Tesla’s Organizational Behaviour Analysis

Introduction

The organisational culture is referred to the way of interacting with others, underlying beliefs, values and assumptions which contribute for development of unique psychological and social environment. The power and office politics impact of the organisation has direct formal and informal influence on the culture of the organisation. In this respect, the organisational culture, power and politics existing in Tesla as the way their influence team and individual performance is to be discussed. The way motivational theories and techniques impact on achievement of business goals by Tesla is also to be explained. Later, the way effective team is to be managed is to be discussed. Lastly, the concepts and philosophies of organisational behaviour within a given business situation of Tesla is to be discussed.

LO1 Analysing influence of culture, power and politics on the behaviours of others in Tesla

Organisation culture is the ideologies, beliefs, values and principle of the organisation that controls the way employees are to behave within the organisation and amongst themselves while working (Hiekkataipale and Lämsä, 2019). In Tesla, the organisational culture is related to dictate the way employees are to interact within the workplace. Organisational power is referred to the position power of an authority or delegate person in the firm (Cacciolatti and Lee, 2016). In Tesla, the organisation power is disturbed within the CEO, managers and higher officials who perform their role and use the power accordingly to uphold the organisational culture. Organisational politics is referred to the unofficial, informal and behind-the-scenes efforts that are used to increase power or fulfil target objectives to sell ideas for influencing the performance of an organisation (Eldor, 2017). In Tesla, organisation politics exist between the employees as well as higher officials based on the culture of the organisation. The politics, power and politics are inter-related within the organisation that influences its performance (Teslarati, 2018).

P1 Analysing the way organisation’s politics, power and culture influence individual as well as team performance and behaviour (M1, D1)

According to Hofstede's Cultural dimensions, there are mainly six nature of organisational culture which are power distance index (PDI), individualism vs collectivism (IDV), uncertainty avoidance (UAI), masculinity vs feminity (MAS), long-term orientation vs short-term orientation (LTO) and indulgence vs restraint (IND) (Deephouse et al. 2016). The individualism vs collectivism (IDV) informs that in some organisation the culture promotes individuals to work as a single person rather than a single unit supporting individualism culture whereas in other organisation the official promotes the employees to work as union and rely on teamwork supporting collectivism (Eisend et al. 2016). The collectivism culture at Tesla has influenced the behaviour of the team to work collaboratively as in this culture each member of the team are provided scope to present their ideas and decide collectively in making decision at work. This has, in turn, improved the team performance at Tesla as best ideas and skills from range of individuals are used in performing the task allocated to the team (Teslarati, 2018). In Tesla, it is seen that they promote collectivism culture which is evident as they ask the employees to devise ideas and present them among their team members to collectively decide the best idea and the way to work as a unit for improving the business collaboratively (Teslarati, 2018; Khlif, 2016). This has influenced the individual behaviour of the employees to brainstorm ideas regarding the way they are to work in a project or perform innovation within the organisation and discuss it with the team members to reach conclusion on executing work (Teslarati, 2018). It has led the individual employees to fruitfully perform their responsibilities and role as the collectivism culture supports an individual employee to access help from other team members on deciding which specific idea they are to implement to work to attain best results. Moreover, the culture assists the employees of Tesla to access assistance from unit members to resolve their work-related problems and improve their skills at work (Teslarati, 2018; Minkov et al. 2017). However, the collectivism culture has led Tesla for the individual employees in taking increased time for initiating to work on projects to accomplish organisational goals (Forbes, 2014). This is evident as in collectivism culture many meetings are to be made where the individuals are to present ideas and get approval on the ideas to be used or which nature of initiative to be taken by them from team members in accomplishing their work that makes it quite time-consuming to execute actions (Teslarati, 2018; Forbes, 2014).

The Handy’s model mentions that there are four organisation cultures which are power, role, task and person (Brenyah and Tetteh, 2016). Task culture is formed when the organisation develops teams to address progress projects or specific problems (Skoumpopoulou and Moss, 2018). In Tesla, the Task culture is supported which is evident as the organisation has develops various teams to solve particular issues and promote innovation and improvement of the organisation (Forbes, 2014; Teslarati, 2018). In Task culture, the organisational power derives mainly from the experts as long as the team requires it (Augustina et al. 2017). Since Tesla uses task culture, thus the power sources are mainly the experts in the organisation from different departments mentioning the power sources are varied and diverse in nature. It also indicates that in Tesla the power source is inter-connected as the power flow between functional departments and projects team in a inter-related manner to accomplishing organisational goals (Forbes, 2014; Teslarati, 2018). This has influenced individual behaviour at Tesla to seek guidance and help in accomplishing their work from various experts that have led them to improve their performance. In case of teams in Tesla, the task culture has influenced their behaviour to be dynamic in nature and it has led them to improve their performance as dynamic attitude makes the team be full of energy and new ideas to accomplish activities (Forbes, 2014; Teslarati, 2018). The task culture has helped Tesla to maintain good organisational politics where fewer conflicts are seen between employees. This is evident as in task culture all the employees are provided equal opportunity to come in the limelight and prove their credibility which leads each of the employees feels valued (do Carmo Silva and Gomes, 2015). However, task culture in Tesla has promoted negative politics between teams where all the teams are not willing to support each other. This is because few teams are seen to be sitting back whereas other teams are performing intensively creating conflicting behaviour between teams as more pressure of work is to be faced by one team over another due to negligence to work intensely by other teams.

Recommendations: The recommendation for Tesla to avoid negative organisational politics in relation to team behaviour is to promote each team to work with similar efficiency and zeal to accomplish goals. This is because when all the team performs equally there is less conflicting political behaviour between teams as they are convinced that all the teams are equally working to ensure no work pressure falls on one team to bear. Moreover, it is recommended to Tesla that they while promoting collectivism culture is to make sure decisions for individual working by the employees are taken within less time by reducing levels of the decision-making process.

LO2 Evaluating the way to motivate teams and individual in achieving a goal

The Content theories inform about the reasons employees require to change with time and the Process theories provide ideas regarding the way an employee can be changed and developed (Cook and Artino Jr, 2016; Sahito and Vaisanen, 2017). The two content theories most often used are the Maslow Hierarchy of Needs theory and Herzberg motivational theory. The Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory is important for improving the performance for individual employees as they indicate the basic needs to be fulfilled that would show them value to make the individuals work with improved zeal (Jonas, 2016). The Herzberg motivational theory is important for improving team performance as they inform about the motivation factors along with the factors whose absence would lead the team to work less hard (Hur, 2018). The two process theories that are often used are Vroom and Adams theories. The Vroom theory is important for promoting team performance as they indicate the three major forces to be considered in promoting motivation (Jago, 2015). The Adams theory is important for promoting individual performance as it indicates the way fair balance between employees can be established to motivate each of them to work (Lăzăroiu, 2015).

P2 Evaluating the way motivational theories and techniques allow effective achievement of goal in the organisation (M2, D2)

According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory, to motivate the employees in individual manner their psychological, safety, love, self-esteem and self-actualisation needs are to be fulfilled so that they work fruitfully for accomplishing the organisational goals (Bhuyan and Goswami, 2017). This theory is being implemented by Tesla to motivate individual employees to achieve organisational goals. The psychological needs of individuals as per the theory are food, water, sleep, clothes and others which are when fulfilled leads the employees to have peace of mind and enthusiasm to work effectively due to mental stability (Akova et al. 2016). Tesla provides high salary which is evident as the average salary of a mechanical engineer starts from $67K whereas the average salary of a mechanical engineer in the UK is $40K (Payscale 2018; Telegraph, 2017). Thus, Tesla by providing high salary packages to the individual employees helps them to be economically able to meet their psychological needs. This lead the organisation to accomplish its goals as psychologically stable individual employees provides greater work effort and show zeal to work to accomplish the activities required for fulfilling the goals out of mental satisfaction. The safety needs are to be fulfilled to make the employees work with zeal without the fear of losing life at work (Kim et al. 2015). In Tesla, the CEO Elon Musk personally looks after and ensures safety needs of the individual employees are met so that they contribute proper effort at work without fear to meet the production of goods at the right time in turn showing improved performance that helps the organisation to meet their goals (Theguardian, 2018). The love and belonging needs as per the theory are fulfilled by Tesla by offering flexible and familiar environment to work for the individual employees (Glassdoor, 2019; CNBC, 2018). This leads the organisation to achieve its goals as by showing love to the individual employees make the employees feel emotionally engaged with the organisation to provide better work outcome for their improvement. The Self-esteem needs are to be fulfilled to show value to the employees (Abun and Maggalanez, 2018). This need according to the theory is fulfilled by Tesla by providing respect to each of the employees irrespective of their position in the company. It has led them to achieve the organisational goals as fulfilment of self-esteem needs of employees by Tesla has helped to show value which in turn has made the employees concerned to work for the organisation to help them accomplish their goals in the market.

The Herzberg motivational theory is applied by Tesla to promote improved teamwork and individual employee contribution which helped them to achieve organisational goals. According to Herzberg motivational theory, the motivating factors include achievement, recognition, growth, advancement and others and the hygiene factors include remuneration, proper company policy and others (Velmurugan and Sankar, 2017). In Tesla, the team as well as its members are remunerated properly for their achievement and are provided rewards annually to recognise their efforts. Moreover, in respect to individual employee, Tesla provides career growth opportunities through training to improve their existing skills for performing in a better way (Glassdoor, 2019; CNBC, 2018). The company that offers career growth and remunerates their employees to show recognition for their work leads to motivate employees and team to work with extra zeal out of satisfaction and value at work which enables them to achieve their goals effectively (Matei and Abrudan, 2016). This principle is followed by Tesla by meting the motivation factors mentioned in the Herzberg motivational theory which has helped them to achieve goals of organisation. The Vroom theory mentions that motivation of team or individuals that results them to achieve organisational goals can be established if the company maintain proper instrumentality, expectancy and valence (Barba-Sánchez and Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2017). The instrumentality is the beliefs that if one perform well they are going to receive a valued outcome (De Simone, 2015). In Tesla, they maintain instrumentality by showing trust on employee’s efficiency to work and maintain transparency in internal decision-making which leads their employees and teams to believe that they are going to receive a valued outcome making them work hard that in turn enables the organisation to fulfil their goals (Glassdoor, 2019; CNBC, 2018). The expectancy is the belief that improved effort is going to increase performance (Arnania-Kepuladze, 2019). In Tesla, they maintain expectancy by allocating right resources and skills to the employees and teams which lead them to show improve efficiency at work enabling the organisation to achieve their goals (Glassdoor, 2019; CNBC, 2018). The valence is factor which the individual stressed upon to get expected outcome (Nimri et al. 2015). In Tesla, valence is maintained by making the employees motivated by money as well as by making them learn the value to additional time-off which enables the organisation to achieve their goals as providing either of the things motivates the employees to work hard in meeting the goals.

The Adam Equity Theory informs that fair balance is to be maintained between employee input and output to make them motivated to work effectively (Ryan, 2016). Thus, following the theory, Tesla has developed proper salary and remuneration for the individual employees according to their contribution at work. The management of fair balance shows value towards employees as it makes them feel no one is accessing inappropriate advantage over another which makes them work harder and effectively (Lee and Raschke, 2016). This has led Tesla to achieve their organisational goals as fair balance indicates by the theory has helped them to make the individual employees' worker harder in resolving problems and achieving objectives to meet the goals.

Recommendation: Tesla is recommended to implement the analysis of their employees to help them identify their strength and weakness so that the employees can use the information in framing their personal development plan to meet their self-actualisation needs with the help of the organisation. According to Maslow theory, fulfilment of self-actualisation needs of employees is essential to make them effectively valued to be intended to work for fulfilling the goal of the organisation.

LO3 Demonstrating the way to cooperate effectively with others

The Tuckman’s theory informs about the four phases of team building to be followed which are forming, storming, norming and performing (Kiweewa et al. 2018). Tuckman's theory is important in today’s organisation as it helps to recognise the information that not yet formed teams require to need to become fully functionally to meet the objectives of the organisation. Belbin's theory informs about the roles to be performed by the individuals according to their behaviour (Omar et al. 2016). The theory is useful in today’s organisation to help the team members identify their behavioural strength and weakness based on which they are to perform their role to effectively accomplish teamwork.

P3 Explaining the factors which make an effective team compared to ineffective team (M3, D2)

An effective team in the organisation is one where the team members keep aside the personal prejudice and are showing willingness for taking responsibility in accomplishing work and achieve organisation goals (Omar et al. 2016). In comparison, ineffective team are those who hold prejudices and avoid working collaboratively as well as shows conflicting behaviour among team members (Ladyshewsky, 2017). The characteristics of teams in Tesla shows that though they are working collaboratively yet lack of proper clarification and allocation of roles to be played by each member based on their personal efficiency is creating an ineffective team. Further, in Tesla, people of diverse culture work together and it is seen that few of the prejudices regarding certain culture among the employees are leading them to show discrimination against few individuals at work which has disrupted the team working environment in negative way. In order to build effective teams, Tesla requires following Tuckman’s and Belbin’s team theory. According to Tuckman’s theory, in the forming stage increased dependence is on the leaders for direction and guidance of forming an effective team (O'Brien, 2019). Thus, Tesla following the stage requires ensuring the leaders at first to work hard for developing cultural harmony in the organisation as well as within teams so that all the employees of different culture can work collaboratively orienting to develop effective teams. In the storming stage, various decisions regarding the way to work collaboratively within teams are presented (Lee et al. 2016). The team leaders at Tesla in this stage require discussing different opinions regarding the way a diverse working environment can be maintained where all people of different culture can work collaboratively in the organisation without any conflict or influence of prejudices at work. In the norming stage, agreement about the decision regarding the way team is to be managed is to be reached (Collins et al. 2016). Thus, team leaders at Tesla in this phase require to choose the most approved way of maintaining cultural diversity in the workplace so that present problem of cultural discrimination between team members seen at the place can be resolved to ensure managing an effective team. According to the performing stage, Tesla in this phase requires to implement the idea of maintaining cultural diversity within teams and avoid rise of conflict due to cultural differences while working to ensure an effective team is developed. The hindrances faced by Tesla in managing effective team due to lack of proper allocation of roles according to the strength of the individuals can be resolved by them by allocating roles to team members following Belbin’s team role theory. According to Belbin’s team role theory, the individuals who are dynamic in nature and have courage to overcome obstacles are to be allocated the role of shaper (Eubanks et al. 2016). Tesla requires looking for employees who met such characteristics are to be followed the role to ensure effective teamwork. Tesla as per the theory are to allocate the role of implementer to individuals in the team who have the ability to turn ideas into actions and are disciplined, efficient, conservative and reliable in nature. The role of complete finisher is to be allocated to the employees in the team by Tesla who has the ability to provide tasks on time and provided error-free work by searching omissions and errors.

The team workers are be made those individuals in the team by Tesla who are co-operative and listen as well as execute tasks in proper manner by abiding with the instructions. According to Belbin, the resource investigators are to those who have wider contacts, extrovert in nature and enthusiastic (Omar et al. 2016). Tesla requires keeping the information in mind while allocating the role. In order to develop effective team, Tesla requires allocating the role of coordinator of the team who is matured in nature and effective delegation abilities. The plant role is offered who are creative in nature and resolve difficult issues with ease whereas monitor evaluator role is provided to individuals who are sober and have the ability to judge accurately (Oskarsson, 2017). Tesla requires to keep the information while allocating the role to individuals in the team and they require to appoint specialists in the group who have wide knowledge and information in the rare supply of resources to ensure the development of the effective team in the organisation who provided proper contribution for the development of the organisation.

Recommendations: The team leaders at Tesla is recommended to continuously review the performance of the team after the allocation of the idea that is done by following Tuckman’s theory to bring cultural diversity within team members for developing an effective team. This is because changes in the ideas from time to time may be required to ensure smooth working of an effective team. Moreover, the team leaders at Tesla is required to clarify information to all the team members regarding the reason specific roles are allocated to each other so that none of them feels that other employees are given improper advantage over another.

LO4 Application of concepts and philosophies of organizational behaviour in a given situation in business

P4 Applying concepts and philosophies of organisational behaviour within a given business situation (M4, D2)

The Path-Goal theory informs specific behaviour or style to be performed by the leader which best suits the work environment and effective management of employee for achieving organisational goal. The theory is regarded as the process which can be implemented for selecting the behaviour of the leaders that would best suit for fulfilling the employee’s needs (Farhan, 2018). In the case of Tesla, situational leadership is to be chosen to be used for leading the organisation. In the current situation, the industry where Tesla operates that the automobile and energy industry is showing immense changes by making electric cars more preferable among the consumers compared to other fuel-efficient cars. Moreover, the technological needs in the automobile industry are also fluctuating that is making Tesla, as well as similar companies, face immediate and frequent changes to be made in their organisational management to ensure proper working environment to manufacture products to cope with the demand in the market (Deloitte, 2018; Openaccessgovernment, 2019). Situational leadership is the one in which the leaders are allowed to adjust their management style for ensuring the improvement and smooth operation of the organisation (Tortorella and Fogliatto, 2017). Thus, using situational leadership by Tesla in the fluctuating market demand would be effective for Tesla’s leaders to change their leadership as per situation to influence the employees at the organisation to perform effectively. Moreover, the situational leadership contains different set of leadership that can be used for analysing the team performance by the leaders in any situation which would help Tesla to use it for examining the performance of the team in any situation. In situational leadership, it is seen that employees often find hindrance to cope with sudden and regular changes (Lynch, 2015). This is because leader changes their style of leadership according to situation which makes employees and teams to make frequent changes in their work nature avoiding them to concentrate on using single skill or way of executing activities. In this situation, the advancement and recognition motivation factors as per the Herzberg motivation theory is to be focussed on by the Tesla leaders to avoid the hindrance regarding implementing the style of leadership. The advancement of employees as motivation factor is to be accomplished while situational leadership is implemented by leaders of Tesla by providing training to the employees to develop advanced skill of being able to work in frequent changing environment of leadership. The recognition of employees in situation leadership is to be implemented as recognition makes the employee feel valued in hard situation regarding their performance making them develop zeal to contribute effectively without complaining to act in the changing environment to meet the organisational goals.

Plan

The plan of Tesla to implement situational leadership in fluctuating technological environment in the industry of their operation is to be made by focussing on Tuckman’s team building theory. The theory informs four stages which are forming, storming, norming and performing (Kiweewa et al. 2018).

Forming: In this stage, the leaders at Tesla require to identify the aspects to be focussed one that is to be taught to the team members while they implement situational leadership so that objection from the employees and teams regarding hindrance to cope with sudden changes as per situations can be controlled. Moreover, in this stage, leaders are to inform about the need for implementing situation leadership in the organisation to the teams and individual employees in Tesla.

Storming: In this stage, leaders are to discuss with the team and individual employees about the ideas and strategies to be focussed on by them regarding situation leadership being implemented in the organisation.

Norming: In this stage, specific decision regarding the ideas to be used by leaders in controlling the team and individual employees at Tesla through situational leadership is to be discussed.

Performing: In this stage, the specific decision taken for team management is to be implemented for successful management of team in Tesla while using situational leadership style by the leaders.

Recommendations: The leaders at Tesla are recommended that they provide detailed description of the roles allocated to each team members in different situation. Moreover, they are recommended that while implementing situation leadership at Tesla they ensure that it resolves the current hindrance but do not create any negative impact on long-term process at the company. The leaders are also recommended to take training to understand the way situational leadership can be implemented by them so that specific skill set for the leadership are present with them.

Conclusion

The above discussion informs that Tesla is using collectivism culture as per Hofstede's Cultural dimensions and is using Task culture as per Handy's organisational culture theory. The Maslow and Hezerberg theories are used as content theories by Tesla and the Vroom and Adam theories are used as process theories by the organisation to identify ways to achieve organisational goals. Moreover, Tuckman’s theory is used to develop an effective team at Tesla and Belbin’s theory is used to allocate roles to the team members at Tesla in developing an effectively performing team. Lastly, based on the current fluctuating industry situation of Tesla situational leadership is to be used in controlling and leading the organisation.

References

Abun, D. and Maggalanez, T., 2018. Psychological need satisfaction at work of faculty and employees of divine word colleges in region I, Philippine and their work engagement. IJAR, 4(3), pp.21-30.

Akova, O., Cifci, İ., Atsız, O. and Gezeroglu, B., 2016. Understanding the motivational factors of dining out: a study at Fatih Kadinlar Bazaar in Istanbul. Tourismos, 11(1).pp.27-34.

Arnania-Kepuladze, T., 2019. Gender stereotypes and gender feature of job motivation: differences or similarity?. Management, 8, p.2.

Barba-Sánchez, V. and Atienza-Sahuquillo, C., 2017. Entrepreneurial motivation and self-employment: evidence from expectancy theory. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(4), pp.1097-1115.

Bhuyan, S. and Goswami, M., 2017. Determinants of Employee Motivation in Assam Carbon Products Limited: A Case Study. Sumedha Journal of Management, 6(1), pp.47-53.

Brenyah, R.S. and Tetteh, E.N., 2016. Organisational Culture and Its Impact on Employee Retention: Evidence from the Private Tertiary Education Sector of Ghana. European Journal of Business and Management, 8(34), pp.47-53.

Cacciolatti, L. and Lee, S.H., 2016. Revisiting the relationship between marketing capabilities and firm performance: The moderating role of market orientation, marketing strategy and organisational power. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), pp.5597-5610.

De Simone, S., 2015. Expectancy Value Theory: Motivating Health Care Workers. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 5(2), pp.19-23.

do Carmo Silva, M. and Gomes, C.F.S., 2015. Practices in project management according to Charles Handy's organizational culture typologies. Procedia Computer Science, 55, pp.678-687.

Eisend, M., Evanschitzky, H. and Gilliland, D.I., 2016. The influence of organizational and national culture on new product performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(3), pp.260-276.

Eldor, L., 2017. Looking on the bright side: The positive role of organisational politics in the relationship between employee engagement and performance at work. Applied Psychology, 66(2), pp.233-259.

Eubanks, D.L., Palanski, M., Olabisi, J., Joinson, A. and Dove, J., 2016. Team dynamics in virtual, partially distributed teams: Optimal role fulfillment. Computers in human behavior, 61, pp.556-568.

Hiekkataipale, M.M. and Lämsä, A.M., 2019. (A) moral Agents in Organisations? The Significance of Ethical Organisation Culture for Middle Managers’ Exercise of Moral Agency in Ethical Problems. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(1), pp.147-161.

Hur, Y., 2018. Testing Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation in the Public Sector: Is it Applicable to Public Managers?. Public Organization Review, 18(3), pp.329-343.

Kim, S., Kim, J.D., Shin, Y. and Kim, G.H., 2015. Cultural differences in motivation factors influencing the management of foreign laborers in the Korean construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 33(7), pp.1534-1547.

Jonas, J., 2016. Making practical use of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory to motivate employees: A case of Masvingo Polytechnic. Journal of Management & Administration, 2016(2), pp.105-117.

Kiweewa, J.M., Gilbride, D., Luke, M. and Clingerman, T., 2018. Tracking growth factors in experiential training groups through Tuckman’s conceptual model. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 43(3), pp.274-296.

Lee, M.T. and Raschke, R.L., 2016. Understanding employee motivation and organizational performance: Arguments for a set-theoretic approach. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 1(3), pp.162-169.

Lee, S.H., Smith, D. and Sergueeva, K., 2016. What do students think about group work in business education? An investigation into the benefits, challenges, and student-suggested solutions. Journal of Education for Business, 91(7), pp.380-386.

Matei, M.C. and Abrudan, M.M., 2016. Adapting Herzberg's two factor theory to the cultural context of Romania. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 221, pp.95-104.

Minkov, M., Dutt, P., Schachner, M., Morales, O., Sanchez, C., Jandosova, J., Khassenbekov, Y. and Mudd, B., 2017. A revision of Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism dimension: A new national index from a 56-country study. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 24(3), pp.386-404.

Nimri, M., Bdair, A. and Al Bitar, H., 2015. Applying the expectancy theory to explain the motivation of public sector employees in Jordan. Middle East Journal of Business, 55(2433), pp.1-13.

Omar, M., Hasan, B., Ahmad, M., Yasin, A., Baharom, F., Mohd, H. and Darus, N.M., 2016. Applying Fuzzy Technique in Software Team Formation Based on Belbin Team Role. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), 8(8), pp.109-113.

Omar, M., Hasan, B., Ahmad, M., Yasin, A., Baharom, F., Mohd, H. and Darus, N.M., 2016. Applying Fuzzy Technique in Software Team Formation Based on Belbin Team Role. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), 8(8), pp.109-113.

Oskarsson, G., 2017. Division of teamwork among university students: the impact of an advanced peer evaluation tool based on Belbin team roles. The Business & Management Review, 8(4), p.122.

Sahito, Z. and Vaisanen, P., 2017. The Diagonal Model of Job Satisfaction and Motivation: Extracted from the Logical Comparison of Content and Process Theories. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(3), pp.209-230.

Tortorella, G. and Fogliatto, F., 2017. Implementation of lean manufacturing and situational leadership styles: an empirical study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(7), pp.946-968.

Velmurugan, T.A. and Sankar, J.G., 2017. A Comparative Study on Motivation Theory with Maslow’s Hierarchy theory and Two-factor theory in Organization. Indo-Iranian J Sci Res, 1(1), pp.204-8.