A Simulated Monster

And then unanticipated problems began to appear. I should have anticipated how large they would
grow, for they turned out to be real world problems with which we are all too familiar.

Students had learned how to beat the system and make money without doing the work I had planned.
The companies with the strongest leaders became the most successful. Those without leadership achieved
little. Company politics crept into he program. Employees became frustrated by problems in working with
one another and/or by being chastised by co-workers. Some resigned. Resigned! That meant they had
dropped out of class. We had yet to open the text. And that was another problem. We needed to cover
material in the text which was not integrated into the simulation.

Students did not have time to be students, work real jobs, and take on the work of simulation as well.
Despite their interest, we were in trouble.

Another difficulty I experienced in the simulation is analogous to the problem we see on a broader scale
between education and the "real world" workplace. Each student in the simulation chose a job within
his/her company: materials manager, cost estimator, bookkeeper, president. (Job titles and duties were
created and described by the students.) Therein lay a major problem: the real workplace usually finds an
employee doing one task or job, but in school our interest lies in teaching the whole. Each student is to
learn about all of the jobs in the organization. Therefore, I realized that my simulation must be changed to
involve a rotation of duties and perhaps a redesign of the organizational structure to one that would insure
that each student contributes. This mistake was perhaps the one which made the simulation process most
valuable to me!

_ Grades were to be assigned to each group as a whole, based on success in the marketplace and on
evidence of participation. But students could not relate to the success or failure which depended on a group
effort. Each insisted on being graded on individual participation. Finger pointing as to who was responsible
for corporate performance became nasty. Real world, yes, but this was not the appropriate place to try and
explain the effect that the value of the whole versus the indifference of the individual makes in the larger
scheme of order in which we all participate. I ended up grading somewhat individually, basing my
decisions on documented effort.

Conclusion

| began the project trying to reinvent a standard wheel; I ended up with a simulated monster that
reflected reality too brightly. The reality I once felt was necessary for these students to experience seemed
questionable after the simulation experience. How valuable was it to them? Their displays of enthusiasm
and dedication to making the simulated economy run for twelve weeks were gratifying, but the wear and
tear on the hearts and minds of the ones who worked hard but came in last anyway seemed to outweigh the
good.

Will I use my wheel again? Maybe and maybe not, but the process of putting it together will be with me
always. And that is what I find most important!

Jetf Henderson
Accounting

For further information, contact the author at Kalamazoo Valley Community College, 6767 West O Avenue,
Kalamazoo, MI 49009.

 

Suanne D. Roueche, Editor
September 25, 1987, Vol. IX, No. 19

INNOVATION ABSTRACTS Is a publication of the National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development, EDB 348, The University of
Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, (512)471-7545. Subscriptions are available to nonconsortium members for $35 per year. Funding in
part by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation and Sid W. Riciardson Foundation. Issued weekly when classes are in session during fall and spring
terms and once during the summer.