08832323.2011.582190
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
The Role of Multi-Institutional Partnerships in
Supply Chain Management Course Design and
Improvement
Suzanna Long , J. Chris Moos & Anne Bartel Radic
To cite this article: Suzanna Long , J. Chris Moos & Anne Bartel Radic (2012) The Role of MultiInstitutional Partnerships in Supply Chain Management Course Design and Improvement,
Journal of Education for Business, 87:3, 129-135, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.582190
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.582190
Published online: 01 Feb 2012.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 139
View related 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: 11 January 2016, At: 21:59
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 87: 129–135, 2012
C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Copyright
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.582190
The Role of Multi-Institutional Partnerships
in Supply Chain Management Course Design
and Improvement
Suzanna Long
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, Missouri, USA
J. Chris Moos
Missouri Southern State University, Joplin, Missouri, USA
Anne Bartel Radic
Université de Savoie, Chambery, France
The authors examined the skills achieved through a multicultural, virtual student project environment among 3 supply chain management courses. The partnership included 2 universities
in the United States and 1 in France and created virtual teams of students across university
lines and is presented as a case study. The case includes detailed descriptions of collaborative
partners and identification of organizational readiness factors, curriculum design elements, a
discussion of multi-institutional project design, and concludes with a framework for successful
multi-institutional collaboration.
Keywords: case study, global learning, multicultural partnership, supply chain management
curriculum design, virtual student teaming
Global strategies and skill sets are essential to meet the challenges of modern business environments. Supply chain management business professionals must be prepared to excel
in a variety of social, political, and cultural settings. This
preparation must begin in the classroom as an essential component of supply chain management programs. This is easier
said than done as there is, as yet, no proven methodology for
integrating global concepts into academic coursework.
In this case study we develop a supply chain management
curriculum that emphasizes the role of multicultural,
student-centered projects in preparing students for the
global workforce. A framework for using multi-institutional
partnerships is developed to provide students with real-world
scenarios that explore collaboration across organizational
cultures, time zones, and practice. This fosters experiencebased learning and examines the value-added skills achieved
through the addition of a multicultural, virtual student
project environment to three supply chain–logistics management courses. The partnership includes two universities
in the United States and one in France and creates virtual,
interdisciplinary student teams across university lines and
international borders. Lessons learned are used to create a
framework for use by other universities interested in using
this approach to global learning.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature presented as part of this study is divided into
three main areas: the need for global content, the importance
of communications skills, and administrative complexity in
adding global content.
Global Content
Correspondence should be addressed to Suzanna Long, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Department of Engineering Management
and Systems Engineering, 600 W. 14th Street, 215 EMGT Building, Rolla,
MO 65401, USA. E-mail: longsuz@mst.edu
Traditional supply chain courses provide students with limited introductions to global processes and concepts. Only
2.9% of the students sampled in the 1980s and 1990s felt
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
130
S. LONG ET AL.
that they had sufficient knowledge of global marketing to
compete in complex international distribution systems (Bess
& Collison, 1987; Turley & Shannon, 1999). In 2003, Kedia
and Daniel reported that among 111 U.S. Fortune 500 companies, 70% reported insufficient globally competent personnel
to fully exploit international business opportunities. These
companies further reported difficulty finding U.S. nationals
with international knowledge, expertise, or language skills
(Kedia & Daniel). Recently, U.S. colleges and universities
have begun to make attempts to address this issue, in part,
due to pressure from national accreditation bodies that have
embraced the importance of globalization (Hoffman, 2005).
Globalization of students and programs should be infused
through a united front from university governing bodies to
the classroom (Jefferson, 2001) and include relevant instruction in standard business terms and security issues (Pagliari,
2005). International trips, when properly structured as mobile
classrooms, are excellent means for giving students a more
global perspective (Loveland, Abraham, & Bunn, 1987). International trips are even more effective when preceded by
a curriculum that includes cultural biases and idioms that
demonstrate the relevance of culture as an influence on the
business environment (Tuleja, 2008).
Participative case studies are useful tools for student
learning. Rather than working only with prewritten cases,
students should research and write cases for analysis,
especially at the MBA level (Forman, 2006). but also for
undergraduate students who, although they may not be ready
to write a case, can research and discuss present topics as
part of a facilitated discussion.
Communications Skills
Students must receive adequate leadership training that builds
their communication and interpersonal skills to be successful
in the 21st century workplace (Hicks, Westbrook, & Utley,
1999). Global communication requires elements of strategic
partnering to truly be effective (Lohmann, 2008; Long &
Spurlock, 2008; Sheppard, Pellegrino, & Olds, 2008). Intercultural competence must include the skills to analyze, interpret, and relate information effectively as well as the ability
to listen and observe. Cognitive skills, including comparative
thinking skills and cognitive flexibility, are also essential for
effective communication (Deardorff, 2006; Johnson, Lenartowicz, & Apud, 2006). Curriculum redesign is necessary
to ensure such important skills as these are demonstrated
(Kelley & Bridges, 2005; Pate-Cornell, 2001).
Preparation for global learning must include study elements on how cultural mores affects the local business environment (Clarke & Flaherty, 2003; Johnson et al., 2006;
Loveland et al., 1987). Units detailing cultural diversity and
cross-cultural analysis provide context for understanding not
only the fundamentals of economic policies, but also for
demonstrating the need for market differentiation strategies
in global markets (Mitry, 2008). Student goals and goal-
setting abilities can be strong predictors of success in the
development of cross-cultural skills (Kitsantas, 2004). Reducing ethnocentricity in students can be accomplished by
redesigning existing curriculum to include global components (Walton & Basciano, 2006). Programs that consider
the role those goals play on student skills development are
the most effective in providing global frameworks.
Supply chain courses should include opportunities to
practice communication skills as well as discussions of
present global issues (Tryggvason & Apelian, 2006). This
must include skills development as part of virtual teams.
Virtual teams are defined as groups of geographically and
organizationally dispersed knowledge workers brought together through information and communication technologies
(i.e., e-mail, videoconferencing, or other computer-mediated
communication systems) in response to specific needs or
to complete unique projects (DeSanctis & Poole, 1997;
Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1998; Lipnack & Stamps, 1997, 2000).
Administrative Complexity
Although few programs are truly global in terms of their
audience and scope, all can import an awareness of globalization to their students. Institutional resources can have
a profound influence on the scope and nature of globalization curricula implementation. Large, top-tier universities are
twice as likely as smaller institutions to approach globalization through the creation of standalone international programs due to the level of resources available and commitment
by governing bodies (Rudell, 2002). Smaller programs can
gain benefit from the use of global case studies and other
enhancements (Lorange, 2003).
Regardless of size, it is important to engage faculty and
administration to prevent resistance to traditional patterns of
academic autonomy (Crosling, Edwards, & Schroder, 2008).
An important first step is awareness that what works for one
country may not guarantee success in another.
PROGRAM OVERVIEWS AND
COLLABORATIVE DESCRIPTIONS
An international partnership of business and engineering supply chain–logistics faculty was developed to link their existing supply chain courses through common international
projects. This collaborative grew from an existing exchange
program between two of the partner universities, Missouri
Southern State University (US1) and L’Institut de Management de Université de Savoie (French1). A third university, Missouri University of Science and Technology (US2)
joined the collaborative in the second year. The partners drew
on combined strengths in supply chain–logistics education
while supplementing educational pedagogy through unique
program approaches. The Department of International Business at US1 explores supply chain management from a U.S.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
business school perspective. The Department of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering at US2 brings
engineering pedagogy to the partnership. French1 brings the
French business school perspective to the partnership. French
School and US2 offer graduate degrees.
At US1 students study the concept of supply chain
positioning. Students are actively encouraged to select upper
division electives that provide content in foreign language,
culture, or other business areas to facilitate a greater
appreciation of the modern business environment. At the
US2 students explore concepts of technological innovation,
supply chain optimization, and strategic partnering. The
courses are open to upper division undergraduate and graduate students. The students participating in the international
projects from French1 are second year master’s degree
students in international logistics. The student cohorts are
employees in a company as part of their studies. This
continuous change between the company and the university
helps students to put theory into practice.
COLLABORATIVE PROJECTS DESIGN
The collaborative projects approach was designed as the
equivalent of a multi-institutional capstone course. Multicultural team building and virtual teaming were the key factors
used to develop teaching modules on communications
and global concepts. These modules provided the basic
framework for the collaborative projects and were integrated
FIGURE 1
131
throughout the course to provide needed context for the
project scenarios. Outlines of the learning modules are
presented in Figure 1.
Each research team was designed to consist of students
from all three cooperating institutions. Students were required to collaborate on course projects utilizing various
methods of communication and contact consistent with the
creation of an international classroom (Leask, 2004). This
approach provided the basis for an experience with global
supply chain issues, and real-world intercultural communications, time zones, time management, and virtual teaming.
Although project descriptions were provided, deliberate ambiguity was created in terms of the establishment of milestones and project objectives to more naturally simulate virtual teaming in global organizations.
Projects compared supply chain management organizations and networks in France with the United States.
This allowed each team to have some familiarity with
part of the project, but also required that each team
member study and learn from team members about another culture. Team project presentations were made in
the United States and France. Examples of projects completed as part of the collaborative partnership included the
following:
1. Toyota systems: a comparison and contrast of Toyota
by region (e.g., United States vs. France) that included
a cross-cultural analysis of manufacturing methods
Learning modules with relevant content. (Color figure available online).
132
S. LONG ET AL.
TABLE 1
Evaluation Questions by Topical Area
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
Question
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Survey questions
Topical area(s)
The virtual teaming element added to the learning experience.
The virtual teaming added to my preparation to compete in the global workplace.
The course included a valuable mix of supply chain and globalization issues.
Virtual teaming simulates real-life situations.
Global content helps to prepare the student for the workplace.
Multicultural teams help create discussion networks to facilitate learning.
Virtual teaming elements help to develop skills and competencies needed by professionals.
Virtual teaming elements help develop points of view needed by professionals.
Global content helps to develop skills and competencies needed by professionals.
Global content helps develop points of view needed by professionals.
Virtual teaming provides the student a chance to share in the responsibility for learning.
Educational technology is essential in the modern learning environment.
Group projects simulate real-world activities.
Global content helps provide important information about other cultures.
Virtual teaming should be combined with international trips to best facilitate learning.
Student learning about global issues can be achieved without international travel.
Understanding supply chain systems is a critical skill set in today’s business environment.
A systems approach increases the chances of supply chain effectiveness.
Transportation networks must be considered as part of the entire supply chain.
This course/program is useful in framing my thoughts about the global workforce.
Virtual, team
Virtual, team
Globalization
Virtual, team
Globalization
Teams
Virtual, team
Virtual, team
Globalization
Globalization
Virtual, team
Virtual learning
Teams
Globalization
Virtual, team
Globalization
General
General
General
Globalization
2. Road transportation: an exploration of how road systems and networks impact logistics planning; the
project considered congestion reduction
3. Distribution in city centers: a look at cross-cultural
differences in the marketplace (United States vs.
France) and how that impacts the supply chain in
terms of business channels and distribution networks
(e.g., warehousing)
4. Alternatives to fuel in transport: a look at issues of
sustainability and energy management policies. How
do alternative fuels impact the value chain of the supply
chain? What alternative infrastructures are needed or
in place (United States vs. France)?
The structure of the class projects was specifically designed to include goal-setting behavior for the projects and
intercultural relations. Research has shown that goal-setting
behavior significantly enhances a participant’s performance
(Bartel-Radic, 2006; Schunk, 2000) and plays an instrumental role in improving student self-efficacy and intrinsic
interest in the task. In addition the course design allowed
for the creation of specific tasks, roles, and learning goals.
Specifically, each student was identified as either a project
manager or researcher; tasks were divided up into smaller
focused tasks with frequent reporting requirements, and
specific questions directed toward the intercultural relations,
communications, and learning were included. This specific
task, role, and learning goal focus has been identified as a
necessary component for a successful intercultural learning
environment (Gabb, 2006).
DISCUSSION
Detailed surveys were completed to assess student learning
and attitudes regarding virtual teaming in cross-cultural
situations in the second year of the partnership. Student
learning and satisfaction were further evaluated based on
experiences with virtual, collaborative teaming among
the three universities. Key factors examined included the
following: a) the virtual teaming added to the learning
experience, b) the multicultural teaming effort added to
student preparation to compete in the global workplace, and
c) the valuable level of global content included in the course.
Student perceptions of the global competencies needed for
a global workforce are useful in determining mechanisms for
facilitating learning and correcting common misconceptions
held by students. We have used student perceptions of these
important facets of global business to best compile ancillary
readings and other materials to supply context and cement
understanding of the complexity of the global workplace. A
summary of questions by topical area is presented in Table
1. Results were discussed as part of a larger lessons-learned
meeting at the conclusion of the semester.
Evaluation data were collected at the end of the semester
through an online survey mechanism. Students were asked
to identify their university, but not asked to provide any additional demographic information to help preserve anonymity.
A standard 5-point Likert-type scale was used to measure
level of agreement; however, we chose to shift the usual 1–5
scale to a scale of –2 to 2. This was done purely for aesthetics.
As such, responses ranged from –2 (strongly disagree) to 2
(strongly agree).
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
133
TABLE 2
Evaluation Data Means and Standard Deviations
Data from surveys
US2 (n = 30)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
Question
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Dropping high and low data points
French1
(n = 7)
US1 (n = 10)
US2 (n = 30)
French1
(n = 7)
US1 (n = 10)
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
0.77
0.83
1.40
1.07
1.47
1.37
1.07
1.03
1.40
1.23
0.97
1.53
1.70
1.40
0.90
0.63
1.43
1.37
1.63
1.37
0.858
0.699
0.563
0.828
0.629
0.850
0.868
0.718
0.675
0.728
0.765
0.507
0.466
0.621
1.250
0.999
0.504
0.490
0.556
0.556
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.30
1.10
1.10
1.40
1.40
1.50
1.50
1.30
1.80
2.00
1.60
1.30
–0.20
1.60
1.60
1.80
1.30
1.252
0.699
0.972
0.675
1.197
1.197
0.966
0.516
0.527
0.527
1.252
0.422
0.000
0.516
0.823
1.398
1.265
0.516
0.422
1.252
0.43
0.14
0.71
0.57
1.29
0.71
0.86
0.86
0.86
0.86
0.57
1.14
1.43
1.14
1.43
0.00
1.14
0.86
2.00
1.14
1.512
1.069
0.951
1.134
0.488
0.756
0.900
0.690
0.690
0.690
0.976
1.215
0.079
0.690
0.787
1.000
1.069
0.900
0.000
0.690
0.79
0.86
1.43
1.11
1.50
1.46
1.14
1.07
1.46
1.29
1.00
1.54
1.71
1.43
0.96
0.68
1.43
1.36
1.68
1.39
0.787
0.591
0.504
0.737
0.577
0.576
0.651
0.604
0.508
0.600
0.667
0.508
0.460
0.573
0.999
0.863
0.504
0.488
0.470
0.497
1.63
1.50
1.75
1.38
1.25
1.38
1.63
1.38
1.50
1.50
1.63
1.88
2.00
1.63
1.38
–0.25
2.00
1.63
1.88
1.63
0.518
0.535
0.463
0.518
1.035
0.518
0.518
0.518
0.535
0.535
0.518
0.354
0.000
0.518
0.744
1.165
0.000
0.518
0.354
0.518
0.60
0.00
0.60
0.60
1.20
0.60
1.00
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.60
1.40
1.60
1.20
1.60
–0.20
1.40
0.80
2.00
1.20
1.140
0.707
0.894
0.894
0.447
0.548
0.000
0.447
0.447
0.447
0.548
0.894
0.548
0.894
0.548
0.447
0.548
0.837
0.000
0.447
Table 2 presents average values and standard deviations
for all evaluation data. The left half of Table 2 shows averages
and standard deviations for all data from the three partner
schools. The right half of the table presents these results with
high and low data points dropped (thereby removing the
affect of a single outlier). There is no significant difference
between the two halves.
Although the relatively small sample size did not allow
any test for statistical significance, some trends were implied. Results were positive regarding the approach with
satisfaction levels for all but one question in the slightly or
strongly agree categories. Levels of satisfaction were higher
for the senior undergraduate business students at US1 than
at the other partner schools. French1 graduate business students showed a dropoff in satisfaction levels when questioned
about the value of virtual elements as learning tools. The responses were still positive, but at a much lower level. The
senior undergraduate and graduate engineering students at
US2 were less convinced of the value of global content or
teams as a simulation of real-world experience. However,
US2 students were strongly accepting of the value of supply
chain content as vital for preparation in engineering.
Figure 2 presents an evaluation of progress toward topical goals. U.S. student results were similar and combined
for general comparison against the student results from the
French school. Our results show a 45% higher level of satisfaction with virtual learning for U.S. students when compared with the French students. Similarly, a 25% difference
was seen in U.S. student satisfaction levels with global content and cultural learning when compared with the French
students. It is also interesting to look at trends from individual questions. Students at US1 were part of an international
business degree program that frequently offers coursework
online. As a result of increased experience with online learning, the US1 students had a higher appreciation for the three
learning aims of this collaborative. Students at US2 were engineering majors in which the overwhelming majority of
courses are in a traditional face-to-face environment. An
overview of student characteristics common to engineering
students frequently includes high quantitative skill levels, but
less developed social skills, such as those that facilitate effective team building (Hicks et al., 1999). US2 students were
less comfortable with a team approach to learning, especially
if that approach involved virtual learning.
French1 students were clearly the most uncomfortable
with the virtual learning elements and saw less value in the
team approach. Similar to the students at US2, French School
students had not been previously exposed to virtual learning. Postclass interviews with the French School students
revealed that their dissatisfaction with the teaming element
was rooted in cultural misunderstanding, despite efforts to
introduce a module aimed at multicultural team building.
Students experienced early communications issues due to
e-mail system failures at the French partner university. Cultural misunderstandings grew in intensity once communication was restored based on stereotypes, language difficulties,
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
134
S. LONG ET AL.
and approaches to resolving ambiguity. Moreover, graduate
students at French School resented loss of authority to undergraduate students.
The differences in course timelines and schedules created
complexities as well. French students enroll for the equivalent
of two U.S. semesters and are not on campus full-time. The
shortened window of collaboration required flexibility on the
part of all student team members and created a real-world
opportunity to experience asynchronous communication issues, along with cross-organizational planning. Moreover,
the multiple bosses reality of the virtual teaming presented
challenges for students and collaborating professors to maintain consistent messages and project outcomes.
Planning efforts should develop learning goals and
outcomes prior to the formation of student groups. Acceptable cases, study formats, and other project team elements
should be developed that incorporate the learning styles
and program strengths of each partner school. Each course
should contribute a unique facet to the project structure and
clear measurement systems should be in place. Common
grading rubrics are useful means of communicating goals
linked to teaming, subject matter expertise, and critical
thinking elements.
If possible, group project reports should be evaluated as a
faculty team rather than scored individually at each school.
This adds a layer of complexity, but does convey the importance of the projects to the students. Joint controls facilitate
teaming efforts that focus on performance and the sustainable
elements of relationship building rather than on individual
results that may or may not be shared.
Partnerships of this type will be dependent on virtual communication and subject to time-zone and cultural differences.
It is important to schedule regular conversations regarding the
student teaming efforts. These conversations will be most
productive if a mix of e-mail and voice communication is
scheduled.
CONCLUSIONS
Our multi-institutional partnership experiences suggest that
students gain global perspectives through the introduction of
integrated project teams to supply chain curriculum. Overall,
results indicate that progress was made toward mastery of our
topical goals of virtual teaming, global content, and cultural
learning. However, some differences did emerge. Our results
(Figure 2) show a 45% higher level of satisfaction with virtual
learning for U.S. students when compared with the French
students. Similarly, a 25% difference was seen in U.S. student
satisfaction levels with global content and cultural learning
when compared with the French students.
It is also interesting to look at trends from individual questions. Despite the increased use of technology by students for
social networking, many lack experience in its application to
the classroom; the same can be said of the faculty. Students
who had prior experience with the online learning environment had an easier time with virtual collaboration. Student
attitudes show a clear bias for their own customs and learning
traditions. The differences in course timelines and schedules
create unresolved complexities. The short window of collaboration requires flexibility on the part of all student team
members. The multiple bosses reality continued to present
challenges for students and collaborating professors throughout the project.
Despite the challenges, we feel that this approach provides
students the opportunity to step outside of their traditional
comfort zones and work with students of very different cultural and academic backgrounds. Furthermore, the students
mentioned in exit interviews that they found value in the ability to work with their counterparts from other universities.
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Although globalization has been incorporated into the curriculum, the effectiveness of methods has not yet been fully
analyzed. Difficulties with adaptability at the student and faculty levels suggest the need for further analysis of root causes.
Incorporating change management theory and best practices
may prove useful. The full implications of what this means
in terms of longitudinal success beyond the classroom experience has yet to be determined. In future researchers we
will examine the extent to which attitudes are changed and a
more global perspective is achieved by tracking graduates of
the program into the workforce and conduct periodic surveys
to determine whether enthusiasm and perceived value for the
instructional approach has waned over time.
REFERENCES
FIGURE 2 Student progress toward learning modules topical goals.
(Color figure available online).
Bartel-Radic, A. (2006). Intercultural learning in global teams. Management
International Review, 46, 647–677.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
Bess, H. D., & Collison, F. (1987). Transportation and logistics curricula:
Still too domestic? Transportation Journal, 26(3), 48–58.
Clarke, I. III, & Flaherty, T. B. (2003). Challenges and solutions for marketing educators teaching in newly emerging markets. Journal of Marketing
Education, 25, 118–128.
Crosling, G., Edwards, R., & Schroder, B. (2008). Internationalizing the
curriculum: The Implementation experience in a faculty of business and
economics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30,
107–121.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 10, 241–266.
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M S. (1997). Transitions in teamwork in new
organizational forms. Advances in Group Processes, 14, 157–176.
Forman, H. (2006). Participative case studies: Integrating case writing and
a traditional case study approach in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 106–114.
Gabb, D. (2006). Transcultural dynamics in the classroom. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 10, 357–368.
Hicks, P. C., Westbrook, J. D., & Utley, D. R. (1999). What are we teaching our engineering managers? Engineering Management Journal, 11(1),
29–34.
Hoffman, W. (2005, January 10). Logistics’ evolving curriculum. Traffic
World, 19–21.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and trust
in global virtual teams. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/
jcmc.1998.3.issue-4/issuetoc. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
Jefferson, R. W. (2001). Preparing for globalization—do we need structural
change for our academic programs? Journal of Education for Business,
76, 160–166.
Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T., & Apud, S. (2006). Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal
of International Business Studies, 37, 525–543
Kedia, B. L., & Daniel, S. (2003, January). U.S. business needs for employees
with international expertise. Paper presented at the Needs for Global
Challenges Conference Proceedings, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Kelley, C. A., & Bridges, C. (2005). Introducing professional and career
development skills in the marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing
Education, 27, 212–219.
Kitsantas, A. (2004). Studying abroad: The role of college students’ goals on
the development of cross-cultural skills and global understanding. College
Student Journal, 38, 441–452.
135
Leask, B. (2004). Internationalisation outcomes for all students using information and communication technologies (ICTs). Journal of Studies in
International Education, 8, 336–351.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual teams: Reaching across space,
time, and organizations with technology. New York, NY: Wiley.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (2000). Virtual teams: People working across
boundaries with technology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
Lohmann, J. (2008). A rising global discipline. Journal of Engineering
Education, 97, 227–230.
Long, S., & Spurlock, D. (2008). Motivation and stakeholder acceptance in
technology-driven change management: Implications for the engineering
manager. Engineering Management Journal, 20(2), 30–36.
Lorange, P. (2003). Global responsibility—Business education and business schools—Roles in promoting a global perspective. Corporate Governance, 3, 126–135.
Loveland, T. L., Abraham, Y. T., & Bunn, R. G. (1987). International business study tours: Practices and trends. Journal of Education for Business,
62, 253–256.
Mitry, D. (2008). Using cultural diversity in teaching economics: Global
business implications. Journal of Education for Business, 84, 84–89.
Pagliari, L. (2005). Developing a global logistics course. Journal of Commerce, 6, 14–36.
Pate-Cornell, M. E. (2001). Management of post-industrial systems: Academic challenges and the Stanford experience. International Journal of
Technology Policy and Management, 1, 151–159.
Rudell, M. F. (2002). Internationalizing the business program—A perspective of a small school. Journal of Education for Business, 78, 103–
110.
Sheppard, S., Pellegrino, J., & Olds, B. (2008). On becoming a 21st century
engineer. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 231–235.
Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd
ed.). New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
Tryggvason, G., & Apelian, D. (2006). Re-engineering engineering education for the challenges of the 21st century. Journal of Management,
58(10), 14–17.
Tuleja, E. A. (2008). Aspects of intercultural awareness through an MBA
study abroad program: Going backstage. Business Communication Quarterly, 71, 314–337.
Turley, L.W., & Shannon, J. R. (1999). The international marketing curriculum: Views from students. Journal of Marketing Education, 21, 175–181.
Walton, J., & Basciano, P. (2006). The internationalization of American
business education: Are U.S. business students less ethnocentric? The
Business Review, 5, 282–286.
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
The Role of Multi-Institutional Partnerships in
Supply Chain Management Course Design and
Improvement
Suzanna Long , J. Chris Moos & Anne Bartel Radic
To cite this article: Suzanna Long , J. Chris Moos & Anne Bartel Radic (2012) The Role of MultiInstitutional Partnerships in Supply Chain Management Course Design and Improvement,
Journal of Education for Business, 87:3, 129-135, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.582190
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.582190
Published online: 01 Feb 2012.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 139
View related 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: 11 January 2016, At: 21:59
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 87: 129–135, 2012
C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Copyright
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.582190
The Role of Multi-Institutional Partnerships
in Supply Chain Management Course Design
and Improvement
Suzanna Long
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, Missouri, USA
J. Chris Moos
Missouri Southern State University, Joplin, Missouri, USA
Anne Bartel Radic
Université de Savoie, Chambery, France
The authors examined the skills achieved through a multicultural, virtual student project environment among 3 supply chain management courses. The partnership included 2 universities
in the United States and 1 in France and created virtual teams of students across university
lines and is presented as a case study. The case includes detailed descriptions of collaborative
partners and identification of organizational readiness factors, curriculum design elements, a
discussion of multi-institutional project design, and concludes with a framework for successful
multi-institutional collaboration.
Keywords: case study, global learning, multicultural partnership, supply chain management
curriculum design, virtual student teaming
Global strategies and skill sets are essential to meet the challenges of modern business environments. Supply chain management business professionals must be prepared to excel
in a variety of social, political, and cultural settings. This
preparation must begin in the classroom as an essential component of supply chain management programs. This is easier
said than done as there is, as yet, no proven methodology for
integrating global concepts into academic coursework.
In this case study we develop a supply chain management
curriculum that emphasizes the role of multicultural,
student-centered projects in preparing students for the
global workforce. A framework for using multi-institutional
partnerships is developed to provide students with real-world
scenarios that explore collaboration across organizational
cultures, time zones, and practice. This fosters experiencebased learning and examines the value-added skills achieved
through the addition of a multicultural, virtual student
project environment to three supply chain–logistics management courses. The partnership includes two universities
in the United States and one in France and creates virtual,
interdisciplinary student teams across university lines and
international borders. Lessons learned are used to create a
framework for use by other universities interested in using
this approach to global learning.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature presented as part of this study is divided into
three main areas: the need for global content, the importance
of communications skills, and administrative complexity in
adding global content.
Global Content
Correspondence should be addressed to Suzanna Long, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Department of Engineering Management
and Systems Engineering, 600 W. 14th Street, 215 EMGT Building, Rolla,
MO 65401, USA. E-mail: longsuz@mst.edu
Traditional supply chain courses provide students with limited introductions to global processes and concepts. Only
2.9% of the students sampled in the 1980s and 1990s felt
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
130
S. LONG ET AL.
that they had sufficient knowledge of global marketing to
compete in complex international distribution systems (Bess
& Collison, 1987; Turley & Shannon, 1999). In 2003, Kedia
and Daniel reported that among 111 U.S. Fortune 500 companies, 70% reported insufficient globally competent personnel
to fully exploit international business opportunities. These
companies further reported difficulty finding U.S. nationals
with international knowledge, expertise, or language skills
(Kedia & Daniel). Recently, U.S. colleges and universities
have begun to make attempts to address this issue, in part,
due to pressure from national accreditation bodies that have
embraced the importance of globalization (Hoffman, 2005).
Globalization of students and programs should be infused
through a united front from university governing bodies to
the classroom (Jefferson, 2001) and include relevant instruction in standard business terms and security issues (Pagliari,
2005). International trips, when properly structured as mobile
classrooms, are excellent means for giving students a more
global perspective (Loveland, Abraham, & Bunn, 1987). International trips are even more effective when preceded by
a curriculum that includes cultural biases and idioms that
demonstrate the relevance of culture as an influence on the
business environment (Tuleja, 2008).
Participative case studies are useful tools for student
learning. Rather than working only with prewritten cases,
students should research and write cases for analysis,
especially at the MBA level (Forman, 2006). but also for
undergraduate students who, although they may not be ready
to write a case, can research and discuss present topics as
part of a facilitated discussion.
Communications Skills
Students must receive adequate leadership training that builds
their communication and interpersonal skills to be successful
in the 21st century workplace (Hicks, Westbrook, & Utley,
1999). Global communication requires elements of strategic
partnering to truly be effective (Lohmann, 2008; Long &
Spurlock, 2008; Sheppard, Pellegrino, & Olds, 2008). Intercultural competence must include the skills to analyze, interpret, and relate information effectively as well as the ability
to listen and observe. Cognitive skills, including comparative
thinking skills and cognitive flexibility, are also essential for
effective communication (Deardorff, 2006; Johnson, Lenartowicz, & Apud, 2006). Curriculum redesign is necessary
to ensure such important skills as these are demonstrated
(Kelley & Bridges, 2005; Pate-Cornell, 2001).
Preparation for global learning must include study elements on how cultural mores affects the local business environment (Clarke & Flaherty, 2003; Johnson et al., 2006;
Loveland et al., 1987). Units detailing cultural diversity and
cross-cultural analysis provide context for understanding not
only the fundamentals of economic policies, but also for
demonstrating the need for market differentiation strategies
in global markets (Mitry, 2008). Student goals and goal-
setting abilities can be strong predictors of success in the
development of cross-cultural skills (Kitsantas, 2004). Reducing ethnocentricity in students can be accomplished by
redesigning existing curriculum to include global components (Walton & Basciano, 2006). Programs that consider
the role those goals play on student skills development are
the most effective in providing global frameworks.
Supply chain courses should include opportunities to
practice communication skills as well as discussions of
present global issues (Tryggvason & Apelian, 2006). This
must include skills development as part of virtual teams.
Virtual teams are defined as groups of geographically and
organizationally dispersed knowledge workers brought together through information and communication technologies
(i.e., e-mail, videoconferencing, or other computer-mediated
communication systems) in response to specific needs or
to complete unique projects (DeSanctis & Poole, 1997;
Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1998; Lipnack & Stamps, 1997, 2000).
Administrative Complexity
Although few programs are truly global in terms of their
audience and scope, all can import an awareness of globalization to their students. Institutional resources can have
a profound influence on the scope and nature of globalization curricula implementation. Large, top-tier universities are
twice as likely as smaller institutions to approach globalization through the creation of standalone international programs due to the level of resources available and commitment
by governing bodies (Rudell, 2002). Smaller programs can
gain benefit from the use of global case studies and other
enhancements (Lorange, 2003).
Regardless of size, it is important to engage faculty and
administration to prevent resistance to traditional patterns of
academic autonomy (Crosling, Edwards, & Schroder, 2008).
An important first step is awareness that what works for one
country may not guarantee success in another.
PROGRAM OVERVIEWS AND
COLLABORATIVE DESCRIPTIONS
An international partnership of business and engineering supply chain–logistics faculty was developed to link their existing supply chain courses through common international
projects. This collaborative grew from an existing exchange
program between two of the partner universities, Missouri
Southern State University (US1) and L’Institut de Management de Université de Savoie (French1). A third university, Missouri University of Science and Technology (US2)
joined the collaborative in the second year. The partners drew
on combined strengths in supply chain–logistics education
while supplementing educational pedagogy through unique
program approaches. The Department of International Business at US1 explores supply chain management from a U.S.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
business school perspective. The Department of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering at US2 brings
engineering pedagogy to the partnership. French1 brings the
French business school perspective to the partnership. French
School and US2 offer graduate degrees.
At US1 students study the concept of supply chain
positioning. Students are actively encouraged to select upper
division electives that provide content in foreign language,
culture, or other business areas to facilitate a greater
appreciation of the modern business environment. At the
US2 students explore concepts of technological innovation,
supply chain optimization, and strategic partnering. The
courses are open to upper division undergraduate and graduate students. The students participating in the international
projects from French1 are second year master’s degree
students in international logistics. The student cohorts are
employees in a company as part of their studies. This
continuous change between the company and the university
helps students to put theory into practice.
COLLABORATIVE PROJECTS DESIGN
The collaborative projects approach was designed as the
equivalent of a multi-institutional capstone course. Multicultural team building and virtual teaming were the key factors
used to develop teaching modules on communications
and global concepts. These modules provided the basic
framework for the collaborative projects and were integrated
FIGURE 1
131
throughout the course to provide needed context for the
project scenarios. Outlines of the learning modules are
presented in Figure 1.
Each research team was designed to consist of students
from all three cooperating institutions. Students were required to collaborate on course projects utilizing various
methods of communication and contact consistent with the
creation of an international classroom (Leask, 2004). This
approach provided the basis for an experience with global
supply chain issues, and real-world intercultural communications, time zones, time management, and virtual teaming.
Although project descriptions were provided, deliberate ambiguity was created in terms of the establishment of milestones and project objectives to more naturally simulate virtual teaming in global organizations.
Projects compared supply chain management organizations and networks in France with the United States.
This allowed each team to have some familiarity with
part of the project, but also required that each team
member study and learn from team members about another culture. Team project presentations were made in
the United States and France. Examples of projects completed as part of the collaborative partnership included the
following:
1. Toyota systems: a comparison and contrast of Toyota
by region (e.g., United States vs. France) that included
a cross-cultural analysis of manufacturing methods
Learning modules with relevant content. (Color figure available online).
132
S. LONG ET AL.
TABLE 1
Evaluation Questions by Topical Area
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
Question
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Survey questions
Topical area(s)
The virtual teaming element added to the learning experience.
The virtual teaming added to my preparation to compete in the global workplace.
The course included a valuable mix of supply chain and globalization issues.
Virtual teaming simulates real-life situations.
Global content helps to prepare the student for the workplace.
Multicultural teams help create discussion networks to facilitate learning.
Virtual teaming elements help to develop skills and competencies needed by professionals.
Virtual teaming elements help develop points of view needed by professionals.
Global content helps to develop skills and competencies needed by professionals.
Global content helps develop points of view needed by professionals.
Virtual teaming provides the student a chance to share in the responsibility for learning.
Educational technology is essential in the modern learning environment.
Group projects simulate real-world activities.
Global content helps provide important information about other cultures.
Virtual teaming should be combined with international trips to best facilitate learning.
Student learning about global issues can be achieved without international travel.
Understanding supply chain systems is a critical skill set in today’s business environment.
A systems approach increases the chances of supply chain effectiveness.
Transportation networks must be considered as part of the entire supply chain.
This course/program is useful in framing my thoughts about the global workforce.
Virtual, team
Virtual, team
Globalization
Virtual, team
Globalization
Teams
Virtual, team
Virtual, team
Globalization
Globalization
Virtual, team
Virtual learning
Teams
Globalization
Virtual, team
Globalization
General
General
General
Globalization
2. Road transportation: an exploration of how road systems and networks impact logistics planning; the
project considered congestion reduction
3. Distribution in city centers: a look at cross-cultural
differences in the marketplace (United States vs.
France) and how that impacts the supply chain in
terms of business channels and distribution networks
(e.g., warehousing)
4. Alternatives to fuel in transport: a look at issues of
sustainability and energy management policies. How
do alternative fuels impact the value chain of the supply
chain? What alternative infrastructures are needed or
in place (United States vs. France)?
The structure of the class projects was specifically designed to include goal-setting behavior for the projects and
intercultural relations. Research has shown that goal-setting
behavior significantly enhances a participant’s performance
(Bartel-Radic, 2006; Schunk, 2000) and plays an instrumental role in improving student self-efficacy and intrinsic
interest in the task. In addition the course design allowed
for the creation of specific tasks, roles, and learning goals.
Specifically, each student was identified as either a project
manager or researcher; tasks were divided up into smaller
focused tasks with frequent reporting requirements, and
specific questions directed toward the intercultural relations,
communications, and learning were included. This specific
task, role, and learning goal focus has been identified as a
necessary component for a successful intercultural learning
environment (Gabb, 2006).
DISCUSSION
Detailed surveys were completed to assess student learning
and attitudes regarding virtual teaming in cross-cultural
situations in the second year of the partnership. Student
learning and satisfaction were further evaluated based on
experiences with virtual, collaborative teaming among
the three universities. Key factors examined included the
following: a) the virtual teaming added to the learning
experience, b) the multicultural teaming effort added to
student preparation to compete in the global workplace, and
c) the valuable level of global content included in the course.
Student perceptions of the global competencies needed for
a global workforce are useful in determining mechanisms for
facilitating learning and correcting common misconceptions
held by students. We have used student perceptions of these
important facets of global business to best compile ancillary
readings and other materials to supply context and cement
understanding of the complexity of the global workplace. A
summary of questions by topical area is presented in Table
1. Results were discussed as part of a larger lessons-learned
meeting at the conclusion of the semester.
Evaluation data were collected at the end of the semester
through an online survey mechanism. Students were asked
to identify their university, but not asked to provide any additional demographic information to help preserve anonymity.
A standard 5-point Likert-type scale was used to measure
level of agreement; however, we chose to shift the usual 1–5
scale to a scale of –2 to 2. This was done purely for aesthetics.
As such, responses ranged from –2 (strongly disagree) to 2
(strongly agree).
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
133
TABLE 2
Evaluation Data Means and Standard Deviations
Data from surveys
US2 (n = 30)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
Question
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Dropping high and low data points
French1
(n = 7)
US1 (n = 10)
US2 (n = 30)
French1
(n = 7)
US1 (n = 10)
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
0.77
0.83
1.40
1.07
1.47
1.37
1.07
1.03
1.40
1.23
0.97
1.53
1.70
1.40
0.90
0.63
1.43
1.37
1.63
1.37
0.858
0.699
0.563
0.828
0.629
0.850
0.868
0.718
0.675
0.728
0.765
0.507
0.466
0.621
1.250
0.999
0.504
0.490
0.556
0.556
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.30
1.10
1.10
1.40
1.40
1.50
1.50
1.30
1.80
2.00
1.60
1.30
–0.20
1.60
1.60
1.80
1.30
1.252
0.699
0.972
0.675
1.197
1.197
0.966
0.516
0.527
0.527
1.252
0.422
0.000
0.516
0.823
1.398
1.265
0.516
0.422
1.252
0.43
0.14
0.71
0.57
1.29
0.71
0.86
0.86
0.86
0.86
0.57
1.14
1.43
1.14
1.43
0.00
1.14
0.86
2.00
1.14
1.512
1.069
0.951
1.134
0.488
0.756
0.900
0.690
0.690
0.690
0.976
1.215
0.079
0.690
0.787
1.000
1.069
0.900
0.000
0.690
0.79
0.86
1.43
1.11
1.50
1.46
1.14
1.07
1.46
1.29
1.00
1.54
1.71
1.43
0.96
0.68
1.43
1.36
1.68
1.39
0.787
0.591
0.504
0.737
0.577
0.576
0.651
0.604
0.508
0.600
0.667
0.508
0.460
0.573
0.999
0.863
0.504
0.488
0.470
0.497
1.63
1.50
1.75
1.38
1.25
1.38
1.63
1.38
1.50
1.50
1.63
1.88
2.00
1.63
1.38
–0.25
2.00
1.63
1.88
1.63
0.518
0.535
0.463
0.518
1.035
0.518
0.518
0.518
0.535
0.535
0.518
0.354
0.000
0.518
0.744
1.165
0.000
0.518
0.354
0.518
0.60
0.00
0.60
0.60
1.20
0.60
1.00
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.60
1.40
1.60
1.20
1.60
–0.20
1.40
0.80
2.00
1.20
1.140
0.707
0.894
0.894
0.447
0.548
0.000
0.447
0.447
0.447
0.548
0.894
0.548
0.894
0.548
0.447
0.548
0.837
0.000
0.447
Table 2 presents average values and standard deviations
for all evaluation data. The left half of Table 2 shows averages
and standard deviations for all data from the three partner
schools. The right half of the table presents these results with
high and low data points dropped (thereby removing the
affect of a single outlier). There is no significant difference
between the two halves.
Although the relatively small sample size did not allow
any test for statistical significance, some trends were implied. Results were positive regarding the approach with
satisfaction levels for all but one question in the slightly or
strongly agree categories. Levels of satisfaction were higher
for the senior undergraduate business students at US1 than
at the other partner schools. French1 graduate business students showed a dropoff in satisfaction levels when questioned
about the value of virtual elements as learning tools. The responses were still positive, but at a much lower level. The
senior undergraduate and graduate engineering students at
US2 were less convinced of the value of global content or
teams as a simulation of real-world experience. However,
US2 students were strongly accepting of the value of supply
chain content as vital for preparation in engineering.
Figure 2 presents an evaluation of progress toward topical goals. U.S. student results were similar and combined
for general comparison against the student results from the
French school. Our results show a 45% higher level of satisfaction with virtual learning for U.S. students when compared with the French students. Similarly, a 25% difference
was seen in U.S. student satisfaction levels with global content and cultural learning when compared with the French
students. It is also interesting to look at trends from individual questions. Students at US1 were part of an international
business degree program that frequently offers coursework
online. As a result of increased experience with online learning, the US1 students had a higher appreciation for the three
learning aims of this collaborative. Students at US2 were engineering majors in which the overwhelming majority of
courses are in a traditional face-to-face environment. An
overview of student characteristics common to engineering
students frequently includes high quantitative skill levels, but
less developed social skills, such as those that facilitate effective team building (Hicks et al., 1999). US2 students were
less comfortable with a team approach to learning, especially
if that approach involved virtual learning.
French1 students were clearly the most uncomfortable
with the virtual learning elements and saw less value in the
team approach. Similar to the students at US2, French School
students had not been previously exposed to virtual learning. Postclass interviews with the French School students
revealed that their dissatisfaction with the teaming element
was rooted in cultural misunderstanding, despite efforts to
introduce a module aimed at multicultural team building.
Students experienced early communications issues due to
e-mail system failures at the French partner university. Cultural misunderstandings grew in intensity once communication was restored based on stereotypes, language difficulties,
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
134
S. LONG ET AL.
and approaches to resolving ambiguity. Moreover, graduate
students at French School resented loss of authority to undergraduate students.
The differences in course timelines and schedules created
complexities as well. French students enroll for the equivalent
of two U.S. semesters and are not on campus full-time. The
shortened window of collaboration required flexibility on the
part of all student team members and created a real-world
opportunity to experience asynchronous communication issues, along with cross-organizational planning. Moreover,
the multiple bosses reality of the virtual teaming presented
challenges for students and collaborating professors to maintain consistent messages and project outcomes.
Planning efforts should develop learning goals and
outcomes prior to the formation of student groups. Acceptable cases, study formats, and other project team elements
should be developed that incorporate the learning styles
and program strengths of each partner school. Each course
should contribute a unique facet to the project structure and
clear measurement systems should be in place. Common
grading rubrics are useful means of communicating goals
linked to teaming, subject matter expertise, and critical
thinking elements.
If possible, group project reports should be evaluated as a
faculty team rather than scored individually at each school.
This adds a layer of complexity, but does convey the importance of the projects to the students. Joint controls facilitate
teaming efforts that focus on performance and the sustainable
elements of relationship building rather than on individual
results that may or may not be shared.
Partnerships of this type will be dependent on virtual communication and subject to time-zone and cultural differences.
It is important to schedule regular conversations regarding the
student teaming efforts. These conversations will be most
productive if a mix of e-mail and voice communication is
scheduled.
CONCLUSIONS
Our multi-institutional partnership experiences suggest that
students gain global perspectives through the introduction of
integrated project teams to supply chain curriculum. Overall,
results indicate that progress was made toward mastery of our
topical goals of virtual teaming, global content, and cultural
learning. However, some differences did emerge. Our results
(Figure 2) show a 45% higher level of satisfaction with virtual
learning for U.S. students when compared with the French
students. Similarly, a 25% difference was seen in U.S. student
satisfaction levels with global content and cultural learning
when compared with the French students.
It is also interesting to look at trends from individual questions. Despite the increased use of technology by students for
social networking, many lack experience in its application to
the classroom; the same can be said of the faculty. Students
who had prior experience with the online learning environment had an easier time with virtual collaboration. Student
attitudes show a clear bias for their own customs and learning
traditions. The differences in course timelines and schedules
create unresolved complexities. The short window of collaboration requires flexibility on the part of all student team
members. The multiple bosses reality continued to present
challenges for students and collaborating professors throughout the project.
Despite the challenges, we feel that this approach provides
students the opportunity to step outside of their traditional
comfort zones and work with students of very different cultural and academic backgrounds. Furthermore, the students
mentioned in exit interviews that they found value in the ability to work with their counterparts from other universities.
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Although globalization has been incorporated into the curriculum, the effectiveness of methods has not yet been fully
analyzed. Difficulties with adaptability at the student and faculty levels suggest the need for further analysis of root causes.
Incorporating change management theory and best practices
may prove useful. The full implications of what this means
in terms of longitudinal success beyond the classroom experience has yet to be determined. In future researchers we
will examine the extent to which attitudes are changed and a
more global perspective is achieved by tracking graduates of
the program into the workforce and conduct periodic surveys
to determine whether enthusiasm and perceived value for the
instructional approach has waned over time.
REFERENCES
FIGURE 2 Student progress toward learning modules topical goals.
(Color figure available online).
Bartel-Radic, A. (2006). Intercultural learning in global teams. Management
International Review, 46, 647–677.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:59 11 January 2016
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
Bess, H. D., & Collison, F. (1987). Transportation and logistics curricula:
Still too domestic? Transportation Journal, 26(3), 48–58.
Clarke, I. III, & Flaherty, T. B. (2003). Challenges and solutions for marketing educators teaching in newly emerging markets. Journal of Marketing
Education, 25, 118–128.
Crosling, G., Edwards, R., & Schroder, B. (2008). Internationalizing the
curriculum: The Implementation experience in a faculty of business and
economics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30,
107–121.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 10, 241–266.
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M S. (1997). Transitions in teamwork in new
organizational forms. Advances in Group Processes, 14, 157–176.
Forman, H. (2006). Participative case studies: Integrating case writing and
a traditional case study approach in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 106–114.
Gabb, D. (2006). Transcultural dynamics in the classroom. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 10, 357–368.
Hicks, P. C., Westbrook, J. D., & Utley, D. R. (1999). What are we teaching our engineering managers? Engineering Management Journal, 11(1),
29–34.
Hoffman, W. (2005, January 10). Logistics’ evolving curriculum. Traffic
World, 19–21.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and trust
in global virtual teams. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/
jcmc.1998.3.issue-4/issuetoc. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
Jefferson, R. W. (2001). Preparing for globalization—do we need structural
change for our academic programs? Journal of Education for Business,
76, 160–166.
Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T., & Apud, S. (2006). Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal
of International Business Studies, 37, 525–543
Kedia, B. L., & Daniel, S. (2003, January). U.S. business needs for employees
with international expertise. Paper presented at the Needs for Global
Challenges Conference Proceedings, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Kelley, C. A., & Bridges, C. (2005). Introducing professional and career
development skills in the marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing
Education, 27, 212–219.
Kitsantas, A. (2004). Studying abroad: The role of college students’ goals on
the development of cross-cultural skills and global understanding. College
Student Journal, 38, 441–452.
135
Leask, B. (2004). Internationalisation outcomes for all students using information and communication technologies (ICTs). Journal of Studies in
International Education, 8, 336–351.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual teams: Reaching across space,
time, and organizations with technology. New York, NY: Wiley.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (2000). Virtual teams: People working across
boundaries with technology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
Lohmann, J. (2008). A rising global discipline. Journal of Engineering
Education, 97, 227–230.
Long, S., & Spurlock, D. (2008). Motivation and stakeholder acceptance in
technology-driven change management: Implications for the engineering
manager. Engineering Management Journal, 20(2), 30–36.
Lorange, P. (2003). Global responsibility—Business education and business schools—Roles in promoting a global perspective. Corporate Governance, 3, 126–135.
Loveland, T. L., Abraham, Y. T., & Bunn, R. G. (1987). International business study tours: Practices and trends. Journal of Education for Business,
62, 253–256.
Mitry, D. (2008). Using cultural diversity in teaching economics: Global
business implications. Journal of Education for Business, 84, 84–89.
Pagliari, L. (2005). Developing a global logistics course. Journal of Commerce, 6, 14–36.
Pate-Cornell, M. E. (2001). Management of post-industrial systems: Academic challenges and the Stanford experience. International Journal of
Technology Policy and Management, 1, 151–159.
Rudell, M. F. (2002). Internationalizing the business program—A perspective of a small school. Journal of Education for Business, 78, 103–
110.
Sheppard, S., Pellegrino, J., & Olds, B. (2008). On becoming a 21st century
engineer. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 231–235.
Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd
ed.). New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
Tryggvason, G., & Apelian, D. (2006). Re-engineering engineering education for the challenges of the 21st century. Journal of Management,
58(10), 14–17.
Tuleja, E. A. (2008). Aspects of intercultural awareness through an MBA
study abroad program: Going backstage. Business Communication Quarterly, 71, 314–337.
Turley, L.W., & Shannon, J. R. (1999). The international marketing curriculum: Views from students. Journal of Marketing Education, 21, 175–181.
Walton, J., & Basciano, P. (2006). The internationalization of American
business education: Are U.S. business students less ethnocentric? The
Business Review, 5, 282–286.