View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Teaching Supply Chain Management Complexities: A SCOR Model Based Classroom Simulation

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Teaching Supply Chain Management Complexities: A SCOR Model Based Classroom Simulation
Language: English
Authors: Webb, G. Scott, Thomas, Stephanie P., Liao-Troth, Sara
Source: Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education. Jul 2014 12(3):181-198.
Availability: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2014
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Supply and Demand, Information Management, Business Administration Education, Simulation, Learning Activities, Learner Engagement, College Students, Experiential Learning, Holistic Approach
DOI: 10.1111/dsji.12038
ISSN: 1540-4595
Abstract: The SCOR (Supply Chain Operations Reference) Model Supply Chain Classroom Simulation is an in-class experiential learning activity that helps students develop a holistic understanding of the processes and challenges of supply chain management. The simulation has broader learning objectives than other supply chain related activities such as the Beer Game. Competing supply chains work to produce and sell two products, each experiencing differential demand. Seasonal demand, time delays, quality defects, and disruptions offer complexities that are part of actual supply chain management. The behavioral dynamics of collaboration between various functional nodes is illustrated through students' interactions as they try to achieve their role's objectives. Through their decisions and actions, students develop a practical understanding of the processes and complexities of supply chain management. The classroom simulation actively engages students, and has been used successfully in multiple courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels at multiple universities and by a major corporation during a manager training session. Assessments indicate that the simulation is an effective experiential learning activity. While it offers learning outcome flexibility, common debrief themes are SCOR model processes, supply chain relationships, information flow, seasonal demand, quality defects, reverse logistics, and supply chain disruptions.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2014
Accession Number: EJ1033676
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEGK_eUxjHutVu6NZEDTRnJAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDERanKIFV127nTLdIgIBEICBmh3Vg0d9_dyMxsxjuv1RkSBG1duls5yV-JMJk5ZEShsA_e9sY872Wh7lR5z9FRq8SATQ0HQBhQ50d_k3vuPFKSbuRJkfNWeerYWIsmqbe_mn9aTE5XUCLvAsV6b5LFPAvg9mgarTIyu6yL0QB0vfJjeDltVaHSQxvVB3n8m5mQyEcdThX2-rvoAYYcCTeALpK1kPdN0OMCJmZe4=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0097177068;q1n01jul.14;2018Jul12.08:25;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0097177068-1">Teaching Supply Chain Management Complexities: A SCOR Model Based Classroom Simulation. </title> <p>The SCOR (Supply Chain Operations Reference) Model Supply Chain Classroom Simulation is an in‐class experiential learning activity that helps students develop a holistic understanding of the processes and challenges of supply chain management. The simulation has broader learning objectives than other supply chain related activities such as the Beer Game. Competing supply chains work to produce and sell two products, each experiencing differential demand. Seasonal demand, time delays, quality defects, and disruptions offer complexities that are part of actual supply chain management. The behavioral dynamics of collaboration between various functional nodes is illustrated through students’ interactions as they try to achieve their role's objectives. Through their decisions and actions, students develop a practical understanding of the processes and complexities of supply chain management. The classroom simulation actively engages students, and has been used successfully in multiple courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels at multiple universities and by a major corporation during a manager training session. Assessments indicate that the simulation is an effective experiential learning activity. While it offers learning outcome flexibility, common debrief themes are SCOR model processes, supply chain relationships, information flow, seasonal demand, quality defects, reverse logistics, and supply chain disruptions.</p> <p>Experiential Learning; Games and Simulations; Operations Management; and Supply Chain Management</p> <p>Teaching complex SCM themes such as interdependencies between supply chain partners and the need for collaboration is challenging given that traditional undergraduate students often have limited practical work experience and thus have difficulty translating conceptual knowledge into a concrete plan of action (Feger & Thomas, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>] ). Even if students have work experience, they may still not fully understand how an individual firm's actions affect the performance of the entire supply chain.</p> <p>Within the classroom, many experiential‐learning exercises have been developed to help students understand concepts and decision making within a supply chain context (e.g., Gumus & Love, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref2">6</reflink>] ; Wu & Choi, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref3">12</reflink>] ). Of note, the popular Beer Game (Forrester, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>] ) illustrates how the bullwhip effect arises in a serial supply chain due to a lack of coordination and systemic thinking. While these simulations are effective at accomplishing their objectives, they each focus on individual aspects of supply chain management such as relational dynamics (e.g., Wu & Choi, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref5">12</reflink>] ) or sourcing (e.g., Gumus & Love, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref6">6</reflink>] ), and may not address the holistic complexity of supply chain management.</p> <p>This article presents the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) Model Supply Chain Classroom Simulation, a classroom activity in which students role‐play a variety of supply chain nodes in order to produce and sell one of two products to end consumers. The simulation, which holistically illustrates supply chain management processes and challenges, can be run in a typical class session (45 to 75 minutes). It is based on the SCOR Model, a cross‐functional supply chain management framework developed in 1996 by the Supply Chain Council for integrated supply chain management (Stewart, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref7">10</reflink>] ), and that is widely used by practitioners to guide supply chain management within firms (Supply Chain Council, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref8">11</reflink>] ). Many companies, such as Intel, General Electric, DuPont, and IBM have adopted the SCOR model, which makes it a relevant and practical model to teach to students (Zhou, Benton, Schilling, & Milligan, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref9">13</reflink>] ). The simulation also involves product selection and development, pricing, and quality decisions, all of which highlight the interconnected nature of the SCOR model's five main processes. Success in buyer‐supplier negotiations also plays a significant part in student performance, as each node must adopt both a buying and selling mentality as it interacts with other nodes up and down the supply chain. In addition, students are exposed to complications arising from the need for transportation, sourcing, and reverse logistics. Lastly, the negative impact of supply chain disruptions (in the form of tax audits or raw material shortages) gives students an informed perspective on how events in one supply chain node can affect multiple firms and end consumers.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-2">THE SCOR MODEL BACKGROUND</hd> <p>The SCOR Model has been identified as a key element which should be included in supply chain management curricula in order to prepare students for successful careers in the field (Grandzol & Grandzol, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref10">5</reflink>] ). Five main management processes make up the SCOR model: Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, Return (Enable was added in 2012). The model is used as a strategic planning tool to simplify the complexities of supply chain management by bringing order to the diverse activities that make up the supply chain, and provides common terminology, standard process descriptions, and performance metric categories (Coyle, Langley, Novack, & Gibson, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref11">2</reflink>] ; Lockamy & McCormack, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref12">9</reflink>] ; Stewart, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref13">10</reflink>] ). Within our courses, we introduce the processes of the SCOR model during this simulation. Later in the semester, we teach the SCOR performance measurement categories and link back to processes covered in this simulation.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-3">OVERVIEW OF THE SCOR MODEL SUPPLY CHAIN CLASSROOM SIMULATION</hd> <p>The purpose of the SCOR Model Supply Chain Classroom Simulation is to offer students an opportunity to simulate the supply chain activities of multiple competing firms within an industry, and increase their understanding of the interconnected nature of organizations in supply chains. Learning objectives for the SCOR Model Supply Chain Game are to:</p> <p>Understand the SCOR Model as a framework for supply chain management,</p> <p>Identify the nodes, processes, and challenges of supply chain management, and</p> <p>Understand the interdependencies of supply chain relationships and the importance of the end consumer in the success of all upstream supply chain nodes.</p> <p>The simulation can be used with various class sizes. The number of students who role‐play each node is flexible and can be increased or decreased based on class size. We have run the exercise with a minimum class size of 15–25 students using two supply chains. However, classes of 100–150 can be accommodated by adding competing supply chains and/or students to each node. The activity is appropriate for strategically focused classes (such as a capstone course) that seek to illustrate the interdependencies and complexity of managing supply chains. We have also used the simulation in introductory classes for supply chain and non‐supply chain majors to illustrate the processes that must occur from raw material sourcing to the end consumer product purchase.</p> <p>In the exercise, supply chains compete to efficiently and effectively produce and sell one of two different products. Each supply chain consists of three functional nodes (Parts Supplier, Manufacturer, and Distributor) that are linked by financial constraints, information, and material flows with Third Party Logistics Providers (3PL), Tax Collectors, Retailers, End Consumers, and Raw Materials Suppliers. We often use the SCOR model's terminology (such as Supplier's Supplier and Customer's Customer), but instructors may use names that are consistent with their own classroom teaching. In carrying out the functions of their assigned node, each group of students must understand issues relating to the SCOR model's 5 main processes: plan, source, make, deliver, return. Students plan by choosing product, inventory, distribution, and customer relationship management strategies as well as setting prices (PLAN). They understand where to source and how to order parts or products, how production of goods is scheduled and ultimately manufactured (SOURCE, MAKE). Students also face logistical issues in the manufacture and delivery of goods (DELIVER). Additional supply chain complexities in the form of quality defects, the resulting product returns, and tax collector audits illustrate difficulties in reverse logistics (RETURN). Differential demand for each of the two products produced also contributes to complexity in managing the supply chain, and illustrates the importance of strategic planning. Finally, each node must determine how to work with other nodes in the face of competing incentives. Figure [NaN] illustrates a sample classroom setup of the nodes and flows of this exercise for 28 students.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-4">IMPLEMENTATION</hd> <hd id="AN0097177068-5">Materials Needed</hd> <p>Assortment of large and colorful construction blocks (e.g., Mega Bloks), with a minimum of three colors to allow for the assembly of two separate products. A total of approximately 400 pieces will be sufficient for classroom use. Mark the inside bottom of approximately 10% of the blocks with a permanent marker to indicate quality defects. Assemble a sample of each of the two products (Eagles and Turkeys) to show the students. An Eagle is composed of one blue and two other color blocks (not red, usually green and/or yellow). A Turkey is composed of one red and two other color blocks (not blue, usually green and/or yellow). We often name the premium product after the university mascot and name the low‐end product after a rival mascot.</p> <p>Play money in denominations of $1, $5, $10, $20, and $100.</p> <p>Game time clock. We utilize an online game clock projected on the classroom screen.</p> <p>Photocopies of demand schedules and Rules and Constraints for each functional node (see [NaN] ).</p> <p>Name tents for each stationary functional node to set around the room (Raw Materials Supplier, Parts Supplier, Manufacturer, Distributor, or the terminology best suited for your course). This helps students know who has been assigned to each node. Name tag labels can also be used to identify students in roles such as Tax Collector(s), 3PLs, Retailers, and End Consumers that move about during the game instead of staying in one location.</p> <p>For every 30–40 students, it may be helpful to have an extra person to assist with running the simulation.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref14">1</reflink>]</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-6">Running the SCOR Model Supply Chain Game</hd> <p>Step 1: Set‐up. Assign each student to a node within a supply chain (recommended numbers for each node are provided in the [NaN] ). At a minimum, the game requires two supply chains and various other functional nodes to be populated. As class size increases, additional supply chains can be added. For example, we have run this activity with five competing supply chains. This also adds another layer of complexity and competition. Alternatively, additional students can be added to the minimum for each supply chain node. Each supply chain should develop a name for identification purposes and to foster friendly competition. A handout that details the specific duties and constraints of each functional node should be provided to the students (see [NaN] ). This information is not initially shared.</p> <p>Step 2: Game Overview. Review the objectives and rules of the game with the class. Students are to simulate a supply chain by sourcing, producing, transporting, selling, and returning one of two products (one is a premium product worth more to the End Consumers in terms of points). Additionally, each node has specific objectives, rules, and information relevant to their role (refer them to their individual rules sheets). With regard to the flow of information, all supply chain nodes are allowed and encouraged to communicate freely. They must also make strategic decisions, for example, each supply chain should decide whether to produce Eagles or Turkeys prior to the start of the game. Encourage the supply chain teams (Parts Supplier + Manufacturer + Distributor) to work together to develop a strategy before the start of the game. Students in the supply chain teams often pool their financial resources at the beginning of the game. It is sometimes helpful for the instructor to discuss the rules and constraints separately with each individual node. It is important to work with the supply chains to get the simulation started, as the decision to compete with a premium versus commodity product is an important one. Discussion with Retailers and End Consumers can take place later as the purchase, production, and flow of the Eagles and Turkeys through the supply chain takes time.</p> <p>Step 3: Getting Started. To begin play, give each functional node the appropriate amount of money (see [NaN] ). Game timelines (see [NaN] ) with demand information should also be given to End Consumers and Raw Materials Suppliers. This information dictates when Eagles rather than Turkeys are accepted by the Raw Materials Suppliers, thus simulating real‐world variance in demand for each product. Raw Materials Suppliers are given all the block component parts. Manufacturers are given an initial supply of green/yellow blocks (we usually give each supply chain 20 blocks to start). This simplifies the initial production process as each supply chain need only source red or blue blocks depending on their choice of product to produce. Reiterate the differences between Eagles (blue) and Turkeys (red) to the class, and show the product samples that you assembled. Remind the class that red and blue parts are not compatible, and cannot be stored, manufactured, or shipped together. As a result, supply chains must decide whether to make either Eagles or Turkeys, but they are not allowed to produce both at the same time.</p> <p>Step 4: Game Play. Project a time clock (countdown) onto a screen in the classroom and begin the simulation. Play is often slow in the beginning as students get familiar with their roles and learn how each of nodes performs their role. During the game, the supply chains decide which products to make (Eagles or Turkeys), and sell that product to Retailers. Retailers in turn sell to End Consumers. The 3PLs move ordered parts and products between the various nodes of the supply chain. There are no set prices; each node determines its own price and level of demand (usually constrained by finances). Supply chains (Parts Suppliers + Manufacturers + Distributors) negotiate with Retailers. They cannot sell directly to End Consumers. Some students will try to negotiate exclusive deals and work to develop a strategic relationship. Others will “wheel and deal,” which often negatively affects the supply chain partners they seek to do business with. The seasonal nature of demand is provided in a timeline (see [NaN] ). The timeline can be adjusted to fit the available class time. The only students who know the demand patterns are the End Consumers and Raw Materials Suppliers. It is interesting to observe when information about the seasonal nature of Eagles reaches the supply chain. Many supply chains elect to make the premium product only to find that Retailers or End Consumers will not purchase them due to the demand schedule.</p> <p>The last 10–15 minutes of the simulation are usually fast‐paced and frantic as competition between the different roles increases. The Tax Collector will conduct audits on the supply chains at various times throughout the game. This disrupts the flow of product and shows students that a smooth flow of goods is challenging and often impacted by factors beyond their control. End Consumers turn in Eagles or Turkeys that they purchase to the Raw Materials supplier, who will check their products for quality defects and award points. End Consumers can choose to turn in a defective product for negative points or to try to return the product to the Retailer they purchased from. We do not offer much guidance regarding the return process (except that Raw Materials Suppliers are instructed to accept returns in the rules sheet), and let students come up with ideas about to handle the returns process. This often becomes an important part of buyer‐supplier negotiations.</p> <p>Step 5: Determining Winners. The game is completed after 45 minutes of game play, but the time can be adjusted for shorter class periods. Ask each group/node to add up the dollars or points they earned. Announce winners for each supply chain (Parts Supplier + Manufacturer + Distributor), 3PL, Retailer, End Consumer, and Tax Collector (if more than one) based on final revenue or points earned (see Table [NaN] ). We often provide candy bars (Pay Days) as a reward for the winners.</p> <p>Step 6: Debrief. Debriefing students’ experiences and strategies is a key piece of this exercise (see Table [NaN] ). Try to leave at least 10 minutes at the end of the game for the debrief discussion.</p> <p>SCOR model supply chain simulation roles and goals</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><th>Player/Node</th><th align="center">Incentive</th><th align="center">How Do They Win?</th></tr><tr><td>Parts Supplier, Manufacturer, Distributor</td><td>Profit</td><td>Make more profit than competing supply chains</td></tr><tr><td>3PL (Transportation)</td><td>Revenue</td><td>Make more money than competing 3PLs</td></tr><tr><td>Tax Collector</td><td>Revenue</td><td>Make more money than competing Tax Collectors</td></tr><tr><td>Retailer</td><td>Profit</td><td>Make more profit than competing Retailers</td></tr><tr><td>End Consumer</td><td>Points</td><td>Collect more points than other End Consumers: 5 points awarded for each Eagle, 2 points for each Turkey, –10 points for each defective product turned in</td></tr><tr><td>Raw Materials Supplier</td><td>NA</td><td>Keep the game flowing by providing raw materials to Part Suppliers and accepting finished goods from End Consumers that are broken down and made available for Parts Suppliers to purchase; tally points to determine the winning End Consumer</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Debrief questions</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><th>Suggested Discussion Points</th></tr><tr><td>SCOR Processes</td></tr><tr><td>• Plan – How did the supply chains determine which product to make and how much to purchase?</td></tr><tr><td>• Source – Were there any challenges determining where to source products? How did Retailers and End Consumers determine who they would purchase products from?</td></tr><tr><td>• Make – What were some of the rules in terms of producing the products? Was production always smooth?</td></tr><tr><td>• Deliver – How would the supply chain describe the customer service of the 3PL(s)? Was delivery instantaneous once an order was placed?</td></tr><tr><td>• Return – Was there a need for a return process? Why?</td></tr><tr><td>Supply Chain Relationships</td></tr><tr><td>• What types of relationships were developed over the course of the simulation?</td></tr><tr><td>• What strategies did you employ regarding your supply chain relationships?</td></tr><tr><td>• Did you have positive or negative experiences dealing with other members of the supply chain?</td></tr><tr><td>Information Flow</td></tr><tr><td>• What constrained your information flow?</td></tr><tr><td>• What key information would have helped your node the most?</td></tr><tr><td>Demand</td></tr><tr><td>• What was the demand for Eagles?</td></tr><tr><td>• How was the initial product mix between Eagles and Turkeys different from the ending product mix?</td></tr><tr><td>• Why does knowing or having an idea of the demand type help supply chain profitability?</td></tr><tr><td>Quality and Reverse Logistics</td></tr><tr><td>• What were considered quality defects?</td></tr><tr><td>• What unforeseen problems did the defects cause within the supply chain?</td></tr><tr><td>• What percentage of the blocks do you think had quality defects?</td></tr><tr><td>• Why do a relatively small number of defects cause the perception of big problems?</td></tr><tr><td>Competing Supply Chain Incentives</td></tr><tr><td>• What sort of partner was the 3PL?</td></tr><tr><td>• How could the 3PL make more money?</td></tr><tr><td>• How could the supply chain have aligned incentives to make the 3PL more cost effective?</td></tr><tr><td>• How did the Raw Materials Supplier help or hurt your supply chains?</td></tr><tr><td>Supply Chain Disruptions</td></tr><tr><td>• How did carrying costs (taxes) motivate your inventory policy?</td></tr><tr><td>• What other penalties hurt the supply chain besides the actual taxes?</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0097177068-7">DEBRIEF</hd> <p>A key component of this activity is the post‐exercise discussion with students. Suggested questions are categorized into six major themes that routinely manifest during the exercise (Table [NaN] ).</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-8">SCOR Processes</hd> <p>During the class period prior to running the simulation, we introduce the SCOR model processes (Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, and Return). After the simulation, students are encouraged to discuss how each process is manifested throughout different supply chain nodes. This discussion helps ensure that students have mastered Learning Objective 1. For the Plan process, we initiate a discussion on how supply chains initially decide which products to produce. For the source process, we ask a Retailer to discuss which supply chain(s) they purchased from and why. For the make process, we ask students to comment on the challenges of maintaining a constant flow through the manufacturing process. For the deliver process, we elicit discussion from the 3PLs as they usually offer lively insights about the pickup and delivery of products, and the frustration experienced by different nodes with the time it takes for delivery. For the return process, we highlight how challenging and time consuming the return process is. The remaining debrief themes help assess the mastery of Learning Objectives 2 and 3.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-9">Supply Chain Relationships</hd> <p>Inter‐organizational relationships are an important part of supply chain management, but without actual experience, many students do not grasp the complex nature of many supply chain relationships. During the debrief it is interesting to ask students about the types of strategies they used in forming supply chain relationships. Some students see the process as strictly business and use a transactional “wheeling and dealing” negotiation approach. Others will try to create strong, exclusive relationships (i.e., having a “go‐to” supply chain). Some students will try to work with students that they may have worked with in other classes (i.e., “I trusted them because I've worked on projects with them in other classes”). Invariably, some students will break their supply chain partner's trust and go back on their word. This will often result in emotional responses that carry over during the remainder of the semester.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-10">Information Flow</hd> <p>Although the seasonal demand schedule for Eagles is known initially by End Consumers and Raw Materials Suppliers, most do not think to share this information with Retailers or supply chains. Even if they do share with the Retailer, the information will often stop at that node and not move upstream to the supply chains. Students who play this game a second time, if placed in the role of an End Consumer, will demand to buy only Turkeys, and can change the overall game to one of supply chains competing on efficiency and price.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-11">Demand</hd> <p>Supply chains universally attempt to produce Eagles (the premium product) at first and do not anticipate the difficulties caused by its seasonal demand (at some point, no one will buy Eagles). If the supply chains are agile, they will switch over to producing Turkeys in the latter half of the exercise. However, information about customer needs and seasonality is often not shared with other members of the supply chain, which presents an opportunity to highlight the importance of information sharing and contact with customers. Students also tend to ignore obvious competitive information—the supply chains tend to make decisions on what to produce without observing the competing supply chain's activities. We often observe that the students’ supply chains end up producing the same product at the same time. Tradeoffs in competing based on product differentiation versus price can be highlighted.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-12">Quality and Reverse Logistics</hd> <p>Students often remember the difficulties in dealing with defects in parts, and will guess that the number of defects is much higher than the actual 10%. As the Raw Materials Suppliers are the only node given instructions regarding defects and returns, students have to negotiate and come up with their own ideas about how to cope. Most End Consumers try to return defective products back through the supply chain rather than incur negative points. This action sends a ripple effect through the supply chain relationships (students have finally figured out their role and strategies, and returning parts is a hassle). If returns are refused, the long‐term relationship tends to be threatened and results in decisions not to do business again. Defective parts show the importance of planning for return flows, otherwise a disproportionate amount of attention will be spent on a small percentage of the total flow. They also present the opportunity to discuss supply chain relationships and how disruptions in the supply chain can strengthen or weaken those relationships depending on how they are handled.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-13">Competing Supply Chain Incentives</hd> <p>Students who play the role of 3PLs are kept busy by the supply chain nodes. One way to vary the game is to add a third 3PL. This creates a more competitive environment for the 3PLs. Some 3PLs will try to negotiate for exclusivity with one supply chain. Depending on how busy the 3PL is, the supply chain nodes may sit idle waiting for the 3PL to move their parts or products, providing a good opportunity to discuss the impact of idle functions on the total supply chain. Some nodes elect to hold inventory in order to assemble a full truckload before transporting parts or products. This may optimize their profit but may also cause a delay or disruption in product flow for the rest of the supply chain.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-14">Supply Chain Disruptions</hd> <p>Students dislike the Tax Collector not because of the tax, but because audits stop the product flow in their supply chains. The presence of the Tax Collector highlights the impact that each individual has on the entire supply chain. There are also times during the simulation that Raw Materials Suppliers may run out of blocks. The simulation should continue, and eventually End Consumers will turn in products to the Raw Materials Suppliers that can then be sold to Parts Suppliers. However, this is an opportunity to highlight supply chain disruptions like raw materials shortages, natural disasters, or labor strikes that can interrupt the flow of products within the supply chain.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-15">SIMULATION EFFECTIVENESS</hd> <p>This SCOR Model Supply Chain Classroom Simulation has been incorporated in a variety of undergraduate and graduate level classes in operations management, supply chain management, and logistics at multiple universities in the United States. To date, over 3,000 U.S. and international students have participated in the simulation. Table [NaN] presents the results of pre‐ and post‐exercise surveys given to 163 undergraduate logistics students at a large university in the Southeast of the United States. An ANOVA comparison of students’ responses shows significant differences in their perceptions of having a “big picture” understanding of how supply chain management works (Q1: F = 118.82, p =.000), as well as describing the basic problems in managing a supply chain (Q2: F = 151.47, p =.000). In addition, students report agreement with positive statements regarding their experience with the simulations.</p> <p>Evidence of effectiveness</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><th>SCOR Model Supply Chain Simulation survey</th></tr><tr><th>Pre‐ and Post‐Game Questions0001</th><th align="center">Pre‐exercise</th><th align="center">Post‐exercise</th><th /></tr><tr><td>Q1: I feel that I have a “big picture” understanding of how supply chain management works</td><td>3.94</td><td>5.40</td><td>F = 118.82, p =.000</td></tr><tr><td>Q2: I could describe the basic problems in managing a supply chain</td><td>3.65</td><td>5.27</td><td>F = 151.47, p =.000</td></tr><tr><td>Post‐Game Only Questions</td></tr><tr><td>Q3: This game improved my understanding of key concepts involved in supply chain management</td><td>–</td><td>5.72</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Q4: I believe I learned more from the game about supply chain management than from traditional lecture/reading assignments</td><td>–</td><td>5.86</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Q5: The game was an engaging classroom exercise</td><td>–</td><td>6.36</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Q6: The game was fun</td><td>–</td><td>6.28</td><td /></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 *Survey questions were adapted from Kanet & Stößlein, 7; Ashenbaum, 1; and Klotz, 8.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-16">CONCLUSION</hd> <p>The SCOR Model Supply Chain Simulation is a fun and educational experiential learning activity that can be used in a variety of classes with different numbers of students. Educators have the flexibility to tailor the simulation and learning objectives to best meet the needs of their students. Feedback from those who have experienced the exercise have been positive, and debrief discussions have suggested that students take away a holistic understanding of supply chain management. The activity engages students in doing, rather than sitting and listening. For students lacking practical business experience, the exercise brings to life key supply chain processes. When conducted at the beginning of a semester, the game provides a foundation of shared experience for instructors to reference throughout the remainder of the semester. If conducted later in the semester, the game can provide a vehicle for students to apply concepts they have learned in theory and observe the results of their decisions. In addition, the friendly competition of competing supply chains helps to create a lively classroom dynamic. Students often ask to repeat the game, hoping for an opportunity to adjust their strategies in the future.</p> <hd id="AN0097177068-17">APPENDIX</hd> <hd id="AN0097177068-18">TEACHING MATERIALS</hd> <p>1. GAME TIMELINES</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><th align="center">For 75 minute class</th><th align="center">For 50 minute class</th></tr><tr><th /><th align="center">Demand Signal (what</th><th /><th align="center">Demand Signal (what</th></tr><tr><th /><th align="center">End Consumers can</th><th /><th align="center">End Consumers can</th></tr><tr><th>Time</th><th align="center">turn in for points)</th><th align="center">Time</th><th align="center">turn in for points)</th></tr><tr><td>Pre‐activity</td><td align="center">NA</td><td align="center">Pre‐activity</td><td align="center">NA</td></tr><tr><td>0–5</td><td>Only Turkeys</td><td>0–5</td><td>Both Turkeys & Eagles</td></tr><tr><td>5–10</td><td>Both Turkeys & Eagles</td><td>5–10</td><td>Only Turkeys</td></tr><tr><td>10–15</td><td>Both Turkeys & Eagles</td><td>10–15</td><td>Both Turkey & Eagles</td></tr><tr><td>15–20</td><td>Only Turkeys</td><td>15–20</td><td>Only Turkeys</td></tr><tr><td>20–25</td><td>Only Turkeys</td><td>20–25</td><td>Only Turkeys</td></tr><tr><td>25–30</td><td>Both Turkeys & Eagles</td><td>Post‐activity Debrief</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>30–35</td><td>Only Turkeys</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>35–40</td><td>Only Turkeys</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>40–45</td><td>Only Turkeys</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Post‐activity Debrief</td><td>NA</td><td /><td /></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">2. RULES FOR PARTS SUPPLIERS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>2 people minimum for each supply chain (working together); 4 people for 2 supply chains</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Maximize revenue in total with your Manufacturer and Distributor</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Plan which product your supply chain will produce (Eagles or Turkeys)</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Work with the Manufacturer and Distributor in your supply chain</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Buy parts from the Raw Materials Supplier</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Blue parts cost $2</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • All other parts cost $1</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You pay shipping costs for all parts ordered to a 3PL</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Create orders for new parts</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Money for parts must be received with the order or the Raw Materials Supplier cannot ship the parts</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may only ship through the 3PL</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Remember Red and Blue parts cannot be shipped together</td></tr><tr><td /><td>4. Receive orders from the Manufacturer for new parts</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may freely communicate</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Fill orders completely if possible, if not, fill as much as possible</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Cost to the Manufacturer = your cost + total shipping cost + $1 processing fee</td></tr><tr><td /><td>5. Ship orders to the Manufacturer through a 3PL</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You must receive full payment before a shipment is sent</td></tr><tr><td /><td>6. Keep a neat and orderly inventory so that periodic tax collection can occur</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If you cannot pay the Tax Collector you must borrow money from other people in your supply chain</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You start with $100</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">3. RULES FOR MANUFACTURERS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>2 people minimum for each supply chain (working together); 4 people for two supply chains</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Maximize revenue in total with your Parts Supplier and Distributor</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Plan which product your supply chain will produce (Eagles or Turkeys)</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Work with the Parts Supplier and Distributor in your supply chain</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Build Eagles & Turkeys</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may assemble as quickly as you want</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • In order to transition from one product to another, you must take 5 min. of changeover time</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may changeover when the Tax Collector is auditing your inventory</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Create orders for new parts</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Money for parts must be sent with the order or the Parts Supplier cannot ship the parts</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Remember Red and Blue parts cannot be shipped together</td></tr><tr><td /><td>4. Receive orders from the Distributor for products</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Fill orders completely if possible, if not fill as much of as possible</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Cost to the Distributor = your cost + shipping cost + $2 manufacturing cost</td></tr><tr><td /><td>5. Store and ship orders to the Distributor</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may run a distribution center with your assembly facility</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You must receive payment before a shipment is sent</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Eagles and Turkeys cannot be shipped together</td></tr><tr><td /><td>6. Keep a neat and orderly inventory so that periodic tax collection can occur</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If you cannot pay the Tax Collector you must borrow money from other people in the supply chain</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You start with $100</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">4. RULES FOR DISTRIBUTORS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>2 people minimum for each supply chain (working together), four people for 2 supply chains</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Maximize revenue in total with your Parts Supplier and Manufacturer</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Plan which product your supply chain will produce (Eagles or Turkeys)</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Work with the Parts Supplier and Manufacturer in your supply chain</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Set Price</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You need to make sure that you make a profit, but you must also compete for Retailers</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You must understand the total cost of each product. It may change with each delivery due to changes in shipment volume or tax assessments</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Be sure that you have included shipping costs for all finished goods ordered from the Manufacturer</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Promote</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Do all you can to entice Retailers to buy</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Try to build customer loyalty</td></tr><tr><td /><td>4. Sell</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You are the only source of income for your entire supply chain.</td></tr><tr><td /><td>5. Place orders to the Manufacturer</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Based on either current demand or your supply chain strategy</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You must send payment before a shipment is sent</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Remember that the 3PL adds 1 minute shipping time</td></tr><tr><td /><td>6. Keep a neat and orderly inventory so that periodic tax collection can occur</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If you cannot pay the Tax Collector you must borrow money from other people in your supply chain</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You start with $100</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">5. RULES FOR 3PLs (TRANSPORTATION)</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>2 3PLs minimum; adding additional 3PLs adds more competition for this node</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Maximize your revenue</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Note: You are competing against other 3PLs for business.</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Carry all inventories between 1. Raw Materials Supplier & Parts Supplier; 2. Parts Supplier & Manufacturer; 3. Manufacturer & Distributor</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You are the only people who can carry parts and products between nodes</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Charge $5 per leg for loads of 25 (25 = truckload and is the maximum you can carry)</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Charge $1 for every 3 items (rounded up) for each leg for less than truckload shipments. Your customers may elect to pay for a full truckload with fewer than 25 items.</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You do not need to carry products for Retailers or End Consumers</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Collect payment for your service</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Payment must be made before a shipment can run</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. For safety, please do not run</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. You start with no $</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">6. RULES FOR TAX COLLECTORS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>1 person minimum; can add an additional tax collector when additional supply chains are added. Too many tax collectors will slow play of the game</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Collect as many taxes as possible given your constraints.</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Note: You will collect more taxes from nodes with high inventory.</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Once every 10 minutes you can shut down one node of the supply chain (Parts Supplier, Manufacturer, or Distributor) to take a total inventory</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Figure out the total cost of their inventory (cost of goods sold only – do not figure in transportation costs, etc.)</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Charge that node 20% of the total cost of their inventory</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Once during the activity you can do a SURPRISE inventory</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Same as above but you do not have to wait 10 minutes between audits</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Keep a record of the amount of tax collected from each supply chain</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You must wait 10 minutes between audits</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. No deliveries, orders or other business (besides changeover) can occur in the nodes you are currently auditing</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. You start with no $</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">7. RULES FOR RETAILERS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>3 people minimum; make sure you have several fewer Retailers than End Consumers to foster competition</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Produce revenue by buying either Eagles or Turkeys from each supply chain's Distributor and selling them to End Consumers</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Buy and sell products from Distributors</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may only buy as many products as you can afford – NO CREDIT TRANSACTIONS</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may promise to buy and sell products at any time during the game</td></tr><tr><td /><td>a. Be careful, if you break a promise you may lose the trust of the Distributor or End Consumer</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may not barter or collaborate with other Retailers</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Reward performance</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If one Distributor does not have what you want in stock or will not give it to for what you consider a reasonable price, treat them appropriately</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If a Distributor sells you an item with a quality defect and will not take it back in return, treat them accordingly.</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Earn as much money as possible</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If you cannot get rid of an item with a quality defect you will lose that money as the End Consumer will not accept defective products</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • All End Consumers have the same funds – your job is to maximize your cash position given the funds you have.</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You start with $100</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">8. RULES FOR END CONSUMERS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>5 people minimum</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Purchase Eagles and Turkeys according to the demand schedule and maximize your points when returning product to the Raw Materials Supplier</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Note: you are competing with other End Consumers!</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Maximize your total points earned in the game by buying product and turning product into the Raw Materials Supplier based on the demand schedule</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You receive 5 points for each Eagle</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You receive 2 points for each Turkey</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Any defective product is worth ‐10 points</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If these are returned they do not count towards your points</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • The End Consumer with the most points compared to other End Consumers receives a grand prize</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • The Raw Materials Suppliers will award your points</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Negotiate with the Retailers group</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • The lower your per unit price, the more points you can gain</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You may negotiate before a purchase BUT no money can exchange hands until a product is being exchanged</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You can accept partial shipments if your Retailer cannot fill your complete order</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Follow your demand constraints</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Eagles are seasonal items and may only be bought and sold during their season</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Turkeys may be purchased at any time</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You start with $1000 but remember your points earned is what matters at the end of the game</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tr><td align="center">9. RULES FOR RAW MATERIALS SUPPLIERS</td></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>3 people minimum (all working together, not a competitive role)</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Act as the Raw Materials Supplier by selling parts to Parts Suppliers</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Award points to the End Consumers based on the demand schedule</td></tr><tr><td>Primary Duties</td><td>1. Award and track End Consumer points on your sheet</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • An Eagle product is worth 5 points</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • A Turkey product is worth 2 points</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • A defective product is worth ‐10 points</td></tr><tr><td /><td>‐ An End Consumer can attempt to return the part to the Retailer or hold onto it</td></tr><tr><td /><td>‐ The negative ten points only applies if they tell you they don't care and you should take it.</td></tr><tr><td /></tr><tr><td>Players</td><td>3 people minimum (all working together, not a competitive role)</td></tr><tr><td>Objectives</td><td>Act as the Raw Materials Supplier by selling parts to Parts Suppliers</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. Sell parts to all Parts Suppliers</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Blue parts cost $2, all other parts cost $1</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Parts Suppliers pay shipping directly to a 3PL</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • You cannot ship until total payment is received</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Fill their order in the quantity they request</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • If you are out of a specific piece, fill as much as possible</td></tr><tr><td /><td>3. Act as a quality control inspector</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • A part with black marker on the bottom of any piece is defective</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Do NOT tell the End Consumer why the part is bad, tell them only that it is defective</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • A product with a red and blue piece on the same product is also defective</td></tr><tr><td /><td>4. Accept Parts Supplier returns</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Do not accept defective products unless they come from the Parts Supplier</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • The Parts Supplier must pay for transportation of the defective parts</td></tr><tr><td /><td> • Refund the Parts Suppliers their cost of defective parts</td></tr><tr><td>Constraints</td><td>1. You may not disclose exact quality defects to anyone else in the game, you must only reveal that the product is defective</td></tr><tr><td /><td>2. You start with no $</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <ref id="AN0097177068-19"> <title>Footnotes</title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref14" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext>For any additional questions regarding the game or to receive a printable copy of game handouts, please contact the corresponding author. </bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0097177068-20"> <title>REFERENCES</title> <blist> <bibtext>Ashenbaum, B. ( 2010 ). The twenty‐minute just‐in‐time exercise. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 8 ( 1 ), 269 – 274. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref11" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext>Coyle, J. J., Langley, C. J., Novack, R. A., & Gibson, B. J. ( 2013 ). Supply chain management: A logistics perspective ( 9th ed. ). Mason, OH : South‐Western. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext>Feger, A. L. R., & Thomas, G. A. ( 2011 ). Bailing out the Once‐Ler: Using Dr. Seuss to teach operations management. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 9 ( 1 ), 69 – 73. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext>Forrester, J. W. ( 2007 ). System dynamics—a personal view of the first fifty years. System Dynamics Review, 23 ( 2–3 ), 345 – 358. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref10" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext>Grandzol, J. R., & Grandzol, C. J. ( 2011 ). An experiential approach to benchmarking curriculum. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 9 ( 3 ), 401 – 409. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref2" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext>Gumus, M., & Love, E. C. ( 2013 ). Supply chain sourcing game: A negotiation exercise. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 11 ( 1 ), 3 – 12. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext>Kanet, J. J., & Stößlein, M. ( 2008 ). Using a supply chain game to effect problem‐based learning in an undergraduate operations management program. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6 ( 2 ), 287 – 295. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext>Klotz, D. ( 2011 ). The bicycle assembly line game. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 9 ( 3 ), 371 – 377. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref12" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext>Lockamy III, A., & McCormack, K. ( 2004 ). Linking SCOR planning practices to supply chain performance: An exploratory study. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 24 ( 12 ), 1192 – 1218. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib10" idref="ref7" type="bt">10</bibl> <bibtext>Stewart, G. ( 1997 ). Supply‐Chain Operations Reference Model (SCOR): The first cross‐industry framework for integrated supply‐chain management. Logistics Information Management, 10 ( 2 ), 62 – 67. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib11" idref="ref8" type="bt">11</bibl> <bibtext>Supply Chain Council. ( 2010 ). http://supply‐chain.org/f/downloads/726710733/SCOR10.pdf. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib12" idref="ref3" type="bt">12</bibl> <bibtext>Wu, Z., & Choi, T. ( 2013 ). Triadic relations in a game of pachisi. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 11 ( 4 ), 305 – 312. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib13" idref="ref9" type="bt">13</bibl> <bibtext>Zhou, H., Benton, W. C., Schilling, D. A., & Milligan, G. W. ( 2011 ). Supply chain integration and the SCOR model. Journal of Business Logistics, 32 ( 4 ), 332 – 344. </bibtext> </blist> </ref> <p>Graph: SCOR model supply chain game flow.</p> <aug> <p>By G. Scott Webb; Stephanie P. Thomas and Sara Liao‐Troth</p> <p></p> <p>G. Scott Webb is an assistant professor of Global Supply Chain Management in the Marriott School at Brigham Young University, where he teaches logistics and introduction to supply chain and operations. He has a Ph.D from Michigan State University. His research interests include supply chain complexity and sustainability. His research has been published in the Journal of Business Logistics, Journal of Operations Management, and Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education.</p> <p>Stephanie P. Thomas is an associate professor of practice in the area of Marketing in the Rawls College of Business at Texas Tech University, where she teaches supply chain management and sales management courses. She has a Ph.D. in Logistics and Supply Chain Management from Georgia Southern University. Her current research interests focus on negotiations, buyer‐supplier relationships, and retail supply chain management. Her research has been published in the Journal of Supply Chain Management, International Journal of Logistics Management, Marketing Management Journal, as well as several conference proceedings.</p> <p>Sara Liao‐Troth is an assistant professor of Logistics at the J. Whitney Bunting College of Business, Georgia College & State University in the Master of Logistics and Supply Chain Management degree program. She has a Ph.D. in Logistics and Supply Chain Management from Georgia Southern University. She is currently studying shortage gaming and rationing behaviors in supply chain networks. Her research has been published or is forthcoming in journals such as the International Journal of Logistics Management, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, and Marketing Education Review.</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1033676
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Teaching Supply Chain Management Complexities: A SCOR Model Based Classroom Simulation
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Webb%2C+G%2E+Scott%22">Webb, G. Scott</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Thomas%2C+Stephanie+P%2E%22">Thomas, Stephanie P.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Liao-Troth%2C+Sara%22">Liao-Troth, Sara</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Decision+Sciences+Journal+of+Innovative+Education%22"><i>Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education</i></searchLink>. Jul 2014 12(3):181-198.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2014
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Supply+and+Demand%22">Supply and Demand</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Management%22">Information Management</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Business+Administration+Education%22">Business Administration Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Simulation%22">Simulation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Activities%22">Learning Activities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learner+Engagement%22">Learner Engagement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Students%22">College Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Experiential+Learning%22">Experiential Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Holistic+Approach%22">Holistic Approach</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/dsji.12038
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1540-4595
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The SCOR (Supply Chain Operations Reference) Model Supply Chain Classroom Simulation is an in-class experiential learning activity that helps students develop a holistic understanding of the processes and challenges of supply chain management. The simulation has broader learning objectives than other supply chain related activities such as the Beer Game. Competing supply chains work to produce and sell two products, each experiencing differential demand. Seasonal demand, time delays, quality defects, and disruptions offer complexities that are part of actual supply chain management. The behavioral dynamics of collaboration between various functional nodes is illustrated through students' interactions as they try to achieve their role's objectives. Through their decisions and actions, students develop a practical understanding of the processes and complexities of supply chain management. The classroom simulation actively engages students, and has been used successfully in multiple courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels at multiple universities and by a major corporation during a manager training session. Assessments indicate that the simulation is an effective experiential learning activity. While it offers learning outcome flexibility, common debrief themes are SCOR model processes, supply chain relationships, information flow, seasonal demand, quality defects, reverse logistics, and supply chain disruptions.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2014
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1033676
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1033676
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/dsji.12038
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 181
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Supply and Demand
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Information Management
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Business Administration Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Simulation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learning Activities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learner Engagement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Experiential Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Holistic Approach
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Teaching Supply Chain Management Complexities: A SCOR Model Based Classroom Simulation
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Webb, G. Scott
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Thomas, Stephanie P.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Liao-Troth, Sara
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 07
              Type: published
              Y: 2014
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1540-4595
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 12
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1