[Solved] Busnisse discussion

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

[>Accounting homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-accounting)

### **For Your Initial Post (300-400 words):**

**Think of a team you're currently on (or have been on recently).** This could be:

– A work team or project team
– A cross-functional team
– A committee or task force
– Even a volunteer or community team

**Address the following:**

1. **Describe your team briefly (2-3 sentences):**
– What is the team's purpose?
– How many people are on it?
– How long has it existed?
2. **Assess psychological safety (using Edmondson article):**
– On a scale of 1-10, how psychologically safe is this team?
– What evidence supports your rating? (Give at least two specific examples of behaviors that indicate high or low safety)
– Can people speak up, disagree, or admit mistakes without fear?
3. **Analyze team norms and climate (using Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 3 and Runde & Flanagan Chapter 5):**
– Does your team have explicit norms? If so, what are they? If not, what implicit norms have developed?
– Does your team have the "right climate" for constructive conflict? (Trust norms? Constructive communication practices?)
– What's working well? What's missing?
4. **Identify a problem (using Mitchell & Gamlem Chapter 10):**
– Have you witnessed any behavior on the "spectrum of disrespect" (micro-inequities, discrimination, harassment, bullying)?
– How did this behavior affect team dynamics and psychological safety?
– Was it addressed? If so, how? If not, why not?
5. **Propose ONE specific intervention:**
– What is ONE concrete action your team could take to increase psychological safety or improve team conflict competence?
– Reference at least ONE reading (Mitchell & Gamlem, Runde & Flanagan, OR Edmondson)
– Be specific: What would happen? Who would do it? When?

### **For Your Peer Responses (100-150 words each to 2 classmates):**

– **Compare psychological safety levels:** How does your team's safety level compare to your classmate's? What factors might explain the difference?
– **Suggest an additional intervention** from the readings that could help their team
– **Ask a probing question** about their team's norms, climate, or the disrespectful behavior they described

**Avoid generic responses like "Great post!" or "I agree."**

#### **Tips for Success:**

✅ **Be honest about your team's safety level:** Low psychological safety is common—acknowledging it is the first step to improving it

✅ **Use specific behavioral examples:** Instead of "people don't speak up," say "In our last three meetings, when the manager asked for input, everyone stayed silent even though several people complained privately afterward"

✅ **Connect to research:** Show you understand Edmondson's concept of psychological safety and how it relates to Runde & Flanagan's "right climate"

✅ **Address the spectrum of disrespect:** Even small micro-inequities can erode psychological safety over time

✅ **Propose realistic interventions:** Don't suggest "fire the toxic team member"—focus on what's actually within your team's control

#### **Example of Strong Integration:**

**Instead of:** "My team doesn't have psychological safety. People are afraid to speak up."

**Try:** "I'm on a 6-person marketing team that's been together for 18 months. I'd rate our psychological safety at 4/10. Evidence: (1) In our weekly meetings, only the two senior members speak—junior members stay silent even when directly asked for input. (2) Last month, a team member made a significant error but tried to hide it rather than admit it, which delayed our project by two weeks. We have no explicit team norms (Mitchell & Gamlem, p. XX), and implicit norms have developed around 'don't challenge the senior members.' This violates Runde & Flanagan's principle of 'constructive communication' (Section 5.3). I've also witnessed micro-inequities: our team lead frequently interrupts the two women on the team but never interrupts the men (Mitchell & Gamlem, Chapter 10). This hasn't been addressed because no one feels safe calling it out. One intervention: We could establish explicit team norms at our next meeting using the process Mitchell & Gamlem describe (p. XX), including a norm that 'everyone's input is valued and interruptions are not acceptable.' This would create the foundation for psychological safety that Edmondson's research shows is essential for team learning."