Experiential learning alone does not guarantee that students will accurately conceptualize content, or meet course outcomes in subsequent active experimentation stages. In an effort to more effectively meet learning objectives, the experiential learning cycle was modified with a unique combination of the 5 Whys root cause problem-solving tool and a collective reflection step. Applying these modifications through multiple iterations of in-class exercises, students in lean operations and leadership courses were able to move beyond treating symptoms of problems and generate more viable alternative actions for future applications of their learning. Improved grades, greater achievement of learning objectives, and positive student reactions provide evidence of the modified experiential learning cycle’s success. A generalized framework for using the modified learning cycle in other management courses is also presented.
Don’t want to miss the latest publications from JME? Be sure to sign up for email alerts through the journal homepage!
The Fritz Roethlisberger Memorial Award commemorates Fritz Roethlisberger’s devotion to inquiry and learning. Fritz Roethlisberger helped pioneer the Human Relations School of Management as a human-centric alternative to Taylorist management. The Human Relations School has strongly informed the recent global push towards business humanities education. The Fritz Roethlisberger Memorial Award is granted to authors judged to have contributed the best paper on teaching and learning in organizational and management sciences published in theJournal of Management Education during the previous year.
The abstract for the paper:
Over the past decade, numerous business schools have begun experimenting with studio-based inquiry, often drawing inspiration from professional studios used within art and design schools and from business and governmental studios used for problem-solving and innovation. Business school studios vary considerably in form, ranging from temporary “pop up” studios to dedicated facilities with full-time staff, with the primary purpose of educating managers in craft, art, and design-based approaches to business problems. The jury on the studio phenomenon is out—can they deliver on their educational promise? To address this question, we pull together 25 years of studio experimentation in multiple settings, visits, and observations of studios around the world and interviews with studio makers from various disciplines. We consider the question of “what is a business studio?” in some detail, conjecture about the value that studios might have for management education, provide examples of four different business studio orientations and how these might translate into practice, and highlight what we believe to be some essentials when starting and running a business studio.
We’re pleased to announce that The American Economistis now online with a new, special March 2016 issue! The special issue takes a look back at some of The American Economist‘s most influential articles, each with a new Editor’s Introduction. Editor-in-Chief Paul Grimes introduces the special issue:
This edition of The American Economist marks a new chapter in the history of the journal and its sponsoring organization, Omicron Delta Epsilon, The International Honor Society in Economics. For more than five decades, Omicron Delta Epsilon self-published the journal using a variety of university presses and contract printers to physically produce and distribute the journal to members of the society, individual subscribers, and libraries around the world. Its deep red cover and distinctive title wordmark became iconic symbols within the economics profession. Although the size and format of the journal evolved over time, the journal was produced only in a hardcopy format—until this issue. With Volume 61, Number 1, Spring 2016, The American Economist enters the digital age of journal publication…
Omicron Delta Epsilon recently celebrated its 100th birthday and The American Economistrecently passed the 50th anniversary of its association with the honor society. As we move past these important milestones and into the digital future, it is fitting that we take the time to look back on the journal’s valuable legacy. This issue opens with a bibliographic history of The American Economist that chronicles the journal’s path from a student-edited and student-produced annual publication into a well-respected academic journal with a global readership. The history is followed by the republication of 12 classic articles from the journal’s backfile. These curated articles were selected to provide readers with a feel of The American Economist’s rich heritage of publishing original work by some of the world’s most prominent economists. Papers by Milton Friedman, Paul Samuelson, John Kenneth Galbraith, Robert Solow, and Elinor Ostrom are included here, among others. Each article opens with a new Editor’s Introduction to set the paper and the author into its proper context.
The Academy Awards is a well-established celebration of talent and achievement in the film industry. Yesterday marked the Oscars’ 88th award ceremony, a testament to the popularity of the Academy Awards, but popularity alone does not mean that the Oscars are a reliable signal of quality. We revisit the article, “Why Some Awards Are More Effective Signals of Quality Than Others: A Study of Movie Awards” published in Journal of Managementby authors Gedra Gemser, Mark A.A.M. Leenders, and Nachoem M. Wijnberg, to consider how different award shows define and award quality work. The authors discuss whether the Academy Awards, a peer-selected award, is less effective in boosting film performance than expert-selected awards. In addition, the authors compare the Academy Awards with less prestigious film awards to determine whether the Oscars are viewed as a more credible cue for consumers to select movies.
In this article, the authors develop and empirically test a conceptual framework that predicts which types of awards
have the biggest impact on the competitive performance of the award winners. The empirical setting is an industry where awards proliferate, namely, the U.S. motion picture industry. Overall, their results suggest that awards granted by a jury composed primarily of end consumers, peers, or experts each have a different effect on consumer behavior, which can be explained in terms of differences in source credibility and award salience.
This essay provides evidence from the neurosciences that standard Introduction to Management and Introduction to Organizational Behavior textbooks may inhibit, rather than facilitate, learning of the basic concepts and the rudimentary knowledge-basis that underlie the complex skills business students should learn in subsequent coursework and that they must hone in practice as future managers. Specific introductory textbook limitations that are addressed include the following: (a) the nearly total absence of neuroscience findings that have important relevance and application to management and organizational behavior; (b) the ineffective manner in which theories are presented; (c) the use of idiosyncratic, academically derived, or simply spot-invented language; (d) the nonengaging manner in which information (generally speaking) is presented; and (e) the question of whether such textbooks are being read, much less studied. Based on my recent, joyous experience in not using such textbooks, I propose, for readers’ possible consideration, an alternative (hyperlink) practice that is (a) fully compatible with recent neuroscience research on management, learning, and information retention/retrieval and (b) likely to dramatically increase student engagement with assigned readings in Introduction to Management and Introduction to Organizational Behavior courses and their ability to retrieve content and apply it during class discussions.
In 1983, federal and state governments began taxing the social security benefits of high-income elderly. We develop a conceptual model and use 1981–1986 Current Population Survey data to estimate the policy’s labor supply effects. Our estimates suggest that the approximate 20 percent reduction in benefits for the highest income individuals led to a two to five percentage point increase in their labor force participation. Using 2008 data, we show that failing to index the taxation thresholds for inflation, adding a second set of thresholds in 1993, and removing the earnings test in 2000 all substantially magnify the policy’s scope.