Business games: What are their potential for entrepreneurial learning? by Fabienne Bornard1 and Guy Parmentier2

Entrepreneurship can be understood as a continuous learning process based on observation and experimentation. To contend with the constraints of lack of time and too much information, entrepreneurs use simplified action strategies that they must constantly bring into question in order to adapt them to the complexity of their working environments. Business games are based on learning through actions, which would be similar to an entrepreneurial learning process. They allow to use formal knowledge acquired during the traditional courses in a virtual and recreational way, and to acquire new knowledge by experimenting with business development strategies. Would the use of these business games, initially designed to train managers, be relevant for entrepreneurial education? This paper examines in the literature on entrepreneurial learning and learning in business games, the similarities between these two processes, in order to propose a framework for use in the training and the support of entrepreneurs.

                                                                                                                      1

Professor at Chambery Business School, France, [email protected]

2

Professor at Chambery Business School, France, [email protected]

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

1  

Introduction Business Games have been used for more than 40 years in higher education for training in business management. They enable the use, in a synthetic way, of the formal knowledge acquired during the classical courses and to acquire new knowledge by experimenting with the strategies in business development. The considerable increase in their use, more than 55% of American teachers in higher education teaching management have been using them since 2004 (Faria and Wellington, 2004), show the interest which students and teachers are showing in them. Originally designed to train managers, would they also be useful for improving the training of entrepreneurs? Since entrepreneurial education has considerably developed in the last 20 years, it is time to consider the overall effectiveness of the traditional pedagogical systems so as to identify the methods and tools that would be more adapted to the particularities of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship is a process based on a pivotal person, the entrepreneur, whose personal characteristics necessarily influence the course of action and doubtless, the end result. Amongst these characteristics, the accent is more and more often placed on cognitive dimensions. Apart from the necessity of detecting a good opportunity and the ability to bring together strategic resources (financial, material, human, network, name recognition, etc) to include them in an efficient organisation by taking up a position in the market, it would seem that cognitive abilities are essential for an entrepreneur. His ability to reflect and his learning and vision certainly play an essential role. Training methods are necessary to prepare entrepreneurs so that they develop these skills, but it seems that they are not always adapted to the characteristics of these types of people. The problem issue is an arduous one: how can one prepare entrepreneurs to handle the complexity of creating a business? How can they be given the indispensible knowledge without impinging on their creative ability? How to reconcile the development of technical skills with creative ones? An entrepreneur brings

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

2  

numerous skills into play: making decisions in an uncertain environment, in an urgent and new situation ; mastering the trans-disciplinary basics of business management: marketing, financial, HR etc. But also going over to the “dark side of entrepreneurship” (Ket de Vries, 1985), that is to say, being capable of moving on from the entrepreneurial stage of constructing an organisation to become a team manager. A first study carried out by Wolfe and Bruton had concluded that business games were advantageous for training in entrepreneurship, but however remarked that they could not integrate all the themes present in entrepreneurship courses (Wolfe et Bruton, 1994). Nevertheless, business games are advantageous insofar as they are more concerned with the acquisition procedural knowledge than with cognitive knowledge. It therefore seems more useful to examine the learning processes rather than their contents to ascertain the potential of business games for studying entrepreneurship and define a framework for the use of this learning tool. The aim of this paper is therefore to examine, on the base of the literature on entrepreneurial learning and the literature on business games, the similitude between these two processes. Our purpose is to define a framework to be used for the training and support of entrepreneurs, both in initial training and continuous education. We will firstly study the characteristics of entrepreneurial learning, then the characteristics of business games and the learning process used, in order to construct a framework for using the business games in entrepreneurial education.

Entrepreneurial learning: what are the characteristics? Entrepreneurship continues to be a research object of which the definition still leads to numerous debates. But it is generally accepted that the processual component is essential for

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

3  

understanding it, originated from and maintained by the entrepreneur. In this part, we will present a summary of the main contributions of the research works concerned with entrepreneurial learning, in order for us to be able to question the advantage of business games for facilitating these leaning processes.

The entrepreneur's cognitive characteristics The cognitive approach as it is applied to the subject of entrepreneurship has been little developed, but is doubtless a promising one. Thus Baron, (2004) showed the potential of this approach for answering the 'why' questions: why do some people choose to become entrepreneurs and not others? Why are some people capable of identifying profitable opportunities? And finally, why do some entrepreneurs succeed better than others? As Bruyat (1993, p. 203) emphasizes, “all through the process, the creator will have to undertake learning procedures, which will be likely to change him”. This learning capacity, and more generally, the entrepreneur's cognition (Daniels et al., 1994), will affect the way he carries out his project of business creation, with more or less success (example : Gatewood and al., 1995). The literature particularly points to two main types of works, those concerned with the entrepreneur's own biases and heuristics, and those that look at his vision. Busenitz and Lau (1996) define entrepreneurial cognition as the extensive use of individual heuristics and beliefs which influence decision-making. In comparison, managerial cognition is presented as a more systematic process of decision-making based on accounts and compensation plans, the structured coordination of activities in several units, and justified with the use of budgets. This would be therefore more factual, whereas entrepreneurial cognition is built on limited key experiences and beliefs. This would constitute both a risk of

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

4  

making errors, but also an asset, as this reasoning, that is not strictly linear or based on facts, would enable innovative ideas to appear. Entrepreneurs have to act and decide in contexts where there is urgency and uncertainty. This particular context firstly leads entrepreneurs to choose a means of reasoning which takes up less time. In fact, there is no time to set up a rational process which identifies and assesses all the possible solutions. Too many problems must be resolved at the same time which leads to an approach being preferred that concerns 'costs/profits' or 'costs/challenges'. Busenitz and Barney (1997) showed that entrepreneurs use heuristics much more than their managerial counterparts in large companies. Heuristics are defined as simplified strategies, particularly used in complex situations, when only less complete or uncertain information is available. Moreover, the urgent or complex context contributes to the consequences of his decisions: in comparison with the manager, an entrepreneur finds himself in a situation, which maximizes the potential consequences of biases and cognitive errors in general (Baron, 1998). A study of the cognitive biases reveals their wrong ways of dealing with real situations. Thus an overloading of information-processing capacities, a high degree of uncertainty as well as the newness of the situation, the strong emotional content and the pressures of a lack of time and tiredness are all characteristic factors in business creation which leads to a risk of inappropriate reasoning (Baron, 1998). This approach by looking at the biases has been used to understand entrepreneurs' behaviour. The fact that it is not shown that entrepreneurs have a propensity for risk-taking that is more prevalent than that of non-entrepreneurs could therefore be explained by a different perception of risks, connected with certain types of cognitive biases. (Simon and al., 1999). In the same way, the difficulties of moving on from the entrepreneurial stage to the managerial stage, the 'dark side' of entrepreneurship (Kets de Vries, 1985), would be caused, amongst other things, by a desire for disproportionate control, another cognitive characteristic

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

5  

of entrepreneurs. The list of biases that have been identified and tested within the context of entrepreneurship has become longer and longer... Knowledge of entrepreneurs' specific cognitive biases would provide a clarification that would be relevant for gaining an understanding of the decision-making. However, one of the limitations in this approach is to imply that the less numerous they are, the more the decisions will be rational (rational decision-making model). We consider that the subjacent idea in the research into entrepreneurs' cognition is that the characteristics of their cognition is doubtless shown through their strengths and weaknesses, in different competitive environments and is therefore a potential source of competitive advantages. Other works have been concerned with entrepreneurial vision, one of the cognitive components of entrepreneurship, which we won’t use in this research. Finally, the research on entrepreneur's cognition or their strategic vision has shown that entrepreneurs have unconscious mental patterns developed during their former experiences and deep-seated beliefs. Krueger (2007) explicitly evoked these deep-seated beliefs as maintaining an entrepreneur's deep cognitive structures and so equally his attitudes, intentions and finally, his actions. The author emphasizes that it is possible to act through training, but by changing the teaching objective. This no longer concerns transmitting knowledge from the teacher to the learner, but learning to learn. Research into an understanding of the ways that these structures evolve and in particular, those of 'expert' entrepreneurs is therefore essential for him.

Entrepreneurs mainly learn through actions or observations Entrepreneurs' learning processes, when studying the profession of company director, are emerging and incremental ones, that is to say, non-intentional, appearing during the course of the analysis and the handling of the different problems; they are undertaken in an urgent

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

6  

situation; are made up of a succession of trails and errors, according to an experimental approach; are dependent on the entrepreneur's mental patterns which condition and limit the learning process, and define the approaches used to deal with the problems. More precisely, most of the authors recognise the centrality of hands-on learning (learning by doing or learning through experience) or by direct observation (Gibb, 1997; Aldrich and Martinez, 2001; Rae and Carswell, 2001; Corbett, 2005; Cope, 2005, Politis, 2005). Entrepreneurial learning is thus explained as being a cumulative process in which knowledge and the skills accumulated during previous experiences condition the way in which an entrepreneur perceives and experiments with learning during the entrepreneurial process (Cope, 2005). Holcomb and al. (2009) explored the connection between heuristics, knowledge and actions, in order to show the role of heuristics, which is either beneficial in the process of accumulating knowledge as an element that facilitates adaptation, or harmful, by affecting judgment and biasing the learning process. They based their findings on two theoretic learning frameworks; experiential (the acquisition of new knowledge thanks to the 'transformation of experience' Kolb, 1984) and learning through observation (vicarious learning) that implies modelling the behaviour and the actions of others.  Holcomb and al. (2009, p.172) state that for them “prior knowledge and heuristics orient entrepreneurs to information cues and act to produce new knowledge on which entrepreneurs rely to recognize and exploit opportunities. In turn, such learning can produce new behavioral patterns, judgmental structures, and generative mechanisms for action”. They define entrepreneurial learning as a process by which the entrepreneurs acquire new knowledge, including knowhow and specific skills, based on experience and observing others, assimilate them and organise them with the knowledge already in their memories, to make them useable during routine or non-routine actions. Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

7  

Certain authors see further and consider that entrepreneurship is essentially a process of dynamic learning (Bygrave and Hofer, 2001; Minniti and Bygrave 2001; Cope, 2005). An entrepreneur is therefore in a continuous learning situation as he continues to affront the new elements of situations. He is put into a context which obliges him to continually make very rapid decisions, with little available information and the consequences of these decisions are exacerbated. For this, he mainly uses approaches that are quite irrational, based on firmly anchored beliefs and heuristics. His procedure for becoming an 'expert' entrepreneur is therefore arduous, as he is not placed in conditions which favour this and may develop the habit of making decisions on mistaken reasoning. Let us however emphasize that a capacity for intuition and creativity is fundamental. What objectives could we therefore fix for a learning system adapted to entrepreneurs? We consider that, in an ideal situation, it should enable learners to develop their ability to learn and their reflexivity, in particular, their ability to rapidly integrate new and complex and information. For this, it appears important to help them to enrich their mental patterns in order to encourage them to integrate new heuristics. The traditional tools for entrepreneurial programs, that is to say, lectures or creating business plans, should therefore by supplemented by more dynamic tools enabling an entrepreneurial learning context that is closer to that of an entrepreneur in a business situation.

Learning with a Business Game Business Games are a category of serious games. They are part of active pedagogies, in new education approaches mainly based on the ideas of the American philosopher John Dewey, initiator of the hands-on learning at the end of the XIV century. These pedagogies, in their current conception, group together varied pedagogical approaches such as the case study

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

8  

method, problem-based learning (P.B.L.), and pedagogy through projects, work study or sandwich courses. A business game proposes fun learning which enables learners to acquire complex skills in business management. In order for the aspects of this learning to be better understood, we should first explain the characteristics of this particular subject.

The characteristics of Business Games The first business games appeared in Russia in 1932, and they developed in the USA from 1955 onwards (Faria et alii, 2009). The first computerized versions appeared at the end of the 50's in mainframe systems. They were transferred to microcomputers from 1985 onwards, making it possible to develop more complex games that were cheaper and easier to administrate. Since 1998, most games, as for example Capsim and Marketplace, have been available in networks from a central server (Faria et alii, 2009) A business game is today a fun business simulation carried out with the aid of a computer programme. The computer programme includes a business and market model making it possible to calculate the performances of each firm according to the decisions made by all the companies present in the market. Firstly, there is an intensive period of training on a business game, lasting 2 or 3 days, and then an extensive training over several weeks of 2 to 3 hours per session. Each company is managed collectively by teams of 3 to 6 people. The students share the responsibility within the teams: marketing director, production director, financial director, and human resources director. The game is punctuated by periods and turns of 2 to 3 hours, during which the participants make strategic decisions concerning investment, production, marketing, human resources management and communication according to the situation at the beginning of the period and the objectives to be reached. At the end of the turn which represents a period of 3 to 6 months in the simulation, the performances of each business are recalculated according to their decisions made.

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

9  

Business Games meet diverse pedagogical objectives. They are used in the beginning of the training to enable students to discover business management and show students the advantages of acquiring financial, marketing and social skills. They are also used during lessons or at the end of courses to enable students to assemble the different aspects of management studied during their training. A Business Game session is supervised by teachers, which lead the session and monitor the teams. According to the pedagogical objective, they can also intervene as advisors or carry out debriefings with the teams so they can analyse their errors and their successes. The game is not completely centred on a simulation, the teachers set up complementary activities to reinforce the learning processes and/or verify the knowledge acquired: calculation of the average production cost, elaboration of a strategy, financial balanced scorecard, and critical analysis of the results of the strategy. The business game therefore has the dual characteristic of a game and a simulation; we will provide details of this in the two following paragraphs.

The fun element of business Games. Huizinga defined a game as “a free activity standing quite consciously outside 'ordinary' life as being 'not serious', but at the same time absorbing the player intensely and utterly. It is an activity connected with no material interest, and no profit can be gained by it. It proceeds within its own proper boundaries of time and space according to fixed rules and in an orderly manner. It promotes the formation of social groupings that tend to surround themselves with secrecy and to stress the difference from the common world by disguise or other means” (Huizingua, 1938, p. 13). A game is therefore a free activity, out of phase, uncertain, unproductive and fictive. Players are free to invent their progression within the limits imposed by the rules. The game activity is uncertain as its progression cannot be determined to obtain

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

10  

the objectives fixed by the rules. It is out of phase in the sense that it occurs outside everyday life, in its own space-time. For this author, it is also unproductive, in the sense where the game can be continually restarted and that it is not connected to a given external usage. And finally, the game is a fictive activity in the sense where the player is aware that he is experiencing a reality that is different from everyday life. The game activity can be divided up into four categories of games, which are not exclusive of each other: l'alea, l'agôn, le mimicry and the ilinx (Caillois, 1967). The alea corresponds to a game of chance, the agôn is a fighting game, the mimicry is a game of imitation and the ilinx is a game of vertigo   (Caillois, 1967). Through these categories, the games can include two fundamental components which combine to make up its fun, intoxicating character, the ludus which corresponds to the rules of the game, and the extent of liberty that these latter permit, and the paidia which is a sort of disorder encouraging an immersion in the game (Caillois, 1967). The business game successfully includes these fun elements that reflect the characteristics described by these authors: the freedom to act, being out of phase, uncertainty and fiction. Nevertheless a Business Game has a utilitarian objective, to allow students to personally experience business management so that they can acquire management aptitudes. This pedagogical objective does not in any way diminish the ludus element, and the uncertainty, and the random effect provoked by the presence of other teams favours the paida element. Business Games involve several categories of game, it is above all a mimicry that includes the agôn but also the ilinx, thanks to the challenge that the development of a business in a competitive environment represents. In such a simulation “What is gained is perhaps lost, and even destined to be lost. The way of winning is more important than the victory itself and, in any case, more important than the stakes” (Caillois, 1967). In this way, we understand that learning is really located in the direction that the players will take to arrive at a victory. The

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

11  

pleasure and the deep involvement of the players can be explained by the fact that the game leads to an optimal experience or a state of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). The optimal experience is a mental state in which an individual is completely immerged in the action, not in his usual state of mind, with maximum concentration. This state is provoked by the characteristics of the game: clear and direct objectives, direct and immediate feedback, a good balance between the business difficulties and the skills required for it to work out well, and a lack of fear of failure (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990 et 2004). However, in a Business Game, the game is not limited to the strict simulation framework, the business simulation activity offers a game on several levels. The participants play within the framework of the rules and the boundaries permitted by the simulation. But the system is flexible and broad enough to make it possible to play around the game (additional challenges put forward by the teachers, interactions between the teams in the same environment exchanging information, entente, and negotiation).

The simulation element of Business Games Business Games include economic models of competitive markets and business behaviour, which originate from knowledge developed in economic sciences and management science. The simulation consists of making 'virtual' business management available to the players, which will evolve within the framework defined by the model, depending on the teams' decisions and the decisions of the other teams. The simulation appears in the game as one of the possible forms of the virtual environment, containing a model that focalizes on a particular situation within reality. The simulations are a way of stocking the knowledge in the same way as myths and theories (Levy, 1998). This distinction between myths and theories was widely studied by Levi-Strauss about the way in which primitive societies acquired knowledge with their 'concrete science' and stocked it in myths (Levi-Strauss, 2008). Levi-

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

12  

Strauss did not compare modern science and concrete science, for him, they were two different methods of creating knowledge that were not opposed to each other. On the contrary, they led to a setting up of structures that is essential for understanding the world and the actions of Man. Simulation is an expression of a model which is structured by an operation where reality is studied with the aid of a scientific instrument. The acquisition of knowledge with a simulation is a third method of acquisition that is very different from the study of a theory or the appropriation of a myth. For the learner it is not a case of understanding a theory or integrating a myth into a system of values, but of discovering little by little the model of reality that is contained in the simulation. Learning through simulation consists in trying, in acting on the model, in going through the failure and success phases to understand, little by little, how the universe of simulation functions. The model, close to that of Levi-Strauss, called the reduced model, is not a simple projection, it constitutes a real experience on the subject, and “in as far as the model is artificial, it becomes possible to understand how it is made” (Levi-Strauss, 2008, p. 585). In other words, the artificial and reduced nature of the model, in comparison with the complexity of reality, opens up the possibility for the person who compares it to apprehend and acquire a part of this complexity. The simulation therefore enables the learner-entrepreneur to be confronted with a reduced reality in the form of responses to his decisions, so that they can be made intelligible for the learner. Virtualization, a complex operation of simplification and problematization, leads to a model that makes it possible to develop a concrete science, acquired through action, which will then be able to be reinforced by the acquisition of a more formal functioning principle. Therefore, the acquisition and the usage of the processes in the model for the action are similar to the entrepreneur's heuristics. In business games, associating the game with the

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

13  

simulation offers a learning method, based on the action, that enables professional skills to be acquired, through the model, that are necessary in business management.

Learn with a business game: a method to understand the complexity of business Professional skills combine two types of knowledge: declarative knowledge (knowing about something) and procedural knowledge (being capable of undertaking an activity). Business games combine the learning of these two types of knowledge, and thus enable the four learning objectives to be satisfied: to be able to use specialized knowledge in specific problem situations; to be able to piece together separately acquired activities to gain a systematic sequence of action; to be able to reconstruct fundamental interactions and processes, and to be able to assess the interactions and consequences of an individual’s and someone else’s activities (Fortmüller, 2009). Business games puts students into a situation where they use the knowledge previously acquired, to verify their correct acquisition through the activity, to modify the knowledge according to the consequences perceived when they are applied in the game. When managing a business, the learners are confronted with complex situations which necessitate continually using multiple, specialised types of knowledge. The combination and repetition of the management activities and the direct visualization of the application in the business results, makes it possible to apprehend the complex process of management and develop ways of understanding these processes. The learners will eventually be likely to develop a mental model of the processes, which maintain the survival of businesses and aid their development (Fortmüller, 2009). The business game, by placing the players in a competitive universe, brings complex interactions into play, which exists between the actors in a market. Nevertheless, as Fortmüller points out, business simulation alone is not enough to enable the 4 learning

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

14  

objectives to be reached. The players must practice regularly in order to multiply the situations so they can assimilate the complexity of the business model. Procedural knowledge must be initiated and reinforced through declarative knowledge. And the teachers supervising the students' games must intervene as consultants, in order to explain what has happened when the students have difficulty in understanding and integrating the complex process of business management. Most of today's business games simulate complex business processes including a large amount of specialised knowledge and include knowledge libraries as well as involving the teachers, who take on the role of consultants. These learning objectives can be partly attained through the acquisition of formal knowledge by means of lectures, conferences and exercises. However, business games make it possible to combine formal knowledge and implicit knowledge acquired through activities. The combination of these two types of knowledge enables both an acquisition of the structures for reflection that are useful for backtracking in order to continue to learn, and to use this good knowledge to solve complex problems, which in everyday business management is always necessary. The business simulation game is an activity that makes it possible to make decisions about simulated activities that are close to real decisions. An analysis of this activity in business simulation games that enables strategic decisions to be made, shows that they are likely to generate complex knowledge, in particular, for understanding relations, or the structure of the relation between the different management courses (Zantow, Knowlton, and Sharp, 2005). The business simulation game obliges learners to combine operations which organise, elaborate and integrate strategy in three phases: the conceptualisation and the planning of the strategy, the implementation and the analysis of the performances of the strategy. (Zantow et alii, 2005).

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

15  

Proposition for a framework using business games in entrepreneurial education A usage which has several advantages An analysis of the literature therefore shows us that business games are in fact advantageous in entrepreneurial education. This is active pedagogy that enables participants to have a certain number of experiences in virtual business management situations to be developed in a competitive market, with limited resources and partial information. The participants are put in situations, in the same way as a future entrepreneur, where they process transversal information about their business and directly learn all the interactions concerned with this. The fun element encourages learners to have a positive perception, which helps in their learning process (Peterman and Kenedy, 2003). Our own experience as teachers has shown us that most of the students in initial training much appreciate business games. In continuous training, there is often more skepticism at the beginning of the simulation, but then the students become absorbed in the game. The repetition of decision-making/results is adapted to the method of entrepreneurial learning through trial and error. We were able to observe, during numerous simulations, that the teams very rapidly reduced the length of time taken for their decision-making, which made it possible to observe the learning of the game's economic model, and the interactive consequences of each group's decisions. Business games also enable the students to experience a certain amount of pressure due to the limited time, with the necessity of making team decisions according to an imposed time limit. The processual dimension in entrepreneurship is therefore understood ( temporal dimension, progression of actions/decisions). The pressure is accentuated as the teams have to be in competition with each other, which leads to a greater implication on the part of the

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

16  

participants. If the chosen game is adapted to the profile of entrepreneurial experience of the participants, it enables them to deal with a relatively large number of new situations, with information to be processed that is quite complex. Situations such as losses in the market share, financial losses and the risk of bankruptcy, which are generally provided for in the scenario, cause an undeniable emotion tension. Thus the game situations make it possible to be nearer to entrepreneurial situations (urgency, stress, emotions, new elements, complexity). Business games are generally played in teams, which necessitates learning how to manage a group and leads to the possibility of conflicts within the group and the necessity of collective organisation for effective decision-making. Whereas an entrepreneur is often alone at the beginning of a project, he often finds himself confronted with this difficulty of moving on from an individual stage to a collective stage, and numerous failures are due to the inability to adapt to this evolution. To summarize, Business Games can be defined as 'reduced models' of reality: for the learners, they propose a simplified and problematical real situation in the form of an economic model which regulates the results of the businesses; this model is integrated in a cognitive manner in the form of heuristics thanks to a succession of trials and errors in an environment whose characteristics are similar to those of the entrepreneur. This experience enriches the learner’s cognitive patterns and improves his capacity for adaptation, as the following diagram illustrates. It makes it possible to partake in an additional experience which could add to the key experiences which constitute the basis of entrepreneurial cognition (Busenitz and Lau, 1996) and increases his 'Absorptive capacity' (Cohen, Levinthal, 1990). The aim is to participate in the development of new heuristics largely used in the entreprenurial process (Busenitz and Barney, 1997).

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

17  

Diagram 1: The process of entrepreneurial learning through Business Game

The limitations There are a certain number of limitations in business games that it is necessary to identify so they can be included in reflections on their optimum use. They propose most of the management situations occurring in a business that has already been created, it is therefore rare to be able to experiment in a situation where an opportunity is detected, and in the ensuing process of creating an organisation. However, we consider that the fact of having to to develop a new business- it is possible to parameterize a situation of taking over a business that is only one year old-and/or a market, within a competitive context and with strategic choices, in fact remains quite similar to the first entrepreneurial stages. Also, the principle is rather one of making collective decisions within groups; so the solitude of an entrepreneur faced with his decision-making is not a subject for experimentation.

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

18  

Business games are based on computerized simulations, constructed using 'reduced models' of reality, with the risk of formatting the participants with heuristics that are not really adapted, as they are too simplified. Moreover, they are often criticized for only providing information to be processed made up of figures, thereby masking the behavioural aspects and their elements of intuition and emotion. Finally, certain authors, such as Honig, recognised that they have numerous advantages such as learning to tolerate risks, learning from failure, developing managerial skills and preparing the students for ambiguous situations (Honig, 2004). But he criticizes them for being based on convergent thought. He thus recommends developing an alternative approach enabling the inclusion of divergent thoughts.

A framework for the use of business games in entrepreneurial education Business game usage should not only be directed towards learning about the economic models of business management, but towards developing a capacity for adaptation on the part of the participants thanks to the enhancement of their cognitive patterns (Honig, 2004 ; Corbett, 2005). This should enable the development of quality heuristics, and try to correct the cognitive biases. Finally the aim is to learn to learn, that is to say, learn to rapidly problematize situations, in order to make decisions. The literature on business games has shown that the traditional pedagogy is not sufficient for the needs of future entrepreneurs, who have to be capable of continually adapting themselves to new situations. We therefore recommend, for an optimal usage of business games for future entrepreneurs:  Avoid using only one type of business game so that participants gain experience with several market and business model-building, and thereby enrich their heuristics.

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

19  

 Propose a second phase in the game with more competitors, or more products to manage. This will make it possible to test the cognitive patterns built up during the first phase  Accelerate the rhythm of the game, with the objective of recreating the context of urgent decision-making (for example, announcing that a decision must be made an hour earlier than planned).  Use the possibility of creating random accidents that are often proposed by the software, an interesting proposition but often badly accepted as it is unfair. We consider however that it enables students to be confronted with an urgent dilemma and to learn how to manage crisis situations.  Provide a time for feedback on the experience at the end of the game, during which the teacher will be able to help the participants to analyse and integrate their errors. There could be the possibility of modifying certain decisions made so that the participants could study the new result.  Encourage the teams to take turns at managing so that each person can experience the individual difficulty involved in the role of a company manager. This can only be possible if the game is sufficiently long. It could also be interesting to propose that a player takes on the role of a company manager and recruits the team himself.  Propose simulations, which require that a single player makes all the decisions about managing his business, but adapting the complexity of the decision-making.  Parameterize the simulation so that failure is possible: it seems to be a good idea for a team to fail, to accentuate the stress of the participants. However, the teacher must consider this team differently, so as to give its members the possibility of recreating a business or of recapitalizing, after having analysed their errors.  Propose that certain participants observe the teams so they can learn through observation, and ask them to present their analysis to the players.

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

20  

 Constitute non-homogenous teams in terms of their level of entrepreneurial skills.  Include role-playing, during which the teacher will, for example, play the role of a banker and ask the trainees to prepare an interview with documents of a simple business plan type and, above all, negotiation techniques.

Conclusion Business Games are a form of experience and therefore contribute to improving the cognitive capacities of entrepreneurs, which we know play a fundamental role in their ability to learn during the entrepreneurial process. It has the advantage of enabling an entrepreneur to work on his cognitive patterns in a 'protected' environment, with the possibility of analysing his errors in order to develop 'correct' heuristics. It makes it possible to work on the ability to rapidly adapt to a new environment with an accessible complexity. Business games use two learning methods preferred by entrepreneurs, experiential learning and learning through observation. They are therefore adapted to the needs of these types of people. We hypothesize that they can, in appropriate conditions of use, force the learners to change their deep cognitive structures to move towards a meta-cognitive ability where they understand the changes that are taking place and those that they must still make in order to become experts. Business games have certainly a considerable potential in entrepreneurial education, and they deserve to be developed, both in terms of the wealth and variety of their scenarios, and in terms of the overall pedagogical methods they could contribute. The difficulty remains to think of these pedagogical systems in terms of learning objectives adapted to the profile of future entrepreneurs: their prior experience, the type of their projects, their styles of learning.

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

21  

References Aldrich, H. E. and Martinez, M. A. (2001), “Many Are Called, but Few Are Chosen: an Evolutionary Perspective for the Study of Entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 25, 41-56 Baron R. (1998), “Cognitive mechanisms in entrepreneurship : why and when entrepreneurs think differently than other people”, Journal of Business venturing, 13 (4), 275-284. Baron R. (2004), “The cognitive perspective : a valuable tool for answering entrepreneuship’s basic ‘why’ questions”, Journal of Business venturing, 19, 221-239. Bruyat, C. (1993), “Création d’entreprise : contributions épistémologiques et modélisation”, Ph.D. dissertation, Université Pierre Mendès France, Grenoble Busenitz, L. and Lau, C. (1996), “A cross-cultural cognitive model of new venture creation, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice”, 20 (4), 25-39. Busenitz, L. and Barney, J. (1997), “Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organisations : biaises and heuristics in strategic decision making”, Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 9-30. Bygrave, W. D. and Hofer, C. W. (1991), “Theorizing About Entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16 (2), 13–22. Caillois R. (1961), Man, Play and Games, New York : Free Press. Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990), “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152. Cope, J. (2005), “Toward A Dynamic Learning Perspective of Entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29 (4), 373-397. Corbett, A. C. (2005), ”Experiential Learning within the Process of Opportunity Identification and Exploitation”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29 (4), 473-491 Csikszentmihalyi M. (1990), Flow, the Psychology of Optimal Experience, New York: Harper and Row. Daniels, K., Johnson, G. and De Chernatony, L. (1994), “Differences in managerial cognitions of competition”, British Journal of Management, 5, 21-29. Faria A.J., Hutchinson D., Wellington W.J., et Gold S. (2009), “Developments in Business Gaming: A Review of the Past 40 Years”, Simulation Gaming, 40 (4), 464-87.

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

22  

Faria A.J. et Wellington W.J. (2004), “A Survey of Simulation Game Users, Former-Users, and Never-Users”, Simulation & Gaming, 35 (2), 178-207. Fortmüller R. (2009), “Learning Through Business Games: Acquiring Competences Within Virtual Realities”, Simulation & Gaming, 40 (1), 68-83. Gatewood, E.J., Shaver, K.G. and Gartner, W.B. (1995), “A longitudinal study of cognitive factors influencing start-up behaviors and success at venture creation”, Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 371-391. Gibb, A. (1997), “Small firms training and competitiveness.Building upon a small business as a learning organisation”, International Small Business Journal, 15. Holcomb T.R., Ireland R. D., Holmes R. M., Jr. and M. A. Hitt (2009), “Architecture of Entrepreneurial Learning: Exploring the Link Among Heuristics, Knowledge, and Action”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 167-192. Honig B. (2004), “Entrepreneurship Education: Toward a Model of Contingency-Based Business Planning”, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (3), 258-73. Huizingua J. (1950), Homo Ludens, New York: Roy Publishers. Kets de Vries, M. (1985), “The dark side of entrepreneurship”, Harvard Business Review, nov-dec, 63 (6), 160-167. Kolb, D. A. (1984), Experiential Learning, Englewood Cliffs, Nj: Prentice Hall. Kolb, D. A., Richard E. Boyatzis and Charalampos, Mainemelis (2000), “Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions”, in Perspectives on Cognitive, Learning and Thinking Styles, Eds. R.J. Sternberg and L.F. Zhang, Routledge, 227-247. Krueger, N.F. (2007), “What lies beneath? The experiential essence of entrepreneurial thinking”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (1), 123–138. Levi-Strauss C. (2008), La pensée sauvage, in Claude Levi-Strauss Oeuvres: Gallimard. Levy P. (1998), Qu'est ce que le virtuel ?, Paris: La decouverte. Minniti, M. and Bygrave, W. (2001), “A dynamic model of entrepreneurial learning”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 5–16. Peterman, N. and Kenedy, J. (2003), Enterprise Education : influencing students’perceptions of entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice. Politis, D. (2005), “The Process of Entrepreneurial Learning: A Conceptual Framework”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29 (4).

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

23  

Rae, D. & M. Carswell (2001), “Towards a Conceptual Understanding of Entrepreneurship Learning”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 8 (2), 150-158. Simon, M., Houghton, S.M. and Aquino, K. (1999), “Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture formation: how individuals decide to start companies”, Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 113-134. Wolfe J. et Bruton G. (1994), “On the use of computerized simulations for entrepreneurship education”, Simulation & Gaming, 25 (3), 402. Zantow K., Knowlton D.S., et Sharp D.C. (2005), “More Than Fun and Games: Reconsidering the Virtues of Strategic Management Simulations”, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4 (4), 451-58.

 

Bornard and Parmentier – ICSB 2011  

24