Individual differences in learning ... - Wiley Online Library

British Journal of Educational Technology

Vol 34 No 4 2003

455–465

Individual differences in learning entrepreneurship and their implications for web-based instruction in e-business and e-commerce

Jonathan Foster and Angela Lin Jonathan Foster is a Lecturer in the Department of Information Studies at the University of Sheffield and co-investigator on the White Rose Centre for Enterprise project Managing Innovation in the Digital Economy. Angela Lin is a Lecturer in the Department of Information Studies at the University of Sheffield and co-investigator on the White Rose Centre for Enterprise project Managing Innovation in the Digital Economy. Address for correspondence: Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK. Tel: +44-114-222-2000; fax: +44-114 278 0300; email: {j.j.foster; a.lin}@sheffield.ac.uk

Abstract This paper reports on outcomes from a White Rose Centre for Enterprise funded project Managing Innovation in the Digital Economy. This project aims to incorporate learning for enterprise into undergraduate and postgraduate curricula in information management and information systems. The paper presents results from a survey distributed to postgraduate information management and information systems students following completion of a module in E-Business and E-Commerce delivered by the Department of Information Studies at the University of Sheffield. The findings suggest that differences in levels of prior knowledge of business studies and in cultural background can impact on students’ acquisition of domain knowledge and intellectual and information research skills during collaborative development of a business plan. Implications of the results for web-based instruction are addressed, by identifying teaching and learning strategies that support differential treatment of learners in terms of content and process. It is concluded that empirical investigation of individual differences within a student body can inform more effective methods for information systems and information management graduates to learn about and for entrepreneurship.

Introduction In response to the competitive challenges of a “knowledge-driven” economy, the UK government recently published a report encouraging the incorporation of learning for enterprise into higher education curricula (Great Britain: DTI/DFEE, 2001). While earlier grant support from the UK government’s Science Enterprise Challenge had © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

456


Vol 34 No 4 2003

already led to the establishment of the White Rose Centre for Enterprise (WRCE) (http://www.wrce.org.uk/). This paper reports on outcomes from a WRCE-funded project Managing Innovation in the Digital Economy (http://www.wrce.org.uk/elbidshef.htm). This project aims to incorporate learning for enterprise into undergraduate and postgraduate curricula in information systems and information management. The paper presents results from a questionnaire distributed to postgraduate information systems and information management students following completion of the E-Business and E-Commerce module delivered by the Department of Information Studies at the University of Sheffield during 2001–2002. The background to the design of the module is addressed first, followed by sections on curriculum design, implementation issues, survey design, and an analysis of learning outcomes focused on individual differences. This is followed by a discussion of the findings in the context of informing web-based instruction. Finally, conclusions are drawn. Background The concept of entrepreneurship draws on economic theory that argues that the entrepreneur “shifts economic resources out of an area of lower and into an area of higher productivity and greater yield” (Drucker, 1985). This definition taken from an eighteenth century economist, J.B. Say, was intended as a manifesto and as a declaration of dissent—the entrepreneur upsets and disorganizes. In the same vein, the economist Joseph Schumpeter has postulated that changes, which upset economic equilibrium, are due to an innovative entrepreneur who sees change as the norm and as healthy to an economy. These changes are considered to be opportunities for the entrepreneur to innovate, to create new ways of doing things, and even to create resources for further economic and social development. It is in this context that the management theorist, Peter Drucker defines the entrepreneur and entrepreneurship as follows: “the entrepreneur always searches for change, responds to it, and exploits it as an opportunity” (Drucker, 1985). The concept of entrepreneurship is often allied with the concept of innovation. Such innovation does not always have to be technical or even result in a tradeable product. Innovation can be social. Changes for example in an education system or a national health service can be considered to be social innovations, because they have a profound impact on society and economy as a whole. Entrepreneurs and the practice of entrepreneurship can be found in every walk of life and in any organization. An increasing number of entrepreneurial initiatives were undertaken across the globe during the technology boom of 1999–2001. Such initiatives in turn also fuelled the take up of technology: “without the action of these entrepreneurs, oriented by a specific set of values, there would be no new economy, and the Internet would have diffused at a much slower pace and with a different range of applications” (Castells, 2001). The launching of these entrepreneurial initiatives was most popular among the young. Younger rather than older generations are more likely to be exposed to new waves of technological development, while younger generations also tend to have a heightened © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.

Individual differences in learning entrepreneurship

457

awareness of the potential business opportunities offered by such technologies (eg, companies such as boo.com, lastminute.com, yahoo.com). Unlike their older counterparts however, younger generations can often lack essential experience in planning, organizing, and managing businesses. A fact that explains why so many dot.com businesses failed to make a sustainable profit and why these businesses collapsed when their initial cash flows dried up. Traditional methods of conducting business still persist in a knowledge-based economy. New business instruments and thinking are however also required. When knowledgebased products and services become the source of organizations’ competitiveness, a variety of technologies are available to support the development and distribution of these products and services. The value of these knowledge-based commodities rests on their symbolic representation of information and not on their manufacturing value (Shapiro and Varian, 1998). Hence organizations need to be able to manipulate and represent information effectively. Modern technologies, particularly digital technologies, can be employed to support the production, distribution, and consumption of such symbolic or intangible goods. In a knowledge-based economy, network technologies represent both an opportunity and a threat for organizations. On the one hand such technologies act as tools that can help accelerate the process of innovation within an organization, at both technical and organizational levels. On the other hand the speed of replication those network technologies afford, particularly with regard to the production, distribution, and consumption of digital products, can represent a competitive challenge. This duality of opportunity and threat makes innovation a key organizational function in the knowledge-based economy: “in an e-economy based on knowledge, information, and intangibles... innovation is the primordial function” (Castells, 2001). The postgraduate module in E-business and E-commerce was selected as a pioneering module in its incorporation of entrepreneurship and innovation into curricula for information systems and information management graduates. Curriculum design Higher education curricula for e-commerce can be broadly categorized into two types: curricula about e-commerce and curricula for e-commerce (Levie, 1999). A curriculum designed for students to learn about e-commerce normally focuses on introducing and developing conceptual models of e-commerce. The approach is taught in a conventional manner through lectures, textbooks, and essay writing. A curriculum designed for students to learn for e-commerce however aims to create a learning environment that enables students to acquire knowledge and skills relevant to the practice of e-commerce. The E-Business and E-Commerce module is designed for graduate programs in information Systems (IS) and information management (IM) and attempts to incorporate both learning about and learning for e-commerce into its curriculum. Two observations of how business has been conducted in the knowledge-based economy inform the design of the E-Business and E-Commerce module. The first of these observations is the myth that the knowledge-based economy has been caused by e-commerce or by the Internet. © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.

458


Vol 34 No 4 2003

Indeed many commentators have overplayed the importance of the Internet or major network technologies (eg, mobile computing, WAP) and underplayed the fact that economic laws remains more or less the same (Szpiro and Neufeld, 2002). This myth of the new economy leads to a second observation and a further myth: barriers of entry into e-business are lower. A general feeling is that doing business online is easier than doing business offline and that it is easier to enter and exit an online market. This conception of e-commerce often leads entrepreneurs into thinking that the setting up of an online business does not need to follow the same set of procedures that a conventional business would follow, such as business planning, risk assessment, business model and strategy, and so on. Evidence demonstrates that a lack of detailed planning in many start-up companies was one of the major reasons for their failure (http://www.businessplan archive.org/). The curriculum design of the E-Business and E-Commerce module emphasizes the fact that the fundamental economic and business principles of conducting e-business and e-commerce in a “knowledge-based” economy are by and large no different from the business principles of the ‘old’ economy. Students were asked to form small working groups and develop a collaborative business plan on the basis of case studies selected by the module team. The structure and content of the business plan was to be almost the same as a standard business plan consisting of an executive summary, company description, industry analysis, product and service description, business model, marketing and business strategy, management team, and financial forecast. In order to develop a business plan, students needed to first analyze their case study in order to frame the problems in the current situation, find information about the current development in the sector, then define the company’s position in the market and evaluate business models and ideas in the context of industry analysis, and apply their knowledge of marketing and business to formulate the strategies. The exercise hence provides an opportunity for students to further their domain knowledge acquired during the module, to develop their intellectual and research skills, and to develop their social competence through interaction with fellow students. Implementation issues Thirty-four students enrolled on the module during the 2001–2002 academic years. The student body was diverse in terms of nationality and gender. 50%, of those who enrolled were home students (British nationality) and 50%, were international students. The gender distribution of the student body was also fifty-fifty. All students were assigned to a group of four by the module coordinator. The decision about assigning students to groups rather allowing them to choose their own group members was taken on pedagogical grounds. First, there can be a tendency with self-selecting groups to establish a division between home and international students with students from the same cultural background tending to work together. A gender divide can also occur. Female students tend to work with female students while male students tend to work with male students. In an effort to encourage students to work together regardless of cultural background or gender the decision was taken to evenly distribute the students on the basis of these criteria. Second, it can be argued that the formation of a diverse business team can help generate good ideas as people from different social and cultural © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.


459

backgrounds can make valuable contributions to business ideas from different perspectives. It can also be argued that working in diverse work environments nowadays is almost inevitable and that students should be prepared for a workplace that will be include colleagues from different cultural backgrounds. Third, through working in an internationally diverse team students’ social competence can be further enhanced. Survey design A questionnaire was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the collaborative business plan exercise in the context of learning about and learning for entrepreneurship. Students were questioned about their knowledge and skills prior to participating in the exercise and the knowledge and skills they believed they had acquired through participating in the exercise. The questionnaire was distributed to the students at the end of the exercise with students permitted to decide whether or not they would like to participate in the research. 56%, of the students on the course completed the questionnaire which asked them to cite their knowledge, experience, and skills acquired prior to undertaking the business plan exercise and the knowledge and skills acquired through doing the exercise. Students were given the opportunity to select multiple choices from a pre-arranged set of aspects of domain knowledge and skills. Learning outcomes This section presents the results of the questionnaire survey. Analysis focuses on individual differences in prior knowledge (Chen, 2002) of business studies and cultural background and the impact that such differences had on learning outcomes in two areas: acquisition of domain knowledge of e-business and e-commerce and intellectual and research skills. Analysis of the results is presented as follows. First, learning outcomes are compared for those students who cited prior knowledge of business studies with those students who cited no prior knowledge of business studies. Second, learning outcomes are compared on the basis of differences in cultural (European and Asian) differences. For each criterion an assessment is made of the impact that such differences had on participants’ acquisition of domain knowledge of e-business and e-commerce and intellectual and information research skills. For an analysis of the learning outcomes for the student body as a whole see Lin and Foster (2002). A simple binomial test of statistical significance enabled us to discount random variation as an explanation for the results in the majority of cases. The p scores for all the results identified in the text are provided in parentheses. Figure 1 illustrates how both sets of students considered knowledge of e-commerce business models (p = < .004 for those with prior knowledge of business studies and p = < .031 for those with no prior knowledge of business studies) and business strategy (p = < .004 for those with prior knowledge of business studies and p = < .031 for those with no prior knowledge of business studies) to be the primary domains of knowledge acquired through their participation in the business plan exercise. Analysis of the other types of knowledge acquired however yields information on two noticeable differences. First, the relatively greater emphasis placed by those with prior knowledge of business studies on acquisition of knowledge of e-commerce technology (p = < .008), © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.

460


Vol 34 No 4 2003

Prior knowledge of business studies

No prior knowledge of business studies

Project management Information management Interface design Management Digital market Value chain management Knowledge management Success and failure of e-commerce Marketing E-commerce technology Business strategy E-commerce business models

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 1: Domain knowledge acquired by knowledge of business studies

and to a lesser extent knowledge management (p = < .125) and value chain management (p = < .250). Second, the greater emphasis placed by those with no prior knowledge of business studies on acquiring knowledge of generic business topics such as management (p = < .063) and in this case, digital, markets (p = < .125). These results suggest that those with prior knowledge of business studies focused on the “e” in the e-business and e-commerce equation, as well as more specialist business topics such as knowledge management and value chain management; while after acquisition of major topics those without prior knowledge of business studies were more focused on acquiring subsidiary knowledge of general business studies topics such as management and marketing—the business and commerce part of the equation. Figure 2 illustrates how prior/no prior domain knowledge of business studies is also a factor in influencing students’ acquisition of intellectual and information research skills with the comparatively greater emphasis placed by those with prior knowledge of business studies on information-based activities (information locating, search and gathering p = < .008; extracting, evaluating and organizing relevant information p = < .016; identifying relevant resources p = < .031) and on problem-solving (p = < .016). Figure 3 illustrates how in terms of cultural background both sets of students placed equal emphasis on knowledge of e-commerce business models (European students p = < .002; Asian students p = < .125) and business strategy (European students p = < .002; Asian students p = < .125) as the primary domains of knowledge acquired. Closer examination though reveals a marked difference in the knowledge of © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.


461

No prior knowledge of business studies Prior knowledge of business studies Initiating and recognizing information inquiry concisely Imagining alternatives Synthesizing data Applying critical judgment Creating ideas Identifying relevant resources Extracting, evaluating and organizing relevant information Identifying and solving problems Information locating, search and gathering 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 2: Intellectual and research skills acquired by knowledge of business studies

European students

Asian students

Project management Interface design Information management Knowledge management Management Value chain management Digital market E-commerce technology Marketing Success and failure of e-commerce Business strategy E-commerce business models 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 3: Domain knowledge acquired by cultural background

© British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.

462


Vol 34 No 4 2003

European students

Asian students

Imagining alternatives Initiating and recognizing information inquiry concisely Synthesizing data Identifying and solving problems Applying critical judgment Creating ideas Identifying relevant resources Information locating, search and gathering Extracting, evaluating and organizing relevant information

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 4: Intellectual and research skills acquired by cultural background

“e-commerce technology’ acquired by Asian students (p = < .125) rather than European students (p = < .016). Management and knowledge management are also cited as being acquired by comparatively more of the Asian students although the numbers are too small to be considered significant. Differences between the two cultural backgrounds are most marked however in the relative emphasis placed by European and Asian students on information/noninformation-related skills (see Figure 4). While in general European students placed greater emphasis on information-related research skills eg, extracting, evaluating and organizing relevant information (p = < .004), information locating, search and gathering (p = < .008), and identifying relevant resources (p = < .031); Asian students placed a greater emphasis on intellectual skills eg, creating ideas (p = < .125), applying critical judgment (p = < .250), and identifying and solving problems (p = < .250). This finding suggests both strengths and weaknesses in the respective approaches taken by individual students from different cultural backgrounds. Where European students may be more focused on information search, retrieval and evaluation as part of business plan development, Asian students may be more focused on skills of creating ideas, applying critical judgment and identifying and solving problems (Chau et al, 2002). Implications for web-based instruction One of the key aims of the module is to provide an opportunity for students to acquire knowledge and skills relevant not only to learning about but also learning for the practice of entrepreneurship. Our findings suggest that factors affecting students’ acquisi-



463

tion of entrepreneurial knowledge and skills reside not just in terms of the task set but also with the students themselves eg, prior knowledge of business studies and cultural background. Learning outcomes can then vary in accordance with such factors. Despite the smallness of the population random variation can be discounted as being the explanation for the findings in the majority of cases. Future analyses can of course help to confirm or disconfirm the findings reported here. What the findings alert us to is the possibility of an informed look at differentiation in successive iterations of the course. Equipped with data on our students we are better able to understand our students and to tailor delivery accordingly. On the basis of the findings we believe that web-based methods of instruction can help in two distinct areas where differentiation can play a part: content and process. First, there is differentiation in content. The findings suggested that prospective learners on the E-Business and E-commerce module come with varying degrees of prior knowledge of business studies and that this can impact on the knowledge and skills that they acquire through their collaborative development of the business plan. Differentially targeted web-based resources in the areas of business eg, management, marketing or e-business and e-commerce technologies would be welcomed by differentiated parts of the student body. Hence greater opportunities are provided for learning about entrepreneurship at little extra cost to the delivery. Students’ acquisition of such preparatory material could be easily tested in an electronic learning environment in a manner that did not impact on teacher-learner contact time eg, self-assessment. Universal access to such materials could also potentially benefit all learners on the module. Thus all students, but especially those with differential levels of domain-relevant knowledge have the opportunity to fully participate in the module. Second, there is differentiation in process. As mentioned above, in developing the collaborative business plan students conduct a number of distinct tasks: analyzing problematic aspects of the case study, finding information about current developments in the sector, defining the company’s position in the market, evaluating business models and ideas in the context of industry analysis, and formulating strategies. The findings suggest that depending on factors such as prior knowledge of business studies and cultural background individual students may take different approaches to each of these tasks. Being alert to such potential individual differences means that facilitation of the process of developing the business plan can be more fully informed by knowledge of the student population. Again technology can help here with the provision of learning infrastructure eg, asynchronous and synchronous facilities which provide learning opportunities outside institutionalized contact time that potentially allow more equitable distribution of learning opportunities. A combination of facilities for both content and process is of course essential to an effective educational design, where content is presented but at the same time students are provided with the opportunity to negotiate the meaning of that content. A process of negotiation in which there is multilateral participation in and active responsibility for meaning-making (Foster, 2000a, 2000b). Finally, an analysis of the individual differences between students at the start


464


Vol 34 No 4 2003

of a module can also provide useful input into the running of a course where more accurate assessments of students’ relative strengths can inform the composition of teams. Here we outline how we have incorporated these findings into a Web Course Tools (WebCT) design for the module to date (ie, 2002–2003) by providing electronic spaces which aim to support the acquisition of content and the process of developing the business plan. Two spaces were created in WebCT: Audio-Video and Online Resources. The former supports individual needs while the latter supports students to develop the necessary skills for writing the collaborative business plan. In the Audio-Video space the students can access audio and video clips from various sources including interviews with e-commerce companies such as Amazon.com, Google, and Lastminute.com along with general business critiques that offer some insights into stories mentioned in the lectures. These audio and video clips aim to provide students with an opportunity to develop their knowledge of e-commerce further in their own time. The Online Resources space focuses on providing support materials to help students perform their tasks for the business plan assignment. In other words these resources aim to develop students’ business skills rather than their domain knowledge. The resources included in this space include guidance on how to how to analyze a case study and how to develop a collaborative business plan. We have observed that students often refer to these spaces when they have had a query relating to a particular task for example how to write a business plan or what to include in a business plan. Further evaluation of these spaces will be carried out at the end of the module, but so far from informal feedback students have found these two spaces to be a useful resource to develop their knowledge of e-commerce and to facilitate their performance. Conclusion Our approach has been to initially investigate face-to-face environments and to learn from these environments to see how web-based instructional methods can inform and enhance the delivery of the module. In our survey we set out to establish what knowledge and skills students had acquired in their collaborative development of the business plan. Analysis of these results has found differences in the impact that characteristics of learners such as prior knowledge of the domain and cultural background have on learning outcomes. Core topics such as e-commerce models and business strategy appear to be immune from variation at a general level of analysis. Examination of the results reveals that differences exist in the domain knowledge and skills acquired on the business plan exercise and that these differences can be partially explained in relation to differential levels of prior knowledge of the domain and cultural background. Those already with prior knowledge of business studies may emphasize the technological aspects of e-business and e-commerce with a focus on further information search and problem-solving while those without prior knowledge of business studies may emphasize the acquisition of knowledge of general business techniques before addressing the specificities of “e”-business and “e”-commerce. This is of course no bad thing, given our argument that an education in business fundamentals remains essential in a business environment that places a premium on network technologies in the production, © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2003.


465

distribution, and consumption of goods. Cultural differences may also mean that parts of the student body may be predisposed to a content-based approach to business plan development while others may take a more process-based approach to business plan development. Appreciation of these differences can further inform future iterations of module delivery, with technology playing a clear role in enabling differentiated treatment of students in course content and facilitative process. The empirical research conducted here has provided us with some guidance as to where best to look in our search for enhanced ways of delivering an education in entrepreneurship for information systems and information management graduates. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the White Rose Centre for Enterprise, which funded the “Managing Innovation in the Digital Economy” project, and the two anonymous referees for providing helpful feedback on an earlier version of this paper. References Castells M (2001) The internet galaxy: reflections on the internet, business, and society Oxford University Press, London. Chau P Y K, Cole M, Massey A, Montoya-Weiss M and O’ Keefe R M (2002) Cultural differences in consumers’ online behavior Communications of the ACM 45 10, 138–143. Chen S Y (2002) The relationships between individual differences and the quality of learning outcomes in web-based instruction in Liu D-R (ed) Global e-business in knowledge-based economy: management, practice, and opportunities, Proceedings of the second international conference on electronic business. National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan, file f105.pdf [CD-ROM]. Drucker P F (1985) Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles. Heinemann, London. Foster J (2000) Deliberating for democracy: an educational inquiry into the public sphere. University of Sheffield, Sheffield, Unpublished M.Ed. Dissertation. —— (2001) Towards a democratic education for e-government: a study of deliberative decisionmaking via information and communications technology in: Stanoevska-Slabeva, K, Schmid B and Tschammer V (eds) Towards the e-society: e-commerce, e-business, and e-government, Proceedings of the first IFIP conference on e-commerce, e-business and e-government. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, 671–682. Great Britain:DTI/DFEE (2001) Opportunity for all: a White Paper on enterprise, skills and innovation HMSO, London Levie J (1999) Entrepreneurship education in higher education in England: a survey London Business School, London. Lin A and Foster J (2002) Making a case for collaborative business planning: educating information management and systems graduates for the knowledge-based economy in Liu D-R (ed) Global e-business in knowledge-based economy: management, practice, and opportunities, Proceedings of the second international conference on electronic business. National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan, file f103.pdf [CD-ROM]. Shapiro C and Varian H (1999) Information rules: a strategic guide to the network economy Harvard Business School, Boston. Szpiro D A and Neufeld D J (2002) Learning information systems with cases http://www.ivey.uwo.ca/ isworld/caselrn.htm
