S1. Is conflict inevitable?
Factors that lead to conflict.
Elements of divergence in conflict situations.
S2. The different types of conflict in work teams: task, process and relationship.
S3. The escalation of conflict
S3.1 Situations that lead to conflict escalation.
S3.2 Using communication to prevent or stop conflict escalation.
S4. Conflict management skills
S4.1 Knowing conflict resolution skills.
Individual strategies for managing conflicts and adapting to the situation
S5. Advantages of teamwork
S5.1 Ways of strengthening interdependence, relational roles and participation styles
S6. Team decision-making
S6.1 Particularities of virtual teams; how to use online interaction tools

Given the theoretical-practical and applied nature of this course unit, assessment is conducted on a continuous basis throughout the semester; there is no final exam. Assessment for the second and special exam periods will follow an alternative format; therefore, students wishing to be assessed during these periods must contact the instructor beforehand to learn about the specific assessment procedure. To qualify for continuous assessment, attendance and participation in at least 80% of classes are mandatory. Passing the course requires a minimum final grade of 10 (out of 20) and fulfillment of the aforementioned attendance and participation requirements. The use of artificial intelligence tools must be transparent, declared, and compliant with academic integrity rules. Methods include lectures, in-class exercises, class discussions, readings, case study discussions (in small groups), group activities, and self-assessment questionnaires.
Pedagogical approach: instruction, self-exploration, and process-based experiential learning.
The continuous assessment process takes place throughout the teaching term and includes a final assessment component.
1. Assessment during the term covers:
- 80% class attendance
- Participation in class exercises (30%)
2. Final individual in-class assignment:
- Practical case study analysis covering specific mandatory key points (70%)
Exam-based assessment (1st and 2nd periods) – 100%

Courses (UCs) that incorporate independent work activities (carried out at home) must mandate an oral discussion—particularly for final written assignments—and clearly specify the oral component's weight in the final grade (emphasizing that the oral assessment can never be optional for the student). It is recommended to state that written assignments completed in class may or may not entail an oral assessment. In such cases, the following wording may be used:
“The individual critical reflection carried out in class may include a presentation and supplementary oral discussion whenever necessary to clarify the assigned grade.”

Mandatory

Neves, J., Carvalho Ferreira, J. M. (2001). Poder, Conflito e Negociação. In J. M. Carvalho Ferreira, J. Neves, & A. Caetano, Manual de Psicossociologia das Organizações (pp. 509 ? 529).
Neves, J., Garrido, M. & Simões, E. (2015). Manual de competências pessoais, interpessoais e instrumentais: Teoria e prática (pp. 179 ? 232). Lisboa: Edições Sílabo. 3ª edção.
Gallo, A. et al. (2020). Lidar com o Conflito ? Guia HBR. Atual Editora. ISBN 9789896943196
Robbins, S. P., & Hunsaker, P. L. (1996). Training in interpersonal skills: TIPS for managing people at work (2nd ed.) (pp. 217 ? 246). Upper Saddle River, N J: Prentice Hall.
Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team ? a guide for managers. (pp. 156 ? 176). Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Optional

1. É inevitável haver conflito?/ Conflict is unavoidable...

Deutsch, M., & Coleman, P. T. (2000). The Handbook of conflict resolution ? theory and practice. S. Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

2. Os diferentes tipos de conflito nas equipas de trabalho: tarefa, processo e relação / The different types of team conflict: task, process and relationship.

De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741-749.

Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.

3. Escalada do Conflito/ Escalating conflict

Kramer, R. M., & Morsella, E. (2000). Communication and Conflict. In M. Deutsch & P.T. Coleman (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution ? theory and practice (pp. 131 ? 144). S. Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Rubin, J. Z., Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (1994). Social conflict, stalement, and settlement (2nd ed.). N. York: McGraw-Hill.

4. Competências de Gestão de Conflitos/ Skills for conflict management

Rahim, M. A. (2002). Towards a theory of managing organizational conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13, 205 ? 235.

Thomas, K. W. (1992). Conflict and negotiation processes in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol.3, pp. 651-717). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

5. A Negociação como uma estratégia essencial de resolução de conflitos / Negotiation as an essential strategy of conflict solution

Thompson (2001). The mind and heart of the negotiator (2nd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Prentice Hall.

Course Content
CC1: Definition and importance of Critical Thinking (CT)
CC2: Basic structure of an argument: premises and conclusion
Examples of simple and complex arguments
CC3: Methods for argument analysis
CC4: Logical fallacies and common reasoning errors
CC5: Criteria for evaluating the quality of arguments
CC6: Argument construction
CC7: Practical applications of CT
CC8: Lateral thinking and the foundations of the Six Thinking Hats model
CC9: Practical applications of each hat: data (white), emotions (red), risks (black), benefits (yellow), creativity (green), thought management (blue)
CC10: Parallel thinking dynamics in academic, professional, and ethical contexts; integration of argumentative methodologies and the Six Hats in simulations, debates, and written exercises

Assessment throughout the semester includes presentations, exercises, debates, readings, and case discussions (in small groups).
Active participation in practical sessions is expected and evaluated according to the following criteria:
Attendance and participation – In-class exercises and group debates (minimum 80% attendance): 20%
Homework assignments – Two tasks: one worth 5%, the other 10%: 15%
Individual essay applying the Six Thinking Hats to a real dilemma or situation: 30%
Final critical reflection, integrating course dimensions and articulating argumentative and parallel thinking: 35%
To successfully complete the assessment throughout the semester, students cannot score less than 7 points in any of the evaluation components listed.
Exam Periods
Written Work - 100%
Although not recommended, it is possible to choose assessment by exam; this assessment may also involve, at the teacher's discretion, an oral discussion (this oral component carries a weight of 40% in the final evaluation).

Mandatory

De Bono, E. (2016). Os Seis Chapéus do Pensamento. Lua de Papel.

Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessment.

Fisher, A. (2011). Critical Thinking: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.

Haber, J., (2020). Critical Thinking, MIT Press

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools. Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Optional

Brookfield, S. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bowell, T., & Kemp, G. (2002). Critical thinking: a concise guide. London: Routledge.

Cottrell, S. (2005). Critical Thinking Skills: Developing effective analysis and argument. New York: Palgrave McMillan.

Morgado, P. (2003). Cem argumentos: A lógica, a retórica e o direito ao serviço da argumentação. Porto: Vida Económica.

Thayer-Bacon, B.J. (2000). Transforming critical thinking: thinking constructively. New York: Teachers College Press.

Weston, A. (2005). A arte de argumentar. Lisboa: Gradiva

Syllabus (S):
S1. Teamwork characteristics
S1.1. Differences between groups and teams
S1.2. Teamwork advantages
S1.3. Ways to strengthen the interdependence of team members
S1.4. Relationship roles and participation styles development.
S1.5. Teams type
S2. Teamwork Effectiveness
S2.1. Teamwork Effectiveness inputs
S2.2. Barriers to collective efficacy
S2.3. Techniques to overcome the barriers of teamwork effectiveness
S3. Team Decision-Making
S3.1. Particular features of team decision-making
S3.2. Techniques for facilitating decision-making in teams
S3.3. The characteristics of virtual teams, using the tools of online interaction

Teaching methods will combine several approaches to promote the intended learning skills and aiming to promote students autonomous and continuous learning.
Namely it will include blended-learning program, exercises, in-class document analysis and discussion.

Ongoing evaluation (blended learning model):
a) In-class participation: 5% of final grade;
b) Approval on online courses provided by blended-learning program
c) Autonomous exercises; 15% of final grade
d) Critical analysis of a technical report : 80% of final grade

Mandatory

Zucker, I. (2020). Is Teamwork Still Possible during a Global Pandemic? American Physiological Society, 319. H1-H2.
Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team ? a guide for managers. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Tannenbaum SI, Traylor AM, Thomas EJ, et al (2020). Managing teamwork in the face of pandemic: evidence-based tips. BMJ Quality & Safety. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2020-011447
Robbins, S. P., & Hunsaker, P. L. (1996). Training in interpersonal skills: TIPS for managing people at work (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N J: Prentice Hall. (Capítulo 11).
Passos, A. (2001). Grupos e Equipas de Trabalho. In J. M. Carvalho Ferreira, J. Neves & A. Caetano (Eds.), Manual de Psicossociologia das Organizações (pp. 335- 356). Lisboa: McGraw-Hill.
Neves, J., Garrido, M. & Simões, E. (2006). Manual de competências pessoais, interpessoais e instrumentais: Teoria e prática. Lisboa: Edições Sílabo. (Capítulo 8).

Optional

Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team ? a guide for managers. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall (Capítulos 6 e 8).
Simões, E. (2001). O processo de tomada de decisão. In J. M. Carvalho Ferreira, J. Neves & A. Caetano (Eds.), Manual de Psicossociologia das Organizações (pp. 405 ? 427). Lisboa: McGraw-Hill.
3.Tomada de Decisão em Equipa
(Capítulo 2).
Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team ? a guide for managers. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Mathieu, J., Maynard, M., Rapp, T., e Gilson, L. (2008). Team Effectiveness 1997-2007: A Review of Recent Advancements and a Glimpse Into the Future. Journal of Management, 34, pp. 410 ? 476.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Bornan, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.). Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychological (Vol. 12, pp. 333 ? 375). London: Wiley.
2.Eficácia do Trabalho em Equipa
Whilliams, H. (1996). The essence of managing groups and teams. London. Prentice Hall. (Capítulo 1).
(Capítulo 1)
Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team ? a guide for managers. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hackman, J. R. (1990). Groups that work and those that that don?t. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Devine, D. J. (2002). A review and integration of classification systems relevant to teams in organizations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 291-310.
1.Características do Trabalho em Equipa