Complexity Avoidance, Narcissism and Experiential Learning Page 255 - Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, volume 38, 2011 ABSTRACT The Millennial Generation, born between the years 1977 and 2000, is the student group that experiential and simu- lation practitioners must work with now and for the next several years as well. Some of the characteristics of Mil- lennials indicate that they have a preference for complexity avoidance coupled with increasing levels of narcissism. This combination manifests as a preference for simplicity and economy in data/information processing as opposed to the requisite willingness to address systemic complexity. The characteristics of these trends, driven by a combina- tion of technology and culture, are interwoven to identify potential hindrances to successful implementation of mean- ingful simulation and experiential learning processes. INTRODUCTION The “three-legged stool” of ABSEL scholarship in- volves the three components of the simulation or exercise, the instructor/facilitator, and, of course, the learning targets of the whole process--- the students. ABSEL has done an exemplary job when it comes to focusing on the design aspects of simulations and experiential learning exercises. Considerable work has also been done in the areas of in- structor technique and simulation and experiential exercise delivery. However, relatively speaking, less focus has been given to student characteristics. “Though we at ABSEL have focused much on innovative delivery techniques, per- haps what we need is more incorporation of student views into the design and development of methods that conform to the way that modern students learn” (Gentry and McGinnis, 2009, p. 46). In this paper, the focus is on as- pects of narcissism and complexity avoidance, identified as characteristics of the Millennial generation, as hindrances to effective execution of the learning processes vital to simulation and experiential learning. Anderson and Lawton (2009) have examined the rela- tionship between goal orientation and simulation perform- ance in terms of attitude change and perceived learning. This paper asserts that a student‟s characteristics of narcis- sism and complexity avoidance play a substantial role in not only how students perceive learning, but also their will- ingness to engage in attitude changes as a function of per- sonalized learning experiences. In addition, a student‟s perceived need to engage in meaningful learning is chal- lenged by the fact that students today have at their disposal more technology, more information, and more ways to gather and integrate information than ever before. My as- sertion is that the value of information is perceived, at least to some extent, as a function of the effort required for its attainment. Habits of “shallow surfing” of the internet (for example, rarely going past page one of a Google search), lead to a lack of appreciation of information obtained. Over time this has the potential to yield a pattern of intellectual incuriosity. Complexity avoidance comes into play when the ques- tion of simulation/exercise simplicity versus complexity is addressed. Cannon, Freisen, Lawrence & Feinstein (2009), as well as many other ABSEL scholars, have looked at the simplicity question, differentiating between the states of complexity resulting from too much information (information overload) and complexity resulting from too little (uncertainty). This paper will assert that Millenials are more comfortable in states of relative uncertainty and sim- plicity in the absence of information because of their inher- ent avoidance of complexity. As such, there is a danger that Millenials may be predisposed to lower the definition of what we, as simulation and experiential learning educators, would consider as adequate to implement adequate learning standards. This is problematical if one agrees with the as- sertion (Cannon, 1995) that a game has to have a level of complexity requisite to be sufficiently realistic and there- fore capable of producing sophisticated managerial learn- ing. “The complexity of a simulation game is expressed in the amount of information processing required to make effective decisions (Cannon et al, 2009, p. 245).” NARCISSISM Graduates of our business schools, now entering the workforce, have been labeled as the Millennial Generation, born between the years 1977 and 2000. Considerable evi- dence exists that one of the characteristics of these so- called Millennials is a propensity for narcissism (Bergman, Westerman & Daly, 2010; Westerman, Bergman, Bergman & Daly, 2010). Twenge and Campbell (2008) list the fol- lowing as observed characteristics of Millennials as op- posed to previous generations: 1) higher self-esteem, 2) narcissism, 3) anxiety, 4) depression, 5) lower need for social approval, 6) more external locus of control orienta- COMPLEXITY AVOIDANCE, NARCISSISM AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING J. Duane Hoover Texas Tech University duane.hoover@ttu.edu mailto:duane.hoover@ttu.edu Page 256 - Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, volume 38, 2011 tion, and, 7) more agentic traits such as assertiveness, espe- cially for women. Twenge has been the leading scholar in this area, and has written a popular book on the subject as well (Twenge & Campbell, 2009) entitled The Narcissism Epidemic. In- cluded in the book are a number of interviews with manag- ers who lament the characteristics of the new generation of employees now entering their companies. Among other things, these mangers cite stories of employees wanting to do less work for more pay, demanding more work flexibil- ity, wanting more work/life balance, and asking for more praise and positive feedback on a regular basis. Perhaps the anchor study in this regard is a 2008 cross-temporal meta- analysis of narcissism with a sample size of 16,475 (Twenge, Konrath, Foster, Campbell & Bushman, 2008). This study found that narcissism levels have risen steadily over several generations from 1979 to 2006, as measured by the 40-item forced-choice Narcissistic Personality In- ventory (Raskin & Hall, 1979). Twenge and her colleagues also found increases in other traits that could be labeled as more individualistic, including assertiveness, a sense of agency, self-esteem and extraversion. When it comes to a particular focus on college stu- dents, similar results of increasing levels of narcissism have been observed (Bergman, et al, 2010, Twenge & Foster, 2008). Westerman and colleagues (2010) found that Mil- lennial students from an AACSB accredited business school (n = 536) had not only higher levels of narcissism then college students in the past, but also higher narcissism scores then students who were psychology majors at the same institution. These results led Westerman et al to ask the question “Are Business Schools Creating Narcissistic Employees?” A recent Newsweek story entitled “Generation Me” (Kelly, 2009) stated “… we‟ve created a generation of hot-house flowers puffed with a dispropor- tionate sense of self-worth.” Westerman et al (2010) also cite Hassett (2009) who wrote a piece entitled “Harvard Narcissists with MBAs Killed Wall Street”. Citing a num- ber of studies that indicate problems with narcissism in organizational settings and with narcissists as managers, Westerman et al (2010, p. 3) conclude that “A rising tide of narcissism would present significant problems for organi- zations, their productivity and long-term viability.” So what is narcissism? Bergman et al (2010, p. 119) state, “The term narcissistic is used to describe activities, behaviors or experiences that serve to maintain or enhance a grandiose, yet vulnerable self…those high in narcissism display a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, self-focus, and self-importance (Carson, Butcher & Coleman, 1988; Mil- lon, 1996).” Narcissists rely on external social sources for information, but they are simultaneously hyper-sensitive to information that supports their inflated self-image or makes them feel good about themselves, while also reacting harshly to and being highly resistant to information that disconfirms their perceptions of grandiosity. In a learning environment, this tendency manifests as resistance to lean- ing processes that require an enhanced sense of self, fol- lowed by the realization of a possible need for individual change. The narcissist‟s attitude is that “I am more than just okay, and for _______ to say otherwise is just wrong.” Narcissism is the opposite of humility. Narcissism is characterized by vanity, materialism, self-promotion, and poor social behavior. Narcissists tend to disregard others feelings, and lack the capacity for empathy and seeing things as other people see them. Narcissism is not good for society or for the individual. It is not a confident attitude or a healthy feeling of self-worth; rather, it is arrogance, con- ceit, vanity, grandiosity, and self-centeredness. A narcissist will become aggressive when challenged or criticized and have a general tendency to externalize blame. Narcissists are especially harmful at work. In the workplace, narcissists are not team players. Instead, they are prone to act as self-serving individuals seemingly need- ing to succeed at all costs. Narcissists are not popular bosses nor are they successful as CEOs. In one study (Chatterjee and Hambrick, 2007) it was found that the more narcissistic the CEO was the more volatile was the com- pany‟s performance. Additional aspects of narcissism will be presented throughout the paper as examples that are more specific are described. Finally, it should be noted that the use of the term “narcissism” in this paper refers to a subclinical personality trait, and not a clinical personality disorder as defined by the American Psychiatric Associa- tion. OTHER COMPLEXITY AVOIDANCE AND NARCISSISM CHARACTERISTICS. How Information Is Processed. All humans are sub- ject to selective screening of data and of potential filtering of information. In particular, the human tendency is to filter out that which is disconfirming to current point of view and/or disconfirming to their self-image. This is the basic rationale for all forms of cognitive dissonance reduction (Festinger, 1957). In the effort to instill educationally rele- vant information in students, every instructor has undoubt- edly uttered the following phrase at some point in a class, simulation or experiential exercise. --- “You need to hear this, really!” The importance of getting educationally relevant infor- mation in place is a challenge that all instructors face. An inability to accomplish this goal will produce inevitable educational failure, because, by default, decisions are then being made by students based on incorrect, faulty, or in- complete information. Note that tendencies for complexity avoidance, to the extent they exist in the class or in the in- dividual student, will automatically function to reduce the amount of information produced. By reducing the amount of extant information being examined, the power of the status quo increases proportionately. Therefore, complexity avoidance yields an inherent conservatism that makes classroom innovation and individual student change/ learning less probable. Page 257 - Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, volume 38, 2011 The other question at hand is how this challenge mani- fests in the realm of narcissism. The peculiar dynamics of narcissism come into play here. Narcissism‟s hunger for grandiosity can only be fed from external sources. There- fore, the narcissist must rely on social sources for informa- tion supportive of inflated self-importance. However, at the same time, narcissists suffer from a lack of empathy and a generalized lack of a capacity to see things as others see them. The combination of these two factors yields a set of dynamics wherein narcissists have a harder time hearing feedback from others while they simultaneously need the feedback that confirms their grandiosity. The conclusion on this point is that while all people tend to engage in proc- esses of selective screening and filtering, narcissists are hyper-functional in this regard. Therefore, narcissists are particularly challenged when it comes to both generating and utilizing information directed towards learning and individual change. As such, narcissists, as students, offer a uniquely viral form of resistance to simulation and experi- ential learning processes as they function to both minimize and distort valid information to serve their own purposes. The Decision to Learn. How might narcissists and collective narcissists handle the decision to learn? Narcis- sists have fragile self-concepts (Bergman, et al, 2010). As such, they are hyper-sensitive to feedback that may discon- firm or threaten that fragile self-concept. This can lead to feelings of anger or embarrassment that can produce ag- gressive and/or anti-social behavior directed against the source of that perceived threat (Stucke & Sporer, 2002). Narcissists can perceive threats as coming from instructors as well as fellow students. As such, narcissists may be too potentially volatile to function successfully in environ- ments characterized by innovative or non-traditional learn- ing. Nor do these traits apply only to individualized learn- ing. They may also manifest in groups or teams utilized in simulation and experiential learning. Given their tendency to externalize failure, narcissists may be a ticking time bomb in group efforts where the collaboration is fueled by a large number of alternatives under consideration and where information is exchanged freely and openly. Further- more, the narcissists‟ tendency to a sense of self- entitlement (Beck, et al, 1990) may attune them to only adopting, and perhaps also only considering, those choices that support their self-perceived status in the system. As a result, narcissists may not only become disengaged in a non -traditional classroom, they may also become a source of active resistance or even aggression. THE CONCEPTS OF ENGAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENTAL READINESS Learner Engagement. The literature of learning/ individual change as a function of engagement has several characteristics in common with the concepts already dis- cussed in this paper. For example, many authors describe engagement as being multidimensional and multifaceted. Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris (2004) include behavioral engagement, emotional engagement and cognitive engage- ment in their description of engagement. Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2003) list engagement dimensions as encompass- ing behavioral engagement, cognitive engagement and mo- tivational engagement. “In fact, some scholars suggest that the term engagement should be reserved specifically where multiple components are present” (Fredricks, et al 2004, p. 60). Regardless of the particular criteria used to define en- gagement, most engagement scholars focus on the general internal characteristics of a learning person, especially an adult learner, making an individual decision to invest in focused efforts towards individual change and learning. As Sharan and Tan (2008, p. 42) state: “Engagement is the student‟s psychological investment in an effort directed toward learning, understanding, and mastering the knowledge, skills or crafts that the academic work is intended to promote. Our only reservation about that defini- tion is the absence of sufficient reference to the motivational-affective aspects of engagement.” This last concept, the motivational-affective compo- nents of engagement, has us once again looking at a learn- ing/change-focused concept through the lens of narcissism. To put this in some perspective, let us look at the concept of the adult learner, or what some scholars call andragogi- cal learning (Forrest & Peterson, 2006). One of the assump- tive elements of adult learning is that the person targeted for change is, in fact, an adult. As such, he or she would be assumed to be acting in a mature fashion, to utilize reason and logic, and to act as a personally responsible participant in the learning/change process. This is in contrast to the parent---child aspects of pedagogy, a system wherein the teacher/change agent takes almost sole responsibility for the system design and execution. However, narcissists with an External orientation, tend to skate around confrontations wherein they must assume personal responsibility. Instead, they prefer to externalize the blame--- placing it on others, on bad luck, or on circumstances beyond their control. Realizing individual change and personalized learning is based on reaching new levels of attainment of self- knowledge and self-reflection. This process is described by many adult education authorities as transformative learning (see Cranton, 1994 and Mezirow, 1991 and 2000 for exam- ples). Mezirow (1991) also provides the very descriptive phrase of “emancipatory learning” to describe this out- come. Mezirow describes emancipatory knowledge as that “gained through critical self reflection, as distinct from the knowledge gained from the technical interest in the objec- tive world” (Mezirow, 1991, p. 88). It must be pointed out that “critical self-reflection” is almost impossible for the narcissist. Moreover, if it is not impossible, it is at least highly improbable. This is because narcissists almost automatically and emphatically reject Page 258 - Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, volume 38, 2011 information that is not supportive of their inflated and gran- diose self-image. This leads to the logical conclusion that it is very difficult for the narcissist to function successfully as an adult learner. This means that simulation and experien- tial learning practitioners may be left with the default con- dition of having to utilize parent/child pedagogical tech- niques with narcissists. Furthermore, these pedagogical applications have to be more or less forced upon narcissists because they have an inherent lack of intellectual curiosity when it comes to reality-based feedback relative to their performance, standing, level of importance, etc. Nor does the lack of critical self-reflection stop at per- ceived performance. It also manifests in the realm of per- suasion of others as well. In a clever set of studies reported in a paper entitled “Are Two Narcissists Better than One?” Goncalo, Flynn and Kim (2010) designed a study wherein blind coders found no differences in the creative perform- ance of individuals with both low and high narcissism test scores. Not surprisingly, narcissists believed that they were more creative and that their work product was superior. More interestingly, they were also able to persuade others of the superiority of their work, not because their work was actually better, but because persons who were targeted with their pitch found that they delivered the pitch with more enthusiasm. Just as high levels of self-confidence and self- efficacy can lead to a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy of a healthier life, enhanced effectiveness and more success (Bandura, 1997), so can narcissism yield similar self- fulfilling outcomes. However, the problem with self- fulfilling outcomes that are a product of narcissistic enthu- siasm is that they are inevitably fragile. Propped up with bravado and reinforced by bluster and brashness, they are a tapestry of fabrications and exaggerations that will unfail- ingly fade in the light of close examination. One of the sad- der aspects of the narcissism syndrome occurs when the life of the narcissist becomes a life-long and sometimes even desperate struggle to preserve an unrealistic, grandiose im- age. Developmental Readiness. The Center for Creative Leadership has suggested that there is an important dimen- sion needed for leadership development. This is the will- ingness of individuals to not only engage in learning by participating in developmental initiatives, but also to seek out such initiatives (Chappelow, 2004; Ting & Hart, 2004). Shebaya (2010) combines these two dimensions in a con- struct that she labels as Developmental Readiness. Shebaya contends than a lack of developmental readiness, such as might be found in a narcissistic population, is sufficient to block any meaningful attempts to engage in leadership de- velopment. Shebaya (2010) portrays developmental readiness as a meta-competency consisting of the dimensions of self- awareness, self-motivation, and self-regulation. Narcissists may have few problems in self-motivation, and they are usually disciplined enough in their self-focused behaviors to function within the realm of self-regulation. Neverthe- less, narcissists find meaningful levels of self-awareness to be a significant stumbling block. Avolio and Hannah (2008) also identify the concept of self-clarity as a meta- cognitive component of developmental readiness. Focusing on the benefits of engagement has led to a num- ber of interesting and varied studies. For example, Linnen- brink and Pintrich (2003) examined the positive role that self-efficacy plays in student engagement. Relative to be- havioral skill development, Blumenfeld, Kempler, and Kra- jcik (2006, p. 476) conclude engagement has iterative prop- erties, and that “mastering a … skill can lead to greater feelings of competence and greater perceived value of the endeavor, and result in higher (subsequent) levels of en- gagement.” This is true, however, only if the processes of the engagement are coming from the perspective of person- ally responsible adult learning. A belief in self-efficacy is healthy only if that self-efficacy belief is encased in an en- veloping envelope of reality-based information. Whole-person based learner engagement (Hoover, 2007) is activated to the extent that an individual‟s psycho- logical needs for relatedness, autonomy, and competence are met (Fredricks, et al, 2004: 80-82). These are difficult roles for the narcissist to execute. Their lack of empathy, lack of ability to see things as others see them, and general disregard for the feelings of others--- all function to make relatedness a tenuous outcome. Narcissists may do well in the area of autonomy, but that autonomy can easily devolve into a state of intellectual, emotional and behavioral isola- tion. Finally, narcissism thrives in an environment of per- ceived competence, even if that sense of personally per- ceived competence is not necessarily based in reality or put in a meaningful context. Furthermore, when reality finally does impinge upon the narcissist, he or she may pay a large personal price. Living in a world of perceived and recog- nized incompetence is hard for the narcissist to bear. Nor does the price to be paid for narcissism stop there. Compa- nies and the stakeholders of companies managed by narcis- sistic CEOs also pay a substantial price (Chatterjee & Ham- brick, 2007). It is reasonable to assume that the same would hold for classrooms engaged in simulation and experiential learning exercises. ONE POSSIBLE SOLUTION: BEHAV- IORAL IMMERSION Giambatista and Hoover (2009) have suggested that “behavioral immersion” may be one of the ways that this challenge could be addressed. Significant levels of behav- ioral immersion produce increased levels of both direct and vicarious experiential learning. For starters, the more in- tense the level of the experience, the outcomes and the con- text of the learning are more individualized. The mental attitude that “this is about me” aligns quite well with a nar- cissistic point of view since the context of the learning is about self. Secondly, the mechanisms of “whole person experien- tial learning” come into play here (Hoover, 2007). In cogni- tive learning processes the clues to the “next step” can of- Page 259 - Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, volume 38, 2011 ten be laid out plainly and systematically. Such step-by- step processes have an inherent appeal to a person addicted to complexity avoidance. However, whole person experien- tial learning (Hoover, 2007) is more systemic than it is sys- tematic. Whole person experiential learning often involves not only complex behavioral skills (Hoover, 1974; Hoover et al, 2010) but also an emotional commitment to the learn- ing process (Argyris, 1970). Compared to cognitive learn- ing clues, whole person experiential learning behavioral/ skill clues are less readily discerned in a complex learning environment. Behavioral immersion, by time compressing the learning experience, makes behavioral/skill clues more readily identifiable, and less subject to complexity avoid- ance filtering. In other words, behavioral immersion simpli- fies the learning process by automatically making it harder for Millenials to filter out some of the complexity elements that Millenials are wont to avoid. CONCLUSION Many obstacles can block the path to the successful implementation of simulations and experiential learning exercises. One possible learning inhibitor can be found in the characteristics of the modern day student. Narcissism is on the rise in the general population. Millennials in general and business school students in particular are demonstrat- ing very high levels of narcissism not only in the classroom environment, but also in the workforce as newly hired em- ployees. Narcissists create problems in the classroom, in- cluding offering a particular challenge to efforts directed towards innovative applications of simulation and experi- ential learning. The emergence of narcissistic Millennials in the class- room and in the work place is not something that is simply going to go away. It is a phenomenon, as well as a set of potential challenges, that is here to stay--- one that ABSEL members will have to address. Millennials present a pecu- liar and almost self-contradictory set of characteristics. They are simultaneously more demanding of autonomy and individual discretion, while at the same time, less able to function without the need for supervision and control. This presents a unique problem for simulation and experiential learning practitioners. We are compelled by our desire for successful adult learning to use more and more participa- tory and andragogically driven techniques. At the same time, we see them flounder in a narcissistic user population that demands such an approach but cannot process it as mature, responsible agents of productive of learning and individual change. REFERENCES Anderson, P.H. & Lawton, L. (2009). “The relationship between goal orientation and simulation performance with attitude change and perceived learning”. Develop- ments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learn- ing, Volume 36, 75-82, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http://ABSEL.org] Argyris, C. (1970). Intervention theory and method: A behavioral science view. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company. Avolio, B.J. & Hannah, S.T. (2008). Leader development readiness. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2: 284-287. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. Beck, A. T., Freeman, A. & Associates. (1990). Cognitive therapy of personality disorders. New York: Guilford Press. Bergman, J.Z., Westerman, J.W. & Daly, J.P. (2010). Nar- cissism in management education. Academy of Man- agement Learning and Education, 9 (1): 118-131. Blumenfeld, P.C., Kempler, T.M. & Krajcik, J.S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning envi- ronments. In R.K. Sawyer, (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of learning sciences. (pp. 475-488). Cannon, Hugh M. (1995). Dealing with the complexity paradox in business simulation games. Developments in Business Simulations and Experiential Exercises, Volume 22, 96-102. (Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library, available from http://ABSEL.org). Cannon, H.M., Freisen, D.P., Lawrence, S.J. & Feinstein, A.H. (2009). “The simplicity paradox: Another look at complexity in design of simulations and experiential exercises”. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 36, 244-250, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http:// ABSEL.org] Carson, R.C., Butcher, J.N. & Coleman, J.C. (1988). Ab- normal psychology and modern life (8th edition) Glen- view, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company. Chappelow, C.T. (2004). 360-degree feedback. In C.D. McCauly & E. Van Velsor (Eds.) The Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership develop- ment, 2nd edition: 58-84. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Chatterjee, A. & Hambrick, D.C. (2007). It‟s all about me: narcissistic CEOs and their effects on company strat- egy and performance. Administrative Science Quar- terly, 52: 351-386. Chatterjee, A. & Hambrick, D.C. (2010). Executive person- ality, capability cues, and risk-taking: How narcissistic CEOs react to their successes and stumbles. Academy of Management Meeting, Montreal, Canada. Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting trans- formative learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pub- lishers. Festinger, L.(1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Fredericks, J.A., Blumenfeld, A.H. & Paris, A.H. (2004). Student engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74 (59) Page 260 - Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, volume 38, 2011 Forrest, S.P. & Peterson, T.O. (2006). It‟s called an- dragogy. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5 (1); 113-122. Gentry, J.W. and McGinnis, L.P. (2008). “Thoughts on how to motivate students experientially”. Develop- ments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learn- ing, Volume 35, 73-77, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http://ABSEL.org] Gentry, J.W. and McGinnis, L.P. (2009). “Movement to- ward increased student roles in the design of experien- tial exercises”. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 36, 44-47, Re- printed in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http://ABSEL.org] Giambatista, R.G. & Hoover, J.D. (2010). An empirical test of „behavioral immersion‟ in experiential learning. Developments in Simulation and Experiential Learn- ing, Vol. 36, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http://ABSEL.org] Goncalo, J.A., Flynn, F.J. & Kim, S.H. (2010). Are two narcissists better than one? The link between narcis- sism, perceived creativity, and creative performance. Academy of Management Meeting, Montreal, Canada. Hassett, K.(2009). Harvard narcissists with MBAs killed Wall Street. Bloomberg.com, February 17th. Hoover, J. D. (1974) “Experiential learning: Conceptualiza- tion and definition” in James Kenderdine and Bernard Keys (Eds.) Simulations, Games and Experiential Learning: On the Road to a New Frontier, ABSEL Proceedings, Vol. 1 Hoover, J. D. & Whitehead, C. (1976) “An Experiential- cognitive methodology in the first course in manage- ment: Some preliminary results” in Bernard Sord (Ed.) Computer Simulation and Learning Theory, ABSEL Proceedings, Vol. 3 Hoover, J. D. (2007) “How “whole” is whole person learn- ing? An examination of spirituality in experiential learning,” Developments in Simulation and Experien- tial Learning, Vol. 34, 324-330, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http:// ABSEL.org] Hoover, J.D. & Giambatista, R.G. (2009). Why have we neglected vicarious experiential learning? Develop- ments in Simulation and Experiential Learning, Vol. 36, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Library [Available from http://ABSEL.org] Hoover, J.D., Giambatista, R.G., Sorenson, R.L. & Bom- mer, W.G. (2010). Assessing the effectiveness of whole person learning pedagogy in skill acquisition. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9 (2). Kelly, R. (2009). Generation me. Newsweek Magazine, April 27th. Linnenbrink, E.A. & Pintrich, P.R. (2003). The role of self- efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19 (2): 119-137. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Mezirow, J. & Associates. (2000). Learning as transfor- mation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing. Millon, T. (1996). Disorders of personality. DSM-IV and beyond (2nd edition). New York: Wiley- Interscience. Raskin, R. & Hall, C.S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45. Robak, R., Chiffriller, S., & Zappone, M. (2007). College students‟motivations for money and subjective well- being. Psychological Reports, 100(1): 147–156. Sharan, S. & Tan, I.G.C. (2008). Organizing schools for productive learning. Springer Publications. Shebaya, M. (2010). Leadership development: How can developmental readiness explain and influence out- comes? Academy of Management Meeting, Montreal, Canada. Stucke, T.S. & Sporer, S.L. (2002). When a grandiose self- image is threatened: Narcissism and self-concept clar- ity as predictors of negative emotions and aggression following ego threat. Journal of Personality. 81: 133- 145. Teach, R. & Murff, E.J.T. (2009). “Learning inhibitors in business simulation and games”. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Vol- ume 36, 191-196, Reprinted in the Bernie Keys Li- brary [Available from http://ABSEL.org] Ting, S. & Hart, E.W. (2004). Formal coaching. In C.D. McCauly & E. Van Velsor (Eds.) The Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership develop- ment, 2nd edition: 116-150. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Twenge, J.M. & Campbell, S.M. (2008). Generational dif- ferences in psychological traits and their impact on the workforce. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23 (8); 862-877. Twenge, J.M. & Campbell, S.M. (2009). The narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitlement. New York: Free Press. Twenge, J.M. & Foster, J.D. (2008). Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic: Increases in narcissism 2002- 2007 within ethnic groups. Journal of Research in Psychology, 42: 1619-1622. Twenge, J. M., Konrath, S., Foster, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Bushman, B.J. (2008). Egos inflating over time: A crosstemporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic Person- ality Inventory.Journal of Personality, 76(4): 875– 901. Twenge, J.M. (2009). Status and gender: The paradox of progress in an age of narcissism. Sex Roles, 61: 338- 340. Westerman, J.W., Bergman, J.Z., Bergman, S.M. & Daly, J.P. (2010). Are business schools creating narcissistic employees? An empirical examination of narcissism in millennial students and its implications. Academy of Management Meeting, Montreal, Canada. Table of Contents Volume 38, 2011 Simulated Tabletop Exercise for Risk Management - Anti Bio-terrorism Scenario Simulated Tabletop Exercise From Business Games to Simulations - Simuworlds & Microworlds Demand Equation Redux: The Design and Functionality of the Gold/Pray Model in Computerized Business Simulations Managing Client-Based Learning: Insights from Successful Teaching Project Courses in Marketing Tracking Forecast Error Type, Frequency and Magnitude with the Forecast Error Package Responding to Facilitate Collaboration Simulating Sudden Change and the Value of Timely Information Managing Human Resources Simulation A Study on Collectivism and Group Decision-Making: An International Comparison of Japan, China, and Russia Using a Gaming Simulation The Use of Management Games in the Management Research Agenda Gaming On-Line: A Simulation Application Positioning and Performance in Simulated Networks Supply Chain Management: A Simulation Application Simulation as a Teaching Method in Strategic Management Distance Studies Entrepreneurship: A Game of Risk and Reward Phase II: The Start-Up Return to the Paradise Islands: From Confrontation to Cooperation Effect on Market Performance of Displaying Supply and Demand Curves in a Business Simulation Appreciating Complexity: The Chief of Staff of the Army Game Managing Organizations: Experiential MBA Course Teaches Alternatives to the Machine Model A Simulation Model for Analyzing the Night-Time Emergency Health Care System in Japan The Continuing Evoluation of Assessing Project Management as an Academic Learning Outcome (ALO) Should College Instructors Change Their Teaching Styles to Meet the Millenial Student? The Mouse Game and its Effects on Team Interdependence Learning from the Gulf Oil Spill to Prepare for a Brighter Future: A New Game Engaging Stake Holders in Triple Bottom Line Accounting & Strategic Planning Video Killed the Biblio Star: The Impact of Digital Media on Student Learning Outcomes Exploring Motivation: Using Emoticons to Map Student Motivation in a Business Game Exercise An Alternative to PC and Internet Based Simulations: The Internet Integrated Mode MiddleState University -- A Crisis in Education Complexity Avoidance, Narcissism and Experiential Learning Examining the Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Dimensions in Management Skill Development Through Experiential Learning: Developing a Framework A Situational Leadership Exercise Based on the Biology of a Starfish JOGAI CEFET -- The Industrial Administration Undergraduate Game Would You Take a Marketing Man to a Quick Service Restaurant? Modeling Corporate Social Responsibility In A Food Service Menu-Management Simulation Use of a Simulation in a Large Class Environment for a Marketing Principles Class: A Qualitative Analysis of Whether Learning Objectives were Met A Team Based Information Literacy Exercise ABSEL Marketing Communications Plan An Interdisciplinary Study of the Impact of Playing a Marketing Simulation Game on Student Knowledge of Management Accounting/Finance Principles Analyzing Construction Planning of Interiro Finish Work of Apartment Building by Simulation Doing Murder One Again The Simple Business Game and Simulation Transfering the Knowledge of Middle Management to Novices Infectious Disease Simulation Model for Estimation of Spreading Understanding the Relative Influence of Several Factors in ERP Simulation Performance: An Exploration of Ecological Validity Tragedy of the Commons: An Exercise Using Clickers to Illustrate and Teach a Key Concept in Negotiations The Meaning of Firm Demand in Business Simulations If the Games Work, Why Aren't More Faculty Willing to Play? Those Who Do and Those That Don't: A Study of Engaged and Disengaged Business Game Players