A learning process for small independent retailers, based
on their personality, to develop 21
st
century digital skills.
Gaby Eenschoten
11433019
First reader: dr. ir. Christine de Lille
Second reader: dr. Frank Nack
1
“A learning process for small independent retailers, based
on their personality, to develop 21
st
century digital skills”
MASTER THESIS
Gaby Eenschoten #11433019 University of Amsterdam, 13-7-2018
gaby.eenschoten@student.uva.nl
ABSTRACT
The customer journey of the consumer has changed the last decade and influences the way people shop and what their needs are during shopping in a physical shopping area. Retailers need to adjust their store and their services to this new consumer behavior in order to survive. Although not all changes are ICT related, most of them are. Small independent retailers have a hard time making these changes, because they lack computer knowledge. Since the way you learn is related to your personality, the personality traits of small independent retailers were determined through interviews and a Big Five personalitytest. This Neo PI-R inventory measured the scores of the retailers and related them to the effectuation principle of Sarasvathy, which measures the entrepreneurial effectiveness. Results showed a relation with the “Bird in a hand” principle, where the focus is on starting with the retailer’s means, asking questions like ‘who am I’, ‘what I know’, ‘whom I know’, and imagine possibilities that originate from these means. Additional research to learning preferences of adult learners and the relation between personality traits and learning gave a good understanding of how the learning process could be designed to fit the retailer’s personality and learning preferences. The learning process was evaluated with small independent retailers.
Keywords
Small independent retailer, personality traits, Big Five personality, 21st century digital skills, learning process
1. INTRODUCTION
The customer journey of the consumer has changed the past decade, and technology is leading in the new consumer behavior (Jongen & Jongejan, 2017). Consumers are 24/7 online and have tools to compare and read reviews, there is interaction and the communication pattern is different than it was a decade ago. Shopping has become a leisure activity, which means consumers have other desires and needs (Hofste & Teeuw, 2012) and the retailer has to meet these to attract the consumer. Retailers however often still present themselves as sales point instead of distinguishing themselves (Ossel, 2014). Their knowledge of physical retailing is often impressive, but as a group they are shockingly subpar in computer literacy (Rigby, 2011). Since technologies enable consumers to easily move between physical and virtual worlds, and technological innovations can take place easier, cheaper and faster, the next ten years the retail landscape will change more than in the last hundred years (Bruins, Veul, & Meijers, 2014). Retailers need to invest in technology that meets the consumer’s needs online and offline and therefore develop digital skills (Hofste & Teeuw, 2012), (Ossel, 2014). As Wenig, president of eBay Marketplaces, states, shops will be there in the
future, but these shops are going to become as much distribution and fulfillment centers as they are full-fledged shopping experiences and these stores will be highly technology enabled (McKinsey & Company, 2014).
“Many retailers have spent their entire lives thinking about how to build an engaging experience in one channel, which is the store. But now, understanding
how to connect with your core customers across every way they want to connect— not the way you want them to connect but the way they want to connect with you—is a different skill” D.Wenig, president of
eBay (McKinsey & Company, 2014)
This master thesis focuses on small independent retailers in neighborhood shopping centers and how they can be supported in developing 21st century digital skills. Jongen & Jongejan (2017) state that these local retailers first need to acknowledge the changes the world is going through (Jongen & Jongejan, 2017). Many retailers are stuck in the mind-set ‘Hold on to what you have and hope for better times’ (active inertia) (Adformatie, 2015).’ In order to really stay up-to-date one has to spend at least half a day a week on learning and make time to read, follow blogs of interesting and business relevant people and visit conferences (Don, 2017). Because if you don’t, you’ll quickly fall behind (Gratton & Scott, 2016).
Besides staying up–to-date retailers have to decide how they position themselves and how to offer the consumer relevance and distinctiveness (ING, 2014). This means the retailer has to know why he does what he does (and why in this way). ING (2014) claims that a lot of company owners are busy surviving and are not looking further than the next quarter (ING, 2014). Which got confirmed during the interviews with participating retailers, and had several reasons, which will be discussed in section 4.1. Janssen (2016) states that the difference in mindset of retailers plays a role in the way they run their business and the extent to which they are willing to and capable of dealing with changes and take action (Janssen, 2016). Research of Martin (2005) showed that for more effective IT use, the owner-manager of a small independent retail shop (SIR) needs to fully understand the potential of the technology in the context of his or her own business (Martin, 2005). The retailer’s beliefs about use of the internet in their business influences the way he/she and his/her employers use the internet and the specific uses they select, and these will impact long‐term success (Stoel, Jeong, & Ernst, 2010), (Martin, 2005).
2 Conversations and interviews I had with small, independent retailers showed, that they have a hard time developing digital skills. Partly because they are ‘stuck’ in the current way of working and thinking, which leaves them little room for spending time on thinking about how to do things differently and what that means when it comes to their skills and knowledge. On the other hand, these retailers realize they have to invest in digitalization and develop skills to make changes, but they don’t have a clue where to start (Duijn, 2017). Platforms, workshops and books about the transformation of retail and the changes the retailer should have to go through do not support him enough to really come into action.
Since learning is related to your personality, the learning process, which supports the retailer in developing 21st century digital skills, has to be designed upon the personality traits of the retailer. To design a learning process that is based on the personality of the retailer, the research was started by formulating the following research question:
“What does the learning process of retailers look like in order to develop 21st century digital skills, based on their personality?”
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to answer the research question a narrative literature review was conducted. This literature review was used to position the significance of my research and gave insight in what was already known about the topic of my thesis. Before desk research was conducted, sub research questions were formulated since the research question holds different aspects which needs to be addressed separately. These sub questions can be seen as review questions as they define the focus of the literature review on that certain topic.
RQ 1: “What is the current situation of the retailer when it comes to 21st century skills and what is his vision on this situation and the future?”
RQ 2: “What personalities can be defined and what is the personality of the small independent retailer?”
RQ 3: “What are 21st century skills and which can be defined as
digital skills and relevant for the retailer?
RQ 4: “What learning styles fit to what personality traits?”
Desk research was conducted throughout the project, which made it a dynamic process where findings were evaluated constantly by both field research findings and other desk research results.
2.1 Personality traits
Entrepreneurship has changed. Unpredictability and complexity of future consumer behavior among other things made the features of older theoretical conceptualization of entrepreneurship insufficient (Dyer, Gregersen, & Christensen, 2008). The insufficiency includes both entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial effectiveness and the attitudes towards starting a business (Zhao, Seibert, & Lumpkin, 2010). The new environment to run a business in asks for innovative, analytic cognitive skills, associative thinking and effective networking and have an enhanced relevance for entrepreneurial effectiveness (Venkataraman, Sarasvathy, Dew, & Forster, 2012). The process of opportunity-recognition and exploitation should be seen as a developmental, circular process and this creative, divergent and circular thinking process should replace the old linear process.
The small, independent retailer this thesis is focusing on, often started their business in times where a strong goal-directed action orientation and risk proneness were the two key characteristics of entrepreneurship (Brandstätter, 2011). These
characteristics remain important, but will not provide the entrepreneur with a competitive advantage to cope with the competition nowadays and the growing complexity and ambiguity of markets. Strong orientation in particular limits the entrepreneurial focus to just one goal and limits actions to its selected goal which decreases the flexibility in seeing alternative entrepreneurial goals and make choices and take action towards these other goals. According to Venkataraman et. al (2012) effective entrepreneurship depends on the quality and efficacy of cognitive analytic and social networking skills (Venkataraman, Sarasvathy, Dew, & Forster, 2012), which Dyer, Gregersen & Christensen (2008) confirms scientifically (Dyer, Gregersen, & Christensen, 2008).
Meta-analyses showed that the Big Five personality traits, see figure 1, predict business intention, creation, and success (Brandstätter, 2011). These analyses also indicated that narrow personality traits, the facets, such as innovativeness, predict these outcomes even better than the broad traits (Rauch & Frese, 2007), (Hensel, Ee, & Korver, 2017). The Five Factor Model of personality (FFM), often labeled the ‘Big Five’ Model, is by far the most widely used taxonomy in the field of personality and ‘the person-environment fit’. Meta-studies have shown that on average specific Big Five personality traits are related to organizational performance – if only for the situation that specific personality traits enhance the performance in specific work and organizational environments. This is called the theoretical framework ‘person-environment fit’ (PEF), which means that the specific demands with specific work environments fit with specific individual personality traits (Schmit & Schneider, 2004). Personality traits can be interpreted as a talent in one context and as a weakness or learning goal in another context. Competencies are also context dependent, which make a competency successful in one context but a disadvantage in another. Ackerman (2017) acknowledges that the Big Five theory still holds as the prevailing theory of personality, but it also includes some salient aspects of current personality research, like:
• Conceptualizing traits on a spectrum instead of as dichotomous variables;
• Contextual personality traits (exploring how personality shifts based on environment and time);
• Emphasis on the biological bases of personality and behavior (Ackerman, 2017).
The importance of mapping the personality traits of retailers in their own environment was recognized by Hoofdbedrijfschap Detailhandel (HBD) in 2005, that had Blauw Research conduct a
3 qualitative research to the characteristics of retailers in relation to digital entrepreneurship in order to develop personas. This research, which is mainly based on the findings out of 44 in-depth interviews, led to six personas: the manager, the merchant, the owner, the hobbyist, the professional and the entrepreneur nolens volens (Dinklo, Haverlag, & Witlox, 2005). One of the characteristics the personas differ on is personality, but also so-called ICT behavior and information, choice and decision-making behavior are taken into account. After field research, to be addressed in section 3.3, three personas can be seen as relevant to this thesis: the owner, the hobbyist and the professional (appendix 7). The description of the personality and entrepreneurial approach of the specific entrepreneur can be addressed to retailers that participated in the field research of this thesis. Nevertheless the extent to which ICT was part of entrepreneurship back in 2005 differs that much from 2018 that these personas need to be revised on that specific aspect to make them usable in today’s retail environment. Sub research question 2: “What personalities can be
defined and what is the personality of the small independent retailer?” can therefore not be answered through desk research
only and will be addressed when conducting field research.
2.1.1 Personality traits and learning (styles)
Not only do personality traits predict entrepreneurial success, the way people learn new things and develop themselves depends on their personality too, and should therefore be taken into account when designing a learning process (Hensel, Ee, & Korver, 2017) (Swanberg & Martinsen, 2009). Askar & Akkoyunlu (1993) and Kolb (1984) state that for example individuals with low levels of neuroticism prefer active learning. Individuals with this type of learning style have a tendency towards practical applications and adoption of what works best. They are results-oriented and they prefer to learn by doing, and like hands-on experiences. This also goes for individuals with high levels of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness and low level of neuroticism (Askar & Akkoyunlu, 1993), (Kolb, 1984).
According to Ibrahimoglu et. al (2013), who identified the relationship between personality types of college students and their learning styles, personality shapes an important aspect of learning style (Ibrahimoglu, Unaldi, Samancioglu, & Baglibel, 2013). Cohen (1996) and Sadeghi et. al (2012) state that learning strategies are directly dependent on the learner’s learning style and other personality variables (Cohen, 1996) (Sadeghi, Kasim, Tan, & Abdullah, 2012). Personality traits actually facilitate learning behavior and motivate the person (Blickle, 1998). So, when using certain learning styles, such as the Kolb Learning Style Inventory by (LSI), people can achieve higher motivation and better adapt to the learning process.
Coffield et. al (2004) however claim that many of the widely used learning styles lack in reliability and validity, for instance because of generalizability (Coffield, Moseley, Hall, & Ecclestone, 2004). One of the most influential models of learning styles was developed by Kolb: the Learning Style Inventory (LSI). Ruble & Stout (1992) found that 16% of their respondents changed to an opposite learning style at the second test (Ruble & Stout, 1992) and Loo (1997) reported that 13% of his sample made a huge change to the opposite style as a result of the second test (Loo, 1997). Coffield et. al (2004) state that in the current state of research-based knowledge about learning styles, one shouldn’t commend detail strategies to practitioners without advising to be highly selective (Coffield, Moseley, Hall, & Ecclestone, 2004). The theories and instruments are not equally useful and there is no consensus about the recommendations for practice. Besides that, not only individual
differences in learners should be given attention, but the whole teaching-learning environment. Twijnstra Gudde (n.d.) confirms this and writes that personality traits do influence the way people learn, but so does an individual’s learning history, culture and environment (Twijnstra Gudde, n.d.). There is not one meaning to learning, nor one way of learning, neither is there one way to organize learning.
2.2 Learning
Although personality traits remain the same when people grow up, adults do learn differently from children because of the wealth of experience adults have to draw on and like to do so. Adults often blame their age for struggling with learning, but according to Gkiokas (2015) adults are as good, if not better, in learning and absorbing new information (Gkiokas D. , 2015). Gaetano (2016) writes that adults want to connect learning to their own unique personal or work situations (Gaetano, 2016). Illeris (2003) learned from own research that adults are not inclined to learn what they cannot see any meaning of interest in (Illeris, 2003). The new information has to be connected to their own experiences and mental models (Gkiokas D. , 2018). They also need opportunities to personalize the learning in this regard.
Another aspect where adults differ from children when it comes to learning is the fact that adults aren’t used to take direction in education. Adults need to be explicitly told what they are doing and why, so they can connect the desired learning outcomes to their own goals and progress. That is also prerequisite for motivation; the more relevant learning is to their life, the more motivated to learn adults will be (Gkiokas D. , 2018). Besides that adults have preconceived notions about education, learning styles and subject matter. Where children will try most new tasks and see them through, adults prefer to learn a certain way, even if it is not the most conducive to their individual needs. A way to overcome this barrier is to offer many different learning styles and present information in a variety of ways. This can best be done in a collaborative environments that utilizes a problem-based approach (Pullagurla, 2014).
And finally adults are (often) afraid to fail. Children are more willing to experiment because they don’t have the same social filters. Adult learning needs be built on in small pieces and supported with extra learning otherwise they risk losing their intrinsic motivation and focus. Besides that new information should be connected to pre-existing knowledge and using active, experiential learning methods instead of passive ones is the most effective way to learn, regardless of one’s age.
Illeris (2003) states that the fact that ‘adult students’ sometimes have no choice but to undertake education or ‘lifelong learning’ the learning therefore isn’t voluntary which makes them not intrinsic motivated to learn and their learning is very superficial (Illeris, 2003). Knowles (1980) and Ammerlaan (2011) however state that adult students are self-motivating; they often do not depend on others for guidance and they are responsible for their own learning – when learning is seen as temporary and relevant (Knowles, 1980), (Ammerlaan, 2011). Other principles that are applied to adult learning, also called andragogy, according to Knowles (1980) are:
1) Adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction
2) Experience (including mistakes) provides the basis for the learning activities
3) Adults are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance and impact to their job or personal life
4 4) Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented (Kearsly, 2010)
The first principle is taken care of in the learning network Kanellou writes about. According to Kanellou (2010) a learning network could be established with the purpose of encouraging learning (Kanellou, 2010). The learning network should be an environment where social interaction, learning and networking are encouraged without dictating the content or outcome of interactions. The cornerstone of network efficacy is trust between members (Florén & Tell, 2003). Each group sets its own development agenda with the assistance of their facilitators and a project manager. They meet once a month and follow a set agenda of 3 main activities: business planning, action learning and creativity workshops. During interviews with the retailers, as well as during the interactive session, retailers suggested meeting with other retailers to share knowledge and experiences, as long this is facilitated by ‘some kind of coach’.
2.2.1 Learning requirements
As Gaetano, Illeris and Gkiokas already stated, Sitskoorn (2016) writes in her book that setting a clear, positive formulated goal is essential when you want to achieve something. Besides setting realistic goals, one has to be motivated to achieve the formulated goals and possess the skills to work towards these goals (Sitskoorn, 2016). Barriers in learning new things are: lack of trust, differences in culture, vocabulary or frame of reference, lack of time and zero tolerance when it comes to making mistakes and/or ask for help (Davenport & Prusak, 1998). Oldenkamp (2001) claims that insufficient priority (lack of time) and alleged incompetence (uncertainty about own level of knowledge) are the main obstacles when it comes to sharing knowledge in an organization (Oldenkamp, 2001). When looking at the retailer’s point of view, this new consumer behavior might feel the same as learning to work with a personal computer, decades ago. Knowles (1984) provided an example of applying andragogy principles to the design of personal computer training (Knowles, 1984). And while these principles have been around for quite some years, they still apply when you replace ‘personal computer’ for ‘new technologies’:
- there is a need to explain the reasons specific things are being taught
- instruction should be task-oriented instead of promoting memorization
- instruction should be take into account the wide range of different background of the learners
- since adults are self-directed, instruction should allow learners to discover things and knowledge for themselves without depending on people (but should be offered guidance and help when needed)
2.2.2 Learning process
The retailers the learning process will be designed for, all have a different background which needs to be taken into account somehow in order to design a ‘person-fit-learning-process’ (Knowles, 1984). As stated by Hensel, Ee & Korver (2017) and Gkiokas (2015) the learning needs to be personalized and instruction should be task-oriented and problem-centered (Hensel, Ee, & Korver, 2017), (Kearsly, 2010), (Gkiokas D. , 2015), (University of Oxford, sd). The best way to organize learning does not exist (Twijnstra Gudde, n.d.). Important is to understand that a
1 http://haskayne.ucalgary.ca/haskayne_info/profiles/houston-peschl
certain approach in a certain environment with certain people can work very good, but on another moment and with other people can be totally powerless (Ruijters, 2017). To think of a way to organize learning, Ruijters formulated a set of 5 preferences in which the biggest differences in ‘learning beliefs’ are grouped: 1) Copy off, 2) Participate, 3) Gain knowledge, 4) Practice and 5) Discover.
To offer a process that fits the personal and educational needs of the retailers, a ‘pre-process-session’ could be accommodated. In research to the Process of Adult Computer Software Training (Hurt, n.d.) presented a training process based on Knowles’ andragogy, in which pretraining was the starting point of the process. This pretraining consisted of all the information the learner currently has about the subject. To get a good understanding of the current situation, specifically when it comes to digital skills and use of ICT, some kind of digital maturity model can be part of this pretraining. This insight, prior experiences, and the learner’s level of knowledge, affect the way in which the trainer must structure the course to the learner and are therefore of importance to ‘capture’. The pretraining should prepare the learner to come the current understanding of the subject.
Sub research question 4: “What learning styles fit to what
personality traits?” has been answered by conducting desk
research. The literature reviews has given insight in the relation between personality and learning styles, preferences and requirements. Field research will be conducted to validate the findings from desk research and gain additional insight in what preferences retailers have when it comes to learning.
2.3 21
stcentury (retail) skills
To answer sub research question 3: “What are 21st century
skills and which can be defined as digital skills and relevant for the
retailer? desk research has been conducted to 21st century skills,
retail skills, digital skills and the relevancy of the findings for small independent retailers.
The changed and still changing retail landscape and consumer behavior demands other skills from the retailer than decades ago. Don (2017) states that it is of great importance that an organization has a moral purpose where ‘non-negotiable values’ are attached to (Don, 2017), a retailer needs to focus on one’s unique and difficult to imitate personal qualities or talents (Sarasvathy, 2001).
Ossel (2014) states that Omni channel is the future of retail, since the consumer needs to be facilitated both on- and offline. But he also states that a real Omni channel strategy demands fundamental rethinking the value chain and thus the business model (Ossel, 2014) (Caunter, 2015). Sarasvathy discovered that the entrepreneur of the 21st century doesn’t make use of the traditional theory of causal thinking, where a business plan is formulated and is worked towards. Successful entrepreneurs constantly make decisions and take action. They apply entrepreneurial thinking, which happens in mind of an individual, and is not a prescriptive ‘do this, do that’ algorithm, but more a set of heuristics that uniquely and universally apply to the challenges that entrepreneurs are bound to face (Sarasvathy, 2001).
MacKinnon (2018) writes about Peschl1 doing research to what is meant by entrepreneurial thinking, who thinks entrepreneurial and what is he doing differently from anyone else? (MacKinnon, 2018) Through research, to be finished later this year,
5 Peschl found characteristics (see table 1) that entrepreneurial thinkers have in common and that might give direction towards the digital skills that need to be developed through the learning process that will be designed.
Problem-solving skills Being creative Resiliency in uncertain
environments
Comfort with failure Understanding other people’s
needs
Making do with limited resources
Being comfortable with teamwork
Being able to pitch an idea
Table 1: Traits of entrepreneurial thinkers by Peschl
P21 (n.d.) developed the Framework for 21st century learning, where four elements form the skills, knowledge and expertise students should master to succeed in work and life in the 21st century (P21 Partnership for 21st century learning, n.d.). Although this framework focuses on students, the skills are broadly used as reference of what a person in nowadays society should master. Where the P21 framework also mentions the development of skills on information, media and technology, Peschl’s 8 Traits only mention behavioral skills and not the use of ICT.
Figure 2: P21 Framework of 21st century skills
Retailers obviously need to master many skills in various areas in order to be a successful retailer. Wenig stated in an interview with McKinsey&Company (2014) that understanding how to engage in a world of exploding social networks demand very different skills (McKinsey & Company, 2014). Rabobank (2016) even claims that the retail sector has become too complicated for retailers to do it all by themselves and more and better cooperation on different areas in necessary (Rabobank, 2016). Nevertheless retailers themselves need to develop quickly, because retailers are lagging behind badly, as they are subpar in computer literacy (Rigby, 2011).
Although the learning process for the small independent retailer focuses on the development of 21st century digital skills, which will be discussed in section 2.4, personality traits and entrepreneurial traits are of major importance while designing a learning process. Besides the digital skills, retailers must be able to reflect on their talents and what is needed to be a successful retailer and if necessary collaborate with others or ask for help. The outcomes of the Sarasvathy self-assessment, which will be discussed in section 4.2, give insight in the extent to which of the Sarasvathy-skills the retailer possesses, while the results of the personality test, see section 4.3, will help us understand the
retailer’s traits and relate these to preferences for learning and the suitable approach.
2.4 Digital skills
Since research showed that retailers lack digital literacy, the focus on this thesis is on developing the digital skills of the retailer. Looking at the 21st century skills, entrepreneurial traits formulated by Peschl and the effectuation principle of Sarasvathy, one can see that not all traits, skills and characteristics contain ICT. Van Laar et. al (2017) discovered through their research that 21st century skills not only are broader than digital skills, but also that they are not necessarily underpinned by ICT (Laar, Deursen, Dijk, & Haan, 2017). Through research to the relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills they were able to identify seven core skills: 1) Technical skills to use (mobile) devices and applications to accomplish practical tasks. 2) Information management skills to use ICT to efficiently search, select and organize information to make informed decisions. These decisions concern for example choosing the most suitable sources of information for a given task. 3) Communication skills to use ICT to transmit information to others, where one knows how to ensure that the meaning is expressed effectively. 4) Collaboration skills to use ICT to develop a social network, work in a team and share and exchange information, negotiate agreements, but also make decisions with mutual respect for each other towards achieving a goal. 5) Creativity skills to use ICT to generate new ideas or treat existing ideas in a new way and transform such ideas into a product or service. 6) Critical thinking skills to use ICT to make informed judgements and choices about the information that is within reach using reflective reasoning. 7) Problem solving skills to use ICT to cognitively process and understand a problem situation in combination with the active use of knowledge to find a solution to a problem (Laar, Deursen, Dijk, & Haan, 2017).
Next to the seven core skills, Laar et. al (2017) identified also five contextual: 1) Ethical awareness, with concerns skills to behave in a socially responsible way. 2) Cultural awareness, whether one shows cultural understanding when using ICT. 3) Flexibility, does the retailer have to skills to adapt his thinking, attitude or behavior to changing ICT environments. 4) Self-direction, is a retailer capable of setting a goal for himself and manage progression towards reaching this goal in order to assess his own progress when using ICT. 5) Lifelong learning, meaning skills to constantly explore new opportunities when using ICT to keep on improving one’s capabilities (Laar, Deursen, Dijk, & Haan, 2017). Lifelong learning could be questioned to be a contextual skill, because this can be seen as more an approach and a mind-set. As Kaur & Beri (2016) state: “Lifelong learning is a continuous, voluntary, and self-motivated act to expand one's own knowledge” (Kaur & Beri, 2016).
To create an overview of the digital skills a retailer needs to possess the 8 traits of Peschl, 12 skills of Laar and the 12 skills of the P21 framework were compared (table 2). Comparisons were made from each of the three perspectives (see appendix 11) for all results). Since Peschl doesn’t mention ICT being a part of his 8 traits, his traits in this comparison should be taken with caution. Taking the Van Laar 21s century digital skills as starting point gave the best results, as in the fewest ‘open spots’ in the comparison. In other words, Van Laar’s skills were validated by Peschl and P21 most often, and by P21 in particular. The P21 framework fits to all Van Laar’s 21st century digital skills except ‘problem solving’ and ‘lifelong learning’. As the last 5 skills of Van Laar are contextual and the first 7 are core 21st century digital skills, the focus on developing 21st century digital skills should be on the first 7 skills
6 (technical, information management, communication, collaboration, creativity, critical thinking and problem solving).
Van Laar 21st century digital skills vs Peschl vs P21
Van Laar Peschl P21
Technical - 6 Information Management - 5 Communication 8** 4, 6 Collaboration 4** 3 Creativity 5** 1 Critical Thinking - 2 Problem Solving 1** - Ethical Awareness 3* ** 10 Cultural Awareness 3* ** 10 Flexibility - 9 Self-direction - 11 Lifelong Learning - -
* understanding other people's needs ** the Peschl traits do not mention use of ICT
Table 2: Van Laar 21st century digital skills compared with Peschl and P21
3. METHODOLOGY
To be able to design a learning process that is based on the retailer’s personality, human centered design thinking is applied to involve the focus group throughout the design process. The research question and the sub-questions will be answered through an inductive approach, where both qualitative and quantitative research activities have been conducted, and results were validated throughout the process by small independent retailers and through theory.
The research was started by formulating the research question and four sub research questions for a narrative literature review. During desk research field research was started as well which influenced the process in a positive way since findings were evaluated and validated on the go by both resources and retailers. At the same time interactive sessions with the Futureproof Retail Research Group took place and added knowledge, experience and findings from other researchers.
3.1 Research method and design
This research follows the mixed method approach as it aims to collect data on several aspects related to the formulated research question through different research activities. 21st century skills, learning styles and characteristics, personality traits and the relation with learning from previous research by desk research. As we wanted to design a learning process that is created on the basis of the retailer’s preferences and personality, field research activities were conducted as well.
Desk research was conducted to understand the current situation of the small retailer from an expert point of view. Interviews with the municipality of Rotterdam, Schiedam and members of the Futureproof Retail Research Group, INRetail and
‘De Nieuwe Winkelstraat’ added ‘real life’ experience to the results of the desk research.
Through field research we collected data from personality tests (Neo PI-R) taken by the participating retailers, during semi-structured interviews the retailer himself was able to give insight in his situation from his perspective and how he looks at the future of retail in general and his future in particular. A self-assessment, formulated of the Sarasvathy skills (Hensel, 2018) was done by the retailer himself and someone close to him, in order to measure his score on the several ‘entrepreneurial competences’ of the effectuation model. By having someone close to the retailer doing the assessment as well, this activity can be used to connect the differences in scores to the results of the personality test, interview and theory on personality traits. In all activities mentioned above purposive sampling was applied to gain knowledge from the persons relevant to the research question. Based on literature and field research personas were formulated (appendix 7).
An interactive session with 12 retailers obtained the retailer’s preferences when it comes to learning. The retailers were asked to fill in a short questionnaire (appendix 8) and discuss one of the overall questions on learning with three other retailers and present an answer they all agreed upon. During a second session three scenarios based on personas were presented and the retailers were asked to design the learning process for each scenario (appendix 9). Additionally the retailer had to make a choice which of the five “Ruijter learning preferences” (could be more than one) were most relevant for the specific persona for each step in the process.
Aim of the several research activities was to be able to validate the outcomes of the individual activity by comparing results to the outcomes of another research activity, and look for correlations and similarities. Influences, both internal and external, that occur and determine the success of the learning process to be designed, will be mentioned, but not included in the study.
Since the sample size is small and to show the trustworthiness of my research findings, triangulation is used to validate the results of all research activities that were conducted. Although Warren (2002) remarks that the number of interviews required to get the interview study published should at least be 20, he also states that sample size in qualitative research should not be so large that it is difficult to undertake a deep case-oriented analysis (Warren, 2002). When coding the interviews, I discovered that within 8 transcripts all different answers to questions were given, which got confirmed after finishing all 12 interviews, which assumes that theoretical saturation was achieved.
3.2 Data collection
Twelve semi-structured interviews with small independent retailers were recorded and transcripted (appendix 2). Open coding was applied, which helped to give an overview of the different kind of answers given to the formulated questions. At that time coding was applied only to the answers to the formulated questions. Since the interviews were taken in the beginning of the process, the coding was revised later in the process to provide a thick description of the interview outcomes. Axial coding was applied to combine all answers that belong to the same category and reduce the number of answers. Through selective coding the results of the semi-structured interviews were categorized based on persona-characteristics.
Twentyfour self-assessments, to measure the Sarasvathy skills, was in 75% of the cases filled in by an interactive PDF and in 25% of the cases on paper. Results were processed by hand in Excel to be analyzed. Outcomes we were looking for were differences in the answers given between the retailer and the
7 acquaintance who filled in the form as well. Besides this comparison, we used these results to find a relation with the results of the personality test and interviews.
The personality inventory, Neo PI-R, examines the Big Five personality traits and consists of 240 questions that needed to be answered through a 5 point Likert scale. This personality inventory was taken online by 27 retailers. It not only reports on the five domains, it also reports the six subcategories (facets) which is important, because research showed that the meaning in outcomes especially is to be found in the facets (Hensel, Ee, & Korver, 2017). SPSS was used to analyse personality traits, attribute the outcomes to the Sarasvathy skills from the self-assessment and the Sarasvathy principles. Although these skills are of another construct than the personality traits, this relation can be made according to Arnold et al (Arnold, Silvester, Cooper, Robertson, & Burnes, 2005).
To design the learning process an interactive session and co-creation session with small independent retailers were conducted. This way the findings from the different research activities could be validated by the input of the target audience by giving their input on the subject. The interactive session, which will be discussed in 3.3.4, was on learning and learning preferences. The goal for the co-creation session was to have retailers design a process and gain insight from their point of view (see section 3.3.5).
3.3 Data process and analysis
First literature review was done in order to understand the context and already existing research results, concepts and solutions. Desk research was done during the research activity itself too to validate the findings with other research results and theory and to reflect on the activity and its outcomes. This inductive approach was taken to ensure the value of the research and the results in particular.
3.3.1 Semi-structured interviews
To answer RQ#1: “What is the current situation of the
retailer when it comes to 21st century skills and what is his vision on this situation and the future?” semi-structured interviews were
conducted with 12 small independent retailers (appendix 1) in a neighborhood shopping area in Rotterdam where 30 shops were situated. These interviews took place in the shop, with the shop owner and 10 out of 12 times during opening hours. Although the interviews were semi-structured, I might have influenced the interview and therefore possibly the answers because of my role as a conversation partner. The answers to the key questions however, would not be different when conducting the interviews again and with another researcher.
These interviews were transcripted and later coded. Open coding captured the essential concepts that were covered in each interview, and created a general overview of the direction of the answers. By axial coding all codes were reviewed and labeled in order to bring all codes within the same context together. Finally, selective coding was used to classify the used codes to the personas. This resulted in an overview of the different kind of personas the retailers belong to (appendix 3).
Notable was the openness of the interviewees during the interviews, which enriched the outcomes of the interviews. The interviews gave insight in how the retailer experiences entrepreneurship, how he deals with developments in the sector and consumer related matters, but also with his own insecurities. It also showed that several aspects play a role in the way the retailer looks at the future, and is willing and able to see the necessity and urge to develop himself, which will be discussed in section 4.1.
3.3.2 Self-assessment Sarasvathy skills
As mentioned above, several aspects play a role in entrepreneurship. Although the focus is on developing digital skills in this thesis, aspects like awareness and ability are of great importance since they determine whether someone knows he has to develop himself and has the ability to do so. Sarasvathy formulated the effectuation principle which accentuates the importance of reflecting on one’s unique and difficult to imitate personal qualities or talents. Sarasvathy showed that innovative and effective entrepreneurs envision a broad and diverse business plan containing a broad spectrum of possible entrepreneurial goals. Instead of adapting a set of means to a given goal, effectuation takes the set of means as given and connects these means with a series of novel ends. This means that a retailer has to know who he is, what is unique talents and personal abilities are he could capitalize on (Hensel, Ee, & Korver, 2017).
To measure how retailers score on the Sarasvathy skills, the participating retailers were asked to do a self-assessment made by Hensel (2018) (appendix 4). This assessment consisted of 3 parts: six statements on ‘power of a business idea’, four statements on ‘inspiring interaction with the environment’ and three statements on ‘vigor’. Besides the retailer himself, someone close to the retailer was asked to score the retailer on the statements as well. Afterwards the scores of both retailer and his acquaintance were compared to find similarities and differences and analyze these. Together with the results of the personality test, which will be discussed in section 4.3, these findings would give more insight in a retailer’s personality and ability of critical self-reflection and ability to convey his personal qualities and talents.
Twentythree retailers have taken the ‘Sarasvathy skills self-assessment’ and 16 had someone else fill in this form as well. This assessment was taken on paper by ten retailers, thirteen retailers used the interactive PDF. When gathering the forms retailers told me they couldn’t always identify with the statements because of the difficult formulated sentences. This made scoring the statements hard and one might question the validity of these scores. Another issue that occurred and strongly influenced the validity of the scores is the fact that not all participants appeared to be able to judge their own skills critically. Citation from a retailer filling in the self-assessment form: “I’m not sure whether I understand the statement, and if it means …., we’re not really keen on that, but I’m trying and working hard, so I give myself a 6.”
Nevertheless, the self-assessment scores were used when analyzing the results of the personality test and to determine which Sarasvathy principle fits best to retailers that conducted both personality test and self-assessment.
3.3.3 Big Five Personality Test
Twentyseven small independent retailers (N=27) have done the Neo PI-R inventory to answer sub question 2: “What
personalities can be defined and what is the personality of the small independent retailer?” This gave insight in the personality of the
10 male and 17 female retailers that attended. The retailers conducted the test online, in their own environment. As mentioned before personality plays a role when it comes to learning and when knowing the personality of the retailers, it is possible to find out whether some personality traits occur more and if these play a role in learning preferences or approaches. Because of the low number of respondents the outcomes can’t be addressed to retailers in general, more personality tests should be conducted to make the result more reliable and improve validity.
8 Although the number of participants is not high enough for a reliable analysis, the results, in combination with the interviews and self-assessments, do give insight in the retailers’ way of dealing with entrepreneurship, the changed retail landscape and more particular the changed consumer behavior. Since we want to use the outcome of this test and the other research activities to design a learning process for retailers, the focus while analyzing the results is on entrepreneurial and learning traits.
From previous study we know that the facets (sub scales) of the Big 5 test turned out to be more relevant than the five major Big 5 dimensions (Hensel, Ee, & Korver, 2017). An example is ‘openness for values’, facet of the dimension ‘Openness’ which is directly related to innovation capacities. And low scores on ‘vulnerability’, which is a facet of ‘Neuroticism’, can be very dysfunctional in entrepreneurial circumstances. When a retailer misses the amount of stress to feel the urgency to come into action, he won’t feel the need to reflect on himself and his shop which is needed to know whether you still fulfill the consumer’s needs. Another score that influences the retailer’s behavior and ability to be effective is the facet ‘dominance’. Dominance is a facet of the dimension ‘Extraversion’ which describes the social aspects of entrepreneurship. High scores on extraversion mean one is venturous, assertive, risk appetite and comfortable in taking initiatives. All needed for effective entrepreneurship, but too high scores on dominance, can make people (too) less sensitive to operate according to the consumer’s needs.
The results of the personality tests must be analyzed with caution, not only because of the low number of respondents. The outcomes are material for further talk, the results stand stronger when they are validated with other research results. Nine retailers who conducted the personality test have also filled in the self-assessment and were interviewees. By triangulation the outcomes will be given meaning for further interpretation towards the learning process to be designed.
The Neo PI-R inventory measured the Big Five personality dimensions and facets of 27 retailers (N=27). Meta-studies have shown that on average, specific Big Five personality traits are related to organizational performance, which means that the specific demands within specific work environments fit with specific individual personality traits (often labeled as the person environment fit (PEF)) (Smith & Schneider, 2004). The relation between the scores on the Big Five dimensions and facets and the effectuation principles of Sarasvathy are measured by using Pearson’s correlation coefficient:
The value can vary between -1 and 1. A correlation coefficient of 0 means that there is no linear coherence. A value of -1 or 1 means that there is a linear coherence, which means that the one variable can be derived fully from the other via a linear relationship.
3.3.4 Interactive session on learning
During a retail meeting 12 retailers (N=12) participated in a co-creation session where they were asked to think of the way and moment they want to learn/develop. The group was informed about what experts think is most important for the futureproof retailer: knowing their target audience and using media and technology to get, save and use the needs and behavior of their target audience and be a part of the customer journey during several touch points.
It appeared to be difficult for the participants to think of ways they would want to learn the different aspects of getting to know their audience, save and use this information and how to involve media and technology to apply the knowledge and information and meet the customer on several online and offline moments during their customer journey. According to Visser et al (2005) asking people to reflect on and express their needs and values in order to explore future scenarios of use is very difficult to do (Visser, Lugt, & Stappers, 2005). Needs and values are abstract qualities that fall at the level of tacit and/or latent knowledge and people are often not used to talking about it directly (Sanders & Stappers, 2016).
Figure 3: Different levels of knowledge about experience are accessed by different techniques. (Visser et al., 2005)
3.3.5 Co-creating the learning process
The second session was therefore prepared on the different levels of knowledge formulated by Visser et al (2005). Figure 5 shows that tacit and latent knowledge, which is often about knowledge, feelings and dreams, can be assessed by generative sessions. The basic principle behind generative techniques is to let people make designerly artefacts and then tell a story about what they have made. Since the retailers cannot make a learning process without knowing the context, clear issues and elements to design the process with, 3 scenarios of persona-retailers with different learning goals are presented as process-wise-case in which the retailer was asked to fill in the elements in each step of the process.
With the design of a learning process for the small independent retailer to develop 21st century digital skills, that is based on his personality, certain requirements were taken into account as well. These requirements were obtained in the different research activities conducted to answer all research questions (see section 5).
3.3.6 Reliability and Validity
To control for validity and reliability, triangulation and member checks were employed. The member checks took place during the interviews, as the participating retailers claimed to be very busy and not able to read a full transcript of the interview afterwards. I strived to ‘stick to the plan’ as much as possible while conducting the interviews by not getting involved too much in the answers given and keep the overall goal of the interviews in mind.
3.3.7 Researcher Bias
A bias that influenced the research I conducted is my background as business owner in helping retailers and entrepreneurs present themselves both offline and online. This applied the most to conducting the interviews. To avoid taking the ‘business owner role’ and continue being a researcher, the research question, sub research question and formulated questions were always situated in front of me.
4. RESULTS
The different research activities have delivered results which will be formulated per research activity.
9
4.1 Interviews
The twelve semi-structured interviews, taken at the beginning of the project gave a good understanding of the situation the participating retailers are in. After transcripting, open and axial coding, selective coding was applied (table 3).
Most of the retailers have a hard time reaching and understanding the consumer and 11 out of 12 claim that consumer behavior has changed, and the retailer doesn’t feel that change as a positive change. Consumers aren’t loyal any more, are more demanding and direct in their way of communication, the focus is on price and convenience is what matters. The retailers questioned have a hard time dealing with this kind of behavior.
Persona Jeanet Persona Michael Persona Joost
Q1 dream family dream
social social
Q2 customer entrepreneurship activities
activities entrepreneurship
entrepreneurship
Q3 not vision somewhat
Q4 passive/not active passive
Q5 behavior relation behavior
consumer needs
Q6 entrepreneurship personaly entrepreneurship
personaly consumer
Q7 often yes no
Table 3: selective coding semi-structured interviews
When asking what they do to get in touch with the consumer and to find out what these consumer wants, and how they can meet these wishes, the retailers can be divided in two groups: a passive and active group. The passive group waits for the consumer to walk in and ask for a certain product and the retailer reacts on it. The active group is more outgoing and active in trying to reach and get in touch with the consumer. All retailers however had difficulties in reaching, understanding and engaging their customers.
Except for one, none of the retailers have a short or long term vision. Most of them have a good understanding of their actual, but short time, financial situation, but they don’t have that spot on the horizon or a goal to be reached. When looking at the reasons why they became an entrepreneur, it becomes clear that the ones that started the shop from a dream or a long-lasting desire, were least good prepared for the entrepreneurial activities that come with the core business. But also the retailers that were raised in an entrepreneurial environment have a hard time with the challenges running a shop nowadays brings. Especially additional activities that distract from the core business activities, like the amount of administration and emails, put pressure on the time available during
the day and many are forced to give in on family time, which most of the retailers don’t accept.
The interviews also gave a better understanding of the importance of the entrepreneurial phase the retailer is in. Retailers who are less than 5 years from their retirement, lack the motivation to invest time and money to develop themselves or their business. The same goes for retailers who run their shop as a ‘hobby’, they do not feel the urge to spend more time or money on the business when they manage to pay the bills. And the private situation of the retailer has major influence on the business.
4.2 Self-assessment Sarasvathy skills
The Sarasvathy self-assessments were conducted by 23 small independent retailers and they had someone who knew them well fill in the form as well. Analyzing the scores of the retailers learned that except for one, all statements were scored with a 6 (out of 10) or higher, with a highest score of 7.26. “My products/services often have the potential to make competing products superfluous” scored a 5.26 and was the lowest score.
When looking at the scores of ‘openness to values’ (within the domain ‘openness’) in the personality test, since this facet is directly related to innovation capacities, the assessments score confirms the personality test score (4.66 out of 9). The retailers obviously have a hard time finding the uniqueness in themselves and the products and or services that they offer. The acquaintances score their retailer on all statements higher than the retailer himself, and the mentioned statement above was scored with a 7.
The biggest differences between the scores of the retailer and his acquaintance are with statement 1-6 (the statement mentioned above, 1.74) and 2-4 (I am often open to feedback/criticism from customers/other retailers, but always surprise others by using authentic entrepreneurial perspectives, 1.04). The smallest difference between the scores is on statement 3-2: I make a decisive impression on others (0.14), but this statements has also a standard deviation of 2.06.
4.3 Big Five Personality test
The Neo PI-R inventory measured the Big Five personality dimensions and facets of 27 retailers (N=27) and the results were analyzed through SPSS15. In order to test the meaningfulness of the relationships between the effectuation model and personality traits, the chi-square test was used.
Table 4: Outcomes Big Five Neo PI-R inventory
Extraversion is related to entrepreneurial effectiveness in all situations with frequent social interaction. High scores on the dimension extraversion are relevant for jobs that demand entrepreneurial or intrapreneurial innovative capacities. Most salient examples in the context of effective entrepreneurship are being self-directed, assertive, and risk prone (Brandstätter, 2011). The retailers scored 6.81 on extraversion, where the ages 20-40 scored slightly higher, 7.15, than 40+ (6.78). Caution is needed because of a standard deviation of 1.98.
Domain Mean St. Dev. Female Male Conscientiousness 5.4 2.32 4.64 6.7
Neuroticism 4.48 2.83 4.82 3.9
Extraversion 6.81 1.98 6.94 6.6
Openness 6.22 1.50 6.05 6.5
10 Agreeableness is very important for entrepreneurial leadership with respect to customer-service orientation and for win-win conflict solving. High scores on agreeableness means being helpful, being able to put your own interests aside and emphasize with others. The retailers in this research scored 3.96, which is low-average. Individuals that score 1-3 on agreeableness have a strong opinion, make less use of knowledge and ideas of others and cannot deal sensitively with a ‘gap’ between customer needs and the core qualities of the products or service they offer. Especially the retailers aged 20-40 score low: 2.75, the oldest retailers (50+) score significant higher: 4.9.
Openness is highly relevant for the visionary, creative entrepreneurship needed in the context of change management, organizational development and organizational learning. Facet ‘openness to values’ is essential since it is directly related to innovation capacities, the effectiveness of change management and group decisions with wicked problems. The retailers score 6.22 on the dimension openness, which is high-average, but on ‘openness to values’ their score is only 4.66. This confirms the findings from literature review and interviews, and needs attention when bringing together the content of the several steps in the learning process.
Conscientiousness deals with goal and result orientation, planning, control and convert ideas into actions. Effective goal setting is one of the most salient variables determining an organization’s effectiveness and therefore important when setting learning goals and achieving them. The respondents scored 5.4 on this dimension. Ambition is an important facet of this dimension, since it concerns attaching value to being successful, the participating retailers scored 6.15 on ambition, both women and men. But on ‘sense of mastery’, men scored higher: 6.74 (women: 6.18).
Neuroticism is often called emotional stability and is important for stress proneness. It also seems to be highly relevant with respect to entrepreneurial leadership charisma as it is experienced by others. Low/lower forms of emotional stability are related to a learning and innovation underperformance in complex situations where innovative and adaptive learning capacities are important to perform well. The retailers scored 4.48 on neuroticism, and the male retailers scored signicifant lower than the average, 3.9. This means they are very stress resistant, but this could also mean that one overestimates his personal effectiveness and the underlying complexity of important aspects.
To translate the scores on the Big Five dimensions and its facets to the effectuation model of Sarasvathy, a correlation bootstrap was applied. Scores of aethetics, trust, sense of mastery and compliance showed a linear relationship. The results revealed a strong relation between the mentioned Big Five facets and the Bird in a hand principle of Sarasvathy (see table 5).
Table 5: Correlation Bootstrap = 1000 Bird in a Hand
A correlation bootschap on the Pilot in the Plane principle, showed a strong relation with the facet ‘dominance’ (appendix 6).
Subsequently stepwise regression on the effectuation principle Bird in a hand was applied. Bird in a hand principle is a complex, multi faceted cognitiv analytical principle and although the outcomes show a high R-square (66%) which distorts the data, they indicate a cohesion between the five facets mentioned in table 6. This table also shows straightforwardness (from the dimension agreeableness) having a negative score which can be translated into retailers not being open to getting feedback. Table 4 shows the low average score on Agreeableness as well.
Model Std. error Stand. Coeff. Sig. Constant 17.538 .008 Compliance .322 1.283 .000 Sociability .186 .817 .000 Straightforwardness .244 -.537 .001 Openness to Ideas .264 .317 .025
Table 6: Stepwise regression Bird in a hand results (N=19)
Both reliability and sociability score closest to 1, which can be seen as a stronger relation with the Bird in a hand princple. Interviews confirmed not necessarily the extent to which retailers score on sociability, but even more the reason why they enjoy being a retailer or became retailer in the first place.
4.4 Interactive session
Twelve retailers participated in the interactive session to gain insight in the retailer’s learning preferences. On the question when they want to spend time on learning, six answered to prefer learning during opening hours of the store, where the other six answered to prefer to learn on weekdays (Monday-Friday) outside opening hours. A discussion made clear that ‘learning’ can be interpreted in several ways which influences the chosen answer. On top of that, what and how you are about to learn, determines when is the most appropriate time (and place) as well.
Seven retailers want to spend up to one hour a week on learning, while four retailers are willing to invest 1-2 hours a week on self-development. One retailer is convinced more than two hours a week are needed to develop yourself.
Other findings were the use of devices when learning: seven prefer a laptop or desktop computer, where five prefer their smartphone and five like to learn from books (offline readings). Only one mentioned an in person learning environment, like a workshop or coach.
The three different ‘design’ questions on learning were formulated and handed out to a group of four retailers. Each group member was asked to think about the question individually first before discussing it with the others and come to a teamwise solution. This appeared to be more difficult and did not result in any useful information.
4.5 Co-creation session
During the co-creation session(s) seven learning processes we designed for persona Jeanet, eight for persona Joost and seven for persona Michael. As can be seen in table 7 the most retailers started the process with ‘who am I’ (‘means’ from effectuation theory, see image 2). Knowing who you are, what you know and
Big 5 facet Pearson Sig. 2-tailed N Openness to Aesthetics - 0.472 .042 19
Trust - 0.472 .042 19
Sense of Mastery 0.520 .023 19
11 whom you know is for the participating retailers where the learning journey starts.
Jeanet Joost Michael total
Who am I 4 6 4 14
Current situation 2 1 1 4
Evaluate 1 1 1 3
Learning goal 1 1
total 7 8 6 21
Table 7: Step 1 of Learning Process during co-creation session with retailers
When looking at the tools the retailers selected for this first step of self-reflection we see that twelve of the retailers that chose ‘who am I’ or ‘current situation’ as first step, think that the concerning persona can figure this out on his/her own (or at least without one of the five Ruijter-preferences). Five times was chosen for ‘copy off’, two times for ‘learn to practice’, ‘learn to discover’ and ‘participate’ and one time for ‘gaining knowledge’.
Looking further in the process designed by the retailers, the results show that formulating a learning goal and set goals within that learning goal were most often (14 times) supported by ‘gaining knowledge’ followed by ‘participating’(12 times). In both cases other people are involved, in the first preference an expert and in the second other people to ‘learn with’. This confirms findings from both literature review and interviews.
Image 2: Sarasvathy's effectuation theory
Other findings from the co-creation session were the low number of times that ‘participation’ was used in the process of persona Jeanet: four times. The retailers selected ‘gain knowledge’,
‘copy off’ and ‘learning by practice’ most often in the learning process of Jeanet, who runs their business totally on intuition. In the learning process of Joost, a professional who beliefs in craftsmanship and has a passion for his business, ‘participation’ was mentioned thirteen times, followed by ‘copy off’ and ‘learning by practice’. ‘Learning by discovering’ was mentioned the least amount of times, which fits his profile perfectly, because Joostl would not discover on his own what digitalization would do to his shop (read the scenario in appendix 9). Michael, the business owner, learns best from ‘participation’ (11 times). Because Michael knows exactly what’s happening in his profession, and he invests in his business consumer- and digitalization-wise, ‘copy off’ is not the learning preference that would help Michael when trying to reach his learning goal. The retailers selected ‘gain knowledge’ as the learning preference, most often in the steps ‘formulate learning goal’ and ‘set goals’.
Jeanet Joost Michael
Copy off 7 11 5
Learning by practice 7 11 7
Learning by discovering 6 6 8
Participate 4 13 11
Gain knowledge 8 10 9
Table 8: Number of preferences per persona
Where the process was designed by determining the sequence of the steps, the retailer was free in placing learning preferences wherever he thought them appropriate. The preferences could be used several times in the process and more preferences could be placed within one process-step (image 1).
During the first interactive session it appeared to be difficult for the retailers to look at their own preferences when it comes to learning. Therefore scenarios, based on personas, were used for this co-creation session. This scenario however, already mentioned a learning goal, which might have influenced the sequence of the steps. To learn more from a co-creation session, the ‘design part’ should have been followed by a discussion to understand the retailer’s thinking. This would have given more insight in the retailer’s interpretation of the different steps and preferences, his assumptions, considerations, and the reasons for making certain choices. Based on the results of the co-creation session the learning process designed by the retailers looks like:
Figure 4: Learning process based on co-creation results
Looking at the learning preferences (table 9), the retailers have selected ‘participation’ the most (29 times), followed by ‘gain knowledge’ (28 times) and ‘learning by practice’ (26 times). This confirms the findings from the literature review that adult learners
Image 1: Designing the learning process during co-creation session
