Beedie’s David Hannah honoured for contribution to management education

A case study co-authored by David Hannah, Associate Professor of Management and Organization Studies at Beedie School of Business, has won Management Teaching Review’s 2016 Best Paper Award.

A case study co-authored by David Hannah, Associate Professor of Management and Organization Studies at Beedie School of Business, has won Management Teaching Review’s 2016 Best Paper Award.

The Organizational Behavior Teaching Society and Management Teaching Review selected the paper, “Jarvis Manufacturing: An Experiential Exercise for Teaching the Fundamentals of Teamwork”, in recognition of the “significant impact” it had made on management education.

“We were delighted to be chosen for this award,” says Hannah. “It was particularly gratifying to hear from one of the members of the selection committee that she uses the exercise in her classes, and it generates great discussion. It’s wonderful that our work is having a positive impact on the experiential learning of students around the world.”

The paper, which was co-authored with Kirsten M. Robertson from University of the Fraser Valley, is a case study exercise designed to teach students the fundamentals of managing teams. Jarvis Manufacturing is a fictional ski and snowboard manufacturing company, and students are asked to assume the role of the CEO, and choose a team to revise the company’s snowboarding strategy.

Hannah and Robertson developed the case after finding a lack of suitable experiential exercises to teach students the knowledge, skills, and abilities required for effective teamwork.

“This realistic case study showed the complexity and importance of the many dimensions of team dynamics,” says Krystal Lowney, a student who used the case in her own studies.

“We were tasked with putting together a well-rounded team in regards to skills, knowledge and abilities that could provide valuable insight, while taking into consideration the personality conflicts, which already existed. To add yet another element, we were put into groups and were required to have a group consensus. It became apparent the diversity of our own group gave valuable insights, otherwise not considered.”