Week 7 and everyone is back from mid-semester break and ready (hopefully) to tackle the MikesBikes business simulation. My group did not end up meeting often but we kept in constant communication (which I believe is key) in regards to what areas the department managers need to focus and research on further before our next rollover. Our team members have really stepped up in researching and making decisions together and our success reflects the team efforts. However as we continue to dominate our market, there are several firms who are not performing well at all. This is a massive problem for us, and according to Daudelin (1996), one that needs further analysis.
At first we thought this is a good thing for our group success by eliminating all competition. However a problem was made apparent to us by Peter that if there is a low supply of goods then there is less demand from our market, limiting the our potential increase in sales, ultimately creating a ceiling for the amount of SHV all companies can achieve in our particular market. The solution is to assist non performing groups in order to increase the market demand. This is far easier said than done. As discussed by Argyris (1991), success in the marketplace increasingly depends on learning, yet most people don’t know how to learn. No one likes to hear that their strategy is 'incorrect' or not appropriate.
We decided to take action and hold a group meeting with all firms in our market to reach a consensus. This proved ineffective with the lowest performing teams absent from the meeting. We have decided to treat those groups as 'dogs' within our market and continue to try reason and discuss with the remaining groups a plan of action. This proved challenging as some groups claimed they knew what they were doing-even though their SHV performance reflects otherwise.
In order to explain the problem, we must understand that if learning is to persist, group members must also look inward. They need to react critically on their own behavior, identify the ways they often inadvertently contribute to the teams problems, and then change how they act. In particular, they must learn how the very way they go about defining and solving problems can be a source of problems in its own right (Argyris, 1991). Hopefully next week, all groups can meet up once again and decide on more actionable plans to follow before the next rollover period (without collusion taking place), for everyones' benefit.
Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard business review, 69(3).
Daudelin, M. W. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36--48