This article was downloaded by: [Sultan Qaboos University]On: 31 March 2012, At: 02:26Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Teaching in InternationalBusinessPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wtib20

A Tri-Country Marketing Project –Preparing Students for the Realities of aGlobal MarketplaceIna Freeman a , Peter Knight b & Irfan Butt ca Jones International University, Centennial, Colorado, USAb University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, Wisconsin, USAc Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore Cantt, Pakistan

Available online: 09 Mar 2012

To cite this article: Ina Freeman, Peter Knight & Irfan Butt (2011): A Tri-Country Marketing Project– Preparing Students for the Realities of a Global Marketplace, Journal of Teaching in InternationalBusiness, 22:4, 277-299

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08975930.2011.653910

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of Teaching in International Business, 22: 277–299, 2011Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0897-5930 print / 1528-6991 onlineDOI: 10.1080/08975930.2011.653910

A Tri-Country Marketing Project – Preparing Students forthe Realities of a Global Marketplace

Ina FreemanJones International University, Centennial, Colorado, USA

Peter KnightUniversity of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, Wisconsin, USA

Irfan ButtLahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore Cantt, Pakistan

With rapidly increasing globalization, business students are required to understand complex globalmarkets and adapt to the rapid changes in the global landscape. This paper discusses a project wherestudents from International Marketing courses in Pakistan, the United States, and France used aninteractive platform as a base to jointly explore the marketing of brand-name products across the threecountries to better understand the realities of global marketing strategies. The results are discussed asare the difficulties and the recommendations for future projects.

Keywords: Virtual teams, Cross-cultural collaboration, AACSB, Double-loop learning

1. INTRODUCTION

In today’s business environment, business students require an increased awareness of globalmarkets and the rapid changes in the global landscape that will impact them and the world ofcommerce. In fact, Bird and Stevens (2003) suggest that the business leaders of tomorrow willbe ‘globals’ who will freely navigate and operate in a variety of international and cross-culturalenvironments. The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) has alsoacknowledged that demand for employees with the ability to analyze international markets usingtechnology is on the rise. In fact, AACSB now requires its members to analyze internationalmarket analysis skills of their business graduate (Kaynak, 2009). However, business schoolsthemselves are shockingly national, even regional in their organizational scope and footprint(Doh, 2010). John Walker (2009) analyzed international business curriculum of 194 AACSBmember schools in five countries and found “widespread absence of specialized courses incross-cultural communication from IB (International Business) mandatory curricula” (p. 304).

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Peter Knight School of Business & Technology, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, 900 Wood Road, Kenosha, WI 53141-2000 USA. E-mail: knightp@uwp.edu

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

278 FREEMAN ET AL.

Most students studying international business are dependent upon their texts, professors, andthe news to grasp an understanding of global markets. The expense and logistics of travel, pre-cludes many students from exposure or understanding of many cross-cultural issues, includingchronemics, proxemics, oculesics, cultural values, and laws (Martin & Chaney, 1992), as wellas specialized fields including negotiation (Walker, 2009) and consumer behaviour. Equippedonly with limited cultural knowledge, limited or absent exposure, and limited skills to commu-nicate within other cultures (Walker, 2009), as well as the human tendency to consider theirexperiences as universal based on their own Self Reference Criterion (Pun, Lewis, & Chin, 2003;Cateora, Gilly, & Graham, 2009), students are not being prepared for understanding and engag-ing in the realities of international business. Burton (2005) suggests that although global marketopportunities have increased exponentially, courses in global marketing remain marginalized.One approach to improve the necessary skills for cross-cultural communication and to reducethe impact of Self Reference Criterion (Pun, Lewis, & Chin, 2003; Cateora, Gilly, & Graham,2009) to a wider cohort than exchange programs is the inclusion of projects where students frommultiple countries work together to produce a collaborative marketing analysis.

This article discusses one such project where students from International Marketing coursesin Pakistan, the United States, and France used an interactive platform as a base to explorethe marketing of products across three continents. This project was designed to enrich thestudents’ knowledge of marketing to and within other cultures by enabling communicationamong the students in the three nations, thereby enabling double-loop learning (Betters-Reed,Nitkin & Sampson, 2008). Project design was guided by an assessment of objectives outlined inInternational Marketing syllabi world-wide, prescriptions outlined by Milhauser and Rahschulte(2010) as to how to make international marketing classes more relevant to potential employ-ers and AACSB program learning goals related to global business (AACSB, 2011b). Projectobjectives and their success were measured by student perceptions of cross–cultural learning,improved cultural knowledge, and interest in global marketing as well as general satisfactionwith the instruction methods used. The instructors also analyzed project outcomes and deliver-ables in relation to project objectives, such as improved teamwork and writing skills (Milhauser& Rahschulte, 2010). We discuss how the project was designed and implemented, the impact ofproject on student’s learnings, and the impediments and challenges faced by the students and pro-fessors. The authors also provide recommendations for successful deployment of such projects infuture by other instructors.

2. BACKGROUND

In educating future managers and industry leaders, the importance of international exposureis recognized as important (Fielden, 2007; Van Dyne & Ang, 2006; Stroh & Caligiuri, 1998).Research indicates that the exposure to real-time environments is beneficial. For example, CEOswith international experience lead their firms to more positive financial results (Carpenter,Sanders, & Gregersen, 2001; Daily, Certo, & Dalton, 2000). In a call for internationalizationof higher education, Arthur Levin, the president of the Woodrow Wilson National FellowshipFoundation, and former president of the Teachers’ College at Columbia University recently cat-egorized the degree and pace of universities’ acceptance of internationalization as essential ifstudents are to be prepared adequately for participation in commerce (Fischer, 2010).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 279

The 2011 Report of the AACSB Globalization Task Force (AACSB, 2011b) finds that busi-ness schools strive to globalize for many reasons: a sense of mission or professional obligation,networking (to build connectivity with other schools), signaling and brand-building, satisfyingdemand, generating revenues, and, ultimately, self-transformation. Simultaneously, the task forcefinds that globalization requires resources that elude many schools (AACSB, 2011b).

Popular approaches used to globalize business education are exchange programs, internshipsand work experience programs take students abroad (Caligiuri, 2006), which encourage stu-dents to gain first-hand knowledge of the differences in societies including culture, ethnicity,legal, political, ethical, and technological differences. A total of 36 percent of AACSB schoolswith international business programs require students to participate in international exchanges(Walker, 2009). The students from these schools feel they have greater intercultural proficiency,openness to cultural diversity, and a change in mindset to become more globally aware than stu-dents who do not participate in exchanges (Clarke et al., 2009). However, a 2009 AACSB studyfound almost 29 percent of AACSB schools in the sample had no requirement for their interna-tional business students to study a foreign language and only 10 percent of these schools alsorequired a cross-cultural communication course (Walker, 2009). In fact, the reality is that only athird of AACSB schools responding to the 2009 survey required an overseas experience (Walker,2009). With AACSB representing only 607 member institutions in 38 countries (AACSB, 2011a),overall a relatively small percentage of business students attend study abroad programs. Theremight be a difference between schools in North America and schools in Europe. In Europe travelis easier due to less distance and the European Union standards of no travel restrictions, althoughas in America or the Pacific Rim, travel outside of their continents by students is difficult. Further,programs such as Erasmus in Europe facilitate the exchange of European students within Europeand many European schools require at least one semester of study abroad in commerce programs.Elsewhere, the United States based International Student Exchange Program includes slightlymore than 300 institutions globally, but not all of them have a specialized program in interna-tional business or even offer a business degree (International Student Exchange Program, 2010).In fact, there were only 262,400 students studying abroad in the 2007–2008 academic year underthis program, with fifteen percent of students in member schools having studied abroad at sometime during their undergraduate experience (IES National Center for Education Statistics, 2010).

Business schools that do not offer international exchanges or experiences are forced to relyon faculty to add international content to existing courses, utilizing active learning (Lawson,White, & Dimitriadis, 1998). Additionally international programs at business schools rarely offerstudents the opportunity to collaborate in truly global work groups to learn the essential skillsdesired by employers (Freeman & Knight, 2007) despite the existence of programs that facilitateexchanges such as the International Student Exchange Program and capstone courses that requireinternational experience in community service learning programs (Metcalf, 2010).

The 2011 Report of the AACSB Globalization Task Force (AACSB, 2011b) also suggested toschools with relatively limited resources, that well focused international business curriculum maybe even more critical to the achievement of the globalization-related objectives they set for them-selves since they may be unable to employ other levers relied on by schools with more resources(AACSB, 2011b). In the absence of any other viable alternative for the majority of business stu-dents, higher education institutions in many countries structure courses in international businessby relying primarily on texts written by authors who cover the broad array of what is necessaryto examine in the international marketplace. Other formats of international education are in the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

280 FREEMAN ET AL.

form of online courses (Beerkins, 2002) and rely on updated information from the internet. Whilethe internet provides a storehouse of information, it is insufficient when entering a new market-place. To compensate, instructors who have lived abroad often facilitate these courses, givingthe students first-hand knowledge of some countries. However, many courses remain didacticand outside the realm of experience wherein the individual is required to function in the foreignenvironment (Leung et al., 2008). The 2011 Report of the AACSB Globalization Task Force(AACSB, 2011b) states that, despite a flurry of global activities business schools have initiatedin recent years, a frustratingly wide curriculum gap remains alongside large risks of misdirectedand incoherent strategies. For instance, most business schools place more emphasis on numbersof students studying abroad than on developing and integrating global content within the cur-riculum; the task force concludes (Mangan, 2011). The report attributes this to a small numberof new and prospective faculty members with significant global experience and insight. Further,there are relatively few outlets for publishing articles about global business issues. Thus, facultymembers hoping for tenure and promotions have fewer incentives to tackle complex internationalissues (Mangan, 2011).

One solution to address limited resources for student exchanges and study abroad programsand improve skills for business students in a purposeful manner is to assign projects that provideexposure to foreign cultures and management practices through real time online cross-culturalcollaborations with students from other countries with different cultural context rather thansimply relying on the instructor to impart this knowledge in a didactic manner.

3. GLOBAL LEARNING IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Learning by studying and working in the “real-world” environment relates to Kolb’s (1984)Experiential Learning Theory wherein learning comes from concrete experience, reflective obser-vation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. Educational institutions oftenrely on reflective observation and abstract conceptualization. Concrete experience and activeexperimentation provide a basis for understanding most often found only in practicum orwork-experience programs.

Learning today in commerce programs typically includes information and communicationtechnology (ICT) courses. This is recognized by AACSB as important (AACSB, 2010) becausemany organizations use ICT to work through specific problems or develop innovative solu-tions (Ramstad, 2009; Jain & Benyoucef, 2008) in a flexible and collaborative Web enabledenvironment (Goldman, Nagel, & Preiss, 1995). This environment is discussed in the literatureacknowledging specialized organizations that facilitate collaboration across boundaries and barri-ers (Tianfield & Unland, 2002). However, there is a substantial void in the literature discussing thehuman factors of global, virtual group formation and function, including the numerous challengesinherent in crossing international and ethnic boundaries and the current importance of developinghigh functioning global teams. Instead, much of the literature deals with the technological aspectsof global virtual teams.

The development and functionality of virtual teams in an educational setting requires interac-tive programs that draw extensively on the education theories of Piaget (1950) and as noted aboveKolb (1984) using the more recent adaptations for an e-environment made by Mayer (2001).This environment allows for the use of the multi-media ICT, facilitating the learning of students

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 281

across various styles of learning (Graf, Liu, & Kinshuk, 2010). The learning styles and experi-ences of students may, in fact, change the online environment (Hunt, Eagle, & Kitchen, 2004).However, global teams in the virtual environment may also face greater challenges than domesticvirtual teams. Global teams often include more culturally diverse members who have differentlanguages and intentions for working in the computer facilitated environment (Latapie & Tran,2007). Compounding these difficulties in the computer mediated environment are the differencesin time zones that allow primarily asynchronous communication and limited understanding dueto a lack of contextual clarification. The importance of context (Hall, 1976), including situa-tional, spatial, and nonverbal factors that are not typically present in asynchronous and textualcommunication, is paramount but varies sharply across national cultures.

Other compounding factors in global virtual teams include limited cultural intelligence (CQ)(Gardner, 2006), which is important to cultivate in a global business environment becausecommunication in international business necessitates the ability to understand individuals fromother cultures and ethnicities. Cultural intelligence is viewed as a moderator of cognitive andbehavioural learning in the development of self-efficacy, ethno-relative attitudes concerning othercultures, and models of leadership that facilitate flexibility across cultures (Ng, Van Dyne, & Ang,2009). Through the development of cultural intelligence, students are better able to understandthe cultural barriers to better prepare to meet the demands of different marketplaces.

4. LEARNING OBJECTIVES OF INTERNATIONAL MARKETING COURSE

Marketing is a fundamental course in many business programs around the globe, and inter-national marketing is essential in any specialization in international business. Firms involvedin international business have indicated that top six knowledge areas include business ethics,cultural differences, teamwork, legal areas, writing skills, and strategic planning (Milhauser &Rahschulte, 2010). In looking at over fifty International or Global Marketing syllabi on the inter-net from multiple countries including the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, India, thePeople’s Republic of China, the Czech Republic, Russia, France, Germany, Australia, amongothers, we found that despite the diversity of the learning objectives all include theory and mostinclude practical exercises (as shown in Table 1).

This table demonstrates only 14 learning objectives due to the overlap and similarity of manyof the objectives. Many courses include case studies and other practical exercises designed toenhance the students’ sense of responsibility, integrity, and honesty, as well as basic communi-cation skills of readings, writing, listening, speaking, and mathematics. Others offer interactiveprograms using computer simulations such as MarkStrat, Monte Carlo, and others. Still othercourses require the development of a paper that requires students to interview or study interna-tional firms. In many courses, students are expected to learn a great deal about the intricacies ofinternational markets and marketing. However, in the absence of any contact and interaction inforeign markets, their learning takes place at a theoretical level, thereby limiting their exposureto the complexities and differences existent in marketing a product from one market to anotherdue to cultural, economic, legal, political and technological variations, as well as strategic plan-ning. However, the expectations that business places on students that are not typically and clearlyaddressed in most International Marketing syllabi include writing skills, effective teamwork, andcultural awareness (Millhauser & Rahschulte, 2010).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

282 FREEMAN ET AL.

TABLE 1Learning Objectives in International Marketing Syllabi

1. An understanding of the theory of marketing in an international context2. An awareness of the international arena including an understanding of the influences of social, economic,

financial, political, legal, ethical, anthropological, historical, and technological environments in both thenational and the international arenas

3. An understanding of the components of a competitive advantage in the international or global arena4. An awareness of differences in the levels of development and the impact of these upon business development in

foreign markets5. An awareness of the role of marketing as a corporate endeavour in an international or global environment6. An understanding of the export and import processes and stages in the distribution channel including the

documentation and procedural complexities7. An understanding of the stages and development of a product and/or service in a foreign market8. An understanding of national and international communication channels used in advocacy, public relations, and

promotion of goods and services; an understanding of the strategies necessary to internationalize products andservices

9. An awareness of websites and other places to look for necessary information concerning potential marketplaces10. An understanding of the consumer including the cultural, religious, and ethnic differences11. An appreciation for the influence of the internet including analogous, and complementary technologies upon

international marketing and its strategies12. An awareness of the changing preferences including awareness of ecological impact, preferences for goods

made by companies claiming to adhere to human rights and corporate social responsibility13. A familiarity with the tools, frameworks, and techniques necessary to develop assessments and strategies for

foreign markets14. An awareness of the challenges and needs for evaluation within the international or global arena

5. LEARNING/RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

To fill the gap between business’s demand for graduates with an understanding of global mar-kets, and the education of students by institutions of higher learning (Millhauser & Rahschulte,2010), this project was developed to enhance student interest and the requisite skills in globalbusiness through working with a virtual team on a global project examining real life internationalmarketing problems. The 2011 Report of the AACSB Globalization Task Force (AACSB, 2011b)reported that anecdotal and survey data compiled by AACSB assessment seminar facilitators indi-cate that learning goals related to international competencies are considerably less common thanthose related to other skills (AACSB, 2011b). This deficiency makes analysis of the effectivenessof existing curricular models and approaches particularly difficult. However, the same report doessuggest that mechanisms that reinforce global learning objectives, most notably classroom diver-sity, international experiences, project work, and language training, when carefully selected anddeployed, can be valuable supplements to course content. Accordingly project learning designand objectives are based on most of those mechanisms (project work, classroom diversity, inter-national experience) as well as those outlined by Millhauser and Rahschulte (2010) and thoseoutlined in our review of International Marketing course syllabi. The Learning Objectives for thisassignment are indicated in Table 2.

These objectives also recognize the need to close the loop (Betters-Reed, Nitkin, & Sampson,2008) in double-loop learning wherein the student learns how to learn and adapt to newenvironments.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 283

TABLE 2Learning Objectives for Tri-Nation Exercise

1. In comparing and contrasting of marketing across three nations, students will demonstrate how theoreticalknowledge is implemented into a practical situation

2. In comparing and contrasting the marketing of similar products across three nations, students will demonstratethe changes necessitated by cross-cultural and geopolitical environments as well as the changes requiredwithin emerging and established markets

3. In completing this project, the students will demonstrate adaptability in learning new computer softwareprograms

4. In completing this project, the students will demonstrate how to adapt marketing according to the needsidentified by Milhauser and Rahschulte (2010), particularly the differences between developed anddeveloping countries

5. In collaborating with students from different cultural backgrounds, the students will demonstrate collaborationin cross-cultural team-working in a virtual and multi-media environment

6. METHODOLOGY

The project was developed by three Canadian professors. The professors worked in Pakistan, theUnited States, and France. Each had an international marketing class of senior level students.The students were in the final year of their commerce program and the courses were the firstinternational marketing course taken by these students. All students were in their early to mid-twenties and few had worked as full-time employees prior to the project. For all students, thisproject was the first of its kind. However, all students had some computer literacy as all schoolshad intranet or institution based web communication.

Because the lowest number of students in any one class was 21, the professors sought 21 dif-ferent global products or brands (Table 3) that were not only sold in all three countries, but alsothat had a significant legal presence. The companies chosen were also all large multi-nationalfirms where a large amount of information on the company’s global activities could be gatheredthrough readily available public sources. The products ranged from vehicles to pens. Neitherthe United States nor France dominated with head offices. This was done to ensure the students

TABLE 3Global Brands Analyzed by Student Teams

Global Brand Category/Product Global Brand Category/Product

McDonalds Restaurants Nokia Cell PhonesSubway Restaurants Knorr Swiss Dry Soups and MixesNike Athletic Shoes Marriot HotelsCoke Soft Drinks L’Oréal CosmeticsPepsi Soft Drinks Michelin TiresLG Appliances Bic PensNestlé Bottled Water Avis Rental CarsUnilever Detergent Colgate ToothpasteToyota Cars Domino’s RestaurantsHonda Cars Sanofi Aventis PharmaceuticalsGillette Razors

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

284 FREEMAN ET AL.

recognized the products and each country as contributing to the project. Although the Pakistanieconomy is rapidly transitioning, few truly global Pakistani brands have yet emerged.

Each brand and product category was analyzed and represented by a separate group. To formgroups, the American and Pakistani students self-selected the product. However, because thenumbers of students were uneven among the classes, (the American class had 21 students, thePakistani class had 28 students, and the French class had 58 students who participated) groupswere typically comprised of 1 U.S. student, 1–2 Pakistani students and 2–4 French students.

The project utilized an independent computer platform, ENAP, developed by a French col-league for online and interactive course content. This option was chosen as none of the schoolswere able to provide the students from all three countries access to the school learning man-agement systems such as D2L due to legal, security, and privacy issues. Previous articles havediscussed international assignments using solely email (Freeman & Knight, 2007; Lawson,White, & Dimitriadis, 1998) but the ENAP site allowed the students a dedicated space throughwhich they were able to message in real time and leave messages asynchronously for team matesliving in other time zones. Students were expected to be active on the platform on a regular basis,at a minimum of three times per week. The platform facilitated the students’ sharing of docu-ments, chatting, posting assignments, emailing other group members and the professors, as wellas providing a databank of project documents including instructions, works in progress, and arti-cles of interest. The students were restricted to assigned brands on the platform but all documentswere downloadable so there was no guarantee that projects were not compared across products.Although some countries in Asia experience difficulty with ICT (Kaplan, Piskin, & Bol, 2010),the university in Pakistan worked to ensure the integrity of the program. This encouraged the stu-dents to explore the e-environment and become aware of various software programs and onlineinformation sources.

7. THE PROJECT

To help prepare the students for potential difficulties, the students were first exposed to writtenmaterial and then participated in a discussion about the differences to be expected between emerg-ing and established markets (Clarke & Flaherty, 2003). While the Asian International MarketingProgram (AIM) has encouraged business-ready marketing professionals who can perform busi-ness function across international boundaries (Kamath & MacNab, 1998), little is discussed inthe literature about providing emerging marketplace exposure to commerce and marketing stu-dents. Thus, to enrich the students’ understanding of differences and similarities of emerging anddeveloped marketplaces, all three instructors discussed multiple aspects of the three countries,comparing the psychological, social, and cultural aspects. Information provided was developedcollaboratively by the professors, including easily accessible information from multiple websites.

The group interaction enabled the students from each country to demonstrate project leader-ship skills when discussing their country. Students were guided by the instructors in exploration oftheir own and other countries’ marketplaces in order to ensure all students had similar knowledgeand the learning was optimized (Mayer, 2004). Specifically, the students were asked to examinethe segmentation, the positioning, and the marketing mix in each country. The students were ini-tially assigned two group building exercises, designed to improve the students’ understanding ofteamwork while facilitating the building of successful teams. The second group building exercise

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 285

was incorporated as the Pakistani students began their classes in March whereas the French andAmerican students began their classes at the beginning of the semester. The project encompassedfor their assigned product categories and brands. The students were initially assigned three projectdeliverables including a research plan, an interim report, and a final report, as well as two groupbuilding exercises.

The representative(s) of each country discussed the standardization or adaptation of market-ing in each country in comparison to those in the partner countries, thus, blending cognitiveand behavioural learning through internalization (Piaget & Inhelder, 1956). With facilitation, thestudents were instructed to initially describe the marketing of the product or brand, and thento look to the cultural and ethnic differences that might explain the differences using Hofstedeand Hofstede (2005) as well as other articles, their course texts, and websites including the CIAFactbook, corporate, and government websites. Using similar tools, the students were able todiscuss with their group members similar concepts across cultural boundaries, enriching andchallenging their understanding of words or concepts as well as augmenting their knowledge ofwhere to look for information. Using the same tools also enabled a better discussion of culturaldifferences as applied to individual products, enhancing the students’ knowledge of their own andothers’ cultures.

The quality of available secondary data varied sharply across the three countries in terms ofmarket and industry reports, census data, and other necessary data to complete the required ele-ments of the report in a consistent and comparable format. Market and product category datathat might be routinely available in the United States was often nonexistent in Pakistan, and ifavailable in France often required accurate language translation. Similar to any global market-ing initiative, students, particularly those in Pakistan, often had to conduct primary research,typically in the form of expert interviews with local managers as the best proxy for data avail-able in the other two countries. It was a good demonstration of the difference within developingeconomies for French and American students who normally take the availability of secondarydata for granted.

The project culminated in an oral classroom presentation and a collaborative report preparedby all group members and assessed by all three instructors. The oral presentation facilitatedstudents’ presentation skills as well as enriching other students’ knowledge. The written reportdemonstrated the understanding of the implementation of theoretical constructs in two developedcountries and one developing country. An outline of exactly what was expected in the reports,including the page length of the project, was given to the students, but ample room was left forinnovation and exploration. This outline is included in the Appendix.

8. EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONALMARKETING COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES—INSTRUCTOR PERSPECTIVES

The project met and, for some students, surpassed many of the international marketing courseobjectives. When referring back to the course objectives structured for this project, which meldedthe objectives found on international marketing syllabi and prescriptions outlined by Millhauserand Rahschulte (2010) with course requirements, we found the students referred to varioustheories in marketing while discussing the international markets, in concurrence with the firstcourse objective. Similar to the variance in the use of individual theories, the understanding of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

286 FREEMAN ET AL.

the theories varied in their application to the international markets. This did, however, indicatethe student had attempted to learn, understand, and utilize theories of marketing in a practicalsituation in compliance with the first course objective and international syllabi objective one.

The second course objective of comparing and contrasting the marketing across the threenations was successfully achieved by the groups in their final reports. The objective encompassesobjective two, six, seven, eight, ten, twelve, and fourteen of the international syllabi. As would beexpected, the home team in each country was better able to discuss the marketing in their country,but when combined, a thorough report was presented, reflecting the team’s understanding of inter-national marketing concepts, though the learning of each member individually was not assessed.Despite the fact all the students in France had studied abroad, few had spent time in an emergingeconomy and few of the students in either France or America understood the need to approachmarketing in these economies using “bottom up” marketing intelligence and the challenge ofincorporating local leaders in marketing plans (Roy & Roy, 2010). This enhanced the students’learning of the variances of marketing strategies when products are sold across different cultures.

Course objective three, dealing with the internet, e-collaboration, and computer software com-pares to international syllabi objectives eight, nine, eleven, thirteen, and fourteen. This wasmonitored almost daily throughout the project by the three instructors. All three professors’ addedcomments and instructions, clarified discussion points, and answered questions concerning theENAP platform, the course, where to find information, and group interactions both online andin-person as the questions and discussion points arose. By monitoring the individual groups, theinstructors were able to facilitate the learning by ensuring the students remained focused. A listof useful internet sites were compiled and distributed to the groups via the platform, allowing thegroup members to explore those sites and add others they found interesting or relevant. While thecourse platform presented some problems, these were used as teaching moments for the studentsas well as the instructors and feedback was also given to the site developer. The American andPakistani students coalesced to utilize the site as they quickly recognized that the platform was inthe beta stage of testing. In contrast to the findings of Ueltschy (2001) that interactive technologyincreased student participation, enhanced student learning, and enhanced team building skills, theFrench students communicated as little as possible using this site and reverted to known sites andprograms. Thus, the success of this objective would be excellent for the American and Pakistanistudents, but poor for many of the French students.

The fourth course objective of demonstrating a better understanding of marketing differencesbetween developed and developing countries compares to objectives one, two, three, four, five,ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen of the international syllabi. This objective, again, wasdemonstrated well in the final report. The final oral report, wherein each group discussed themarketing internationally of their product, was done well, with each individual participating.Questions from the class and from other students during presentations indicated that at leastsome students were cognizant of the differences in the marketing strategies, communication,economics, and political-legal ramifications among the three countries. The understanding ofthe need to adjust some and sometimes all aspects of the marketing mix depending on thesocio-political-economic-technological structure of the marketplace was evident within manygroup presentations and resulted in some interesting discussion points that other groups had notanticipated or considered. Thus, the oral presentations also served as a learning point for theseobjectives, if the student chose to take the opportunity to engage.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 287

The fifth and final course objective of effective collaboration within a cross-cultural team ina virtual environment compares favourably with the majority of the objectives from the interna-tional syllabi as well as the emphasis on develop teamwork and team building skills as outlined byMillhauser and Rahschulte (2010). Despite some conflicts due to miscommunication, time zonedifferences, and varying cultural frames of reference, in most cases, group norms of behaviorand strong collaboration began to rapidly develop as the project progressed. This was clearly evi-dent to the instructors through as review of student posts. Group members began to increasinglycollaborate on completion of specific group tasks and communicate more often.

The impact of having to edit and refine the work of others from different cultures was nottrivial in terms of developing strong writing skills by those engaged in International Business(Millhauser and Rahschulte, 2010). English was not the first language of the French students inthe vast majority of cases, while the Pakistani students had been largely educated in a traditionalBritish system that typically has a strong emphasis on grammar. The U.S. students quite oftenfound they needed to significantly edit some French submissions for clarity and grammar, andsimultaneously had their own writing skills sometimes challenged by some of the Pakistani stu-dents, regarding grammar and clarity. This dynamic, new to most students appeared to improveconsciousness about the importance of clear writing skills. In an ideal learning environment, theU.S. and Pakistani students who had studied second languages, such as French, would likely facethe same challenges.

In general, the students worked together to develop an awareness and an understanding of theunderlying reasons for the differences and similarities in marketing programs for identical prod-ucts. In so doing, the students became aware of the need for differences in marketing programsfor a specific product enabling them to utilize the knowledge obtained from their readings tounderstand the application across international borders. The sharing and discussion facilitated thestudent’s awareness of the cultural and social differences, aspects often not included in academia.Instructors noted all students’ constant surprise of the impact of culture on differences in productlines, distribution channels, target markets, promotion strategies, and consumer behavior. Someof these differences became obvious in the comparison of advertisements and public relationscommunication from and about the company. Another noteworthy learning included the differ-ent conceptualization of time and work, highlighting the need to respect these in an increasinglyglobal economy. These included the need to understand the lack of response from colleagues whoare sleeping or celebrating a national or religious holiday.

We also noted significant variations when looking at the differences in business ethics andcultures. The French school had the strongest focus on international marketing and some of itsstudents were foreign nationals from other countries. Many of the French students had travelledextensively and all had engaged in studying abroad (Table 4) within two compulsory expatria-tions wherein they attended school and completed internships in other countries. In contrast, theAmerican students hailed from a Midwestern campus, where many of the students had never trav-elled to another country (Table 4). The Pakistani student group lodged in the middle concerninginternational experience (Table 4).

Many of the tasks required all students to collaborate in adapting to the conditions and expecta-tions of the project (Kearsley, 2000) and also allowed the real time interaction and communicationthat is often absent from online learning. The projects were structured to facilitate cooperativelearning wherein each group member was recognized as equally valuable while differentially

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

288 FREEMAN ET AL.

TABLE 4Countries Visited in Last 5 Years

Countries Visited US (proportion) France (proportion) Pakistan (proportion)

none 11 (.55) 1 (.02) 7 (.26)1–2 6 (.30) 3 11 (.41)3 or more 3 (.15) 57 9 (.33)Total 20 61 27

Notes. Chi-square: 60.282, degrees of freedom: 4, p-value: 000,

contributing due to different learning styles as well as different opinions and conceptualizationsas to what was important and what was not.

9. EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONALMARKETING COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES-STUDENT PERSPECTIVES

At the conclusion of the project, students were polled as to their perceptions of whether thelearning objectives had been met, separate from the instructor’s post hoc evaluations of the deliv-erables and the learning process. The polling questions were also designed to gain student inputfor improvements in exercise design and its perceived value in the course as well as to validateinstructor perceptions that some of the learning objectives had indeed been met. The survey ques-tions required that students rate various statements on a scale of 0–100 (0 = totally disagree, 100= totally agree) by placing a slider at the appropriate point (Table 5). This scale was administeredonline with access via a URL posted on the ENAP platform and emailed to the students.

The U.S. and Pakistani students ranked the project more highly (t = 3.3219, 0.0014 and(t = 2.578, 0.0122 respectively) in terms of increased knowledge of global business than did theFrench (Table 5). The U.S. students ranked the project quite highly for increasing their knowledgeof other cultures, perhaps because they had the least prior exposure to other cultures, while thePakistani students reported the highest degree of increased interest in employment as an inter-national marketer resulting from the project (Table 5). The French students’ responses wereonly moderately positive in this regard (Table 5), perhaps because they had generally experi-enced more “hands on” interaction with other countries due to a one-year study-abroad and asix-month foreign internship requirement, making this project routine. Importantly, following theproject, students from all three countries reported their perceptions of the other two countrieschanged moderately to greatly (Table 6) on average (3.45–4.53 on a 5-point scale). This perhapssuggests that prior perceptions, previously based largely on the student’s own Self ReferenceCriterion and Ethnocentrism (Pun, Lewis & Chin, 2003; Cateora, Gilly, & Graham, 2009) ratherthan personal interaction, changed quite dramatically through the double-loop learning process(Betters-Reed, Nitkin, and &, 2008) of the project. One would expect that all students engagingin future multi-national collaborations would adopt a greater sensitivity of cultural differencesand not make assumptions about other cultures based on stereotypes, Self Reference Criterionand Ethnocentrism to the same degree.

The highly significant change (4.53/5) in the perception of the Pakistani students regarding theFrench students was particularly notable and deserves further examination. The characteristics

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 289

TABLE 5Student Perceptions of the Project

Exercise Evaluation QuestionSignificant Mean Differences

USN = 20

PAKISTANN = 17

FRANCEN = 51

The project was helpful in increasing your knowledgeof global business

US mean > France mean (T = 3.3219, 0.0014)Pakistan mean > France mean (T = 2.578, 0.0122)

77.55SD = 21.08

74.19SD = 22.81

56.41SD = 25.18

The project was helpful in increasing your knowledgeof other cultures

US mean > Pakistan mean (T = 2.2085, 0.0338)US mean > France mean (T = 4.3413, 0.00)

79.80SD = 24.81

62.53SD = 22.32

53.74SD = 21.92

The project has increased my interest in working inInternational Marketing

US mean > France mean (T = 2.5005, 0.0148)Pakistan mean > France mean (T = 4.4407, 0.00)

68.40SD = 27.44

80.18SD = 23.16

52.64SD = 21.27

I had the educational preparation to complete the projectNo significant differences in means

75.45SD = 24.58

80.59SD = 26.19

67.86SD = 25.83

I would recommend this type of project to otherstudents considering this course

Pakistan mean > France mean T = 5.1117, 0.00)US mean > France mean (T = 2.5044, 0.0146)

65.60SD = 27.84

79.29SD = 20.80

51.04SD = 19.38

Note. Scale of 1–100 1 = Completely Disagree, 100 = Completely Agree

TABLE 6To What Degree Did Your Perceptions of the Two Partner Countries Change

After the Project

Not at all = 1 Very little = 2 Moderately = 3 Greatly = 4 Totally = 5

Country (significant differences in means)

US Student (n = 20) Perceptions of Pakistan FranceMean = 3.60SD = 0.94

Mean = 3.85SD = 1.27

Pakistani Student (n = 17) Perceptions of US FranceMean = 3.88SD = 1.17

Mean = 4.53SD = 0.72

French Student (n = 51) Perceptions of US PakistanMean = 3.45SD = 1.45

Mean = 3.49SD = 1.05

of the students’ interaction must be examined in light of the cultural typologies as defined byHofstede and Hofstede (2005), Hall (1976), and Schwartz (2006). While Mayer (2004, 2001)indicates the electronic environment enhances individual learning, the willingness to under-stand is different among the three nations. For example, using Hofstede and Hofstede (2005),the French, who rate Power Distance moderately high at 68, assumed a power-over positionto Pakistan who rate Power Distance at 55. When coupled with the French slowness to acceptchange as seen in France’s slow adoption of equality of women (Bird, 2003) and ICT (Galliano

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

290 FREEMAN ET AL.

& Roux, 2008), providing a plausible explanation for some of the French reticence in acceptingthe Pakistani students as equals, in that the French see Pakistan as an emerging nation. In otherwords it seemed that the Pakistanis were rather shocked at how they were viewed by the Frenchand thus gained perceptions of France they clearly had not anticipated. This phenomenon wasin fact somewhat evident in the communications between French and Pakistani students. Thisattitude, however, was not seemingly transferred in the French student’s dealings with the stu-dents from the United States perhaps because the United States is a developed country. However,the French students presented atavistic opposition against those perceived to have more power(Levinson, 2003), the U.S. In contrast, the United States scores 40, indicating a lower PowerDistance resulting in the American students treating both nations as peers and not understandingthe French resistance to multiple aspects of the exercise.

As the U.S. students had travelled less (Table 4), they perhaps had more to learn about inter-national business and global cultures than either the Pakistani or French students and this oftenrequired a difficult examination of their own Self Reference Criterion. Nonetheless, the US spiritof egalitarianism and the fact that the U.S. students were typically only one within their group offour to six students seemed to result in a fairly co-operative and accommodating group interac-tion style. However, the instructors did note some rather judgmental comments from some U.S.students as to the academic abilities and particularly English skills of French students. A numberof U.S. and French students also appeared to be dissatisfied with being out of their comfort zonein the project and having to collaborate with new and culturally different team mates resultingin negative evaluations of the project and some French students refusing to participate in theexercise.

Student evaluations also included qualitative questions regarding the best and worst aspectsof the course. All three student groups generally reported exhilaration and satisfaction at beingable to achieve the challenge of a new and different project amongst different cultures and tolearn about global business in a new, applied manner. This included the recognition of the lack ofcountry-of-origin on products produced in one country and sold in another. This was particularlynoted by the Pakistani students who noted this lack of information between America and France.

Many students from all three countries, however, reported dissatisfaction with the ENAP plat-form and the instructions provided by instructors as to navigability. The ENAP program wasin the beta stage of development, not unlike beta testing any program in a work environment,such as when Microsoft releases new versions of its Office programs. Being a pilot program, afew issues with access and navigability were discovered as the project progressed. Some studentcomments seemed to indicate that the platform related issues had some impact on reducing sat-isfaction with the project while others expressed their satisfaction with the platform, particularlyfollowing revision of instructions and norms.

10. CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE COLLABORATIONS

While designed with a utopian perspective (Halpin, 2001), this project was not without its chal-lenges. The first was the relative availability of secondary data in each of the three countries. Formany of the product categories, relevant government and industry data is not as readily availablein Pakistan as it would be in the United States or France, so greater emphasis on primary datacollection (buyer surveys and interviews with local management) was required by the Pakistani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 291

students. Additionally, French data was often only in French and the French students did nottranslate or translated the data poorly into English for their partners. Although the French stu-dents were in an international program, the school did not require knowledge of English, meaningsome of the French students had no or very poor English. Nonetheless, these challenges mimicreal life within the realm of global business.

Another challenging aspect included the course scheduling. The project itself was time con-suming because the implementation of the educational aspects was necessary for holistic learning.Due to the fact the French students were completing internships during the fall semester, thisproject was placed in the winter/spring or last semester in the final year of studies. At this point,the students are often occupied with final papers/memoirs, job hunting, and applying for grad-uate studies. Thus, this project would be better placed in the fall semester for the American andPakistani students, eliminating the particular French school wherein it was completed due to theprogram scheduling.

When looking to partner with other schools, the issue of tolerance and acceptance of foreigncollaborators comes to the fore. This was particularly evident in the French students’ difficultyin accepting the equality of other students, in particular the Pakistani students who noted theFrench students’ need for the Pakistani student to understand French culture while refusing totry to understand the Pakistani culture. The instructor observed this in class when many of theFrench students simply sat through the lecture and the exercises on intercultural awareness. Thefailure to learn resulted in recorded incidents such as the French students lecturing the Pakistanistudents about the acceptability of cultural norms and discrediting themselves by naming theUrdu language as “Pakistanese.” Much of this occurred away from the platform structure, dueto the French students’ resistance to learning a new technological tool and demanding the stu-dents in the other nations comply by corresponding via their private email. This may be eitheror both a reflection of greater French ethnocentrism as well as a function of the French studentsdominating group norms due to their greater numbers within the groups allowing for face-to-face collaboration to set norms. Nonetheless, the visiting international students who were in theFrench classroom and assigned to groups often were not included in the discussions of the Frenchgroups, resulting in a large number of them dropping the course (16 students dropped the course)or failed due to group dysfunction. Clearly, although the reality in virtual global business groupsis that group norms are set often by the corporate country of origin, for optimal effectiveness instudent teams, the numbers of each country cohort should be roughly equal where possible.

This brings forward a further recommendation concerning the posting on the website andthe discussion in class of clear and comprehensive norms for communication within the group.Communication was a primary facet of the project and the posting of these norms will reducedeviations. Another way to enhance communication is through the implementation of mandatoryonline communication sessions at the beginning of the project. These sessions would be super-vised by the instructors to answer questions and assist with the familiarization of the studentswith the website.

While the instructors monitored the information and communication on the web, enhancedinteraction among the student groups must be encouraged, perhaps by the inclusion of standardquestions or small joint exercises. Although students in Pakistan and the United States are sepa-rated by eleven hours, the inclusion of one or more online sessions with all three classes wouldendorse the unity of the professors in the project as well as facilitating the communication andaddressing any questions or difficulties. The appointment of one person as a group leader would

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

292 FREEMAN ET AL.

also enhance this communication and assist in the intra-group formation. The leadership role maybe transferred to others in the group a number of times over the length of the semester, dependingon the length of the timeframe of the project.

Matching course time frames for student group participation is also very desirable, althoughnot a preclusionary element. The Pakistani students, given their course schedule, had to jointhe project a month after the French and U.S. students had begun to collaborate. To facilitatethe inclusion of the Pakistani students, a second introduction exercise was completed. This con-siderably lessened any tensions within the team, and the prior advice given to the American andFrench students of the later arrival allowed the teams to appropriately schedule work assignments.As with differences in time zones and concepts of time (Hall, 1976) matching course time framesis not always possible when working with university timetables in other countries. However itis recommended that those engaging in similar exercises attempt to match course schedules ofglobal virtual teams as closely as possible.

Despite the challenging aspects discussed above, these situations can also be used as teachablemoments of the realities of global business teams. The need to work in teams is well recognizedin business education (Chapman et al., 2010). Rarely are employees granted the privilege ofselecting who is on their international team, what country they investigate, which product orservice they are exploring the marketplace for, or the right to refuse to participate or allow othersto participate in ‘their’ team. The group difficulties experienced in this project are indicative ofthe failure of the educational system to prepare students for working in industry, a failure noted byothers (Jackson, 2010; De Vos, De Stobbeleir, & Maganck, 2009; Wilton, 2008). This is amplifiedwhen looking at the needs of business operating in a multinational environment (Jackson, 2010;Trelevean & Voola, 2008).

Also of note are the different working styles of students across the nations. The Pakistani stu-dents discussed their comfort in working face-to-face rather than via the e-environment. Althoughnot often discussed, the French have few interactions within the e-environment, also preferringface-to-face interactions. Because the primary method of communication was via written com-munication within the e-environment, this challenged the students. Pakistan and France havecultures which are “higher context” than the United States (Hall, 1976). In high-context cul-tures, much remains unstated, letting the context explain. Words and word choice become veryimportant within the context of the situation. Thus, a few words can communicate a complexmessage very effectively to an in-group (and less effectively outside that group), while in a lowercontext culture, the communicator needs to be much more explicit. Therefore, it can be arguedthat the French and Pakistani students felt that asynchronous, textual communication was ratherineffective without the context of face-to-face communication.

Clearly, sourcing or designing a suitable platform should be a high priority for instructors con-sidering a similar project, including a greater number of training modules to encourage studentparticipation. Robust functionality, ease of navigability of the collaborative virtual platform, andachieving prior “buy in” are essential elements in the success of both global virtual student andbusiness teams (Bagozzi, 2007). Existing, widely used platforms, such as “Google Docs” may bepreferable to a new platform but might have limitations in terms of confidentiality, usability, andprivacy. Given the rapid development of Web 2.0 technology, more tools are evolving that mayallow for the interaction of multiple school’s students on a private platform. However, few cur-rently offer that exclusivity. If access can be provided, collegiate learning management systems(LMS) supported by one or more of the campuses (i.e., Blackboard or D2L) on a campus wide

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 293

basis would seem optimal. However, even if one school allowed multiple non-registered studentsonto a specific platform, the partner schools’ students would have to learn that platform’s capa-bilities. Matching the technology to the task is an essential precursor to project success (Goodhue& Thompson, 1995).

The number of brands incorporated into this project (21) was originally designed due to thelarge number of French students. However, this meant extensive work for the instructors, partiallydue to the formatting of the platform wherein individual group access necessitated numeroussteps. With 21 groups, remaining on top of the students’ activities was challenging for instructors.

Students’ preparation for the project might include discussion of the theory and practice ofteam building in class, prior to the beginning of the collaboration. While discussion includedinformation on the other countries and cultures such that students had a basic knowledge, allow-ing the students a better insight into their team mates and allaying some of the difficulties ofworking with people from different cultural backgrounds, a need for more restraint and patiencewas exhibited.

This project allowed for three stages of Kolb’s (1984) learning cycle. That is, the studentslearned about both international marketing and international cultures through concrete experiencein working with students in foreign countries and in contact with marketing of the individ-ual products in their country; through reflective observation, through needing to develop onereport concerning the marketing of one product across three countries and in comparing mar-keting programs across the three nations; and abstract conceptualization through the promptingsof instructors to read and discuss alternative perspectives and contemplating alternative market-ing solutions. The final stage of active experimentation was not completed in this project dueto the fact this was an academic project. The students were encouraged to think through boththeir hypothesized and factual marketing plans. However, the fact the students were in immedi-ate contact with students from higher education institutions in foreign countries, does allow thestudents to learn through active experimentation how to work in groups with individuals living inenvironments that are different politically, economically, socially, and technologically.

The project was facilitated by ICT, providing additional learning experiences for the stu-dents (Mayer, 2001, 2004). This facilitated not only the communication among the students,but demanded the students look to the internet for reliable information, thus encouraging theexploration of new channels for information gathering and dissemination. In looking acrossinternational borders, this project simulated a real-time examination of cultures and ethnicities,facilitating the students’ knowledge of marketplaces (Piaget, 1950). While this project has high-lighted a number of problems, it is not without merit as the first foray into e-learning for theFrench where online learning is still rather novel and exposure to very different cultures forall students.

However, despite the importance of international experience, not all students are ready toaccept the cultural and ethnic differences. While some of the behaviors would be cause fordiscipline in a working environment, these were used as teaching points to discuss differencesamong cultures. The objective of enhancing the cultural intelligence of the students such thatthey were better prepared to develop self-efficacy and understand their own and others’ ethno-relative attitudes (Ng, Van Dyne, & Ang, 2009) had varying degrees of success, reflective ofprevious education and national perceptions. Given the globalization of the marketplace, thesebehaviors and beliefs might be discussed in multiple classes and courses throughout the students’commerce education.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

294 FREEMAN ET AL.

This project enhanced or called upon the students’ sense of responsibility not only to them-selves (being their own grade) but to others in that the grading was a group grade. This calledupon the students’ communication skills and tested the limits of integrity and honesty for some.While this is distressing in a classroom, it becomes devastating in a work environment. Studentsmust learn how to deal with team-mates who do not work or who are not honest in their commu-nications or dealings with the group without the comfort of a professor who will deal with theerrant student.

Finally, although the achievement of learning objectives of this rather unique project was eval-uated via project artefacts and a number of qualitative and ethnographic methods, evaluation oflearning outcomes for projects of this nature could potentially be reinforced through adminis-tration of pre/post instruments that could measure requisite skills and attitudes for conductingGlobal Business. For example, an instrument that assesses Cultural Quotient has been devel-oped by Earley and Ang (2003) and domain specific measures of cross-cultural self-efficacycould also be quite easily developed based on Schwarzer and Jerusalem’s (1995) GeneralizedSelf-Efficacy scale.

Nonetheless, the Global Education research community itself must first better define what keycompetencies and learnings are required. As noted in a recent AACSB Report (Mangan, 2011)“a frustratingly wide curriculum gap remains alongside large risks of misdirected and incoherentstrategies,” (para. 3). As previously noted, the 2011 Report of the AACSB Globalization TaskForce (AACSB, 2011b) reported that anecdotal and survey data compiled by AACSB assessmentseminar facilitators indicated that learning goals related to international competencies are con-siderably less common than those related to other skills (AACSB, 2011). This deficiency makesanalysis of the effectiveness of existing curricular models and approaches particularly difficult.Finally, Pankaj Ghemawat, a professor of global strategy at the IESE Business School, run by theUniversity of Navarra, in Spain noted in an AACSB (2011a) report “in a world best character-ized as semi-global, to attempt to reduce international management education content to a global‘canon’ makes little sense” (para. 13) and in fact dismissed this notion as “globaloney” (para. 12).

11. CONCLUSION

Despite the many difficulties faced, the outcomes of the project met the guidelines developed bythe instructors. The first is that this project exposed the students to a meaningful cross-culturalexperience; one that can enhance their practice upon graduation (Walker, 2009). Instructorevaluations of deliverables and group dynamics as well as post hoc student perceptions demon-strated that the goals of improved teamwork, cultural awareness, and writing skills proposed byMillhauser and Rahschulte (2010) for international education as well as those established in inter-national syllabi found on the web were all met with at least some degree of success. Dependingupon the learning style of the individual student, this project provided the opportunity to completethe learnings by encouraging students to explore different means and methods that could then beutilized and refined within their own practices.

This project extends beyond the traditional educational process, providing an innovative cur-riculum that increased the competitiveness and experience of participants. Not only does thisproject encourage the “out-of-the-box” thinking necessary in a rapidly evolving environment, butit exposes the students to the multi-cultural environment encompassed in business today. In fact,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 295

a group of recent graduates from the US school now working on a global virtual sales supportteam for a large global cleaning supply manufacturer discussed their roles with the U.S. classand the challenges and rewards were uniformly similar to those experienced by students in theexercise.

Further, this project contributes to the international business education literature in address-ing the lack of information concerning “how to” implement international learning in commercecourses. While there are many challenges and it necessitates a lot of work by the professors, thisproject facilitates the learning by students in a manner not possible in didactic or simulation basedcourses and can be offered cost effectively to a much wider cohort than can global exchange pro-grams, important for schools with limited resources (AACSB, 2011b). The project also facilitatesthe cross-cultural exchanges that are necessary in an increasingly global world. Not only does theproject put students in contact with people from other nations, it gives students the opportunityto explore common interests and perhaps international employment possibilities.

In future projects, the gaps discovered in this project will be addressed and more extensivepre and post measures will be employed to evaluate the efficacy of the project. Future projectswill have similar timetables for the students, potentially using a different software program forcommunication, more intervention in the students’ communication, and more instruction and“practice runs” at the beginning of the project. Although these shortfalls will be addressed, theproject will continue to evolve and will continue to need modifications due to the changingenvironment, the improved understanding of the project by the instructors and clearer guidancethrough the extant literature as to optimal learning models for teaching international business andparticularly international marketing. Together, the learnings from this project were immense forthe faculty and varied in intensity for the students. However, this project forms a basis upon whichthe faculty and students can and will learn.

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

Ina Freeman, Ph.D., is currently working in the community and teaching as an AdjunctAssociate Professor at Jones International University, Centennial, Colorado. Her research inter-ests include marketing in the international marketplace, CSR, and international marketingeducation.

Peter Knight, Ph.D, is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside. His research interests are in Marketing and eCommerce program evaluation, as well ascross-cultural and virtual learning. He has presented his research globally, including conferencesin Seoul and Dubai.

Irfan Butt, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the College of Commerce andEconomics, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman. His research interests comprise inter-national marketing, country-of-origin, positioning strategies, and emerging markets. He haspresented his research in various conferences such as American Marketing Association (AMA),Administrative Sciences Association of Canada (ASAC), and Australia New Zealand MarketingAcademy (ANZMAC), amongst others. He has received numerous best paper awards for hisresearch.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

296 FREEMAN ET AL.

REFERENCES

AACSB, (2010), “AACSB initial accreditation handbook”, Retrieved 8 February 2011 from http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/initial_accreditation_handbook.pdf.

AACSB, (2011a), “Accreditation”, Retrieved 6 February 2011 from http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/AccreditedMembers.asp.

AACSB, (2011b), “Globalization of management education changing international structures, adaptive strategies, andthe impact on institutions”, Report of the AACSB International Globalization of Management Education Task Force(AACSB International; Tampa Florida USA).

Bagozzi, Richard P., (2007), “The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift”,Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8 (4), 244–254.

Beerkens, Eric, (2002), “International inter-organisational arrangements in higher education”, Tertiary Education andManagement, 8(4), 297–314.

Betters-Reed, Bonita L. Mindell, R. Nitkin, and Susan D. Sampson, (2008), “An assurance of learning success model:Toward closing the feedback loop”, Organizational Management Journa, 5 (4), 224–240.

Bird, Allan, and Michael J. Stevens, (2003), “Toward an emergent global culture and the effects of globalization onobsolescing national cultures”, Journal of International Management 9 (4), 395–407.

Bird, Karen, (2003), “Who are the women? Where are the women? And what difference can they make? Effects of genderparity in French municipal elections”, French Politics 1 (1), 5–38.

Burton, Dawn, (2005), “New course development in multicultural marketing”, Journal of Marketing Education 27,151–161.

Caligiuri, Paula, (2006), “Developing global leaders”, Human Resource Management Review 16 (2), 219–228.Carpenter, Mason A., Wm. Gerald Sanders, and Hal B. Gregerson, (2001), “Bundling human capital with organiza-

tional context: The impact of international assignment experience on multinational firm performance and CEO pay”,Academy of Management Journal 44 (3), 493–511.

Cateora, Philip R., Mary C. Gilly and John I. Graham, (2009), “International Marketing” (14th edition) (McGraw-Hill,USA; New York).

Chapman, Kenneth J., Matthew L. Meuter, Daniel Toy, and Lauren K. Wright, (2010), “Are student groups dysfunctional?Perspectives from both sides of the classroom”, Journal of Marketing Education 32 (1), 39–49.

Clarke III, Irvine, and Theresa B. Flaherty, (2003), “Challenges and solutions for marketing educators teaching in newlyemerging markets”, Journal of Marketing Education 25 (2), 118–129.

Clarke III, Irvine, Theresa B. Flaherty, Newell D. Wright, and Robert M. McMillen, (2009), “Student interculturalproficiency from study abroad programs”, Journal of Marketing Education 31 (2), 17–181.

Daily, Catherine M., S. Trevis Certo, and Dan R. Dalton, (2000), “International experience in the executive suite: the pathto prosperity?”, Strategic Management Journal 21 (4), 515–523.

De Vos, Ans, Kathleen De Stobbeleir, and Annelies Maganck, (2009), “The relationship between career-relatedantecedents and graduates’ anticipatory psychological contracts”, Journal of Business Psychology, 24(3),280–298.

Doh, Jonathan P., (2010), “From the editors. Why aren’t business schools more global and what can managementeducators do about it”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9 (2), 165–168.

Earley, P. Christopher, and Soon Ang, (2003), “Cultural Intelligence: An Analysis of Individual Interactions AcrossCultures” (Stanford University Press; Paul Alto, CA).

Fielden, John, (2007), “Global Horizons: Internationalising Higher Education” (The Council for Industry and HigherEducation; London, UK).

Fischer, Karin, (2010), “Internationalized academe is inevitable, but its form is not, says Arthur Levine”, Chronicle ofHigher Education, February 17: On Line. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/

Internationalize-Academe-Is/64230/http://chronicle.com/article/Internationalize-Academe-Is/64230/.Freeman, Ina, and Peter Knight, (2007), “Fostering global perspectives in undergraduate marketing students – A

Kazakhstani/Canadian Collaboration”, Canadian Journal of Higher Education 37 (2), 47–67.Galliano, Danielle, and Pascale Roux, (2008), “Organisational motives and spatial effects in Internet adoption and

intensity of use: Evidence from French industrial firms”, The Annals of Regional Science 42 (2), 425–448.Gardner, Howard, (2006), “Changing Minds. The Art and Science of Changing our Own and Other People’s Minds”

(Harvard Business School Press; Boston MA).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 297

Goldman, Steven I., Roger N. Nagel, and Kenneth Preiss, (1995), “Agile Competitors and Virtual Organization: Strategiesfor Enriching the Customer” (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York).

Goodhue, Dale L., and Ronald L. Thompson, (1995), “Task-technology fit and individual performance”, MIS Quarterly19(2), 213–236.

Graf, S., T. Liu and C. Kinshuk, (2010), “Analysis of learners’ navigational behaviour and their learning styles in anonline course”, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 26 (2), 116–131.

Hall, Edward T., (1976), “Beyond Culture” (Anchor Press; Garden City, NY).Halpin, David, (2001), “Utopianism and education: The legacy of Thomas More”, British Journal of Educational Studies

49 (3), 299–315.Hofstede, Geert, and Gert-Jan Hofstede, (2005), “Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind” (McGraw Hill; New

York).Hunt, Lynn, Lynne Eagle, and Philip J. Kitchen, (2004), “Balancing marketing education and information technology:

Matching needs or needing a better match?” Journal of Marketing Education 26 (1), 75–88.IES National Center for Education Statistics (2010), “Contexts of Postsecondary Education: Characteristics

of Postsecondary Students”, Retrieved 8 February 2011 from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2010/section5/indicator40.asp.

International Student Exchange Program (2010), “Annual Report”, Retrieved 7 February 2011 from http://www.isep.org/Downloads/annual_10.pdf.

Jackson, Denise, (2010), “An international profile of industry-relevant competencies and skill gaps in modern graduates”,International Journal of Management Education 8 (3), 29–58.

Jain, Vipul, and Lyes Benyoucef, (2008), “Managing long supply chain networks: Some emerging issues and challenges”,Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 19 (4), 469–496.

Kamath, Shyam J., and Bruce E. MacNab, (1998), “Developing business-ready marketing professionals: The strategicfocus on the Asian international marketing (AIM) program”, Journal of Marketing Education 20 (2), 110–120.

Kaplan, Melike Demirbag, Burak Piskin, and Beste Bol, (2010), “Educational blogging: integrating technology intomarketing experience”, Journal of Marketing Education 32 (1), 50–63.

Kaynak, Erdener, (2009), “Editorial”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 20 (4), 269–271.Kearsley, Greg, (2000), “Online Education: Learning and Teaching in Cyberspace” (Wadsworth; Belmont, CA).Kolb, David A., (1984), “Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development” (Prentice Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Latapie, Hugo M., and Vu .N. Tran, (2007), “Subculture formation, evolution, and conflict between regional teams in

virtual organizations – Lessons learned and recommendations”, The Business Review 7 (2), 189–193.Lawson, Diana, D. Steven White, and Serge Dimitriadis, (1998), “International business education and technology-based

active learning: Student-reported benefit evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Education 20 (2), 141–148.Leung, Angela Ka-yee, William W. Maddux, Adam D. Galinsky, and Chi-Yue Chiu, (2008), “Multicultural experience

enhances creativity: The when and how”, American Psychologist, 63 (3), 169–181.Levinson, Daryl J., (2003), “Collective sanctions. NYU Law School Law Research Paper No. 57 and NYU,

Centre for Law and Business Research Paper No. 03–04”, Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=389980http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=389980

Mangan, K., (2011), “Business Schools Worldwide Fall Short on Globalization, Report Says” Chronicle of HigherEducation, Charlottesville, VA, February 10, 2011, Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Business-Schools-Worldwide/126320/.

Martin, Jeanette S. and Lillian H. Chaney, (1992), “Determination of content for a collegiate course in interculturalbusiness communication by three Delphi panels”, Journal of Business Communication 29 (3), 267–283.

Mayer, Richard E., (2001), “Multimedia Learning” (Cambridge University Press; New York).Mayer, Richard E., (2004), “Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided

methods of instruction”, American Psychologist 59 (1), 14–19.Metcalf, Lynn E., (2010), “Creating international community service learning experiences in a capstone marketing-

projects course”, Journal of Marketing Education 32 (2), 155–171.Milhauser, Kathy L., and Tim Rahschulte, (2010), ”Meeting the needs of globl companies through improved international

business curriculum”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 21 (2), 78–100.Ng, Kok-Yee., Linn Van Dyne, and Soon Ang, (2009), “From experience to experiential learning: Cultural intelligence

as a learning capability for global leader development”, Academy of Management Learning and Education 8 (4),511–526.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

298 FREEMAN ET AL.

Piaget, Jean, (1950), “The Psychology of Intelligence “(Routledge; New York).Piaget, Jean, and Bärbel Inhelder, (1956), “The Child’s Conception of Space” (Routledge and Kegan Paul; London).Pun, K., G. Lewis, and K. Chin, (2003), “Design of self-assessment model for evaluating corporate-wide learning perfor-

mance in manufacturing enterprises”, International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management 5 (5/6),428.

Ramstad, Elise, (2009), “Developmental evaluation framework for innovation and learning networks”, Journal ofWorkplace Learning 21 (3), 181–197.

Roy, Abhijit, and Mousumi Roy, (2010), “Managing and leveraging poverty: Implications for teaching internationalbusiness”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 21 (1), 4–26.

Schwarzer, R., and M. Jerusalem, (1995), “Generalized Self-Efficacy scale”. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M.Johnston (eds.), “Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs” (pp. 35–37).(NFER-NELSON; Windsor, UK).

Schwartz, Shalom H., (2006), “Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents, and consequences across nations” inR. Jowell, C. Robert, R. Fitzgerald, and G. Eva (eds.) “Measuring Attitudes Cross-Nationally: Lessons From theEuropean Social Survey”, (Sage; London).

Stroh, Linda K., and Paula M. Caligiuri, (1998), “Increasing global competition through effective people management”,Journal of World Business 33 (1), 1–16.

Tianfield, Huaglory, and Rainer Unland, (2002), “IT enabling: essence of virtual organization”, International Journal ofInformation Technology and Decision Making 1 (3), 367–370.

Trelevean, Lesley, and Ranjit Voola, (2008), “Development of graduate attributes through constructive alignment”,Journal of Marketing Education 30 (2), 160–173.

Ueltschy, Linda C., (2001), “An exploratory study of integrating interactive technology into the marketing curriculum”,Journal of Marketing Education 23 (1), 63–72.

Van Dyne, Linn and Soon Ang, (2006), “Getting more than you expect: global leader initiative to span structural holesand reputational effectiveness”, in W.H. Mobley and E.W. Weldon (eds.) “Advances in Global Leadership” (JAI Press;New York).

Walker, John, (2009), “Language and culture requirements in international business majors at AACSB-accredited businessschools”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 20 (4), 293–311.

Wilton, Nick, (2008), “Business graduates and management jobs: An employability match made in heaven?” Journal ofEducation and Work 21 (2), 143–158.

APPENDIX: OUTLINE OF COURSE REPORTS

1. Corporate/Market Overview (7–8 pages)a. Global Corporate Historyb. Global Financial Performancec. Brief Overview of History of the Brand, Market Entry Strategy and Brand Presence

in Each of the 3 Countriesd. Comparative Market Overview of US, France and Pakistan including Broad Impact

of Culture (refer to Hall/ Hofstede and others)e. Market Share and Key Competitors in Each Countryf. Global SWOT for Corporation

2. By Country Category and Brand Analysis (9–12 pages)a. Overview of the Specific Impact of National Culture, Demographics, Legal and

Political Environment and Language in Each Country on:i. Category and Brand Promotion

ii. Product Design and Product Linesiii. Market Segments and Target Markets for Category/Brand

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2

PREPARING STUDENTS FOR A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE 299

iv. Perceptual Map of Brand for Each Country (Survey Research Advisable)v. Distribution

vi. Pricingvii. Effect (if any) of Country of Origin

viii. Summary SWOT Analysis for Brand in Each Country (Point Form)3. Recommendations to Corporation Re Each Country Market (3–5 pages)

a. Productb. Placec. Promotiond. Pricee. Positioning

4. Summary of Key Learnings (One Paragraph Each Member) (2 pages)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Sulta

n Q

aboo

s U

nive

rsity

] at

02:

26 3

1 M

arch

201

2