CIPS L5M1 Managing Teams and Individuals Exam Practice Test

Groups are an essential feature of organisational life. A group can be defined as two or more individuals who interact and work together to achieve a purpose. Groups may be formally created by management or may form informally through social interaction. There are several reasons why groups form in organisations.

The first reason istask and goal achievement. Formal groups are created to achieve organisational objectives that require collaboration. For example, in procurement, a cross-functional sourcing group may be formed to run a tender process involving operations, finance, and procurement staff. Individuals form these groups because working together helps them achieve outcomes that they could not accomplish alone.

The second reason issocial and psychological needs. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, people seek belonging and relationships. Informal groups often form to meet these needs, providing friendship, support, and a sense of identity. In Star Fish Ltd, for instance, employees working remotely may form a social group using Teams or WhatsApp to stay connected and reduce feelings of isolation.

The third reason issafety and security. Groups can give members confidence and protection when facing uncertainty or change. For example, during organisational restructuring, employees may form informal groups to share information and support each other, making them feel less vulnerable. In procurement, staff may collaborate in groups to manage supplier risks or market volatility.

The fourth reason ispower and influence. Groups provide individuals with a stronger collective voice. Trade unions are a formal example, but informal groups can also lobby management or resist unpopular changes. In procurement, buyers might form a group to influence senior managers on issues such as introducing sustainable sourcing practices. By forming groups, individuals can increase their bargaining power and impact decisions.

In conclusion, groups form for task achievement, to satisfy social needs, to provide security, and to increase power and influence. Managers must understand these dynamics because groups can both support organisational objectives and create challenges if informal groups resist change. Effective leaders harness the benefits of group formation while addressing the risks to ensure both cohesion and productivity.

TheTwo-Factor Hygiene Theory, developed byFrederick Herzberg, explains what drives employee satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work. Herzberg argued that there are two categories of factors that affect motivation.

The first category isHygiene Factors. These are extrinsic elements such as pay, working conditions, company policies, job security and supervision. If these are poor or absent, employees become dissatisfied. However, their presence alone does not create motivation – they simply prevent dissatisfaction. For example, in procurement, if buyers do not have fair pay or adequate systems, they will feel frustrated, but improving pay alone will not guarantee enthusiasm or creativity.

The second category isMotivators. These are intrinsic to the job itself, such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and personal growth. When present, these factors actively increase motivation and job satisfaction. For instance, giving a procurement professional ownership of a supplier relationship, recognising their success in a negotiation, or offering training opportunities can significantly boost motivation.

The impact of Herzberg’s theory on motivation is significant. Managers cannot rely only on hygiene factors like pay and working conditions to motivate staff. These need to be in place to avoid dissatisfaction, but true motivation comes from providing meaningful work, opportunities for growth, and recognition.

In practice, this means managers should:

Ensure hygiene factors are adequate (fair pay, safe environment, supportive policies).

Focus on motivators such as giving responsibility, offering progression pathways, and recognising achievement.

Design jobs with variety and challenge, rather than only repetitive tasks.

Encourage intrinsic motivation through empowerment and involvement in decision-making.

In procurement and supply, applying Herzberg’s theory could mean ensuring staff have reliable systems and clear processes (hygiene), while also providing opportunities to lead supplier negotiations, recognise cost savings achievements, or involve staff in strategic sourcing projects (motivators).

In conclusion, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory shows that avoiding dissatisfaction through hygiene factors is not enough. Managers must also provide motivators to create true engagement and drive performance. For procurement leaders, balancing both sets of factors is essential for building high-performing, motivated teams.

Conflict is common in organisations and in procurement, where competing priorities, supplier issues, and internal pressures often clash. TheThomas-Kilmann Conflict Modelidentifies five different approaches managers may use to handle conflict, depending on the situation and the desired outcome.

The first approach isCompeting (high concern for task, low concern for people). Here the manager asserts their own position to achieve quick results, even at the expense of relationships. For example, a procurement manager may insist on enforcing compliance with tendering rules despite stakeholder resistance. This is effective in crises but can harm morale if overused.

The second isAccommodating (low concern for task, high concern for people). In this style, the manager prioritises relationships by giving way to the other party’s needs. For instance, a procurement manager might accept a stakeholder’s preferred supplier to maintain goodwill, even if it is not the cheapest option. This preserves harmony but risks poor business outcomes if used too often.

The third approach isAvoiding (low concern for both task and people). Here, the manager withdraws from the conflict or postpones action. This may be appropriate when the issue is minor or when emotions are high, giving time for reflection. However, in procurement, avoiding conflict with a poor-performing supplier may worsen problems over time.

The fourth isCollaborating (high concern for both task and people). This involves working with others to find win-win solutions. For example, a procurement manager may work with finance and operations to balance cost, quality, and sustainability objectives in supplier selection. This is often the most effective approach but requires time and trust.

Finally,Compromising (medium concern for task and people)involves each side giving up something to reach a middle ground. For instance, a procurement manager may agree to split supplier contracts between two stakeholders’ preferences. This provides quick solutions but may leave all parties partially dissatisfied.

Conclusion:

A procurement manager can approach conflict through competing, accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, or compromising. Each has strengths and weaknesses. The best managers adapt their style depending on the importance of the issue, the urgency of the decision, and the relationships involved. In procurement, collaboration often delivers the most sustainable results, but flexibility across all five approaches is key.

Blake and Mouton’sLeadership Gridhighlights five leadership styles based on two dimensions:concern for peopleandconcern for task. Kevin can use different styles depending on the skills of his team and the importance of each project.

Impoverished Management (Low task/Low people)This style shows little concern for people or performance. Kevin would provide minimal guidance or support, essentially leaving the team to their own devices. While not usually effective, it may be applied temporarily where staff are highly capable and self-motivated, or in less critical projects where close oversight is not needed.

Country Club Management (High people/Low task)Here, Kevin shows strong concern for people but little focus on results. He prioritises team harmony, morale, and relationships. This could be used with a new or inexperienced team to build confidence and trust, but it risks low performance if project deadlines or targets are missed.

Task Management (High task/Low people)This style focuses heavily on performance, structure, and efficiency, with little attention to employee needs. Kevin might use this in high-pressure procurement projects, such as negotiating urgent supply contracts, where results are critical. However, overuse can demotivate staff and create high turnover.

Middle-of-the-Road Management (Medium task/Medium people)This is a balanced approach where Kevin gives some attention to both people and results but does not excel in either. It produces average performance and morale. Kevin might use this style for steady projects with moderate importance, though it risks mediocrity if not adapted when situations demand more.

Team Management (High task/High people)This is considered the most effective style, where Kevin drives high performance while also motivating and supporting his team. He involves employees in decision-making, sets challenging goals, and encourages collaboration. For example, in strategic procurement projects, Kevin could adopt this style to achieve strong results while also developing his team’s skills.

By switching between these styles, Kevin can match leadership behaviours to the skills of his team and the importance of the task. For example, urgent, high-value contracts may need task management, while long-term development projects may benefit from team management.

Conclusion:

Blake and Mouton’s grid provides five leadership styles – impoverished, country club, task-focused, middle-of-the-road, and team management. Each has strengths and weaknesses, and Kevin’s role as Head of Procurement is to adapt his approach depending on the project demands and the skills of his team members. By applying situational leadership, he can ensure both high performance and team engagement.

Part A – Knowledge Transfer (10 points):

Knowledge transfer refers to the process of sharing skills, experience, insights and information from one person or group to another within an organisation. It ensures that valuable expertise is not lost and that best practice can be replicated. This can happen formally, such as through training, mentoring, or documented procedures, or informally, through conversations, collaboration, and shared experiences. In procurement, knowledge transfer might involve senior buyers passing negotiation tactics to junior colleagues or documenting supplier performance insights in a shared database.

Part B – Ensuring Strong Knowledge Management (15 points):

Managers play a key role in creating systems and cultures that support knowledge sharing. Some ways include:

Creating knowledge repositories– using databases, intranets, or category management playbooks where information is stored and accessible to all team members.

Encouraging mentoring and coaching– pairing experienced staff with new employees helps transfer tacit knowledge that may not be written down.

Promoting collaboration and teamwork– cross-functional project teams and regular knowledge-sharing meetings spread expertise across functions.

Using technology– collaboration platforms (e.g., SharePoint, Teams) allow procurement staff to record supplier insights, lessons learned, and contract data in real time.

Rewarding knowledge sharing– recognising and incentivising individuals who share expertise encourages a culture of openness rather than knowledge hoarding.

Embedding learning in processes– after-action reviews, lessons-learned sessions after supplier negotiations or tenders ensure experiences are captured systematically.

Leadership behaviours– managers must role-model transparency and collaboration, showing staff that sharing knowledge is valued.

Conclusion:

Knowledge transfer is about ensuring that critical experience and expertise are shared across the organisation. Managers can ensure strong knowledge management by combining systems, processes, and culture – from IT tools and databases to mentoring and recognition. In procurement, effective knowledge management helps avoid repeated mistakes, builds stronger supplier relationships, and improves decision-making across the team.

Definition of Emotional Intelligence (5 points):

Emotional Intelligence (EI), popularised by Daniel Goleman, is the ability to recognise, understand, and manage one’s own emotions as well as the emotions of others. It involves self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. A high EQ enables individuals to manage stress, build strong relationships, and influence others effectively.

Benefits of High EQ in Procurement (20 points):

Improved Negotiation Skills:Procurement professionals with high EQ can read emotions, adapt communication styles, and manage conflict effectively during supplier negotiations. This leads to stronger outcomes and sustainable supplier relationships.

Stronger Stakeholder Management:EQ helps buyers understand the needs and concerns of internal stakeholders (finance, operations, CSR). This fosters trust, persuasion, and collaboration in category strategies.

Conflict Resolution:In diverse teams or complex supply chains, conflict is common. High EQ managers can defuse tensions, listen actively, and find win-win solutions, maintaining team cohesion and supplier cooperation.

Resilience Under Pressure:Procurement often deals with supply crises, deadlines, or cost pressures. High EQ professionals manage stress, stay calm, and make rational decisions under pressure, maintaining credibility.

Team Leadership and Motivation:Managers with high EQ can inspire, coach, and support individuals, recognising different personalities and motivations. This improves morale, retention, and performance in procurement teams.

Ethical and Responsible Behaviour:High EQ includes empathy and awareness of wider impacts. Procurement leaders with EQ are more likely to consider ethical sourcing, sustainability, and supplier welfare, aligning decisions with organisational values.

Change Management:Procurement functions often undergo transformation (e.g., digital tools, supplier consolidation). Leaders with high EQ can communicate sensitively, understand employee concerns, and build buy-in for change.

Conclusion:

Emotional intelligence is the ability to manage emotions and relationships effectively. In procurement, high EQ strengthens negotiations, builds trust with stakeholders, resolves conflicts, motivates teams, and supports ethical and sustainable practices. It is therefore a critical capability for procurement leaders aiming to achieve both operational excellence and strategic value.

A psychological contract refers to the unwritten and informal expectations that exist between employer and employee, beyond the formal employment contract. It is built on perceptions of fairness, trust, and mutual obligation. For example, an employee may expect career development, recognition and fair treatment, while the employer expects loyalty, commitment, and discretionary effort. Unlike a legal contract, it is subjective, evolving, and deeply influenced by organisational culture and management behaviour.

Several factors influence the strength of the psychological contract. Leadership style is crucial: a participative, empowering approach helps employees feel valued, while autocratic or inconsistent leadership weakens trust. Organisational culture also plays a role; a supportive, ethical culture creates fairness, whereas a toxic or discriminatory environment erodes confidence. Communication is another factor – transparent and honest messages during performance reviews or organisational change maintain alignment of expectations, whereas misinformation or silence damages the relationship. Reward and recognition are key, since inconsistencies in promotion or pay may create perceptions of unfairness. Work–life balance and flexibility also matter, particularly in modern hybrid workplaces. Finally, opportunities for development such as training, mentoring, or exposure to new projects sustain the sense of reciprocal value between employer and employee.

Employers can take several steps to protect the psychological contract from being broken. Firstly, clear communication of job roles, objectives and expectations reduces misunderstandings. Fair and consistent treatment across employees ensures equality and avoids resentment. Involving employees in decision-making through surveys or consultation gives them a voice and strengthens commitment. Employers should also invest in people through coaching, mentoring and career development pathways, demonstrating a long-term interest in their growth. Recognition of achievement, both financial and non-financial, reinforces the sense of value. When organisational changes occur, managers should follow good change management practice, such as Lewin’s three-step model or Kotter’s stages, to ensure transparency and inclusion. Finally, ethical and values-driven leadership is vital, as trust is easily broken if managers behave dishonestly or fail to live up to organisational values.

For example, in a procurement setting, if a buyer is promised involvement in international supplier negotiations but never receives the opportunity, the psychological contract is broken, potentially leading to disengagement or resignation. Employers can prevent this by giving realistic job previews, following through on commitments, and offering development opportunities aligned to employees’ expectations.

In conclusion, the psychological contract is a powerful but fragile element of the employment relationship. It is influenced by leadership, culture, communication, rewards, and development opportunities. By maintaining fairness, clarity, recognition, and open dialogue, employers can protect and strengthen this contract, leading to higher engagement, motivation and retention of talent.

When entering negotiations with a new supplier, a procurement professional must use a variety of interpersonal and cognitive skills to achieve the best outcome. Three important qualities arecuriosity, creative thinking, and reflective analysis.

Curiosity (8–9 marks):

Curiosity means asking questions, exploring options, and seeking to understand the supplier’s position. In a negotiation, curiosity allows the buyer to uncover the supplier’s motivations, constraints, and priorities. For example, asking why a supplier has higher costs may reveal underlying logistics challenges, which could be solved collaboratively. Curiosity builds rapport, demonstrates interest, and helps procurement move beyond price to explore value-added benefits such as quality improvements or sustainability initiatives.

Creative Thinking (8–9 marks):

Creative thinking is about generating new solutions and finding alternatives to traditional approaches. In negotiation, this may involve looking for win-win outcomes rather than focusing only on cost. For example, instead of demanding lower prices, procurement could propose longer contracts, volume commitments, or joint innovation projects that benefit both parties. Creative thinking expands the scope of negotiation and helps develop more sustainable supplier relationships.

Reflective Analysis (8–9 marks):

Reflective analysis involves reviewing past experiences and learning from them to improve decision-making. Before negotiating, procurement professionals can reflect on what has worked or failed in previous negotiations. During the negotiation, reflective analysis helps assess whether strategies are effective and adapt accordingly. After the negotiation, reflection allows continuous improvement in approach. For example, a buyer may reflect on why a past supplier negotiation failed due to being too aggressive, and adjust by using more collaborative tactics with the new supplier.

Conclusion:

Curiosity helps procurement gather insights, creative thinking enables innovative solutions, and reflective analysis ensures continuous improvement. Together, these skills allow procurement professionals to build trust, secure better value, and establish strong long-term relationships with new suppliers.

Abureaucratic management styleis based on the theories ofMax Weber, who described bureaucracy as a structured, rule-based and hierarchical way of organising work. In this style, managers rely heavily on formal rules, policies and procedures to direct employee behaviour. Decision-making authority follows a clear chain of command, and employees are expected to follow established processes without deviation. Job roles are highly specialised and responsibilities are clearly defined. The emphasis is on order, consistency and compliance rather than flexibility or creativity.

This approach is often seen in government departments, regulatory bodies, or large organisations where compliance, accountability and control are critical. For example, in procurement and supply, bureaucratic management may be applied in highly regulated environments such as public sector purchasing, where adherence to policies, legal frameworks and audit requirements is essential.

Advantagesof the bureaucratic style include:

Clarity and consistency: clear rules and procedures mean employees know exactly what is expected of them.

Fairness and equality: decisions are made based on rules, not personal favouritism, reducing bias.

Accountability and control: strong documentation and audit trails improve transparency.

Efficiency in routine tasks: structured processes can streamline repetitive, transactional work (e.g., purchase-to-pay).

Disadvantagesinclude:

Inflexibility: rigid rules make it difficult to adapt to change or unique situations.

Low motivation: workers may feel disempowered or demoralised by lack of autonomy.

Slow decision-making: multiple levels of approval can create delays.

Stifled innovation: focus on compliance discourages creativity and proactive problem-solving.

In conclusion, the bureaucratic management style is effective where consistency, compliance and control are needed, such as in regulated procurement activities. However, it can be limiting in dynamic environments where flexibility, innovation and speed of decision-making are essential. Successful managers may therefore adopt bureaucratic methods for governance but balance them with more adaptive styles for strategic and innovative work.

Definition (5 points):

Alienation at work refers to a state where employees feel disconnected, powerless, or estranged from their job, their colleagues, or the organisation. The concept, linked to Karl Marx’s theory, highlights situations where workers feel that they have little control, little purpose, and no personal fulfilment in their role. Alienation often leads to low motivation, disengagement, and reduced productivity.

Five Factors that Cause Alienation (20 points):

Repetitive and monotonous work– Jobs that involve the same routine tasks every day can make employees feel like “cogs in a machine.” For example, a procurement clerk only processing invoices with no involvement in decision-making may quickly feel alienated.

Lack of autonomy– When employees have no control over how they do their work, they feel powerless. In procurement, if buyers must follow rigid procedures without input into strategy, they may feel disengaged.

Poor leadership and communication– Alienation grows when managers fail to involve employees, communicate decisions, or provide feedback. Staff may feel undervalued and excluded from organisational goals.

Weak connection to organisational purpose– If employees cannot see how their work contributes to wider goals or society, they may feel their role lacks meaning. For instance, working in a cost-cutting environment without recognition of social value or sustainability can reduce motivation.

Lack of recognition or development opportunities– When employees feel their contributions are ignored, or they see no path for growth, they disengage. In procurement, failing to recognise successful negotiations or not offering training can create a sense of alienation.

Conclusion:

Alienation occurs when employees feel disconnected from their work, leading to low morale and performance. It can be caused by repetitive tasks, lack of autonomy, poor leadership, absence of purpose, and lack of recognition. For managers, reducing alienation means creating meaningful work, involving employees in decisions, and supporting development, which leads to higher engagement and productivity in procurement and supply functions.

Understanding individuals is crucial for effective leadership. People bring unique qualities to the workplace, which influence how they behave, perform, and interact. Four important factors that make up the individual are as follows.

Firstly,personalityplays a major role. Traits such as extroversion, conscientiousness, or openness (from models like the Big Five) influence how individuals communicate, make decisions, and fit into teams. For example, an extrovert may thrive in negotiation roles, while an introvert may excel in analytical procurement tasks.

Secondly,attitudes and valuesshape how individuals respond to work situations. Values around ethics, sustainability, or fairness can influence motivation and alignment with organisational culture. In procurement, a professional with strong ethical values may be more resistant to corruption risks.

Thirdly,perception and motivationaffect behaviour. Individuals interpret situations differently, and motivation theories such as Maslow, Herzberg or McGregor’s Theory X/Y show how personal drivers impact performance. Some may be motivated by pay, others by recognition or career development.

Finally,abilities and skillsdefine what individuals can contribute. These include technical competencies, problem-solving skills, and interpersonal abilities. A skilled negotiator, for example, adds significant value to a procurement team.

Managers must also choose effective ways to lead teams. Three common approaches are:

Autocratic leadership– where the manager makes decisions without consulting the team. This can be effective in crises or routine, highly regulated tasks (e.g., compliance procurement), but risks low morale if overused.

Democratic or participative leadership– where managers involve team members in decision-making. This improves engagement, creativity, and buy-in. For example, involving procurement staff in category strategy development can generate stronger results.

Laissez-faire leadership– where the manager provides minimal direction, allowing the team high autonomy. This works well when teams are highly skilled and self-motivated, but may cause confusion if individuals lack experience.

In conclusion, individuals are shaped by their personality, values, perceptions/motivations, and skills, all of which affect their workplace performance. Managers can choose between autocratic, democratic, or laissez-faire leadership depending on the situation. Successful leaders adapt their style to the individuals and teams they manage, ensuring both high performance and motivation.