Training Tool 2

William Arnold; Lynne McClure

16 Training Tool 2

SUGARBAD CORPORATION A SIMULATION

Introduction

The following pages contain an extensive simulation of an organization. The purpose of the simulation is to help students in a training and development class understand the difficulty of conducting a needs assessment.

Instructions for students prior to the simulation:

The class is divided into teams of from 5 to 8 people. Each team is given time to prepare questions that they might ask employees in Sugarbad as the team begins a needs assessment. Usually a team is given 30 minutes of class time the week before they are to do the interviews. They are advised to take time outside of class to make sure that they have a good interview schedule.

On the day or days of the interviews, each team is given a select period of time to interview the employees. It is up to the team members to decide whom to talk to and for how long. I usually give each team from 20 to 30 minutes. Each team is then scheduled for the appropriate period of time.

The team members are told that they have a meeting with Roger/Ann Smith* and that the company is a high tech firm. They are told that they have a specified time to learn about the organization and any communication problems that the company might have. They are also told that they can talk to anyone in the organization without regard to a name. For example, they might want to talk to the lowest level person in one of the divisions. (Clearly they must learn about the structure of the organization early on if they are to get an accurate picture of the company.)

Instructions for the Instructor prior to the simulation:

If you do not have an “acting” bent, this simulation is not for you. In essence, you play the role of everyone in the organization . You are Roger/Ann Smith and anyone else that the team would like to talk to. You can get others to help you with the thousands of possible roles if you like.

The only requirement for you is that you remain consistent when you interact with the teams. If Roger/Ann is unethical in his/her behavior with team one, he/she should remain so with the other teams. No one in the organization volunteers information without being asked. Each team should be given the information sought with their questions. If a later team does not ask a particular question, it doesn’t get the information.

The teams can talk to anyone including Roger/Ann’ s boss, secretary, or a dock worker. It is up to the team members to decide who to talk to and for how long. You need to cut them off at the end of the allotted time.

*You may select different names to balance gender and ethnic differences.

The information on pages 47—69 is for the instructor’s eyes only. As the instructor you are playing all the roles that are described. Your students may ask to talk to a person who is not on the chart. You can add that employee to the chart and use it with the future groups. If a student asks to speak to the person in charge of electronics (p. 49) you can use the information listed under Earl Easton to respond. If that student asks to speak to the head of assembly you use the same information. Don’t repeat the information if the request is for both. Rarely in a short period of time do students ask for someone at the same level. If they do, you have to create new information immediately. Unless the information provided says otherwise, only that person is aware of the content. For example, only Mark Harmon is aware of the information on the top of page 49.

The bottom line of this simulation is creativity and consistency. What is missing you have to create. If several groups are going to interview you, you have to be consistent. Don’t volunteer information unless asked.

Instructions for post simulation discussion:

After all of the groups have completed the simulation, each group must report its findings. I also ask each team to draw an organizational chart so that we might compare the findings from each team. Like the story of elephant, we may get different versions of the same company even though the information is potentially the same.

Upon completion of the above factual discoveries, we then discuss the types of problems that the teams faced in completing the interviews and in drawing conclusions. One can discuss respondent ambiguity, question types, probing, and a wide variety of issues depending on the time available.

Additional notes:

You will not find a complete description for every character in the company. Each team always comes up with someone somewhere that I had not built into the simulation. I simply create that person and add it to the simulation. You should incorporate whatever additions you would like to bring to the exercise. What I have included consists of my experiences at a wide variety of companies during my consulting.

Any feedback and suggestions would be appreciated.