Stevens Institute of Technology
Stevens Institute of Technology
School of Business
AACSB
ASSURANCE OF LEARNING
Master of Science in Management (MSM & MBA)
LEARNING GOAL # 3
Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
Responsibility: Steve Savitz (2007-2014)
Yan Chen (2015-2018)
Michael Frank (2019)
June 18, 2018
Table of Contents
1. Introduction: Learning Goal #3 4
2. Learning Objectives And Traits 8
3. Rubrics 9
4. Assessment Process 10
5. Results Of Learning Goal Assessment - Introduction 11
6. Results Of Assessment: Fall 2007 13
7. Results Of Assessment: Fall 2009 15
8. Specific Steps Taken In Fall 2009 16
9. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2011 17
10. Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2011 19
11. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2012 20
12. Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2012 22
13. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2013 23
14. Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2013 25
15. Results Of Assessment: Fall 2013 21
16. Specific Steps Taken In Fall 2013 25
17. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2015 23
18 . Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2015 24
19. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2016 25
20 . Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2016 26
21. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2017 27
22. Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2017 28
23. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2018 29
24. Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2018 30
25. Results Of Assessment: Spring 2019 29
26. Specific Steps Taken In Spring 2019 30
25. Outcomes: Learning Goal # 3 After Rounds Of Assessment 31
26. Close Loop Process – Continuous Improvement Record 34
APPENDIX-A: Course Changes Introduced in 2019
1. INTRODUCTION: LEARNING GOAL #3 (Original-Used prior to 2019)
Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy.
This goal is assessed in Mgt 671 Technology and Innovation Management, which is one of the required “core courses” in the MSM core curriculum. This learning goal requires students to think strategically in developing a 3 or 5 year technology and innovation management strategy for a real company and to propose development an array of new products and services for the company selected.
The assessment exercise requires individual students working on a team and individually to strategically develop an abbreviated business strategy for the chosen firm, then create a technology strategy forecasting future customer needs, new products to satisfy these needs, determine how the firm will source and develop required technological competencies. Elements of the technology strategy also include developing an IP strategy and a risk reduction plan to consider alternative approaches and risk mitigation actions. In addition the student learns and develops an alliance strategy for sourcing of capability externally. The outline for the technology and innovation management strategy is included in the Appendix.
To complete this exercise successfully, each student needs to master a number of strategic challenges and be able to communicate their strategy to the class in a 30-40 minute presentation. The Strategy includes strategic technology roadmapping process to help identify customer needs, competitive position relative to competition, core and enabling technologies needed and technological maturity models all consolidated into a concise and coherent document.
Students are assessed on their ability to develop quality roadmaps that tell a logical and comprehensive story and that are similar to those used in the real world corporate environment. Knowledge of different strategic management principles of incremental, platform to radical innovation projects are required to satisfy a balanced portfolio of projects. In addition, valuation of the portfolio is also required to ensure organizational focus and proper resource allocation. This course is positioned as improving the student’s ability to better manage the process of innovation in a firm.
3. INTRODUCTION: LEARNING GOAL #3 (After 2019 Redesign)
Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy.
This goal is assessed in Mgt 671 Technology and Innovation Management, which is one of the required “core courses” in the MSM core curriculum. This learning goal requires students to think strategically in developing a 3 or 5 year technology and innovation management strategy for an idea developed by team members for a company providing a new product or service or taking an existing company’s product(s) or service(s) and digitally transforming them by utilizing and/or integrating one or more new and emerging technologies or innovative business structures, methods or techniques (examples include crowdsourcing, developing uses of “big data,” gamification, backward/forward business integration and utilizing design thinking to radically adjusting the customer experience).
The assessment exercise requires individual students to work individually each week to assess current events from a strategic perspective, to work in small groups to understand and present business implications and strategic implications of a major emerging technology or set of technologies and finally, in a large group format, to develop an 50-100 page PowerPoint presentation of a business strategy and plan for the team’s prosed new product or service.
The assessment exercise requires students to perform the following:
(1) Small group executive level presentation on a particular emerging technology, outlining the major advances occurring in this technology, current business implementation where this technology is being deployed and future potential applications of this technology. Students must research technology papers on the technology and appreciate how this technology integrates with existing or other emerging technology to serve a business purpose. Students must review the industry utilizing recognized 3rd party IT research organizations such as Gartner (HypeCycle, Magic Quadrant), Forrester (Forrester Wave), McKinsey (McKinsey Bluebook) to understand the market potential, key players and key features of their assigned technology.
(2) Weekly “Heard It On The Grapevine” Articles Submissions
Every week, throughout the course, each student must read and search the internet or print media for new technological announcements and examples of companies reaching significant success in utilizing such technologies. They must provide one example article every week and include a hyperlink to the article as well as a multi-media (ex. Video) showing the use of the technology. The article must be about a significant event which happened within the last 2-3 weeks and not just an explanatory article about the technology. For example, just having an article about autonomous cars would be insufficient. A June 2019 New York Times article talking about Tesla having problems with achieving production numbers, quality issues and news of accidents/fatalities due to autonomous car software failures would be a great submission.
Depending on scheduling, each student submits 9 to 12 “Heard It On the Grapevine” articles through the Semester. Submissions start from around week #3 and end the week prior to the student groups delivering their final presentation.
(3) Reading Assignments on Technology Management and Innovation Methods
Students are required to read major portions of Melissa Schilling’s Strategic Management of Technological Innovation and completely read Dan Roam’s The Back of the Napkin (Expanded Edition): Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures and Barry Nalebuff and Ian Ayres’s book Why Not?: How to Use Everyday Ingenuity to Solve Problems Big And Small.
Strategic Management of Technological Innovation provides a formal discussion of Industry Dynamics of Technological Innovation including Sources of Innovation, Types and Patterns of Innovation, Standards Battles and Design Dominance, Timing of Entry. It follows with Formulating Technological Innovation Strategy including Defining the Organization’s Strategic Direction, Choosing Innovation Projects, Collaboration Strategies and Various methods to Protecting Innovation. The book completes with discussions about Implementing Technological Innovation Strategy including Organizing for Innovation, Managing the New Product Development Process, Managing New Product Development Teams and Crafting a Deployment Strategy. Ms. Schilling has updated the 4th Edition with more current case examples which are discussed in class.
The Back of the Napkin provides methods and techniques on how to use visual tools to simply communicate complex ideas to any group of individuals, including business executives.
Why Not? provides example and methods of using ideation techniques to create, challenge and enhance new business ideas.
(4) Final Team Project: Corporate Funding Pitch for A New Product/Service Utilizing At Least One Emerging Technology
Final Group Business Plan Project: Project teams are tasked with developing a new product or service which (1) does not presently exist or (2) develop a change to an existing product or service which fundamental transforms the core product/service. Project teams must incorporate at least 1 emerging technology into their solution – these come from the list of emerging technologies I shared with students at the beginning of the semester as well as the emerging technologies students and I presented during the semester. Student must present to the class as if they were presenting to financial backers. These presentations, 60-100 pages long, must detail all aspects of the management team’s business and technology strategy. A full description of the final report can be found in APPENDIX B5: Large group Final Project Business Plan Presentation.
To complete this exercise successfully, students need to master a number of conceptual and strategic frameworks including: methodologies for generating business strategy which provides the overarching context within which technology strategy is enacted, technology unbundling to reveal the technologies comprising the firm’s technology platform, forecasting tools such as the Gartner Hype Cycle to map technology progress and product/technology road mapping methodologies, processes to determine core technical competencies and technology sourcing strategies (including alliance strategies) aligned with strategic business objectives. Students also need to understand intellectual property strategies (with emphasis on patent protection) to protect the output of the firm’s knowledge management activities. Students must show empathy and consideration to the meeting the customer’s needs. These include utilizing a current and future sequence diagram which outlines the benefits to be derived by the customer in terms of simplicity, time savings, cost savings or enhanced feature set. Students must present a before and after structure diagram showing all the key technological components required to provide the full capabilities of the product/service, highlight those technologies which might present risk, unfavorable cost structures or which might be open to substitutes.
Teams are required to synthesize the key elements of their business and technology strategy incorporating the above tools effectively; aligning the technology strategy with business strategy while considering strategic alternatives and associated risk profiles.
Teams must show how they are going to market and communicate their product/service’s value to their customers as well as show how they plan to phase their roll-out strategy based on who the buyers are, how they are selling or where they are selling their product/service.
(5) Lectures
Over the course term, students are provided with many lectures on the history, development and deployment of dozens of currently available technologies as well as on several of today’s emerging technologies. They are taught to understand the timeframes, steps and varying degrees to which industries and customers accept new technologies. They become attuned to the challenges of communicating and presenting business cases for becoming a leader or adopter of new technologies, especially for companies which are already heavily invested in process, technology and training on a current set of technologies. They are provided with the resources and methodologies to explore any number of technologies they have never heard of before and objectively scope out the business potential and timing of this technology.
Through class discussions, students are assessed on their ability to: think strategically, assimilate new ideas and concepts and appreciate the opportunities and challenges of harnessing current or emerging technologies.
2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND TRAITS
|Objective 1: Students will be able to prepare a project detailing a firm's technology strategy. |
|Traits | |
|Trait 1: | |
| |Knowledge of Technology Management theory |
|Trait 2: | |
| |Identification of business strategy |
|Trait 3: | |
| |Generation of technology strategy |
3. RUBRICS
Objective 1: Students will be able to prepare a project detailing a firm's technology strategy.
| |Trait |Poor |Good |Excellent |
| |Value |0 |5 |10 |
|Trait 1: | Knowledge of Technology |Misuses analysis models, incorrectly |Selects appropriate models for analysis and |Uses best combination of models for |
| |Management theory |identifies key technologies |uses them to illuminate case |analyzing case and show understanding|
| | | | |of how the analyses overlap or |
| | | | |provide different perspectives |
|Trait 2: | Identification of business |Mistakes tactics or implementation |Shows understanding of what a strategy is and|Is able to offer alternative |
| |strategy |issues for strategy. Fails to |is able to explain why the strategy fits with|strategies and explain their strong |
| | |isolate and state the firm’s |the firm’s environment, character and |and weak points. Critical innovative |
| | |strategy. |objectives. |solutions are proposed. |
|Trait 3: |Generation of technology strategy|Fails to connect technology |Creates credible technology strategy that |Offers keen insights into best use of|
| | |management to business strategy. |takes both firm’s technology competence and |technology strengths for long-range |
| | |Fails to create a technology |firm strategy into account. |strategic direction of firm. |
| | |strategy. | | |
4A. ASSESSMENT PROCESS (Original-Used up until 2018)
|Where & When Measured? |How Measured? |Criterion |
|In MGT 671A, Technology and Innovation |The project requirements in MGT 671 are a written |If the collective average is 15 or less, |
|Management, each student team will write a|paper and an oral presentation. These will be |the professors will utilize the scoring on|
|final technology strategy paper and |evaluated to assess the student's knowledge of the |each subsection and create better learning|
|present his or her work. Data will be |use of technology for strategic advantage using the |approaches. |
|collected starting in Spring 2007 in all |following rubric. Team performance is carefully | |
|sections of MGT 671 on campus and on the |watched and assessed each case and confidential | |
|web |survey of team member performance is evaluated | |
| |during and at the end of the semester to ensure each| |
| |member is deserving of the grade given to the team. | |
| |If issues of performance arise, the professor meets | |
| |with the individual and the team to discuss the | |
| |issue and determine if any adjustment to the student| |
| |in questions grade is needed. | |
4B. ASSESSMENT PROCESS (After 2018 Redesign)
|Where & When Measured? |How Measured? |Criterion |
|In MGT 671A, Technology and Innovation |The course requirements in MGT 671 are the |If the level of presentations are not |
|Management, (1) each student’s weekly |submission of 8-12 “Heard It On The Grapevine” |maintained at a high level, the professor |
|HIOTGV article will be reviewed and 2-3 |articles, written in the student’s own prose as to |will create more descriptive and samples |
|articles will be discussed in class, (2) |the reason why a current event is significant and |of successful presentations for students |
|small groups of 2-3 students will give an |the strategic implication on this event for a |to more clearly understand what is being |
|executive level presentations on a |particular company, industry or emerging technology.|expected of them. |
|particular emerging technology, outlining | | |
|the major advances occurring in this |As these are current event articles (no more than |Utilization of the Canvas online grading |
|technology, current business |2-3 weeks old), late subissions are not accepted. It|system for the HIOTGV articles will be |
|implementation where this technology is |is expected almost all of the requested submissions |used to provide more directed and current |
|being deployed and future potential |will be provided over the semester. Submissions are |feedback to the students on their |
|applications of this technology and (3) |included in assessing the Class Participation |submissions. |
|final business plan will be developed by |portion of the grade. | |
|larger student groups of 6-8 students and |Students are randomly assigned to research, create | |
|presented to the class. Data will be |and present a 10-15 page PowerPoint presentation | |
|collected starting in Spring 2019. |(20-30 minute) to the full class on a major, | |
| |transformational/emerging technology. This is graded| |
| |as a group assignment. | |
| | | |
| |During the last 1-2 sessions of the semester, larger| |
| |groups will present to the class a business plan for| |
| |a new product/service and request for | |
| |funding/support from an investor group (the rest of | |
| |the class). This 1 hour presentation will be | |
| |evaluated to assess the student's and team’s | |
| |knowledge of the use of technology for strategic | |
| |advantage using the format outlined in Appendix A5: | |
| |Large Group Final Project Business Plan | |
| |Presentation. | |
| | | |
| |If issues of performance arise, the professor meets | |
| |with the individual and/or the team to discuss the | |
| |issue and determine if any adjustment to the student| |
| |in questions grade is needed. | |
5. RESULTS OF LEARNING GOAL ASSESSMENT - INTRODUCTION
The results of the initial learning goal assessments carried out to date are included below.
Explanation
Each learning goal has a number of learning objectives and performance on each objective is measured using a rubric that in turn contains a number of desired “traits”. Students are scored individually on each trait.
The grading sheets for each student are used to develop a Summary Results Sheet for each learning goal objective. A selection of these Summaries is included below.
The first table in the Summary Results Sheet for a learning objective and trait gives the counts of students falling in each of the three categories:
- Does not meet expectations
- Meets expectations
- Exceeds expectations
The right-hand column in the table is used to record the average score of the students on each trait. This table provides an indication of the relative performance of students on each trait.
The second table on each sheet provides the counts of students who fall in each of the above three categories for the overall learning objective.
The person doing the assessment provides explanatory comments and recommendations on the bottom of the Results Summary Sheet. The recommendations improve content or pedagogy changes for the next time the course is given.
6. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: FALL 2007
LEARNING GOAL # 3; Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/28/2007 ASSESSOR: Steve Savitz
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671 (17 Students) Course: MGT 671
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectat-ions|Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |2 |3 |12 |7.9 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |6 |11 |8.2 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |5 |12 |8.5 |
| | | | | |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |8.2 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds Expectations|
| |Expectations | | |
|Total Students by Category |4 |2 |11 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |76% |
COMMENTS: Overall, the above results are promising in that the main goals of the course have been accomplished. I am confident that based on the case studies, exams and final project which included a formal 5 year technology and innovation management strategy the vast majority of the class had gained a high level of learning in the 3 goals above. The fact that such a high percentage achieved an “Exceeds Expectations” rating gives me confidence that the course is well designed and accomplishes a high level of learning in strategic management of technology. The quality of the course “Capstone” the 5 Year Technology and Innovation Management Strategy demonstrated the high level of strategic thinking and the understanding of the linkage of the business strategy to the technology strategy.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS: While the results are encouraging overall I would like to see even more students accomplish an “exceeds expectations.” The main area that I will improve and focus on is the understanding of technology management theory. I can improve this in my course by emphasizing and more detailed discussion on the technology management articles dealing with theory. More Christensen, Hamel and Moore discussion in class will help me ensure that the class understands that while the practical application of theory is important, the in depth understanding of the theory is also key to allowing a more sophisticated comprehension and interpretation of technology management theory as it applies to innovation management. I plan to ask for student volunteers for each of the key theory articles and have them present all of them to the class for discussion along with critique focused on how this theory can be applied as well. This will allow me to understand the level of comprehension accomplished.
7. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Fall 2009
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Fall 2009 ASSESSOR: Steve Savitz
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671 (17 Students) Course: MGT 671
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |2 |5 |6 |6.5 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |8 |5 |6.9 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |4 |9 |8.5 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |7.9 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds Expectations|
| |Expectations | | |
|Total Students by Category |2 |5 |6 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |85% |
COMMENTS:
Significant changes have been made to the course readings and case studies. This semester each student is required to read and give a 5-10 minute presentation of the particular article and relate this article to the student’s job or real world situation. Students are graded on quality of thinking, insight and depth of analysis. In addition I have incorporated the “right” to have a “pop” quiz on the article or case due for the particular session. My opinion is that student’s discussion and communication during class is increased and I end up doing less lecturing and more facilitating of course materials. The net overall result of this is that the final project- 5 Year Technology and Innovation Management Strategy is of higher quality and more strategic in nature. Also noted is the fact that I now have a better way of grading each student because they are more engaged in class. I have also initiated a Team Member Contribution Rating form (Appendix) to allow each team member to rate the performance of each other team member and to state if all the team members are equally deserving of the same grade. This has proven very effective in weeding our “Social Loafers” and also resulted overall a slightly lower overall grade of 7.9 vs. 8.2 from the previous evaluation.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
My plan has accomplished what I had aimed for, namely a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of innovation. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets.
8. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN FALL 2009
a. Students present summary of key articles on technology strategy and competitive advantage
b. Team Member Contribution Rating forms required for each team case and for the final project to ensure each student is given the appropriate grade for the team cases based on actual individual contributions to the team effort.
c. The final exam also ensures I grade each students strategic knowledge accurately
d. Updated service innovation and new product development HBR articles
9. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2011
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2011 ASSESSOR: Steve Savitz
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671 (26 Students) Course: MGT 671
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |4 |8 |14 |6.5 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |1 |14 |11 |6.9 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |12 |14 |8.5 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |7.9 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds Expectations|
| |Expectations | | |
|Total Students by Category |3 |18 |5 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |88% |
COMMENTS:
Significant changes continue to be made to the course readings and case studies and teaching approach. Having students each read and give a 5-10 minute presentation of the particular article and relate this article to the students job or real world situation has helped engage the students in a more relevant experience. Students are graded on quality of thinking, insight and depth of analysis. In addition I have incorporated the “right” to have a “pop” quiz on the article or case due for the particular session. I gave two this semester with good results in that the class was prepared for the quiz and scored well. My opinion is that student’s discussion and communication during class has increased and I end up doing less lecturing and more facilitating of course materials. The net overall result of this is that the final project- 5 Year Technology and Innovation Management Strategy are of higher quality and more strategic in nature, the course tools are used in a more sophisticated manner. Also noted is the fact that I now have a better way of grading each student because they are more engaged in class. I have used the Team Member Contribution Rating form (Appendix) to allow each team member to rate the performance of each other team member and to state if all the team members are equally deserving of the same grade. I now do this for each team case to ensure team members are not taking advantage of other members and doing a fair share of the work for each case. This has proven very effective in weeding out “Social Loafers.” A higher percentage of ESL students are enrolling in the course and this has impacted class discussion in a minor way. In particular we now have a larger contingent of Chinese students with marginal English language communication skills and as a result their class participation is limited. I believe they understand the work but are not going to be active in class. To remedy this I meet with the Chinese students each week for one hour before class and discuss the work due and ask questions to find out if they are prepared. Overall they find this encouraging and helpful and I am able to ensure learning.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of innovation. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets.
I have added two current Case studies that have been very well received. Apple 2010 and Threadless Inc. Both are Harvard cases. The Threadless, Inc. case is a CD ROM case that requires the student to listen the managers of the company (a “T” shirt company) work thru their unique business model of network/community based product development. This is a very exciting case with young managers running a business without internal R&D. This shows the power of the internet to accomplish traditional functions without internal resources for product design and development.
This semester also so three students that performed quite poorly in that they did not seem to come prepared to class and just barely passed the course. I met with all of them personally to explain the consequences of poor preparation and asked if I could help. Unfortunately, they were not willing to do the work required to earn more than a C or B-. This was a most unusual situation for me personally and not typical. My final quiz was a great test of their lack of reading and engagement and their grades on the quiz reflected this quite accurately.
10. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2011
a. Students present summary of key articles on technology strategy and competitive advantage
b. Team Member Contribution Rating forms required for each team case and for the final project to ensure each student is given the appropriate grade for the team cases based on actual individual contributions to the team effort.
c. The final exam also ensures I grade each students strategic knowledge accurately
d. Updated service innovation and new product development HBR articles as noted above
e. Private meetings before class with ESL students to work with them in a more private setting to allow them to communicate more freely.
f. Addition of 2 new high energy and relevant cases that engage more.
11. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2012
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2012 ASSESSOR: Steve Savitz
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671 (24 Students) Course: MGT 671 A and 671WS (Online)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |1 |8 |15 |7.9 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |1 |7 |17 |8.2 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |8 |16 |8.3 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |8.1 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds Expectations|
| |Expectations | | |
|Total Students by Category |1 |6 |17 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |96% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results this year were impressive in that the quality of the final cases submitted along with the higher level of discussion in the class made for an exciting and energetic class. This was true for the online and on campus classes.
My online class reacted very positively to the weekly live sessions I hold each Monday evening. This allows real time discussion and gives the teams a chance to present their cases and engage in meaningful dialogue that is “live.” I also have recorded live voice over PowerPoint lectures for each Module. I use these recorded lectures in both my online and on campus class with good results. For online it adds an element of reality to the course.
Changes continue to be made to the course readings and case studies and teaching approach. Having students each read and give a 5-10 minute presentation of the particular article and relate this article to the students job or real world situation has helped engage the students in a more relevant experience and gives them a change to practice their communication skills. I now have added current videos mostly from YouTube that I have links for the class to review prior to the session. I have found these are very well received by all.
This semester’s final case – 5 Year Technology and Innovation Management Strategy was as high a quality as any semester I have taught. I believe the quality of many of my students was higher as well as the energy created in the class allowed all students with a few exceptions to actively engage in the discussions. The previously mentioned Team Member Contribution Rating form (Appendix) which allows each team member to rate the performance of each other team member and to state if all the team members are equally deserving of the same grade seem to avoid issues that I have previously had with some teams. I now do this for every team case to ensure team members are not taking advantage of other members and doing a fair share of the work for each case. This has proven very effective in weeding our “Social Loafers.” I still get a relative high percentage of ESL students this has impacted class discussion in a minor way. To remedy this I meet with the Chinese students each week for one hour before class and discuss the work due and ask questions to find out if they are prepared. Overall they find this encouraging and helpful and I am able to ensure learning. I have also developed a bond with the students and they seem motivated to try harder and volunteer more to speak during class. I even invited two of the Chinese students in my online class to come to the pre-class session for my on-campus class.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of innovation and what specifically is involved in this process. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets.
This semester I had only one student that performed poorly. I have worked with this student throughout the semester and I believe the problem is that he does not want to put the time in to perform at a higher level. I am limited in what I can offer this student.
12. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2012
a. Students present summary of key articles on technology strategy and competitive advantage- more time allowed for this each class
b. Focus and more importance given to the Team Member Contribution Rating forms required for each team case and for the final project to ensure each student is given the appropriate grade for the team cases based on actual individual contributions to the team effort.
c. The final exam remains key to ensuring key concepts are learned and also ensures I grade each students strategic knowledge accurately
d. Updated service innovation and new product development HBR articles as well as relevant, current YouTube videos.
e. Private meetings before class with ESL students to work with them in a more private setting to allow them to communicate more freely and to set expectations.
13. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2013
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2013 ASSESSOR: Steve Savitz
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671 (41 Students) Course: MGT 671 A (20) and 671WS (21) (Online)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |4 |20 |16 |8.4 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |2 |17 |22 |7.5 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |1 |16 |24 |7.3 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |7.7 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds Expectations|
| |Expectations | | |
|Total Students by Category |3 |18 |20 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |93% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results this year were consistent with previous semesters in that the quality of the final cases submitted along with the higher level of discussion in the class made for a more exciting and energetic class. This was true for the online and on campus classes. Enrollments were higher this semester so we have a larger more significant sample size.
My online class reacted very positively to the weekly live sessions I hold each Monday evening. This allows real time discussion and gives the teams a chance to present their cases and engage in meaningful dialogue that is “live.” I also have a very extended time to evaluate each students ability to communicate technology and business strategy topics and this counts towards their class participations grade. I also have recorded live voice over PowerPoint lectures for each Module. I use these recorded lectures in both my online and on campus class with good results. For online it adds an element of reality to the course.
Changes continue to be made to the course readings and case studies and teaching approach as in past semesters. Having students each read and give a 5-10 minute presentation of the particular article and relate this article to the students job or real world situation has helped engage the students in a more relevant experience and gives them a change to practice their communication skills. I now have added current videos mostly from YouTube that I have links for the class to review prior to the session. I have found these are very well received by all.
This semester’s final case – 5 Year Technology and Innovation Management Strategy was as high a quality as any semester I have taught. I believe the quality of many of my students was higher as well as the energy created in the class allowed all students with a few exceptions to actively engage in the discussions. The previously mentioned Team Member Contribution Rating form (Appendix) which allows each team member to rate the performance of each other team member and to state if all the team members are equally deserving of the same grade seem to avoid issues that I have previously had with some teams. I now do this for every team case to ensure team members are not taking advantage of other members and doing a fair share of the work for each case. This has proven very effective in weeding our “Social Loafers.” I still get a relative high percentage of ESL students this has impacted class discussion in a minor way. Again this semester, I meet with the Chinese students each week for one hour before class and discuss the work due and ask questions to find out if they are prepared. Overall they find this encouraging and helpful and I am able to ensure learning. I have also developed a bond with the students and they seem motivated to try harder and volunteer more to speak during class. I even invited two of the Chinese students in my online class to come to the pre-class session for my on-campus class.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of innovation and what specifically is involved in this process. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets. Overall I believe is a very high quality course that has evolved over the years.
This semester I had 3 student that performed poorly. I have worked with several of these students throughout the semester and the problem is mainly one of time commitment to the class and participation with the team.
14. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2013
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I am eliminating the module of Service Innovation as I find I do not have adequate time to cover this subject in adequate detail. I am substituting a module on Business Model Innovation which is a good fit with the course and will expand the students understanding of the process of innovation as it relates to new products as well as new business models. Significant material is available as well as case studies and these will be evaluated and then integrated into the course as a substitute.
I am also evaluating other methods of assessing learning outcomes for this course less reliant on team projects and presentations. I will develop a proposal for review before Fall semester of 2013.
15. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Fall 2013
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Fall 2013 ASSESSOR: Steve Savitz
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671WS (12 Students)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |3 |9 |8.2 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |3 |9 |8.5 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |8.1 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds Expectations|
| |Expectations | | |
|Total Students by Category |0 |1 |11 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |100% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results this year were much better than previous semesters in that the quality of the final cases submitted along with the higher level of discussion in the class made for a more engaged and energetic class. I also have extended time to evaluate each student’s ability to communicate technology and business strategy topics and this counts towards their class participations grade. Having students each read and give a 5-10 minute presentation of the particular article and relate this article to the students job or real world situation has helped engage the students in a more relevant experience and gives them a change to practice their communication skills.
This semester’s final case – 5 Year Technology and Innovation Management Strategy was as high a quality as any semester I have taught. I believe the work experience and quality of many of my students was higher as well as the energy created in the class allowed all students with a few exceptions to actively engage in the discussions. The previously mentioned Team Member Contribution Rating form (Appendix) continues to be used to ensure each team member is equally deserving of the same grade. I now do this for every team case to ensure team members are doing a fair share of the work. This has proven very effective in weeding our “Social Loafers.”
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. The idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive advantage. The students leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage the process of innovation and what specifically is involved in this process. The course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work from the students than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I am working on a better way to access learning outcomes by developing one or two individual case studies with questions that will better allow me to access each student. Many of the concepts learned apply equally to service as well as product companies
The results are quite good and I think it is partly due to the smaller class size and my ability to work with students individually and discuss each case with them on a one on one basis.
16. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN FALL 2013
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I eliminated the module on Service Innovation as mentioned last semester with more focus on strategic technology strategy and discussion of high technology companies, i.e., Apple, Blackberry, Google and Intel. I am substituting a module on Business Model Innovation which is a good fit with the course and will expand the students understanding of the process of innovation as it relates to new products as well as new business models.
As noted above, I am also evaluating other methods of assessing learning outcomes for this course less reliant on team projects and presentations. I will develop a proposal for review before Fall semester of 2014.
17. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2015
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2015 ASSESSOR: Yan Chen
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671WS (21 Students)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |0 |2 |19 |9.0 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |2 |19 |9.2 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |1 |4 |16 |8.7 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |9.0 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |
|Total Students by Category |0 |3 |18 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |100% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results are good. The final projects submitted by students are of high quality. Throughout this course, students also participate actively in online discussion: they not only answer questions that I post but also debate with each other on the discussion forum. This semester, students are required to read a select set of articles on topics related to technology and innovation management, and students do very well in understanding and summarizing these articles.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically about technology and innovation. I will continue to challenge students to emphasize the linkages between innovation and strategic management. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance. Currently, the results are good, and I believe that they can become better in later semesters.
18. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2015
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I have updated the assigned readings to incorporate newer articles on related topics. I have redesigned the course project to clarify the linkages between innovation and strategic management.
19. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2016
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2016 ASSESSOR: Yan Chen
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671WS (22 Students)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |1 |0 |21 |9.8 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |1 |0 |21 |9.8 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |1 |0 |21 |9.8 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |9.8 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |
|Total Students by Category |1 |0 |21 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |95% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results are good. The final projects submitted by students are of high quality. Throughout this course, students also participate actively in online discussion: they not only answer questions that I post but also debate with each other on the discussion forum. This semester, students are required to read a select set of articles on topics related to technology and innovation management, and students do very well in understanding and summarizing these articles.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically about technology and innovation. I will continue to challenge students to emphasize the linkages between innovation and strategic management. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance. Currently, the results are good, and I believe that they can become better in later semesters.
20. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2016
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I have updated the assigned readings to incorporate newer articles on related topics. I have modified the course project to clarify the linkages between innovation and strategic management.
21. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2017
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2017 ASSESSOR: Yan Chen
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671WS (19 Students)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |0 |4 |15 |9 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |4 |15 |9 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |4 |15 |9 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |9 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |
|Total Students by Category |0 |4 |15 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |100% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results are good. The final projects submitted by students are of high quality. Throughout this course, students also participate actively in online discussion: they not only answer questions that I post but also debate with each other on the discussion forum. This semester, students are required to read a select set of articles on topics related to technology and innovation management, and students do very well in understanding and summarizing these articles.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically about technology and innovation. I will continue to challenge students to emphasize the linkages between innovation and strategic management. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance. Currently, the results are good, and I believe that they can become better in later semesters.
22. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2017
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I have updated the assigned readings to incorporate newer articles on related topics.
21. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2018
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2018 ASSESSOR: Yan Chen
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671A (21 Students)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |0 |0 |21 |10 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |0 |21 |10 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |0 |21 |10 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |10 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |
|Total Students by Category |0 |0 |21 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |100% |
COMMENTS:
Overall the results are great. The final projects submitted by students were of very high quality. Students went through three steps in submitting and revising the project. Each student first submitted a draft report, which was reviewed by a peer. After receiving peer feedback, each student revised and resubmitted the final report. After going through this revise-and-resubmit process, all final submissions were of very high quality.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course that can challenge students to think more strategically about technology and innovation. I will continue to challenge students to think about how to use technology and innovation to achieve strategic results. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance. Currently, the learning outcomes are great, and I believe that the learning experiences and outcomes can become even better in future semesters.
24. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2018
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I have updated the assigned readings to incorporate newer contents on related topics.
PREFACE TO RESULTS OF COURSE DELIVERED SUMMER 2019 (MICHAEL FRANK)
This was the second year where I taught MGT671 within the MBA program. Previously I was teaching two similar classes within the EMT and MSIS programs and was asked to teach MGT671 within the Fall/Spring sessions.
I took portions from my MSIS 699 (Emerging Technologies) class and integrated it with some of the materials from the MGT671 and EMT714 (Technology Strategy and Innovation Management) classes taught by prior professors, including Professor Murrae Bowden.
I tried to benefit from the structure of the textbook suggested by Professor Bowden but also allow students to become engaged and excited with the transformative nature of emerging technologies to any business and to be more inclined to “think outside of the box.”
Major elements of the revised course included:
(1) Utilizing the a formal textbook from Melissa Schilling. (Melissa Schilling (February 2016). Strategic Management of Technological Innovation (Fifth Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN-13: 978-1259539060). This book is a nationally recognized textbook on Strategic Management and Technology Innovation and utilizes Harvard Business School case method approach examining specific companies and product introductions including Elon Musk and Tesla,
(2) Incorporated two additional, less technical textbooks which offered excellent examples and methods on thinking and presenting creatively through the use of graphics and other visual elements and a set of ideation techniques.
The two books were:
a: Dan Roam (2013) - The Back of the Napkin (Expanded Edition): Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures, Portfolio Publishing ISBN-13: 978-159184269
b: Barry Nalebuff (Author), and Ian Ayres (2006). Why Not?: How to Use Everyday Ingenuity to Solve Problems Big And Small Boston: Harvard Business Review Press ISBN-13: 978-1422104347
3) Weekly completion of a “Head it On The Grapevine” exercise.
Weekly HIOTGV articles required students to formulate their own views and to communicate in their own voice, rather than just simply cutting/clipping from existing research/commentary
.
4) Small Group research project and Senior Management presentation. Small groups were randomly created and assigned a specific and significant emerging technology from a list of current emerging technologies. This composite list of emerging technologies is provided to students in spreadsheet format at the beginning of the semester. The items of the list have been consolidated from the following recognized, external IT and Strategy consulting firms, McKinsey, Gartner and Forrester. (see Attachment A3)
The emerging technology presentation required students to spend time researching and learning about a new technology but more importantly taking all of this information and distilling it into its core elements and explaining the uses case(s) for using this technology, understanding how viable the technology was and how such technologies could/may align with business strategies. Presentations need to be interesting and compelling to ensure a senior executive would wish to learn more and to learn more about applying the technology in their particular business environment.
5) Final Team Project with Final Presentation Proposing a Product or Service which does not, as of yet, exist or to propose a major, transformative change to an existing product or service through the introduction of at least one or more emerging technologies (from the aforementioned Emerging Technologies matrix).
Students are provided with a list of requirements for their presentations plus suggestions to allow them to be creative and innovative and utilize any other methods, visualizations and graphics they believe best supports their business case. (the list is included in attachment A4)
REMEDIAL ACTIONS: This was the first time I was asked to review MGT 671 for Learning Goal #3 so the actions above outline my method/approach to teaching the course and making it current, relevant and compelling.
21. RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT: Spring 2019
LEARNING GOAL # 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy
LEARNING OBJECTIVE # 1: Students are able to complete a strategic analysis process on a technology-based business and develop a comprehensive business strategy for the ensuing 5 years.
ASSESSMENT DATE: Spring 2019 ASSESSOR: Michael Frank
NO. OF STUDENTS TESTED: MGT 671A (17 Students)
| |Number of Students | |
|Learning Goal Traits |Not Meet |Meet Expectations |Exceed |Avg. Grade |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |on Trait |
|1: Knowledge of Technology Management theory |0 |0 |17 |10 |
|2: Identification of business strategy |0 |0 |17 |10 |
|3: Generation of technology strategy |0 |0 |17 |10 |
|Average Grade (Maximum 10) |10 |
| |Not meet |Meets Expectations |Exceeds |
| |Expectations | |Expectations |
|Total Students by Category |0 |0 |17 |
|(Based on Average score across all traits) | | | |
|Students meeting or exceeding expectations: |100% |
COMMENTS:
This was my first time I am completing the Goal #3 review for MGT671. I believe this approach was an improvement over prior years based on student engagement, comments at the beginning of class, during the class and afterwards through the class survey, comments from the Director of the program and continued dialogue with students post-graduation. As a group, the class comes close, on the whole, to exceeding expectations.
There is a more detailed preface before this Results page which outlines the changes made to MGT671.
Overall the results are very good. Over the semester, individual HIOTGV articles greatly improved as did the in-class conversations about 1-2 selected student submissions. Students were generally excited and proud to learn about a new emerging technology, being able to research, understand and present the topic to the class in business terms and clearly outlining the strategic impact of such technology(ies) to corporations and typical use-cases of the selected technology. The final projects submitted by student groups were of very high quality and were truly ideas which were novel, innovative and worthy of investment and support.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS:
I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course that can challenge students to think more strategically about technology and innovation. I will continue to challenge students to think about how to use technology and innovation to achieve strategic results. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance. Currently, the learning outcomes are great, and I believe that the learning experiences and outcomes can become even better in future semesters.
24. SPECIFIC STEPS TAKEN IN SPRING 2019
Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I have updated the assigned readings to incorporate newer contents on related topics. Each semester I review a variety of recognized external research organizations and innovative publications (ex. Gartner, Forrester, IDC, McKinsey, Accenture, Deloitte, FastCompany, Mary Meeker’s Annual Internet Trend Report) to determine if any emerging technologies should be added or dropped from the class Emerging Technology list and possible small group assignments.
25. OUTCOMES: MSM LEARNING GOAL # 3 AFTER ROUNDS OF ASSESSMENT
After Second Assessment
The course is evolving each semester to focus on more critical evaluation and grading of the students to reinforce the concepts of how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage to satisfy its business strategy. I have much higher expectations of the class and of the final project which has proven to be an effective Capstone project. I have developed tools to ensure proper grading of team member contributions. Student’s five-year technology and innovation management strategy final case projects have grown in sophistication, depth and scope. The students leave my class with a better understanding of how to manage the process of innovation and how to use technology to add value to the customer and company and how to gain a competitive advantage.
After Third Assessment
The course continues to each semester to focus on more critical evaluation and grading of the students to reinforce the concepts of how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage to satisfy its business strategy. I continue to have much higher expectations of the class and of the final project which has proven to be an effective Capstone project. Student’s five-year technology and innovation management strategy final case projects have grown in sophistication, depth and scope. The students leave my class with a better understanding of how to manage the process of innovation and how to use technology to add value to the customer and company and how to gain a competitive advantage. The course has gained a reputation of being an above average amount of work but “worth it.” The increase of foreign students has added challenges that have been dealt with in creative ways ensuring the work is understood and they are given a non-threatening environment to learn in.
After Fourth Assessment
While I am always cautious with simple solutions, I believe I have reached a certain level of confidence in my course teaching and delivery methods. The results speak for themselves in terms of the learning gains this semester. My main goal moving forward is to introduce more current and relevant material in the areas of “Open Innovation, Breakthrough Business Innovations and Models as well as more relevant videos. I am also going to try to find outside speakers for the class to add more reality to the material.
My online class is going great due mainly to my more than 10 years’ experience in online teaching and the use of new technology to allow live sessions during online courses to add an element of reality and personalization. I am also now teaching other faculty members how to be better online teachers and how to use the live conferencing technology available to the faculty and students. Live sessions have been proven to add depth and insight into online courses.
Overall, I will continue to work closely with students to help them learn but more importantly to help them think critically like business/technology leaders. My focus on helping them “better manage the process of innovation” has met with great excitement as a new core competency for them - the students!
After Fifth Assessment- Overall the course delivers important lessons that are learned in managing technology for competitive advantage. I am now looking at better ways of measuring individual learning outcomes with a focus less on team performance and team case studies. I am collaborating with another Professor that teaches a similar course in the EMTM program to determine different individual measures of learning outcomes. We will propose a solution prior to the Fall of 2013.
After Sixth Assessment- A high level of understanding of technology strategy development has resulted with the constant improvement of the course over the years. Students are now asked to share their final case projects with their employer to receive feedback and to use the final case project as a valuable tool to communicate their new found personal core competency. Preliminary results from students that work for Boeing has been impressive. I am trying to integrate this concept into the assessment process if possible as it is an excellent verification of the quality of learning from this course.
After Seventh Assessment
The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required not only to read a textbook but also to read a select set of journal articles. By so doing, students not only develop a deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal articles.
After Eighth Assessment
The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required not only to read a textbook but also to read a select set of journal articles. By so doing, students not only develop a deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal articles.
After Ninth Assessment
The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required not only to read a textbook but also to read a select set of journal articles. By so doing, students not only develop a deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal articles.
After Tenth Assessment
As mentioned, the course was expanded significantly. The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required not only to read a textbook but also to a select set of articles. By so doing, students not only develop a deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal articles and as importantly utilizing multiple sources, including technical, business, industry sources.
The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last several assessments.
Performance on Learning Goal #3 Over Time
| |Trait 1 |Trait 2 |Trait 3 |Overall |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |Identification of Business|Generation of Technology |Learning Goal |
| | |Strategy |Strategy | |
|Spring 2007 |7.9 |8.2 |8.5 |8.2 |
|Spring 2009 |6.5 |6.9 |8.5 |7.9 |
|Spring 2011 |6.5 |6.9 |8.5 |7.9 |
|Spring 2012 |7.9 |8.2 |8.3 |8.1 |
|Spring 2013 |8.4 |7.5 |7.8 |7.9 |
|Fall 2013 |7.5 |8.2 |8.5 |8.1 |
|Spring 2015 |9.0 |9.2 |8.7 |9.0 |
|Spring 2016 |9.8 |9.8 |9.8 |9.8 |
|Spring 2017 |9.0 |9.0 |9.0 |9.0 |
|Spring 2018 |10.0 |10.0 |10.0 |10.0 |
|Spring 2019 |10.0 |10.0 |10.0 |10.0 |
26. CLOSE LOOP PROCESS – CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT RECORD
Assurance of Learning
Assessment/Outcome Analysis
Close Loop Process - Continuous Improvement Record
Program: Master of Science in Management
Goal 3: Our students will understand how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage in satisfying its business strategy.
Goal Owner: Steve Savitz
Where Measured: In MGT 671A, Technology and Innovation Management, each student team will write a final technology strategy paper and present his or her work. Data will be collected starting in Spring 2007 in all sections of MGT 671 on campus and on the web.
How Measured: The project requirements in MGT 671 are a written paper and an oral presentation. These will be evaluated to assess the student's knowledge of the use of technology for strategic advantage using the following rubric. Team performance is carefully watched and assessed each case and confidential survey of team member performance is evaluated during and at the end of the semester to ensure each member is deserving of the grade given to the team. If issues of performance arise, the professor meets with the individual and the team to discuss the issue and determine if any adjustment to the student in questions grade is needed. Individual and team cases studies as well as class participation is used to measure learning outcomes.
Closing the Loop: Actions taken on specific objectives
|Objective 1 |Each student will prepare a project detailing a firm’s technology strategy. |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2019 |
|Remedial Action |The adjustments to the course structure better ensures students are engaged and aware of what new technologies are |
| |being introduced as core elements of real companies, right at the same time they are taking MGT671. The main benefit of|
| |the course is not just to teach students on new technologies but to provide each student with the right strategic, |
| |research and analytic skills they can utilize today, tomorrow and throughout their professional careers. Each time the |
| |class is taught, I will revise the list of example companies/cases which are reviewed and the HIOTGV approach assures |
| |that students remain aware of where various technologies are in terms of capabilities, uses, cost and revenue |
| |structures as well as the associated ethical, moral, legal, operational and customer experience implications of such |
| |technologies. |
|Outcome from previous |After Eleventh Assessment – Redesigning the delivery of the course to provide real-time, current perspectives as well |
|assessment: |as sharing various techniques/methods to think creatively, to transfer ideas from one industry to another, to |
| |incorporate a more customer focused, design-thinking approach to measuring business success. Students are now required |
| |not only to read a textbook but also to apply their knowledge through current events. By so doing, students not only |
| |develop a deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning they can use years |
| |after completing their MBA education. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last several assessments. |
| | |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.8 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Fall 2013 |
| |7.5 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2015 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.2 |
| |8.7 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2016 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| | |
| |Spring 2017 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2018 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2019 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2018 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course that can challenge students to think more strategically about |
| |technology and innovation. I will continue to challenge students to think about how to use technology and innovation to|
| |achieve strategic results. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate |
| |student performance. Currently, the learning outcomes are great, and I believe that the learning experiences and |
| |outcomes can become even better in future semesters. |
|Outcome from previous |After Tenth Assessment – The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required |
|assessment: |not only to read a textbook but also to a select set of articles. By so doing, students not only develop a deeper |
| |understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal articles. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last several assessments. |
| | |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.8 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Fall 2013 |
| |7.5 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2015 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.2 |
| |8.7 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2016 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| | |
| |Spring 2017 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2018 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| |10.0 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2017 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically about technology and |
| |innovation. I will continue to challenge students to emphasize the linkages between innovation and strategic |
| |management. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance.|
| |Currently, the results are good, and I believe that they can become better in later semesters. |
|Outcome from previous |After Ninth Assessment – The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required |
|assessment: |not only to read a textbook but also to read a select set of journal articles. By so doing, students not only develop a|
| |deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal |
| |articles. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last several assessments. |
| | |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.8 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Fall 2013 |
| |7.5 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2015 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.2 |
| |8.7 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2016 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| | |
| |Spring 2017 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2016 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically about technology and |
| |innovation. I will continue to challenge students to emphasize the linkages between innovation and strategic |
| |management. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance.|
| |Currently, the results are good, and I believe that they can become better in later semesters. |
|Outcome from previous |After Eighth Assessment – The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required |
|assessment: |not only to read a textbook but also to read a select set of journal articles. By so doing, students not only develop a|
| |deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal |
| |articles. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last several assessments. |
| | |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.8 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Fall 2013 |
| |7.5 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2015 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.2 |
| |8.7 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
| |Spring 2016 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| |9.8 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2015 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically about technology and |
| |innovation. I will continue to challenge students to emphasize the linkages between innovation and strategic |
| |management. I am working on a better way to organize the courses, design assignments, and evaluate student performance.|
| |Currently, the results are good, and I believe that they can become better in later semesters. |
|Outcome from previous |After Seventh Assessment – The quality of the course is constantly improving over the years. Students are now required |
|assessment: |not only to read a textbook but also to read a select set of journal articles. By so doing, students not only develop a|
| |deeper understanding of technology and innovation but also cultivate a habit of learning through reading journal |
| |articles. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last several assessments. |
| | |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.8 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Fall 2013 |
| |7.5 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2015 |
| |9.0 |
| |9.2 |
| |8.7 |
| |9.0 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Fall 2013 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. The |
| |idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project|
| |is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a |
| |competitive advantage. The students leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage the process of |
| |innovation and what specifically is involved in this process. The course is more challenging, strategic in nature and |
| |requires more work from the students than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and|
| |emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I am working on a better way to access learning|
| |outcomes by developing one or two individual case studies with questions that will better allow me to access each |
| |student. The elimination of the Service Innovation module has allowed more focus on the strategic technology management|
| |process. Many of the concepts learned apply equally to service as well as product companies |
| |The results are quite good and I think it is partly due to the smaller class size and my ability to work with students |
| |individually and discuss each case with them on a one on one basis. |
|Outcome from previous | |
|assessment: |After Sixth Assessment- A high level of understanding of technology strategy development has resulted with the constant|
| |improvement of the course over the years. Students are now asked to share their final case projects with their employer|
| |to receive feedback and to use the final case project as a valuable tool to communicate their new found personal core |
| |competency. Preliminary results from students that work for Boeing has been impressive. I am trying to integrate this |
| |concept into the assessment process if possible as it is an excellent verification of the quality of learning from |
| |this course. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last 6 assessments |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |Fall 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.5 |
| |8.2 |
| |7.8 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2013 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am |
| |also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a |
| |competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they|
| |all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive |
| |advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of |
| |innovation and what specifically is involved in this process. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, |
| |strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the |
| |students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more |
| |relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets. |
| |Overall I believe is a very high quality course that has evolved over the years. |
| |This semester I had 3 students that performed poorly. I have worked with several of these students throughout the |
| |semester and the problem is mainly one of time commitment to the class and participation with the team. |
| |Specific Steps Taken |
| |Modernization of the content has always been a focus of the course. I am eliminating the module of Service Innovation |
| |as I find I do not have adequate time to cover this subject in adequate detail. I am substituting a module on Business |
| |Model Innovation which is a good fit with the course and will expand the students understanding of the process of |
| |innovation as it relates to new products as well as new business models. Significant material is available as well as |
| |case studies and these will be evaluated and then integrated into the course as a substitute. |
| |I am also evaluating other methods of assessing learning outcomes for this course less reliant on team projects and |
| |presentations. I will develop a proposal for review before Fall semester of 2013. |
|Outcome from previous |Overall the course delivers important lessons that are learned in managing technology for competitive advantage. I am |
|assessment: |now looking at better ways of measuring individual learning outcomes with a focus less on team performance and team |
| |case studies. I am collaborating with another Professor that teaches a similar course in the EMTM program to determine |
| |different individual measures of learning outcomes. We will propose a solution prior to the Fall of 2013. |
| | |
| |The following table shows the average scores on each trait for the last 5 assessment |
| |Performance on MSM Learning Goal #3 Over Time |
| | |
| | |
| |Trait 1 |
| |Knowledge of TM Theory |
| |Trait 2 |
| |Identification of Business Strategy |
| |Trait 3 |
| |Generation of Technology Strategy |
| |Overall |
| |Learning Goal |
| | |
| |Fall 2007 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.5 |
| |8.2 |
| | |
| |Fall 2009 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2011 |
| |6.5 |
| |6.9 |
| |8.5 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
| |Spring 2012 |
| |7.9 |
| |8.2 |
| |8.3 |
| |8.1 |
| | |
| |Spring 2013 |
| |8.4 |
| |7.5 |
| |7.8 |
| |7.9 |
| | |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2012 |
|Remedial Action |I am still aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am |
| |also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a |
| |competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they|
| |all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive |
| |advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of |
| |innovation and what specifically is involved in this process. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, |
| |strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the |
| |students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more |
| |relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets. |
| | |
| |This semester I had only one student that performed poorly. I have worked with this student throughout the semester and|
| |I believe the problem is that he does not want to put the time in to perform at a higher level. I am limited in what I |
| |can offer this student. |
| |Specific Steps Taken |
| |Students present summary of key articles on technology strategy and competitive advantage- more time allowed for this |
| |each class |
| |Focus and more importance given to the Team Member Contribution Rating forms required for each team case and for the |
| |final project to ensure each student is given the appropriate grade for the team cases based on actual individual |
| |contributions to the team effort. |
| |The final exam remains key to ensuring key concepts are learned and also ensures I grade each students strategic |
| |knowledge accurately |
| |Updated service innovation and new product development HBR articles as well as relevant, current YouTube videos. |
| |Private meetings before class with ESL students to work with them in a more private setting to allow them to |
| |communicate more freely and to set expectations. |
|Outcome from previous |While I am always cautious with simple solutions, I believe I have reached a certain level of confidence in my course |
|assessment: |teaching and delivery methods. The results speak for themselves in terms of the learning gains this semester. My main |
| |goal moving forward is to introduce more current and relevant material in the areas of “Open Innovation, Breakthrough |
| |Business Innovations and Models as well as more relevant videos. I am also going to try to find outside speakers for |
| |the class to add more reality to the material. |
| |My online class is going great due mainly to my more than 10 years’ experience in online teaching and the use of new |
| |technology to allow live sessions during online courses to add an element of reality and personalization. I am also now|
| |teaching other faculty members how to be better online teachers and how to use the live conferencing technology |
| |available to the faculty and students. Live sessions have been proven to add depth and insight into online courses. |
| | |
| |Overall, I will continue to work closely with students to help them learn but more importantly to help them think |
| |critically like business/technology leaders. My focus on helping them “better manage the process of innovation” has met|
| |with great excitement as a new core competency for them - the students! |
|When Assessed: |Spring 2011 |
|Remedial Action |I am aiming for a more comprehensive course challenging students to think strategically and in more depth. I am also |
| |more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic course. The idea of gaining a competitive |
| |advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the final project is completed they all seem to|
| |understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a firm gain a competitive advantage. The |
| |student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage to process of innovation. My opinion |
| |is that the course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work than previous courses I have taught.|
| |I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges in gaining a competitive advantage. I |
| |will continue to look for more relevant and recent case studies and reference articles to ensure a balance of |
| |operational and academic skill sets. |
| |I have added two current Case studies that have been very well received. Apple 2010 and Threadless Inc. Both are |
| |Harvard cases. The Threadless, Inc. case is a CD ROM case that requires the student to listen the managers of the |
| |company (a “T” shirt company) work thru their unique business model of network/community based product development. |
| |This is a very exciting case with young managers running a business without internal R&D. This shows the power of the |
| |internet to accomplish traditional functions without internal resources for product design and development. |
| |This semester also so three students that performed quite poorly in that they did not seem to come prepared to class |
| |and just barely passed the course. I met with all of them personally to explain the consequences of poor preparation |
| |and asked if I could help. Unfortunately, they were not willing to do the work required to earn more than a C or B-. |
| |This was a most unusual situation for me personally and not typical. My final quiz was a great test of their lack of |
| |reading and engagement and their grades on the quiz reflected this quite accurately. |
| | |
| |Specific Steps Taken |
| |Students present summary of key articles on technology strategy and competitive advantage |
| |Team Member Contribution Rating forms required for each team case and for the final project to ensure each student is |
| |given the appropriate grade for the team cases based on actual individual contributions to the team effort. |
| |The final exam also ensures I grade each students strategic knowledge accurately |
| |Updated service innovation and new product development HBR articles as noted above |
| |Private meetings before class with ESL students to work with them in a more private setting to allow them to |
| |communicate more freely. |
| |Addition of 2 new high energy and relevant cases that engage more. |
|Outcome from previous |The course continues to each semester to focus on more critical evaluation and grading of the students to reinforce |
|assessment: |the concepts of how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage to satisfy its business strategy. I continue to |
| |have much higher expectations of the class and of the final project which has proven to be an effective Capstone |
| |project. Student’s five year technology and innovation management strategy final case projects have grown in |
| |sophistication, depth and scope. The students leave my class with a better understanding of how to manage the process |
| |of innovation and how to use technology to add value to the customer and company and how to gain a competitive |
| |advantage. The course has gained a reputation of being an above average amount of work but “worth it.” The increase of |
| |foreign students has added challenges that have been dealt with in creative ways ensuring the work is understood and |
| |they are given a non threatening environment to learn in. |
|When Assessed: |Fall 2009 |
|Remedial Action |My plan has accomplished what I had aimed for, namely a more comprehensive course challenging students to think |
| |strategically and in more depth. I am also more aware of what I need to continue to focus on in teaching a strategic |
| |course. The idea of gaining a competitive advantage is not something many engineering students easily grasp. Once the |
| |final project is completed they all seem to understand the role of technology in the firm and how technology can help a|
| |firm gain a competitive advantage. The student teams all leave with a much better understanding of how to better manage|
| |to process of innovation. My opinion is that the course is more challenging, strategic in nature and requires more work|
| |than previous courses I have taught. I will continue to challenge the students and emphasize the strategic challenges |
| |in gaining a competitive advantage. I will continue to look for more relevant and recent case studies and reference |
| |articles to ensure a balance of operational and academic skill sets. |
| |Specific Steps Taken |
| |Students present summary of key articles on technology strategy and competitive advantage |
| |Team Member Contribution Rating forms required for each team case and for the final project to ensure each student is |
| |given the appropriate grade for the team cases based on actual individual contributions to the team effort. |
| |The final exam also ensures I grade each students strategic knowledge accurately |
| |Updated service innovation and new product development HBR articles |
|Outcome from previous |The course is evolving each semester to focus on more critical evaluation and grading of the students to reinforce the |
|assessment: |concepts of how a firm uses technology for competitive advantage to satisfy its business strategy. I have much higher |
| |expectations of the class and of the final project which has proven to be an effective Capstone project. I have |
| |developed tools to ensure proper grading of team member contributions. Student’s five year technology and innovation |
| |management strategy final case projects have grown in sophistication, depth and scope. The students leave my class |
| |with a better understanding of how to manage the process of innovation and how to use technology to add value to the |
| |customer and company and how to gain a competitive advantage. |
|When Assessed: |Fall 2007 |
|Remedial Action |While the results are encouraging overall I would like to see even more students accomplish an “exceeds expectations.” |
| |The main area that I will improve and focus on is the understanding of technology management theory. I can improve this|
| |in my course by emphasizing and more detailed discussion on the technology management articles dealing with theory. |
| |More Christensen, Hamel and Moore discussion in class will help me ensure that the class understands that while the |
| |practical application of theory is important, the in depth understanding of the theory is also key to allowing a more |
| |sophisticated comprehension and interpretation of technology management theory as it applies to innovation management. |
| |I plan to ask for student volunteers for each of the key theory articles and have them present all of them to the class|
| |for discussion along with critique focused on how this theory can be applied as well. This will allow me to understand |
| |the level of comprehension accomplished. |
APPENDIX-A: Course Appendices
(Michael Frank – MGT671 – 2019 Spring)
APPENDIX A1: Emerging Technologies Spreadsheet
Emerging Technology Spreadsheet Sources
I utilize three primary sources to develop a list of what are considered “emerging technologies” today.
I also teach my students about the Gartner Hype Cycle so they can appreciate that emerging technologies flourish over a period of time, with varying levels of acceptance, successes and failures so it is difficult to generalize what is emerging versus what is in common use.
The primary sources I utilize each time I prepare the matrix are:
1) The Gartner Hype cycle (53 entries are included in my 2018 list)
2) Frost & Sullivan -Global Top 50 technologies list each year (146 included in my 2018 list – combined from several of their yearly reports)
3) McKinsey Global Institute’s Disruptive-Technologies list (30 entries are including in my 2018 list)
4) Personal additions – I added 7 technologies which I felt were missed
As one would expect, there is overlap between the various sources but the total number of technologies in the list is currently 230. During the 2018 semester, students were introduced to at least 117 of the technologies through formal lectures, Small Group technology presentations, “Heard It On the Grapevine” articles and Final Group presentations.
Although they do not have in-depth knowledge of the 117 technologies, students are aware of the names of the technologies, some examples of the use and potential of some of the technologies and appreciation to how they fit in the applications they and their companies may use today and potential create in the future. Many of the students are not in IT areas but will feel empowered to discuss and advocate for their ideas and give better direction to IT management and staff they utilize in their daily business life.
Emerging Technology Spreadsheet List (Current Version 2019)
Page 1 of 5
[pic]
Emerging Technology Spreadsheet List (Current Version 2019)
Page 2 of 5
[pic]
Emerging Technology Spreadsheet List (Current Version 2019)
Page 3 of 5
[pic] [pic]
Emerging Technology Spreadsheet List (Current Version 2019)
Page 4 of 5
[pic]
Emerging Technology Spreadsheet List (Current Version 2019)
Page 5 of 5
APPENDIX A2: Weekly “Heard it on the Grapevine” Articles
Description:
Throughout the course, every week, each student must read and search the internet and print media for new technological announcement and examples of companies reaching significant success in utilizing such technologies. They must provide one example article every week and include a hyperlink to the article as well as a multi-media (ex. video) showing the use of the technology.
Individual Submissions: Nine to 12 Submissions are provided through the semester, starting around week #3 and ending the week before students present their final presentation.
Elements of submission:
Students provide their weekly submittal in the form of a single row spreadsheet with the following columns:
1. Last Name,
2. First Name
3. Date of Next Class
4. Hyperlink to Article
5. Date of Article
6. What is the technology? (explained in the student’s own words – not copied and pasted)
7. Why is interesting to you?
8. Why is it newsworthy at this specific point in time (ex. major technology advance, press release,
research project conducted, major advantage gained by use of technology, uses/needs for this
technology, etc.)
9. What is your impression of the technology - is it likely to succeed? How many years do you think it
will before it can be rolled out to the general market?
10. What other technologies need to be in place or would benefit from being integrated with the
technology mentioned in the news article.
11. Will this technology/product/service make money?
12. Please find a YouTube or other video link which can be brought up during class. Please provide the
URL. If the original article does not have a video, use Google to find related media –
most of the time there is some direct media provided by the company or in an interview.
Students submit their weekly articles each week and are reviewed by the instructor. If time allows, a few of the week’s articles are selected and the student who submitted the article shares their perspectives with the rest of the class and the original article and video/multi-media material is shown to the class.
Composite of Individual Submissions:
All the weekly submissions are combined into a single spreadsheet and shared with the class, so they can see the how many transformative emerging technologies are being introduced and how many companies are utilizing them differently to meet varying business use cases.
At the end of the course students have a composite list of hundreds of articles.
For example, a class of 25 students offering 12 articles during the semester provides a trove of 300 articles.
Since the spreadsheet is searchable and sortable, students can also appreciate the following:
1. There are other students who are interested in the same topics or technologies as they are
2. Fellow students may cite the same article but have very different viewpoints on the viability of the
technology and its potential uses
3. See all of the varied sources students used to develop their submissions. These include various general publications, specific industry trade sites (ex. Fierce Pharma, BankInfoSecurity), more established publications (ex. NY Times, CIO magazine, Forbes, Fortune), Innovation oriented sites (ex. Wired, FastCompany) or other sites specific to their own interests and hobbies.
APPENDIX A3: MGT671 – Hyperlink Spreadsheet
Description:
In my welcome letter to each class, I attach an Excel spreadsheet with built-in hyperlinks do direct the user automatically to selected external website. The full matrix includes many of the information sources I consider valuable and necessary to remain current on scientific research, emerging technologies, business use of technologies, technology research organizations and standards groups such as NIST, ISO, IEEE.
Students can simply utilize this spreadsheet by clicking on each logo to find articles for their “Heard It On The Grapevine” submissions each week.
A screen shot of the spreadsheet can be seen in the following page:
APPENDIX A3: MGT671 – Hyperlink Spreadsheet (Continued)
Screen Shot of the Spreadsheet (Part A)
APPENDIX A3: MGT671 – Hyperlink Spreadsheet (Continued)
Screen Shot of the Spreadsheet (Part B)
[pic]
APPENDIX A3: MGT671 – Hyperlink Spreadsheet (continued)
List of Sources By Category
APPENDIX A4: Small group – Emerging Technologies Presentation
Description:
Small Group Presentation on A Specific Emerging Technology: Each student is part of a team which prepares at 20-30 minute presentation on a specific emerging technology (ex. 3D Bioprinting, Micro GPS/Indoor Positioning Systems, Augmented/Virtual reality, Speech-to-Speech Translation, Gamification, Home Health Monitoring, Energy Storage, Swarm Robotics).
Groups communicate, in business terms what the technology is, where it lies in the Gartner Hype Cycle, the size of the industry and growth opportunities, key companies/players in the industry and cite/show videos/examples of successful deployment of their specific technology.
Presentations are for about 20-30 minutes long and are typically around X pages long.
Sample List of Topics Presented in MGT671 – Spring 2019
[pic]
APPENDIX A5: Large group Final Project Business Plan Presentation
Description:
Final Group Business Plan Project: Project teams were tasked with developing a new product or service which (1) does not presently exist or (2) develop a change to an existing product or service which fundamental transforms the core product/service. Project teams must incorporate at least 1 emerging technology into their solution – these come from the list of emerging technologies I shared with students at the beginning of the semester as well as the emerging technologies students and I presented during the semester. Student must present to the class as if they were presenting to financial backers. These presentations, 50-100 pages long, must detail all aspects of the management team’s business and technology strategy.
Ideation: The first step of developing a list of potential ideas was done individually as a group. Each student was required to come up with 2 ideas. These were discussed by all team members and then collated into a master team list which is presented to me for consideration. Over one or more telephone conference calls, each team and I review and consider each idea in the master list (of 10-16 ideas). Through 1-2 conference calls with student groups, they trim down their list to a potential list of 2-3 ideas.
The size and complexity of each product/service idea is considered as well as the business opportunity, short term and long term of the product/service is considered in this at this point. Ideas need to be sized correctly. Successful final projects are large enough to divide and assign the considerable work to each team member. Ideas like “changing the entire election system” or “developing a new, national health record” are considered to be too big in scope for the purposes of the final project. Ideas to simply developing an app with no external aspects such as big data, sensors or a crowdsourcing element would be considered too small.
Teamwork, Consensus Building, Resolution: Once the list is trimmed to 2-3 ideas, the students are requested to confer among themselves and select the project they are most excited about and wish to select as their final project product/service. The student group members need to advocate for their favorite ideas and negotiate which single project they wish to go forward with. Students send an email to me with their intentions to proceed with a particular idea and I confirm this is the idea the team will present at the end of the course.
Research, Preparation, Presentation: Once given the go-ahead, the students need to develop their business plan/pitch documents and assign which team members will research, develop and prepare slides on the various components – strategic vision, elevator pitch, market assessment, understanding the capabilities/limitations and viability of all of the component technologies, use cases and process/cost/functionality improvements offered by the this product or service, financial analysis, marketing/advertising plan, development and implementation phases from prototyping, development and rollout. I also help guide them to existing research, sources of competitive information and related technologies they should review and consider for their product/service.
At a minimum, the final presentation covers the following elements:
1. Team member names and the proposed name of their product/service.
2. A “30-60 second elevator pitch”
3. Problem Statement and Problem scenario
4. Solution statement and solution scenario
5. Sequence diagrams and structure diagrams for the current state and
the future product/service solution
6. High level explanation of two possible alternate solutions
7. Explanation of the technological aspects of the product/service included a diagram explaining the IT architecture required to support the product/service.
8. Cost/revenue analysis related to the development, deployment and benefits/revenues to be derived from the service/product. The economic value of the product/service from the customer’s perspective are also considered.
9. Marketing Plan including an assessment of the 4 P’s of Marketing Mix
10. Quantitative and qualitative metrics of success for all key stakeholders
11. Financial analysis
12. Product/service road map including phasing of roll-out, financial requirements
Additional Material:
Additional materials can be provided and have historically been included presentations:
a. Statements of Objectives
b. Graphics
c. 3rd Party Research (Gartner, Forrester, Industry analyses, IDC)
d. Simulations/Mockups
e. Photos/Videos/Other Multimedia
f. Skits which help show the audience why the product/service is needed
g. Storyboarding
h. Other analytic methods might include a:
* Market Value Map
* Customer Journey and Experience Mapping
* Side by Side Feature Comparison to Competitors’ Products/Services
* Scenario Analysis
* Use Case listings
* Value Chain Analysis
* Prototyping
* Build-vs-Buy Analysis
* Future customer surveys
* Crowdfunding approaches
* Outline of Exit Strategies
* Assessments of Strategic Alliances/Joint Ventures
* Methods of protecting/monetizing corporate Intellectual Property
For a team of 6-8 students, final projects presentations are typically 60-100 pages in length. Each team member is required to present a portion of the presentation.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- seton institute of reconstructive surgery
- thaddeus stevens college of technology
- michigan institute of real estate classes
- sports institute of tucson
- institute of physics iop
- institute of physics uk
- american institute of physics
- american institute of physics citation
- american institute of physics inc
- chicago institute of plastic surgery
- indian institute of public health
- nigerian institute of international affairs