PEER REVIEW FORM 1 - This is about individuals contribution in GROUP

You should score each team member using this scale: PEER REVIEW 1: 5 = Excellent contributio
Occasional contribution, although could have done a lot more; 1 = Contributed little || PEER REV

PEER REVIEW FORM 1 - T

GROUP 2 (write here your name and ID, as a Commitment to

double check). group meetings
(rate of attendance,
Make sure to black out the row that has your punctuality, level of
name on it and do not change the order of people involvement; flexible
about meeting times)
within the group

1733919 Wachiravit Karuensatit 5

1744784 Thi Thuy Dung Truong 5
1745245 Krishnendu Menon 1
1747637 Anjana Thangavelu
1750107 Elisabeth Vania 5

Important: for Peer Review Form 1, a score of 5 means that person has contributed much mor
Although the review process is completely confidential, you are strongly encouraged to diplomati
ntribution in GROUP meetings
1: 5 = Excellent contribution; much more than anyone else in the team; 4 = Above-average contribution; probably mo
ontributed little || PEER REVIEW 2: 5 = strongly agree; 4 = agree; 3 = undecided; 2 = disagree; 1 = strongly disagree

R REVIEW FORM 1 - This is about individuals contribution in GROUP meetings

Contribution to group
Contribution of ideas
process (sensitive to
(thought about topic in
Contribution to other views; left personal
advance; suggested
research, preparation Contribution to end differences outside group;
workable ideas; tested
and analysis (helped product (final willing to review progress
ideas on group;
find information and presentation; high and tackle conflict; kept
contributed academic
materials; helped standard of work) group on track; facilitated
frameworks or creative
analyse and evaluate) discussion; willing and
suggestions /
flexible; supportive;
recommendations)
reliable)

3 4 3 3
2 3 3 3
2 4 3 4

3 4 3 2

has contributed much more than anyone else in the group. It is illogical for everyone to be scored at 5. Please note th
gly encouraged to diplomatically approach any conflictual issues during the module. This is an integral part of the learn
-average contribution; probably more than his/her fair share; 3 = Average contribution; what was expected; 2 =
= disagree; 1 = strongly disagree
PEER REVIEW FORM 2 - This is about individuals
PERSONAL developement (from a cross-cultural management
perspective)

Is able to adopt the

Is critical of his/her Is sensitive to Is able to work
different ideas and
own culture, and tolerant of effectively with Calculated
approaches of
behaviour and the needs of colleagues from total
team members
perspectives other cultures other cultures
from other cultures

3 3 3 3 66
3 3 3 2 59.5
3 3 3 3 58
0
3 3 3 3 64

ne to be scored at 5. Please note that if you do score everyone at 5, all marks will be lowered to a 3. Forms should have
This is an integral part of the learning process, a good opportunity to practice giving face-to-face feedback and dealing
bution; what was expected; 2 =

TOTAL (pls copy

the scores for
each person, Reasons for the score
manually, do not
copy/paste)

was able to co-operate with everyone and was able to

66 work in groups.
was not able to grasp the idesas and found the accent
59.5 of others difficult
58 was not always punctual

64 found little dominating and was able to work in groups in a frinedly manner

l be lowered to a 3. Forms should have the full range of marks, from 1 to 5.

ving face-to-face feedback and dealing with conflict, in a safe environment. Dont leave it to the peer review stage to p
 Reasons for the score*

the peer review stage to punish people!