Table of contents
1.0 Introduction3
2.0 Intrapersonal Effectiveness3 2.1 Theory……………………………………………………………………………..…….3 2.2 Emotional Intelligence…………………………………………………………………..3 2.3 Learning Style Profiler………………………………………………………….……….4 2.4 Development Actions…………………………………………………………….….…..5 2.5 Impact on Organizational Effectiveness………………………………………….……..6
3.0Interpersonal Effectiveness…………………………….…………………………….…..6 3.1 Theory……………………………………………………………………………….…..6 3.2 Spark and MEIS…………………………………………………………………………7 3.3 Belbin Team Roles ……………………………………………………………………..7 3.4 Development Actions……………………………………………………………………8 3.5 social and cultural diversity considerations……………………………………………..9 3.6 Impact on Organizational Effectiveness……………………………………………...…9
4.0 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………10
Reference list………………………………………………………………………………..11
Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………..…13
Assignment#1

1.0 Introduction
Working in business is a unit whose aim is to develop an understanding of the skills which can make efficient works in business environment. In this portfolio, I am going to discuss the theories what I have learned in class, including intrapersonal, interpersonal and organizational effectiveness. I will also discuss my own experience which link to the theories. I will choose to concentrate on my learning style based on the Jackson Learning Style Profiler for intrapersonal effectiveness. In the second part I will choose SPARK feedback and MEIS to explain interpersonal effectiveness. It is important to develop self-awareness and effectiveness in intrapersonal, interpersonal and organizational areas because self-awareness and effectiveness can power people’s inner, improve the communication with others and increase the level of organizational ability. I will mention other two theories which are emotional intelligence for intrapersonal effectiveness and Belibin for interpersonal effectiveness.

2.0 Intrapersonal Effectiveness 3.1 Theory
According to Tucker, Sojka, Barone & McCarthy (2000, p.335), Intrapersonal effectiveness contains activities for improving self awareness, self motivation and managing emotions. In this part I will talk about and reflect on my intrapersonal effectiveness using the results of questionnaires that I have finished about the Jackson’s learning styles and Schutte’s Emotional Intelligence Scale.

3.2 Emotional Intelligence
According to Goleman (2002), emotional intelligence is the ability to manage oneself and influence others in constructive and mature ways. In McShane’s (2010) opinion, it includes abilities to feel and express emotion, absorb emotion in thought, understand and advise to emotion, and manage their own emotions. According to Schutte’s Emotional Intelligence Scale questionnaire, my total emotional intelligence score was 34 which indicate that I have high emotional intelligence. According to MEIS questionnaire, my MEIS score was 7 which indicate that I have high MEIS.
As mentioned previously, my scores from Schutte’s Emotional Intelligence questionnaire indicate that I have high emotional intelligence. I am able to read one’s own emotions and recognize their impact, use “gut sense” to guide decisions. I have organizational awareness: reading the currents, decision networks, and politics at the organizational level. And I am also able to guide and motivate with a compelling vision. I partly agree with this score as I am really a person who can read others’ emotional frequently. For example, my friend Sue was unhappy last Friday, however, she tried hard to hide her emotional. Actually, it was not difficult to see her emotional situation after I observed her for a while. In addition, I disagree that I have strong social awareness such as organizational awareness. Because I cannot read the currents correctly, realize the politics at the organizational level. Based on my comments, I am weaker in social competence than personal competence. I have used emotional intelligence when I communicate with friends and control over my emotional.

3.3 Learning Style Profiler
The Learning Style Profiler (LSP) provides us a modern measure of individual differences in learning style based on a neuropsychological model (O'Connor, 2008). In Jackson’s learning styles, learning is segmented into two parts: instinctive learning and conscious learning (Jackson, 2005). In relation to the Learning Style Profiler (LSP) questionnaire, my conscientious achiever score was 74th percentile, my deep learning achiever score was 42nd percentile, my sensation seeker and emotionally intelligent achiever score were 17th percentile. Based on the Learning Style Profiler (LSP) questionnaire, I am defined as a conscientious achiever and deep learning achiever.
According to my Learning Style Profiler (LSP) questionnaire scores, I have a high score in conscientiousness indicates that I am able to have good planning skills and I am a smart and responsible learner who has learnt that hasty decisions can be prevented by checking, sifting and collecting, through the available facts, information and figure. However, as a low sensation seeker, I will tend to like the safety of what is known to avoid new and possibly uncomfortable situation, and I have learnt not to join a sensation seeking activity if it does not have a very good reason (Schell, 2004). I agree with this score, because I always passive learning. I have used the Learning Style Profiler (LSP) in my functional learning.

3.4 Development Actions
My score for emotional intelligence questionnaire shows that my strength is personal competence. Firstly, I am good at reading others’ emotions through their facial expression and their actions. Secondly, I can help other people fell better when they are down and control my negative emotions. Thirdly, I am able to resolve disagreements. My weaknesses relate to my ability to social awareness. And these capabilities determine how we manage relationships. To improve this area I need to have organizational awareness, such as read the currents and politics at the organizational level. What’s more, in service of social awareness, I need to recognize and meet follower, client or customer needs. According to the Learning Style Profiler (LSP) questionnaire, I have a high score in conscientiousness which shows I have good planning skills and I am perseverance, even in the face of failure. My second most preferred conscious learning is deep learning which means I have deep thinking, good search and analytical skills. On the basis of the Learning Style Profiler questionnaire, my weakness is sensation seeking which means I lack of intellectual curiosity. And I also regard my weakness as lacking independent learning and innovation which are the factors of success (Simon, 2009). On account of the understanding of my weaknesses by LSP, my target is to improve my innovation capability and independent thinking ability which have been considered as the effective guarantees to find new chances (Carroll, 2009).

3.5 Impact on Organizational Effectiveness
Intrapersonal effectiveness is included in organizational effectiveness. According to Davidson, Simon, Woods & Griffith (2009) “Diversity is when members of a group or organisation differ from one another along one or more important dimensions such as age, race, sex or ethnicity”. McShane and Travaglione (2007) said Social network communication clusters people around interests such as Face book, MySpace, forums, and immersive platforms. According to emotional intelligence questionnaire, my strength is personal competence which means I am good at managing interpersonal skill in organizational effectiveness criteria. My weaknesses relate to my ability to social awareness which means I am weak in evaluation by external entities. On the basis of the Learning Style Profiler questionnaire, I have a high score in conscientiousness which shows I have good planning skills and I am perseverance. That means I am stability and good at planning and goal setting. When I prepared presentation, I planned my time and did my part on time. My weakness is sensation seeking which means I lack of intellectual curiosity which indicates I lack of motivation in organizational effectiveness criteria.

3.0 Interpersonal Effectiveness

4.6 Theory
According to Whetten & Cameron(2011,p.130), interpersonal effectiveness is “the ability to manage conflict, to build and manage high-performance teams, to conduct efficient meetings, to coach and counsel employees, to provide negative feedback in constructive ways, to influence others' opinions, and to motivate and energize employees". In this portfolio I will discuss and reflect on my interpersonal effectiveness using the results of questionnaires that I have finished about Team Emotional Intelligence, SPARK rating and Belbin.

4.7 MEIS and SPARK
“The MEIS is composed of a 12-subscale measure of emotional intelligence and provided the first comprehensive measure of emotional intelligence” (Bryant, 2005). According to the questionnaire which I have done in BSD124 class, my MEIS score was 7 which is a high score that indicates I am a high score in multifactor emotional intelligence. There are five people in my group, however, only two people did the questionnaire in class, and the score of the other people is 3 so our average score is 5. It is a medium score which means our team emotional intelligence is balance. So our team work such as oral presentation may not be bad, it may in normal level. SPARK is to both collect self and peer ratings and calculates an adjustment factor to convert group marks into an individual mark for a project (Wiley, K. & Gardner A., 2011). SPARK feedback is divided into SAPA and SPA factor. SAPA tells you how your reflections of your performance match with your peers reflections of your performance. SPA factor is a weighting factor that can be used to determine an individual's contribution to a team project. My SAPA rating is 1.05 which means I think I did well in team work and made more contribution to my group. My SPA is 1.02 which means my contribution rated as greater than other team members. They also think I did contribution to my group. My two group members gave me some feedback about my performance in teamwork. One is “You are a good active participant, and also have many ideas to help the group, and organisation.” The other is “Iris is always the first one arrived on the group meeting and have good contribution to our group.” I think they all made objective assessment to me.

4.8 Belbin Team Roles
Belbin Theory is the derivative approach which is used in the organizations for the team behaviors and the work group effectiveness (Belbin, 1981). It has eight separated team types and each individual plays a primary or secondary team role. It balances teams and to be an appropriate leadership profile (Anderson, 2004). According to the questionnaire of Belbin Team Role, I had high score in co-ordinator, monitor evaluator and completer finisher, they were all 10. According to Belbin Team Role summary descriptions, as a co-ordinator, I am mature and confident, I have clarifies goals. However, I can be seen as manipulative and offload own share of the work. As a monitor evaluator, I am sober, strategic and discerning and I can see all options and judge accurately, but I lack drive and ability to inspire others and I can be overly critical. As a completer finisher I am painstaking, conscientious and anxious. I can search out errors, however, I incline to worry unduly and I am reluctant to delegate. These results are consistent with my experiences in teamwork of BSD124. I worked hard to finish my part in time and suggested good ideas to group when we prepared for the presentation. I searched out errors in PowerPoint, and saw wrong opinions. I known well about our goals and urged group members to complete their work.

4.9 Development actions
As what average MEIS score shows our group has medium emotional intelligence skill, however, our presentation score is higher than what our average MEIS score shows, we got the highest score in class. I think I can continue doing well in my part in teamwork. My SAPA was higher than SPA that means I thought I do well in teamwork and my team member also thought I made contribution to group, however, what I thought I have done is lower than they thought me. Therefore, I need to improve my work in teamwork. As Belbin shows, I suitable for the team role of co-ordinator, monitor evaluator and completer finisher, however, I have low score in shaper role which indicates that I may prone to provocation and offend people’s feelings. Therefore, I need to control my moods and gentle to other group members.

4.10 Social and cultural diversity considerations
Workforce diversity refers to the differences identifiable among members of the workforce such as age, gender, ethnicity, health and physical ability (Strachan, French & Burgess, 2009, p. xvii). There were five people in my group, one of us is Macanese, and so we have cultural diversity in group. There are some advantages and disadvantages in cultural diversity. Because of language differences, we sometimes use English to communicate with each other. It is not as easy as we communicate with the people who use the same language. However, there were not conflict of cultural diversity in our group, and we only had some different ideas about the topic. Because of social diversity, everyone can think different suggestions for topic which benefit for our teamwork.

4.11 Impact on organizational effectiveness
Interpersonal effectiveness is included in organizational effectiveness. According to average MEIS and feedback from teacher, our team is in medium level, therefore, we need to improve our ability to cooperate and understanding of the topic. That emphasizes our group need to focus on efficiency and shared influence in organizational effectiveness criteria. On basis of SPARK rating and feedback from my group members, my SAPA and SPA rating were all over 1.0, therefore, my contribution was rated as being equal to the average contribution of their team which shows that both my group and I satisfied to my job in organizational effectiveness criteria. Belbin Team Roles questionnaire shows that I am suitable for co-ordinator, monitor evaluator and completer finisher team roles, which indicates I am good at planning and goal setting, readiness, and achievement emphasis. However, I am not a good shaper. I cannot control my moods in discussion in organizational effectiveness criteria.

4.0 Conclusions In conclusion, I have reflected my experiences in BSD124 for intrapersonal, interpersonal and organizational effectiveness. I also specified how I intend to develop my interpersonal and intrapersonal competencies in the portfolio. I now understand my strengths and weaknesses according to these questionnaires which help me to develop my personal and professional abilities. Moreover, I have given my experience in presentation and set goals to address the identified weaknesses. In order to achieve success in future working, I need to consider about my experiences and reflections in BSD124. I think I should focus on my ability to social awareness and have intellectual curiosity which shows I need to learning independent. Finally, I also should focus on my most suitable team role in teamwork such as co-ordinator and completer finisher. I think if I overcome most of my shortcomings I will make a success in my future work.

Reference list
Anderson, N (01/09/2004). "An evaluation of gender differences on the Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory". Journal of occupational and organizational psychology (0963-1798), 77, p. 429.

Belbin, M. (1981). Management Teams: Why they succeed or fail. England: Butterworth Heinemann.

Bryant, D. (2005). The components of emotional intelligence and the relationship to sales performance. The George Washington University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 148-148 p. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304998171?accountid=13380. (304998171).

Carroll, V. S. (2009). Innovation.(jnnonline.com)(journal of neuroscience nursing launches its website). Journal of Neuroscience Nursing, 41(4), 177.

Davidson, P., Simon, A., Woods, P., and Griffith, R.W. (2009). Management. 4th Australasian Edition, Wiley & Sons: Milton AUS, Chapter 3, The International environment: culture and diversity pp. 77-100.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., McKee, A., & Books24x7, I. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.

Jackson, C. J. (2005). An applied neuropsychological model of functional and dysfunctional learning: Applications for business, education, training and clinical psychology. Cymeon: Australia.

McShane, S. L., Travaglione, A., & Olekalns, M. (2010).Organisational behaviour on the pacific rim. North Ryde, N.S.W: McGraw-Hill.

McShane, S. & Travaglione, T. (2007). Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim (2nd ed). Sydney: Mc Graw Hill Irwin.

O’Connor, P. J., & Jackson, C. J. (2008). The factor structure and validity of the learning styles profiler (LSP). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 117-123. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.24.2.117

Schell, L. A. (2004). Teaching learning styles with technology.Journal of Physical Education Recreation and Dance JOPERD,75(1), 14.

Simon, H. (2009). Innovation. (pp. 159-190). New York, NY: Springer New York. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-98147-5_6

Strachan, G. French, E., and Burgess, J. (2009). Managing Diversity in Australia Theory and Practice. AUS: McGraw Hill.

Tucker, M.L., Sojka, J.Z., Barone, F.J., & McCarthy, A.M. (2000). Training tomorrow’s leaders: Enhancing the emotional intelligence of business graduates. Journal of Education for Business, 75(6), 331-337.

Whetten, D., & Cameron, K. (2011). Developing management skills (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Wiley, K. & Gardner A.(2011) Improvements in the self and peer assessment tool SPARK: Do they improve learning outcomes? Faculty of Engineering and IT, University of Technology, Sydney, http://www. ojs.unisa.edu.au/ind ex.php/atna/art icle/viewFile/343/258

Appendix
Jackson’s learning styles Factor | My score | Sensation Seeker | 17 | Goal Oriented Achiever | 21 | Emotionally Intelligent Achiever | 17 | Conscientious Achiever | 74 | Deep Learning Achiever | 42 |
Schutte’s Emotional Intelligence Scale Factor | My score | Self awareness | 24 | Self management | 47 | Social awareness | 40 | Relationship management | 28 | total | 34 |

factor | Score | MEIS | 7 | SAPA | 1.05 | SPA | 1.02 |

Belbin Team Roles Factor | Score | plant | 8 | Resource investigator | 7 | Co-ordinator | 10 | Shaper | 6 | Monitor evaluator | 10 | Team worker | 8 | Implementer | 9 | Completer finisher | 10 |