Wiki contents

Journals

2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Did we trust in how simulated results would do that we forgot that reality can be much different? After looking at the results of the practice turnover, I think we did.

To test the various strategies that we came up with we often used the offline mode of Mike Bikes. This of course comes with advantages and disadvantages. Advantages being that you can test and fine tune what goes on in the business and with the launch of products. Disadvantages would be that it doesn’t account for what our competitors will do. This is what we forgot to take into account. What if the other teams have similar strategies? How do combat these strategies and come out on top? By not considering these questions, we may have dealt ourselves a blow.

As we go in to the competition phase of Mikes Bikes, it is important for us to make sure that we make the best use of the strategies that we have cultivated. To do this we must consider all the possible futures that can happen. How they can affect us and then make a effective plan to implement our strategies. By taking what is said in Edmondson (2003) about collective learning and applying an iterative process to implementing our strategies. But instead of waiting for results come out or the offline practice rollovers which enforce an optimal outcome, we have an ongoing action, reflection and adjustment process. Now with the competition phase we will not have the offline mode, so testing our products to see how they do will in the simulation will not be a option. This means it’s even more critical to make our own hypothetical situations to fine tune our product specs upon release and strategies that we have come out with. By doing this I think that we can be one of the top teams.

References:

Edmondson, Amy C. "Managing the Risk of Learning: Psychological Safety in Work Teams. " Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 02-062, March 2002.

Retrieved from: https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=12333 

4 Comments

  1. I enjoyed this reflection and found it insightful.

    The rhetorical question frames your problem statement quite nicely. You discussed the analysis and a theoretical model. You also utilised the power of questions and it fits well in your introduction.

    Improvements to make would include: further discussion of the questions posed. More detail on what you learnt or what you could learn from the questions in the first paragraph. A stronger link to the readings may also help. Katzenback, J. R., & Smith would make for a great reference when discussing how to make a better team.

    1. Vincent Krishna it's nice to see you've updated your avatar. Very cool (do people still say that?).

      Unlike you, I think that the problem statement conflates the problem (which I'm still unclear about) with its causes (which I'm not sure are justified by what's said in the learning journal).  I don't believe Sachin Dewan has followed the advice given in "And here we go"; Sachin needs to be explicit in using Daudelin ... and a clearly articulate the problem as Daudelin says:

      The first stage of reflection, articulation of a problem, defines the issue that the mind will
      work on during the process of reflection. It is often preceded by what John Dewey calls “a
      state of doubt, hesitancy, perplexity, or mental difficulty.” The clear articulation of a problem
      is often an insight in itself, and rewarding to the manager who has struggled to identify
      a vague sense of discomfort or dissatisfaction.

      In Sachin's problem statement there needs to be an unequivolcal statement as to what the problem is that is being addressed in the learning journal. Without that, the analysis, hypothesizing/theorising, and action are likely to be off-track.

      1. Peter Smith

        Apologies for the incredibly late response.

        Here are my thoughts on Sachin Dewan's problem statement. The problem itself was the unsatisfactory result from the practice round due to dependence on the offline mode. I'm going off an unstated need to achieve a better SHV. The cause of this problem was the excessive trust placed in offline mode and not much else. The cause and problem are both entwined in the introductory question. I do agree that an unequivocal problem statement is more easily addressed and I'll have to check my journals for this too. Often I fall prey to the idea that others know exactly what I'm thinking and trying to communicate.


        I may be biased as I had discussed potential problems with my fellow team-mate and may also be drawing from what he had articulated in person rather than just in this journal.

        Thank you for noticing the avatar. Need to lean into the name. People definitely still say cool. Don't think it'll ever stop being cool.

  2. Hi Sachin, I agree with the comments Vincent has made above and would also like to add that it would be great to see you discussing how you are doing things better as the weeks pass compared to your previous weeks, this will show a true pattern of your learning process.