Laboratory-based Electronic Commerce: A Comparison of Technical and Business-oriented Student Experiences Craig M. Parker and Paula M.C. Swatman Department of Information Systems Monash University, Caulfield Campus P.O. Box 197, Caulfield East, Victoria, Australia, 3145. email:
[email protected] [email protected] Paul A. Swatman Centre for Information Systems Research Swinburne University of Technology P.O. Box 218, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia, 3122. email:
[email protected] Abstract The slow rate of acceptance of telecommunications applications - Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) in particular - can be attributed, at least in part, to a lack of understanding of the strategic benefits which can accrue from their effective utilisation. This paper describes the design of an international laboratory called TREAT (Teaching Realistic EDI And Telecommunications) which is being developed to address this concern. It then compares the design and operational findings resulting from implementing TREAT in a technically-oriented Computer Science department and a business-oriented Information Systems department. The results of this preliminary study provide indicative support for the conclusion that participants' responses to TREAT were influenced in some cases by their particular educational background the Computer Science students were more interested in the mechanisms of the game (including the use of the EDI translation software), while the Information Systems students were primarily interested in the organisational structure of TREAT and the way in which telecommunications can be used to support business activities.
Introduction Businesses are increasingly becoming aware of the need to exchange computer-generated information across organisational boundaries, allowing firms to replace costly and inefficient paper-based processes with global telecommunications networks, which enable the transmission of information between organisations or between distributed centres of a single organisation [5, 6, 11, 13]. Such activities are encouraged by the increasing publicity being given to the "Information Super-Highway" in the print and electronic media. The business community's adoption of telecommunications applications, however, has been delayed by a general lack of understanding of the potential strategic benefits which can accrue from their effective utilisation [5, 15, 4, 12, 16]. Many organisations, indeed, appear to regard such technologies as providing only a faster mail service, rather than seeing that they can offer an infrastructure suitable for strategic initiatives such as business reengineering [17, 14]. The relatively slow rate of acceptance of telecommunications-based technologies and, in particular, of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), highlights the need for current and future business professionals to gain a wider education in this area. This slower than anticipated uptake of telecommunications-based systems provided the basis for a research project which is investigating the possibility that education may be the most appropriate way to encourage a strategic, higher-level view of the usefulness of such systems. We are using a laboratory-based environment (which we call TREAT - Teaching Realistic EDI And Telecommunications) in which participants can experience genuine international electronic commerce - but without the financial risks of an underlying physical exchange of goods. The initial TREAT laboratory was developed at Curtin University in Western Australia and formed the practical component of an optional subject offered to both undergraduate and graduate students in the Department of Computer Science. The international component was provided by students from the University of Maribor in Slovenia who also participated in the game - giving the participants the opportunity to trade with genuinely external trading partners as well as providing a more realistic "feel" to the international aspects of the educational environment. The Maribor students were undertaking research in their university's EDI-IOS Laboratory, established in June 1992 [3] and, for interested readers, the genesis and development of this inter-university project are discussed in detail in [7, 8]. The principal investigators moved to the Department of Information Systems at Monash University in Victoria in the middle of the Australian 1994 academic year. This move offered the opportunity to work with students from a business background, rather than the more technicallyoriented students involved in the original TREAT experiment. The relocation did, however, mean that it was not possible to develop an associated subject immediately. The second TREAT laboratory was therefore run as a stand-alone experiment using volunteers, once again with the assistance of students from the University of Maribor. This paper will discuss: C the design of and justification for using a laboratory environment to support the objectives of the research project C the theoretical and practical learning experiences gained from the TREAT experiments C a comparison of the findings obtained by running TREAT in both a Computer Science and an Information Systems Department.
In order to demonstrate the usefulness of an educational approach to encouraging greater acceptance of EDI and telecommunications-based systems, we recognised that it would be necessary to run laboratory sessions designed for commercial users of such systems. University students provide only a limited insight into the likely success of our educational approach in the real world. The comparison of technically-oriented students from a Computer Science background with more organisationally-oriented students from an Information Systems background, however, has shown that there are genuine differences between these participants' expectations and responses to the TREAT environment, which provides a foundation for the development of a truly effective commercial learning environment.
The Design of the TREAT Laboratory Environment The primary goal in designing TREAT was to develop an effective pedagogic environment where students would be given the opportunity to learn, appreciate and experience the way in which telecommunications can be applied internationally. More specifically, TREAT was intended to provide students with a means to apply concepts learned from lectures, self-directed reading and other resources, by encouraging them to use telecommunications and EDI facilities in a manner similar to business community usage. The major research project of which these two action research experiments form the initial stage was designed to allow students to adopt "deep" approaches to learning the telecommunications curriculum1, thus providing both an effective university teaching environment and a more appropriate design for our ultimate commercial laboratory environment. A detailed explanation of the educational aims and theory which underpin this project can be found in [9]. We believe that such an approach is particularly appropriate in designing a laboratory which will eventually be used for training business users. Participants trained in such a manner will be far more likely to apply their new concepts constructively and to look for strategic uses of these technologies within their organisations when compared to more theoretical approaches such as lectures or seminars. Choosing a Laboratory-based Approach A laboratory-based trade community, in which students could adopt the role of trading organisations and engage in "international trade", appeared to be the most promising method of encouraging students to adopt deep learning approaches, because it would: C allow students to experiment with a real global telecommunications facility (the Internet) and with genuine commercial EDI software packages C encourage students to make decisions about their business activities and thus experience the benefits available from using telecommunications in a realistic commercial environment (in turn fostering a greater appreciation of the use of telecommunications technology than would be possible from a purely theoretical introduction) C provide students with immediate feedback regarding the soundness of their application of knowledge within the laboratory environment C make the curriculum more interesting and relevant to students as a result of their active involvement with the subject matter [2, 10]. This laboratory-based environment had parallels with the pioneering work carried out at Erasmus (Faculty of Business Administration) and McGill (Faculty of Management) Universities, which
have used a simulation approach to teaching, with a significant degree of success, to enhance students' understanding of their respective curricula [18, 19]. While both these authors describe their use of EDI simulations, Wrigley [19] provides a very detailed and useful description of a simulation environment which has been used to teach information systems development skills and concepts. Although our own work concentrates on the areas of the strategic use of information systems and on international trading partner relationships, we believe that there is considerable synergy between the work of all the authors writing in this field. The Design of TREAT The TREAT laboratory environment was made up of organisations which traded abstract/ fictitious input materials and end-products with their respective suppliers and customers. An imaginary toaster manufacturing industry formed the trade environment of the laboratory and comprised the following types of organisations: C a raw materials supplier C two types of component suppliers using the raw materials C manufacturers using the components from both types of component suppliers C retailers purchasing the finished products from the manufacturers - and providing the variation in customer demand C a warehouse which coordinated the transfer of goods between all the companies involved C a bank which coordinated the EFTs between these same companies. Pairs of students each adopted the role of a company competing within this industry and exchanged both EDI and unstructured messages, where appropriate, via the Internet allowing them to procure goods in pseudo-production activities to generate sufficient end-products to meet customer demand. In addition, the firms were also responsible for setting prices based on various purchase prices and operational charges and for ordering appropriate quantities of input materials and manufacturing appropriate quantities of end-products. The manufacturing and component supplier organisations were operated by participants, while the remaining companies were run by the laboratory coordinator. This allocation allowed the trade environment (in terms of supply and demand) to be controlled and manipulated more readily than would have been possible had students adopted these roles - it also ensured that funds and goods were exchanged with minimal controversy. Gri
ar [3] suggests that worldwide teaching initiatives with common goals should amalgamate via a global telecommunications network such as the Internet, so that a realistic international laboratory environment can be developed. This concept was further developed during our research project, when students from Maribor adopted the role of 'foreign suppliers' and traded with participants from Curtin and Monash. Students from these institutions were thus encouraged to appreciate the importance of universal standards (in particular, of EDI standards) and to experience the way in which telecommunications can support the goals of cost-effective and efficient international trade within a simplified, yet realistic, environment. Our use of the action research methodology provided us the means by which to alter the design of TREAT on the basis of feedback from students and our observation of the on-going success of the laboratory activities. Action research therefore gave us the opportunity to study and generate knowledge concerning the appropriateness and effectiveness of TREAT when implemented in these two different tertiary environments.
The Implementation of TREAT Our primary objective when implementing TREAT for the second time at Monash was to ensure that the two experiments were sufficiently similar that we could make comparisons between the two. In particular, we were interested in how effective the laboratory environment would be in improving the learning opportunities of Computer Science and Information Systems students. The move from Western Australia to Victoria, which occurred in the middle of the academic year, led to a number of differences between the implementations of TREAT at the two institutions. Although these differences forced us to make some changes to the implementation of the laboratory, they also gave us the opportunity to investigate alternatives to the design of TREAT. Table 1 compares the Curtin and Monash implementations. Implementation Features
Curtin
Monash
Recruitment
Students enrolled in an optional subject which comprised lectures and practical sessions.
Students were volunteers and were not enrolled in a subject and therefore did not attend formal classroom sessions.
Course of study type and prior work experience.
Approximately half the students were final year undergraduates without business experience (although one had had a few years' work experience), while the remainder of the students were post-graduate participants with several years' public or private sector experience.
Two thirds of the students were postgraduates with a few year's public or private sector experience, while the remainder of the students were final year undergraduates with limited or no work experience.
Educational background.
Students had technical backgrounds rather than extensive business/ management experience (even the part-time students from the public or private sectors were engaged in technical occupations).
Students had business/management backgrounds rather than extensive technical experience. One student had experience with EDI document mapping and another had technical experience as a technical support officer on a Unix platform although being qualified as an accountant.
Enrolment type.
Approximately half the students were part-time.
All the students were full-time.
Gender.
Approximately one quarter were female.
Approximately one third were female.
Arrangement of the TREAT practical sessions.
One session each week of 1 hour's duration.
Two sessions each week of 1 hour's duration.
Number of independent TREAT laboratories.
Two independent games.
One game.
Number and type of TREAT student organisations.
Group 1:
Group 1:
! !
3 manufacturers 2 of each type of local component supplier
Group 2:
! !
2 manufacturers 2 of each type of local component supplier
! !
2 manufacturers 1 of a single type of local component supplier
Implementation Features
Curtin
Monash
Total duration of TREAT.
12 weeks.
Six weeks.
Number of weeks for a single TREAT trade cycle.
Two weeks.
Two weeks.
Number of weeks for the international trade cycles.
Four weeks.
Four weeks.
Table 1: A Comparison of the Curtin/Monash Experiments. Such a disparate group of students could not, of course, form a representative sample - indeed, the small sample sizes and differing implementations at the two institutions made quantitative analysis impossible. Our intention when undertaking the two experiments was therefore not to compare two identical groups, but to generate qualitative, indicative knowledge concerning the use of TREAT with students having two different educational backgrounds. We were, in fact, undertaking preliminary investigation into the differences which a technical or business-oriented background could be expected to furnish. We discuss the implications and findings resulting from these alterations concerning the implementation of TREAT in detail in the following sections of this paper.
Comparing the Curtin and Monash Experiments TREAT participants were encouraged to express their ideas and to put forward constructive suggestions for improving the effectiveness of the practical sessions - both verbally throughout the semester and by means of a questionnaire at the conclusion of the course. We found the participant feedback enormously useful - indeed, many of the enhancements to TREAT were based on the responses we received both during and after the running of the two separate TREAT laboratories. A detailed analysis of the first experiment can be found in [9], where we discuss the approaches taken to developing our laboratory environment and the learning experiences of both the students taking part in the experiment and the researchers designing the laboratory. This paper concentrates on distinguishing the results of the Curtin and Monash TREAT experiments (a more detailed description of these results can be found in [7]): C students from both technical and business-oriented backgrounds found a laboratory environment an effective means of gaining experience in Electronic Commerce C the more business-oriented Monash students found the commercial details interesting and believeable, while the technically-oriented Curtin students were primarily interested in the mechanism of the laboratory environment itself. Background and Understanding of Telecommunications and EDI Since very few of the students in either experiment had previous experience with telecommunications or EDI, we decided to precede the laboratory activities with introductory sessions intended to:
C C C
introduce EDI by presenting sample document standards and explaining why they are important teach students how to use the telecommunications and EDI facilities which were to be utilised during TREAT give students the opportunity to perform practice trade cycles so that they could gain familiarity with the tasks comprising TREAT.
Both experiments commenced with an introduction to EDI which gave participants an overview of EDI standards and their structure, implementation and use, together with an explanation of EDI standard subsets and the importance of implementation guidelines. The usefulness of the EDI discussion session was highlighted when 100% of the Curtin and Monash questionnaire respondents stated that this particular session enhanced their understanding of EDI concepts and issues, enabling them to appreciate the role of EDI and, consequently, that of telecommunications during TREAT. It therefore appeared that the technical or business background of the students did not affect this aspect of the learning process - rather that students' previous knowledge of this subject area was the principal influence upon how much benefit they obtained from the session. This introduction was identical in both experiments, being a one-hour session which did not require special equipment or facilities. The length of the introductory sessions designed both to give participants practical experience of the telecommunications and EDI facilities needed during the game and to allow them to practice some trade cycles, however, had to be reduced during the Monash experiment because of the shorter time available for its implementation. This time constraint meant that it was necessary to conduct these introductory sessions differently during the two experiments: C during the Curtin experiment we demonstrated the use of the EDI translation package being used, as well as demonstrating a variety of telecommunications utilities (including email, ftp and telnet) and allowed students to experiment with these software packages for a one-hour laboratory session; C the time constraint upon the Monash experiment, however, meant that we could not demonstrate all the software to be used and we therefore concentrated on demonstrating the EDI translation software alone. Instead of demonstrating the telecommunications utilities, we provided the Monash students with detailed step-by-step instructions (not available to the Curtin students) explaining how to use telnet, ftp and the email packages needed to participate in the full range of trade cycle activities. Our observations suggest that both groups of students required these introductory sessions on the use of the various software packages and utilities. The Monash experiment however, somewhat surprisingly, showed that the detailed documentation we provided to replace the hands-on experimentation available to Curtin students actually reduced the number of initial problems encountered - these students were able to make use of the software more rapidly. Future TREAT introductory sessions will therefore include documentation and instructions on the use of the telecommunications and EDI facilities required for the game, in addition to providing hands-on experience. Our observations during the Monash study, however, suggested that the business-oriented students were not as interested in the technical aspects of the EDI software - focusing instead on the business issues associated with running their companies. Once they had learned enough about the software to be able to use it as needed, they spent no further time on experimentation. This was in complete contrast to the Curtin students, who spent quite considerable amounts of their
own time learning every possible aspect of the software (particularly the EDI translation software) and provided the first confirmation that educational background would differentiate TREAT participants' attitudes. Students in both TREAT experiments also were given the opportunity to practice their trade cycles locally, before they were required to commence the game with the international players. This opportunity for experimentation was, in both cases, accompanied by detailed documentation describing the game as a whole, the companies to be operated by each pair of students and the tasks the students were required to perform. Our observations suggest that both groups of students did seem to need this documentation and practice to be able to operate their companies effectively. There was sufficient time during the Curtin experiment for participants to conduct practice trade cycles using all the software facilities which would be used during the real game. The shorter time available for the Monash experiment, however, limited the opportunity for students to practice trade cycles using all the software facilities. We decided it was more important for students to practise an entire trade cycle than to use all the software packages which would be involved in the final laboratory version, because we believed participants needed to gain a complete understanding of the international trade environment. The Monash students therefore ran their practice trade cycles using only email facilities, rather than the mixture of email and EDI software which Curtin students were able to use. We decided to concentrate on the email-based rehearsals because there was detailed documentation available for the EDI software, which we hoped would supply the deficiency. We found that the Curtin students appeared to be more confident in their use of the technical aspects of the game (such things as moving EDI messages to the UNIX platform for transmission and in the use of the EDI translation package itself). They were, however, inclined to make silly mistakes because they did not have manuals to refer to for on-the-spot assistance. The Monash students, by contrast, avoided the initial errors by using the documentation we had provided, but seemed to gain confidence in the use of the EDI software more slowly because, until the start of the game, they had not actually used the package. It would therefore appear that both detailed documentation and hands-on practice is necessary for students to gain the maximum benefit from the practice sessions which precede the TREAT laboratory. We intend to provide both these facilities in future experiments. Both groups of students experienced greater difficulty in understanding the procurement processes of TREAT than in learning and using the software facilities, irrespective of the way in which this software was introduced. This provided confirmation of our decision to concentrate on the procedural aspects of the trade cycles with the Monash students when we were confronted with limited time for training. It appeared that even those students having business backgrounds found it difficult to come to grips with the activities required for the international trade cycles. Since all participants (whether university students or business professionals) will have to learn the sequence of trade cycle activities, we believe that even greater concentration on the procedural aspects of TREAT may be necessary in future implementations of the game.
Student Interest Levels The students from both the Curtin and Monash TREAT experiments seemed to enjoy the game and found it an innovative and exciting way of learning about international electronic commerce. Apart from students' comments to this effect, additional evidence is provided by: C the mere fact of Monash students volunteering to take part in the game, despite their many other commitments and pressures from coursework subjects C the company meetings held by some students in both groups (outside practical session times) to discuss such topics as their firm's purchase and production requirements, the prices of their end-products and the suppliers from whom to purchase each input material C the spreadsheets which some Curtin and all Monash students developed to assist with and automate their decision-making and future planning C the self-assigned titles of key company personnel in both groups, such as "Sales Director", "Senior Executive" or "Accounting Manager" C the questionnaire responses from students suggesting that 95% of students in both groups believed that TREAT enhanced their learning experiences concerning the telecommunications curriculum and was generally interesting C the questionnaire responses, which showed that 82% of all students felt that the practical sessions had a significant (or at least some) impact upon the quality of their understanding of the business applications of EDI and telecommunications. In terms of student enthusiasm, educational background appeared to play very little part, although there was some difference in terms of its manifestation. For example, the development of spreadsheets to assist in the analysis of their organisational data was far more prevalent amongst the Monash students. The Curtin students, however, spent a much greater time (indeed, more than was necessary) exploring the EDI software to learn how it operated and how it was configured. Operational Aspects of TREAT We anticipated that a number of aspects of TREAT would be influenced by the physical difficulties of running an international laboratory experiment, rather than by the educational background of the participants. This assumption appeared to be true of the following three operational aspects of TREAT, which we believe are influenced by factors independent of technical or business bias: C the length of practical sessions C trade agreements and the length of trade cycles C interactive vs. non-interactive message exchanges The length of the practical sessions was an important consideration during both the Curtin and the Monash experiments, because the duration of these sessions influenced the amount of time students had to complete their trade cycle activities. Results suggest that the one hour each week available to Curtin students was insufficient, while the two hours per week available during the Monash experiment in most cases allowed the students to complete the required activities. We believe that the students' ability to complete the trade cycle activities was therefore influenced by the time available, rather than by the educational background of the participants. Each trade cycle of TREAT was completed over a fixed, two-week period in both the Curtin and Monash experiments, which we anticipated would ensure all students could complete the required
procurement activities. Verbal and written responses from all the students, regardless of educational background, showed that there was a significant degree of dissatisfaction with some of their trading partners' performance, due mostly to incorrectly filled or unfilled orders and to a lack of commitment. Future TREAT experiments will therefore investigate the advantages of variable trade cycle lengths, which will require students to stipulate deadlines for all EDI messages and to decide which party is liable for specific types of errors - which would then be documented in trade agreements. We believe that this approach will alleviate some of the causes of dissatisfaction amongst participants, because violation of such agreements could form the basis for the termination of ineffective or undesirable trade relationships. This finding is in accord with the experiences of commercial EDI systems, who generally find that trading partner agreements resolve most of their procedural difficulties. The seven hour time difference between Perth and Kranj, Slovenia meant it was feasible to adopt an interactive messaging scheme, where students from both laboratories sent and responded to EDI and electronic messages during a single practical session. We found that this approach did not work well in practice, however, because the messages being exchanged between our laboratories over the Internet were often delayed. Interactive messaging was even more unworkable during the Monash experiment because of the ten hour time difference between Melbourne and Kranj. We therefore decided to investigate other interchange techniques which did not rely on the immediacy of document transfers between international players. A noninteractive messaging technique was adopted during the Monash experiment, which required students at Monash to send messages in one session and retrieve the responses from Maribor in a subsequent session. This technique allowed us to avoid the problems of delayed messages and obviated the time difference between the international players participating in the experiment. Message Types Students were required to use both EDI and electronic (unstructured) messaging when exchanging information with their trading partners to complete the laboratory trade cycles. More specifically, EDI messages were used for standardised documents (including invoices, purchase orders and purchase order responses) and electronic messaging (email) was used for procurement, EFT and freight forwarding documents and for general communication purposes (including the advertisement of prices and following-up orders). We anticipated that this combination of messaging types would give students the opportunity to compare the two techniques. Students initially found the email system more comfortable because the unstructured nature of the email messages was perceived as being easier to use and less complex. This attitude changed, however, when many students had difficulties with incorrect communication of information (for instance, incorrect cross-referencing of part numbers and part descriptions) which resulted in some incorrect orders and production schedules. Students' overt complaints about these problems suggest that even inexperienced users are able to appreciate the importance of standards when applying telecommunications, because they can experience for themselves the problems caused by using unstructured electronic messaging for business purposes. The significance of this finding was further emphasised when 75% of Curtin and 100% of Monash questionnaire respondents stated they believed that the number of EDI messaging types should be increased. In fact, an intense focus on EDI messaging might prove to be important in future TREAT implementations, particularly when the trade environment involves an increasing number
of international players. It appears that educational background plays little part in students' perception of the importance of messages and message types. International Trade The students from both Curtin and Monash were given the opportunity to trade with the foreign suppliers from Maribor towards the end of the semester - after they had been familiarised with the trade cycle procedures during the introductory practical sessions. The student companies were responsible for deciding from which supplier(s) they purchased the individual input materials and for determining the criteria upon which this decision was based. We made the choice more realistic by ensuring that the local and foreign suppliers, who were selling exactly the same materials, each had a comparative advantage for a subset of their end-products. We anticipated that the students would therefore be encouraged to select a supplier for each material on the basis of a price advantage, so that they could experience the similarity of international trade with domestic trade. This assumption seemed justified when we consider that 4 of the possible 5 Curtin student companies and all the Monash firms able to trade with the foreign suppliers from Maribor (in addition to the local suppliers) took the opportunity to engage in simple, yet realistic, international trade. Our observations suggest that the decision of whether to trade locally and/or internationally was made purely on the basis of whose prices were lowest - and not on factors such as the time delays associated with the document exchanges between the Australian institutions and Maribor. The decision to trade internationally, once again, did not appear to be influenced by the educational background of the students. This finding is encouraging, because it gives us confidence that commercial participants in TREAT will gain a similar appreciation of the potential for international trade which telecommunications provides - regardless of their original background or their more recent business experience. Organisational Complexity This facet of TREAT was the factor most noticeably affected by the educational background of the participants. Following our analysis of the responses of the Curtin students (who found the organisational complexity of the game somewhat daunting) we were particularly interested to compare the responses of a group of Information Systems students to this aspect of TREAT. Our observations and written responses from students did, in fact, provide support for our belief that participants' views regarding the complexity of the laboratory industry and its associated organisations depend on their technical or business bias. This finding was shown most succinctly when the: C Curtin students stated that the organisations they operated were too complex in terms of the number of products they were required to utilise, the calculation of prices to charge for their end-products and the need to determine how many products to produce. This response seemed to be consistent with these students' preference for emphasis to be placed on the technical issues associated with the game (in particular, the EDI software) C Monash students believed generally that there were no problems with the organisational complexity of TREAT and were not especially interested in the technical details associated with configuring the EDI translation software, creating trading partner "profiles" (details
of addresses, types of messages to be sent and the sub-sets of those messages in use), or the details of translating and transmitting EDI and email messages to their trading partners. Clearly, this finding requires further investigation - both in terms of the numbers of participants and their specific educational backgrounds. We need to ensure that the students' attitudes were not unduly influenced by, for example, having studied a particular subject or group of subjects, or by the curriculum of one particular educational institution. We shall address this problem during the next phase of this research project, when we develop more formal laboratory experiments where participants are selected by background and experience.
Conclusions This paper has demonstrated the important role TREAT played in providing students with a quality pedagogic environment for teaching international electronic commerce. It has also described the indicative results of two experiments - one run in a Computer Science Department and the other in an Information Systems Department - showing that some attributes of TREAT were more affected by the educational background of participants than others. Table 2 summarises these findings. Although Table 2 demonstrates clearly the fact that there are more similarities than differences between the two groups of students, it is equally clear that the similarities concern the more operational aspects of the experiment, while the differences relate to what may loosely be termed the "strategic" aspects. While both groups of students enjoyed the experience, the Monash students spent their time improving the efficiency of their trading organisations, while the Curtin students were primarily interested in the technical aspects of the software itself. These results suggest that our initial approach to designing TREAT was correct. The ultimate use of the laboratory will be in the business world and the positive response from the business-oriented students gives us confidence that more realistic organisational structures are preferable to a techno-centric approach to design. While we cannot state with confidence that students are appropriate substitutes for the business professionals who will ultimately be targetted by these experiments, it seems likely that business-oriented students will reflect their views more accurately than the more technically-oriented Computer Science students with whom we first ran this experiment. Features/Attributes of TREAT
Influence of Educational Background
Importance and necessity of the EDI discussion, the software practice and the trade cycle practice sessions.
Not dependent on educational background. Both groups had had no or little previous experience in these areas.
Impact of the operational aspects of TREAT (i.e., interactive vs. non-interactive messaging exchanges, length of trade cycles and practical sessions.
Not dependent on educational background.
Appreciation of the different message types.
Not dependent on educational background. Both groups believed that TREAT should include more EDI messages.
Decision of whether to trade with local or international partners.
Not dependent on educational background. Students based this decision on cost alone.
Features/Attributes of TREAT
Influence of Educational Background
Interest in and enjoyment of TREAT.
Not dependent on educational background.
Manifestation of student interest in and enjoyment of TREAT.
Dependent on educational background. The Curtin students explored the EDI software in their own time. The Monash students focused on the decision-making aspects of the laboratory, such as designing spreadsheets.
Attitudes toward organisational complexity.
Dependent on educational background. The Curtin students generally found the firms difficult and complex to operate, whereas the Monash students saw no problems with the company structure (one student suggesting changes which would have increased organisational complexity).
Interest in technical aspects of TREAT (e.g., the operation and configuration of the EDI software and telecommunications utilities).
Dependent on educational background. The Curtin students were more interested in the technical aspects than the Monash students.
Interest in the organisational/strategic aspects of TREAT (e.g., operating the companies, reducing inventory levels, etc).
Dependent on educational background. The Monash students were more interested in the business aspects than the Curtin students.
Table 2: The Impact of Educational Background on Attributes of TREAT Although the results of these first two iterations of TREAT can only be regarded as indicative, they do suggest that experiments conducted on a larger scale will support these initial findings. More specifically, the Curtin/Monash studies have given us confidence to conduct quantitative experiments, where students will be grouped according to their educational backgrounds and participate in identically executed TREAT implementations, to generate more conclusive results. The overriding hypotheses of the entire research project of which TREAT forms a part are that: effective education programmes can greatly assist in overcoming the lack of acceptance of internationally-based telecommunications/EDI by the business community C an international, laboratory-based approach to electronic commerce, using commercial EDI products, is a suitable educational environment for teaching applied telecommunications.
C
If these hypotheses are correct, it is clearly important that the laboratory environment created be as realistic as possible to assist in overcoming potential users' initial reluctance. The initial experiments undertaken at Curtin and Monash Universities suggest that commercial users of EDI will be attracted to a realistic laboratory environment and that they will gain major benefits from TREAT. The next phase of this research project will involve the development of two further experimental versions of TREAT - one for a university environment, taking into account the variables identified in these initial experiments (the educational background variable has been the focus of this paper) and a second version designed for the business world, which will build on the findings of the university experiments.
End Notes 1. Deep approaches to learning can be identified when students concentrate on extracting the underlying meaning of the curriculum and on: C understanding the subject matter completely and fully (often spending their free time exploring topics covered in class) C understanding concepts or hidden messages so that knowledge can be used in new problem domains C relating previous knowledge (such as concepts learned from a previous course of study) to new knowledge, thus building a framework of meaningful, interconnected understanding [1, 9].
References 1.
Biggs J.B. (1987) Student Approaches to Learning. Melbourne, ACER.
2.
Fletcher J.L. and Dobbins A.L. (1971) An Approach to Evaluating Learning in Simulation Games. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
3.
Gri
ar J. (1992) Laboratory for EDI and Interogranisational Systems EDI Teaching Component. Proceedings of the Researching and Teaching EDI - 2nd Symposium Bled, Slovenia, September 5, 23-25.
4.
Healy T. (1991) EDI in Australia: Still Making Haste Slowly. Australian Communications, June, 63-70.
5.
Keen P.G.W. (1986) Competing in Time: Using Telecommunications for Competitive Advantage. Ballinger, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
6.
Leigh W.E. and Burgess C. (1987) Distributed Intelligence: Trade-offs and Decisions for Computer Information Systems. South-Western Publishing Company, Cincinnati, Ohio.
7.
Parker C.M. and Swatman P.M.C. (1995) The TREAT Laboratory: Comparing an Electronic Commerce Experiment at Curtin and Monash Universities, Computer Communcations 18(6): 447-457.
8.
Parker C.M. and Swatman P.M.C. (1995) Encouraging SME Acceptance of EDI: An Educational Approach, Proc Conf 8th International EDI-IOS Conference, Bled, Slovenia, June 5-8, 27-46.
9.
Parker C.M., Swatman P.M.C., Petri
D. and Gri
ar J. (1994) The Curtin/Maribor EDI Simulation: An Innovative Approach to Teaching International Telecommunications. In: Gri
ar J. and Novak J., eds. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on EDI-IOS, Bled, Slovenia, June, 291-315.
10.
Ramsden P. (1992) Learning to Teach in Higher Education. Routledge, London.
11.
Roche E.M. (1991) Telecommunications and Business Strategy. The Dryden Press, Chicago.
12.
Schnaidt P. (1992) Enterprise-Wide Networking. Sams Publishing, Carmel, Indiana.
13.
Steinbart P.J. and Nath R. (1992) Problems and Issues in the Management of International Data Communications Networks: The Experiences of American Companies. MIS Quarterly 16(1), 55-76.
14.
Swatman P.M.C. (1994) Business Process Redesign using EDI: The BHP Steel Experience. Australian Journal of Information Systems 1(2), 55-73.
15.
Turnbull P. (1990) EDI, Innovation and Organisation. In: Gifkins M., ed. EDI Technology. Blenheim Online Publications, Pinner, Middlesex, 231-246.
16.
Valovic T. (1993) Corporate Networks: The Strategic Use of Telecommunications. Artech House, Boston..
17.
van Kirk D. (1993) EDI Could be Coming Soon to a PC Near You. Network World, November, 30-34.
18.
Wagenaar R.W. (1992) Research on EDI at the Faculty of Business Administration, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Proceedings of the Researching and Teaching EDI - 2nd Symposium, Bled, Slovenia, September 5, 5-9.
19.
Wrigley C.D. (1993) The IOSGame: Inter-organizational Business Simulation, Working Paper, Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
