Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to review and assess the teamwork and chemistry within the newly formed Team Equity. Specific objectives of the report are to overview data gained from the various psychometric indicator tests of each member and to analyse them for any possible interpersonal conflicts which may arise during team activities and offer strong recommendations to the Human Resources Officer to alleviate those conflicts.
Conflicts were found relating to how the team would progress through the needed tasks which lead to the completion of the project, differences in acquiring and sharing information, professional conduct, personality differences and differences in mindsets. Recommendations are provided in the report which are presented in order to alleviate the problems and to better the work efficiency of Team Equity of Intelligent Financial Solutions Consultants (Pvt.) Ltd.

Table of Contents
Contents
Executive Summary 1 Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 1.1 Terms of Reference 3 1.2 Main Points 3 1.3 Personal Effectiveness 3 1.4 An overview to the Evaluation Tests 4 Psychometric Tests and Results 5 Discussion 10 Overall Analysis 12 Problems and Conflicts 13 Conclusion 14 Recommendation 15 Reference List 16 Appendix 1 17 Appendix 2 24

1. Introduction
1.1 Terms of Reference

* As the Human Resource manager Mr. Ranjan Ferdinando of Intelligent Financial Solutions Consultants has requested to investigate a Personnel effectiveness evaluation, this report has been formatted to meet the criteria set off by the manager. * Moreover, the report is a logical testimony which depicts the personal traits of the members of Team Equity that would highlight individual attributes for instance team spirit, leadership, motivation and personality etc. * Team Equity of IFS is a newly formed team consisting of Mr. Ramesh Kandanarachchi and Mr. Arush Kumarage. The team would be responsible for working with one of the key clients of the company in relation to financial consultancy services based in Colombo for a period of 6 months. * Further, the report reveals personal attributes of both of us which would be great employability skills and valuable assets to the bank.

1.2 Main Points

The report facilitates in identifying individual talents and drawbacks which Team Equity could effectively utilize in order to maximize the employee productivity as well as achieve optimum individual working capacities among individual workers. Further, the strengths and weaknesses of Arush Kumarage & Ramesh Kandanarachchi are investigated through the highly recommended personal evaluation tests taken from reputed sources. In this context, personal evaluation aspects have been vividly demonstrated through certain evaluation tests.

1.3 Personal Effectiveness
1.3.1 Definition

Personal Effectiveness is the managerial competence and their underlying techniques and approaches required in personal behavior and skills in order to achieve effective performance (Murdock & Scutt, 1993).
Personal effectiveness skills are those skills needed to take responsibility for developing and managing yourself to improve your personal and professional performance. Personal effectiveness skills include: * Being able to identify your personal style and the impact it has on others. * The ability to adapt your ‘style’ of interaction to suit individuals and situations. * Be able to manage your own development. * Effective team working – both as team members and leaders. * Managing your workload effectively. * Managing stress.

1.3.2 Why is personal effectiveness important?

We all want to be successful at work and to feel valued for our contribution. Developing ourselves engages our emotions and requires effort. It can take time to understand the impact we are having on those around us and to make sense of our reactions to different situations. Understanding our strengths and qualities helps build confidence to tackle new and different situations. Knowing the personal resources we have to draw on enables us to make use of them and meet challenges head on.

1.4 An overview to the Evaluation Tests

In order to evaluate the mentioned employees (Arush & Ramesh), five effective evaluations tests were embarked on. Furthermore, it has also been identified that by utilizing the evaluation tests conclusions, it is extremely effortless to trace the traits of each employee mentioned here where eventually; a highly successful work team could be established in this regard.
1.4.1 Hemisphere Dominance
1.4.2 Learning Styles Test
1.4.3 Interaction Styles
1.4.4 Big Five Locator
1.4.5 Self-monitoring test
1.4.6 Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

2.0 Psychometric Tests and Results

The following facts and figures are derived from the personal indicator tests done by each member of Team Equity of IFS. Each test is given followed by a brief description of what it signifies, preceded by the results of each member

2.1 Hemisphere Dominance
This will determine which side of your brain left or right is dominant to our day to day activities we carry out.The left side of the brain is the seat of language and processes in a logical and sequential order. The right side is more visual and processes intuitively, holistically, and randomly (Chopper, n.d.). By doing this test we will know how information within us is processed and which information we will feel easier dealing with at the work place.
The results achieved by each member of Team Equity
3.1.1 Test results obtained by Arush for personal evaluation of Hemisphere Dominance Test.
Table 1 -: Test Results for Hemisphere Dominance Test (Arush)

Hemisphere Dominance | Left Brain | Right Brain | Overall conclusion | 11 | 08 | |

3.1.2Test results obtained by Ramesh for personal evaluation of Hemisphere Dominance Test.
Table 2 -: Test Results for Hemisphere Dominance Test (Ramesh)

Hemisphere Dominance | Left Brain | Right Brain | Overall conclusion | 15 | 04 | |

2.2 Learning Styles
The DVC learning style survey for college was introduced by Catherine Jester. This will help you to identify your learning style and also includes learning strategies that will help you work in a productive manner, one that matches your unique learning style. This tells whether the person is a verbal, non-verbal, tactile or auditory Learner (Miller, 2000). This was chosen to identify our learning style and how this will help us in carrying out our tasks at the work place.
The results achieved by each members of Team Equity
3.2.1 Test results obtained by Arush for personal evaluation of Learning Styles Test.
Table 3 -: Test Results for Learning Styles Test (Arush)

Visual Verbal Learning Style | Visual/Nonverbal | Visual/Verbal | Auditory | Kinesthetic | Overall Conclusion | 26 | 26 | 24 | 32 | Learn best when information is presented through when the information through “hands on” activities such as through Lab experiments and P.E |

3.2.2 Test results obtained by Ramesh for personal evaluation of Learning Styles Test.
Table 4 -: Test Results for Learning Styles Test (Ramesh)

Visual Verbal Learning Style | Visual/Nonverbal | Visual/Verbal | Auditory | Kinesthetic | Overall Conclusion | 20 | 26 | 24 | 16 | Learn best when information is presented visually and written language form. Benefit from then information obtained from textbooks and power point presentation |

2.3 Interaction Styles
Interaction Styles are how you appear to and interact with others. While your temperament indicates why you do the things you do, your Interaction Style indicates how you do what you do. Both are a part of your personality type.

2.4 Big Five Locator
The Big Five was originally derived in the 1970's by two independent research teams -- Paul Costa and Robert McCrae (at the National Institutes of Health), and Warren Norman (at the University of Michigan)/Lewis Goldberg (at the University of Oregon) who took slightly different routes at arriving at the same results, most human personality traits can be boiled down to five broad dimensions of personality, regardless of language or culture. This is the main test we must consider important as this shows us what our personalities are and how we can adapt to the work place. By knowing our personalities we can develop an understanding of our differences between each other and how we can bond.
The results achieved by each member of Team Equity
3.4.1 Test results obtained by Arush for Big Five Locator test.
Table 5 -: Test Results for Big Five Locator Evaluation (Arush)

Visual Verbal Learning Style | Openness | Conscientiousness | Extraversion | Agreeableness | Neuroticism | 4% | 58% | 12% | 44% | 37% |

3.4.2 Test results obtained by Ramesh for Big Five Locator test.
Table 6 -: Test Results for Big Five Locator Evaluation (Ramesh)

Visual Verbal Learning Style | Openness | Conscientiousness | Extraversion | Agreeableness | Neuroticism | 35% | 74% | 31% | 60% | 18% |

2. 5 Self-monitoring test
This shows whether you’re a high or low self-monitor. By taking this personality test you can find out how much you change your personality in different contexts (“Self-Monitoring”, n.d.) By carrying out this test we will know if we are on the same level or if we are on a different level we can sort out our differences and come to a mutual understanding with each other and which person can take the responsibility in different circumstances.

3.4.1 Test results obtained by Arush & Ramesh graphically represented
Chart 1 -: Test Results for Self Monitoring Test (Arush & Ramesh)

2.6 Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

The Myers-Briggs inventory is based on Carl Jung's theory of types, outlined in his 1921 work Psychological Types . Jung's theory holds that human beings are either introverts or extraverts, and their behavior follows from these inborn psychological types. He also believed that people take in and process information in different ways, based on their personality traits.
The Myers-Briggs evaluates personality type and preference based on the four Jungian psychological types: * extraversion (E) or introversion (I) * sensing (S) or intuition (N) * thinking (T) or feeling (F) * judging (J) or perceiving (P)

The results achieved by each member of Team Equity.

3.6.1 Test results obtained by Arush for the Myers-Briggs type indicator test.
Table 7 -: Test Results Myers-Briggs type indicator test (Arush)

Introverted | Intuitive | Thinking | Judging | 39 | 25 | 75 | 67 |
3.6.2 Test results obtained by Ramesh for the Myers-Briggs type indicator test.
Table 8 -: Test Results Myers-Briggs type indicator test (Ramesh)

Introverted | Intuitive | Thinking | Judging | 56 | 25 | 38 | 22 |

3.0 Discussion

As previously stated the purpose of this report is to review and assess the teamwork potential and overall chemistry between the members of the newly formed Team Equity, consisting of Mr. Arush Kumarage and Mr. Ramesh Kandanarachchi. The objective of Team Equity is to provide dependable and quality service of accounting and tax preparation assistance. As such, it goes without mention, that this task requires that the two members of team equity work in tandem, continuously supporting each other and breeding the kind of atmosphere which gives its members a free mind with which to think evermore clearly, and in doing so, help the team to not only meet their objective, but also to present the most innovative of ideas for the project. For this end, it is of utmost importance that they “start off on the right foot”, allaying any possible team conflict which may hinder their overall potential. Therefore, in using the results gained from the various psychometric indicator tests which the team has completed, this section will discuss foreseeable points of conflict which may arise, and further on, give recommendations to remedy those conflicts. * In section 2.1, the hemispheric dominance test, places Mr.Kandanarachchi and Mr. Kumarage as as left brained. This is advantages, due to the fact that left brained individuals have a much more orderly and logical progression to how they complete a task. In retrospect, due to their narrow and linear thinking structure, they might not fully understand how the finished task should look like. Overall, it can be observed that there would be a conflict in how the team as whole should move forward in completing a task.

* In section 2.2, the learning style inventory test, shows that Mr.Kandanarachchi is a visual/nonverbal in their approach to learning. This means that both Mr.Kandanarachchi acquire information better when it is presented visually and accompanied by illustrations or diagrams. Mr. Kumarage, on the other hand, is a Tactile/ Kinesthetic learner in his approach to learning. This means that Mr.Kumarage acquires information better when he physically active in the learning environment and instructors who encourage in-class demonstrations and field work outside the classroom.

* In section 2.3, the interaction styles test shows that both individuals will work together without any conflicts since both members have the same result.

* In section 2.4, the Big Five Personality indicator test, highlights the personality of each member in such a way that it is possible to draw comparisons and relativity. For example, Mr.Kandanarachchi comes off as the most open in nature towards new ideas and outlooks with the most conscientious within the group and Mr.Kumarage as the most neurotic of the group. But taking all results into consideration, there is a high potential for conflict.

* In section 2.5, the self monitoring test results, shows that Mr.Kumarage uses internal values and beliefs in deciding how to behave, act the same in most social circles, can be relied upon for opinions as they tend to say it like they see it ,tend to be better in research and project-based work. Mr. Kandanarachchi fits into the category of moderately high self-monitoring, show variability in behavior in different contexts, and are extremely flexible in adapting to their current situation tend to have different public and private personas and are careful about mixing different social circles tend to make better managers and do better in jobs that involve influencing other people As a result, both individuals have the inner ability of adapting to any environment without having to struggle to blend in. It is important for employees to adapt as corporate culture is a changing environment and therefore, being a high self-monitor is beneficial. Given the current safety issues and customer related issues at IFS, both employees could engage in this change in nature and quickly solve the issues faced given the positive high self- monitored personalities. Formal acts carried out in these type of personalities could lead to a better understanding of the issues an work accordingly to prevent these issues in the future. * In section 2.6, Myers –Briggs Type Indicator, serves to point out the mind set of an individual. According to the results, it seems as if the members of team equity have very similar mind sets. Mr.Kandanarachchi and Mr. Kumarage are both supposed to be an INTJ. Marina Margaret Heiss (2009) explains that INTJ individuals have a knack for taking the helm whenever the chance presents itself, and are outspoken about their views. Within a team, INTJ can be seen as the “perfectionist”, often overstepping their position, if they feel it is most necessary.

Overall Analysis

It is observed that through the psychometric test and their results of the team members of Team Equity the limitations and constraints within the team and its members which may lead to potential conflict diluting the primary objective of the formed team for the specific task at hand. The overall objective of this report is to recommend strategies in which the Human Resource team could minimize conflicts within the team and optimize results. In doing so it is essential to analyze the results of Mr. Ramesh and Mr. Arush in relation to the psychometric tests done.
It is evident that both members are quite organized and have a logical process of thinking which will enhance the team’s ability to plan effectively and carry out duties in an organized manner. Downside of this frame of mind of thinking would be the possibility of inhibiting the openness of the team. The team may be very process oriented and systematic since both members show such skills. Furthermore the Mr. Ramesh and Mr. Arush resemble different types of learning styles which will create confusion in understanding the nature of work and the different tasks to be carried out within the team. According to the tests done, both the team members of Team Equity showcase diverse personality traits. Though this will improve the diversification within the team it may lead to conflict in cases where one member’s action may not be in line with the other member and vice versa. In addition the different levels of self monitoring skills of the members may lead to lack of team understanding. Team work is essential in context of delivering the output required for the clients and meeting such deadlines. Differences in personality traits further may create confusion and conflict within the team.
Our team has some similarities and differences, which we got to, know from the evaluation, which is a benefit for the team. By knowing the similarities, we can work together and produce an effective work, and by knowing the differences we can decide plus will get a benefit in deciding which one of us have the potential to take action in different situations.
To develop our relationship we can communicate and build a personal relationship with each other with an increased understanding of the project we have to do. Building personal relationship will give a perfect knowledge about both of us and could be beneficial when we disagree in each other’s opinions. And we can divide the responsibilities according to the abilities.

Problems and Conflicts

* All team members are more listeners than talkers therefore proper communication of work within the team may not occur. In order to overcome this situation a proper leadership must be provided in order to achieve team goals. * Members have different perspectives of thinking where one adopts a more practical approach compared to another’s technical approach. This can lead difference of opinion which can be solved by defining responsibility boundaries’ in allocating work where one member would be in charge of technical aspects were as the other to be involved in more practical implementation. * Openness and agreeableness within the team is essential in moving forward together therefore the different levels of willingness to be open and different nature of working with others may inhibit the ability of the team to grow and move ahead together. * The level of extraversion may create few communication problems since members tend to be reserved and introverted resulting in lack of clarity and transparency within the team. * The dynamics of the team and its culture may be conflicting due to the differences in social attributes of the team members. This may cause discomfort and * The differences in principles of decision making would create confusion amongst group member in making decision where one members decision making basis may not be viable and suited by the other. This difference of opinion leads to conflict within the team.

Conclusion

As the objectives of this report was to identify, evaluate and analyze the personal attributes of two employees and there by discover the hidden potential capabilities and utilize them for the success of IFS in terms of employee productivity. In addition, the in depth analysis of the two individuals are also immensely contributing to build up a better work place environment at IFS, eventually prevail over the existing employee issues existing. Further, this would also immensely contribute to enhance the reputation of IFS ion terms of employee satisfaction, and employee retention which would ultimately generate a value perspective of the company to the potential labour market where IFS would be able to hire the most skillful consultants on their trust on the company’s employee satisfaction. In conclusion, the report has been a clear testimony in depicting a vivid evaluation, analysis and recommendations for the above mentioned two employees and it is also guaranteed that this report would resemble rain to desert in the context of resolving conflicts among the employees at IFS.

Recommendations

* Mr. Arush Kumarage and Mr. Ramrsh Kandanarachchi can be a strong potential team when working together.

* The psychometric results show that both members could work in similarly in some situations.

* There are certain differences between the two members which may cause conflicts if not properly dealt with for example Mr. Arush Kumarage is more of a tactical learner, which means that Mr. Arush Kumarage acquires information better when he’s physically active in the learning environment and by instructors who encourage in-class demonstrations and field work outside the workplace.

* Mr Ramesh Kandanarachchi is seen as a visual/nonverbal learner which he acquires information when it is presented visually and accompanied by illustrations. This means Mr. Ramesh Kandanarachchi’s learning process is a bit slower than Mr. Arush Kumarage.

* Define clear-cut directions on how each member should conduct themselves.

* Clarify each member on the team on their responsibilities and authorities on the team.

* Appoint an intermediary, who can be called on to alleviate, in an impartial manner, any conflicts may arise.

* Conduct interpersonal skills development training for the members

Reference List

Big Five Personality Test [n.d.] Retrieved May, 2011, from http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/info/
Heiss M., (2009) Retrieved August, 2011, from http://typelogic.com/intj.html
Left vs. Right [n.d.] Retrieved August, 2011, from http://frank.mtsu.edu/~studskl/hd/LRBrain.html
Matthews P., (2004) Response to Clack & Allen. Retrieved September, 2011, from http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7450/1244/reply
Murdock, A & Scutt, C.N. (1993). Personal Effectiveness: (3rd Edition). Butterworth Heinemann.
Miller, S. (2000). Learning Styles Introduction. Diablo Valley College. Retrieved September 3, 2011. From http://metamath.com/lsweb/fourls.htm.
O’Meara, Daniel P., (1994) Personality tests raise questions of legality and effectiveness, 39, p.97. Retrieved May, 2011, from Business Source Premier Database.
Self Monitoring [n.d.] Retrieved September, 2011, from http://www.outofservice.com/selfmonitor-censor-test/results
Terence Hines (1987) Left Brain/Right Brain Mythology and Implications for Management and Training, Retrieved September, 2011 from http://www.jstor.org/pss/258066
The Four Learning Styles in the DVC Survey [n.d.] Retrieved September, 2011, from http://www.metamath.com/lsweb/fourls.htm

Appendix 1
Psychometric Tests and Results
Section A :Hemispheric Dominance

The human brain is divided into two distinct hemispheres which mirror each other in form. However, each hemisphere serves very different functions. As such, psychologist have categorized various brain functions (i.e.: creativity, logic) to each side of the brain. Furthermore, as humans have a tendency to be either right handed or left handed, so too do they have the tendency to be a predominantly right brained person or a left brained person. This gives way to the understanding that being a left brain person or a right brained person, one has a better grasp of the major functions of that particular hemisphere than someone who is of the opposite hemisphere. Kaminski-da-Roza (cited in Hines, 1987, p.600) lists the alleged characteristics of left brain thinking as “conscious, inductive (looks from parts), logical, linear thinking, questions why and how”. Characteristics of right brain thinking are said to be “subconscious or even unconscious, deductive (looks from the whole), intuitive not logical, nonlinear thinking”.
The results achieved by each member of team IFS * Arush Kumarage * Responses : Left brain - 11 Right brain - 08 * Ramesh Kandanarachchi * Responses : Left brain - 15 Right brain- 04
Section B:Learning Styles
As much as each person is unique, so too is a person’s method of memorizing information. These methods are called learning styles and can be categorized into four groups based on what method a person successfully remembers information. These styles are: The Visual/ Verbal Learning Style, the Visual/ Nonverbal Learning Style, the Tactile/ Kinaesthetic Learning Style and the Auditory/ Verbal Learning Style. Miller (2000) explains the characteristics of each learning style as follows; * The Visual/ Verbal Learning Style
Individuals of this group take in information better, when the information is presented in a visual and written format, such as through a book, PowerPoint presentations. * The Visual/ Nonverbal Learning Style
Individuals in this group take in information better, when the information is presented in a visual and picture or design format, such as through films, videos, maps, charts, etc. * The Tactile/ Kinaesthetic Learning Style
Individuals in this group take in information better, when the information is gained through “hands on” activities such as through Lab experiments and P.E. * The Auditory/ Verbal Learning Style
Individuals in this group take in information better, when the information is presented orally or in an auditory format such as listening to lectures and participating in discussions
The American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (cited in Leite et al., 2010 p.325) puts forth that due to “....the nature of the latent constructs measured by the existing learning styles instruments is still unclear makes it difficult to establish the validity of the scales’ scores for their intended interpretations”. As such, the results the tests are not without mistakes in portraying an individual’s true learning style, and should be looked at objectively
The results achieved by each members of team IFS * Arush Kumarage * Visual/Nonverbal: 26 * Visual/Verbal: 26 * Auditory: 24 * Kinaesthetic: 32

* Ramesh Kanadanrachchi * Visual/Nonverbal: 20 * Visual/Verbal: 26 * Auditory: 24 * Kinaesthetic: 16
Section C: Self Monitoring
Self Monitoring refers to how an individual behaves when confronted with various situations such as at work, play or when they are alone. In this context, a high self monitoring person would change and/or adapt their actions and behaviours depending on the environment. Opposite to this, a low self monitoring person would neither adapt nor change their usual behaviour, instead opting to figure out how to behave based on their pre-existing attitudes and beliefs. (“Self Monitoring”, n.d.)
The results achieved by each member of team Equity * Arush Kumarage Score : 30 % * Ramesh Kandanarachchi Score : 75%
Section D:Big Five Personality
The Big Five Personality Indicators, attempts to rate an individual based on 5 general points of their personality, which are; Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism abbreviated as OCEAN. This generalized overview thus serves to find which group of people an individual most appropriately resemble in a personal sense, and also points out what sort of attitude an individual may possess. It should be said however, that this particular test is highly generalized and as such may not provide an adequate, to say the least, overview of an individual and should be judged objectively. (“Big 5 Personality Test”, n.d)
The results achieved by each member of team Equity * Arush Kumarage * Openness: 4 % * Conscientiousness: 58 % * Extraversion: 12 % * Agreeableness: 44 % * Neuroticism: 37 % * Ramesh Kandanarachchi * Openness: 35% * Conscientiousness: 74% * Extraversion: 31% * Agreeableness: 60% * Neuroticism: 43%
Section E: Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
The Myers-Briggs type indicator test (herein referred to as MBTI) is a psychometric indicator test which is designed to designate an individual’s personality according to a predefined typological index correlated by the influential Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Gustav Jung, and extrapolated onto a more modern context by Myers-Briggs. The MBTI uses the concept put forth by Jung which says that an individual has their own specific way of thinking and acting, and these psychological differences can be sorted into four opposite pairs, referred to as ‘dichotomies’. This results in sixteen variations of psychological types. These dichotomies are as follows; * Extraversion (E) – Introversion (I) * Sensing (S) – Intuition (N) * Thinking (T) – Feeling (F) * Judgement (J) – Perception (P)
The sixteen variations are therefore made up of the combination of four of the above dichotomies. For example; a person who is extraverted (E), Sensing (S), thinking (T), Judgement (J) would be classified as an ESTJ. (Myers et al., 1985)
However, some psychological research circles have interpreted the MBTI to be low on reliability. In fact studies have shown that between 39% and 76% of those who have taken the MBTI, fall into different psychological types after retesting a few weeks or so later. (Matthews P, 2004). As such, it is advisable to take the results of this test on an objective basis.
The results achieved by each member of team IFS * Arush Kumarage : INTJ * Introverted – 39 * Intuitive – 25 * Thinking – 75 * Judging - 67 * Ramesh Kandanarachchi : INTJ * Introverted – 56 * Intuitive -25 * Thinking - 38 * Judging -22

Section F: Interaction styles

Arush Kumarage

Get-Things-Going

In-Charge

Chart-the-Course

Behind-the-Scenes

Get-Things-Going

In-Charge

Chart-the-Course

Behind-the-Scenes

Ramesh Kadanarachchi

Appendix 2

The following agreement refers to the members of IFS Consultants * Ramesh Kandanarachchi * Arush Kumarage
The tasks of each member are defined. Each member will follow the rules reviewed in this contract.
Company Profile

Intelligent Financial Solutions Consultants (Pvt) Ltd, established in 2006 provides tax services, management and cost consulting services, financial statement preparation, financial auditing, business process consultancy and other financial sector services. Intelligent Financial Solutions Consultants Pvt Ltd serves small businesses (under Rs 100 million in revenue) in Colombo, primarily in service industries. Intelligent Financial Solutions Consultants (Pvt) Ltd plans to add bookkeeping services to its suite of services to better serve its current and future clients.

Vision To transform knowledge into professional financial services
Mission Statement

Intelligent Financial Solutions Consultants (Pvt.) Ltd mission is to provide dependable and quality service of accounting and tax preparation assistance to all sectors of industry, commerce, and individuals. We shall endeavor to provide our services in a comprehensive and cost-competitive manner, while providing our customer care advantage.

Goals

1. The aim of the business is to establish a professional accounting/bookkeeping service that will reflect quality performance and fill a wide range of business needs. 2. To create for clients proper accounting, inventory, and financial controls that will aid them by giving constant business growth on a profitable basis. 3. To make available to clients accounting systems that have been designed for their business, and have these systems available for both hand-posted and computerized usage.

4. To gradually expand the business through the inclusion of qualified associates who have been adequately trained in business management.

Expectations | | As a project team we will: | | 1. Only agree to do work that we are qualified and capable of doing. | | 2. Be honest and realistic in planning and reporting project scope, schedule, staffing and cost. | | 3. Operate in a proactive manner, anticipating potential problems and working to prevent them before they happen. | | 4. Promptly notify our customer(s) and sponsor of any change that could affect them. | | 5. Keep other team members informed. | | 6. Keep proprietary information about our customers in strict confidence. | | 7. Focus on what is best for the project as a whole. | | 8. See the project through to completion. | | | Code of Conduct * Participation | | As a project team we will: | | 1. Keep issues that arise in meetings in confidence within the team unless otherwise indicated. | | 2. Be honest and open during meetings. | | 3. Encourage a diversity of opinions on all topics. | | 4. Give everyone the opportunity for equal participation. | | 5. Be open to new approaches and listen to new ideas. | | 6. Avoid placing blame when things go wrong. Instead, we will discuss the process and explore how it can be improved. | | | * Communication | | As a project team we will: | | 1. Seek first to understand, and then to be understood. | | 2. Be clear and to the point. | | 3. Practice active, effective listening skills. | | 4. Keep discussions on track. | | 5. Use visual means such as drawings, charts, and tables to facilitate discussion. | | | * Problem Solving | | As a project team we will: | | 1. Encourage everyone to participate. | | 2. Encourage all ideas (no criticism), since new concepts come from outside of our normal perceptions. | | 3. Build on each other's ideas. | | 4. Use team tools when appropriate to facilitate problem solving. | | 5. Whenever possible, use data to assist in problem solving. | | 6. Remember that solving problems is a creative process—new ideas and new understandings often result. | | | * Decision Making | | As a project team we will: | | 1. Make decisions based on data whenever feasible. | | 2. Seek to find the needed information or data. | | 3. Discuss criteria (cost, time, impact, etc.) for making a decision before choosing an option. | | 4. Encourage and explore different interpretations of data. | | 5. Get input from the entire team before a decision is made. | | 6. Ask all team members if they can support a decision before the decision is made | | | | | * Handling Conflict | | As a project team we will: | | 1. Regard conflict as normal and as an opportunity for growth. | | 2. Seek to understand the interests and desires of each party involved before arriving at answers or solutions. | | 3. Choose an appropriate time and place to discuss and explore the conflict. | | 4. Listen openly to other points of view. | | 5. Repeat back to the other person what we understand and ask if it is correct. | | 6. Acknowledge valid points that the other person has made. | | 7. State our points of view and our interests in a non-judgmental and non-attacking manner. | | 8. Seek to find some common ground for agreement. | | | | | Policies and Procedures | | * All members must read thoroughly and conform to the contract document whilst understanding the gravity of it. * Other members of the team should collectively decide penalty for breach of contract by any member with consultation of the main board of directors * In event of illness and other unavoidable circumstances the work load of group member concerned should be equally shared by the other members * Each member should have a voice and opinions should be expressed openly within the team | | | | | | | | Roles and Responsibilities | | | * Ramesh Kandanarachchi - Planning, Coordinator and assigning duties. Overview of consultancy project, and quality assurance of work
(Team Leader)

* Arush Kumarage - Research and analysis of consultancy work and heading audit teams
(Head of Financial Accounting and Auditing)

RAMESH KANDANARACHI Team Leader

* Provide the team with the company’s vision and the objectives of all projects.

* Create an environment oriented to open communications, creative thinking, cohesive team effort and workplace trust.

* Lead by example (be a role model) – make behaviour consistent with your words. * Manage, train, and help the development of team members; help resolve any dysfunctional behaviour. * Lead problem solving and collaboration. * Keep discussions focused and ensure decisions lead toward closure. * Assure that all team members have the required education and training to effectively participate on their assigned project.

* Acknowledge and reward team and team member accomplishments, as well as exceptional performance. * Lead creativity, risk-taking, and continuous improvements in workflow.

I have read and fully understood the terms and conditions mentioned above. I agree to follow all of them and put my best foot forward to complete any assignment, projects assigned to me. In the event of failure of not completing the task assigned to me, I agree to take any penalty on my actions that is the reduction in my marks I get. ……………………………….. Ramesh Kandanarachchi
ARUSH KUMARAGE Head of Financial Accounting and Auditing

* Negotiate, interpret and manage loan arrangements and various project contracts. * Take responsible for internal financial statements of all implemented projects. * Prepare analysis report on cost of goods sold and operational expenses against the previous year. Issue explanations and business solutions to minimize the risks. * Analyze the state of financial performance for major business metrics and related document to financial highlights that will enable management to determine progress for budgets. * Identify, investigate, and analyze potential operational improvement. As appropriate, based on findings make proposal for operational changes (policy, procedures, processes, etc.) * Foresee cash flow trend, need for loans and available funds for investment. * Ensure availability of sufficient funds for purpose of meeting current operational and capital investment requirements.

I have read and fully understood the terms and conditions mentioned above. I agree to follow all of them and put my best foot forward to complete any assignment, projects assigned to me. In the event of failure of not completing the task assigned to me, I agree to take any penalty on my actions that is the reduction in my marks I get.

..……………………………….. Arush Kumarage