First of all, what I particularly felt about week 2 is the toughness of MikesBikes simulation to achieve the minimum level of shareholder value of $25. I spent time on this single player simulation as much as possible. However, in the first 10 hours, whatever I did to make the company performance better actually made it worse and worse, and shareholders were always furious at my performance. Without realizing the importance of the quality of the products/services, and awareness of the brand though advertising and PR, I probably could not achieve the minimum requirement of $25. I finally got more than $40 for shareholder value just one hour before the time we have to submit our CV with the financial statement of MiesBikes simulation.
Secondly, We no longer have lectures any more!! The same thing cannot happen to other courses. In week 2, we were finally assigned into groups by submitting CVs which show our characteristics, majors/grades, preferred teams, or the performance of MikesBikes simulation. At the first meeting of our group, we exchanged our personal information ensuring each member’s role of the simulation and briefly discussed about what we are going to do in the following weeks. I personally think that our first meeting was done well because all of members actively participated in discussion and tried to know other members.
In order to maximize the quality of the team performance, I would also like to provide some reflections on the article “Turning student groups into effective teams (Oakley, Felder, Brent, & Elhaji, 2004)”. According to this article (Oakley, Felder, Brent, & Elhaji, 2004), the effectiveness of the team when students are assigned by the instructors tends to overweigh one of self-selection-based teams mainly because already established relationships hardly create or develop the new abilities to solve the problems such as conflicts, and also reduce the opportunities to interact with team members. I agree with this idea because anyway we have to or need to work with people we do not know their backgrounds when we get a job and work on any particular projects. However, I also disagree with this idea when the instructors assign people into groups/teams quite randomly because, in my experience of team working in internship, randomly organized teams sometimes easily create the conflicts or discrimination due to the poor combination of members’ abilities. It is clear that we all have different capabilities or characteristics which can cover the disabilities of others. Therefore, I reckon that our backgrounds or abilities should be carefully evaluated and then assigned into teams as MGMT 300 did.
Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of student centered learning, 2(1), 9--34.