Analysis of the scenario ‘Elliot’s Rise to

Power’ in movie ‘The Flight of The Phoenix’

using the Organization Behaviour Field Map

Submitted to: Prof Unnikammu Moideenkutty

by SEC G, Group 9

Group 9, Sec G OB group details

Name Roll No.

Dibyanshu Kumar PGP/22/348

Kanan Pardeshi PGP/22/356

Jay Gohel PGP/22/353

Sharon Soreng PGP/22/380

Skanda P PGP/22/385

1
Table of Contents
S No Contents Page No

1 Introduction 3-4

2 OB Model (Input) 4-7

3 OB Model (Process) 7-9

4 OB Model (Output) 9

5 Journal 10-15

6 Conclusion 15

7 Experiences of working in group 16-17

8 References 17

2
Introduction

The Gunshot and Elliot’s Rise to Power:

We have picked the scene in the movie where Elliot shoots the Mongol intruder and thereafter, an intense

confrontation ensues between Elliot (Toy plane designer and hitchhiker) and Mr. Frank Town (the pilot).

The confrontation evolves into a physical fight that ends with Mr Elliot getting punched in the face. This is a

fight between two alpha males:

1.Mr Towns- a leader who is recognized and respected by the group

2.Mr Elliot- A technically skilled person who wants to be respected for his role as an Entrepreneur and

Resource Allocator, but feels he isn’t.

Mr Elliot’s already fragile ego is shattered when he is humiliated and assaulted by Mr. Towns. He retreats to

the airplane to lick his wounds and pander to his self-esteem. Thereafter, ensues the most interesting scene

in the movie. Kelly realizes that Mr. Elliot might not continue making the plane, which puts the whole group

in jeopardy. Sammy and Kelly hence approach the airplane to console Elliot and get him back on the team.

Kelly plays the role of a facilitator and leader who recognises the need to keep the group together. Sammy

supports her in this endeavour. Kelly is not put off by Elliot’s attitude towards her and the group and tries

her best to pander to his ego i.e. “Esteem needs”. Ellie approaches Elliot and apologizes to him for Mr.

Towns’ behaviour. Since Elliot’s ego is greatly hurt, Elliot retorts by saying that he doesn’t need the group;

the group needs him. He further goes on to emphasize that the whole group is unreliable and that he does not

want to continue making the plane with such unreliable people. Elliot recognizes his leverage over the whole

group and demands that each one of them apologize to him. His demand is initially met by disbelief from

Kelly, but that instant, Liddle plays the role of a disturbance handler and is the first person to apologize to

Elliot. Elliot gets encouraged by Liddle’s response and demands the same from Jeremy.

Jeremy, who portrays a defiant attitude forcefully apologizes thereafter. Jeremy’s attitude is acknowledged

by Elliot. Elliot now starts to realize the extent of his power over the group and pokes Jeremy to say

“Please” and apologize two more times. From this point onwards, all the remaining team members present

3
understand the gravity of the situation. They are now subservient towards Elliot and this is displayed by their

ready replies and a submissive body language. During the climax of the scene, Mr. Towns walks into the

airplane realizing his mistake. He comes in with an intention to figure out where the group stands in regards

of the situation. He is taken by surprise, when he sees Elliot demanding him to acknowledge Elliot as the

boss. However, Kelly signs at Mr. Towns to let go off his ego and do as Elliot asks. Mr. Towns being a

mature leader realizes the gravity of the situation and quickly acknowledges Elliot as the boss of the group.

This move by Mr. Towns is pivotal in convincing Elliot to re-join the team and ensure the team’s survival.

This entire shift in power dynamics in the group is a very interesting case of Organizational Behaviour.

The movie ‘Flight of the Phoenix’ is based on the novel Trevor Dudley-Smith that tells the cargo plane

crashed in Sahara Desert. This movie is well known in B-School as we can see a lot of its connection with

Organization Behaviour.

Let us map this movie in the OB Model as given below.

Inputs

Taking about the inputs, there are three parts Individual Level, Group Level and Organization Level. In the

Individual Level, we need to talk about the diversity, personality and values. Now doing analysis of all

characters with all are as follows:-

4
Name of Character Diversity Personality Values
Frank Towns Adds energy to the Energetic, risk Empathy, open to
team with risk taking taking, responsible, discussion, open to
person, quite intelligent, good innovation
dominating, takes strategist, good team
responsibility as he player
is pilot by
occupation to save
and rescue his
passengers
A.J. Fun loving, Follows a leader, Adds new
supporter and energetic and fun environment
follower rather than loving refreshment to the
being the leader team
Elliott Airplane designer so different personality Creativity and
a new kind of overall, didn’t talk innovative mind
skillset from others, and interacted with than others as he
good observation others much but later draws how to design
skills came out as a the plane and escape
different character the desert
Kelly Johnson Only female crew in Polite and respectful Adds empathy to
them, caring and to others, huge them team, creates
good in maintaining personality as many good relation and
good relation among get attracted to them healthy environment
team members to the whole team
Alex Rodney Bold characteristics, Good observational Bold character,
gave his life for his skills, emotional and emotional flavour to
team and told them sacrificed his life for the team
not to save him, his team
knew his
surroundings well as
he was the first to
notice Davis was not
there
Jeremy Aggressive and Fun loving, risk Adds fun in the team
showed power as his loving and when they are
strength, was fun aggressive in his fighting for survival,
loving as well approach looked a bring power and
bit ignorant as well strength to team as
his comment of well
walking through the
Sahara Desert
Sammi As a cook, he is one Energetic, fun- Adds value of most
of the asset for loving and caring important thing i.e.
survival for the team towards its team food, water and
as he brings his member manages it for the
skills in cooking and period they stayed in
estimating the day that desert
they can go on with
that amount of food
Ian Thinked himself as Not likeable but Added value to this
boss and changed as their situation how
discriminated others lives went in that leadership changes

5
 as he told his desert, became more with the change in
teammates to sit friendly so he was different
away from him, rude changed the way he circumstances
with others used to think before
James Person who drove Calm and composed, Stopped them
Franks to bring hope spoke during high conflict by seeing
in others by making time first that plane could
plane, brought fly
different perspective
in team
Rady Stopped others to do Wise and cool Good team member
wrong, somewhere minded
helped team to stay
together and
combated whenever
the team was failing
Davis NA Superstitious did NA
jinx, didn’t stayed as
team together or
didn’t notified when
he went to pee

In-group level, they were doing not have any mutual understanding among themselves at first. Frank Towns

was always pressurizing that they should stay there rather than trying to do something else. Therefore, the

group accepted it but as it goes, they went for change and they started to be more innovative in the group.

The group accepted the change and marched for new ideas. So somewhere, it played huge role in it. They

were in structure and everyone knew responsibility. They all helped each other and management the

resources well. Therefore, it had huge impact among each other. Talking about responsibilities, the

responsibilities as known among themselves and each one performed in their full potential with all their

skills they had in them.

The structure and organization was well maintained and very much planned as well. Therefore, we can

justify that the team was performing well among themselves.

Now mapping the situation, we all want to study, here many showed them actual personality but many

showed other personality, which they had, but we did not see. There are many instances like Elliott, who

was very rude and always was being stubborn with others got angry and stopped making plane. He

afterwards only makes a move when everyone apologizes. James, who was calm, composed, and thereby

showed what a person he is, initiated this. Then, came the Kelly who was good in conflict management,

6
played a huge role by settling the conflict with him and urged others to do the same. She indirectly stated all

to understand the situation and apologize to him. Frank as rude and dominating he was. He only started the

fight with Elliott and therefore he was the one who also showed his dominance. Therefore, this was whole

how individuals perform in this situation and all this was for the power to prove dominance. Later, Frank

also apologized and therefore showed how he understood the problem and stood with his team. So here we

see a very different prospective of him. So, this was all about them in a nutshell.

Process (Individual Level)

Emotions and Moods

The PROCESS LEVEL of the basic OB model can be divided into Individual Level, Group Level and

Organisational Level. The process are actions that individuals, groups, and organizations engage in as a result

of inputs and that lead to certain outcomes. At the individual level, processes include emotions and moods,

motivation, perception, and decision making. At the group level, they include communication, leadership,

power and politics, and conflict and negotiation. Finally, at the organizational level, processes include human

resource management and change practices. Emotions can be defined as intense feeling that are directed at

someone or something. The emotions are of two parts positive and negatives emotions. Positive emotions

consist of positive emotions such as excitement, enthusiasm. Negative emotions is a mood consisting of

nervousness, stress, and anxiety. Some of the primary influences of the emotions are personality, time of the

day, stress, weather. Emotional labor is a key component of effective job performance. Felt emotions are our

actual emotions. In contrast, displayed emotions are those the organization requires workers to show and

considers appropriate in a given job. Displaying fake emotions requires us to suppress real ones. Surface acting

is hiding inner feelings and emotional expressions in response to display rules. Deep acting is trying to modify

our true inner feelings based on display rules. Surface acting deals with displayed emotions, and deep acting

deals with felt emotions. The applications of emotions and moods can be seen in selection, decision making,

motivation, leadership, negotiation.

In the present scenario we can see the intense emotion during the confrontation between Mr Towns and Elliot.

Elliot shots the smuggler when everyone in the group is having discussion on whether to save smuggler or

7
not. Mr Town shows is anger on the actions done by Elliot. The entire team was trapped in the mid of the

desert. Hunger for the survival and rebuilding the plane was stressful time that they all were suffering from .

The loss of one of the members has deeply affected everyone and Mr Elliot is upset as now they have to put

extra effort in rebuilding a plane. There in emotional dissonance between the captain Mr Towns and Elliot

where Elliot accuses him of being the reason for all the mis happenings and in the midst of this Mr town gets

angry and punches Elliot. Elliot is sad because his self-esteem is destroyed and the ego is hurt. Kelly goes to

him and requests him to drive the group again for the rebuilding, he replies back saying each member in the

group has to say “Please”. Well to satisfy his ego every member in the group does surface acting especially

Mr towns who completely dislikes Elliot. Deep acting is done my Mr Elliot, internally he is nice person in

heart and current behaviour is result of the situation. The mood of the entire group can be described as

hopelessness, distressful, disastrous, unhappiness.

Motivation

Motivation can be defined as the processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence

of effort toward attaining a goal. The best-known theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of

needs, which hypothesizes that within every human being there is a hierarchy of five needs. The five needs

are psychological, safe security, social belongingness, esteem and self-actualisation. Physiological need

includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and other bodily needs. Safety-security. Security and protection from

physical and emotional harm. Social-belongingness includes Affection, belongingness, acceptance, and

friendship. Esteem includes Internal factors such as self-respect, autonomy, and achievement, and external

factors such as status, recognition, and attention. Self-actualization needs includes Drive to become what we

are capable of becoming includes growth, achieving our potential, and self-fulfilment.

In the present scenario the group was trapped in the middle of desert, they were helpless and deprived from

the lower order needs such as shelter and food. The sand storm has already destroyed the shelter. Safety

security is also one of the lower order needs which was very much required. They were struggling for the

survival and safety from the smugglers. On the higher order needs social belongingness was required to keep

the team together, help and motivate each other to bring in the hope for the survival. Self-respect and self-

8
esteem are important need of Elliot and Mr town. Mr Town was the captain and his position demanded

motivating the group, respect whereas Elliot was the only person the entire group who has the knowledge to

craft building and he is important person who could save them so demanded respect and dedication towards

building plane.

Decision Making

The rational decision-making model assumes the decision maker has complete information, is able to identify

all relevant options in an unbiased manner, and chooses the option with the highest utility. Intuitive decision

making, an unconscious process created from distilled experience. Intuitive decision making occurs outside

conscious thought; relies on holistic associations or links between disparate pieces of information; is fast; and

is affectively charged, meaning it engages the emotions. In this scene Elliot made an intuitive decision and

pulled out a trigger and shot the smuggler and this was dire need of the situation because both of the keeping

him alive would have cost the entire team who were already in deprival situation. His action is combination

of both rational and intuitive thinking.

Outcome

After the incident, most of the group members shows withdrawal behavior as a fight between two alpha

males. It was also because of the behavior that Elliot elicits as he retorts by saying that he doesn’t need the

group; the group needs him. He further goes on to emphasize that the whole group is unreliable and that he

does not want to continue making the plane with such unreliable people. He demands that everyone should

apologize him, which all did but it was forceful and something that they all had to do so as to ensure to get

out of that place. Elliot has lower social-emotional wellbeing (psychological symptoms) which had affected

the performance of the whole group and the environment is also had become tense.

Mr. Towns apologizes Elliot because he knows it was for the greater good of the whole group. This made

the whole group adhere to the demand of Elliot because it was the survival of the whole group which made

to function as a whole unit.

9
Journals

Conflict: An Important Dimension of Successful Team Management

Team interactions are ideally supposed to be beneficial. They encourage discussion which helps in reducing

ambiguity and also brings out all possible dimensions of a problem. Conflict in such interactions would

determine the success of a team. If the team managed conflict successfully it would lead to better creative

output and set the benchmark higher. The teams who found conflict to be uncomfortable and tended to avoid

it, performed poorly and as a result their productivity deteriorated.

Types of Conflict:

1. C-type: This conflict arises due to disagreements because of difference in the substantive/work views

of the members of the team. This type benefits the team as it encourages discussion on issues and

brings out the all too often ignored assumptions. It promotes acceptance leading to frank interactions

and integrates the diverse opinions that arise. It negates the negative effect of group think and helps

avoid decisions made out of false assumptions that were unchallenged. It leads to better decisions,

increased empathy, cohesiveness and commitment of the team members.

2. A- type: This type arises due to disagreements on personal views or resentment of particular

individuals by the members. It is directed at individuals rather than ideas. It leads to lower team

effectiveness by evoking apathy, distrust, hostility and cynicism. The number of team discussions are

reduced and the tendency to be open and interactive also reduces. As a consequence, the creativity

and quality of the team's decisions suffer. The members not only lose the value of their input but they

also lose the will to participate actively in the future.

The goal is to prevent A-type conflicts and encourage C-type conflicts. This can be done by 1. Focused

Activity: The teams should focus entirely on the task at hand and never get deviated by trivial issues. They

should prepare and stick to a voted agenda.

2. Creativity: Encouraging thinking beyond the conventional options and expressing it.

10
3. Open Communication: Developing a culture where the view point of one person can be freely challenged

by the others without fear of reprisal, anger or resentment.

4. Integration: Effective involvement of team members leading to equal contribution.

In context of the scene in flight of the Phoenix:

In our situation of the movie, the ‘Flight of the Phoenix’ we see that the team* was involved in a conflict on

whether to shoot the ‘desert native’ prisoner. In that particular scenario each member of the team expresses

their own opinion on what to do with the prisoner if he was kept alive. This was a C type conflict. Elliot

feels that the standoff is leading to delay in decision making and brings an abrupt end to the C-type conflict

by shooting the prisoner. Elliot as a leader later goes on to create A-type conflict leading to an atmosphere of

fear and resentment among the team.

*team: Consists of all the people who were on the ‘Phoenix’ plane which crashed in the desert.

The Intuitive Executive Understanding and Applying gut feeling in Decision Making

This journal tells us about intuitive decision making and its relationship with rationality. The application of

Intuitive decision making in management. Intuition in organisational level, bias theory associated with

intuition and relationship between intuition and imagery.

Intuition can be defined as capacity for attaining direct knowledge or understanding without the apparent

intrusion of rational thought or logical inference. One should learn to trust their intuition as ignoring intuition

has led to bad decision making. Fat high quality, strategic decision making represents a fundamental dynamic

capability in high performing organisation. The tradition response to this situation is rational analysis:

information is collected, collated, analysed and interpreted, alternatives are formulated. There should be a fine

balancing between two seemingly contradictory capabilities intuition and rationality. Intuition is mostly

overlooked or disregarded in decision-making. Executives are undergoing training to improve intuitive

knowledge, understanding and skill. Being rational entails the acquisition of knowledge through the power of

conscious reasoning and deliberative analytical thought .Against this rational backdrop, the significance of

unconscious mental process and feelings should not be underestimated or overlooked since they can be source

11
of intuitively based judgments that may provide an alternative to consciously derived rational choices .When

outcomes are difficult to predict through rational means ,executive need to acknowledge the uncertainties

through potential of unconscious mind and be comfortable with it and leverage its potential for success

.Intuition is difficult to describe but easy to recognise. Experienced executive possesses great Intuition ability.

Research suggest that executive significant for decisions in corporate strategy and planning, marketing, human

resource development. Intuition presents the possibility of turning ides into action and speeding up decision

making. Intuitive managers are more likely than other types to favour more abstract information and perpetual

process, be inclined towards idealistic. They also feel self-sufficient and trusting their own judgement. It can

be intuition as a knowing and intuition as feeling interact and may be distinguishable from the point of view

of individual. The quality of the incidental and unplanned learning opportunities depend upon the extent to

which feedback is used. There is various bias associated with intuitive decision making such as ease of recall,

overconfidence bias, confirmation bias. Concluding this journal intuitive is a natural component and can be

powerful component when understood and managed effectively.

In context of the scene in flight of the Phoenix

In the situation all the members in the group were in huge dilemma on what actions to be taken on the

smugglers who was brought to their camp and in the midst of the discussion Elliot made an intuitive decision

and pulled out a trigger and shot the smuggler. This decision was for the benefit of the group who were already

the victim of the scarcity of the resources. His action was justifiable because the smuggler was already injured

and saving him would have cost them more. His intuitive decision caused trouble between him and the captain

Mr Towns. He later blamed the captain for the unforeseen situation in which they are now. Elliot decision was

a combination of rational knowledge and unconscious mind. The rational thought can be described because

he had already warned his group members who were heading to introspect the smugglers.

Shared leadership as a concept and its importance:

What is shared leadership?

“Leadership is like fine wine: It is meant to be shared, globally.”

12
The paper defines shared leadership as a very dynamic process. It involves an interactive process between

individuals trying to influence each other to achieve a collective and a collaborative goal. Shared leadership

breaks the concept of hierarchical leadership, and allows skilled individual to take the mantle in different

situations. The leadership shifts between team members based on the situations, expertise of the person, or

status of the project. In certain scenarios, shared leadership may involve influence moving up and down the

hierarchy. Typically, the leader may initiate the empowering of multiple individuals in the group based on

the situation. Once the group has settled into the process, the leadership mantle may be taken up by people

organically and based on ones own volition.

Why shared leadership?

Collaborative leadership by way of shared responsibility is the way to go forward. Every member of the

group may have a different perspective and a new insight into the problem, some of which may be good,

some of which may be bad. However, shared leadership allows every team member to take up ownership of

the project and lead the team towards completion of the project. In fact, the article goes on to say that shared

leadership can have a very strong impact on the performance of the team. However, the article also mentions

that shared leadership is not a replacement of hierarchical leadership, but a way of making the team

members taking up initiatives and owning up to their responsibilities. It gives any organization a more

flexible, dynamic, dynamic, robust and responsive leadership infrastructure.

In context of the scene in flight of the Phoenix:

There are many instances in the movie where shared leadership is extensively visible. Since the group did

not have a clear cut leadership figure, shared leadership was all the more imperative to the group for the

flight to be operational. For example, Elliot takes up the responsibility of guiding the group to build the

airplane. In the chosen scene, when Towns punches Elliot for killing the Mongolian, Kelly is the one who

takes up the mantle to solve the grievances of Elliot and diffuse the situation. Further, Towns acts as the

leader while landing the plane or while saving the water for the group. Here, in different situations, different

people in the group take up the leadership position.

13
This increased the camaraderie in the group and made them work together despite various setbacks that they

faced. The collaborative for survival was achieved due to shared leadership.

Who Gets Power-and how they hold on it: A Strategic-Contingency Model of Power

The power can be defined as the ability of the person who possess the power to ring the desired outcome that

the person wants. The processes through which the power develops and is implemented in organizations

results in more aligned and more misaligned with the environment of the organization. When you ask people

in the organization who is more influential they know that in addition to agreeing with others to a great

extent. The power is helpful to the organization to adapt to its environment and problems. Power is derived

from the ability of the individual and the groups whether they take the actions that are desired by the others.

It is also derived from the social situation in which an individual has the capacity to do something and the

other person does not but wants it done. The extent an individual has the power depends not only on the

activities that he/she controls but also on the existence of the other persons. The means through which the

activities could be achieved and on those who determine the desired outcome so on the activities that are

critical and desired in the organization. It is a fact that power revolves around scarce and critical activities

makes the control of the above activities a major background in struggles for power. The main effect on the

use of power in organizations has been scarcity, criticality, and uncertainty. While the critical contingencies

facing by the organization could change. When it happens it is reasonable to effect that the power of the

individuals and subgroups would also change in the course of the time. Sometimes the change can be swift

or shattering. The power is determined by the contingencies that an organization is facing and that ultimately

determines the bases of the power.

In context of the scene in flight of the Phoenix:

With the relation to the situation when Elliot says that he does not need the team but the whole team needs

him. It is the power of Elliot that only he knew how to structure the whole plane once again. And after the

feud between Elliot and Mr. Towns, Elliot demands the apologies from the whole group that is the desired

step that person(Elliot) in the power is having which the whole group accepts. As the whole group

14
acknowledges him the apologies and Mr. Towns had to acknowledge him as a boss because of the larger

benefit of the whole group. Elliot was the only person who has that ability and he desired to get respect from

all because he had the power with him.

Conclusion:

In the course of the group work involving ‘the Gunshot and Elliot’s Rise to Power’ situation in the movie

the ‘Flight of the Phoenix’ we identified elements of the OB model such as leadership traits, group

emotions, attitudes, effect of power, conflict and persuasion. We saw how power shifts hands based on

circumstances and learnt that there is strategy involved in how one acquires power at times. The role of the

lady as a pacifier lead to group cohesion. The diversity in the group is also maybe one of the reasons why

they did not end up killing each other even though they wanted to. Everybody was indispensable in one way

or the other. The situation also portrays a strong example of how power can be wielded by brute force but

only for a short period of time. It also shows that in certain situations shared leadership (albeit informal) is

essential for the effective functioning of the team. In the end we were able to relate many of the concepts we

learnt in OB-1 with the movie scene.

Experiences

Sharon’s experience of working with the group: I had an insightful experience working in my OB team

where everyone had different personality from ENTJ, ENFJ, ESTP and ESFP. The journey all together was

amazing, knowledgeable, great learning experience. Selection on the interesting part of the movie to

completion of the OB report, we had some clashes and I believe these clashes are necessary to increase the

quality of decision making. We had different thought process on solving problem which benefitted us in

understanding the situation through varied perspective. All of the five members played a different role

example the facilitator, supporter, initiator. The collective information, mutual understanding, positive

synergy kept this group intact. Eventually the group work was transformed to team work. Our team can be

described a cross functional and problem-solving team. The constructive conflict helped our team to work

and reach to our goal efficiently. The dedication, hard work and team cohesion played a major role in

completing the project successively.

15
Jay’s experience of working with the group: Working with the team was a great experience. All the team

members were very helpful and supportive. We distributed the workload equally. However, Skanda took the

lead at most points through the project and guided the group to the competition of the project.

Skanda’s experience of working with the group: As a team I feel we had a great start. The introduction

document task was done with all of us sitting together. We had a healthy discussion where everyone’s

viewpoints were discussed and debated. I found it helpful as we sequentially filtered all assumptions and

came to a clear consensus. We were able to submit it on time. But at some point, in the future some of the

group members were unresponsive for a time. We had some difficulty in getting things back on track. But

this was done successfully as all the members had a good incentive to do well. Overall it was the perfect

real-life experience of group think, conflict and open communication. In the course of the group work I

noticed and related to many of the concepts that we learnt while studying the OB-1 course. The experience

also made me ponder how difficult/different the scenario would have been if the same task was to be

completed with a team who were not students of a great b-school. In the end I also got to learn beyond the

textbook as I went through the summaries of articles from recognized journals.

Kanan’s experience of working with the group: While working in the group I was able to understand how

there are several angles through which one could look at the situation. There were times when we all did not

come across the same point but have a different stand. But we as a group then come together with

considering the best perspective that will benefit the group as a whole. It was related to how the strength of

members can be taken into care for the initiating accomplishment of the task. To come across different sets

of people and then the derivation of ideas. It does not stop there but I came across how a problem can dig

deeper so as to analyse it. While taking the final decision our group consider propositions of all most of the

time. When we were not able to sit together we share our responsibility and then in the next meeting each

person will tell about the work that he/she had done. I learn how to manage time and to coordinate with the

other members of the group.

Dibyanshu’s experience of working with the group: The team was very diverse and each one acted in

different way. The team had started with some conflict when the scenario needs to be selected. I was not
16
convinced with the scene but eventually went with it as I afterwards feel the mental game of power was

required in this world. Secondly working with the group was totally a new experience and new challenge in

whole. The characters type was very different from the people I have seen in the past. There were many

conflicts mentally but I learnt how to adapt in future. Therefore, that’s my experience in whole working with

team.

References

1) Article: Who gets power and how they hold on to it; Journal: Organizational Dynamics; Authors:

Gerald R. Salancik & Jeffrey Pfeffer; Year:1977

2) Article: Shared Leadership; Journal: Organizational Dynamics Authors: Craig L & Christina L; Year:

2013

3) Article: Conflict: An Important Dimension in Successful Management Team; Journal: Organizational

Dynamics; Authors: Allen C. Amason, Wayne A. HOCHWARTER, Kenneth R. Thompson & Allison

W. Harrison; Year: 1994

4) Article: The intuitive executive: Understanding and applying 'gut feel' in decision-making; Journal:

Academy of Management Executive Authors; Eugene Sadler-Smith and Erella Shefy; Year: 2004

5) Organizational Behaviour Stephens P Robbin and Timothy A Judge 17th Edition

17
18