Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Value Creation in the Business Curriculum: A Tale
of Two Courses
Art Weinstein & Hilton Barrett
To cite this article: Art Weinstein & Hilton Barrett (2007) Value Creation in the Business Curriculum: A Tale of Two Courses, Journal of Education for Business, 82:6, 329-336, DOI: 10.3200/JOEB.82.6.329-336
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.82.6.329-336
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 48
View related articles
ABSTRACT.
R
ABSTRACT. Inthisarticle,theauthors discusstheneedforintegrative,multidis-ciplinarycoursesinvaluecreation.They describethedesignandimplementation ofcoursesin2differentschoolsatthe masterofbusinessadministration(MBA) andundergraduatelevels.Bothcourses involvedschematicmodelsintheteach-ingmethodologies,buteachemphasizeda differentmodelforanalysisandsynthesis. TheCustomerValueFunnel(CVF)wasan innovativestrategictoolusedtofindcom-petitiveadvantage.Majorstrengthsofthis frameworkweresimplicity,pragmatics,and aninterfunctionalperspective.Theverti-callytieredvaluechainwasasupplychain networkadaptationofM.Porter’s(1985) horizontalvaluechain.Thismodelenabled studentstocreativelyconsideractivities thatcouldbeimplementedintheorganiza-tionandthesupplychainmembers’firmsto createvalue.
Keywords:caseanalysis,customervalue, horizontalandverticalvaluechain,teach-inginnovation,valuecreation
Copyright©2007HeldrefPublications
n this article, we will discuss (a) the need for integrative, multidisci- plinarycoursesonvalue,(b)thedevel-opment of the courses and innovative orientations to students’ learning about value,and(c)anunderstandingofhow organizationscreatevalue.
In his seminal article, Levitt (1960) stated that successful organizations do betteratcreatingandaddingmorevalue for their customers than the compe-tition does. The organizations’ heads hopethatthesellingpriceoftheprod-uct (delivered value) will exceed the costs,resultinginaprofitforthefirm. To accomplish this objective, business experts define target markets; research and understand those markets; develop goods, services, and ideas that fulfill themarkets’needs;andhavedistinctive core competencies in their operations. All of these activities result in com-petitive advantages that are preferably sustainable.
Aperusalofschoolofbusinesscata-logs shows that school administrators generallyadoptaliberalartsorgeneral education platform as a base and then introducestudentstoprinciplesofeco-nomics, accounting, marketing, man-agement,informationsystems,finance, law,andperhapsethics,operations,and communications. They then offer con-centrationsormajors,and,rightbefore thestudentsgraduate,abusinesspolicy courseforthecapstonetoteachintegra-tion of the functions. The termvalue creation often appears in discussion of
stock prices and market capitalization. However, another use of the term is value created for the customer or con-sumer of a product. Students’ earlier coursework (e.g., principles of market- ingandmanagement)shouldbemulti-disciplinary and integrative (B.Ander-son,1997;ManchesterBusinessSchool GraduateSeminarMembers,1969).
Weteachtwoentirelydifferentgroups of students. The first author teaches in a major cosmopolitan area in a large private university at the master’s level. Thesecondauthorteachesinasparsely populated, rural area in a small public universityattheundergraduatelevel(no masterofbusinessadministration[MBA] program). The first author developed a courseinvaluecreation—specifically,a coursetakenearlyintheprogram—and emphasizedamultidisciplinary,integra-tive orientation. A specific schematic modelwasusedinthecourse.Weused this model in case analyses. The sec-ond author provided one of the cases andsomeadditionalmaterialusedinthe MBAcourse.Later,wecollaboratedand developed an undergraduate course in value creation and tested it as a special topics course. It is being evaluated by ElizabethCityStateUniversityforinclu-sion in an undergraduate entrepreneur-shipcurriculum.
PedagogicalChallenges
AccordingtoBraun(2004),business students have deficiencies in
critical-ValueCreationintheBusinessCurriculum:
ATaleofTwoCourses
ARTWEINSTEIN HILTONBARRETT
NOVASOUTHEASTERNUNIVERSITY ELIZABETHCITYSTATEUNIVERSITY
FORTLAUDERDALE,FLORIDA ELIZABETHCITY,NORTHCAROLINA
I
thinking skills. She claimed that there are three ways of overcoming this knowledge gap: (a) case studies, (b) course-content-embeddedlearning,and (c) components underlying other peda- gogies(e.g.,theory,reflection,andsys-temsthinking).
ConsistentwithBloom’s(1956)tax-onomy, the case method for analyzing businesssituationspracticedatHarvard University, University of Virginia, and elsewhereiseffectivebecauseitaffects various levels of learning knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Rees and Porter(2002)statedthattherearenine benefitstothecasemethod:diagnostic skills, subject and functional integra- tion,deeplearning,involvedandmoti-vated students, effective use of class time, team learning, group discussion processes, usage by multiple profes-sors within departments, and construc-tivedebates.Theycautionedthatpitfalls may include (a) time consumption, (b) lack of ties to learning outcomes, (c) misunderstanding of the theory–prac-tice link, and (d) student resistance. In general, most educators agree that casestudiescanplayanimportantrole in management and related programs (Harling&Akridge,1998).
Many MBA students have limited exposure to case analysis. Rather than teaching the students in the traditional manner(e.g.,HarvardBusinessSchool), wherethefocusontheanalyticalskills may overshadow the course content, the first author established a new case analysis framework where instructors couldteachcoursecontent(i.e.,custom-er value) and simultaneously conduct the analysis. This pedagogical objec-tiveincorporatesaspectsofallthreeof Braun’s(2004)approaches.
McCurry (1996) and Miller (1983) recognizedthattwoofthemajormodal-ity preferences of learning are visual and aural, and they have endorsed the useanddiscussionofschematicmodels Davis (1993) endorsed the use of both divergentandconvergentskillsinprob-lem-solving processes. Although the
Americaneducationsystememphasizes convergentoranalyticalskills,business innovation is based on divergent, or creativethinkingskills.Over10%ofthe class time in the undergraduate course was devoted to developing individual creative,thinkingskills.
McCurry’s (1996) work on learn-ingmodalitiesshowedthefourleading learningelements:(a)print,(b)interac-tive,(c)visual,and(d)aural.Theprint elementincludesreadingtextbook,sup-plemental assignments, and tests. The
interactive element includes participat-ingingroupprojects.Thevisualelement includestheuseofmultimediapresen-tations by the professors and students, individually or in teams.Although the
auralelement, or hearing, was fourth intheprimarylearningelements,itwas by far the leading secondary learning elementforstudents.Theclasssessions fortheMBAandundergraduatecourses emphasizedvisuallearningexperiences with discussion on the various topics. Both courses involved textbook and supplemental reading materials. Both courses also included a group project that emphasized intragroup communi-cationoreffectiveness,andthestudents presentedtheirreportstotheclass.
FirstGeneration:TheMBA Course
Delivering Superior CustomerValue isamarketingcoursethatstudentstake intheMBAprogramatalarge,private, southeastern U.S. business school.The instructorsteachthecourseinfivefor-mats: (a) weekend MBA, (b) full-time day program, (c) online, (d) blended model (three weekends plus online activities), and (e) entrepreneurship specialization on campus, off campus, out-of-state,andinternational.Thefirst authorwastheprimarydesignerofthe course, and as of January 2007, more than 15 adjunct and full-time faculty have been trained to teach this course effectively. The school administrators consider this course a successful, inte-gralpartoftheirbusinesscurriculum.
The course stresses the service aspects of an organization, especially customer service, relationship market-ing, and organizational responsiveness.
Itismoreinterdisciplinarythanmarket-ing management courses and brings in relevant material from strategic man-agement,humanresourcesmanagement (HRM),operationsandtechnology,and marketing. This approach is consistent with the need to redesign MBA pro-grams (e.g., Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute;Gloeckler,2005).
Major course objectives relate to (a) exploring the importance of customer orientation and process management; (b) discussing how the various com-ponents of customer value (service, quality, image, and pricing) interact to build customer satisfaction; (c) using operations and logistics processes to improve the delivery, (d) monitoring and measuring customer services; and (e)examininghowrelationshipmarket-ing creates long-term customer value andretention.
Casemethodisanintegralpartofthe course,representing70%ofthecourse grade.Studentspreparethreecasestud-ies (10% each) and work in teams of two to four students to write a case aboutaneweconomycompany(40%of overall grade). The case studies depict actual situations faced by managers in dynamic industries. Acting as consul- tants,studentsoffermarketingorbusi-ness expertise, objectivity, and creativ-ity. Grading criteria are the depth and insight of the environmental and stra-tegic analyses and the use of customer valueconcepts.
A research-based experiential Inter-net term project is a major activity in the course. The USA Today Internet 50 Index (2006), which is located on
USA Today’s Web site, provides the point where approximately 80% of the analysesoriginate(otherneweconomy companiesrequireinstructorapproval). The e-Business 25 features such com-paniesasCisco,Corning,Dell,Oracle, and Sun Microsystems whereas the e-Consumer 25 include Amazon, eBay, Google,Priceline,andCharlesSchwab. These companies provide students withanappreciationforthechangesin globalbusinessinthedigitalage.Also, they offer them good references (e.g., articles,financialinformation,andpress releases)togetaquickoverviewofthe situationaspecificcompanyfaces.
Thecustomer value funnel (CVF) approach is a valuable tool for
under-330
standingandassessingmarketdynamics and situations (Weinstein & Pohlman, 1998). Instructors use a CVF model extensivelythroughoutthecourse.
SecondGeneration—The UndergraduateCourse
The second author encountered other challengesattheundergraduatelevel.He emphasized the basics of what is value and how various customers and targets perceive value markets. We established an entrepreneurial orientation with an emphasisonmarketingresearch.Schum-peter (1934) defined theentrepreneur as one who recombined existing fac-torsorcarriedoutnewcombinationsin a business. He included not only new products, but also new processes and new markets. Miller (1983) expanded the definition to entrepreneurial activity within an organization that emphasized innovation, risk-taking, and pursuit of new opportunities. The second author also expanded the course activities to recognizethedynamicnatureoftoday’s global environment and the Austrian SchoolofEconomics,whichemphasizes the dynamics of markets and believes entrepreneurshipistheeconomicactivity thatdirectsthereorganizationofresourc-es toward the fulfillment of customers’ needs(Jacobson,1992).Becauseofthis dynamic and hypercompetitive business environment (Coulson-Thomas, 2000; D’Aveni,1994),membersofasuccess-ful value-creating firm must understand thechangingneedsofthetargetbusiness andconsumermarketsandhowtofulfill thoseneeds;hence,thereisanemphasis onmarketingresearch.
Thesecondauthorgradedthecourse in a conventional way with three tests accountingfor30%ofthegrade,article analysesfor20%,casesfor30%,anda teamprojectonvaluecreationfor20%. He emphasized creativity and innova- tionthroughoutthecourse.Thisempha-sis and a separate module on develop-ingcreativitywithintheindividualand organization accounted for more than 10% of the course’s classroom hours. Inaddition,Thefirstauthorfocusedon article analyses related to innovation andvaluecreation.
We presented a number of models anddiscussedtheiruseinanalysisand
creationofvalue-addedactivitiesinthe total product offering. These ranged from the generic consumer’s surplus modeltoonedevelopedbytheprofes-sor showing a relation among value, benefits, and associated costs (e.g., costs of purchasing, using, disposing). Valueformularepresentsarelationship
One of the required cases involved a prescriptive vertically tiered value chain modeldepictinghowvaluecouldbecre-atednotonlyhorizontallywithinthefirm (theusualexplanationforPorter’s[1985] valuechain)butalsoverticallythroughthe supplychain.Thesecondauthorusedthis model for case analyses and discussion throughoutthisundergraduatecourse.
In an article on the next economy, Budman (2004) emphasized that societal advantageofcreativityandinnovationwill become more important as developing countriessuchasIndiadomoreprogram-mingandbasicaccountingactivitiesonan outsourced basis for the U.S. companies. Muchofthelowerlevelphysicalandsemi-skilled labor jobs have already migrated overseas.Likewise,wewillseethelower level knowledge work migrate overseas. Schoolsneedtoemphasizethehighlevel characteristics of the U.S. economy (e.g., science,creativity).Thenexteconomyof theU.S.organizationswillembracechange andadaptability,empowermentanddecen-tralization, and will reinvent the business model on an as-needed basis. Therefore, wefeelthiswillrequirecreativeandinno-vative managers who act more entrepre-neuriallythandomiddlemanagers.
Thornberry (2002) believed an infu-sion of corporate entrepreneurship (or intrapreneurship) into the U.S. orga-nizations would help them meet the challengesofthe21stcentury.Thechal-lenge to business schools will be to groomgraduatestothinklikeentrepre-neurswhethertheyareinastart-upora Fortune100companyenvironment.
TheImportanceofCustomer Value
Great companies do not just satisfy customers; they strive to delight and
wow them. There are many ways to define value (Woodruff, 1997). The defining process can be both complex and complicated. Today,superior cus-tomer value means to continually cre-ate business experiences that exceed customer expectations. Value is the strategic driver that global companies andsmallbusinessesusetodifferentiate themselvesfromothersinthemindsof customers.Forexample,howcanLexus sellitssportutilityvehiclesfor$65,000 and Taco Bell sell meal combinations forlessthan$4,andbothbeconsidered good value?Value is the answer, and thecustomerdefinesvalue.
Citigroup, FedEx, General Electric, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft, Nestlé, Nokia, Singapore Airlines, Sony,Toyota,andWal-Martareamong the most admired companies in the world.Stellarcorporatereputationsare based on eight criteria: (a) innovation, (b) financial soundness, (c) employee talent, (d) use of corporate assets, (e) long-term investment value, (f) social responsibility, (g) quality of manage-ment, and (h) quality of products and services(Fortune,2002).Thesecompa-nies practice customer value thinking, which propels them to market leader-shippositions.Ackerman(2000)stated that the successful leaders of the 21st century must be able to identify and capitalizeonvalue-creatingcharacteris-ticsuniquetotheirorganizations.
Inthe1980s,thebattleforcustomers was won or lost because of quality.As totalqualitymanagement(TQM)became therageinbusiness,qualitygapsdimin-ishedandcompaniesfocusedonservice. Customer value blends and extends the qualityandcustomerservicemovements andhasemergedasthedominanttheme for business success for 21st-century companies(Fagiano,1995).
TheInternetexplosionofthemiddle to late 1990s was characterized by a frenzy of entrepreneurial activity and newbusinessconcepts;billionsofdol-larsraisedinventurecapital;asoaring stock market; and a marketing mind-set advocating e-commerce. Exciting e-businesses such as Amazon.com, Cisco Systems, Dell Computer, eBay, Expedia, PriceLine.com, and Yahoo! achieved remarkable success by devel-oping innovative and better ways to
Benefits
PricePaid+AssociatedCosts
createvalueforcustomers.Thesebusi-nesses survived the dot.com meltdown of 2000 by creating winning strategies that were based on superior value for theircustomers.Unfortunately,mostof thestartupWeb-basedcompanieslacked a solid business model, strong value proposition, and a long-term focus. Ultimately,theyfailed.
In the new economy, tradeoffs are notnecessary.Customerswantfairpric-es and acceptable quality, good value, innovativenessandimagestatus,physi-cal goods and value-added services, and retail shopping malls as well as onlinemerchants.AsBarnesandNoble learned,customerswanttobuybooksat themarketplace(astore)orthemarket space(www.bn.com).
Managing customer value is more critical to all organizations in the new service- and information-based econo-my. Progressive companies that create maximumvaluefortheircustomerswill survive and thrive; they will be able tocarvesustainablecompetitiveadvan-tages for themselves. Other firms that do not provide adequate value to their target markets will struggle or disap-pear. Therefore, to succeed in the 21st century, organizations must do a good job of creating customer value. Devel- opingstrongbondswithcustomerscre-atesloyalty,whichleadstoretention.
UsingtheCVFModel
TheCVFapproachisavaluabletool for understanding and assessing mar-ketdynamicsandsituations(Weinstein & Pohlman, 1998). A customer value frameworkoffersmanagementaunique andpotentiallysuperiorwayofanalyz-ing business problems and opportuni-ties. The CVF is a systematic, multi-faceted, integrated, and rich tool for making customer-focused decisions. Managers consider economic values, relevant values of the various constit-uencies, maximizing value over time (customerlifetimevalue),valueadders or destroyers, value-based segments, and value tradeoffs to improve their businessanalyses.
When one examines relevant cus-tomer value, marketing, and business concepts and applications, it is appar-ent that customer value has become
an overall basis for business strategy. Building on this idea, the CVF can be used to improve managerial decision making. Students can use the CVF to analyzebusinesscasesaswellaswrite
To compete successfully, organiza-tions must evaluate all pertinent actors and factors in a market. This section develops a business perspective featur-ing the four-stage CVF. Management’s objective should be to maximize value over time, realizing that customer val-ues have a major impact on processes and performance. The enhanced cus-tomer value approach offers manage- mentanalternativeviewofhowtocom-peteeffectivelyindynamicandvolatile markets.
This value maximization premise means that corporate success should be evaluated in a new light. We pro-pose that business performance should be built on a dual foundation of para-mount value concepts: (a) anticipating and responding to the relevant values of all constituencies (e.g., customers, stakeholders, employees, collaborators, competitors, suppliers, regulators, and society), and (b) value maximization (how economic value and knowledge are created and applied throughout an organizationtobestserveitstargetcus-tomers). Although the former element islargelyqualitativeinnature,thelatter is mostly quantitative. This approach provides insight for designing a value-based model for managers to assess businesssituationsinthe21stcentury.
The CVF captures and summarizes the salient attributes of the two sets of customer value concepts in action. As theframeworkillustrates,organizations mustdealwithasetofmacroissuesas well as customer-specific concerns to excelinbusiness.Viewingthefourlevels ofthemodel—globalbusinesscommu- nity,market,organization,andcustom-ers—throughabroadtonarrowinglens ultimately affects the performance of businessunits(seeFigure1).Theinter-dependency of the four levels is very
apparent.Thedottedlines(betweenlev-els)indicatethateachsuccessivelevelis partoftheprecedingone.Forexample, there would be no companies without customers; similarly, organizations are partofmarkets,whichinturn,arepart oftheglobalbusinesscommunity.
Onemustcarefullyscrutinizetheval-uesofthemajorplayersinthemodelas to value identification and congruency, andvaluedeliveryoptions(thesearethe relevantvalues;seeFigure1).Fromthe topdown,thevaluedriversare(a)what asocietyvalues(Level1);(b)whatsup-pliers, partners, competitors, and regu-latorsvalue(Level2);(c)whatowners andemployeesvalue(Level3);and(d) whatcustomersvalue(Level4).
A realistic assessment of value cre-ation opportunities (value maximiza-tion) throughout the funnel is the next step.Organizationsconsistofvaluepro-viders. If the delivered value of these employees exceeds the expectations of customers (perceived value), posi-tive net transaction experiences result. This leads to ongoing satisfaction and increased customer loyalty. In these cases, organizations fare well in their moments of truth, and isolated favor-abletransactionsevolveintocontinued, long-termrelationships.Thevalueover time (lifetime value) of a customer is measurableandoftensubstantial.
For the most part, the funnel model represents a downward flow with each successive level being a component of thelevelabove(e.g.,marketsarepartof theglobalbusinesscommunity;organi-zations are part of markets). However, the feedback loops evidenced in levels 1, 2, and 3 demonstrate that market intelligenceandknowledgeisanongo-ing,iterative,interactive,andintegrated process. If business performance does notmeetcorporateobjectives,strategic or tactical changes are mandated. The organization(Level3)canadjustinter-nallybyrethinkingitsoveralldirection, implementingtraininganddevelopment initiatives, and revising business plans. Often, however, external adaptations arerequiredbecauseofchangestaking place in the macro (global) or micro (market)environments.
Think about how an organization uses competitive differentiation to take
maximumadvantageofmarketopportu-332
nities.Asaframeworkforanalysis,five guidingCVFquestionshelpstudentsor case analysts assess the relevant cus-tomervalueissues:
1.Identifytherelevantmacroenviron-mental factors (Level 1). What impact dotheyhaveontheorganization?
2.Discuss the microenvironmental (market)factors(Level2).Howdocol-laboration, competition, suppliers, and regulatorsaffecttheperformanceofthe organization?
3.Explainhowtheorganization(Level 3)createsvalueforitscustomers.What
strategicchangesarerequiredtodeliver outstandingvaluetoitscustomers?
4.Do customers (Level 4) perceive valueassuperior,satisfactory,orunsat-isfactory? Why? Which attributes do customersvaluethatdonotreceiveade-quateattention?
5.Critique the organization’s busi- nessperformanceonthebasisoftradi-tional(e.g.,sales,profits,marketshare) and value-based criteria (e.g., process metrics, customer retention measures, net present value [NPV; value over time]).Whatcantheorganizationdoto improveitsperformance?
UsingtheVerticallyTieredValue ChainModel
Instructors who teach courses in principles of marketing and manage-ment and strategic managemanage-ment fre-quently mention Porter’s (1985) value chain work.They emphasize develop-ing value through activities within the organization—a horizontal orientation. Ifthefirmlowersthecostorincreases the performance of the product for the customer,valueiscreated.Accordingto Porter,“Supplierlinkagesmeanthatthe relationshipwithsuppliersisnotazero sum game in which one gains only at theexpenseoftheother,butarelation-shipinwhichbothcangain”(p.51).
Thecriticalfactorisanunderstanding ofacustomer’svaluechain.Forexam-ple, a uniform manufacturer developed anindustrialworkshirtforsupervisors and managers that had an oxford cloth appearance.Inaddition,theyusedpins for the shirt to produce a retail fold. Theirrentallaundrycustomerslikedthe shirt,butcomplainedthattheyincurred additional labor costs taking the pins outbeforeprewashingthegarment.The uniformmanufacturertookthepinsout, reducedtheircosts,reducedthecustom-ers’ costs: a win–win situation for all parties involved.An organization must understand everything the customer doesassociatedwiththeproductandthe sameistruefortheultimateconsumer, to attain the full advantage of vertical analysis.
Webb and Gile (2001) showed that therealstrengthofavaluechainanaly-sis is not the firm’s traditional compe-tencies but the knowledge and under-standingofwhatthecustomerneedsto increasevalueintheirvaluechain(see Figure2).Thequestionbecomes,what canthefirm,orthefirm’ssuppliers,do toaccomplishthisfeat?
S. Anderson (2000) recommended a business school integrative course that incorporates an extended value chain through the supply chain net-work. This incorporates the Austrian School’s windows of opportunity and an appreciation for the limited time to take advantage of these opportuni-ties. S. Anderson (2000) emphasized an understanding of the opportunities tocreatevalueandlowercoststhrough
FIGURE1.Thecustomervaluefunnel(CVF)—developingvalue.
I.Globalbusinesscommunity(macroenvironment) • Societysubcultures
• Demographicsorsocioculture • Economic
• Naturalorphysical • Politicalorlegal • Technological
II.Market(microenvironment) • Collaboration
• Competition • Supplier • Regulators
III.Organization • Stakeholders • Businessculture • Organizationalstructure • Strategies
• ValueProviders(people) Deliveredvalue
versus Perceivedvalue
IV.Customers Received
value +0−
Businessperformance
•Sales,profits,marketshare,image •Processmetrics,customerretention measures,netpresentvalue
coordination of firms. S. Anderson (1999) stated that the competitors today are moving from firm versus
firm to becoming competitive value chain cooperative networks that not
onlyfulfillmarketneedsbutalsoantic-ipate the changes of customers and environmentsandrespondaccordingly towinthecompetitivebattle.
334
FIGURE2.Tieredvaluechainanalysis.
Opportunitytoincreasebenefitstothecustomer
Develop
product Source Produce Sell Deliver Servicesupport
•Customizationtorequirements
•Volumecommitments
Supplier
•LeadtimeandcoordinatedschedulesDevelop
offering Source Operations Sell Deliver Service Lookforactivitiesthatyoursuppliercandotoreduceyourcostsandimprovequality—sameforlevelsdownstream.
•Gatherinformation •Understandrequirements
•Designproduct andservice
•Linkagewithsupplier •Internet-based
ordering
•Reduce finishing
costs •Increaseavailability•Reducecosts
•Providebetterinformation •Understandcustomer
requirements
•Improveresponse •Improvemaintenance
orupgradesystem toimprovequality
YourFirm
Cycle
Recognize
need Source Purchase Operations Sell Deliver Service
Customer
•Flexiblecontract •Makeservice easytopurchase
•Totalcosts analysis
Youmayalsoneedtoexamine nextlevelinsupplychain: yourcustomer’scustomer
Lookforlinkagesbetweenvaluechains.
Oftenwhatcostslittletoonememberofsupplychainisworthmuchtoanothermember.
Opportunitytodecreasecosttothecustomer
Oncethestudentsunderstandthecon-ceptofaverticallytieredvaluechainand thecooperativecapabilities,theinstructor no longer uses the model of the supply chainbeingachannelofdistributionwith distinctorganizations,butamodelofvir-tual supply chain network of integrated intranetsintoafunctioningextranet.This facilitates the use of the most important factor of production knowledge, which allows the participating members to decreasethefrictioncausedbypoorfore- casting,toomuchinventory,wronginven-tory, and poor customer service. It also facilitates the decreasing of cycle time, whetheritistimetomarket,timetoship, time to customer’s back door or—most important—timetocustomerusage.
Marketershavelongadvocatedacus- tomerfocus(Day,1994),butfewmarket-ershaveshiftedtheirfocustoincludetheir suppliers. The successful company will alsounderstanditssupplier’svaluechains (seeFigure3andFigure4).Whatcanthe firm or its supplier do that will reduce costsoraddvalue?Itisnotjustwhatthe firm can do for its customer; it is also whatthefirmcandoforitssupplychain network to create value for all members ofthenetworkincludingtheconsumer.It isaninclusive,collaborative,relationship-oriented business (not marketing, man-agement,finance,oroperationsfunction, butbusiness)philosophy.Thesecretisa partnership orientation among members ofthesupplychain.
AssessmentandImplementation Challenges
Five key, positive measures of an innovationare(a)relativeadvantage,(b) compatibility,(c)complexity(expressed as simplicity), (d) trialability, and (e) observability (Rogers, 1995). Both the CVF and the vertically tiered value chain models perform well on all of these dimensions, demonstrating value as innovations for teaching with case analyses.
Although the CVF has been an important addition to business profes-sors’ toolboxes in recent years, there are three issues that require attention. First,manystudentsareuncomfortable with the idea of any case analysis, let alone the CVF. To put them at ease, it is a good idea to provide a sample case. For example, the instructor can discussaFedExcasestudyinclassand useanaccompanyingdetailedhandout. Second, because of the comprehensive natureofthemethodology,aCVFanal-ysis can be daunting at first. Instruc-torscanimplementarevisedemphasis on mastering major components of the funnel rather than have the students tackle the CVF in its entirety. In the MBA courses, the first case explores themacro-andmicroenvironments;the second case emphasizes organizational issues;andthethirdcaseexaminesthe value proposition and business perfor-mance measures. Third, the need for
excellent instructors is critical. Initial training, ongoing brushup programs, and regular communication with the leadprofessorshouldbeapriority.
AcademicImplications
Theneedforearlierintegrativecours-es is a possible response to the state governments that want their universi-tiestohavefewerhoursintheirdegree programs.Thetraditional124-semester hrundergraduatedegreeprogramtrends toward 120 hr. It is not surprising that academiciansseeaneedformorehours and more courses. As the economists state, it is a question of allocation of scarce resources. In this example, the scare resources are the semester hours inacurriculum.
Theraisond’êtreofbusinessisvalue creation. Students need guidance to understandalltherelatedcoursesbefore theytakeaseniorlevelintegrativebusi-ness policy course. TheAssociation to AdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusiness (AACSB,2006)stated,“undergraduate …degreeprogramswillincludelearn-ing experiences in such … areas as: creationofvaluethroughtheintegrated production and distribution of goods, services,andinformation”(p.71).The second author’s school recently rein-troduced the freshman Introduction to Businesscourseexpresslytoprovidean overviewtostudentsofwhattoexpect atthestartoftheiracademiccareer.
Theinstructorsatthesponsoringuni-versity have used the CVF approach for several years in various formats (e.g.,online)andlocations(e.g.,branch campuses). Graduate or undergraduate courses in subjects such as customer orientation, managing customer value, and service management can benefit from this innovative approach to case analysis.Theconceptofembeddedcase analyses (the relevant course concepts are captured through the case analy-sismethodology)offersinterestingand insightfulapplicationstoothercourses.
The horizontal value chain model is the default model of Porter’s (1985) value chain work.The vertically tiered value chain model is seldom seen in textbooks, academic journals, or busi- nesstradebooksandmagazines.How-ever, with the increased use of the
FIGURE3.Traditionalchannelofdistribution.
Supplier companyYour Customer
FIGURE4.Supplychainmembernetwork.
Supplier
intranet Yourcompanyintranet Customerintranet Extranet
portal portal
336
Internet and emphasis on supply chain networks, the vertically tiered model shouldbegarneringmoreattentionfrom theacademiccommunityandpracticing managers.
In addition, these approaches and the emphasis on value creation have been internalized by the students. For-mer students have said that custoFor-mer value thinking helps them understand business situations and improve strat-egyformulation.Valuecreationcourses and the increased use of these models bypracticingmanagerswilleffectively close the loop from textbook theory to business practice.This is an admirable goalofbusinesseducators.
NOTE
Dr.ArtWeinstein ’sresearchinterestsaremar-ketsegmentationandcustomervalue.
Dr. Hilton Barrett’s research interest is in entrepreneurship-marketinginterface.
Correspondence concerning this article should beaddressedtoDr.HiltonBarrett,ElizabethCity StateUniversity,ElizabethCity,NC27909.
E–mail:hbarrett@mail.ecsu.edu
REFERENCES
Ackerman,L.(2000). Identityisdestiny:Leader-shipandrootsofvaluecreation.SanFrancisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Anderson,B.(1997).Acustomeranalysiscourse forthemarketingcurriculum. JournalofMar-ketingEducation,19(2),2–16.
Anderson, S. (1999). The globally competitive
firm:Functionalintegration,valuechainlogis-tics, global marketing, and business college support.Journal of Global Competitiveness, 7(1),36–47.
Anderson, S. (2000). The globally competitive firm:Functionalintegration,valuechainlogis-tics, global marketing, and business college strategic support. Competitiveness Review, 10(2),33–45.
AssociationtoAdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusi-ness(AACSB)International.(2006).Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards for Business Accreditation. Retrieved January 10, 2006, from http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation /business/STANDARDS.pdf
Bloom,B.(1956). Taxonomyofeducationobjec-tives.London:Longman.
Braun, N. M. (2004). Critical thinking in the business curriculum. Journal of Education for Business,79,232–236.
Budman, M. (2004, January/February). Looking aheadtoourplaceinthenexteconomy.Across theBoard,pp.15–20.
Coulson-Thomas,C.(2000).Developingacorpo-rate learning strategy: Creating intrapreneurs. StrategicChange,9,469–479.
D’Aveni, R. A. (1994).Hypercompetition. New York:FreePress.
Davis,B.G.(1993).Toolsforteaching. SanFran-cisco:Jossey-Bass.
Day,G.(1994).Capabilitiesofmarket-drivenorga-nizations.JournalofMarketing,58,37–52.
Fagiano,D.(1995,February1).Fightingforcus-tomers on a new battlefield.American Sales-man,pp.20–22.
Fortune (2002, March 4).Global most admired companies–2002 all-stars. Retrieved Novem-ber 20, 2003, from www.fortune.com/fortune /globaladmired
Gloeckler, G. (2005, May 16). This is not your father’sMBA.BusinessWeek,pp.74–75. Harling,K.F.,&Akridge,J.(1998).Usingthecase
methodofteaching.Agribusiness,14(1),1–14. Jacobson, R. (1992). The “Austrian” school of
strategy.Academy of Management Review, 17(4),782–807.
Levitt, T. (1960). Marketing myopia.Harvard BusinessReview,38,45–56.
Manchester Business School Graduate Seminar Members (1969). Integrated organizational strategy.JournalofManagementStudies,6(1), 96–111.
McCurry,P.S.(1996). Adelphistudyforpercep- tualmodalityclassificationofeffectiveinstruc- tionalactivitiesinTennesseemarketingeduca-tion.PaperpresentedattheAnnualMeetingof the American Educational Research Associa-tion,NewYork,April8–12.(ERICDocument ReproductionServiceNo.ED393975) Miller, P. (1983). The correlate of
entrepreneur-shipinthreetypesoffirms. ManagementSci-ence,29,770–791.
Porter, M. (1985).Competitive advantage. New York:FreePress.
Rees,W.D.,&Porter,C.(2002).Theuseofcase studies in management training and develop-ment-Part1. IndustrialandCommercialTrain-ing,34(1),5–8.
Rogers, E. M. (1995).Diffusion of innovations (4thed.).NewYork:FreePress.
Schumpeter,J.A.(1934).Thetheoryofeconomic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni-versityPress.
Thornberry, N. (2002). Corporate entrepreneur-ship: Teaching managers to be entrepreneurs. Journal of Management Development, 22(4), 329–344.
USAToday.(2006).USATodayInternet50Index. Retrieved January 11, 2006, from http://www. net50.usatoday.com/money/markeats/inter-net50.htm
Webb,J.,&Gile,C.(2001).Reversingthevalue chain.Journal of Business Strategy, 22(2), 13–17.
Weinstein, A., & Pohlman, R. A. (1998). Cus-tomer value: A new paradigm for marketing management.Advances in Business Studies, 6(10),89–97.
Woodruff, R. (1997). Customer value: The next sourceforcompetitivevalue. AcademyofMar-ketingScience,25(2),139–153.