Relevant or taught the wrong way? – How course design contributes to knowledge applicable in business environments.

(1)

1

Master Thesis Supply Chain Management

University of Groningen

Relevant or taught the wrong way? – How course

design contributes to knowledge applicable in business

environments.

Bernd Frericks S2371189

berndfrericks@hotmail.com

Supervisor University of Groningen: Dr. K. Scholten

Co-Assessor University of Groningen: Dr. H. Broekhuis

(2)

2

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of this research is to discover how course design influences the concept of

knowledge applicability in business environments in a SCM context.

Design/ Methodology/ Approach – By applying a multiple case study several courses are compared

in order to discover mechanisms which influence knowledge applicability in business environments. A total of 14 semi-structured interviews with alumni formed the base of this multiple case study.

Findings – Findings show how course design influences knowledge applicability, it turns out that

visibility, job crafting and the creation of a realistic business experience influence knowledge applicability in business environments. Additionally, it was found that the unity of a course has influence on knowledge applicability.

Originality – This research is among the first to study the whole course design concept instead of the

course design elements on their own. Therefore, all elements of course design could be studied in their natural role as teaching method, assessment method or setting in a course.

(3)

3

Preface

(4)

4

Introduction

Jobs for Supply Chain Management (SCM) are booming these days (Beattie, 2014; Fisher, 2014). SCM is more important than it has ever been, because of the increasing complexity in which firms are operating (Kotzab, Munch, De Faultrier, & Teller, 2011). Therefore, universities are under pressure to deliver SCM graduates who are fit for the business life. However, while SCM is often characterized as a practical business discipline (Zsidisin, Hartley, & Collins, 2013) universities tend to approach practical subjects from a highly academic view (Ankers & Brennan, 2002). Yet organizations are in need of professionals who can make real time decisions containing uncertainties rather than academic fact collectors (Bennis & O’Toole, 2005). Therefore, the question arises how applicable the acquired SCM knowledge at universities is.

In university programs the required knowledge is mostly taught in courses. This requires universities to develop courses in which knowledge applicable to business environments is taught. Yet, there is no single right way to design and teach courses (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011). Courses are composed of three elements: teaching methods, assessment processes and the setting in which learning takes place (Biggs, 1999). It is already known that active student involvement in learning experiences leads to improved learning (Fish, 2007) and higher engagement with the subject (Piercy, Brandon-Jones, Brandon-Jones, & Campbell, 2012). Research of Chui, Hodgson & Wong (2015) has shown that learning in extreme settings made students enjoy learning by direct personal experience and participation. Additionally, experiential teaching methods offer students a safe environment to apply knowledge (Piercy et al., 2012), and make subject information usable (Pfahl, Laitenberger, Ruhe, Dorsch, & Krivoboka, 2004). Finally, assessment could be used to steer student learning (Norton, 2009). While the effect of the different course elements on knowledge applicability is known, it is not known how the combination of these elements in courses influences knowledge applicability. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore How course design influences knowledge applicability in

business environments in a SCM context. This will be investigated using a multiple case study among

six differently designed courses. However, it has been shown that certain configurations of course design are appreciated by students after graduation, and not during their study (Amar, 2016). Therefore, it may take some years for the former students to realize what the value of the courses in their program is. Consequently, data was collected from alumni.

(7)

7

never been examined. This research will also unravel specifics on the relationship between course elements. Third, this research is among the first studies to analyse how course design contributes to knowledge applicability from an alumni point of view. By using an alumni perspective, insights can be gained beyond exams and assignments while both the industry and academic perspective can be used.

(8)

8

Theory section

Knowledge applicable in a business environment

Studies such as Gammelgaard and Larson (2001), Mangan and Christopher (2005) and Singer and Welborne (2014) summarize key knowledge and skill areas that are relevant for SCM managers. These key knowledge areas are for instance modelling, multimodal logistics and flow management. However, also skills such as listening, gathering information and SCM awareness are important (Gammelgaard & Larson, 2001; Mangan & Christopher, 2005; Singer & Welborn, 2014). These studies of Gammelgaard and Larson (2001), Mangan and Christopher (2005) and Singer and Welborne (2014) allow universities and business schools to align the curricula with what is needed in business environments to prepare graduates for business needs (Bernon & Mena, 2013). However, according to Ankers & Brennan (2002) universities approach practical topics from an exceedingly theoretical perspective. Curricula are too often filled with theory and academic rigour and, therefore, being short of applicable knowledge for the business environment (Ankers & Brennan, 2002). According to Zsidisin et al. (2013) particularly SCM professionals need to have a practical mind-set; they underline that “SCM is an applied academic discipline in which its learning is enhanced by understanding,

dissecting, and analysing real-world problems to improve business practice” (Zsidisin et al., 2013, p.

389).

So for SCM professionals it is important to have knowledge on certain subjects, to be able to apply them, and above all, it needs to be relevant to businesses. Hence, applicability relates to activated subject specific SCM knowledge (Gammelgaard & Larson, 2001; Hale, 2013; Mangan & Christopher, 2005), which has to be relevant to the business environment (Ankers & Brennan, 2002; QAA, 2015) and practical (Heron & Reason, 1997; Zsidisin et al., 2013). Therefore, in this research knowledge

applicable to business environments is operationalised with these three constructs as represented in

table 1.

Table 1 Operationalisation of knowledge applicability to business environments

Construct Definition Business

environment relevancy

“Relevant knowledge includes technical expertise (e.g. SCM knowledge) and critiques of management and accounting practices in their organisational and social context.” (Lucas & Milford, 2003, p. 385)

Activated knowledge

“Activated knowledge is information that is insightfully understood and routinely acted upon when relevant to do so.” (Hale, 2013, p. 314)

Practical knowledge

“Practical knowledge is knowing how to do something, demonstrated in a skill or competence.” (Heron & Reason, 1997, p. 281)

(9)

9

critiques of management practices in their organisational and social context (Lucas & Milford, 2009). An example of a critique of management is the Enron scandal. For future managers, it is important to know the Enron scandal, how it happened and the consequences of it (Bennis & O’Toole, 2005).For this study, business environment relevancy comprises the SCM specific knowledge subjects, as well as the more general management practices such as Gammelgaard and Larson (2001) and Mangan and Christopher (2005) elaborate on, these are depicted in table 2.

Table 2 Key subject knowledge areas

Mangan and Christopher (2005)

Gammelgaard and Larson (2001) Knowledge areas General Finance IT Management / Strategy SCM specific Operations / SCM

Focus on processes / flows Legal, security and

international trade Multimodal logistics

Logistics in emerging markets

Competences / skills General Analytical Interpersonal Leadership Change management Project management Listening

Gathering & Sharing information Initiating change

Project management Internal marketing Problem solving Systems development Facilitation (of meetings) Motivation

People management

SCM specific SCM awareness

Cross-functional awareness Inter-organizational skills

(10)

10

business relevant SCM knowledge, it needs to be insightfully understood and acted upon when needed. Hale (2013) provides teachers guidance how activated knowledge can be developed. According to Hale (2013) teachers have to challenge students to take facts as hypotheses, give students assignments that require them to puzzle somewhat out, and assess students’ understanding by having them illustrate or exemplify a phenomenon (Hale, 2013).

Only when students have developed activated knowledge, they can continue to the practical knowing stage (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011). As was stated by Heron and Reason (1997) the practical knowing stage is reached when skills can be applied in practice. Similarly to activated knowledge, students have to know and understand information. However, the practical stage is achieved when students know how to use their knowledge, as demonstrated in a skill or competence (Heron & Reason, 1997). Therefore, knowledge can only be truly applicable when the practicality stage is reached.

Concluding, knowledge applicability in a business environment entails business environment relevancy, activated knowledge and practicality. In the next paragraph the influence of the concept of course design and its elements on knowledge applicability in business environments will be described.

Course design

As elaborated above, the aim of university programs is to help students gain activated knowledge, which can be applied, and is relevant to the business environment. In order to accomplish this, students have to follow a diverse set of courses in their program. These courses are designed for different purposes, hence, they have different learning objectives (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011). Yet, they should all lead to applicable knowledge. There is a distinction between introductory courses, delivering factual knowledge, and capstone strategy courses, delivering business relevant practical knowledge (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011). In order to realise diverse goals, course designers can stress different elements of course design. According to Biggs (1999) these elements are: the teaching methods, the assessment processes and the setting created through the interaction with students. Furthermore, to achieve the business environment relevancy, course designers can embed insights from practice (Hoek, Godsell, & Harrison, 2011). In the following paragraphs teaching methods, assessment methods and the setting will be elaborated on using literature.

(11)

11

methods are based on listening to the experiences of teachers (Fish, 2007). Hoidn (2016) illustrates traditional teaching methods as “passing knowledge from the expert instructor to the novice

students” (Hoidn, 2016, p. 431). She further elaborates that traditional methods are based on

lectures and seminars accompanied with exercises and classroom discussions (Hoidn, 2016). So, lectures are important, as they are the foundation of traditional teaching methods (Race, 2011). They are efficient (Nicholson, 2000; Race, 2001) in delivering factual knowledge to students (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011). If lectures are combined with the use of modern technologies the audience could be involved in an interactive lecture (Brigley, 2009). Interactivity stimulates increased retention of factual knowledge, and, it also increases understanding and application of knowledge (Costa, Van Rensburg, & Rushton, 2007). However, according to Piercy et al. (2012), attempts to improve interaction within lectures only involved the use of film clips and basic cases. This has not solved the weaknesses of this traditional way of teaching, because it does not actively involve the student in ones learning and therefore it is not suited for gaining applicable knowledge (Piercy et al., 2012). Additionally, to enhance business environment relevancy companies can be invited for guest lectures (Hoek et al., 2011). So as traditional methods could stimulate activated knowledge and business environment relevancy, the extent to which practicality is enhanced is discussable.

Contradicting traditional teaching, experiential teaching methods stimulate students to learn by experiencing events first-hand (Feinstein et al., 2002). Experiential teaching methods like role-plays allow teachers to represent first-person experiences in a safe learning environment (Lateef, 2010). Additional methods as simulation games, like the beer game (Sparling, 2002) or the dice game (Lambrecht, Creemers, Boute, & Leus, 2012), have students discover the different perspectives of a supply chain or the influences of variability on operations. Furthermore, experiential methods may enforce teamwork, communication and decision making skills (Elam & Spotts, 2004; Friedman, 2004; Truscheit & Otte, 2004). These are relevant skills for the supply chain managers of the future (Derwik, Hellström, & Karlsson, 2016). However, experiential teaching methods are less efficient in transferring large amounts of information, and there is the risk that students are only trying to win the simulation games instead of actually learning from it (Piercy et al., 2012). So while practicality and business environment relevancy may be boosted by experiential methods, activated knowledge may be impaired. Therefore, in the end most courses use both types of teaching methods, because both traditional and experiential methods reinforce each other (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011). This could occur in seminars, which could facilitate both forms of traditional and experiential methods.

(12)

12

cases more realistic, companies could be involved to create a live-case. In live-cases, students actually undertake projects for an organization (Beaty, 2003). This enhances their understanding of the relevance of theory to practice (Zsidisin et al., 2013). Furthermore, when presenting the results of these live-cases to professionals, students experience which questions are asked in business environments (Zsidisin et al., 2013).

While teaching methods allow students to learn, it is upon assessment to give a judgement on that learning. Thus, assessment is very important in course design: it promotes student learning, it measures student understanding, and it certifies students with a certain level of achievement (Norton, 2009; QAA, 2016). Norton (2009) additionally states that assessment design could steer student learning and when used as feedback it is more likely to improve student learning. Hence, course designers can prioritize importance to subjects by means of assessment. It is also important to consider the method of assessment. To fully achieve effective learning, the assessment activities must match with the intended learning objectives (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011; Ramsden, 1992). Multiple choice question exams are for example useful to assess students on factual, inert knowledge, while written assignments can test students’ argument skills (Hale, 2013; Norton, 2009; Wakeford, 2003). Additionally, Karagozoglu (2017) suggests that longer-term projects, like written assignments, have students focus less on their grade performance and more on the learning they are participating in. However, exams could also be made in other formats than multiple choice questions like essay questions and short answer questions, the former allowing teachers to test students’ activated knowledge, the latter being easier and quicker to mark (Wakeford, 2003). Some course designers even apply an open-book approach to exams (Wakeford, 2003). Moreover, assessment can also be based on practical work and orals (Wakeford, 2003).

(13)

13

settings require teachers to take on different roles. According to Hamilton and Klebba (2011), different roles accommodate these different teaching and assessment methods and particular settings. They express that lectures require a highly involved directed learning role, while in simulation or reality-based cases their role shifts down to a more moderate guidance role giving direction and facilitating resources (Hamilton & Klebba, 2011).

An overview of the different aspects of course design is given in table 3.

Table 3 the elements and constructs of course design

Element Construct Definition Teaching

method

Traditional Lectures “Lectures are used in conveying information to large audiences with little interaction from students, while allowing the instructor to have maximum control of the learning experience, but this fails to provide the instructor with feedback about the extent of student learning” (Di

Leonardi, 2007) Traditional

or

experiential

Tutorials “A meeting with a very small group, often based on feedback to an essay or assignment”

(Griffiths, 2009, p. 79)

Seminar “An occasion when a teacher or expert and a group of people meet to study and discuss something.” (“Cambridge Dictionary,” 2017)

Experiential Case studies “A teaching device that utilizes real life situations by placing the student in a realistic position, presents them with actual conditions, forces them to think analytically &

constructively, makes them consider alternatives, and forces them to arrive at a decision” (Rarig, 1972)

Role plays “Use of allocated or self-created roles.”

(Griffiths, 2009, p. 79) Business

Simulation games

“Simulations are attempts to create a realistic experience in a controlled environment” (Beaty,

2003, p. 137)

Assessment Exam Multiple choice exam

“Classically, an item stem with four or five completions, with the candidate being invited to identify the most correct one (the ‘single correct response’ type). Generally, responses are entered on a computer-readable card.”

(Wakeford, 2003, p. 48) Short answer

exam

“Exam with questions inviting limited written responses, not normally more than a page in length and often less; which can be short notes or diagrammatic in nature. Response time is 5 to 10 minutes per item.” (Wakeford, 2003, p. 48)

(14)

14

approach permitted to be brought into the examination room” (Wakeford, 2003, p. 47)

Essay question “Questions inviting extended written responses (each taking from half-an-hour to an hour or more to answer).” (Wakeford, 2003, p. 46)

Other Essay “A short piece of writing on a particular subject, especially one done by students as part of the work for a course” (“Cambridge Dictionary,”

2017)

Practical work “The use of a laboratory situation to assess aspects of a student’s work that may not appropriately be assessed by regular paper-based tests.” (Wakeford, 2003, p. 49)

Setting Student interaction

Group work “An assignment that requires two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, to come together to achieve specific objectives.”

(Young & Henquinet, 2000, p. 56)

Individual work “An assignment that does not require two or more individuals, interacting and

interdependent, to come together to achieve specific objectives.” (Based on Young &

Henquinet, 2000)

Other Teacher role “Nature of student oversight and flexibility of approach required of the instructor.” (Hamilton

& Klebba, 2011, p. 5)

(15)

15

environment relevancy (Hoek et al., 2011; Zsidisin et al., 2013). Additionally, assessments can also be used to stimulate the development of activated knowledge in longer-term projects (Karagozoglu, 2017) and steering the learning (Norton, 2009). Finally, the setting could also have an influence because group settings can positively influence activated knowledge (McKimm & Jollie, 2003; Rogoff, 1998). Additionally, the setting can also contribute to business environment relevancy since teamwork is important in business environments (Derwik et al., 2016). Yet, at the course level it remains unclear how the combination of these elements contribute to knowledge applicable in a business environment. This study will therefore explore the relationships between course design (i.e. teaching methods, assessment processes and setting) and knowledge applicability (i.e. business environment relevancy, activated knowledge and practicality) using a multiple case study. An overview of all relations is depicted in figure 1.

Figure 1 Conceptual model

Methodology

(16)

16

in this research is that every course has its own subject. Since alumni are working in different industries and job positions, for one alumnus a course may be more relevant than for another alumnus. Next, a multiple case study design allows to find answers on questions of why, what and how (Voss, Tsikriktsis, & Frohlich, 2002; Yin, 2009). In this study these answers are the underlying mechanisms how course design contributes to the applicability of knowledge. Because of the exploratory aim of this research the case study methodology is the most suitable methodology. In line with the aim of the study to explore the relationship between course design and knowledge applicability in business environments the unit of analysis in this case research are courses.

Research setting

The University of Groningen redesigned the master of Supply Chain Management program for the academic year of 2012-2013. All courses within the programs were critically reflected and if needed redesigned. This implies that the courses by that time, could have be seen as state of the art, teaching the knowledge which is needed within industry. This particular MSc degree program, Supply Chain Management (SCM), delivers graduates twice a year since the academic year of 2012-2013. This resulted in a big group of alumni that is already practitioner in their field of study. So, the first group of alumni already work up to three years as practitioner in industry. The SCM master in Groningen is chosen as research setting because it is (one of) the best programs in The Netherlands (Centrum hoger onderwijs, 2016; Elsevier, 2016). Furthermore, the faculty to which the program belongs is EQUIS and AACSB accredited. Only 1 percent of the world’s business schools have this combination of accreditation. Therefore, the courses in this program are believed to be among the best to prepare alumni for work in all kinds of different industries. Hence this is the best setting for this research.

Case selection

(17)

17

Table 4 Overview of case selection

Course design Cases

Element Category Construct A B C D E F

Teaching methods

Traditional Lectures 7 lectures 4 lectures 4 lectures 6 lectures 6 lectures 8 lectures

Seminar 5 seminars 2 seminars 6 seminars 6 seminars 6 seminars

Experiential Case studies 2 case studies 3 case studies

1 case study

Role plays 1 presentation of students (company managers) to two teachers (CEOs) about the game strategy Business simulation games 6 rounds (2 in one week) of simulation game Students play a simulation in one seminar which is examined Assessment methods Exams Essay question 60% 45% 55% 5% (simulation game examination) 75% Open book 25%

(18)

18 essay linking their experiences of the simulation game with theory (50%) link different chapters (40%) Other Chapter presentation (20%) Setting Student interaction

Group work All essays Simulation + simulation based essay

Book chapter essay + presentation

All essays All essays

Individual work

Paper review Book proposal essay

Theory integration essay

All essays

(19)

19

Other elements Involvement of industry

Data collection in the first two weeks in the canteen of the University to provide real data for assignment 1 Use of company data in assignments 2 and 3 3 guest lectures Final presentation to industry In 2 tutorials a representative from a company will present and discuss a real life case on which the 2nd essay is based 1 guest lecture A company visit on which the first assignment is based Teachers 2 3 2 2 2 2 Required readings

(20)

20

Data collection

(21)

21

Table 5 Overview of respondents

Year of gradua tion

ID Industry Business

size

Job area Position M/F I/NL Length of interview (minutes) 2013 1 Manufacturing of food products Large Management Middle manager M NL 74

2 Wholesale and retail trade Large Logistics Junior F NL 57

3 Manufacturing of other products non-electronic-components Large Operations Middle manager F I 61 4 Manufacturing of rubber and plastic products Medium Production Middle manager M NL 77

5 Transportation and storage Large Transport Middle manager M NL 97

6 Education Large Research Trainee M NL 59

2014 7 Manufacturing of food products Large Purchasing Junior F NL 57

8 Transportation and storage Medium Supply chain Middle manager M NL 55

9 Manufacturing of food product and beverages Large Supply chain Trainee F I 54

10 Wholesale and retail trade Large Planning Middle manager F NL 63

2015 11 Consultancy, research and other specialised business services Medium Planning Middle manager M NL 53 12 Manufacturing of wearing apparel + leather, products of

leather and footwear

Large Purchasing Junior M I 64

(22)

22

Data analysis

To analyse the interviews, three steps suggested by Miles and Huberman (1994) were used: data reduction, data display and conclusion. At the start of the analysis the data was reduced to quotes, sentences or paragraphs relating to each case. Each quote was coded for the case it belongs to, which made it possible to generate output documents relating to each case. First all data relating to one case was read. Thereafter coding was done in several rounds. In the first round all quotes were coded for course design elements. In the following round sentences relating to business environment relevancy, activated knowledge and practicality were coded. In the last round the (potential) underlying phenomena influencing knowledge applicability were looked for. Eventually second-order categories such as “personal experience”, “course characteristics”, “student group interaction” and “active learning mind-set” were deduced wherever possible. This gave first insights in activities arising out of course design which contribute to the applicability of knowledge in business environments. These second-order categories together with the first-order codes made it able to identify explanatory themes.

Following the coding rounds, the analysis started in order to discover how specific course design factors influence knowledge applicability. In the start of this analysis emphasis was played on the individual cases to get familiarized with the circumstances of each course design (Eisenhardt, 1989). Appropriately, preliminary conclusions were summarized for each case based on the interviews in separate case narratives. These narratives are included in appendix C. Thereafter the different cases were compared for a cross-case analysis, which is included in appendix D. Hereby patterns were looked for that should explain how course design could possibly influence knowledge applicability. Appendix B shows an extract of the in-depth analysis. It illustrates how the different steps of data reduction (first order codes), descriptive coding (second-order categories) lead to third-order themes grounded in and deduced from literature.

(23)

23

Findings

In analysing the data I was able to identify how course design elements like teaching methods, assessment methods and the setting contribute to knowledge applicability in a business environment. In particular, it was found that course coherence and the creation of an overview had an influence on knowledge applicability in a business environment.

Business environment relevancy

My findings show that course design helped in creating relevant knowledge for the business environment. In order to do this it is necessary to create intended realistic experiences with teaching methods. Furthermore, involvement of real businesses in teaching methods was found to influence business environment relevancy. Finally, course design elements like assessment and the setting also accidentally influence business environment relevancy.

Intended realistic experiences can be created by teaching methods such as role-play and simulation games. In case F, a role-play teaching method was identified. The teacher played the customer of a consultancy firm, while students played the consultants. Students had a meeting with their customer on a weekly base and they could send a limited amount of emails to their customer. The addition of this communication limitation to the role-play helped in creating a realistic relationship within the role-play: “You had a limited three emails where you could ask questions or something. That could

happen in a business scenario where you need information from someone who is quite a lot higher up and you cannot keep sending questions” (Source 12; S12). In case B however, two different role-plays

were identified. The first role-play identified, had the teachers playing CEO, and students acting as the management board of a simulated company. However, this roleplay was not connected to business environment relevancy. The second role-play in case B, was combined with a simulation game and a group setting. Students had to take on different roles (purchasing manager, operations manager, sales manager or supply chain manager) to form the management board managing of a simulated company. Students experienced the interaction between different departments in a company. This helped them realize how different departments within a company have an impact on each other: “the importance of collaboration between people within a company, but in that game you

really… You get to see how it impacts a company […] I also told people here at the company I work now that maybe they should do the game once” (S7). In the course descriptions the differences in the

(24)

24

was not considered as a realistic experience: “maybe it’s a good representation of how it works in

real life but I do not know if it’s true because the pirates and the hurricanes… I do not know. And you can choose from multiple suppliers, multiple sourcing, and you can just choose to do it or not. That’s not how it works in real life because you have to deal with capacity of suppliers and your position in the market, I do not remember that was the case during that game” (S14). Additionally, it was found

that the simulations of cases E and F were not mentioned in relation to business environment relevancy. So my findings show that simulation games are not considered as realistic by themselves, as cases B, E and F show. However, when the simulation is combined with role-play, as occurred in case B, it is considered realistic to the business environment. Additionally, the simulation in case F only took one day while in case B the simulation and role-play took 3 weeks. So, like the role-play in case F similarly, the duration of the role-play contributed to business environment relevancy.

Next to intended realistic experiences also accidental experiences were considered relevant to the business environment. This was identified in cases C, D and E. In case C the setting accidentally created a realistic experience. Students had to do group work with students from other business related master programs. Although their background had no role in the assignment, it was experienced as a realistic as: “sometimes it’s a little difficult because with this course it was also

people coming in from marketing who had zero experience or knowledge of supply chains. Which is good because you have to work with them” (S10). The groups had to do longitudinal group work in

mixed groups created by the teacher. In other cases, A, D and F, group work was not found to be accidentally realistic. When the rules for group making in the cases were compared I found that case A also has groups created by the teacher. However, case A is only open to students of the SCM master. In cases D and F, students can make groups themselves. So the combination of compulsory groups with students from other programs, as happened in case C, accidentally contributes to a realistic business experience. While, in other cases like A (no students from other programs), D and F (no compulsory groups) the group setting did not contribute to a realistic business experience. Assessment accidentally contributed to a realistic experience in cases D and E. In case D it was found that within education students have to perform to a certain level for a certain grade. This is the same for the business world as the next quote shows: “For me it [the assignment] was perfect, it couldn’t

get any better. But it was just a 6 on master level. […] it was a kind of reflection for me. Even if I, in my opinion, wrote a masterpiece, does not directly mean that it is successful. And that’s also things that are happening in an organisation, especially when you are doing, in your opinion, a perfect job and give it to the director and within half a minute you get more than 20 questions that are not in the document that you worked out” (S1). While in case E it was found that the preparation for an open

(25)

25

you. It can teach you to select the right information right, because you’ve got a stack of papers this big, covered in highlighting marks, and if you highlighted everything you are screwed because you can’t find anything and if you highlighted nothing then you read the whole paper during the exam. You could compare that to taking information into meetings and stuff, if you prepare properly the meeting is quick and efficient” (S12). However, the open-book exam of case F in 2014 was not

mentioned in relation to business environment relevancy. I therefore looked for the differences between both open-book exams of E and F (2014). It was found that in case E the exam is already after two weeks, while in F it is an end term exam. Additionally, the aim of the open-book exam in case E was to “test your understanding of the basic literature: it is open book. This will provide the

base for all assignments” (Course Manual E; CME). While in case F, in 2014, the aim of the open-book

exam was more vague: “Questions can be asked on any aspects treated in this course” (CMF). So an open-book exam assessment method can accidentally become realistic when students know what to prepare themselves for, just like a business meeting.

Finally, in cases A and D it was found that involvement of real businesses also contribute to business environment relevancy. In case A, teaching methods involved real businesses with practical work. Students had to do measurements in the university canteen in order to make an analysis of the customer flow. It was found that “Although it was a very basic level [assignment]. But in these things

you learn a little bit how it improve […] our bottleneck was the pin machine and the new recommended a faster pin machine, something like that. But it’s these kinds of things that are very real life, I mean; it could be in any company” (S11). Additionally, in case D, a live-case also involved a

real business. Practitioners would attend two seminars in order to present and discuss the live-case with students. Although the presentation of the live-case did not go well, because “the problem was

just very poorly presented and we just had to come up with any rubbish because that company would have benefit from any change anyway” (S12), the subject is considered very important as the

following quote shows: “We had to make some changes in order to make people more aware of the

strategic part, not only focus on cost but also focus on other aspects. […] You need change management in order to make people aware of that” (S7). In cases C and E businesses were also

(26)

26

So my findings show that courses can create business environment relevancy by intended and accidental realistic experiences. Furthermore, also the involvement of real businesses contributes to business environment relevancy. Intended course design aspects influence business environment relevancy with a combination of teaching methods, and a term duration. Furthermore, a long-term duration is also needed to have the involvement of real businesses enable business environment relevancy. Finally course design elements like assessment and the setting can accidentally contribute to business environment relevancy when there is a compulsory group setting with students from other business related master programs, and when students are aware of what to prepare for an open-book exam assessment method.

Activated knowledge

My findings show that course design also contributes to activated knowledge. In particular it was found that teaching methods influenced activated knowledge through visibility and experimentation. Furthermore it was identified that course coherence had an influence on activated knowledge. In cases A and C it was found that visibility can be created by teaching methods. In particular lectures (case A and C) and practical work (case A) contribute to visibility. As mentioned before in case A, students had to do an assignment in the university canteen. The practical work made it visible to students what was happening in a system: “It’s really easy and practical to see what’s happening” (S4). Additionally, in the lectures of case A visibility was enhanced by an interactive class setting. The lecturer “would use students to get up in front of the class and demonstrate with people what it

would look like. […] So he made it really easy to understand what all these theories were about”

(S10). In other cases this interactivity in the lectures was not mentioned in relation to activated knowledge. In case C, visibility was created in a different way. Although there was no interactivity involved, the guest lectures also provided insights. They showed how theory is applied in practice: “I

think the combination of the theory and the guest lectures, because the guest lectures is just one case. It’s good to know, and it helps to understand the theory as well. And when you know how they apply theory to practice, you can also apply it to other cases” (S7). Cases D, E and F also had guest

lectures involved, however, these were not mentioned in relation to activated knowledge. After looking in the course manuals I found that in case C students had to use the guest lectures in order to add practical cases in their essays, while, in other courses the guest lectures were used as practical addition to theory, however, without a clear use. So having a clear purpose for guest lectures could enhance visibility which enhances activated knowledge.

(27)

27

dynamics of an organisation as the simulation “gave me insight in the complexity of the organisation,

so changing 1 parameter affects the other one at a total different level in the other side of the organisation. That gave me a very good understanding of it” (S1).While in case E, a student combined

knowledge from other courses to use the possibility in the simulation to “incorporate an extra step in

the process because of the different courses that we had and the impact that you see when you add a certain operation, and how that might affect the bottleneck or not […] thinking of the simulation on a different level because of the information acquired allowed me to just try out something completely new rather than just go with the information given” (S5). However, the simulation of case F was not

mentioned in relation to activated knowledge. After additional contact with alumnus S12 I found out that in case F “the practical game highlighted some concepts taught in class, but the complexity of

the organisation of the game kind of got in the way of the message” (S12). So the simulation in case F

could not translate the message to the students because the organisation was considered too complex. The simulations in B and E however, were not identified to have a complex organisation. So a simulation teaching method allows students to experiment when there are no complexities involved and, therefore, activated knowledge can be developed.

Additionally, in cases D and F it was found that the coherence of a course contributes to activated knowledge. In 2014 Case F had a lack of structure as: “it was quite a lot of information and every

tutorial had a different topic, so it was also quite broad in terms of knowledge. Every time we had that course I was like: this is very interesting! But it was that general so in the end I didn’t really apply everything I learned” (S7). In 2015 the coherence was improved with the replacement of the project.

The course was now considered as one story, having students practice for the exam during the course. “It was difficult, but the techniques were very hands-on and they all came back in the project

that we had to do. […] After certain times I really had the feeling that I mastered the techniques […] when you passed this exam you actually know how to do it” (S11). Furthermore, it was found that

also case D had a lack of coherence as the next quote illustrates: “Well, there was a structure in the

planning […] but people were really confused: ok what’s the focus? It was really going from this to that to that in one course and then you’re like: wow” (S7). When these cases are compared to other

cases, it turns out that both D and F students had to write two essays, that could not be combined, or did not built upon each other. While in other cases, the essays built upon the same knowledge areas, or could be combined whatsoever. So coherence in a course is identified as an enabler for the creation of activated knowledge.

(28)

28

to have a clear purpose to enhance visibility. Furthermore, it was found that activated knowledge is stimulated by experiential teaching methods, like simulation, by experimentation. However, when complexity of the simulation gets in the way of the message, students cannot experiment anymore and the simulation will not contribute to activated knowledge. Finally it was found that the coherence of courses as a whole also positively influences activated knowledge.

Practicality

In my findings it was also found that course design influenced practicality. In particular it was found that course goals like the creation of an overview had a positive relationship with practicality. Furthermore, a positive relationship between a group setting and practicality through job crafting was identified. However, no evidence for a relation between activated knowledge and practicality was found.

In case B and C it was found that when knowledge is taught at a strategic overview level the practicality is reduced. In case B this occurred in the “first three lectures when you get introduced to

all the things that are out there on supply chain, which is nice and interesting and really helpful, I mean […] but it’s not that you can use that kind of knowledge which you can immediately apply […] I would say the lower level, more detailed process related courses were more helpful then” (S6). In case

C practicality was not enhanced by the essay assessment method, which is illustrated by the next quote: “Obviously I am in purchasing, so this course stands out as well. But again we looked at

purchasing in a large scheme of things. […] The book is of course very interesting but has almost no bearing on what I do operationally on a day to day level” (S12). However, a contradicting view was

also found: “I think because we also learned how to apply the models and how it’s related to practical

cases and purchasing in practice, so that’s why I came back here and I was like: ok we’re going to write a whole format for strategies for purchasing, ok guys come on! Kraljic Matrix, let’s fill it in” (S7).

This contradictory view can be explained by the differences between the alumni. Both S12 and S7 work in purchasing, and both had job experience before the master. However, S7 continued to work at the same company after graduation while S12 went to another company. Yet, in both cases B and C, it is not related to the teaching- or assessment method in which it occurs. In the course manual of case B it was found that the lectures aimed at “offering a contemporary overview of developments

and research in strategic supply chain management” (CMB). Furthermore, the course manual of case

C states: “This course will equip students with frontier knowledge in strategic Purchasing” (CMC). So the strategic overview taught in both cases does not enhance practicality. However, it still is important to know as “I need a whole picture, I need to know the links, I need to know why this work

(29)

29

Furthermore, in case A and F it was found that the setting could negatively influence practicality. This particularly occurred in group work settings involving an essay with MS Excel. As the group assignment of case F: “Which was a group effort; everyone did a little bit their own area that they

were comfortable with, which is the pitfalls of a project of course, because there were somethings that I found difficult: I did not touch them. It was someone else who did that, so that’s always a pitfall when you work in a project” (S11). I also found the same connection in case A when “somebody else, when my partner could do it, he did it and I just looked” (S2). Additionally, in other cases involving

group work, cases B, C and D, this phenomenon was not found. After looking at the course manuals it turned out that these courses did not had the obligatory use of MS Excel in the essay. Therefore, the obligatory use of a computer program for making an essay could possibly enhance group job crafting in a group setting, which leads to less practicality.

(30)

30

Discussion

As university business programs are to prepare students for their career life it is important to teach them in a way so they obtain applicable knowledge. Therefore, this research contributes in revealing how course design influences knowledge applicability. In contrary to other studies (Bressler & Bressler, 2007; Chui et al., 2015; Piercy et al., 2012), this study uses alumni to examine the relationship between course design and knowledge applicability. In doing this the real applicability of knowledge to the business environment can be measured (Jennings Jr., 1989). Having done this research the views of Piercy et al. (2012), Brigley (2009) and Costa et al. (2007) on teaching methods, the views of Karagozoglu (2017) on group work and the views of Norton (2009) and Hamilton and Klebba (2011) on assessment are extended. I identified mechanisms which influence the relationship between course design and knowledge applicability. It was found that creating a realistic business setting contributed to business environment relevancy. Next to that visibility and job crafting had an influence on activated knowledge. Furthermore, it was identified that abundancy negatively influenced practicality. Next to the different course design elements it also became apparent that the unity within a course also had an influence on knowledge applicability.

The role of course design in the creation of applicable knowledge

Business environment relevancy

My findings indicate that course design can contribute to business environment relevancy with intended realistic experiences and the involvement of businesses. Furthermore, my findings indicate that realistic experiences can also be created by accident.

Creation of intended realistic experiences

(31)

31

evidence that field trips could link theory to practice. However, the field trip in my cases only took place for one day. So again, missing a long-term duration did not enhance business environment relevancy. Therefore, in line with my findings, I propose that:

1. Combinations of different teaching methods are more likely to create an intended realistic business experience, and enhance business environment relevancy, hence, knowledge applicability in business environments.

2. Business environment relevancy, therefore, knowledge applicability in business environments, is enhanced by a long-term duration of intended realistic experiences.

Accidentally creating realistic experiences

Next to intended realistic experiences also accidental experiences could be considered realistic to a business environment. Group projects were already identified to contribute to business environment relevancy, as teamwork is central in businesses (Derwik et al., 2016; Karagozoglu, 2017). However, I found that group projects accidentally contribute to business environment relevancy only, when compulsory groups are made with students from other business related master degree programs. This adds detail on the way how group settings should be implemented in business courses to enhance business environment relevancy. As already identified, assessment had, according to the Quality Assurance Agency (2015) and Norton (2009), different purposes in the educational context. In my findings however, it appeared that assessment accidentally can create a realistic business setting. Open-book exams (Wakeford, 2003) can create a realistic experience when students know what they have to prepare for. In my findings this was compared to taking information into meetings. Additionally, I found that the grading aspect of assessment could also be linked to business environment relevancy. So, grading could certify students with a certain level of achievement (Norton, 2009; QAA, 2016) in education, which they also recognize later on in the business world. Therefore I propose that:

3. Group settings can enhance business environment relevancy, and therefore, knowledge applicability in business environments, when students are forced to work together with students from other business related master programs.

4. Assessment accidentally can enhance business environment relevancy for students, and therefore, enhance knowledge applicability in business environments.

Activated knowledge

(32)

32

knowledge. Furthermore it was found that the coherence of a course also contributes to activated knowledge.

Visibility

My findings indicate that visibility within teaching methods enhances the development of activated knowledge. Within a lecture visibility can be created by interaction with students. While the findings of Costa et al. (2007) showed that interactivity stimulated increased retention of knowledge, my findings shows that interactivity is an antecedent of visibility. Additionally, the views of Hoidn (2016) and Hamilton and Klebba (2011) that traditional teaching methods only pass on knowledge is, according to my findings a limited view. According to my findings insightful knowledge can be taught in lectures using interactivity to create visibility. This adds new details on literature regarding traditional teaching methods. In addition to the view of Van Hoek et al. (2011) my findings show that the use of insights of industry also enhance visibility and, therefore, activated knowledge. When combined with a practical work teaching method (Wakeford, 2003) it can enhance visibility and, therefore, activated knowledge. However, in order to achieve visibility, and activated knowledge, with guest lectures, there must be a clear purpose to have guest lectures. I found that when students had to do something with the information of guest lectures; it created visibility, and therefore, activated knowledge. It is not sufficient to use them as practical additions to theory. Hence, usefulness is an antecedent of visibility. In accordance with my findings I therefore, propose that:

5. Traditional teaching methods enhance activated knowledge, and knowledge applicability in business environments, by the creation of visibility.

a. Interaction is an antecedent of visibility. b. Usefulness is an antecedent of visibility.

Experimentation

In accordance with the recommendations of Hale (2013), my findings also show that having students to puzzle somewhat out, hence, experimenting, contributes to activated knowledge. Thus, in accordance with Feinstein et al. (2002) experiential teaching methods stimulate learning by experiencing events first hand. However, complexity involved with a simulation teaching method could hide the message of the simulation. Therefore, complex simulation games may reduce the stimulation of activated knowledge. This also proves why simple simulation games like the dice game are so popular and effective (Lambrecht et al., 2012).

Therefore, I propose that:

(33)

33

a. Complexity reduces the likelihood of experimentation.

Course coherence

Finally the structure of a course also influenced the creation of activated knowledge. I found that the more unity a course had the better it developed activated knowledge. So having a constant repetition of the same knowledge in different teaching methods, settings and finally, in the assessment helps students to create activated knowledge. Therefore, I propose that:

7. Course coherence contributes to activated knowledge and, in turn, knowledge applicability in business environments.

Practicality

In my findings, it became clear that course design influences practicality through job crafting and the creation of an overview.

Job crafting

Contrasting the findings of McKimm and Jollie (2003), my findings show that group work does not enhance learning. As group work did enhance business environment relevancy a mixed view on group work is identified. However, for group work enables job crafting. Students, when working in groups, divide the tasks between them so everybody can do what they are good at. This reduces the learning effect because the chance for any discussion is also reduced. Therefore, I propose that:

8. A group setting can have negative influence on the development of practicality, hence, knowledge applicability in business environments.

Creation of an overview

Complexity could already negatively influence activated knowledge. Furthermore, job crafting negatively influenced practicality. Additionally I found that courses with an abundancy of strategical knowledge gathered within written assignments and lectures negatively influenced the practicality. This is in line with statements made by Hamilton and Klebba (2011) who declare that, knowledge needs to be taught bottom-up, without the operational practical part there is no value for the strategical overview. Therefore I propose that:

9. Practicality is negatively influenced by course designs which tend to teach from an overly strategical view.

(34)

34

(35)

35

Conclusion

(36)

36 Visibility Experimentation Job crafting Duration Accidental realistic experiences Teaching methods Assessment methods Setting Combination Business environment relevancy Activated knowledge Practicality

Knowledge

applicability in

business

environments

Course coherence Strategic overview

Figure 2 How course design influences knowledge applicability in business environments

Managerial implications

(37)

37

setting than elements on their own. So teachers have to design courses with long-term realistic business experiences, which are built upon different teaching methods. Additionally, also unintended aspects like grading, open book exams and the embedding of other degree students contributes to the creation of a realistic business setting. So teachers could implement realistic business experiences while students are not aware of it. To enhance activated knowledge teachers need to incorporate visibility and coherence in their courses. Visibility can be achieved by interaction with students in a lecture. Coherence implies courses to be like a story: with a beginning, a body and an end. Like the structure of an academic paper, courses also need to have a story, otherwise students cannot follow the point teachers want to make. Teachers need to be aware of job crafting when students work in a group setting. Students divide the tasks as they like, removing any learning aspect of the group setting. Finally it is important for teachers to consider the content of the story they want to tell. An abundancy of highly theoretical and strategical knowledge is not per definition a bad thing, however, a lack of the operational implications is. Students need to know what daily operations are. Still, having the strategical overview is not considered a bad thing.

Limitations and further research

Although I did my best to deliver a reliable and valid research, there might be some limitations to this study. First of all, even though the alumni perspective was the best perspective to take for this research it has some implications. People tend to only remember the extremes of their experiences, so only courses which were considered special were remembered by alumni. This resulted in a bias in my dataset. For instance, when lectures did not go well, this resulted in negative response to a certain course, while the design of the course was not necessarily bad.

Further research should focus on the role of teachers have in course design. Since, teachers have to take more in consideration with the design of courses. At universities, for instance, they also have to do research. Additionally, although perspectives to course elements change after graduation (Amar, 2016) the student view is still important to consider, since, they have to be stimulated to learn. Therefore, future research should aim to include all three perspectives (alumni, students and teachers). This should result in a template for truly effective course design which is still manageable for teachers.

(38)

38

References

Amar, H. C. (2016). Exploring experiential learning in fully employed (FEMBA) programs. California State University, Northridge.

Ankers, P., & Brennan, R. (2002). Managerial relevance in academic research: an exploratory study.

Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 20(1), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500210414729

Beattie, A. (2014). Supply Chain Management Jobs Are Booming. Retrieved January 25, 2017, from http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/111314/supply-chain-management-jobs-are-booming.asp

Beaty, L. (2003). Supporting learning from experience. In H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, & S. Marshall (Eds.), A

Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (pp. 134–147). London: Kogan Page.

Bennis, W. G., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How Business Schools Lost Their Way. Harvard Business Review,

83(5), 96–104. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.si.unav.es:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true& AuthType=ip,url&db=edsdnp&AN=1157584ART&lang=es&site=eds-live&scope=site

Bernon, M., & Mena, C. (2013). The evolution of customised executive education in supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(4), 440–453. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-07-2012-0262

Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press. Bressler, M., & Bressler, L. (2007). Teaching methodologies in the classroom: A study of student

preferences. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 11(1), 69–80.

Brigley, S. (2009). How to spice up your lectures. Education for Primary Care, 20, 322–323. Cambridge Dictionary. (2017). Retrieved January 21, 2017, from

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/

Centrum hoger onderwijs. (2016). Keuzegids. Retrieved January 26, 2017, from http://www.keuzegids.org/ol/gidsen/ma16/vergelijken

Chui, S., Hodgson, P., & Wong, A. (2015). Impacts of learning through experience: An application of service leadership in whole-person development. In Promoting service leadership qualities in

University students (pp. 139–160). Singapore: Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-515-0

Costa, M. L., Van Rensburg, L., & Rushton, N. (2007). Does teaching style matter? A randomised trial of group discussion versus lectures in orthopaedic undergraduate teaching. Medical Education,

41(2), 214–217.

Delaney, A. M. (2004). Ideas to Enhance Higher Education’s Impact on Graduates' Lives; Alumni Recommendations. Tertiary Education and Management, 10(2), 89–105.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2004.9967120

(39)

39

Di Leonardi, B. C. (2007). Tips for facilitating learning: the lecture deserves some respect. The Journal

of Continuing Education in Nursing, 38, 154–161.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Review,

14(4), 532–550.

Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

Elam, E. L. R., & Spotts, H. E. (2004). Achieving Marketing Curriculum Integration: A Live Case Study Approach. Journal of Marketing Education, 26(1), 50–65.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475303262351

Elder, P., Elder, R., & Elder, L. (2012). Critical Thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and

your life (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Pearson.

Elkjaer, B. (2009). Pragmatism: A learning theory for the future. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary

theories of learning (pp. 74–89). New York: Routledge.

Elsevier. (2016). Beste studies. Retrieved January 26, 2017, from

http://onderzoek.elsevier.nl/onderzoek/beste-studies-2016/27/vergelijk/0514,515,516 Feinstein, A., Mann, S., & Corsun, D. (2002). Charting the experiential territory: clarifying definitions

and uses of computer simulation, games and role play. Journal of Management Development,

21(9/10), 732–744.

Fish, L. (2007). Graduate student project: operations management product plan. Journal of Education

for Business, 83(2), 59–71.

Fisher, A. (2014). Wanted: 1.4 million new supply chain workers by 2018. Retrieved January 25, 2017, from http://fortune.com/2014/05/01/wanted-1-4-million-new-supply-chain-workers-by-2018/ Friedman, S. (2004). Learning to make more effective decisions: changing beliefs as a prelude to

action. The Learning Organization, 11(2), 110–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470410521583

Gammelgaard, B., & Larson, P. D. (2001). Logistics skills and competencies for supply chain management. Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), 27–50.

Griffiths, S. (2009). Teaching and learning in small groups. In A Handbook for Teaching and Learning

in Higher Education (pp. 72–84). New York: Routledge.

Guevara, C., & Stewart, S. (2011). Do student evaluations match alumni expectations? Managerial

Finance, 37(7), 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1108/03074351111140252

Hale, E. (2013). for Improving Student Learning, 3(4), 312–323.

Hamilton, J. G., & Klebba, J. M. (2011). Experiential Learning: A Course Design Process for Critical Thinking. American Journal of Business Education, 4(12), 1–12. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1056615