Advertisement

‘Virtual Learning-by-Doing’ Teamwork KSA: Strategic Management Simulation as an Effective Tool

  • Víctor Martín-Pérez
  • Natalia Martín-Cruz
  • Pilar Pérez-Santana
  • Juan Hernangómez-Barahona
  • Celia Martín-Sierra
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 73)

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of strategic management simulations as a learning-by-doing tool, that is they can enhance their knowledge, skills and abilities for effective teamwork. We have carried out an analysis of the effect of business simulation on the teamwork KSA with a group of undergraduates of the Business School. The results show that the teamwork KSA can improve and that the initial knowledge of those teamwork KSA, at the individual level, is the only factor which conditions their learning. Initial knowledge of the teamwork KSA and the spread of this knowledge within the team, are not a determinant influence on the individual learning-by-doing. Neither are features such as intelligence, personality, attitude to teamwork and teamwork self-efficacy.

Keywords

learning-by-doing strategic management simulation teamwork knowledge skills and abilities team stock of knowledge 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Stevens, M., Campion, M.: The Knowledge, Skill and Ability Requirements for Teamwork: Implications for Human Resource Management. Journal of Management 20(2), 503–530 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stevens, M., Campion, M.: Staffing work teams: Development and validation of a selection test for team-work settings. Journal of Management 25(2), 207–228 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Tannenbaum, S.I., Salas, E., Volpe, C.E.: Defining Competencies and Establishing Team Training Requirements. In: Guzzo, R.A., Salas, E. (eds.) Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cannon, M.D., Edmonson, A.C.: Confronting failure: antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior 22(2), 161–177 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, G., Donahue, L., Klimoski, R.: Training undergraduates to work in organizational teams. Academy of Management Learning and Education 3(1), 27–40 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zantow, K., Knowlton, D.S., Sharp, D.C.: More than fun and games: Reconsidering the virtues of strategic management simulations. Academy of Management Learning & Education 4(4), 451–458 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boone, C., Van Olffen, W., Witteloostuijn, A.: Team locus-of-control composition, leadership structure, information acquisition, and financial performance: A business simulation study. Academy of Management Journal 48(5), 889–909 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pisano, G.P.: Knowledge, integration and the locus of learning: An empirical analysis of process development. Strategic Management Journal 15(1), 85–100 (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nelson, R., Winter, S.: An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1977)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doloi, H., Jaafari, A.: Towards a dynamic simulation model for strategic decision making in life cycle project management. Project Management Journal 33(4), 23–38 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jennings, D.: Strategic management: An evaluation of the use of three learning methods. The Journal of Management Development 21(9/10), 655–665 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Butterfield, J., Pendegraft, N.: Gaming techniques to improve the team-formation process. Team Performance Management: An International Journal 2(4), 11–20 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rulke, D.L., Galaskiewicz, J.: Distribution of knowledge, group network structure, and group performance. Management Science 46(5), 612–626 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Watkins, K.E., Marsick, V.: Sculpting the learning organization. Lessons in the art of systemic change. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1993)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kraut, R.E., Fussell, S.R., Lerch, F.J., Espinosa, A.: Coordination in teams: Evidence from a simulated management game. Unpublished manuscript (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mohammed, S., Dumville, B.C.: Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior 22(2), 89–106 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fiol, C.M.: Consensus, diversity, and learning in organizations. Organization Science 5(3), 403–420 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Argote, L., Gruenfeld, D., Naquin, C.: Group learning in organizations. In: Turner, M.E. (ed.) Groups at work: Advances in theory and research. Erlbaum, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Edmondson, A.C.: Framing for learning: Lessons in successful technology implementation. California Management Review 45(2), 34–54 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hollingshead, A.B.: Information suppression and status persistence in group decision making: The effects of communication media. Human Communication Research 23(2), 193–219 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wegner, D.M.: Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In: Mullen, I.B., Goethals, G.R. (eds.) Theories of Group Behavior. Springer, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Argote, L., Liang, D., Moreland, R.: Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21(4), 384–393 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paulus, P.B., Larey, T.S., Dzindolet, M.T.: Creativity in groups and teams. In: Turner, M.E. (ed.) Groups at work: Theory and research. Applied social research. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thompson, A., Stappenbeck, G.: The Business Strategic Game 6.0. Irwin McGraw Hill (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Steiner, I.D.: Group process and productivity. Academic Press, NY (1972)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Neuman, G.A., Wright, J.: Team effectiveness: Beyond skills and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology 84(3), 376–389 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saucier, G.: Mini-Markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment 63(3), 506–516 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ruiz, B., Adams, S.: Attitude toward teamwork and effective teaming. Team Performance Management: An International Journal 10(7/8), 145–151 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Eby, L.T., Dobbins, G.H.: Collectivistic orientation in teams: An individual and group-level of analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18(3), 275–295 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Víctor Martín-Pérez
    • 1
  • Natalia Martín-Cruz
    • 1
  • Pilar Pérez-Santana
    • 1
  • Juan Hernangómez-Barahona
    • 1
  • Celia Martín-Sierra
    • 1
  1. 1.Organización de Empresa y C.I.M.ValladolidSpain

Personalised recommendations