1

MGTS1601: Organisational Behaviour

Course Reflection

Semester 2 2024

Name: Wei-Lun Kao

Student Number: 48232586

Word Count: 1299

PLEASE PLACE AN “X” IN ONE OF THE BOXES BELOW

I attended the Week I failed to attend the I failed to attend the

12 and 13 tutorials Week 12 and/or 13 Week 12 and 13

tutorials but I received tutorials

an exemption or

attended a different

class with permission

from MGTS1601

course staff**

** If you received an exemption or permission to attend a different class,

please include a scan or photo of your e-mail from course staff on the last

page of your assignment.

Note: As per the information in the Course Profile, if you failed to attend

the compulsory tutorials without an exemption your mark on this

assignment will be restricted to 9/20

Introduction

having a good self-awareness is an important skill, especially for

individuals to understand more about their strengths, weaknesses, and

impact on others (Goleman, 1995). In this reflection, the following

paragraph is aimed to analyse my personality traits, along with team

experiences, and employability skills using the result of Big Five model

and simulation.

Big Five Personality Inventory Scores

The Big Five personality model is a framework widely used by

employees and employers for the insights of their personality traits, which

includes Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion,

Agreeableness, and Natural reactions. My results provide insight into my

own personality, helping me understand how my traits influence behavior

in personal and team settings. For openness to experience, I scored 59

out of 100, which is the highest out of other four traits, this indicates that I

have a strong preference for creativity, adaptability, and exploration of

new ideas. This also aligns with the research according to McCrae &

Costa (1997) suggesting that high openness tends to correlates with

intellectual curiosity and innovative thinking. Based on the result have a

53 out of 100 when it comes to conscientiousness this means that I am

balance when it comes to reliability and flexibility, according to Roberts et

al. (2009) this also means that in teams, I can effectively engage in team

without rigidly adhering to structure. In terms of extraversion, I only

scored 24 percent meaning that I am more introverted, favoring deep

interactions over socializing, and Cain (2012) states that this is a trait

suited for roles involving reflection and independence. My moderate

Agreeableness is at 31 percent, this indicates empathy and

cooperativeness, balanced with assertiveness, this allows me to

collaborate effectively in a team without sacrificing personal values

(Graziano & Eisenberg, 1997). Lastly, with the score of 52% on Natural

Reactions means that I am mostly resilient, and Connor and Davidson

(2003) stated that high resilience is the ability to adapt in a diverse

environment, and maintain stability with challenges, which based on the

passed experience it is one of my strong suit.

Reflection on Personality and Workshop Team Experience

Three of my strongest include Openness to Experience,

Conscientiousness, and Natural Reactions, are all traits that can impact

the behavior in my team, and the overall team dynamics in my workshop.

Even though my openness and conscientiousness were great for working

in a team, however the lack of communication and role misarrangement is

something that slowed our team during the groups workshop.

For 59% of Openness to Experience, it suggests that I am quite open

to creative solutions and new ideas (McCrae & Costa, 1997). This trait

helps me get through the early stages of our team project, where through

discussion , I can accept different perspectives easily while also providing

my own. Despite my openness, we never really came up with a common

goals, which I found out that the lack of shared mental models in our team

limited how effectively we could align our ideas, which ultimately

contributed to our low grade (Mathieu et al., 2017). With a

Conscientiousness score of 53%, suggesting that I to be reliable and

organized, and are able to engage well in a team (Roberts et al., 2009),

which is typically advantageous in collaborative settings. But during our

team workshop the uneven role distribution in our team led to

demotivation (Savelsbergh et al., 2012), where two team members,

including myself, were overburdened with tasks, and the two other

members are not really engaged. Finally, my Natural Reactions (52%)

indicate a moderate level of resilient but can still experience stress in

challenging situations. During our workshop I managed to find a way

through all the stressful situations. Still, the low motivation within my

team is what led to increase stress levels (Sassenus et al., 2022), which

also impacted my attitude and engagement. Connor and Davidson’s

(2003) research on resilience aligns with this, as moderate resilience can

help navigate stress but may not be enough when team support is

lacking.

Reflection on Simulation Experience

The Harvard simulation emphasize the challenges of balancing

work, relationships, self-care, and social impact. My result states that

personal relationships and self-care are my top priorities (Appendix A).

However, my low satisfaction score indicates that I need a better purpose

before doing the work (Appendix B). It also provided me an opportunity to

evaluate my strengths and areas for growth, particularly in relation to my

values and purpose. There is two key insights learned about myself from

this stimulation, which is my high preference for structured goal-setting,

and the lack of collaborative problem-solving.

This simulation highlighted that I overly relied on structured goal-

setting. Throughout the stimulation and group workshop, I consistently

aimed to establish clear objectives and timelines, which this helps me to

always get my work done efficiently, but the simulation showed that from

occasionally allowing more flexibility might help when it comes to working

in a group. This insight was valuable, as it showed me the balance

between structure and the ability to adapt. This simulation also reminded

me of the importance of collaborating. Throughout the tasks, rather than

actively engaging with others to brainstorm and develop solutions, I often

focused on completing my individual work. I feel like this is something that

hinders our team cohesion, since I missed the opportunities to utilize the

diverse perspectives within the team. This insight revealed a gap in my

teamwork approach, showing that while I can work independently,

fostering collaboration is an area I need to work on.

Reflection on Employability Skills

The analysis of my skill set has highlighted both strengths and areas

for improvement when compared to four key 21st-century employability

skills, which includes adaptability, digital literacy, communication, and

self-management. In today’s society, the workplace environment is

constantly changing, which is the reason why adaptability is critical.

According to Pulakos et al. (2000), adaptability involves adjusting

strategies in response to new challenges. As indicated in the simulation, I

heavily rely on structured goal-setting, for instance, I am always trying set

up regular meeting time, but for my teammates, they often struggle to

regularly attend.

Digital literacy is another critical skill, as digital technologies

increasingly shape work environments (Ng, 2012). I am proficient in

standard digital tools, but I struggle to rightfully make use of it during this

team workshop. This suggests that there’s still room to enhance my ability

to work with software for data analysis and project management. Ng

(2012) stated that digital literacy now requires more than basic tool

knowledge; it involves critical thinking and problem-solving in digital

contexts.

Moreover, for me collaboration is an area that needs major

improvement, particularly in fostering group cohesion. Since during the

workshop there were several factors that limited my team synergy as I

often complete tasks independently. Research by Salas et al. (2015)

emphasizes the importance of trust and open communication in effective

collaboration. Moving forward, I will focus on actively engaging with

teammates, creating an inclusive atmosphere where diverse perspectives

are valued.
7

Finally, I think that I did a good job at self and time management

because most of the time I am organized and reliable, since I always keep

a habit of planning my schedule. According to Roberts et al. (2009), to

maintain an effective self management it includes resilience and stress

regulation. Therefore, I think there are still places for me to improve on,

for example I need to be able to balance self discipline with mental

healthiness.

Conclusion

In conclusion, with the result of the workshop and simulation, I

identified my need to enhance adaptability, collaboration, and flexibility in

structured goal-setting. Additionally, comparing my skills with essential

21st-century competencies highlighted areas for improvement in digital

literacy and communication. Moving forward, I aim to apply these insights

to foster personal development and enhance my effectiveness in team

and professional settings.

Reference

Cain, S. (2012). Quiet: The power of introverts in a world that can’t stop

talking. Crown Publishing Group.

Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. (2003). Development of a new resilience

scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression

and Anxiety, 18(2), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than

IQ. Bantam Books.

Graziano, W. G., & Eisenberg, N. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of

personality. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.),

Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 795–824). Academic Press.

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50031-7

Mathieu, J. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., van Knippenberg, D., & Ilgen, D. R. (2017).

A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 452–467.

https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000128

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of

openness to experience. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs

(Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 825–847). Academic

Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50032-9
9

Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers &

Education, 59(3), 1065–1078.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016

O’Neill, T. A., & Salas, E. (2018). Creating high performance teamwork in

organizations. Human Resource Management Review, 28(4), 325–

331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.09.001

Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E. (2000).

Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of

adaptive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 612–

624. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.4.612

Roberts, B. W., Jackson, J. J., Fayard, J. V., Edmonds, G., & Meints, J.

(2009). Conscientiousness. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.),

Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 369–381).

The Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-12071-025

Salas, E., Shuffler, M. L., Thayer, A. L., Bedwell, W. L., & Lazzara, E. H.

(2015). Understanding and improving teamwork in organizations: A

scientifically based practical guide. Human Resource Management,

54(4), 599–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21628

Savelsbergh, C., Gevers, J. M. P., van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., & Poell, R. F.

(2012). Team role stress: Relationships with team learning and

performance in project teams. Group & Organization Management,

37(1), 67–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601111431977

Sassenus, S., Van den Bossche, P., & Poels, K. (2022). When stress

becomes shared: Exploring the emergence of team stress.

Cognition, Technology & Work, 24(3), 537–556.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-022-00698-z
11
12

Appendix

Appendix A

Appendix B