Бакалавриат
2025/2026
Управление командой
Статус:
Курс обязательный (Управление цифровым продуктом)
Где читается:
Высшая школа бизнеса
Когда читается:
2-й курс, 1 модуль
Охват аудитории:
для своего кампуса
Преподаватели:
Багратиони Константин Амиранович
Язык:
английский
Контактные часы:
30
Course Syllabus
Abstract
The Impact of Managerial Skills on Employee Performance is particularly pronounced when the outcome of the work is the result of combining the individual efforts of all participants in collaborative work.The course takes into account the presence of artificial intelligence as a competitor to modern humans and aims to develop in participants the knowledge necessary for the independent development of emotional intelligence and influence skills.
Learning Objectives
- To introduce students to classic and modern theories pertinent to leadership and team management
Expected Learning Outcomes
- Demonstrate communication skills
- Analyze the information from appropriate sources for academic activities
- Analyze the information from appropriate sources for academic activities
- Distinguish between different team roles
- Distinguish between different types of leadership styles
- Identify components of team resilience
- Identify stages of team development
- Define main concepts pertinent to leadership and social influence
- Diagnosis of a team using Tuckman's, Katzenbach-Smith's, Lencioni's, Belbin's, or other relevant models
- Formulate research tasks for AI
- Define the boundaries and conditions for the use of AI in academic work
- Use AI tools to systematize scholarly sources and prepare analytical materials
- Identify errors and distortions (“hallucinations”) in AI-generated responses and correct them in the final materials
- Verify the accuracy and reliability of information obtained through AI by cross-checking with original publications
Assessment Elements
- ExamThe exam is taken written. The exam is conducted on the StartExam platform. The Exam consists of 2 Tests (0,4 and 0,6 of the Grade for the Exam). The Questions of the first Test are formed on the basis of lecture material, the questions for the second test and are formed on the basis of articles, assigned for the reading and analysis to the students during the Course. Answers to test questions of both Test 1 and Test 2 are counted as correct only in case of full compliance (all correct answers are marked as correct, none of the wrong answers are marked as correct) Initially, a student must surpass the respective minimum threshold. The minimum threshold for obtaining “4” or higher (a satisfactory grade) is 40%, “6” or higher - 60%, “8” or higher grade - 80% etc. Once the respective threshold is surpassed, grades are distributed according to the following scale: 10 - 10%, 9-10%, 8-10%, 7-17.5%, 6-17.5%, 5-17.5%, 4-17.5%. The first and second (commission) resit procedures are similar to the exam procedure: the Cumulative Grade is taken into account (i.e. the formula remains the same). If something goes wrong, it is important to document the issue by taking a screenshot of the screen. Please report the problem to IT support at sd.gsb@hse.ru (attach the screenshot to your email). The exam is conducted in an "open-book" format: you are allowed to use your notes and scholarly articles. After the exam: Reviewing of exam works is not provided. Appeals are only possible regarding the exam procedure. Proctoring (as mandated by the letter from the Deputy Director of the HSE A.O. Gabrielov dated August 16, 2024): Automated proctoring (the system monitors student actions) will be conducted to identify the examinee and prevent dishonest behavior (such as speaking the questions aloud, using mobile phones and other gadgets, interference by outsiders, etc.). If the system flags comments for decision-making (such as speaking aloud, using a mobile phone, interference by outsiders etc), professor responsible for lectures / professor responsible for seminars have the right to assign a grade of “0”. Brief notes on proctoring: (1) Please check your camera, microphone, and internet connection in advance. (2) Please follow the software’s instructions (show the room, passport, etc.) (3) Please work alone, remain in the camera's view, and focus on the screen and keyboard (do not look at the floor, away from the computer, etc.) (4) Please do not use phones or other gadgets (you can open your notes and academic articles directly on the computer) (5) Please maintain silence, and do not speak the questions aloud. (6) Do not wear hats, dark glasses, or other head coverings. Do not share the exam link with anyone outside the course. During the exam it is prohibited to: (1) Use any social networks. (2) Use any messaging applications. (3) Use any collaborative tools (including Miro, Figma, or Google Workspace). (4) Talk to one another. (5) Read the exam questions aloud. Students who violate these rules will receive unsatisfactory grade (0).
- PresentationIndividually or in Groups (up to 3 students; at least 10 slides per student). The topic of Presentation should be approved by the lecturer. Presentation is prepared Individually or in Groups (up to 3 students; at least 10 slides per student). There is no evidence of improper and/or unethical use of AI. The verification of AI-generated content is carried out using GPTZero, Antiplagiat, BypassAI, or similar tools. In assessing students’ Presentations, the tutor is guided by the following criteria: Criteria # High quality of the presentation: the material is well-balanced (approx.: 50% - research part, 50% - “story” part), the majority (not less than 10 per student) of the slides should be informative, there should be references at the bottom of the slides (APA style, at least 3 sources) 1 The material presented for evaluation is presented in a logical and scientific style. A table briefly characterizing the conclusions and methods by which they were obtained for each source of theoretical analysis. The role of AI (whether it was used when working with this source, the name of the tool, and a description of the tasks for which AI was applied) is clearly indicated. (clarity and consistency). 2 Citing is justified. All references are in place. All references obtained through the use of AI tools have been manually verified. 3 A student is well versed in the material: able to answer relevant questions. Student cites at least one meta-analysis or systematic review. 4 The story is relevant to the research part. Story part is comprised of not less than 300 words. the stories contain references to the main postulates of theoretical analysis. The story should be original (not on the basis of YouTube or other sources). At least 1 Story per student. 5 High quality of the material. There are no typos, syntax and spelling errors, negligence in design, etc., as well as missing figures, graphics, diagrams, words. Sound (tangible) conclusions. Conclusion part is comprised of not less than 200 words 6 meeting the deadline, otherwise the grade will be lowered. 7 Criteria Grade 8 + Not less than 15 sources indexed in Scopus / Web of Science per student 10 8 + Not less than 12 sources indexed in Scopus / Web of Science per student 9 7+ Students conduct analysis citing sources (at least 10 per student) indexed in Scopus/Web of Science. At least two classic works are cited (classic works have at least 500 citations on Google Scholar). 8 All criteria are met 7 6/7 criteria are met 6 5/7 criteria are met 5 4/7 criteria are met 4 3/7 criteria are met 3 2/7 criteria are met 2 1/7 criteria are met 1 Originality less than 80% / Generated text / Material not submitted for evaluation / 0/7 criteria met / Incorrect format (not PPT or PPTx OR screenshots instead of text) 0 List of Examples of Improper or Unethical Use of AI. Each violation results in a 1-point deduction from the presentation grade: (1) Using generative AI to create or describe the introduction, case section, or conclusions. (2) Including non-existent sources in the presentation. (3) Presenting false or distorted information obtained from AI without verification against original publications. (4) Failing to disclose the use of AI where it was actually employed. (5) Incorrectly formatting references suggested by AI, in violation of the assignment requirements.
- SeminarsActive participation in Discussion. Each seminar equals 2 academic hours. Relevant comments are considered only if they were made during the seminars. Each time a student actively participates in the discussion (either verbally or via the seminar chat), they receive a grade according to the HSE scale (0–10). If a student does not participate actively in the discussion (neither verbally nor via the seminar chat), they receive a grade of “0.” The final grade for Discussion is calculated as the total sum of all grades divided by the number of seminar sessions. Only relevant comments made verbally during seminars are taken into account. Example 1. Commentary 5 points In addition to the leadership styles mentioned in your presentation, there is also a positive example of a destructive style – strategic bullying – highlighted in Ferris, G. R., Zinko, R., Brouer, R. L., Buckley, M. R., & Harvey, M. G. (2007). Strategic bullying as a supplementary, balanced perspective on destructive leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 195-206. Surprisingly, this approach can yield positive results in the short term. Example 2. Commentary 10 point: Although the trait theory and the situational theory have added important variables to the “leadership equation”, they have limitations. For instance, the context of a situation is very difficult to measure, and personality traits are closely tied to the development of psychological science. Perhaps this is why Hersey and Blanchard Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1997). Situational leadership. In Dean’s Forum (Vol. 12, No. 2, p. 5) profited from monetizing their theory: leadership style is actually behavior, and leader’s behavior, unlike traits and situations, can be controlled by the leader herself/himself. Nevertheless, taking all three variables into account, as in Derue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N. E. D., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011). Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta‐analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 7-52, seems the most promising approach. comprehensive presentation of the study material in assignments, along with original thoughts supported by references to academic sources. The expressed ideas are creative, and their scientific novelty is substantiated by the student.
Bibliography
Recommended Core Bibliography
- Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 901–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.901
- Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence : The Psychology of Persuasion. New York: HarperCollins. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=279852
- De Mascia, S. (2011). Project Psychology : Using Psychological Models and Techniques to Create a Successful Project. Farnham: Routledge. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=408754
- DeLamater, J. D., Collett, J. L., & Myers, D. J. (2014). Social Psychology (Vol. 8th ed). New York: Routledge. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=828243
- Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41. https://doi.org/10.2307/256496
- Maltby, J., Day, L., & Macaskill, A. (2017). Personality, Individual Differences and Intelligence (Vol. Fourth Edition). New York: Pearson. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1473271
- Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)–Sixth Edition (Vol. Sixth edition). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1595320
- Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a Theory of Managing Organizational Conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13(3), 206. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022874
- Stephen J. Zaccaro. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. Http://Www.Mydarknight.Com/Wp-Content/Uploads/2013/04/Traits-Based-Approach-Zaccaro-Article.Pdf.
- Timothy A. Judge, Remus Ilies, Joyce E. Bono, & Megan W. Gerhardt. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.26B52021
- Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited. Group & Organization Management, 2(4), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/105960117700200404
- University of Florida, U. S. ( host institution ), Judge, T. A. ( author ), Piccolo, R. F. ( author ), & Kosalka, T. ( author ). (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.004
Recommended Additional Bibliography
- Henri Barki. (2003). Rethinking Interpersonal Conflict.
- van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2009). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.F4F49079