ABSTRACT
At the 1999
annual ISAGA meeting the authors introduced the original CongruenceTM game.
"Its purpose was to demonstrate the importance of congruence among
team members, strategies and resources for entrepreneurial firms." The purpose of Congruence IITM: A
Strategic Business Board Game, is to teach the strategic importance of
congruence in strategy, quality and finance through the firms' life cycle. Participants make strategic decisions at
different stages of the product life cycle (one board for each stage of the
life cycle). As participants compete
only with themselves and play against the possible, the game is designed for
one or many players, or teams.
Participants will learn the importance of continuous strategic decision
making that serves to build a "better team" and a "better
firm."
INTRODUCTION
With
many new firms failing, venture creation is a seemingly stochastic
process. The primary reason for new
firm failure, which is high, is generally cited as "poor
management." Typically the new
entrepreneurs and their management teams do not possess the appropriate
skill-sets or resources. In addition
they may not focus their resources on the defined problem at hand, i.e., the
establishment of a successful firm.
Lack of congruence among team members is a major cause for this lack of
focus. A partial cure is starting the
firm with the right people, those possessing the appropriate functional skills
that have similar beliefs. The key to
future success is to make appropriate strategy and resource changes as
opportunities arise. As in the business
world, real strategic and tactical events occur that interfere, in a positive
or negative sense, with a firm accomplishing their strategies. These occurrences or interferences are built
into the game. Congruence IITM
is designed for participants to learn lessons across the product life cycle
that lead to firm success.
BACKGROUND
There has been growing recognition among business
simulation developers that firm strategies must be taken into account in their
games. Simulations have begun to
include a better, but far from perfect, capability for the players to choose
strategies when playing business games (Wolfe and Roge, 1997). In early computer games, decisions were
mostly focused around manufacturing and marketing budget inputs. How well do today's games allow for actual
strategic input? Do they merely
masquerade decision-making of “ole,”
(i.e., budgetary inputs), or do they allow for strategic choices which affect
simulation output? Finally, do
participants learn about the relationships between strategy and performance, or
do they just jump the hoops of the business game they played?
To help answer these questions in a positive way, the
authors have developed a board game that teaches important concepts that once
learned will assist in developing better entrepreneurs and better managers,
whether in the classroom or in the field.
Game players can develop their understanding of the value of congruence,
self-efficacy and team building as the simulated firm's product moves through
its life cycle.
Congruence can be viewed as a "fit or best match
between key variables." Thus
congruence could mean a number of things:
... the interplay and interrelations of: environment and strategy, organizational tasks and technologies,
and the individual and organizational structure (Hatton and Raymond,
1994).
Games
and simulations are designed "to heighten participant capacities for
critical thinking" as well as to teach lessons "recognizing the
validity of different points of view... developing ...peaceful resolution of
conflicts" (Stoy, 1999). Wolfe et
al. (1989) investigated the importance of "team building on economic
performance." The authors
concluded that effective team building resulted in more cohesive teams
resulting in better performance early on.
These teams maintained their superiority, while other teams, not as
cohesive, began to do better, but not superior, later in the game. This observation is supported by other
researchers (Jaffe and Nebrenzahl, 1990) and is consistent with Liedtka's work
(1989) as well. Other management
studies suggest that better formed teams perform better (Schwartz et al.,
1987). Thus, teaching game players that
working together, as a congruent team with congruent organizational goals is a
performance-enhancing outcome.
CONGRUENCE IITM
This game was designed as a total enterprise game so
that it would mirror an entrepreneurial environment (few people and all
functional needs and demands). The game
creates an environment that allows for its participants to learn the importance
of a number of issues. Learning in this
fashion is a "method that draws on structured behavioral activities to
teach complex, affective, cognitive and behavioral concepts" (Gundry and
Kickul, 1996). The game allows
participants to maximize their game performance through congruent
decisions. All participants can then be
"winners." The game allows
for participative learning, i.e., team building and choices followed by
performance and reward, thus teaching, in a creative way, about efficacious
strategic choices. Because of the
multiple functions represented in the team and the decisions needed, the game
also teaches about the value of interface congruence (Suzawa, 1985; Rho, 1994).
THE GAME AND ITS PLAY
The intended participants are students, entrepreneurs,
and business people interested in congruent strategic decision-making and its
impact on firm development and performance.
Individuals or groups can play either alone, or in teams. They can also play competitively when two or
more games are played simultaneously.
The game begins with a player being given the
description of the firm, its product and the entrepreneur's goals, beliefs, and
ideals. The game proceeds as the player
begins to move around the board. Moves
are determined by the throw of a pair of dice.
The use of dice allows for the introduction of a stochastic element into
the game, thus somewhat mirroring the nature of entrepreneurial firm
development. If more than one player,
each individual plays on a separate board, making decisions in a confidential
manner, in the same way firms' operate in the analog world.
A player is expected to go around the board four or
five times to achieve the desired outcomes.
Outcomes are determined by chance as the player lands on various squares
(as in MonopolyTM) that represent strategy, personnel, finance,
operations, strategic and tactical occurrences and environmental
interventions. The player makes a
decision as to whether or not to accept what the card represents. The board outcomes must include a certain
level of congruence in personnel and strategies, with accumulated capital to
allow for entrance to the next board level.
The game proceeds through the four conventional levels of business
development: start-up, introduction,
growth and maturity (Thompson and Strickland, 2000; Boyd et al., 2000). As in
the analog world the costs of doing business and making changes increase at
each level.
The game administrator briefs the player on the
general nature of the game. The game
utilizes cards that define a role for each team member, including background,
capabilities, personal resources, ideals, goals and beliefs, and favored
strategies. Each simulated team
consists of an entrepreneur, a senior officer and marketing, operations, and
finance managers.
At any time the player requests congruence scores, the
game administrator calculates player progress and reports the congruence of
strategies and personnel. If greater
congruence among personnel and/or strategies is desired, then a replacement
manager may be hired. The price to be
paid for the replacement and/or a new strategy is then deducted from the
player's financial score. The game
continues as strategies are decided and resources accumulated. The play on a board ends with the
accumulation of the necessary congruence scores and sufficient resources to
allow for moving to the next level.
As stated above, similar to MonopolyTM, the
board contains squares that are reached by the right throw of the dice. Each functional square (16 total) has a
specific activity for the new firm to achieve.
These squares allow for selection of appropriate personnel; a choice of resources; operations decisions focused on quality, and
a choice of corporate and divisional strategies.
There are eight other squares that relate to tactical
and strategic occurrences that will impact the firm either as opportunities or
threats. These cards have to be
accepted. The remaining four squares
(28 in total) include the beginning/ending square and three corners that
represent environmental interventions that again create opportunities and
threats. These interventions must be
accepted as well. There is a fee for
passing the beginning/ending square.
All choices are contained in the sets of cards that
include the various strategies (corporate and divisional); financing choices (debt and equity); personnel needed (marketing, finance,
operations and senior management); and
operations (quality) choices. When
landing on a square, a card is drawn, and the player has the choice to accept
the card or not.
For the player to move from the Start-up board to the Market
Introduction board, the player must have achieved a
minimum congruence score of 80 for personnel and 50 for strategy. Capital is accumulated in the normal conduct
of business, e.g., angel capitalists, credit, etc., and the player must have
accumulated $2,500,000 in capital. The
purpose for the minimum scores and capital is to teach what is needed to create
successful firms and the importance that congruence plays in that success. If the player cares to increase the firm's
resources or change strategies or managers, this may be done at this level at a
lower cost than at a higher level, but there is also a cost for each round of
board movement.
The second level of play, the market introduction level of the product life cycle, creates new
challenges for the player. Strategies
change as a firm moves through a life cycle.
Challenges include new strategic decisions about changing personnel,
operations, strategies and finance to create a more congruent firm. To leave this level in order to advance to
the market growth board, the player's
firm must have a congruent score of 90 in personal, 75 in strategy, and over
$6,000,000 in accumulated capital. In
addition to possible venture capital and bank loans, sales revenues begin as
the firm begins to sell its product.
The next level of play is market growth and the final level is market maturity. At each
level the player can maximize performance by changing and choosing the right
personnel, finances, operations, and strategies appropriate to the product life
cycle stage the firm is in. As noted,
strategies change as do personnel, financing and operations needs and the
player must continue to congruently manage his/her firm. Net capital is cumulative, but can be lost
either with intent (decisions on various issues) or by happenstance, i.e., the
strategy, tactical occurrences and environmental interference cards with their
associated costs and revenues resulting from the opportunities and threats.
There is a cost associated with the number of times
the player moves around a board, with the cost increasing each time the player
moves up a board. For example, if a
player has difficulty landing on a needed square, then additional moves are
made and the cost would depend on the number of times the player has to move
around a board. Further, if the player
selects a less then optimum manager, and wishes to change that person for
another, the cost of the change increases as the player moves up to higher
boards.
The game ends when the player has achieved what he or
she desires, i.e., knowledge of the impact of congruence on decision making and
performance. Another way for it to end
is after playing one, two, three or all four boards. A third way for the game to end is for the player to run out of
funds, as he/she learns about "burn rates" for capital! At the conclusion of the game, the player is
debriefed, emphasizing the relationships among the simulated team members,
strategy, and performance with the focus on the overall importance of
congruence.
Game administration requires one individual to explain
the overall play of the game, to distribute materials, and to perform the
scoring and debriefing. The game set
includes a set of boards, one for each level;
sets of cards that include all the "card" choices for each of
the squares on the board; a pair of
dice; the player score cards; and the administrator's key for congruence
among the personnel and strategies; and
cards reflecting the costs for decisions.
Each set of game boards and
cards can accommodate one person playing as an individual or many persons
playing as a team. Team play creates
the opportunity to learn about team congruence, somewhat different than
individual play. The sole player learns
the congruence lesson from "paper," the team does so by participating
in the decision making.
The game has been designed with
different firm and product types, and with a set of five team members that
"best fit" each of the firms.
This provides for the opportunity of learning about different strategies
in different industries and how congruence can vary by the nature of the firm
and industry and team.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The developers of the game have extensive experience
in studying the relationships between performance and firms' strategies. The play of the game has been designed so
that the presence and absence of needed resources, chosen strategies, and
congruence of beliefs, ideals and goals can be easily determined and final firm
performance calculated.
The firm performance evaluation is based upon the
acquisition of capital and revenue. The
sales of the firm are determined by the appropriateness of the selected
strategies resulting from the congruence of beliefs, ideals, and goals and the
quality of the management personnel. In
the second and subsequent boards, sales are the major source of cash. Equity and debt can also be accumulated and
count towards the available cash.
Depending on what the initial learning goals were for
the individual player, i.e., firm performance as measured by dollars; team leadership as measured by the gathering
of appropriate resources; or learning
to hire for the right beliefs, ideals and goals, single or multiple lessons can
be learned. The game can be played for
many different reasons in multiple industries.
Finally, chance plays a role in the game, but leadership relating to
congruence reduces that chance. Sound
strategic choices also increase congruence and capital outcomes.
REFERENCES
Boyd, H. W., Jr., Walker, O. C., Jr. and Larreche, J-C
(2000), "Marketing Management," The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New
York
Gundry, Lisa K. and Kickul, Jill R. (1996),
"Flights of Imagination: Fostering
Creativity Through Experiential Learning," Simulation & Gaming: An
International Journal, 27(3), pp. 334-349
Hatton, Lindle and Raymond, Bruce (1994), "
Developing Small Business Effectiveness in the Context of Congruence," Journal of Small Business Management,
33(3), pp. 76-89
Liedtka, J. M. (1989), "Value Congruence: The Interplay of Individual and
Organizational Value Systems," Journal
of Business Ethics, 8, pp. 805-815
Posner, Barry Z. and Schmidt, Warren H. (1993),
"Values Congruence and Differences Between the Interplay of Personal and
Organizational Value Systems," Journal
of Business Ethics, 12(5), pp. 341-349
Schwartz, Robert G., Teach, Richard D. and Tarpley,
Fred A., Jr. (1987), "Venture Teams and Firm Performance," Business Development Review, Summer 1987
Schwartz, Robert G. and Teach, Richard D. (2000), "Research Note: Entrepreneurship Research: An Empirical Perspective," ETP,
Spring 2000, 24(3), pp. 77-81
Stoy, Diane B. (1999), "Simulation/Game
Review," Simulation &
Gaming: An International Journal, 30(4), pp. 535-537
Suzawa, Shoichi (1985), "How the Japanese Achieve
Excellence," Training and Development Journal, 39(5), pp. 110-116
Teach, Richard D. and Schwartz, Robert G. (1999),
"The Congruence Game: A Team
Building Game for Entrepreneurs,"
To be published in the 1999 ISAGA Proceedings
Wolfe, Joseph (1976), "The Effects and
Effectiveness of Simulations in Business Policy Teaching Installations," Academy of Management Review, 1, pp.
47-56
Wolfe, Joseph, Bowen, D. D. and Roberts, R. C. (1989),
"Team-Building Effects on Company Performance,"
Simulation & Gaming: An International Journal, 20(4), 388-408
Wolfe, Joseph and Bruton, G. (1994), "On the Use
of Computerized Simulations for Entrepreneurship
Education,"
Simulation & Gaming: An International Journal, 25(3),
402-415
Wolfe, J. and Roge, J. N. (1997), "Computerized
General Management Games as Strategic Management
Learning
Environments," Simulation &
Gaming: An International Journal,
28(4),
pp.
423-441