Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.79.3.169-175
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Modular Experiential Learning for Business-toBusiness Marketing Courses
Kenneth Anselmi & Robert Frankel
To cite this article: Kenneth Anselmi & Robert Frankel (2004) Modular Experiential Learning for
Business-to-Business Marketing Courses, Journal of Education for Business, 79:3, 169-175, DOI:
10.3200/JOEB.79.3.169-175
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.79.3.169-175
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 23
View related articles
Citing articles: 5 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 12 January 2016, At: 23:08
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Modular Experiential Learning
for Business-to-Business
Marketing Courses
KENNETH ANSELMI
East Carolina University
Greenville, North Carolina
The course of nature is to divide what is
united and unite what is divided.
—Goethe
E
xperiential learning is a process of
discovery that simplifies complex
situations and provides opportunities for
resolution of problem elements. Kolb
(1984, p. 38) defined experiential learning as a “process whereby knowledge is
created through the transformation of
experience.” In this article, we describe
an experiential exercise, the Extended
Buying Center Game (EBCG), that integrates marketing course concepts, theories, and practices; develops skills valued by industry; and is adaptive to
course design. The game is an extended,
modular version of the base role-playing game originally developed by Morris (1984). The EBCG promotes active
learning by involving students, through
role-playing, in the dynamics of organizational buying behavior and adaptive
selling. Activity and assignment modules in the EBCG are both individual
and team based. Although primarily
designed for marketing, the EBCG is
applicable to other business areas, particularly operations/purchasingand management/negotiations.
Experiential Learning
Experiential learning is recognized
widely as a technique that improves the
ROBERT FRANKEL
University of North Florida
Jacksonville, Florida
ABSTRACT. In this article, the
authors present the Extended Buying
Center Game (EBCG), an experiential
exercise that integrates marketing concepts and theory with a strong emphasis on industry skills and that does so
in an adaptive course design format.
The focus of the EBCG is on organizational buying behavior, buyer-seller
interaction, and marketing response.
The EBCG structure provides students
with cooperative and competitive roleplaying opportunities, individual and
group written assignments and presentations, and verbal skill challenges.
effectiveness of higher education; it represents a shift from an instruction paradigm to a learning paradigm (Barr &
Tagg, 1995; Saunders, 1997). Within the
instruction paradigm, students are
viewed as passive recipients of knowledge, as opposed to the active participants that they are seen to be within the
learning paradigm (Bobbitt, Inks,
Kemp, & Mayo, 2000).
The use of the learning paradigm
requires students to apply the concepts,
theories, and practices presented in
class to real-world situations. This experiential extension provides discovery
and involvement for students, as they
become full partners or collaborators in
the learning process and assume responsibility for their own decisions (O’Banion, 1997, p. 49). Experiential learning
also encourages students to engage in
higher-order learning as they personal-
ize content, thus developing a deeper
understanding of the material (Anderson, 1997; Bonwell & Eison, 1991;
Dabbour, 1997; Shakarian, 1995).
Marketing education literature
encourages the use of experiential techniques (Dommeyer, 1986; Graeff, 1997;
Titus & Petroshius, 1993; Williams,
Beard, & Rymer, 1991). Recent articles
suggest experiential frameworks, techniques, and exercises for improving
learning in marketing courses (Bobbitt,
Inks, Kemp, & Mayo, 2000; Gremler,
Hoffman, Keaveney, & Wright, 2000;
Hamer, 2000; Petkus, 2000). Bobbitt,
Inks, Kemp, and Mayo (2000) suggested that students sometimes conclude
their business program without a good
understanding of the interrelationships
between areas of study, especially within the marketing area. The EBCG focuses on students’ active participation in
organizational buying behavior, buyerseller relationships, and use of the marketing mix to create value.
The movement to experiential learning represents a shift among educators
from “teaching marketing to helping
students learn marketing” (Lamont &
Friedman, 1997, p. 24). An extensive
body of literature suggests that instructors allocate too much time to disseminating information and too little time to
developing student skills (Chonko,
1993; Lamb, Shipp, & Moncrief, 1995;
January/February 2004
169
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Ursic & Hegstrom, 1985). Problem
solving, communication, and interpersonal skills are valued by employers
(Floyd & Gordon, 1998; McMahon,
1996). These skills are an important
component of meeting industry “customer requirements” for educators.
Experiential exercises may develop
interpersonal skills as well as communication and problem-solving skills. The
exercises promote cooperation and
enhance listening and critical thinking
skills as students share ideas and listen to
the ideas of others. When used as a complement to lecture, team exercises can be
an effective learning technique (Holter,
1994). The main difficulty in employing
experiential exercises, and thus the main
hurdle to instructor usage, is developing
a project that effectively integrates theory and application in a meaningful way
(Bobbitt, Inks, Kemp, & Mayo, 2000).
Overview of Extended Buying
Center Game
The Extended Buying Center Game
builds on the base game developed by
Morris (1984), in which students (typically undergraduate juniors and seniors)
participate as managers in a team buying center decision. Students readily
grasp the theoretical basis of a buying
center as “those individuals who participate in the purchasing decision and
who share the goals and risks arising
from the decision” (Hutt & Speh, 2001,
p. 73). As active participants in the decision process, students experience application-based learning in the form of
multiple influences within the decision
process; complex interactions between
individuals; and decision making (i.e.,
the purchasing problem) that is driven
by both individual and organizational
goals. Webster and Wind (1972) suggested that “organizational buying is
problem solving” through which organizations resolve the gap between what
they have and what they need.
We developed game extensions in
which students perform new roles as
sales/marketing representatives and participate in adaptive selling and
enhanced buying activities and assignments. This integrates a greater number
of content areas and enhances the learning experience. Students use tools such
170
Journal of Education for Business
as quantitative vendor analysis and perceptual mapping, prepare print advertisements and customer proposals, and
make presentations.
The EBCG follows a learning cycle
that integrates Kolb’s (1981, 1984) four
learning abilities: concrete experience,
reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation.
Concrete experience occurs as students
take on a series of roles as departmental
managers, buying center members, and
vendor representatives. Students integrate concepts and communicate their
observations and reflections in both written and verbal assignments and actively
experiment in game iterations and buyerseller decision making. In Table 1, we
present roles, activities or tasks, and
learning objectives for this exercise.
The EBCG divides the complex situation of organizational buying and marketing response into understandable
units or elements. Students learn
through involvement and discovery,
applying marketing knowledge in a
game that they self-report as unique and
challenging, creative, fun, inventive,
enjoyable, relevant, and important to
continue. In Table 2, we show a sample
of student evaluations. As indicated,
students appreciate and value the EBCG
and perceive that the game improves
their understanding of business marketing and the skills necessary for their
success. We based our collection of student feedback on a design by Darian
and Coopersmith (2001).
There are two iterations of the
EBCG: Buying Decision 1 and Buying
Decision 2. In Buying Decision 1, students become buying center members
and make a vendor selection decision.
In Buying Decision 2, students take on
the additional role of sales/marketing
representative. That role creates new
information that, when combined with
the previous experience of acting as the
buying center customer, forms the basis
for the second vendor-selection decision. Buying Decision 1 may consume
up to four 50-minute class periods, and
Buying Decision two up to eight.
In each buying scenario, students
deal with forces that influence buying
decisions, such as environmental conditions (external to the company), organizational factors, buying center role
expectations and behavior, and individual personalities. These buying influences, along with the influence of conflict and negotiation rules, purchase,
selling, information, role stress, and
decisions, as suggested in the literature
(Johnston & Lewin, 1996; Robinson,
Faris, & Wind, 1967; Sheth, 1973;
Webster & Wind, 1972), are a part of the
game scenarios and are created within
the game experience.
In making their decisions, students
consider the buying situation (e.g.,
modified rebuy), buying stage (e.g.,
description of product characteristics
needed), and the type of vendor relationship desired. They evaluate seven
vendors on criteria that include total
dollar value, life cycle costs, vendor
experience and reputation, sales support, reciprocity, quality and reject
rates, order response time, engineering
innovation, size and length of contract,
after-sale services, and end-product
positioning. Johnston and Lewin (1996)
suggested that understanding organizational buying behavior is difficult
because the behavior is often a multiphase, multiperson, multidepartmental,
and multiobjective process, but this
knowledge is critical for success.
Buying Decision 1
Step 1. Functional Department Vendor
Preference
Students participate in a buying situation by performing functional organizational roles, acting as managers in one of
seven assigned functional departments:
sales and marketing, finance and
accounting, purchasing, design and
development engineering, quality assurance, production, and maintenance.
Written position descriptions acquaint
students with the primary concerns and
responsibilities of their functional roles.
Each departmental manager carries equal
power in the subsequent crossfunctional
buying center decisions, a process that
enhances interpersonal skills.
Within each functional department,
students must agree on key dimensions
or criteria through which to evaluate each
of the seven vendors, and they begin the
selection process by rank-ordering their
top three vendor choices. Written back-
TABLE 1. Extended Buying Center Game Roles, Activities/Tasks, and Learning Objectives
Role
Activities/tasks
Objectives
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Buying Decision 1
Functional department
manager
Preference decision:
Analyze vendors
Rank top three vendors
Perform functional roles
Demonstrate buying process
Develop interpersonal skills
Buying center
member
Vendor selection decision:
Analyze vendors
Rate and select one vendor
Demonstrate influences in organizational buying
process models
Apply concepts of value analysis and life-cycle costs
Demonstrate crossfunctional teams
Demonstrate conflict and risk
Develop interpersonal and problem-solving skills
Buying center
member
Assignments:
Evaluate EBCG process and experience
Write memorandum
Make executive presentation
Prepare perceptual map
Develop written communication skills
Improve formal presentation skills
Apply concept of positioning and illustrate spatial
representation
Buying Decision 2
Sales/marketing
representative
Sales appointments:
Plan and make sales call
Apply the marketing concept
Demonstrate sales behaviors of obtaining, using, and
giving information
Apply concepts of adaptive selling, sales and customer
orientation, and working smarter
Demonstrate buyer-seller interaction process
Develop interpersonal skills
Apply marketing-mix strategies
Sales/marketing
representative
Assignments:
Prepare print ad
Write recommendation memo
Write proposal letter to buying center
Demonstrate role of advertising
Apply advertising guidelines
Employ creativity
Develop written and analytical skills
Buying center
member
Vendor selection decision:
Analyze, rate, and select one vendor
Demonstrate influences in organizational buying process
models
Apply concepts of value analysis and life-cycle costs
Demonstrate crossfunctional teams
Demonstrate conflict and risk
Develop interpersonal and problem-solving skills
Buying center
member
Assignments:
Write recommendation memo
Make buying center recommendation
Evaluate EBCG
Develop written communication skills
Develop formal presentation skills
Provide feedback to instructor
grounds for each vendor detail attributes
that appeal to different functional departments; for instance, the ease of component installation would be important to
the production department. The development of departmental criteria and preferences sets the stage for Step 2.
Step 2. Vendor Selection
The objectives of Step 2 focus on promoting student understanding of the
multiple influences on the organizational buying process, value analysis, and
life-cycle cost, and how crossfunctional
teams resolve conflict and risk via interpersonal problem solving. Buying centers are formed by regrouping randomly
selected students from each functional
department. A typical class of 35 to 40
students, which would create seven
functional departments of five to six students each, will evolve into five to six
buying centers of seven students each.
Thus, each buying center represents a
multiple-influence, crossfunctional team
assigned to resolve a vendor selection
(buying) problem. Purchase decisions
are moving more toward team participation (Ellram & Pearson, 1993) and
greater diversity and motivation (Johnston & Lewin, 1996).
The task of the buying center is to
perform, as a team, an analysis of the
potential vendors and then select only
one vendor (using the same component
scenario as in the departmental preference decision). A single source decision increases student interaction and
thus exposes both departmental and
organizational interests. Each buying
center creates and implements five
January/February 2004
171
three written assignments⎯two individually and one as a group.
TABLE 2. Student Evaluations of Knowledge and Skills Derived From
EBCG and the Value of Its Components (in Percentages)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Item
Individual reflection on Buying Decision 1. For the first, individual assignment, students answer a series of questions regarding their experiences in
Buying Decision 1. They address the
vendor selection process (e.g., dimensions selection process), motivation
(e.g., functional role), group interaction,
and individual behavior (e.g., bonus
points). The essay provides students
with an opportunity to reflect on and
reinforce the knowledge gained in the
first buying decision experience while
improving their writing skills.
SA
A
N
D
SD
43
54
57
46
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
71
28
22
4
7
0
0
0
0
50
43
7
0
0
36
36
36
36
46
43
53
60
18
21
11
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Item
E
VG
AA
A
BA
P
The value of
Buying Decision 1
Weighted rating analysis
Buying Decision 2
Print advertisement
Proposal letter
Recommendation memo (marketing)
Playing role of representative
Recommendation memo (procurement)
Presentation
Playing role of BC team member
18
21
46
39
46
36
57
25
29
61
54
46
36
46
36
50
32
50
29
32
14
18
18
7
18
7
11
25
32
7
14
15
0
8
0
7
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The EBCG increased my understanding of
How teams work
How organizations buy and sell
How buying is influenced by many
factors
How successful organizations adapt
How to integrate marketing concepts and
practices
The EBCG helped to improve
Interpersonal skills
Written communication skills
Verbal communication skills
Problem-solving skills
Note. Sample size of 28. Students evaluated the EBCG’s imparting of knowledge and skills with
the following anchors: SA (strongly agree), A (agree), N (neutral), D (disagree), and SD (strongly disagree). They evaluated the value of the EBCG components with the following anchors: E
(excellent), VG (very good), AA (above average), A (average), BA (below average), and P (poor).
dimensions as choice criteria in its vendor selection process.
Vendor selection incentive. Personal
influences are an important force in
organizational buying behavior. To add
this motivational element (and its potential to place individual or departmental
goals in conflict with organizational
goals) to the buying center decision, we
have individual students earn bonus
points for a match between the vendor
selected by their buying center and the
three vendors selected by their functional department. Points are allotted based
on the rank order of vendors by the
department (e.g., five points if the
match is with their department’s first
choice, four points with second choice,
and three points with third choice).
Weighted rating analysis. Many progressive companies use weighted rating
172
Journal of Education for Business
analyses in vendor evaluations (Giunipero & Brewer, 1993). Although buying centers may use both quantitative
and qualitative analysis, as well as decision heuristics (e.g., a conjunctive rule
that eliminates a vendor if it falls below
a given cutoff level), in their selection of
a vendor, the weighted rating analysis
provides students with a systematic tool
for alternative evaluation.
To formalize a quantitative approach
to vendor selection, students use worksheets to perform a weighted rating vendor analysis. This process allows students (as a group) to adjust vendor
ratings on each of the five selected
dimensions by each dimension’s importance weight.
Step 3. Written Assignments for Buying
Decision 1
For this step, students must complete
Memo and presentation to procurement
executive. The second assignment
improves group interaction as well as
student memorandum writing, oral
communication, and formal presentation skills. Each buying center group
writes and submits a vendor recommendation memo to a professional procurement executive (from outside the classroom). The memo follows an outline
that provides a brief directive, identifies
what is at issue, the facts considered and
assumptions made, and the analyses
performed. The buying center group
then makes a formal presentation of the
recommendation to the outside executive. Finally, the procurement executive
evaluates and grades each presentation
on problem-solving and presentation
skills, providing students with industrylevel expectations and feedback.
Perceptual mapping. The objective of
this individual assignment is for students to prepare a perceptual map (using
data taken from the weighted ratings
analysis tables) and understand its use
in the development of marketing strategy. Although students use only averages, and the data represent only their
buying center, this assignment helps
students discover the benefits of visually mapping product positions and
assessing vendor positions relative to
their ideal point. The assignment also
requires students to take the perspective
of a marketing manager and answer
questions on vendor strategies and tactics, given their buying center market
knowledge. Students explore more fully
vendor response and adaptive selling in
Buying Decision 2.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Buying Decision 2
In Buying Decision 2, students make a
second vendor selection decision using
the same component scenario from Decision 1, but this time student participation
is expanded to include both sides of the
exchange process. Students maintain
their original buying center roles but now
assume the role of a sales and marketing
representative for one of the seven original vendors (calling on a buying center
other than their own). Each buying center
determines its own reason, such as the
performance of the in-vendor, for moving from a straight rebuy situation to a
modified rebuy situation and thus requiring sales calls from vendors for Period 2
(e.g., Year 2).
As a sales and marketing representative, each student has three opportunities⎯a sales call, an advertisement, and
a proposal (offer) letter⎯to communicate with his or her assigned customer
buying center. In this seller role, students perform the basic sales behaviors
of obtaining, using, and giving information (Reid, Pullins, & Plank, 2002), consider their orientation to the customer
(Saxe & Weitz, 1982), and practice
adaptive selling (Spiro & Weitz, 1990;
Weitz, Sujan, & Sujan, 1986). Saxe and
Weitz suggested that customer-oriented
selling is problem solving, or the “practice of the marketing concept at the level
of individual and customer.” Adaptive
selling is an important part of success
(Weitz, 1981), requiring knowledge of
sales situations and information acquisition skills (Weitz et al., 1986).
A second vendor decision provides
opportunities for active learning on both
sides of the exchange process. Students
continue their development of interpersonal and communication skills and
apply marketing concepts, theories, and
practices in creative problem solving
⎯determining the right strategies and
tactics to get the business or respectfully
declining to seek it. The use of the
sales/marketing representative role in
Buying Decision 2 creates new vendor
proposals and information. In other
words, students become co-creators of
the game.
Step 1. Sales/Marketing Representative
Role—Vendor Sales Appointment With
Buying Center
The vendor sales appointment provides students with a basic understanding of the sales side of the buyer-seller
interaction process, the marketing concepts of customer orientation and adaptive selling, and the role of pricing in
strategy. To accomplish this objective,
students must plan and make the sales
call. They have an appointment time
and window (10 to 15 minutes) to call
on their assigned buying center customer. Although familiar with the buying scenario and process from their previous experience in Buying Decision 1,
the students’ challenge is to acquire
information (selection criteria) from
their assigned buying center customer
and make a positive initial impression.
Two signature sheets provide for roleplaying verification and the assignment
of participation points. A variation of
this step may be the use of “team” selling, a practice discussed by Moon and
Armstrong (1994).
Step 2. Written Sales Assignments
For this step, the student must complete three written assignments as the
sales and marketing representative;
these assignments are individual efforts.
Print advertisement for buying center
customer. In their role as a sales/marketing representative for their assigned vendor, students develop a full-page (8.5 x
11) print ad that would appear in an
industry trade journal. Information
obtained during their sales call appointment and the strategy and tactics that they
employ with this account form the foundation for the assignment. The print ad
assignment provides an opportunity for
students to demonstrate the role of advertising, develop criteria for an effective
print ad, and use creativity and advertising guidelines, such as those found in
Lohtia, Johnston, and Aab (1995). Media
selection is not part of the assignment but
could be a game extension.
Recommendation memo to the director of
marketing. The objective of the internal
recommendation memo is to improve
students’ analytical and memorandum
writing skills. In their role of sales/marketing representatives, students write a
memo to the (hypothetical) director of
marketing of their vendor company. The
memo includes the vendor’s current
account status (e.g., out-vendor), a situational analysis (e.g., competitive offerings), and a course-of-action recommendation for the proposal. Students derive
their situational analyses from scenario
information (e.g., initial vendor offering
and background) and the buying center
appointment. Issues addressed in the
analysis include the organizational buying process, in- or out-vendor strategies,
forces that influence the buying process,
the value proposition, and account relationship and behavior. Students adapt the
initial product or service offering (i.e.,
bundle of attributes and benefits) according to buying center/customer requirements and sound analysis.
Proposal letter to buying center customer. Using the recommendation
memo from the previous assignment as
a basis, students further their analytical
and writing skills by presenting a proposal to their buying center customers.
The proposal letter outlines the requirements for the vendor offer for Period 2.
Students may adjust the bundle of
attributes and benefits offered from initial scenario information (based on realistic strategic objectives), within the
instructor’s accepted limits. The clarity
and appearance of the letter has proved
influential in the vendor selection decision of buying centers. The buying center appointment, recommendations, and
proposal provide students with the
opportunity to explore the three basic
sales behaviors and adapt their offering
and communication to the given purchase situation. Reid, Pullins, and Plank
(2002) discussed this adaptive process
for sales success.
Step 3. Buying Center
Vendor Selection
In the second buying center vendor
decision, students revisit the process of
organizational buying. The task for each
buying center is to perform a vendor
analysis and decide on a single vendor
for Period 2 by using new vendor inforJanuary/February 2004
173
mation (i.e., print advertisements and
proposal letters) and the skills learned in
the Buying Decision 1 activities. This
time, the buying center members make
their vendor decision knowing that they
will communicate their choice in a recommendation memo to their vice president of procurement.
Step 4. Buying Center Assignments
for Decision 2
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
For this step, students must complete
three written assignments⎯two group
efforts and one individual assignment.
Recommendation memo to the vice
president of procurement. To expand
student memorandum-writing skills,
each buying center communicates its
vendor choice and selection rationale in
a two-page memo to the vice president
of procurement. Students follow a problem-solving format and state the purpose of the assignment (e.g., the reason
for moving to modified rebuy), identify
relevant facts, present their analysis
logic, and offer a recommendation.
Buying center presentation to a business marketing class. Buying centers
are required to present an overview of
the buying process and tools used to
select their vendor and to participate in
an oral question-and-answer component, which helps develop students’ formal presentation skills. The assignment
helps buying centers reflect on and
communicate about the decision
processes, answer questions from any or
all vendors, and acknowledge the successful vendor. The presentation provides an opportunity to share as a class,
process influences and motivations, and
think through experiences.
Individual student evaluation of the
EBCG. To provide a formal feedback
mechanism to the instructor and to
solicit suggestions for future EBCG
usage, students respond to scaled questions on the level of increased understanding and skill improvement resulting from the EBCG and the value of
game components. Open-ended questions provide an opportunity for student
suggestions. For questionnaire content,
see Table 2.
174
Journal of Education for Business
Discussion
Our purpose in this article has been to
present an example of experiential learning applicable to business-to-business
marketing, operations, and management
courses. The Extended Buying Center
Game covers a broad spectrum of topics
with the intent of exposing students to a
number of basic activities or skill sets—
such as problem solving, verbal and written communications, and interpersonal
skills⎯that they are likely to use in an
introductory employment setting.
From the students’ learning perspective, the EBCG provides several diverse
benefits. First, students confront the
reality of the business world and its
demands of both competitive and cooperative behavior from individuals. Students must work as individuals as well
as in groups. Many, if not most, business
courses today require group work,
though this often excludes the development of individual responsibility. The
EBCG requires individual preparation to
strengthen individual student development and counter any individual’s tendency to “free-ride” in a group setting.
Second, the Extended Buying Center
Game provides students with a look at
both sides of the exchange process; in
other words, they see the sales and marketing perspective as well as the purchasing/sourcing perspective. This dual
perspective enables students to see a
variety of career opportunities. Third,
students develop both written and verbal skills. Industry recruiters emphasize
that both skills are critically important
today, particularly the ability to present
and support a position concisely, clearly, and accurately.
Finally, the EBCG becomes a part of a
student’s portfolio for prospective employment opportunities. In fact, one of
the authors uses sales and marketing assignments as a reference point for student
referrals. Barr and McNeilly (2002) suggested that these valuable experiences
should be communicated to recruiters.
Clearly, the EBCG is a time-consuming activity that requires considerable
planning on the part of the instructor.
Thus, instructors initially may choose to
perform only the buying center Decision 1 activities until they feel comfortable with the game’s format and are sat-
isfied that the game provides the benefits that they expect.
NOTE
We gratefully acknowledge the work of Michael
H. Morris in developing the base exercise.
REFERENCES
Anderson, E. J. (1997, May). Active learning in
the lecture hall. Journal of College Science
Teaching, 26, 428−429.
Barr, T. F., & McNeilly, K. M. (2002). The value of
students’ classroom experiences from the eyes of
the recruiter: Information, implications, and recommendations for marketing educators. Journal
of Marketing Education, 24(2), 168−173.
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to
learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate students. Change, 27(November/December), 12.
Bobbitt, L. M., Inks, S. A., Kemp, K. J., & Mayo,
D. T. (2000). Integrating marketing courses to
enhance team-based experiential learning.
Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 15−24.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Washington, DC: George Washington University,
School of Education and Human Development.
(ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1)
Chonko, L. B. (1993). Business school education:
Some thoughts and recommendations. Marketing Education Review, 3(1), 1−9.
Dabbour, K. S. (1997, July). Applying active
learning methods to the design of library
instruction for a freshman seminar. College and
Research Libraries, 58, 299−308.
Darian, J. C., & Coopersmith, L. (2001). Integrated marketing and operations team projects:
Learning the importance of cross-functional
cooperation. Journal of Marketing Education,
23(2), 128−135.
Dommeyer, C. J. (1986, Spring). A comparison of
the individual proposal and the team project in
the marketing research course. Journal of Marketing Education, 8, 30−38.
Ellram, L. M., & Pearson, J. N. (1993). The role
of the purchasing function: Toward team participation. International Journal of Purchasing
and Materials Management, 29(3), 3−9.
Floyd, C. J., & Gordon, M. E. (1998, Summer).
What skills are important? A comparison of
employer, student, and staff perceptions. Journal of Marketing Education, 20, 103−109.
Giunipero, L. C., & Brewer, D. J. (1993, Winter).
Performance-based evaluation systems under
total quality management. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management,
29, 35−41.
Graeff, T. R. (1997, Spring). Bringing reflective
learning to the marketing research course: A
cooperative learning project using intergroup
critique. Journal of Marketing Education, 19,
53−64.
Gremler, D. D., Hoffman, K. D., Keaveney, S. M.,
& Wright, L. K. (2000). Experiential learning
exercises in services marketing courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 35−44.
Hamer, L. O. (2000). The additive effects of semistructured classroom activities on student learning: An application of classroom-based experiential learning techniques. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 25−34.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Holter, N. C. (1994). Team assignments can be
effective learning techniques. Journal of Education for Business, 70(2), 73−76.
Hutt, M. D., & Speh, T. W. (2001). Business marketing management: A strategic view of industrial and organizational markets. Fort Worth:
Harcourt.
Johnston, W. J., & Lewin, J. E. (1996). Organizational buying behavior: Toward an integrative
framework. Journal of Business Research,
35(1), 1−15.
Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In Alan W. Chickering and
Associates (Eds.), The modern American college (pp. 37−75). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Lamb, C. W., Shipp, S. H., & Moncrief, W. C., III
(1995, Summer). Integrating skills and content
knowledge in the marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education, 17, 10−19.
Lamont, L. M., & Friedman, K. (1997, Fall).
Meeting the challenges to undergraduate marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 19, 17−30.
Lohtia, R., Johnston, W. J., & Aab, L. (1995).
Business-to-business advertising: What are the
dimensions of an effective print ad? Industrial
Marketing Management, 24(5), 369−378.
McMahon, K. (1996, Winter). MBA job search:
Surviving the résumé round file. Marketing
Educator, 4.
Moon, M. A., & Armstrong, G. M. (1994, Winter). Selling teams: A conceptual framework
and research agenda. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 14, 17−30.
Morris, M. H. (1984). The buying center game:
An experiential approach to developing an
industrial marketing orientation. In G. Teeple
(Ed.), Proceedings: Atlantic Marketing Association Conference (pp. 72−77). Orlando:
Atlantic Marketing Association.
O’Banion, T. (1997). A learning college for the
21st century. Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges.
Petkus, E., Jr. (2000). A theoretical and practical
framework for service-learning in marketing:
Kolb’s experiential learning cycle. Journal of
Marketing Education, 22(1), 64−70.
Reid, D. A., Pullins, E. B., & Plank, R. E. (2002).
The impact of purchase situation on salesperson communication behaviors in business markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(3),
205−213.
Robinson, P. J., Faris, C. W., & Wind, Y. (1967).
Industrial buying and creative marketing.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Saunders, P. M. (1997, March). Experiential
learning, cases and simulations in business
communications. Business Communication
Quarterly, 60, 97.
Saxe, R., & Weitz, B. A. (1982, August). The
SOCO scale: A measure of the customer orientation of salespeople. Journal of Marketing
Research, 19, 343−351.
Shakarian, D. C. (1995, May-June). Active learning strategies that work. Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation, and Dance, 66, 21−24.
Sheth, J. N. (1973, October). A model of industrial
buyer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 37, 50−56.
Spiro, R. L., & Weitz, B. A. (1990, February).
Adaptive selling: Conceptualization, measurement, and nomological validity. Journal of
Marketing Research, 27, 61−69.
Titus, P. A., & Petroshius, S. M. (1993, Spring).
Bringing consumer behavior to the workbench:
An experiential approach. Journal of Marketing
Education, 15, 20−30.
Ursic, M., & Hegstrom, C. (1985, Summer). The
views of marketing recruiters, alumni, and students about curriculum and course structure.
Journal of Marketing Education, 7, 21−27.
Webster, F. E., Jr., & Wind, Y. (1972, April). A general model for understanding organizational buying behavior. Journal of Marketing, 36, 12−19.
Weitz, B. A. (1981). Effectiveness in sales interactions: A contingency framework. Journal of
Marketing, 45(1), 85−103.
Weitz, B. A., Sujan, H., & Sujan, M. (1986,
October). Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: A framework for improving selling effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 50,
174−191.
Williams, D. L., Beard, J. D., & Rymer, J. (1991,
Summer). Team projects: Achieving their full
potential. Journal of Marketing Education, 13,
45−53.
January/February 2004
175
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Modular Experiential Learning for Business-toBusiness Marketing Courses
Kenneth Anselmi & Robert Frankel
To cite this article: Kenneth Anselmi & Robert Frankel (2004) Modular Experiential Learning for
Business-to-Business Marketing Courses, Journal of Education for Business, 79:3, 169-175, DOI:
10.3200/JOEB.79.3.169-175
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.79.3.169-175
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 23
View related articles
Citing articles: 5 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 12 January 2016, At: 23:08
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Modular Experiential Learning
for Business-to-Business
Marketing Courses
KENNETH ANSELMI
East Carolina University
Greenville, North Carolina
The course of nature is to divide what is
united and unite what is divided.
—Goethe
E
xperiential learning is a process of
discovery that simplifies complex
situations and provides opportunities for
resolution of problem elements. Kolb
(1984, p. 38) defined experiential learning as a “process whereby knowledge is
created through the transformation of
experience.” In this article, we describe
an experiential exercise, the Extended
Buying Center Game (EBCG), that integrates marketing course concepts, theories, and practices; develops skills valued by industry; and is adaptive to
course design. The game is an extended,
modular version of the base role-playing game originally developed by Morris (1984). The EBCG promotes active
learning by involving students, through
role-playing, in the dynamics of organizational buying behavior and adaptive
selling. Activity and assignment modules in the EBCG are both individual
and team based. Although primarily
designed for marketing, the EBCG is
applicable to other business areas, particularly operations/purchasingand management/negotiations.
Experiential Learning
Experiential learning is recognized
widely as a technique that improves the
ROBERT FRANKEL
University of North Florida
Jacksonville, Florida
ABSTRACT. In this article, the
authors present the Extended Buying
Center Game (EBCG), an experiential
exercise that integrates marketing concepts and theory with a strong emphasis on industry skills and that does so
in an adaptive course design format.
The focus of the EBCG is on organizational buying behavior, buyer-seller
interaction, and marketing response.
The EBCG structure provides students
with cooperative and competitive roleplaying opportunities, individual and
group written assignments and presentations, and verbal skill challenges.
effectiveness of higher education; it represents a shift from an instruction paradigm to a learning paradigm (Barr &
Tagg, 1995; Saunders, 1997). Within the
instruction paradigm, students are
viewed as passive recipients of knowledge, as opposed to the active participants that they are seen to be within the
learning paradigm (Bobbitt, Inks,
Kemp, & Mayo, 2000).
The use of the learning paradigm
requires students to apply the concepts,
theories, and practices presented in
class to real-world situations. This experiential extension provides discovery
and involvement for students, as they
become full partners or collaborators in
the learning process and assume responsibility for their own decisions (O’Banion, 1997, p. 49). Experiential learning
also encourages students to engage in
higher-order learning as they personal-
ize content, thus developing a deeper
understanding of the material (Anderson, 1997; Bonwell & Eison, 1991;
Dabbour, 1997; Shakarian, 1995).
Marketing education literature
encourages the use of experiential techniques (Dommeyer, 1986; Graeff, 1997;
Titus & Petroshius, 1993; Williams,
Beard, & Rymer, 1991). Recent articles
suggest experiential frameworks, techniques, and exercises for improving
learning in marketing courses (Bobbitt,
Inks, Kemp, & Mayo, 2000; Gremler,
Hoffman, Keaveney, & Wright, 2000;
Hamer, 2000; Petkus, 2000). Bobbitt,
Inks, Kemp, and Mayo (2000) suggested that students sometimes conclude
their business program without a good
understanding of the interrelationships
between areas of study, especially within the marketing area. The EBCG focuses on students’ active participation in
organizational buying behavior, buyerseller relationships, and use of the marketing mix to create value.
The movement to experiential learning represents a shift among educators
from “teaching marketing to helping
students learn marketing” (Lamont &
Friedman, 1997, p. 24). An extensive
body of literature suggests that instructors allocate too much time to disseminating information and too little time to
developing student skills (Chonko,
1993; Lamb, Shipp, & Moncrief, 1995;
January/February 2004
169
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Ursic & Hegstrom, 1985). Problem
solving, communication, and interpersonal skills are valued by employers
(Floyd & Gordon, 1998; McMahon,
1996). These skills are an important
component of meeting industry “customer requirements” for educators.
Experiential exercises may develop
interpersonal skills as well as communication and problem-solving skills. The
exercises promote cooperation and
enhance listening and critical thinking
skills as students share ideas and listen to
the ideas of others. When used as a complement to lecture, team exercises can be
an effective learning technique (Holter,
1994). The main difficulty in employing
experiential exercises, and thus the main
hurdle to instructor usage, is developing
a project that effectively integrates theory and application in a meaningful way
(Bobbitt, Inks, Kemp, & Mayo, 2000).
Overview of Extended Buying
Center Game
The Extended Buying Center Game
builds on the base game developed by
Morris (1984), in which students (typically undergraduate juniors and seniors)
participate as managers in a team buying center decision. Students readily
grasp the theoretical basis of a buying
center as “those individuals who participate in the purchasing decision and
who share the goals and risks arising
from the decision” (Hutt & Speh, 2001,
p. 73). As active participants in the decision process, students experience application-based learning in the form of
multiple influences within the decision
process; complex interactions between
individuals; and decision making (i.e.,
the purchasing problem) that is driven
by both individual and organizational
goals. Webster and Wind (1972) suggested that “organizational buying is
problem solving” through which organizations resolve the gap between what
they have and what they need.
We developed game extensions in
which students perform new roles as
sales/marketing representatives and participate in adaptive selling and
enhanced buying activities and assignments. This integrates a greater number
of content areas and enhances the learning experience. Students use tools such
170
Journal of Education for Business
as quantitative vendor analysis and perceptual mapping, prepare print advertisements and customer proposals, and
make presentations.
The EBCG follows a learning cycle
that integrates Kolb’s (1981, 1984) four
learning abilities: concrete experience,
reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation.
Concrete experience occurs as students
take on a series of roles as departmental
managers, buying center members, and
vendor representatives. Students integrate concepts and communicate their
observations and reflections in both written and verbal assignments and actively
experiment in game iterations and buyerseller decision making. In Table 1, we
present roles, activities or tasks, and
learning objectives for this exercise.
The EBCG divides the complex situation of organizational buying and marketing response into understandable
units or elements. Students learn
through involvement and discovery,
applying marketing knowledge in a
game that they self-report as unique and
challenging, creative, fun, inventive,
enjoyable, relevant, and important to
continue. In Table 2, we show a sample
of student evaluations. As indicated,
students appreciate and value the EBCG
and perceive that the game improves
their understanding of business marketing and the skills necessary for their
success. We based our collection of student feedback on a design by Darian
and Coopersmith (2001).
There are two iterations of the
EBCG: Buying Decision 1 and Buying
Decision 2. In Buying Decision 1, students become buying center members
and make a vendor selection decision.
In Buying Decision 2, students take on
the additional role of sales/marketing
representative. That role creates new
information that, when combined with
the previous experience of acting as the
buying center customer, forms the basis
for the second vendor-selection decision. Buying Decision 1 may consume
up to four 50-minute class periods, and
Buying Decision two up to eight.
In each buying scenario, students
deal with forces that influence buying
decisions, such as environmental conditions (external to the company), organizational factors, buying center role
expectations and behavior, and individual personalities. These buying influences, along with the influence of conflict and negotiation rules, purchase,
selling, information, role stress, and
decisions, as suggested in the literature
(Johnston & Lewin, 1996; Robinson,
Faris, & Wind, 1967; Sheth, 1973;
Webster & Wind, 1972), are a part of the
game scenarios and are created within
the game experience.
In making their decisions, students
consider the buying situation (e.g.,
modified rebuy), buying stage (e.g.,
description of product characteristics
needed), and the type of vendor relationship desired. They evaluate seven
vendors on criteria that include total
dollar value, life cycle costs, vendor
experience and reputation, sales support, reciprocity, quality and reject
rates, order response time, engineering
innovation, size and length of contract,
after-sale services, and end-product
positioning. Johnston and Lewin (1996)
suggested that understanding organizational buying behavior is difficult
because the behavior is often a multiphase, multiperson, multidepartmental,
and multiobjective process, but this
knowledge is critical for success.
Buying Decision 1
Step 1. Functional Department Vendor
Preference
Students participate in a buying situation by performing functional organizational roles, acting as managers in one of
seven assigned functional departments:
sales and marketing, finance and
accounting, purchasing, design and
development engineering, quality assurance, production, and maintenance.
Written position descriptions acquaint
students with the primary concerns and
responsibilities of their functional roles.
Each departmental manager carries equal
power in the subsequent crossfunctional
buying center decisions, a process that
enhances interpersonal skills.
Within each functional department,
students must agree on key dimensions
or criteria through which to evaluate each
of the seven vendors, and they begin the
selection process by rank-ordering their
top three vendor choices. Written back-
TABLE 1. Extended Buying Center Game Roles, Activities/Tasks, and Learning Objectives
Role
Activities/tasks
Objectives
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Buying Decision 1
Functional department
manager
Preference decision:
Analyze vendors
Rank top three vendors
Perform functional roles
Demonstrate buying process
Develop interpersonal skills
Buying center
member
Vendor selection decision:
Analyze vendors
Rate and select one vendor
Demonstrate influences in organizational buying
process models
Apply concepts of value analysis and life-cycle costs
Demonstrate crossfunctional teams
Demonstrate conflict and risk
Develop interpersonal and problem-solving skills
Buying center
member
Assignments:
Evaluate EBCG process and experience
Write memorandum
Make executive presentation
Prepare perceptual map
Develop written communication skills
Improve formal presentation skills
Apply concept of positioning and illustrate spatial
representation
Buying Decision 2
Sales/marketing
representative
Sales appointments:
Plan and make sales call
Apply the marketing concept
Demonstrate sales behaviors of obtaining, using, and
giving information
Apply concepts of adaptive selling, sales and customer
orientation, and working smarter
Demonstrate buyer-seller interaction process
Develop interpersonal skills
Apply marketing-mix strategies
Sales/marketing
representative
Assignments:
Prepare print ad
Write recommendation memo
Write proposal letter to buying center
Demonstrate role of advertising
Apply advertising guidelines
Employ creativity
Develop written and analytical skills
Buying center
member
Vendor selection decision:
Analyze, rate, and select one vendor
Demonstrate influences in organizational buying process
models
Apply concepts of value analysis and life-cycle costs
Demonstrate crossfunctional teams
Demonstrate conflict and risk
Develop interpersonal and problem-solving skills
Buying center
member
Assignments:
Write recommendation memo
Make buying center recommendation
Evaluate EBCG
Develop written communication skills
Develop formal presentation skills
Provide feedback to instructor
grounds for each vendor detail attributes
that appeal to different functional departments; for instance, the ease of component installation would be important to
the production department. The development of departmental criteria and preferences sets the stage for Step 2.
Step 2. Vendor Selection
The objectives of Step 2 focus on promoting student understanding of the
multiple influences on the organizational buying process, value analysis, and
life-cycle cost, and how crossfunctional
teams resolve conflict and risk via interpersonal problem solving. Buying centers are formed by regrouping randomly
selected students from each functional
department. A typical class of 35 to 40
students, which would create seven
functional departments of five to six students each, will evolve into five to six
buying centers of seven students each.
Thus, each buying center represents a
multiple-influence, crossfunctional team
assigned to resolve a vendor selection
(buying) problem. Purchase decisions
are moving more toward team participation (Ellram & Pearson, 1993) and
greater diversity and motivation (Johnston & Lewin, 1996).
The task of the buying center is to
perform, as a team, an analysis of the
potential vendors and then select only
one vendor (using the same component
scenario as in the departmental preference decision). A single source decision increases student interaction and
thus exposes both departmental and
organizational interests. Each buying
center creates and implements five
January/February 2004
171
three written assignments⎯two individually and one as a group.
TABLE 2. Student Evaluations of Knowledge and Skills Derived From
EBCG and the Value of Its Components (in Percentages)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Item
Individual reflection on Buying Decision 1. For the first, individual assignment, students answer a series of questions regarding their experiences in
Buying Decision 1. They address the
vendor selection process (e.g., dimensions selection process), motivation
(e.g., functional role), group interaction,
and individual behavior (e.g., bonus
points). The essay provides students
with an opportunity to reflect on and
reinforce the knowledge gained in the
first buying decision experience while
improving their writing skills.
SA
A
N
D
SD
43
54
57
46
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
71
28
22
4
7
0
0
0
0
50
43
7
0
0
36
36
36
36
46
43
53
60
18
21
11
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Item
E
VG
AA
A
BA
P
The value of
Buying Decision 1
Weighted rating analysis
Buying Decision 2
Print advertisement
Proposal letter
Recommendation memo (marketing)
Playing role of representative
Recommendation memo (procurement)
Presentation
Playing role of BC team member
18
21
46
39
46
36
57
25
29
61
54
46
36
46
36
50
32
50
29
32
14
18
18
7
18
7
11
25
32
7
14
15
0
8
0
7
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The EBCG increased my understanding of
How teams work
How organizations buy and sell
How buying is influenced by many
factors
How successful organizations adapt
How to integrate marketing concepts and
practices
The EBCG helped to improve
Interpersonal skills
Written communication skills
Verbal communication skills
Problem-solving skills
Note. Sample size of 28. Students evaluated the EBCG’s imparting of knowledge and skills with
the following anchors: SA (strongly agree), A (agree), N (neutral), D (disagree), and SD (strongly disagree). They evaluated the value of the EBCG components with the following anchors: E
(excellent), VG (very good), AA (above average), A (average), BA (below average), and P (poor).
dimensions as choice criteria in its vendor selection process.
Vendor selection incentive. Personal
influences are an important force in
organizational buying behavior. To add
this motivational element (and its potential to place individual or departmental
goals in conflict with organizational
goals) to the buying center decision, we
have individual students earn bonus
points for a match between the vendor
selected by their buying center and the
three vendors selected by their functional department. Points are allotted based
on the rank order of vendors by the
department (e.g., five points if the
match is with their department’s first
choice, four points with second choice,
and three points with third choice).
Weighted rating analysis. Many progressive companies use weighted rating
172
Journal of Education for Business
analyses in vendor evaluations (Giunipero & Brewer, 1993). Although buying centers may use both quantitative
and qualitative analysis, as well as decision heuristics (e.g., a conjunctive rule
that eliminates a vendor if it falls below
a given cutoff level), in their selection of
a vendor, the weighted rating analysis
provides students with a systematic tool
for alternative evaluation.
To formalize a quantitative approach
to vendor selection, students use worksheets to perform a weighted rating vendor analysis. This process allows students (as a group) to adjust vendor
ratings on each of the five selected
dimensions by each dimension’s importance weight.
Step 3. Written Assignments for Buying
Decision 1
For this step, students must complete
Memo and presentation to procurement
executive. The second assignment
improves group interaction as well as
student memorandum writing, oral
communication, and formal presentation skills. Each buying center group
writes and submits a vendor recommendation memo to a professional procurement executive (from outside the classroom). The memo follows an outline
that provides a brief directive, identifies
what is at issue, the facts considered and
assumptions made, and the analyses
performed. The buying center group
then makes a formal presentation of the
recommendation to the outside executive. Finally, the procurement executive
evaluates and grades each presentation
on problem-solving and presentation
skills, providing students with industrylevel expectations and feedback.
Perceptual mapping. The objective of
this individual assignment is for students to prepare a perceptual map (using
data taken from the weighted ratings
analysis tables) and understand its use
in the development of marketing strategy. Although students use only averages, and the data represent only their
buying center, this assignment helps
students discover the benefits of visually mapping product positions and
assessing vendor positions relative to
their ideal point. The assignment also
requires students to take the perspective
of a marketing manager and answer
questions on vendor strategies and tactics, given their buying center market
knowledge. Students explore more fully
vendor response and adaptive selling in
Buying Decision 2.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Buying Decision 2
In Buying Decision 2, students make a
second vendor selection decision using
the same component scenario from Decision 1, but this time student participation
is expanded to include both sides of the
exchange process. Students maintain
their original buying center roles but now
assume the role of a sales and marketing
representative for one of the seven original vendors (calling on a buying center
other than their own). Each buying center
determines its own reason, such as the
performance of the in-vendor, for moving from a straight rebuy situation to a
modified rebuy situation and thus requiring sales calls from vendors for Period 2
(e.g., Year 2).
As a sales and marketing representative, each student has three opportunities⎯a sales call, an advertisement, and
a proposal (offer) letter⎯to communicate with his or her assigned customer
buying center. In this seller role, students perform the basic sales behaviors
of obtaining, using, and giving information (Reid, Pullins, & Plank, 2002), consider their orientation to the customer
(Saxe & Weitz, 1982), and practice
adaptive selling (Spiro & Weitz, 1990;
Weitz, Sujan, & Sujan, 1986). Saxe and
Weitz suggested that customer-oriented
selling is problem solving, or the “practice of the marketing concept at the level
of individual and customer.” Adaptive
selling is an important part of success
(Weitz, 1981), requiring knowledge of
sales situations and information acquisition skills (Weitz et al., 1986).
A second vendor decision provides
opportunities for active learning on both
sides of the exchange process. Students
continue their development of interpersonal and communication skills and
apply marketing concepts, theories, and
practices in creative problem solving
⎯determining the right strategies and
tactics to get the business or respectfully
declining to seek it. The use of the
sales/marketing representative role in
Buying Decision 2 creates new vendor
proposals and information. In other
words, students become co-creators of
the game.
Step 1. Sales/Marketing Representative
Role—Vendor Sales Appointment With
Buying Center
The vendor sales appointment provides students with a basic understanding of the sales side of the buyer-seller
interaction process, the marketing concepts of customer orientation and adaptive selling, and the role of pricing in
strategy. To accomplish this objective,
students must plan and make the sales
call. They have an appointment time
and window (10 to 15 minutes) to call
on their assigned buying center customer. Although familiar with the buying scenario and process from their previous experience in Buying Decision 1,
the students’ challenge is to acquire
information (selection criteria) from
their assigned buying center customer
and make a positive initial impression.
Two signature sheets provide for roleplaying verification and the assignment
of participation points. A variation of
this step may be the use of “team” selling, a practice discussed by Moon and
Armstrong (1994).
Step 2. Written Sales Assignments
For this step, the student must complete three written assignments as the
sales and marketing representative;
these assignments are individual efforts.
Print advertisement for buying center
customer. In their role as a sales/marketing representative for their assigned vendor, students develop a full-page (8.5 x
11) print ad that would appear in an
industry trade journal. Information
obtained during their sales call appointment and the strategy and tactics that they
employ with this account form the foundation for the assignment. The print ad
assignment provides an opportunity for
students to demonstrate the role of advertising, develop criteria for an effective
print ad, and use creativity and advertising guidelines, such as those found in
Lohtia, Johnston, and Aab (1995). Media
selection is not part of the assignment but
could be a game extension.
Recommendation memo to the director of
marketing. The objective of the internal
recommendation memo is to improve
students’ analytical and memorandum
writing skills. In their role of sales/marketing representatives, students write a
memo to the (hypothetical) director of
marketing of their vendor company. The
memo includes the vendor’s current
account status (e.g., out-vendor), a situational analysis (e.g., competitive offerings), and a course-of-action recommendation for the proposal. Students derive
their situational analyses from scenario
information (e.g., initial vendor offering
and background) and the buying center
appointment. Issues addressed in the
analysis include the organizational buying process, in- or out-vendor strategies,
forces that influence the buying process,
the value proposition, and account relationship and behavior. Students adapt the
initial product or service offering (i.e.,
bundle of attributes and benefits) according to buying center/customer requirements and sound analysis.
Proposal letter to buying center customer. Using the recommendation
memo from the previous assignment as
a basis, students further their analytical
and writing skills by presenting a proposal to their buying center customers.
The proposal letter outlines the requirements for the vendor offer for Period 2.
Students may adjust the bundle of
attributes and benefits offered from initial scenario information (based on realistic strategic objectives), within the
instructor’s accepted limits. The clarity
and appearance of the letter has proved
influential in the vendor selection decision of buying centers. The buying center appointment, recommendations, and
proposal provide students with the
opportunity to explore the three basic
sales behaviors and adapt their offering
and communication to the given purchase situation. Reid, Pullins, and Plank
(2002) discussed this adaptive process
for sales success.
Step 3. Buying Center
Vendor Selection
In the second buying center vendor
decision, students revisit the process of
organizational buying. The task for each
buying center is to perform a vendor
analysis and decide on a single vendor
for Period 2 by using new vendor inforJanuary/February 2004
173
mation (i.e., print advertisements and
proposal letters) and the skills learned in
the Buying Decision 1 activities. This
time, the buying center members make
their vendor decision knowing that they
will communicate their choice in a recommendation memo to their vice president of procurement.
Step 4. Buying Center Assignments
for Decision 2
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
For this step, students must complete
three written assignments⎯two group
efforts and one individual assignment.
Recommendation memo to the vice
president of procurement. To expand
student memorandum-writing skills,
each buying center communicates its
vendor choice and selection rationale in
a two-page memo to the vice president
of procurement. Students follow a problem-solving format and state the purpose of the assignment (e.g., the reason
for moving to modified rebuy), identify
relevant facts, present their analysis
logic, and offer a recommendation.
Buying center presentation to a business marketing class. Buying centers
are required to present an overview of
the buying process and tools used to
select their vendor and to participate in
an oral question-and-answer component, which helps develop students’ formal presentation skills. The assignment
helps buying centers reflect on and
communicate about the decision
processes, answer questions from any or
all vendors, and acknowledge the successful vendor. The presentation provides an opportunity to share as a class,
process influences and motivations, and
think through experiences.
Individual student evaluation of the
EBCG. To provide a formal feedback
mechanism to the instructor and to
solicit suggestions for future EBCG
usage, students respond to scaled questions on the level of increased understanding and skill improvement resulting from the EBCG and the value of
game components. Open-ended questions provide an opportunity for student
suggestions. For questionnaire content,
see Table 2.
174
Journal of Education for Business
Discussion
Our purpose in this article has been to
present an example of experiential learning applicable to business-to-business
marketing, operations, and management
courses. The Extended Buying Center
Game covers a broad spectrum of topics
with the intent of exposing students to a
number of basic activities or skill sets—
such as problem solving, verbal and written communications, and interpersonal
skills⎯that they are likely to use in an
introductory employment setting.
From the students’ learning perspective, the EBCG provides several diverse
benefits. First, students confront the
reality of the business world and its
demands of both competitive and cooperative behavior from individuals. Students must work as individuals as well
as in groups. Many, if not most, business
courses today require group work,
though this often excludes the development of individual responsibility. The
EBCG requires individual preparation to
strengthen individual student development and counter any individual’s tendency to “free-ride” in a group setting.
Second, the Extended Buying Center
Game provides students with a look at
both sides of the exchange process; in
other words, they see the sales and marketing perspective as well as the purchasing/sourcing perspective. This dual
perspective enables students to see a
variety of career opportunities. Third,
students develop both written and verbal skills. Industry recruiters emphasize
that both skills are critically important
today, particularly the ability to present
and support a position concisely, clearly, and accurately.
Finally, the EBCG becomes a part of a
student’s portfolio for prospective employment opportunities. In fact, one of
the authors uses sales and marketing assignments as a reference point for student
referrals. Barr and McNeilly (2002) suggested that these valuable experiences
should be communicated to recruiters.
Clearly, the EBCG is a time-consuming activity that requires considerable
planning on the part of the instructor.
Thus, instructors initially may choose to
perform only the buying center Decision 1 activities until they feel comfortable with the game’s format and are sat-
isfied that the game provides the benefits that they expect.
NOTE
We gratefully acknowledge the work of Michael
H. Morris in developing the base exercise.
REFERENCES
Anderson, E. J. (1997, May). Active learning in
the lecture hall. Journal of College Science
Teaching, 26, 428−429.
Barr, T. F., & McNeilly, K. M. (2002). The value of
students’ classroom experiences from the eyes of
the recruiter: Information, implications, and recommendations for marketing educators. Journal
of Marketing Education, 24(2), 168−173.
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to
learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate students. Change, 27(November/December), 12.
Bobbitt, L. M., Inks, S. A., Kemp, K. J., & Mayo,
D. T. (2000). Integrating marketing courses to
enhance team-based experiential learning.
Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 15−24.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Washington, DC: George Washington University,
School of Education and Human Development.
(ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1)
Chonko, L. B. (1993). Business school education:
Some thoughts and recommendations. Marketing Education Review, 3(1), 1−9.
Dabbour, K. S. (1997, July). Applying active
learning methods to the design of library
instruction for a freshman seminar. College and
Research Libraries, 58, 299−308.
Darian, J. C., & Coopersmith, L. (2001). Integrated marketing and operations team projects:
Learning the importance of cross-functional
cooperation. Journal of Marketing Education,
23(2), 128−135.
Dommeyer, C. J. (1986, Spring). A comparison of
the individual proposal and the team project in
the marketing research course. Journal of Marketing Education, 8, 30−38.
Ellram, L. M., & Pearson, J. N. (1993). The role
of the purchasing function: Toward team participation. International Journal of Purchasing
and Materials Management, 29(3), 3−9.
Floyd, C. J., & Gordon, M. E. (1998, Summer).
What skills are important? A comparison of
employer, student, and staff perceptions. Journal of Marketing Education, 20, 103−109.
Giunipero, L. C., & Brewer, D. J. (1993, Winter).
Performance-based evaluation systems under
total quality management. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management,
29, 35−41.
Graeff, T. R. (1997, Spring). Bringing reflective
learning to the marketing research course: A
cooperative learning project using intergroup
critique. Journal of Marketing Education, 19,
53−64.
Gremler, D. D., Hoffman, K. D., Keaveney, S. M.,
& Wright, L. K. (2000). Experiential learning
exercises in services marketing courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 35−44.
Hamer, L. O. (2000). The additive effects of semistructured classroom activities on student learning: An application of classroom-based experiential learning techniques. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 25−34.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:08 12 January 2016
Holter, N. C. (1994). Team assignments can be
effective learning techniques. Journal of Education for Business, 70(2), 73−76.
Hutt, M. D., & Speh, T. W. (2001). Business marketing management: A strategic view of industrial and organizational markets. Fort Worth:
Harcourt.
Johnston, W. J., & Lewin, J. E. (1996). Organizational buying behavior: Toward an integrative
framework. Journal of Business Research,
35(1), 1−15.
Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In Alan W. Chickering and
Associates (Eds.), The modern American college (pp. 37−75). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Lamb, C. W., Shipp, S. H., & Moncrief, W. C., III
(1995, Summer). Integrating skills and content
knowledge in the marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education, 17, 10−19.
Lamont, L. M., & Friedman, K. (1997, Fall).
Meeting the challenges to undergraduate marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 19, 17−30.
Lohtia, R., Johnston, W. J., & Aab, L. (1995).
Business-to-business advertising: What are the
dimensions of an effective print ad? Industrial
Marketing Management, 24(5), 369−378.
McMahon, K. (1996, Winter). MBA job search:
Surviving the résumé round file. Marketing
Educator, 4.
Moon, M. A., & Armstrong, G. M. (1994, Winter). Selling teams: A conceptual framework
and research agenda. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 14, 17−30.
Morris, M. H. (1984). The buying center game:
An experiential approach to developing an
industrial marketing orientation. In G. Teeple
(Ed.), Proceedings: Atlantic Marketing Association Conference (pp. 72−77). Orlando:
Atlantic Marketing Association.
O’Banion, T. (1997). A learning college for the
21st century. Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges.
Petkus, E., Jr. (2000). A theoretical and practical
framework for service-learning in marketing:
Kolb’s experiential learning cycle. Journal of
Marketing Education, 22(1), 64−70.
Reid, D. A., Pullins, E. B., & Plank, R. E. (2002).
The impact of purchase situation on salesperson communication behaviors in business markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(3),
205−213.
Robinson, P. J., Faris, C. W., & Wind, Y. (1967).
Industrial buying and creative marketing.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Saunders, P. M. (1997, March). Experiential
learning, cases and simulations in business
communications. Business Communication
Quarterly, 60, 97.
Saxe, R., & Weitz, B. A. (1982, August). The
SOCO scale: A measure of the customer orientation of salespeople. Journal of Marketing
Research, 19, 343−351.
Shakarian, D. C. (1995, May-June). Active learning strategies that work. Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation, and Dance, 66, 21−24.
Sheth, J. N. (1973, October). A model of industrial
buyer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 37, 50−56.
Spiro, R. L., & Weitz, B. A. (1990, February).
Adaptive selling: Conceptualization, measurement, and nomological validity. Journal of
Marketing Research, 27, 61−69.
Titus, P. A., & Petroshius, S. M. (1993, Spring).
Bringing consumer behavior to the workbench:
An experiential approach. Journal of Marketing
Education, 15, 20−30.
Ursic, M., & Hegstrom, C. (1985, Summer). The
views of marketing recruiters, alumni, and students about curriculum and course structure.
Journal of Marketing Education, 7, 21−27.
Webster, F. E., Jr., & Wind, Y. (1972, April). A general model for understanding organizational buying behavior. Journal of Marketing, 36, 12−19.
Weitz, B. A. (1981). Effectiveness in sales interactions: A contingency framework. Journal of
Marketing, 45(1), 85−103.
Weitz, B. A., Sujan, H., & Sujan, M. (1986,
October). Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: A framework for improving selling effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 50,
174−191.
Williams, D. L., Beard, J. D., & Rymer, J. (1991,
Summer). Team projects: Achieving their full
potential. Journal of Marketing Education, 13,
45−53.
January/February 2004
175