Lauren Wright

Academic Integrity in the Business School Environment: I’ll Get by with a Little Help from My Friends

The incidence of academic dishonesty has been increasing throughout the past few decades. Past research has indicated that business students cheat more than their peers in other disciplines across the university. And, of particular concern to marketing educators, the current research finds that marketing majors cheat significantly more than their peers in other business disciplines. The research results also indicate that students are much more likely to cheat in situations in which friends (versus mere acquaintances) are involved. The study identifies a robust false consensus effect in which the respondents significantly overestimate the degree to which others cheat. Finally, the research investigates behaviors, beliefs, and propensities related to cheating on electronic exams. The article suggests tactical and strategic measures that business schools and their faculty can use to reduce the incidence of academic dishonesty.

Can’t We Pick our Own Groups? The Influence of Group Selection Method on Group Dynamics and Outcomes

In today’s business world, the ability to work efficiently and effectively with others in a group is a mandatory skill. Many employers rank “ability to work with a group” as one of the most important attributes for business school graduates to possess. Therefore, it is important for instructors to understand the factors that influence group dynamics and outcomes and students’ attitudes toward group experiences. The objective of this research is to test whether the method of group member assignment (i.e., random or self-selected) affects the nature of group dynamics and outcomes, and students’ attitudes toward the group experience. The results indicate that the method of group member assignment does influence group dynamics, attitudes toward the group experience, and group outcomes.

Are Student Groups Dysfunctional? Perspectives from Both Sides of the Classroom.

In today’s business world, the ability to work efficiently and effectively in a team is mandatory to a business student’s success. Many employers rank “ability to work with a group” as one of the most important attributes for hiring business school graduates. Although an abundance of research has investigated group processes and dynamics during student group projects, no studies to date have specifically examined how instructors perceive the way in which students operate within their groups. The primary goal of this research is to address how student views regarding group work compare to those of their instructors. The results indicate that there are significant gaps between students’ opinions of their team experiences and the perceptions of the faculty who assign the group activities. The findings have implications for the use of team projects and the attitudes and behaviors instructors have regarding the efficacy of student groups.

A comparison of team developmental stages, trust and performance for virtual versus face-to-face teams

This study is an empirical analysis that compares virtual with face-to-face teams on team trust, performance issues and team developmental stages. The study uses data collected both before teams were formed and after teams completed their project deliverable. Pre-task measures include individual disposition to trust and initial team trust. Upon completion of their deliverable, team members responded to post-task measures on motivation, team trust and teamwork dynamics. In addition to these attitudinal comparisons, we investigate how teams spent their time during the completion of their team task. We examine potential differences in the percentage of time spent in each of the classic team formation stages (forming, storming, norming and performing). Team members also reported the total time spent completing the deliverable as well as time spent using various communication tools. In addition, we evaluate and compare team performance in terms of the deliverable quality. Our results indicate that both virtual and face-to-face teams bring relatively high initial trust to the team experience. More enduring trust, however, must be maintained by positive, task-oriented team dynamics. Team mates need to meet work expectations in order to maintain the trusting environment. We confirm that trust is important to team performance for both virtual and face-to-face teams. Higher trust teams do tend to perform better. We also found that both virtual and face-to-face teams spend similar proportions of time in each team formation stage. Finally, there is no significant difference in results produced by face-to-face and virtual teams, though in this study the direction of effectiveness leans towards the virtual teams. This is potentially good news since many believe that face-to-face groups produce better results than their virtual counterparts.

New Approaches to Business Process Redesign: A Case Study of Collaborative Group Technology and Service Mapping

Whether it is called reengineering, quality function deployment, quality circles, continuous improvement or total quality management, business process redesign (BPR) is occurring in many organizations. In the broadest sense, BPR includes nearly any kind of systematic effort by companies to realign their business processes so that they are more competitive. Successful business process redesign can lead to dramatic improvements in productivity and quality. But BPR typically requires vast amounts of time and money to implement, since extensive employee input is necessary during the redesign process. Group Decision Support Software (GDSS) provides a viable alternative to the traditional BPR approach. GDSS is defined as “computer-based information systems used to support intelligent, collaborative work.”This technology allows multiple users to meet and discuss topics simultaneously via a computer network, thus increasing employee commitment while decreasing time and cost.This paper describes a business process redesign project that was conducted for a division within a large government agency fall of 1993. The BPR was done using a type of Group Decision Support Software called Group Systems V. A services marketing tool called service mapping was also used to identify customer needs and interfaces. Data were collected throughout the project to measure employee attitudes about the redesign process and the GroupSystems technology. Time to complete tasks was also recorded. The results of the study showed that the business process redesign was accomplished more effectively in a shorter period of time than with traditional BPR methods previously used. Participants also indicated that the service mapping tool provided a perspective that is missing from many BPR approaches: an understanding of the service from the customers perspective.

Reducing Content Variance and Improving Student Learning Outcomes: The Value of Standardization in a Multisection Course.

This article describes a standardization process for an introductory marketing course with multiple sections. The authors first outline the process used to develop a standardized set of marketing concepts to be used in all introductory marketing classes. They then discuss the benefits to both students and faculty that occur as a result of standardizing a required course that has multiple sections. Finally, they present results from a survey designed to assess student attitudes about the use of standardized marketing concepts within a course and across the curriculum. The results indicate that students value a standardized curriculum and appreciate more repetition of concepts within and between marketing classes. In addition, the survey results show that students who are introduced to the standardized set of concepts in their introductory marketing classes score higher on a knowledge test than students who are not exposed to the standardized set of concepts.

Enhancing business process redesign: using tools to condense the process

The paper describes a business process redesign project that was conducted for a large government agency. The BPR was done using GroupSystems V as a means of reducing total project time and enhancing the performance of the cross-functional team that was responsible for the redesign project. Service process blueprinting was also used as a tool to identify and incorporate customer needs and interfaces. The results of the BPR demonstrate that the redesign process was accomplished very effectively over a relatively short period of time. Participants also indicated that the service blueprinting tool provided a perspective that is missing from many BPR approaches: an understanding of the process from the customers perspective.