As the halfway point draws nearer, my scepticism increases. Knowing that our group marks lie in the hands of an online simulation is a crazy thought. So my confusion for this week lies in the reliability of the MikesBikes simulation, because how do we as students know that by manipulating certain figures and amounts we spend in various areas we will achieve the results we desire or deserve. And the answer is we don’t. There is no way to know exactly what will happen week to week, we can only put in the research and hope for the best, because a lot of our results as a time are derived from the decision made by our competitors.
Although it is up to us as teams to put in the work and find out what figures and amounts need to be manipulated, how do we know for certain that the simulation might not suddenly decide it doesn’t like what it sees, even if we have gone to great lengths to derive formulas to work out what to change the Retail margin to or what to spend on Brand Awareness. My theory here is that a slight ‘glitch’ in the system can go unnoticed and although this may be uncommon for this particular programme there is no absolute way of knowing that the simulation might not overlook a decision made due a glitch in the system. I no this may be an obscene hypothesis however in todays world we rely so heavily on technology we just expect things will always work out. My iPhone is the perfect example, as majority of the time it works perfectly and the end result is always great, however from time to time it suddenly decides to forget all brightness settings and complete dim the screen without even the touch of a button, or it may freeze on a snapchat. My main point is ‘glitches’ occur more than we realise in technology and that this heavy reliance on an online simulation for 20% of our grade is frightening.
With Rollover 3 complete it is becoming evident which firms entered the first few rollovers with all guns blazing, as they differ from the firms who approach each rollover with more of a long-term strategy. With my group originally looking like the firm that others may have seen as the underdogs (literally) and the firm that groups may have started to think about taking over, we were one of the few to have positive profits on rollover three and although we may not be anywhere near the top yet, as a group we are confident in our long term strategy and have high hopes for the future. But the learning doesn’t stop there. As the Chris Argyris reading states “success in the marketplace increasingly depends on learning”, (Argyris, C. 1991) and without giving away any of our strategies we are constantly trying to find new ways to improve our SHV, whether it be focus our attention in a particular area one week or try to think of a secret weapon to keep up our sleeves in case everything goes bottom up. In this aspect I feel we are constantly trying to learn more about the simulation, and in doing this it helps ease my uncertainty in the great reliance on technology in this assessment. Other thoughts I have had over the past week in regards to my group and efforts towards MikesBikes include; is the reason we have put a lot of time and research into each rollover due to our poor results in the practice rollover, and although we are trucking along quite nicely at the moment, are other groups that did well in the practice rollovers struggling because the practice rollovers were only 2 weeks thus only allowing a short term approach??
Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Reflections, 4(2), 4--15