Wiki contents

Journals

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

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This week¿s focus was on strategy.  Class sessions revolved around pondering future strategies and consequentially, what we can take from our practice simulation into our ¿real deal¿ simulation.  The reading by Kim and Mauborgne (2004) opened my eyes about blue ocean strategies, about rendering the competition irrelevant, or at least trying to.  Thus, instead of competing with everybody else for a large market share, we decided to invest strictly in Racers; which is why we are named Strictly Racers accordingly.  We discussed this decision thoroughly, and as a team we decided, seeing as the simulation results are only worth 20%, that we would rather be ambitious and get a great mark, risking not doing so well, than to play it safe and to just get a ¿good¿ mark.  We designed three bikes, one racer and another in each of the two largest markets.  We don¿t wish to have to produce and sell these bikes, however we must be prepared for everything.  Establishing that we are committed to monopolizing the racers market, it¿s not a case of other teams not competing with us out of fear; it¿s just logical that they don¿t.  However, it would be unwise to bank on every other team being logical.  As the saying goes, the only person scarier than the smartest person in the world is the dumbest person in the world.  It is important that we remain fluid, and although it would contradict our team name, if another team tries to compete with us in racers, then we will be forced to release one of our other designs.  We will likely release the one that means we mimic that of the team who decided to compete with us.  A sort of ¿this will teach you to mess with us¿ mentality.  But preferably, we would rather be ¿left alone¿ with the racer market.

The other reading from Kim and Mauborgne (2004) about charting our future was also very helpful.  We recognized that the racer market had potential to do well, but seeing as it was only small, then it wouldn¿t really be wise for two teams to compete with each other in this section as it is like a child trying to take another¿s toy when there is a whole box full of toys for everyone.  So we decided to make our mark, using the third complementary quality that characterizes an effective strategy in particular; a compelling tag line.  ¿Strictly Racers¿,  and we wish to be strictly that.  We feared that some teams may think that this is a ploy, or a tactic but this is obviously not the case.  As CEO, I approached two other CEOs from the teams that we decided had the best potential and explained our situation.  It wasn¿t difficult to convince them to not enter into our market as it was an obvious choice not to.  Upon hearing my strategy, I didn¿t have to convince them at all, as after a little hard thinking, they were able to figure out for themselves that it would have ended up as a disaster – very smart CEOs!  We only hope that the other teams can realise the obvious and ¿leave us alone¿ too.

I¿m looking forward to next week¿s rollover, I have heard from a few other teams and I believe that through careful planning and smart choices, that we can all end up with a good grade.

REFERENCES

Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. (2002). Charting your company¿s future. Harvard Business Review, 80(6), 76---83

Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategyHarvard Business Review, 82(10), 75---84

6 Comments

  1. Lee,

    Thank you for the opportunity to review your learning journal.  "The main thing of which yo demonstrated learning is", through your interpersonal connections regarding the respective literature and your own personal situations.

    You didn't really use Daudelin's approach this week, you would be wise to do so next week.

    Regarding Bloom's Taxonomy, I would place you in the application level of learning.  You had a lot more to offer, and I can tell that this was very last-minute.

    In terms of improvement, you would be wise to structure your entry framework around that of Bloom's Taxonomy and Daudelin a lot more closely.

    Thank you for sharing your work, this entry was actually pretty crap.  Do better next time.

  2. Hi Lee,

    Thank you for the opportunity to review your learning journal. The main thing of which you have demonstrated learning is trying to manipulate your competition through your company name and talking to other firms CEO's.

    I didn't see any evidence of Daudelin within your journal for this week. A suggestion for next time would be to try identify 1 problem and go through Daudelin's four steps outlined in the reading.

    It is hard to say what level of Bloom's Taxonomy you demonstrated, at times you showed an application level of understanding however, I don't think you fully displayed your comprehension of this weeks readings.

    An improvement for next time would be follow Daudelin's and Bloom's Taxonomy more effectively and display higher levels of reflection.

    Thank you for sharing your work! I learnt a lot about your strategy, which was interesting

    Thanks

  3. Hi Lee,

    Thank you for the opportunity to review your learning journal.

    Can I just say this is awesome! Because what you plan to do is unethical i.e. colluding with the competitors and dividing the market which is anti-competitive behaviour and the best part of it is that you come and post it online not only for us to see but the whole world of internet users!

    Word of advice: if you are ever to make such deals its probably best for you and your company to NOT announce it online. Plus if you were in the real world you would facing impeachment as a director, possible criminal charges and your company would face a high chance of being stricken of the companies registar (Comlaw 203 knowledge)

    *Note: I do not encourage such anti-competitive behaviour.

    1. Umar,

      Thank you for your 2 cents.  For future reference, if you could please assist me in bettering my journal writings by following the recommended format;

      • Next comment on either (a) the degree to which they have followed Daudeline's recommended approach, or (b) the stages of Kolb's cycle of experiential learning they have gone through. Again, be explicit, and comment on the relative balance; e.g., is most of the journal about 'Concrete Experience'.
      • Then move onto Bloom's taxonomy and think about the highest level they demonstrate. Write something along the lines of "The highest level of Bloom's taxonomy demonstrated in this journal is X. This was done when you said Y quote from their journal
      • Next indicate how they can improve, using ideas from either Daudelin, Kolb, or Bloom (only one).
      • Finally, close by thanking them again for sharing their work, and indicate how it has helped to improve your own work.

      I must commend you on achieving 1/5 of the criterion.  Keep it up, with a bit of practice I'm sure you will get there ;)

      Lee

    2. Umar, that was far from constructive, its really unnecessary.

      1. Let him be Abhiram ;)

        His words warrant no merit.