Improving the Understanding of Supply Chain Interaction Through the Application of Business Games

  • Jannicke Madeleine Baalsrud Hauge
  • Nils Meyer-Larsen
  • Rainer Müller
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Logistics book series (LNLO)


Dynamic systems such as global supply chains (SC) compel the workforce of all involved players to be faced with ever-changing working environments. This complexity makes it difficult to predict the impact of decisions taken, thus future SC managers need to be trained in taking decisions under uncertainty and to reflect the impact on the whole SC. This type of practical decision making is necessary to take shape within the business and engineering schools since it prepares future practitioners for the requirements they will face. Game-based learning (GBL) is well suited to GBL process. This paper compares two different game-based learning setups with students. The first explains a pure game-based course, whereas the other discusses how a new game is introduced in an undergraduate course on container security. Our comparison helps others to avoid pitfalls in the introduction of GBL in logistics education.


Supply chain management Decision making Gamebased learning Serious gaming Case studies 



This work has partially been carried out in the context of the EU project GALA Network of excellence, FP7.


  1. Angehrn AA, Maxwell K (2009) EagleRacing: addressing corporate collaboration challenges through an online simulation game. Innovate J Online Educ 5(6):4Google Scholar
  2. Arnab S, Lim T, Carvalho MB, Bellotti F, de Freitas S, Louchart S, Suttie N, Berta R, De Gloria A (2014) Mapping learning and game mechanics for serious games analysis. Br J Educ Technol (BJET). doi: 10.1111/bjet.12113 Google Scholar
  3. Baalsrud Hauge J, Duin H, Oliveira M, Thoben K-D (2006) User requirements analysis for educational games in manufacturing. Proceedings of the ICE conference, pp 47–49Google Scholar
  4. Baalsrud Hauge J, Duin H, Thoben K-D (2008) Increasing the resiliency of global SN by using games. In: Pawar KS, Lalwani CS, Banomyong R Conference Proceedings ISL 2008, Centre for Concurrent Enterprise, Nottingham University Business School, Nottingham 2008, S. 125–132Google Scholar
  5. Baalsrud Hauge J, Boyle E, Mayer I, Nadolski R, Riedel JCHK, Moreno-Ger P, Bellotti F, Lim T, Ritchie J (2013) Study design and data gathering guide for serious games’ evaluation. Psychology, pedagogy, and assessment in serious games. IGI Global 2014:394–419. doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-4773-2.ch018 Google Scholar
  6. Barrat M (2004) Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Manage: Int J 9(1):30–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beck K et al (2006) Manifesto for agile software development. Accessed 12 Jan 2006
  8. Bellotti F, Berta R, De Gloria A (2010) Designing effective serious games: opportunities and challenges for research. Special issue: creative learning with serious games. Int J Emerg Technol Learn (IJET) 5:22–35Google Scholar
  9. Bellotti F, Kapralos B, Lee K, Moreno-Ger P (2013) User assessment in serious games and technology-enhanced learning. Hindawi Adv Hum-Comput InteractGoogle Scholar
  10. Bödker S (1996) Creating condition for participation: Conflict and ressources in systems development. Hum-Comput Interact 11(3):215–236Google Scholar
  11. Boehm B (1988) A spiral model of software development and enhancement. Computer 21(5):61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Braziotis C, Tannock J (2011) Building the extended enterprise: key collaboration factors. Int J Logistics Manage 22(3):349–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. CASSANDRA (2014) Accessed 27 Jan 2014
  14. Christopher M, Peck H (2004) Building the resilient supply chain. Int J Logistics Manage 15(2):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Faria AJ, Hutchinson D, Wellington WJ, Gold S (2009) Developments in business gaming: a review of the past 40 years. Simul Gaming 40(4):464–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hintsa (2012) CASSANDRA COMPENDIUM, Accessed 27 Jan 2014Google Scholar
  17. Gee JP (2003) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Hochschule Bremerhaven (2014) Accessed 27 Jan 2014
  19. Hunecker F (2009) A generic process simulation-model for educational simulations and serious games. On the Horiz 17(4):313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Integrity (2008) Global container supply chain compendium, Accessed 27 Jan 2014Google Scholar
  21. Integrity (2014) Accessed 27 Jan 2014
  22. Jüttner U (2005) Supply chain risk management. Int J Logistics Manage 16(1):120–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Manuj I, Sahin F (2011) A model of supply chain and supply chain decision-making complexity. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 41(5):511–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Michael D, Chen S (2006) Serious games: games that educate, train and inform. Thomson Course Technology, BostonGoogle Scholar
  25. Peck H (2005) Drivers of SC vulnerability: an integrated framework. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 35(4):210–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Peck H (2003) Creating resilient SCs: a practical guide, Centre for Logistics and SC Management. Cranfield School of Management, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  27. Pfohl H-C, Gallus P, Köhler H (2008) Supply Chain Risikomanagement—Vision oder pragmatisches Konzept? Ergebnisse des BVL-Arbeitskreises “Sicherheit und Risikomanagement in der Supply Chain”. In: Pfohl H-C, Wimmer T (eds) Wissenschaft und Praxis im Dialog. Robuste und sichere Logistiksysteme. 4. Wissenschaftssymposium Logistik. München. Hamburg, pp 446–470Google Scholar
  28. Pfohl H-C, Köhler H, Thomas D (2010) State of the art in supply chain risk management research. Empirical and conceptual findings and a roadmap for the implementation in practice. Logistics Res 2(1): 33–44Google Scholar
  29. Pfohl H-C (2002) Risiken und Chancen: Strategische Analyse der Supply Chain. In: Pfohl H-C (ed) Risiko- und Chancenmanagement in der Supply Chain: proaktiv - ganzheitlich - nachhaltig. Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin, pp 1–58Google Scholar
  30. Prensky M (2003) Digital game-based learning. ACM Comput Entertain 1(1)Google Scholar
  31. Raybourn EM (2007) Interact Comput 19:206–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sheffi Y (2005) Building a resilient supply chain. Harvard Bus Rev Supply Chain Strategy 1(5):1–4Google Scholar
  33. Shute VJ, Ke F (2012) Games, learning, and assessment. In: Ifenthaler D, Eseryel D, Ge X (eds) Assessment in game-based learning: foundations, innovations and perspectives. Springer, New York, pp 43–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sørensen L.B. (2005) How risk and uncertainty is used in SC management: a literature study, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  35. Starkey K, Tempest S (2005) The future of the business school: knowledge challenges and opportunities. Hum Relat 58(1):61–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. van Oosterhout MPA, Veenstra AW, Meijer MAG, Popal N, van der Berg J (2007) Visibility platforms for enhancing supply chain security: a case study in the port of rotterdam. Paper presented at the the international symposium on maritime safety. Security and Enviromental Protection, Athens, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  37. Waters D (2007) Supply chain risk management: vulnerability and resilience in logistics. Kogan Page, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jannicke Madeleine Baalsrud Hauge
    • 1
  • Nils Meyer-Larsen
    • 2
  • Rainer Müller
    • 2
  1. 1.Bremer Institut für Produktion und LogistikBremenGermany
  2. 2.Institut für Seeverkehrswirtschaft und LogistikBremerhavenGermany

Personalised recommendations