ABSEL's Contributions to Experiential Exercises in the 90's Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 ABSEL’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISES IN THE 90S John K. Butler, Jr., Clemson University ABSTRACT In an attempt to capture the contribution of ABSEL to experiential exercises in the 1990s, proceedings papers for that decade were classified into three tiers (full, condensed, interactive); three tracks (exercises, simulations, multimedia); three categories (actual, assessment, design/ adminis- tration); and eight fields (marketing, OB/HRM, Policy, etc.). This analysis revealed some interesting events, terminologies, and trends. These included the advent of the condensed paper, the emergence of multimedia as a third track, the inclusion of practitioners, the development of a trend toward interactive workshops, and the invention of some new terms such as cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and jigsaw. Some suggestions are offered for exercises in the future. INTRODUCTION One custom that was instituted in 1990 was the condensed paper -- sort of a second-tier option for work slightly less well developed than that in full papers. (Condensed papers were limited to two or three pages depending on the year.) This idea seems to have allowed people to get preliminary work accepted and published in the proceedings without excessively expanding the proceedings. Although the focus of this paper is experiential exercises in the 90s, we compared the experiential track to the simulation track in terms of numbers of papers published. During the 90s, the lion’s share of the full-papers tier went to articles on simulation (158 simulation, 94 exercise). There were also more condensed papers on simulations (92) than on exercises (76). Reasons for these differences vary depending upon whom you ask. The simulation people say their articles are superior, the experiential people say their reviewers are more demanding and conscientious. Such is the ABSEL way! Our insightful outgoing president thought up another reason -- it is easier to gather data for research studies with simulations than with exercises. Although that may be true, exercises are very useful for gathering data if they are designed to have participants respond to questionnaires about the process and outcomes. One more reason for papers on simulations being more numerous than those on exercises is the welcome trend toward interactive sessions, workshops, roundtables, and panels. During the 90s, there were almost twice as many such papers on exercises (84) as on simulations (46). Could it be that it’s easy to whip off a Cudworthian brief about a notion on how to debrief exercises, or about a workshop called “The ABSEL Fellows Game,” or one entitled “Striptease?” What reviewer could resist that, depending on who’s stripping and of what? The bottom line is, we know what people like Alan Cudworth (or Wheatley, or the Geneseo bunch) can do in a workshop. We know we will like it and will probably want to adopt it for our students. The length of the paper in the proceedings, full or condensed, is irrelevant. ABSEL is small and we know each other. The downside of this is the cadre. Although it would be naive to deny the cadre, somehow the cadre is open and it seems to expand continuously. You come to two or three meetings and you’re in. Such is the ABSEL way! That’s one thing that hasn’t changed during the 90s. One thing that has changed, although unplanned, is a new track that seems to have emerged. In 1996, it became evident that we had a third track, which we suggest might be called “multimedia.” If a “track” represents a large number of papers devoted to a specific method of delivering learning, then multimedia must be a track. Learning is indeed delivered through multimedia and an increasing number of papers in our 16 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 proceedings address multimedia. These papers generally focused on using electronic technology for learning methods such as: computer-mediated video conferencing, distance learning, virtual reality, computer spreadsheets, computer telephony, the web, and the internet. This new track could be a significant part of ABSEL’s future, especially to the extent that modern technology can facilitate interactive learning both within and without the classroom. Nevertheless, we need to be careful not to use these modern methods of presentation simply as ways to spice up and legitimize lectures when interactive learning is appropriate. The future of ABSEL (and perhaps universities in general) in a mass-media world of TV, distance learning, and the web lies in personal, reciprocal interaction within relatively small groups of learners. A fourth track, “neither,” includes papers that could not be categorized as exercise, simulation, or multimedia. These papers varied in scope and in terms of their fit with ABSEL. They addressed topics such as the past, present, and future of ABSEL; characteristics of ABSEL contributors; research on teacher evaluations; and how to write a case or a textbook. Another unfolding pattern for ABSEL proceedings papers in the 90s was their distribution in terms of categories (type of process) and fields (type of content). The process categories were: design/administration, assessment, and actual. Papers classified as design/administration discussed ways to design or develop an exercise, what to expect, how to run an exercise, or how to debrief or analyze one. The assessment category included papers on evaluating the effectiveness of an exercise in terms of student learning, using exercises for evaluating students for grading purposes, or using exercises for research purposes such as testing hypotheses. Assessment also included evaluations of ABSEL itself and development of plans for ABSEL’s future, as with the Merlin Exercise. Papers in the actual category usually described or demonstrated specific exercises. Most of the interactive workshops fell into this category. Nine content fields were identified, following Krippendorff (1980) and Weber (1985). They were cross cultural (dealing with international issues or diversity); decision making (including problem solving, management science, quantitative techniques, and MIS); finance and accounting; marketing; OB and HRM (including communication); policy and entrepreneurship (including small business); production and manufacturing (including TQM); general learning (a rather large category with an increasing trend including papers on topics such as learning by doing, increasing excitement of learning, service learning, and definitions of learning); and finally “other” (including infrequent yet important fields such as ethics and outdoor programs). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 1 shows frequency counts of ABSEL proceedings papers in the 1990s, classified by tier and track. Table 2, derived from Table 1, portrays these frequencies as percentages of all papers published in the proceedings each year. Since the numbers of papers on exercises (including multimedia) varied from 16 in 1994 to 39 in 1993 and 1998, percentages seem more relevant than raw frequencies because percentages correct for the sizes of the conferences. 17 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 TABLE 1 ABSEL PROCEEDINGS PAPERS DURING THE 90S: FREQUENCIES 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 TOT Tier Track Full Exercises 10 7 10 17 10 9 6 10 15 94 Simulations 20 18 26 11 19 20 12 20 12 158 Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 8 Neither 8 3 8 2 6 3 5 3 0 38 Condensed Exercises 18 9 9 9 2 11 10 2 5 75 Simulations 18 9 9 15 4 7 2 12 16 92 Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 7 Neither 10 5 6 8 3 2 3 2 1 40 Interactive Exercises 7 4 5 13 4 17 3 20 11 84 Simulations 2 2 3 4 9 9 4 11 2 46 Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 6 Neither 0 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 6 TOTALS 93 58 79 79 57 79 52 86 71 654 All Exercises 35 20 24 39 16 37 19 32 31 253 All Simulations 40 29 38 30 32 36 18 43 30 296 All Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 6 8 21 All Neither 18 9 17 10 9 6 8 5 2 84 All Interactive 9 7 11 17 13 27 10 32 16 142 18 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 The data showed no statistically significant trends with a sample size of only nine years. However, Table 2 shows some “notable” trends for the 90s including an increasing number of full papers on exercises and the aforementioned increasing number of papers on exercises in interactive sessions. An additional finding shown in Table 2 is the emergence of papers on multimedia beginning in 1996. ABSEL might want to nurture this trend and direct its focus on interactive learning. TABLE 2 ABSEL PROCEEDINGS PAPERS DURING THE 90S: PERCENTAGES OF TOTALS EACH YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 TOT Tier Track Full Exercises 11 12 13 22 18 11 12 12 21 14 Simulations 22 31 33 14 33 25 23 23 17 24 Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 6 1 Neither 9 5 10 3 11 4 10 3 0 6 Condensed Exercises 19 16 11 11 4 14 19 2 7 11 Simulations 19 16 11 19 7 9 4 14 23 14 Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 3 1 Neither 11 9 8 10 5 3 6 2 1 6 Interactive Exercises 8 7 6 16 7 22 6 23 15 13 Simulations 2 3 4 5 16 11 8 13 3 7 Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 3 1 Neither 0 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 101 101 100 100 101 100 102 98 100 99 All Exercises 38 34 30 49 28 47 37 37 44 39 All Simulations 43 50 48 38 56 46 35 50 42 45 All Multimedia 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 7 11 3 All Neither 19 16 22 13 16 8 15 6 3 13 100 100 100 100 100 101 100 100 100 100 All Interactive 10 12 14 22 23 34 19 37 23 22 Table 3 classifies the papers on exercises in terms of the three categories and nine fields (including “other”). Table 4, derived from Table 3, shows the percentages of papers published each year in each of the category-by-field cells. Table 5 portrays these percentages with the three categories combined. One notable finding is the spike in cross-cultural papers in 1993. One reason for this might have been that international management was one of the themes for that meeting in Savannah. Also, there seems to have been a preponderance of papers in the field of OB/HRM; but this gave way to papers on general learning in the later half of the decade, especially in 1996 and 1998. The increasing focus on general learning seems beneficial since it might portend an ABSEL without boundaries between disciplines. 19 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 TABLE 3 PAPERS ON EXERCISES: FREQUENCIES 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996* 1997* 1998* TOT Hnlu Nvlle LV Svnh SD SA Orlnd NO Maui Category Field Actual Exercises Cross cultural** 5 3 0 11 3 2 1 3 6 34 Decision making*** 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 2 4 11 Finance & Acctg 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 5 General learning 0 0 1 2 1 4 2 7 7 24 Marketing 1 3 0 2 0 1 1 4 2 14 OB & HRM 8 6 8 3 2 10 3 8 6 54 Policy & Entrpnrshp 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 Prdctn & Mfg 1 1 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 11 Other 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 4 TOT ACTUAL EX 15 14 15 21 9 20 11 27 28 160 Assessment Cross cultural** 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 5 Decision making*** 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 5 Finance & Acctg 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 General learning 3 0 3 4 1 4 2 1 3 21 Marketing 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 OB & HRM 3 1 2 0 4 3 1 2 1 17 Policy & Entrpnrshp 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 Prdctn & Mfg 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOT ASSESSMENT 11 2 8 8 5 9 3 5 5 56 Design & Admin Cross cultural** 1 0 0 5 0 1 2 0 0 9 Decision making*** 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 Finance & Acctg 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 General learning 2 0 0 2 1 2 7 3 3 20 Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 OB & HRM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 9 Policy & Entrpnrshp 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 6 Prdctn & Mfg 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Other 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 TOT DES & ADM 9 4 1 10 2 8 12 6 6 58 Grand Totals 35 20 24 39 16 37 26 38 39 274 * Includes papers on Multimedia. ** Includes "international" and "diversity." *** Includes "problem solving," "management science," "MIS," and "quantitative techniques." 20 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 TABLE 4 PAPERS ON EXERCISES: PERCENTAGES OF TOTALS EACH YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996* 1997* 1998* Tot Hnlu Nvlle LV Svnh SD SA Orlnd NO Maui Category Field Actual Exercises Cross cultural** 14 15 0 28 19 5 4 8 15 12 Decision making*** 0 5 0 0 0 3 12 5 10 4 Finance & Acctg 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 8 0 2 General learning 0 0 4 5 6 11 8 18 18 9 Marketing 3 15 0 5 0 3 4 11 5 5 OB & HRM 23 30 33 8 13 27 12 21 15 20 Policy & Entrpnrshp 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 5 1 Prdctn & Mfg 3 5 21 8 6 0 0 0 0 4 Other 0 0 4 0 6 3 0 0 3 1 TOT ACTUAL EX 43 70 63 54 56 54 42 71 72 58 Assessment Cross cultural** 0 0 4 5 0 3 0 3 0 2 Decision making*** 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 3 2 Finance & Acctg 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 General learning 9 0 13 10 6 11 8 3 8 8 Marketing 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OB & HRM 9 5 8 0 25 8 4 5 3 6 Policy & Entrpnrshp 3 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 Prdctn & Mfg 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOT ASSESSMENT 31 10 33 21 31 24 12 13 13 20 Design & Admin Cross cultural** 3 0 0 13 0 3 8 0 0 3 Decision making*** 3 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 1 Finance & Acctg 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 1 General learning 6 0 0 5 6 5 27 8 8 7 Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 OB & HRM 3 5 4 3 6 3 4 5 0 3 Policy & Entrpnrshp 6 5 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 2 Prdctn & Mfg 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 Other 6 10 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 TOT DES & ADMIN 26 20 4 26 13 22 46 16 15 21 * Includes papers on Multimedia ** Includes "international" and "diversity." *** Includes "problem solving," "management science," "MIS," and "quantitative techniques." 21 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 TABLE 5 PAPERS IN THREE CATEGORIES COMBINED: PERCENTAGES OF TOTALS EACH YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996* 1997* 1998* Tot Hnlu Nvlle LV Svnh SD SA Orlnd NO Maui Cross cultural** 17 15 4 46 19 11 12 11 15 17 Decision making*** 6 5 0 3 0 9 16 8 13 7 Finance & Acctg 6 0 4 0 0 6 8 8 0 4 General learning 15 0 17 20 18 27 43 29 34 24 Marketing 6 15 0 5 0 3 4 11 10 6 OB & HRM 35 40 45 11 44 38 20 31 18 29 Policy & Entrpnrshp 9 10 0 3 6 3 0 3 8 4 Prdctn & Mfg 3 5 25 13 6 0 0 0 0 5 Other 9 10 4 0 6 6 0 0 3 3 * Includes papers on Multimedia ** Includes "international" and "diversity." *** Includes "problem solving," "management science," "MIS," and "quantitative techniques." The dearth of papers on production and manufacturing was surprising (Table 5). With the exception of 1992 and 1993, there were very few, and none after 1994. In 92 and 93, TQM was a theme. In 1992, a team from the U.S. Navy presented the keynote speech on the Navy’s total implementation of TQM. Thus, the emphasis on production and manufacturing in those two years. Perhaps that field could benefit from a marketing effort by ABSEL, and ABSEL might find recruiting fruitful there. Other fields that seem under-represented, according to Table 5, include finance/accounting and policy/ entrepreneurship, each with only four percent of the total; marketing with only six percent of the total; and decision making with only seven percent of the total. This despite the fact that the decision making field included problem solving, management science, MIS, and quantitative techniques. Although exercises might be perceived as inappropriate as aids to learning in the quantitative fields, they are being used successfully in manufacturing plants in conjunction with the nominal group technique. Further, the emphasis on self-managed work teams in the work place suggests a need for experiential exercises in the fields of production/manufacturing and decision making. Here are two other recruiting targets for ABSEL. A final observation from Tables 3 and 4 is the preponderance of papers on actual exercises. Many of these actual exercises were presented in interactive sessions, which seems to be an appropriate theme for ABSEL. This fact is of questionable benefit to ABSEL, however, since the papers on actual exercises are written and published at the expense of those on assessment and design/administration. There were almost three times as many papers on actual exercises as there were on either assessment or design/administration. Should we strive for a balance? Or are we happy with this ratio? In addition to the quantitative content analyses, it is noteworthy that some new terms were introduced in the ABSEL proceedings of the 90s - 22 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 - at least new terms to me. One of these was jigsaw. Even after reading three articles referring to jigsaw, I still was not sure what it was, so next time I talked to Lee Graf on the phone I asked him. He didn’t know either but he thought it might refer to a method of learning likened to a jigsaw puzzle. In a jigsaw format, he conjectured, students would collaborate on a problem in teams. Each student’s contribution to the solution would represent one of the pieces to the puzzle. If, together, all team members had all the puzzle pieces, they could put the puzzle together and solve the problem. That sounded logical to me, but it was clear that Lee was making things up as he went along and we still don’t know what jigsaw is. But we think that’s what it is. Two other notable terms were collaborative and cooperative. In the middle of the decade, 1993 to 1997, a number of authors distinguished between collaborative learning and cooperative learning. Although not all authors were specific about the differences, it seems that collaborative learning uses teams of participants who work together, learn together, and receive rewards together for their work. Cooperative learning differs from that process in two respects. First, cooperative learning focuses on how to learn in groups and ensures interdependence among students. Second, cooperative learning provides for individual accountability such that students’ grades depend on individually completed tests and papers rather than undifferentiated group grades. Another theme from the proceedings of the 90s suggests that the effectiveness of an exercise does not come from the activities and interactions of the exercise itself, but from the total anatomy of the exercise. Several ABSEL contributors have emphasized the importance of the debriefing, but there is more than that to an exercise done effectively. Consider that, in order to make the most of an exercise, facilitator and participants need to attend to every one of the following nine steps. 1. Prior to the exercise, study the relevant material. 2. Review the objectives of the exercise. 3. Be aware of group members’ characteristics before the exercise. 4. Listen to the briefing and ask questions if you do not understand the exercise. 5. Participate in the role play. Observe the activities, interactions, and consequences of the exercise. 6. Get involved in the debriefing -- make comments, ask questions, take notes. (The debriefing might be the most important aspect of an exercise.) 7. Read related material. 8. Write up an analysis of the exercise. Use a number of conceptual models to explain why people behaved, communicated, and reacted as they did. Note whether the learning objectives were achieved. 9. Seek feedback on your analysis. If I might follow the lead of ABSEL’s contributors in the 90s, two suggestions come to mind for future emphasis in ABSEL. One of these addresses the problem of the system boundary. Happily, we seem to be moving away from discipline-specific thinking toward learning about the interdependencies in organizations -- and toward learning how to learn. For example, Jack Welch, disgusted with the building of empires and hoarding of information at General Electric, declared boundarylessness a way of life at GE. Boundarylessness has also become the approach to education for a number of excellent business schools such as Babson and the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. These schools have synthesized several courses into team-taught modules that integrate several disciplines. This approach discourages the compartmentalization of knowledge that victimizes many students. In the standard business curriculum, the capstone strategy course is intended to serve as the integrator. However, that is far too late, as evidenced by an undergraduate’s comment on a teacher evaluation I read recently while serving on a promotion and tenure committee. The course was business strategy. The student said, “I am not a graduate student and I shouldn’t have to 23 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 26, 1999 remember everything I learned in marketing, finance, economics, and accounting in order to pass this management course.” What are we doing to our students?! A second suggestion addresses relevance. We know business students appreciate and even demand relevance. If they can’t use the knowledge, they believe they are wasting their time. Kurt Lewin’s argument that there is nothing as useful as a good theory falls on highly skeptical ears of undergraduates and MBA students. As facilitators of learning in business fields, we must show students how to use theories (“models”) to solve relevant problems. Moreover, we must make our exercises relevant. One way to do this is to follow the lead of case writers who visit organizations, learn from them, and describe their problems as cases for students to analyze and solve. The experiential-exercise counterpart of this approach is called action learning. Here, the exercise developer would visit an organization and, instead of writing up a case, would use a real business issue to design an experiential exercise such as a role play or group problem. Another, more immediate approach in evening MBA courses, where the students are practicing managers, would be to solicit real problems from students in class. These problems can then be converted into exercises, either by the teacher or by the students themselves, and solved by the students. Although we, as teachers, might appreciate the relevance of our canned exercises, it is the students’ perceptions that count. Without this perception of relevance, our exercises do not seem very effective any more. REFERENCES All ABSEL Proceedings from 1990 through 1998. Krippendorff, K. 1980. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage. Weber, R. P. 1985. Basic content analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage. 24 Table of Contents Volume 26, 1999 ABSEL's Historical Research Interests Back From the Future: An ABSEL Merlin Exercise for the Year 2005 The Contributions of ABSEL During the 1980's ABSEL's Contributions to Experiential Exercises in the 90's ABSEL's Contributions to Experiential learning/Experiential Exercises: The Decade of the 1970's Business Simulations - Algorithms and Model Enhancements: A 25 year Review A Study of the ETS General Field Test as an AACSB Assessment Tool and the Impact of Experiential Exercises and Simulation on Learning A Framework for Assessing the Competencies Reflected in Simulation Performance Developing A Learning Culture: Assessing Changes in Student Performance and Perception Financial Simulation Using Distributed Computing Technology Analyzing Managers' Judgements and Decisions with an Educational Business Simulation Understanding Your Business through Home-Made Simulator Development An Examination of a Reanalysis of the Impact of a Market Leader on Simulation Competitors' Strategies Applying Shocks to TE Simulations: A Demonstration Increasing Efficiency of Management Skill Assessment A Testbank for Measuring Total Enterprise Simulation Learning Developing Leadership Skills - Video Live! LEADSIMM: Collaborative Leadership Development for the Knowledge Society A Team Approach to Producing Multi-Media Laptop and Video Formatted Presentation Tinkertoys Revisited: Exploring Trust Based Relationships Overall Dominance in Total Enterprise Simulation Performance Success or Bankruptcy: The Relationship between Personal and Goal Orientation and Simulation Performance Assessing the Effects of Feedback: Muti-method and Muti-directions in Multi-pedagogical Courses The Missing Ingredients in Experiential Learning Purpose and Learning Benefits of Business Simulations: A Design and Development Perspective Building Capabilities for Change through Laboratory Simulations Modeling Innovation as a Process of Design in Educational Business Simulation The Need to Measurer variance in Experiential Learning and a New Statistic to do so Assessing Effectiveness of an Experiential Oriented Course Over Time Developing Participant Satisfaction Models of Experiential Exercises in Business Education Perceptions of Learning in TE Simulations Students' View on the Use of Business Gaming in Hong Kong Management Gaming's Lost Opportunity: Meditations about the Russian Experience and Prospects for the Future Unanticipated Enhancements in the Business Strategy and Policy Game when Running in Windows 95 Using a Business Game to Demonstrate Broad Business Concepts A New Model for Business Courses (Getting the Student Connected) Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Integrating Knowledge Using Large Scale Simulations in Capstone Business Strategy Classes Is It Here To Stay? A Roundtable Discussion of the Inter-Group Interaction Interactive Tools Used in Applying Financial Concepts Strengthening Essential Skills through a Finance Exercise: Calculation of Beta A Model of Currency Exchange Rates Understanding Currency Exchange Rates: A three-part Exercise Student Experiences in the World Intercollegiate Business Game Competition Student Experiences in the International-Collegiate Business Policy Game Competition Using Boards of Directors in Simulation Environments: Comments From Board Members Sharing Best Practices: Teaching Smarter, Not Harder Star Power: A Simulation for Understanding Power and Empowerment The Marketing Game: A Marketing Principles Simulation Alexander Islands: GSSM Tiny Business Simulator on the WWW Putting Strategy into Strategic Business Games Industry Analysis, Porter's Five Forces Model and Strategic Group Maps in the Business Strategy Game Simulation The Use of Concept Mapping to Improve Student Performance and Understanding of Strategic Management Concepts: A Comparison of Techniques Transformational thinking in the Organizational Behavior Course: The Use of Metaphor as an Assessment Tool Creation of a Virtual Learning Community for the Global Virtual Enterprise Project Inter Institutional use of Educational Resources: Joint Use of Management Simulation Games Business Insights: Theory and Practice with the Aid of a Business Simulation Progress: An Experiential Exercise in Development Marketing The ABC's of teaching the Theory of Constraints to Undergraduate Business Students Demonstrating Principles of Organizational Purchasing Behavior through an Experiential Exercise The Virtual Manager: A Different Simulation for Managing Complexity When the Rules are changing and Chaos Breeds Innovation: Recapturing the Value of Constructive Thinking and Play in Simulation Training The Pitfalls, and Potential, of Actual Events as Problem Drivers Using Business Games to teach Environmental Awareness and Green Management: The International Experience with the ENSIM Game A Review of my ABSEL-Related Work Simulation of Government: A Workshop Using GEO Creating Internet-Based Games Using Perl and JavaScript Who's on First? Exploring the Concepts of Problem-Based Learning, Experiential Learning, and Lifelong Learning Students Learn Customer Service and Selling while Conducting Research So You Want to Run an NFL Football Team–An Honors Interdisciplinary Project Supervised Internship: The Employer's Perspective Using Computer Assisted Simulation to Teach International Business Strategy: A Case of the Multinational Management Game (MMG) Multi-Cultural Experiential Learning: A Computer Simulation in China An Appreciative Stance on Diversity as We Move into the 21st Century: A Timeline Exercise to Identify Key Experiences in Good Work Relationships between Black and White Peers A Day in the Life of an Interactive, Real Time, and Internet Delivered Course: A Demonstration Comparing Internet Search Engines: An Experiential Learning Exercise Total Enterprise Simulations and the Internet: Assessing Student Perceptions and Preferences Teaching Accounting Information Systems in a Practicum Format Providing Experiential Learning in Accounting through a Field Study Payroll Project A Spreadsheet Based Business Simulation Game Computer-Behavioral Simulations Training for Project Managers Simulation Scenarios - Rationale and Illustration