reliabilities of all constructs, but not because the same demographic profiles. |
Findings |
The research found the perfect trust model that the relation between co-workers and organisational results which effected by emotional promises and performance. |
Significance |
The research were the first to build a specific model which is explain trust importance in co-workers and it influence organisations, it also can effects development about organisational outcomes. The group found this articles significance to be the metaphor which it created to ease understanding. |
Strengths |
The author showed very clearly diagrams to describe the trust between co-workers and organisations. Also, used many math formulas to make reader understand easily. |
Weakness |
Although the author showed many diagrams to make more useful, it is difficult for the readers. Some of these diagrams are more formal and academic. |
Trust is important. There is a consensus across the six articles that there is a strong correlation between trust and the relationship. It is therefore vital that should an organisation seriously recognise the importance of trust, they must also recognise to succeed in building trust this is reliant on the development of the relationships with both; i) the individual team members made up of workplace colleagues and; ii) between the collective team and the team leader.
Dirks (1999) research that trust influences between co-workers and organisations. The survey give clearly results about importance that trust effect in cooperation, but this survey was more common and had some limitations on definition of trust in teamwork. Although not entirely relevant to the overall topic in question, as it was a sporting team, Dirk (2000), clearly illustrated the links that exist between trust and team performance. Further to this the research defined the importance of one’s reputation and past history affecting team performance. This would be vastly relevant in the workplace to increase a team’s performance. Erdem, Ozen, and Atan, (2003) study the relationships between trust and performance. They suggested that there are variable factors to affect the team performance and the level of trust. So further research was suggested to consider the above issues. They also advised that the more samples were needed to strongly support the additional factors got influence in the team working.
Further studies have been addressed since Bijlsma and Koopman (2003), such as Weibel(2002), is to discuss the relation between trust and control may also be explained by systematic risk. Another way for future research is Silverman (2001) is to need more models of antecedents of trust. The last suggestion for many promising research is to present in front of us. Tan and Lim (2007) reviewed the importance in relation which including colleagues and organisations. Based on research not only show example to describe trust in teamwork, but also try to find model which is consequence in trust. The jargon used with statistical data and research completed with only three different organisations in one industry sector makes this article partly ineffective when completing individual research. However the surveys large sample size and findings reached by justifying its hypotheses proves affective.
In conclusion, developing trust on team members depend on a team-based organization, even with perfect planning, which will supporting team members in each stage. Therefore the performance and outcomes increasing.
References
Aryee, S., Budhwar,P.S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes; Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 23 No. 3 pp 267 – 285 .
Bijlsma, K. and Koopman, P. (2003 ) Introduction: Trust Within Organisations, Personal Review, 32,5,543-555.
Dirks ,K. T. (1999) The Effects of Interpersonal Trust on Work Group Performance, Effects of Interpersonal Trust , Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 84. No. 5. pp 445-455
Erdem, F., Ozen, J. and Atan, N.(2003) The Relationship Between Trust And Team Performance, Work Study, Vol. 52. No. 7. pp 337-340.
Hackman, J. R., and Morris, C. G. (1975) Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press.
Korsgaard, M. A., Schweiger, D. M., and Sapienza, H. J. (1995) Building commitment, attachment, and trust in strategic decision-making teams: The role of procedural justice. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 38. No. 1. pp 60-84.
Lewicki, R.J. and Bunker, B.B. (1996), Developing and Maintaining Trust in Work Relationships”, in Kramer, R.M. and Tyler, T.R. (Eds), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, Sage, London, pp. 114-39.
Leung, S., Chan, J. & Lee, W. (2003) The Dynamic Team Role Behaviour: Approaches to Investigation. Team Performance Management Vol. 9. No 3/4. pp. 84 – 96
Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. (2005) Trust for management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 48. No. 5. pp 874 – 888.
Owen, H. (1996) Building Teams on a Display of Trust, People Management, Vol. 2. No. 6. pp 34-37.
Shockley-Zalaback, P., Ellis,K. and Winograd, G. (2000), Organizational Trust: What is Means, Why it Matters ?”, Organizational Development Journal, Vol. 18. No. 4. pp 32-48.
Tan ,H. H., Lim, A.K.H(2007) Trust in Coworkers and Trust in Organizations, Measure Trust in Organizations, The Journal of Psychology. Vol. 143. No. 1. pp 45 – 66
Weibel, A. (2002), Trust and Control. Theoretical Notes for an Expert Meeting on Trust, theoretical notes for an expert meeting on trust. Personal Review. Vol. 32. No. 5. pp 543 – 555
GSBS6020 Management & Organisational Behaviour Annotated Bibliography
Harmony
11 | Page
,
FORMAT AND CRITERIA EXPLANATION FOR ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
GSBS6001: MANAGING UNDER UNCERTAINTY
REFERENCE |
Full and correct form of reference required as per a reference list format |
AIM/PURPOSE |
State the aim or purpose of the article in one sentence |
ARTICLE TYPE |
In a word or a phrase, state the type of article. For example: research, (quantitative or qualitative) conceptual, critique, historical, meta-analysis. It can only be one of these. |
METHOD (research papers only) |
If the article is a research article, provide a brief summary of the sample, location, method of data collection and data analysis. |
APPROACH (non research papers) |
If the article is not a research article, provide a succinct summary of the structure and/or key content of the article. |
FINDINGS (research only) |
If the article is a research article, provide a brief description of the findings of the research. |
CONCLUSION (non research only) |
If the article is not a research article, provide a brief description of the conclusion or conclusions. |
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ANNOTATED REFERENCES |
Indicate how the annotated article relates to the other annotated articles in the bibliography – draw out similarities and/or differences in various aspects. |
STRENGTHS |
Indicate the strength or strengths of the article as you evaluate it. Do not restate what the authors suggest is the contribution of the article. |
WEAKNESSES |
Indicate the weakness or weaknesses of article as you evaluate it. Do not restate what the authors suggest as the limitations of the article. |
Note: In completing this form, delete the text and the sections that do not apply. For example, if your article is research based, then delete the two rows relating to non-research based articles and vice-versa.
Recent Comments