Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.84.6.367-373

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

Real-Time Case Method: Analysis of a Second

Implementation

James M. Theroux

To cite this article: James M. Theroux (2009) Real-Time Case Method: Analysis of a Second Implementation, Journal of Education for Business, 84:6, 367-373, DOI: 10.3200/ JOEB.84.6.367-373

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.6.367-373

Published online: 07 Aug 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 26

View related articles

he฀ traditional฀ case฀ method฀ can฀ be฀classified฀as฀a฀type฀of฀experi-ential฀ learning฀ because฀ students฀ treat฀ the฀ problem฀ in฀ the฀ case฀ as฀ if฀ it฀ were฀ real฀and฀immediate,฀even฀though฀events฀ in฀ the฀ case฀ occurred฀ many฀ months฀ or฀ years฀in฀the฀past.฀Until฀the฀emergence฀ of฀ the฀ Internet,฀ there฀ was฀ no฀ practical฀ way฀ for฀ cases฀ to฀ actually฀ be฀ real฀ and฀ immediate.฀The฀Internet฀makes฀instan-taneous฀ distribution฀ of฀ cases฀ possible,฀ and฀ offers฀ the฀ potential฀ for฀ their฀ cre-ation฀ in฀ real฀ time.฀ The฀ present฀ article฀ describes฀an฀attempt฀to฀use฀the฀Internet฀ to฀ bring฀ business฀ reality฀ to฀ business฀ courses,฀ and฀ to฀ facilitate฀ communica-tion฀ among฀ instructors,฀ students,฀ and฀ the฀ case฀ company.฀ My฀ goal฀ was฀ to฀ stimulate฀ a฀ dialogue฀ about฀ how฀ the฀ Internet฀ can฀ be฀ used฀ to฀ move฀ current฀ teaching฀ methods฀ forward—especially฀ the฀ case฀ method—because฀ it฀ is฀ so฀ prominent฀in฀schools฀of฀business.฀

Educators฀ over฀ the฀ past฀ 50฀ years฀ have฀ introduced฀ many฀ learning฀ models฀

for฀ business฀ characterized฀ as฀

experi-ential฀ learning.฀ They฀ shared฀ the฀ pur-pose฀ of฀ increasing฀ motivation฀ through฀ interactivity฀(Swift฀&฀Kent,฀1999).฀Cases฀ provide฀ a฀ proxy฀ for฀ the฀ most฀ direct฀ form฀ of฀ experiential฀ learning:฀ intern- ships฀(Shulman,฀1992).฀Recent฀develop-ments฀ in฀ experiential฀ learning฀ include฀ simulations฀(Antepohl฀&฀Herzig,฀1999),฀ games฀ (Saunders,฀ 1997),฀ living฀ cases฀ (Andrews฀ &฀ Noel,฀ 1986),฀ team฀

learn-ing฀(Harrison-Walker,฀2000),฀and฀action฀ learning฀ (Cribbs,฀ 2000).฀ These฀ efforts฀ represent฀ the฀ search฀ for฀ more฀ compel-ling฀instructional฀methods.฀

To฀ affect฀ management฀ education,฀ any฀ pedagogical฀ innovation฀ must฀ pass฀ the฀ following฀ tests:฀ (a)฀ Students฀ must฀ like฀ it;฀ (b)฀ faculty฀ must฀ find฀ it฀ worth฀ the฀switching฀cost;฀and฀(c)฀the฀innova-tion฀must฀be฀economical฀and฀practical฀ to฀ produce.฀ It฀ is฀ interesting฀ that฀ the฀ adoption฀ of฀ one฀ pedagogical฀ method฀ over฀ another฀ is฀ not฀ based฀ on฀ evidence฀ of฀efficacy฀(Shulman,฀1992).฀The฀pur-pose฀of฀the฀present฀article฀was฀to฀report฀ on฀student฀satisfaction฀during฀the฀sec-ond฀ implementation฀ of฀ an฀ innovation฀

in฀experiential฀learning฀called฀the฀

real-time฀ case฀ (RTC)฀study.฀ Theroux฀ and฀ Kilbane฀ (2004)฀ evaluated฀ student฀ sat- isfaction฀with฀RTC฀for฀the฀first฀imple-mentation฀of฀the฀concept.฀Kilbane฀et฀al.฀ (2004)฀assessed฀the฀faculty฀experience,฀ and฀ in฀ my฀ previous฀ work฀ (Theroux,฀ 2007),฀ I฀ researched฀ the฀ feasibility฀ and฀ costs฀to฀produce฀an฀RTC฀study.฀

The฀Sloan฀Foundation,฀the฀Kauffman฀ Foundation,฀ and฀ the฀ Coleman฀ Founda-tion฀ facilitated฀ the฀ initial฀ launch฀ of฀ an฀ RTC฀study฀in฀2001฀as฀an฀innovation฀in฀ the฀case฀method฀and฀experiential฀learn-ing,฀with฀myself฀as฀project฀director.฀The฀ financial฀supporters’฀goal฀was฀to฀stretch฀

the฀definition฀of฀case฀study

฀and฀to฀mod-ernize฀ it.฀ The฀ subject฀ company฀ for฀ the฀ first฀ production฀ of฀ an฀ RTC฀ study฀ was฀

Real-Time฀Case฀Method:฀Analysis฀of฀a฀

Second฀Implementation

JAMES฀M.฀THEROUX

UNIVERSITY฀OF฀MASSACHUSETTS฀AMHERST AMHERST,฀MASSACHUSETTS

T

ABSTRACT.฀In฀2005,฀M.฀Hopkins฀and฀J.฀ Theroux฀implemented฀the฀second฀example฀ of฀an฀experimental฀case฀study,฀at฀11฀business฀ schools฀in฀the฀United฀States฀and฀Canada.฀ The฀new฀type฀of฀case฀study,฀named฀the฀ real-time฀case฀(RTC)฀study,฀uses฀the฀Internet฀to฀ bring฀business฀reality฀to฀business฀courses฀ and฀to฀facilitate฀communication฀among฀ faculty,฀students,฀and฀the฀case฀company.฀ In฀the฀present฀study,฀data฀from฀student฀ surveys฀provided฀an฀assessment฀of฀RTC.฀ The฀author’s฀analysis฀suggests฀that฀the฀RTC฀ concept฀engages฀and฀satisfies฀students฀at฀a฀ higher฀level฀than฀do฀average฀courses฀and฀ presents฀a฀more฀realistic฀and฀integrated฀view฀ of฀business฀decision฀making.฀However,฀the฀ level฀of฀satisfaction฀declined฀in฀comparison฀ with฀the฀first฀iteration฀of฀RTC฀in฀2001฀(S.฀ House฀&฀J.฀Theroux).฀In฀the฀present฀study,฀ the฀author฀presents฀student฀feedback฀to฀ explain฀the฀difference.฀

Keywords:฀active฀learning,฀case฀study,฀ pedagogy

Copyright฀©฀2009฀Heldref฀Publications

Optasite,฀Inc.,฀of฀Worcester,฀Massachu-setts1_{฀(House฀&฀Theroux,฀2001).}

An฀RTC฀ study฀ is฀ a฀ series฀ of฀ weekly฀ case฀studies฀focusing฀on฀a฀single฀com-pany.฀The฀case฀installments฀are฀written฀ and฀distributed฀to฀students฀as฀the฀events฀ being฀ described฀ are฀ unfolding฀ in฀ real฀ time.฀ Each฀ weekly฀ case฀ focuses฀ on฀ a฀ problem฀ facing฀ the฀ subject฀ company฀ at฀ that฀ moment฀ and฀ invites฀ students฀ to฀ solve฀it.฀By฀the฀end฀of฀a฀semester,฀stu-dents฀have฀studied฀the฀subject฀company฀ in฀depth฀and฀have฀had฀some฀direct฀con-tact฀with฀the฀company฀by฀way฀of฀a฀Web฀ site฀dedicated฀to฀RTC.฀Students฀do฀not฀ need฀ to฀ use฀ the฀ company’s฀ Web฀ site;฀ rather,฀ the฀ company฀ uses฀ the฀ Web฀ site฀ dedicated฀ to฀ RTC฀ as฀ well.฀The฀ follow-ing฀ is฀ an฀ excerpt฀ from฀ the฀ syllabus฀ of฀ a฀ course฀ that฀ was฀ centered฀ on฀ an฀ RTC฀ study฀that฀I฀created฀in฀2001:฀

As฀ you฀ read฀ this,฀ the฀ managers฀ of฀ a฀ new฀ high-tech฀ company฀ are฀ striving฀ to฀ achieve฀the฀entrepreneurial฀dream.฀On฀a฀ password-protected฀ Web฀ site฀ (realtime- casestudy.com)฀you฀will฀follow฀that฀com-pany,฀and฀see฀its฀progress฀week฀by฀week.฀ You฀ will฀ be฀ actively฀ engaged฀ with฀ the฀ company,฀ analyzing฀ its฀ problems,฀ and฀ making฀ input.฀You฀ will฀ be฀ participating,฀ along฀with฀students฀from฀other฀universi-ties,฀in฀a฀full-semester,฀RTC฀study.฀Unlike฀ traditional฀ case฀ studies,฀ this฀ RTC฀ study฀ will฀dig฀deeply฀into฀one฀company฀during฀ the฀ entire฀ semester.฀ At฀ this฀ moment,฀ a฀ case฀ writer฀ is฀ stationed฀ full฀ time฀ at฀ the฀ case฀company.฀Each฀week,฀the฀writer฀will฀ provide฀us฀with฀the฀information฀we฀need฀ to฀analyze฀a฀particular฀problem฀or฀ques-tion฀faced฀by฀the฀company.฀But฀our฀goal฀ is฀not฀analysis฀for฀its฀own฀sake;฀instead,฀ we฀ want฀ to฀ go฀ beyond฀ critiquing฀ and฀ make฀ valuable฀ recommendations฀ to฀ the฀ company.฀The฀company฀is฀counting฀on฀us฀ to฀perform,฀and฀we฀want฀to฀deliver.฀

Results฀from฀the฀2001฀case฀(Theroux฀ &฀ Kilbane,฀ 2004)฀ were฀ positive:฀ Par-ticipating฀ students฀ and฀ faculty฀ became฀ supporters฀ of฀ the฀ RTC,฀ and฀ the฀ con-cept฀garnered฀three฀national฀awards฀for฀ pedagogical฀ innovation฀ (see฀ Appendix฀ A).฀ The฀ supporters฀ were฀ motivated฀ to฀ produce฀a฀new฀RTC฀study฀in฀the฀fall฀of฀ 2005.฀ The฀ purpose฀ of฀ the฀ second฀ case฀ was฀ to฀ validate฀ results฀ from฀ the฀ first฀ case,฀ to฀ test฀ scalability฀ by฀ expanding฀ the฀ use฀ of฀ the฀ case฀ from฀ 4฀ universities฀ to฀11,฀and฀to฀improve฀the฀case฀produc-tion฀ process฀ by฀ implementing฀ lessons฀ learned฀from฀the฀2001฀case฀(Hopkins฀&฀ Theroux,฀2005).

The฀ subject฀ company฀ for฀ the฀ 2005฀ case฀ was฀ DAFCA,฀ Inc.,฀ of฀ Framing-ham,฀ Massachusetts.฀ DAFCA฀ creates฀ software฀ tools฀ that฀ chip฀ designers฀ use.฀ Thus,฀ DAFCA฀ is฀ part฀ of฀ the฀ highest฀ high-tech฀ industries.฀ Its฀ employees฀ work฀in฀the฀invisible฀world฀of฀the฀semi-conductor.฀They฀are฀on฀the฀forefront฀of฀ new฀products฀and฀technology฀(Hopkins฀ &฀Theroux,฀2005).

Scope฀and฀Limitations

The฀ purpose฀ of฀ the฀ present฀ study฀ was฀ to฀ evaluate฀ the฀ effect฀ of฀ the฀ RTC฀ method฀(Hopkins฀&฀Theroux,฀2005)฀on฀ students฀ of฀ the฀ 2005฀ implementation฀ and฀to฀compare฀it฀with฀the฀2001฀imple-mentation฀ (House฀ &฀ Theroux,฀ 2001).฀ The฀RTC฀concept฀is฀still฀at฀the฀experi-mental฀ stage฀ after฀ just฀ two฀ implemen-tations.฀ Although฀ evaluation฀ data฀ such฀ as฀those฀presented฀in฀the฀present฀study฀ are฀ important,฀ more฀ evaluation฀ work฀ needs฀to฀be฀done,฀particularly฀with฀other฀ groups฀ of฀ students฀ and฀ other฀ teachers฀ using฀the฀method.฀My฀evaluation฀should฀ aid฀ future฀ RTC฀ users,฀ producers,฀ and฀ those฀ who฀ seek฀ to฀ evaluate฀ the฀ meth-od฀ further.฀ The฀ degree฀ to฀ which฀ these฀ results฀generalize฀to฀other฀teachers฀and฀ settings฀is฀an฀important฀area฀for฀further฀ research.฀ It฀ would฀ have฀ been฀ ideal฀ to฀ use฀experimental฀designs฀that฀randomly฀ assign฀ students฀ to฀ RTC฀ and฀ non-RTC฀ groups฀to฀best฀evaluate฀the฀method,฀but฀ such฀designs฀were฀hard฀to฀implement฀in฀ a฀university฀setting.

METHOD

My฀ main฀ goal฀ in฀ evaluating฀ RTC฀ was฀ to฀ validate฀ what฀ I฀ and฀ the฀ other฀ researchers฀learned฀in฀the฀2001฀inaugu-ral฀implementation฀(House฀&฀Theroux,฀ 2001).฀In฀particular,฀we฀wanted฀to฀con-firm฀ that฀ students฀ (a)฀ found฀ the฀ RTC฀ concept฀ engaging฀ and฀ interesting,฀ (b)฀ perceived฀ it฀ had฀ value฀ for฀ themselves฀ and฀ for฀ others,฀ and฀ (c)฀ believed฀ that฀ the฀ RTC฀ enabled฀ some฀ type฀ of฀ learn-ing฀ not฀ offered฀ by฀ conventional฀ cases,฀ including฀ a฀ more฀ realistic฀ understand-ing฀of฀business฀and฀an฀appreciation฀for฀ the฀complex฀nature฀of฀business฀decision฀ making.฀ I฀ discuss฀ the฀ methodological฀ issues฀in฀carrying฀out฀the฀evaluation฀of฀ these฀objectives.฀

Participants฀

Because฀ all฀ RTC฀ material฀ is฀ distrib-uted฀ on฀ a฀ Web฀ site,฀ there฀ is฀ no฀ limit฀ to฀ the฀ number฀ of฀ schools฀ that฀ could฀ study฀ the฀ case.฀The฀ number฀ of฀ schools฀ in฀ 2005฀ was฀ 11,฀ including฀ 1฀ in฀ Puerto฀ Rico฀and฀1฀in฀Canada฀(for฀a฀list฀of฀par-ticipating฀institutions,฀see฀Appendix฀B).฀ Schools฀ were฀ self-selected฀ in฀ response฀ to฀an฀open฀invitation฀that฀I฀made฀at฀two฀ academic฀meetings.฀I฀did฀not฀reject฀any฀ school’s฀ request฀ for฀ inclusion฀ in฀ the฀ present฀study.

Instrument฀Development

I฀ developed฀ a฀ postimplementation฀ survey฀ with฀ items฀ to฀ assess฀ the฀ three฀ main฀aforementioned฀objectives,฀several฀ questions฀about฀specific฀aspects฀of฀RTC฀ study฀ (e.g.,฀ its฀ depth฀ and฀ its฀ real-time฀ nature),฀and฀several฀open-ended฀probes.฀ To฀allow฀comparisons฀between฀the฀first฀ and฀ second฀ implementations฀ of฀ RTC฀ study,฀ the฀ questions฀ related฀ to฀ the฀ two฀ were฀ the฀ same.฀ The฀ survey฀ contained฀ (a)฀ 14฀ selected-response฀ items฀ using฀ a฀ 5-point฀ Likert-type฀ scale฀ ranging฀ from฀ 1฀ (strongly฀ disagree)฀ to฀ 5฀ (strongly฀ agree)฀ and฀ (b)฀ 4฀ open-response฀ items.฀ I฀ designed฀ the฀ questions฀ to฀ measure฀ the฀degree฀to฀which฀RTC฀study฀accom-plished฀ its฀ specific฀ pedagogical฀ objec-tives฀and฀to฀inquire฀about฀the฀students’฀ impressions฀of฀how฀much฀they฀enjoyed฀ and฀learned฀from฀the฀RTC฀experience.฀I฀ developed฀the฀original฀questions฀in฀con-junction฀ with฀ a฀ panel฀ of฀ three฀ experts฀ in฀educational฀test฀and฀survey฀develop-ment฀at฀the฀University฀of฀Massachusetts฀ School฀ of฀ Education.฀ I฀ pretested฀ the฀ instrument฀ by฀ presenting฀ the฀ questions฀ to฀a฀group฀of฀five฀graduate฀students฀who฀ were฀not฀included฀in฀the฀study.฀I฀queried฀ the฀students฀about฀the฀clarity฀and฀mean-ingfulness฀ of฀ the฀ questions฀ and฀ made฀ slight฀revisions฀to฀improve฀the฀clarity฀of฀

some฀items.2_฀

Data฀Collection฀

To฀ discover฀ students’฀ perceptions฀ of฀ their฀experience฀with฀RTC,฀each฀partici-pating฀ professor฀ administered฀ a฀ paper฀ survey฀at฀the฀end฀of฀the฀14-week฀expe-rience฀with฀the฀RTC฀study.฀In฀2005,฀the฀ survey฀ included฀ (a)฀ all฀ the฀ questions฀ asked฀ in฀ 2001฀ and฀ (b)฀ several฀ others฀

relating฀to฀the฀cost฀of฀the฀RTC฀materials฀ and฀the฀degree฀of฀difficulty฀in฀using฀the฀ online฀technology.฀

Of฀the฀245฀students฀who฀participated฀ in฀ the฀ case฀ study,฀ 167฀ students฀ filled฀ out฀ the฀ survey฀ instrument฀ (68%).฀ This฀ return฀ rate฀ exceeded฀ the฀ rate฀ in฀ 2001,฀ when฀professors฀asked฀their฀students฀to฀ fill฀ out฀ an฀ online฀ survey฀ in฀ their฀ spare฀ time฀(50%).฀In฀2005,฀all฀students฀attend- ing฀class฀on฀the฀day฀of฀the฀survey฀com-pleted฀it฀in฀class.฀I฀had฀no฀control฀over฀ the฀administration฀of฀the฀surveys฀except฀ in฀my฀classroom.฀One฀class฀was฀online฀ only฀ (no฀ face-to-face฀ interaction),฀ and฀ its฀students฀filled฀out฀the฀survey฀online.฀ All฀responses฀were฀anonymous.฀

RESULTS

A฀ summary฀ of฀ data฀ obtained฀ from฀ students฀ is฀ presented฀ in฀ the฀ following฀ figures.฀ Students฀ responded฀ to฀ state-ments฀ on฀ a฀ continuum฀ ranging฀ from฀ strongly฀ disagree฀ (SD)฀ to฀ strongly฀ agree฀(SA).

Figures฀ 1฀ and฀ 2฀ indicate฀ that฀ the฀ majority฀ of฀ students฀ felt฀ that฀ RTC฀ study฀ was฀ more฀ realistic฀ as฀ a฀ learning฀ experience฀and฀as฀a฀perspective฀on฀the฀ business฀ world.฀ In฀ all,฀ 80%฀ (134)฀ of฀ students฀saw฀the฀case฀as฀a฀more฀realis-tic฀learning฀experience฀than฀traditional฀ business฀ courses,฀ and฀ 71%฀ (119)฀ felt฀ it฀ presented฀ a฀ more฀ realistic฀ view฀ of฀ the฀ business฀ world.฀ Thus,฀ RTC฀ study฀ appears฀ to฀ have฀ strongly฀ delivered฀ a฀ realism฀factor฀to฀students.฀

When฀evaluated฀as฀a฀tool฀for฀teaching฀ entrepreneurship,฀ RTC฀ study฀ received฀ high฀ scores.฀ In฀ all,฀ 84%฀ (140)฀ of฀ stu-dents฀ surveyed฀ saw฀ RTC฀ study฀ as฀ an฀ effective฀ way฀ to฀ learn฀ about฀ entrepre-neurship฀(see฀Figure฀3),฀and฀81%฀(135)฀ would฀ recommend฀ using฀ RTC฀ study฀ for฀ future฀ entrepreneurial฀ courses฀ (see฀ Figure฀4).฀

Students’฀enjoyment฀levels฀were฀gen-erally฀ high.฀ In฀ all,฀ 81%฀ (135)฀ would฀ recommend฀the฀course฀to฀a฀friend฀(see฀ Figure฀ 5).฀ In฀ addition,฀ 50%฀ (84)฀ of฀ students฀enjoyed฀RTC฀more฀than฀other฀ business฀ courses,฀ whereas฀ 30%฀ (50)฀ were฀unsure฀(see฀Figure฀6).

The฀ majority฀ of฀ students฀ surveyed฀ preferred฀ RTC฀ to฀ traditional฀ business฀ courses.฀ Moreover,฀ 57%฀ (95)฀ would฀ not฀ choose฀ a฀ traditional฀ course฀ over฀

RTC฀ study฀ (see฀ Figure฀ 7),฀ and฀ 56%฀ (94)฀did฀not฀prefer฀traditional฀courses฀ over฀RTC฀study฀(see฀Figure฀8).฀There฀ is฀ some฀ ambiguity฀ with฀ the฀ 32–34%฀ (55)฀ who฀ were฀ unsure฀ which฀ type฀ of฀ course฀ they฀ would฀ prefer.฀ However,฀ the฀percentage฀of฀students฀who฀would฀ choose฀ traditional฀ courses฀ over฀ RTC฀ study฀ was฀ low,฀ 10%฀ (17)฀ for฀ both฀

questions฀ comparing฀ RTC฀ study฀ with฀ traditional฀business฀courses.฀

When฀ comparing฀ RTC฀ study฀ with฀ a฀ historical฀case฀study,฀67%฀(112)฀of฀the฀ students฀ indicated฀ they฀ would฀ prefer฀ RTC฀ to฀ a฀ historical฀ case฀ (see฀ Figure฀ 9).฀Reasons฀for฀this฀are฀included฀in฀the฀ discussion฀of฀open-ended฀questions.฀In฀ all,฀ 23%฀ (38)฀ were฀ unsure฀ which฀ they฀

60

Not฀sure Agree 16

Not฀sure Agree 21

Not฀sure Agree 10

would฀prefer.฀It฀is฀unclear฀whether฀this฀ was฀ because฀ of฀ (a)฀ no฀ prior฀ exposure฀ to฀ historical฀ cases฀ or฀ (b)฀ no฀ strong฀ feelings฀ toward฀ either฀ type฀ of฀ case.฀ The฀ results฀ that฀ indicated฀ the฀ value฀ students฀ assigned฀ to฀ the฀ course฀ was฀ mixed฀(see฀Figure฀10).฀Moreover,฀30%฀ (50)฀ felt฀ that฀ they฀ would฀ consider฀ it฀ the฀ most฀ valuable฀ course฀ ever฀ taken,฀ whereas฀22%฀(37)฀disagreed,฀and฀48%฀ (80)฀were฀not฀sure.฀

Student฀ reaction฀ to฀ the฀ Web-site฀ technology฀ that฀ I฀ used฀ in฀ the฀ case฀ was฀ mixed฀ but฀ largely฀ positive.฀ In฀ addition,฀ 64%฀ (107)฀ did฀ not฀ feel฀ that฀ there฀ were฀ too฀ many฀ technical฀ difficulties฀ in฀ using฀ the฀ case,฀ whereas฀ 26%฀ (43)฀ did฀ see฀ too฀ many฀ technical฀ difficulties฀ (see฀ Figure฀ 11).฀I฀included฀the฀question฀in฀the฀survey฀ because฀ there฀ were฀ so฀ many฀ technical฀ dimensions฀to฀using฀the฀case:฀online฀chat,฀ online฀ video,฀ phone฀ conferencing,฀ and฀ video฀ conferencing.฀ Unfortunately,฀ the฀ students฀ who฀ found฀ too฀ many฀ technical฀ difficulties฀did฀not฀elaborate฀on฀or฀explain฀ this฀view฀in฀the฀open-ended฀questions.฀In฀ all,฀ 54%฀ (90)฀ did฀ not฀ see฀ the฀ course฀ as฀ disorganized฀ when฀ compared฀ with฀ other฀ courses,฀ whereas฀ 31%฀ (52)฀ did฀ consider฀ RTC฀disorganized฀(see฀Figure฀12).

Student฀Responses฀to฀Open-Ended฀Questions฀

Among฀responses฀to฀an฀open-ended฀ question฀ regarding฀ what฀ could฀ be฀ improved฀in฀the฀case฀were฀several฀indi-cating฀ that฀ students฀ felt฀ a฀ strong฀ con-nection฀to฀the฀case฀company฀(DAFCA,฀ Inc.)฀and฀that฀they฀wanted฀more฀direct฀ communication฀ with฀ the฀ company.฀ This฀request฀for฀more฀communication฀ was฀not฀voiced฀in฀the฀2001฀case฀(Opta-site,฀ Inc.;฀ Theroux฀ &฀ Kilbane,฀ 2004).฀ The฀ absolute฀ level฀ of฀ student–com-pany฀communication฀was฀much฀higher฀ in฀ 2001,฀ and฀ I฀ explain฀ that฀ difference฀ in฀ the฀ Discussion฀ section.฀ A฀ conse-quence฀of฀the฀students’฀interest฀in฀the฀ case฀ company฀ (DAFCA)฀ was฀ signifi-cant฀ student฀ frustration฀ with฀ some฀ of฀ the฀ company’s฀ business฀ decisions฀ and฀ frustration฀with฀the฀company’s฀lack฀of฀ responsiveness฀ to฀ them.฀ This฀ frustra-tion,฀ though฀ it฀ could฀ be฀ viewed฀ as฀ a฀ negative,฀ indicated฀ a฀ level฀ of฀ engage-ment฀ not฀ typically฀ seen฀ with฀ tradi-tional฀ cases.฀ Students฀ indicated฀ that฀

they฀ wanted฀ more฀ direct฀ communica-tion฀with฀DAFCA,฀wanted฀to฀interview฀ DAFCA฀ executives,฀ and฀ wanted฀ more฀ feedback฀from฀the฀company.฀

In฀response฀to฀an฀open-ended฀question฀ about฀what฀makes฀RTC฀study฀more฀com-pelling฀ than฀ a฀ conventional฀ case฀ study,฀ students฀made฀the฀following฀comments:฀ if฀ you฀ work฀ hard฀ enough,฀ you฀ can฀ help฀change฀the฀outcome.฀It฀is฀fun฀to฀ think฀ that฀ the฀ recommendations฀ we฀ make฀could฀help฀DAFCA฀succeed.” ฀2.฀“[There฀was฀a]฀sense฀of฀‘power’฀from฀

being฀ given฀ the฀ chance฀ to฀ ‘consult’฀ for฀a฀company฀and฀being฀part฀of฀the฀ history฀of฀the฀company.”

฀3.฀“You฀feel฀as฀though฀your฀work฀mat-ters฀ for฀ something฀ besides฀ a฀ letter฀

60

Not฀sure Agree 16

Not฀sure Agree 10

Not฀sure Agree 30

grade.฀ There’s฀ incentive฀ to฀ produce฀ better฀quality฀work.”

฀4.฀“Often,฀ classes฀ may฀ not฀ seem฀ very฀ applicable฀to฀real฀life.฀This฀class฀real-ly฀showed฀us฀how฀to฀apply฀topics฀in฀ the฀real฀business฀environment.”

In฀ response฀ to฀ an฀ open-ended฀ ques-tion฀ about฀ what฀ would฀ improve฀ RTC,฀ there฀ was฀ an฀ overwhelming฀ indication฀ from฀ students฀ that฀ they฀ wanted฀ more฀ communication฀and฀interaction฀between฀

and฀among฀schools.฀These฀feelings฀were฀ not฀expressed฀in฀2001.฀Many฀of฀the฀2005฀ students฀ suggested฀ ways฀ to฀ facilitate฀ this฀ interaction.฀ Suggestions฀ included฀ more฀ videoconferences฀ or฀ conference฀ calls,฀ teams฀ comprising฀ students฀ from฀ various฀ schools,฀ and฀ feedback฀ among฀ schools฀on฀team฀submissions.

In฀ response฀ to฀ an฀ open-ended฀ ques-tion฀about฀what฀they฀disliked฀about฀the฀ case,฀some฀students฀felt฀the฀course฀was฀ too฀strenuous฀and฀disliked฀focusing฀on฀

one฀ company฀ for฀ an฀ entire฀ semester.฀ Other฀students฀wanted฀the฀case฀to฀move฀ at฀ a฀ faster฀ pace.฀ Some฀ representative฀ student฀comments฀follow:

฀1.฀“You฀ can฀ only฀ get฀ a฀ short฀ snapshot฀ of฀ the฀ company฀ during฀ a฀ semester,฀ since฀ not฀ a฀ lot฀ happens฀ and฀ recom-mendations฀ made฀ won’t฀ be฀ noticed฀ for฀months฀or฀years฀to฀come.”

฀2.฀“Choosing฀a฀company฀that฀isn’t฀fast- paced฀doesn’t฀utilize฀RTC฀to฀its฀full-est฀ effect.฀ Perhaps฀ a฀ company฀ with฀ fast฀turnaround฀would฀make฀for฀more฀ interesting฀cases.”

฀3.฀“The฀entire฀class฀was฀based฀on฀pre-diction:฀ What฀ might฀ or฀ could฀ hap-pen?฀I฀would฀have฀liked฀to฀have฀seen฀ more฀action.”

A฀ majority฀ of฀ students฀ disliked฀ the฀ technical฀ nature฀ of฀ the฀ company฀ and฀ found฀the฀effort฀required฀to฀understand฀ DAFCA’s฀ industry฀ (semiconductor฀ design)฀ to฀ be฀ burdensome.฀ Neverthe-less,฀approximately฀20%฀of฀the฀students฀ were฀ intrigued฀ and฀ challenged฀ by฀ the฀ high-tech฀ nature฀ of฀ the฀ case.฀ Student฀ sentiment฀ can฀ best฀ be฀ characterized฀ by฀ the฀following฀comments:

฀1.฀“There฀ is฀ a฀ big฀ learning฀ curve.฀ It฀ took฀ me฀ a฀ while฀ to฀ get฀ to฀ the฀ point฀ where฀ I฀ could฀ understand฀ elec-tronic฀ design฀ automations฀ and฀ what฀ DAFCA฀does.”฀

฀2.฀“You฀need฀to฀know฀about฀the฀industry฀ to฀ learn฀ the฀ company’s฀ background,฀ which฀is฀very฀difficult.”

฀3.฀“There฀ was฀ way฀ too฀ much฀ back-ground฀information฀that฀must฀be฀gone฀ over฀just฀to฀have฀an฀idea฀of฀what฀the฀ cases฀are฀talking฀about฀.฀.฀.฀.฀A฀busi-ness฀ type฀ that฀ is฀ more฀ familiar฀ to฀ students฀would฀provide฀an฀easier฀time฀ linking฀ideas฀and฀practices.”

In฀addition฀to฀differences฀of฀opinion฀ among฀ students฀ in฀ 2005,฀ there฀ were฀ some฀ broad,฀ consistent฀ similarities฀ in฀ the฀ responses฀ students฀ gave฀ after฀ 2001฀ and฀ 2005.฀ These฀ similarities฀ included฀ the฀ following:฀ (a)฀ Students฀ liked฀ the฀ realistic,฀ real-world฀ feel฀ of฀ RTC;฀ (b)฀ students฀ noted฀ that฀ in฀ a฀ complex฀ real-life฀ case฀ there฀ was฀ no฀ right฀ answer.฀ In฀accordance,฀the฀professor’s฀role฀was฀ changed฀ to฀ one฀ of฀ coparticipant฀ and฀ coach.฀Students฀also฀liked฀this.฀

Not฀sure Agree 32

Not฀sure Agree 34

Not฀sure Agree 23

Student฀Recommendations Students฀ provided฀ a฀ broad฀ range฀ of฀ recommendations,฀ and฀ the฀ following฀ were฀the฀most฀common:

฀1.฀“Use฀ an฀ industry฀ that฀ is฀ easier฀ to฀ understand฀ so฀ not฀ as฀ much฀ time฀ needs฀ to฀ be฀ spent฀ on฀ learning฀ the฀ technology.”

฀2.฀“Run฀the฀case฀for฀an฀entire฀year฀so฀ students฀ can฀ follow฀ the฀ company฀

for฀a฀longer฀period฀of฀time.” ฀3.฀“Update฀ students฀ on฀ DAFCA’s฀

reac-tion฀ to฀ their฀ suggestions.฀Are฀ any฀ of฀ the฀recommendations฀implemented฀at฀ the฀company?”

฀4.฀“Provide฀ students฀ with฀ a฀ follow-up฀ case฀or฀update฀the฀semester฀after฀the฀

Because฀ this฀ was฀ the฀ second฀ imple- mentation฀of฀the฀RTC฀concept,฀it฀is฀inter-esting฀ to฀ look฀ at฀ how฀ student฀ responses฀ varied฀between฀the฀two฀implementations.฀ I฀ interpret฀ those฀ differences฀ in฀ the฀ Dis-cussion.฀First,฀I฀focus฀on฀the฀comparison฀ data.฀ In฀ 2005,฀ fewer฀ students฀ (50%฀ vs.฀ 84%)฀ found฀ the฀ course฀ more฀ enjoyable฀ than฀ they฀ did฀ other฀ courses฀ they฀ had฀ taken.฀ A฀ much฀ lower฀ percentage฀ (24%฀ vs.฀ 45%)฀ of฀ students฀ in฀ 2005฀ named฀ RTC฀their฀favorite฀course.฀In฀2005฀versus฀ 2001,฀a฀much฀lower฀percentage฀(24%฀vs.฀ 45%)฀of฀students฀felt฀RTC฀was฀the฀most฀ memorable฀ or฀ valuable฀ course฀ they฀ had฀ taken.฀Slightly฀fewer฀students฀from฀2005฀ (79%฀ vs.฀ 91%)฀ would฀ recommend฀ the฀ course฀ than฀ would฀ students฀ from฀ 2001,฀ although฀ the฀ response฀ for฀ both฀ imple-mentations฀was฀positive.

DISCUSSION฀

The฀ 2005฀ data฀ indicate฀ that฀ RTC฀ achieved฀ its฀ stated฀ goals฀ of฀ creating฀ a฀ course฀that฀is฀(a)฀engaging,฀(b)฀valuable฀

Although฀ the฀ 2005฀ case฀ received฀ posi-tive฀ratings,฀those฀ratings฀were฀significantly฀ lower฀than฀those฀from฀the฀2001฀case.฀What฀ could฀explain฀this?฀Although฀the฀students฀ in฀2005฀appreciated฀RTC฀features฀such฀as฀ immediacy,฀realism,฀and฀depth฀of฀informa-tion,฀ they฀ were฀ troubled฀ in฀ the฀ following฀ two฀areas:฀(a)฀the฀burden฀of฀digesting฀the฀ technology฀underlying฀the฀case฀company’s฀ business฀and฀(b)฀the฀lack฀of฀two-way฀com-munication฀with฀the฀case฀company.฀

Regarding฀the฀inscrutability฀of฀the฀case฀ company’s฀ work฀ and฀ products,฀ student฀ feedback฀ indicates฀ that฀ future฀ case฀ pro-ducers฀ should฀ avoid฀ such฀ types฀ of฀ com-pany.฀Perhaps฀certain฀students฀in฀technical฀ fields฀might฀be฀ready฀and฀willing฀to฀take฀ on฀ such฀ a฀ challenge,฀ but฀ for฀ the฀ average฀ student฀it฀is฀not฀worth฀the฀effort.฀

Regarding฀ the฀ lack฀ of฀ two-way฀ communication฀with฀the฀case฀company฀ that฀the฀students฀felt,฀this฀was฀a฀problem฀ in฀ 2005฀ but฀ not฀ in฀ 2001.฀ The฀ RTC฀ concept฀ was฀ designed฀ to฀ deliver฀ two-way฀communication.฀This฀was฀promised฀

Not฀sure Agree 13

Not฀sure Agree 11

Not฀sure Agree 48

to฀ students฀ in฀ both฀ implementations,฀ but฀delivered฀to฀a฀large฀degree฀in฀2001,฀ versus฀a฀small฀degree฀in฀2005.฀I฀believe฀ that฀this฀was฀a฀major฀factor฀in฀reducing฀ student฀ satisfaction฀ in฀ 2005.฀ The฀ problem฀in฀2005฀was฀a฀human฀one฀that฀ caused฀ the฀ CEO฀ of฀ the฀ case฀ company฀ to฀reduce฀his฀level฀of฀engagement฀with฀ the฀case฀production฀team.฀The฀situation฀ was฀ not฀ bad฀ enough฀ to฀ prevent฀ the฀ writing฀of฀the฀weekly฀cases,฀but฀it฀lead฀ to฀ a฀ reduction฀ in฀ the฀ planned฀ RTC฀ practices฀ of฀ weekly฀ online฀ chats฀ with฀ company฀ managers,฀ monthly฀ video฀ conferences,฀ and฀ regular฀ feedback฀ to฀ student฀recommendations.฀

The฀problem฀with฀the฀2005฀CEO฀high-lights฀ how฀ critical฀ it฀ is฀ to฀ have฀ the฀ full฀ cooperation฀of฀the฀case฀company.฀I฀have฀ ideas฀ on฀ how฀ to฀ increase฀ the฀ odds฀ of฀ this฀cooperation฀in฀future฀cases,฀including฀ a฀ written฀ agreement฀ outlining฀ responsi-bilities฀ and฀ commitments฀ of฀ each฀ party.฀ I฀ invite฀ readers฀ to฀ discuss฀ this฀ and฀ other฀ topics฀related฀to฀the฀creation฀of฀RTCs฀and฀ to฀ read฀ the฀ economics฀ and฀ the฀ practical฀

challenges฀ of฀ producing฀ an฀ RTC฀ (Ther-oux,฀2007).฀

NOTES

฀1.฀ A฀ description฀ of฀ what฀ an฀ RTC฀ study฀ looks฀ like฀ and฀ how฀ it฀ works฀ is฀ available฀ at฀ http://intra. som.umass.edu/theroux฀(Web฀site).

฀2.฀ A฀copy฀of฀the฀survey฀is฀available฀from฀James฀ M.฀Theroux฀on฀request.

James฀M.฀Theroux฀is฀the฀Flavin฀Professor฀of฀ Entrepreneurship฀at฀University฀of฀Massachusetts฀ Amherst.฀ He฀ specializes฀ in฀ bringing฀ business฀ reality฀ to฀ the฀ classroom.฀ His฀ research฀ focuses฀ on฀ the฀ evaluation฀ of฀ pedagogical฀ innovation฀ for฀ business฀education.฀

Correspondence฀ concerning฀ this฀ article฀ should฀ be฀addressed฀to฀James฀M.฀Theroux,฀the฀University฀ of฀Massachusetts฀Amherst,฀School฀of฀Management,฀ 121฀Presidents฀Drive,฀Amherst,฀MA฀01003,฀USA.

E-mail:฀theroux@som.umass.edu

REFERENCES

Andrews,฀ E.,฀ &฀ Noel,฀ J.฀ (1986).฀ Adding฀ life฀ to฀ the฀ case฀ method.฀Training฀ and฀ Development฀ Journal,฀40(2),฀28–29.

Antepohl,฀ W.,฀ &฀ Herzig,฀ S.฀ (1999).฀ Problem-based฀learning฀versus฀lecture-based฀learning:฀A฀ controlled,฀ randomized฀ study.฀Medical฀ Educa-tion,฀33,฀106–113.

Cribbs,฀ G.฀ (2000,฀ May฀ 29).฀ Back฀ in฀ fashion฀ yet฀ again:฀Action฀learning.฀Financial฀Times,฀p.฀14. Harrison-Walker,฀ L.฀ (2000).฀ A฀ comprehensive฀

pedagogy฀for฀team-based฀case฀analysis.฀Journal฀ of฀Education฀for฀Business,฀75,฀241–245. Hopkins,฀ M.,฀ &฀ Theroux,฀ J.฀ (2005).฀DAFCA:฀

A฀ real-time฀ case฀ study.฀ Retrieved฀ December฀ 11,฀ 2005,฀ from฀ University฀ of฀ Massachusetts฀ Amherst,฀ School฀ of฀ Management฀ Web฀ site:฀ http://spark.oit.umass.edu

House,฀S.,฀&฀Theroux,฀J.฀(2001).฀Optasite:฀ A฀real-time฀ case฀ study.฀ Retrieved฀ December฀ 12,฀ 2001,฀ from฀ University฀ of฀ Massachusetts฀ Amherst,฀ School฀ of฀ Management฀ Web฀ site:฀ http://spark. oit.umass.edu

Kilbane,฀ C.,฀ Theroux,฀ J.,฀ Sulej,฀ J.,฀ Bisson,฀ B.,฀ Hay,฀D.,฀&฀Boyer,฀D.฀(2004).฀The฀real-time฀case฀ method:฀ Description฀ and฀ analysis฀ of฀ the฀ first฀ implementation.฀Innovative฀Higher฀Education,฀ 29(2),฀121–135.

Saunders,฀P.฀(1997).฀Experiential฀learning,฀cases,฀and฀ simulations฀in฀business฀communication.฀Business฀ Communication฀Quarterly,฀60(1),฀97–114. Shulman,฀ J.฀ (1992).฀Case฀ methods฀ in฀ teacher฀

education.฀ New฀York:฀Teachers฀ College฀ Press,฀ Columbia฀University.

Swift,฀ C.,฀ &฀ Kent,฀ R.฀ (1999).฀ Business฀ school฀ internships.฀Journal฀of฀Education฀for฀Business,฀

75,฀23–26.

Theroux,฀J.฀(2007).฀What฀it฀takes฀to฀innovate:฀The฀ experience฀ of฀ producing฀ an฀ online,฀ real-time฀ case฀study.฀Journal฀ of฀Asynchronous฀ Learning฀ Networks,฀11(4).฀Retrieved฀May฀5,฀2009,฀from฀ http://www.sloan-c.org/node/1047฀

Theroux,฀ J.,฀ &฀ Kilbane,฀ C.฀(2004).฀ The฀ real-time฀ case฀method:฀A฀new฀approach฀to฀an฀old฀tradition.฀

Journal฀of฀Education฀for฀Business,฀79,฀163–167.

APPENDIX฀A

National฀Recognition฀Awarded฀to฀the฀Real-Time฀Case฀Concept

The฀U.S.฀Association฀for฀Business฀and฀Entrepreneurship,฀the฀largest฀organization฀ of฀professors฀of฀entrepreneurship,฀named฀the฀real-time฀case฀study฀as฀the฀Pedagogical฀ Innovation฀of฀the฀Year฀in฀2002.

The฀Sloan฀Consortium,฀a฀leader฀in฀the฀study฀and฀dissemination฀of฀best฀practices฀in฀ online฀education,฀selected฀the฀real-time฀case฀for฀Best฀Practice฀for฀Student฀Satisfaction฀ in฀2002.

The฀U.S.฀Distance฀Learning฀Association฀is฀one฀of฀the฀three฀largest฀organizations฀ focused฀on฀the฀development฀and฀improvement฀of฀online฀learning.฀In฀2003,฀it฀selected฀ the฀real-time฀case฀study฀for฀the฀Excellence฀in฀Distance฀Teaching฀Award.

APPENDIX฀B

Real-Time฀Case฀Participants,฀by฀Site

Site฀ Student฀profile฀ Institution

Site฀1฀ 13฀MBA฀students฀ Clark฀University

Site฀2฀ 14฀undergraduate฀senior฀business฀majors฀ University฀of฀Northeast฀Oklahoma

Site฀3฀ 14฀high฀school฀juniors฀and฀seniors฀ Wilbraham-Munson฀Academy

Site฀4฀ 15฀undergraduate฀engineering฀and฀business฀majors฀ Loyola฀Marymount฀University Site฀5฀ 25฀undergraduate฀business฀and฀engineering฀students฀฀ Olin฀College,฀Babson฀College Site฀6฀ 28฀MBA,฀executive,฀and฀undergraduate฀students฀ University฀of฀Mary฀Hardin-Baylor

Site฀7฀ 7฀MBA฀students฀ Inter฀American฀University฀of฀Puerto฀Rico

Site฀8฀ 26฀MBA฀students,฀part-time฀and฀full-time฀฀ Pennsylvania฀State฀University Site฀9,฀Section฀1฀ 40฀full-time฀undergraduate฀students฀ University฀of฀Massachusetts฀Amherst Site฀9,฀Section฀2฀ 13฀full-time฀MBA฀students฀ University฀of฀Massachusetts฀Amherst Site฀10฀ 34฀MBA฀students,฀4฀were฀executives฀฀฀ University฀of฀New฀Brunswick,฀Canada

Site฀11฀ 16฀undergraduate฀business฀majors฀ University฀of฀Tampa