THE 3A APPROACH:
IMPLEMENTING PRACTICE-BASED INTERACTIVE LEARNING METHODS IN THE
MIDDLE EAST
Experience based paper
Marina Apaydin
Assistant Professor of Strategic Management and Innovation
School of Business
The American University in Cairo
AUC Avenue, P.O. Box 74
New Cairo 11835, Egypt.
Phone: +20.2.2615.3341
Fax: +20.2.2795.7565
1
THE 3A APPROACH:
IMPLEMENTING PRACTICE-BASED INTERACTIVE LEARNING METHODS IN THE
MIDDLE EAST
ABSTRACT
According to the majority of the theorists, the most effective learning model is an
integrative one which encompasses cognitive and behavioral change (Inkpen & Crossan,
1995; Miller, 1996; Crossan et al., 1999). In this paper, I develop a practice-based
approach to learning grounded in this integrative model. My 3A approach consists of the
following components:
•
Awareness refers to pro-active scanning of the environment and noticing potentially
beneficial opportunities in it.
•
Analysis refers to evaluation of identified opportunities in terms of their expected
benefits and drawbacks using a systematic and logical problem solving approach.
•
Action refers to pro-active implementation of the decisions taken and solutions
developed.
The Middle East and North African (MENA) region represents a fertile ground for transition
to such student-centered instruction. Unlike western countries characterized by high
individualism (Hofstede, 1980) and low contextual grounding (Hall & Hall, 1990), the
MENA region is more collectivistic and contextual. Therefore, interactive teaching methods
and local materials are even more important for MENA educational institutions than for
those in the West (Apaydin, 2008).
In this experience based paper, I first offer a theoretical background for the 3A approach
and then discuss the results of its implementation at the American University in Cairo
during the academic years 2009-11. After the analysis of the student and instructor
experience and the learning outcomes, I propose suggestions for further development of
this
approach.
2
THE 3A APPROACH:
IMPLEMENTING PRACTICE-BASED INTERACTIVE LEARNING METHODS IN THE
MIDDLE EAST
In 1988, DeGeus brought attention of the academic world to the issue of learning with his
seminal statement that the only competitive advantage of any organization of the future will
be its ability to learn faster than its competitors (DeGeus, 1988). This foresight was
immediately followed by Senge’s (1990) popularization of the idea of a ‘learning
organization,’ which was enthusiastically picked up by practitioners and management
consultants alike during 1990s on the wave when the rapid evolution of information
technology and the internet allowed the development of sophisticated knowledge
management tools. By the end of the decade, the majority of the theorists agreed that the
most effective learning model is an integrative one which encompasses cognitive and
behavioral change (Inkpen & Crossan, 1995; Miller, 1996; Crossan et al., 1999).
In the traditional context, classroom lecturing is an example of pure cognitive learning,
which calls for information to be absorbed, analyzed and consciously integrated within preexisting cognitive structures. Depending on circumstances, a purely cognitive change
might lead to either anticipatory learning or blocked learning (Inkpen and Crossan, 1995).
In the former case, individuals will eventually learn through practice like medical students
or football players. However, when other beliefs conflict with the cognitive scenario,
subsequent behavioral learning might be blocked. The student-centered case method
approach enables behavioral learning, where the students practice applying management
principles learned during the cognitive phase.
Thus, ten years ago it was already established that the cognitive model of learning from
the books and lectures is not enough. Yet, in most countries in the world with the
exception of North America and some European countries, the rote memorization is a
norm. The paucity of interactive-style learning methods in emerging markets is impeded
not only by the lack of trained instructors but even more so by the absence of locally
developed training materials such as teaching case studies. When I was moving from a
3
100% case-based top Canadian business school to the leading university in the Middle
East and North Africa (MENA) well-equipped with educational and learning technologies, I
set myself a goal to promote student-centered practice-based methods in my new
institution.
The MENA region represents a fertile ground for transition to student-centered instruction.
Unlike western countries characterized by high individualism (Hofstede, 1980) and low
contextual grounding (Hall & Hall, 1990), the MENA region is more collectivistic and
contextual. Therefore, interactive teaching methods and local materials are even more
important for MENA educational institutions than for those in the west (Apaydin, 2008).
Thus, I have developed and implemented a practice-based learning model in the courses I
taught.
PRACTICE-BASED LEARNING MODEL
Learning research draws on theories from a variety of disciplines. In this paper, I employed
the Practice-Based View (PBV) approach which combines the individual, group, contextual
and process variables that are prevalent in the literature.
PBV is a contemporary theoretical perspective which has gathered momentum since the
1980s. This perspective endeavors to overcome bifurcation of the field between
‘individualism,’ which favors human action while ignoring macro-forces, and ‘societism,’ a
concept that focuses on large social forces while discounting individual action (Whittington,
2006). In a recent review of this new perspective, Johnson, Melin, and Whittington (2003)
proposed an ‘activity-based view,’ focusing on the activities that organizational actors
conduct (micro level), their consequences for organizational outcomes (macro level) and
the feedback loop from contextual and organizational variables back to the actors. The
authors argue that this approach does not replace traditional management theories such
as the resource-based view or institutional theory, but rather provides what Bunge (1997)
calls a mechanismic explanation for them.
The latest developments in the field of PBV (Jarzabkowski, Balogun, & Seidl, 2007)
propose to conceptualize any phenomenon as a situated, socially accomplished activity,
4
which comprises actions, interactions and negotiations of multiple actors and the situated
practices that they draw upon in accomplishing this activity (Jarzabkowski, 2005). PBV
studies episodes of organizational activities (Hendry & Seidl, 2003) in order to uncover the
mechanisms underlying the learning practice. It asks questions such as “how is the
conduct of a class consequential in terms of how learning gains momentum?”
Whittington (2006) proposes that three elements of the theory of practice should be
isolated: practice, praxis, and practitioners. Practice represents the ‘espoused theories’
that guide this activity, such as shared routines of behavior, norms and procedures that
can be altered according to the activity in which they are used (Orlikowski, 1996; Seidl,
2007). Praxis refers to actual activities or, ‘theories-in-use’ (Argyris, & Schon, 1974) that
constitute the fabric of actual learning. Practitioners are those who actually perform praxis,
be it leaders, instructors, trainers or outside agents such as consultants, for what they
actually do affects learning. These three elements are integrated parts of a whole called
Practice-Based Leaning Model (PBLM) (Figure 1).
p
Ex
Regional faculty
and teaching
assistants trained
in interactive
educational
methods
ert
s
Theoretically
grounded,
practice-based
s
contextualized
se
a
materials for C
interactive
instruction
Practices
Theoretically grounded
contextualized
best educational,
business and
policymaking
practices
Figure 1. Practice-Based Learning Model
5
As depicted in Figure 1, learning practitioners are learning experts, regional faculty and
teaching assistants trained in the interactive learning methods who contribute to learning in
two ways: by establishing learning practice and receiving feedback from it and by
engaging in learning praxis through utilization of contextually grounded regionally relevant
case materials. In turn, practice interacts with praxis, whereby the former conditions the
latter, which, in turn, influences the first. In other words, the interaction between the three
components of the framework is always bi-directional and learning activity is accomplished
by their combination.
THE 3A APPROACH
The implementation of PBLM in MENA classrooms was grounded in a 3A approach to
learning. 3A Approach combines cognitive and behavioral learning and consists of three
‘A’:
•
Awareness refers to pro-active scanning of the environment and noticing
potentially beneficial opportunities in it. We know what we know and what we don’t
know, but the amount of things we don’t realize that we don’t know is much larger
than the first two. Practicing awareness helps decreasing the space of knowledge
you don’t realize that you don’t know. In the context of a classroom, student achieve
awareness through traditional methods of textbooks and lectures with the difference
that first, they learn that this is just the first step so they become aware of the whole
learning cycle.
•
Analysis refers to evaluation of identified opportunities in terms of their expected
benefits and drawbacks using a systematic and logical problem solving approach.
This is the key skill required in any kind of managerial job. Being able to construct
arguments and develop solutions is the basis of success in business. Analysis
combines cognitive and behavioral learning as it proceeds from intuiting and
interpreting to integration though articulation in group and class discussion
(Crossan et al., 1999). This is a typical process of a case-method approach as
practiced in institutions which already embraced this style of learning.
6
•
Action refers to pro-active implementation of the decisions students have taken
and solutions they developed. More often than not, our ideas remain unrealized
because we fail to act in a timely fashion and miss the window of opportunity.
Quoting Arnold H. Glasgow, “Ideas not coupled with an action never become bigger
than the brain cell they occupy.” This is a purely behavioral activity where learning
moves from potentiality to actuality in Aristotelian sense. In this phase, students
enact their decisions through role play or actually undertaking case-writing and
quasi-consulting assignments with local companies.
This approach was implemented in the undergraduate International Business and
Business Ethics classes, as well as in the graduate Business Communications and
Strategic Management of Innovation classes in Egypt during the academic year
2009/2010. As a result of this implementation, 12 high quality teaching cases
(accompanied by teaching notes) about local companies expanding in other countries
were produced and being prepared for publishing by Ivey Publishing, Emerald Publishing,
Pearson Publishing and IGC Publishing.
The most interesting was the experience of a pilot class on innovation which combined
business and engineering students. The next section describes this experience in detail.
INNOVATION AND CAIRO IN THE AUC CURRICULUM
Founded in 1919, the American University in Cairo (AUC) strives to build a culture of
leadership, lifelong learning, continuing education and service among its graduates, and is
dedicated to making significant contributions to Egypt and the international community in
diverse fields (Mission statement). For 90 years, the university was located in the Cairo’s
downtown and had nurtured close relationships with local communities.
In 2008, AUC celebrated the opening of a large university-style campus located on the
outskirts of the city. This move created disconnect with the local communities. Recognizing
the need to keep this vital connection, Provost Lisa Anderson launched an appeal to AUC
faculty to include Cairo in their curricula:
7
Our increased distance from much of Cairo obliges us to reflect more
self-consciously about how we take advantage of the asset the city
represents for our students; the availability of Tuesdays allows us …
to leave the campus with our students for systematic exposure to,
and engagement in, the world in which they live, particularly the great
metropolis from which we take our name. To that end I am proposing
that we get started in developing the new University-wide program I
have called “Cairo in the Curriculum.”
Ultimately, every student who leaves AUC (whether as a degree
recipient or a departing study abroad student) should be required to
have completed at least one course that takes him or her into Cairo,
to walk the streets, visit the offices, view the monuments, test the
waters, talk to the people, pour over the maps, to get to know at least
a little of what makes Cairo the remarkable place that it is.
… I will be inviting proposals for development of new courses that
would fulfill this purpose…
Provost Lisa Anderson, AUC email dated March 22, 2010
Almost at the same time, the newly established School of Business at the AUC declared
‘Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Leadership’ as its guiding principles: “The School of
Business strives to create an environment that fosters the development of principled and
innovative business leaders and entrepreneurs who can make a difference” (Mission
statement). According to management scholars, innovation capability is the most important
determinant of firm performance (Mone et al., 1998), which is the ultimate goal of any
company.
To enact these two initiatives, I have introduced a new graduate course MGMT 511
Strategic Management of Innovation in Spring 2010. This graduate seminar was grounded
in the comprehensive innovation framework (Crossan & Apaydin, 2009) and Japanese
design thinking approach developed by Keio University. The course had no textbooks or
8
exams. Instead, it included the latest readings from Harvard Business Review, latest cases
from Ivey Publishing, an improvisation workshop, an ethnographic fieldwork in 10 urban
communities of the city and administration of the innovation audit tool to eight local
companies (a consulting style project resulting in a series of recommendations) – during
two semesters of 2010. Ten urban communities in Cairo were surveyed, innovative
commercially viable ideas were developed for them and proposals sent to the responsible
parties.
Innovation is regarded as a critical source of competitive advantage in an increasingly
changing environment. It used to happen by chance but not any longer. This new course
was designed to teach students a systematic 3A approach to innovation necessary to
achieve success in the marketplace.
Awareness
The first module of the class builds the awareness of the students about what innovation
is, its importance to organization and the comprehensive model of innovation which is
required to achieve sustainable innovation outcomes.
Innovation is the production or adoption, assimilation, and exploitation of a value-added
novelty in economic and social spheres; renewal and enlargement of products, services,
and markets; development of new methods of production; and the establishment of new
management systems. It is both the process and the outcome.
The comprehensive model of innovation was developed as a part of my doctoral
dissertation research and appeared in the Journal of Management Studies (Crossan &
Apaydin, 2009). Based on a systematic review of literature published over the past 27
years, this model synthesizes various research perspectives into a comprehensive multidimensional framework of organizational innovation – linking leadership, innovation as a
process, and innovation as an outcome (Figure 2).
According to the theory proposed in the dissertation, the comprehensiveness of the model
is a necessary and sufficient requirement for success. A firm demonstrating innovation in
all the components of the comprehensive framework (leadership, managerial levers,
9
business processes and culture) will achieve sustainable innovation outcomes (Zona,
2010: 63).
LEADERSHIP
(Individual
and Group
Level)
MANAGERIAL
LEVERS
(Organizational
Level)
BUSINESS
PROCESSES
(Process
Level)
Chief Executive
Officer’s, Top
Management
Team’s and
Board of
Directors’ ability
and motivation
to innovate
Mission, goals ,
& strategy
Initiation &
decision-making
Structure &
systems
Portfolio
management
Resource
allocation
Org. learning &
knowledge
management
Development &
implementation
Project
management
INNOVATION
AS
A PROCESS
INNOVATION
AS
AN OUTCOME
Level
Form
(Individual/Group /
Firm)
(Product /Service/
Process/Business
Model )
Driver
(Resources /Market
opportunity )
Magnitude
Direction
(Incremental /
Radical)
(Top-down/
Bottom-up)
Referent
(Firm /Market/
Industry)
Source
Invention/Adoption
Organizational
culture
Upper
Echelon
Theory
Resource Based View &
Dynamic
Capabilities
Commercialization
Type
Locus
(Administrative/
Technical)
(Firm/Network)
Process
Theory
DETERMINANTS OF INNOVATION
Nature
(Tacit/Explicit)
DIMENSIONS OF INNOVATION
Figure 2: Comprehensive Model of Corporate Innovation
After becoming aware of the necessity of the comprehensive innovation model, the
students enter the second phase of the process.
Analysis
During the analysis phase, the students had to analyze the degree of innovativeness of
eight Egyptian companies (Table 1) using the comprehensive innovation framework and a
survey-based measurement instrument proposed in Crossan and Apaydin (2009).
10
Industry
# Companies
Company
# Employees
# Surveys
# Interviews
3
A
6,000
24
6
Telecommunications
Information
Technology
2
B
WIP
WIP
WIP
C
WIP
WIP
WIP
D
700
25
5
E
WIP
WIP
WIP
Energy
1
F
10,000
16
5
FMCG
1
G
WIP
WIP
WIP
Packaging & Shipping
1
H
WIP
WIP
WIP
Total Companies
8
WIP - Work In Progress
The students had to analyze the results of the survey and benchmark it against the
consolidated data from 68 Forbes listed companies in 20 countries available from a
research conducted by Crossan and Apaydin in 2008.
WIP:
COMPARISON
OF
68
COMPANIES’
DEFFICIENCIES
AND
EGYPTIAN
COMPANIES’ DEFIEINCIES HERE.
Additionally, the students had to conduct interviews to assess the gap between espoused
and enacted innovation models based on a unique methodology developed in my
dissertation.
In their seminal work, Argyris and Schon (1974) differentiate the espoused theories from
theories-in-use:
If someone asked how he would behave under certain circumstances, the
answer he usually gives is his espoused theory of action for that situation.
This is the theory of action to which he gives allegiance, and which, upon
request, he communicates to others. However, the theory that actually
governs his actions is his theory-in-use, which may or may not be compatible
with his espoused theory; furthermore, the individual may or may not be
aware of the incompatibility of the two theories. (1974: 7)
A comprehensive innovation strategy should include all components of the model as
explained in the previous section. A partial innovation strategy however will include only
11
some of them. On one hand, leaders may have comprehensive innovation strategies but
enact them only partially (Symbolic innovation), while on the other hand, firms may enact
comprehensive
strategies
without
realizing
that
their
innovation
strategies
are
comprehensive (Spontaneous innovation). These two scenarios represent a case of
incongruence between espoused and enacted innovation. Two congruent scenarios are
having a partial innovation strategy and enacting it partially (Sporadic innovation), or
having a comprehensive innovation strategy and implementing it comprehensively
Comprehensive
Symbolic
innovation
Sustainable
innovation
Partial
Espoused innovation
(Sustainable innovation) (Figure 3).
Sporadic
innovation
Spontaneous
innovation
Partial
Comprehensive
Enacted innovation
Figure 3. Espoused and Enacted Innovation Strategies
How would one know the degree of comprehensiveness of innovation strategies? For
espoused ones, the survey results could suffice. Assessment of managers’ awareness
about the full model of innovation will provide us with the answer. Establishing the degree
of comprehensiveness of the enacted strategies is more difficult. In my dissertation, I
propose the linguistic-physiological approach to this analysis.
The scholars who study the representation of reality (Auerbach, 1953; Barthes, 1970) have
identified several aspects of a narrative which would serve as evidence that the events did
indeed take place. Thorough details, especially numeric ones such as specific dates and
12
quantities, and references to a specific external event or a public character are the main
signs of so-called ‘reality effects’ (Barthes, 1970). In addition, Auerbach (1953) proposes a
useful distinction between a ‘legend’ and a ‘historical account:’ “[A] historical event which
we witness or learn from the testimony of those who witnessed it, runs much more
variously, contradictorily, and confusedly,” while the “legend arranges its material in a
simple and straightforward way; it detaches it from its contemporary historical context, so
that the latter will not confuse it” (Auerbach, 1953: 19-20). Bringing it back to Argyris and
Schon’s (1974) theory of action, espoused theories would be recounted as a ‘legend’
whereas enacted ones will have the features of a ‘historical account’ – details, amounts,
dates, characters, and disrupted narratives. Therefore, to separate interview statements
into espoused and enacted, I employed the following linguistic distinction.
The espoused constructs were assessed based on the answers to the general, normative
or abstract questions such as “what practices of innovation exist in your organization?”,
“how should this be done?” or “how is it usually done?” The enacted constructs were
assessed based on the evidential statements, which contained details, dates and
references, and usually made in the past or present/past perfect tenses (“an example of it
may be,” “it did/didn’t happen,” “things occurred differently” etc). For example, “we often
have team meetings” would be classified as espoused, whereas “last Tuesday we had a
team meeting at a client’s location with [name] present in the audience” would be classified
as enacted because it contained a date, a place and a name and is presented in the past
tense.
Based on this methodology, eight Egyptian companies can be placed in the following
quadrants (Figure 4). (Work In Progress)
13
Figure 4. Distribution of the Eight Companies across the Four Innovation Quadrants
Usually graduate course projects end in a project report and a grade. However, in this
course, the 3A approach called for completing the cycle by conducting an Action.
Action
After completing the project, the students presented their findings to the management of
the companies. Some of the suggestions included: (Work In Progress)
•
Appointing a dedicated Innovation strategy officer to drive the definition, integration
and adoption of innovation
•
Developing a reward system for innovation that is based on tangible and intangible
recognition
•
Decreasing workload to space up for innovation and promoting Job Shadowing
•
Formalizing the Business Process governing Innovation
•
Creating Cross-Functional Teams to encourage ideation
14
•
Developing and utilizing crowdsourcing collaborative tools to accelerate innovation
•
Incorporate the innovation process within the corporate strategy to achieve
sustainable growth
•
Establish a more decentralized decision making structure to enable employees and
leaders to improvise
As a result, two firms (from the three in Spring 2010) asked for a repeat of the audit project
a year later in order to assess the improvements.
3A AND DESIGN THINKING IN CAIRO
Another, smaller application of the 3A approach in this course was a fieldwork project
conducted in 10 distinct communities in Cairo.
Developed by KMD University (Japan), the ‘Design Thinking’ module of the course
introduces students to a new method of developing commercially viable ideas through an
ethnographic field study in one of the districts of Cairo.
Design Thinking is an ability to combine empathy, creativity and rationality to meet often
unarticulated user needs and helping the user “get the job done” (Bettencourt & Ulwick,
2008) in an easier and more fun fashion. Unlike analytical thinking, design thinking is a
creative process of a natural building up of ideas with no early judgments.
The students start the 3A cycle by first learning the methodology of design thinking, its
objectives and expected outcomes. Then, they conduct their field research in a specific
urban location in Cairo with high concentration of population. During their fieldwork, the
students observe a representative individual or a group of individuals (Awareness).
Then, the students create several models of their subjects’ behavior analyzing their
patterns and identifying their unarticulated needs and desires (Analysis). The idea is to find
a pattern of activities and attempt to extend them in order to augment human experience.
The idea of commercializing experience is relatively new. In the past, we moved from
selling products to selling services but now, selling experience (e.g. theme parks,
Starbucks) is becoming more prominent. Thus, the focus of this project is to identify
15
commercially viable ideas towards improving people’s experience in the urban
communities under consideration.
During two semesters of 2010, the teams of students went to 12 locations in Cairo to
conduct such research.
Location
Airport
Al-Azhar park
Alexandria library
Armenia club
AUC campus
Carrefour supermarket
Citadel monument
City of 6th October
Community
People waiting for the arrival of specific passengers
Families with children
Visitors
Armenians
Students and faculty
British couple with a young child
English-speaking tourists
Arab students
Khan Khalili tourist market
Metro Underground
Mohandessin district
Private health club
Japanese tourists
Passengers (low-middle class)
Arab tourists from the Gulf area
Young people
As a result of this fieldwork, the students came up with the following suggestions:
Airport:
•
Track arrival flight with SMS notifications;
•
Register car license plate via SMS for automated parking payment; and
•
Mobile phone navigation to direct users to the arrival terminal.
Al-Azhar park:
•
Child tracking system using GPS and RFID Tags;
•
Accessibility for Strollers, Disabled and Elderly; and
•
Proper display/design of trash bins.
Alexandria library:
•
BA.Life - Bibilotheca Alexandria Online Think Tank Hub; and
•
BA Crafts designed by Alexandria University Students for visitors.
16
Armenia club:
•
Social network website for Armenians in Egypt;
•
Basket ball school for Armenians; and
•
Bus service to and from the club.
AUC campus:
•
Interactive Display Screens with detailed campus map, voice enabled to support
students with special needs;
•
A Campus Map Mobile Application; and
•
“Wassalny .. Shoukran” Student Car Pooling Service.
Carrefour supermarket:
•
Modular shopping card with sensors;
•
Smart route charter; and
•
Smart layout management.
Citadel monument:
•
Augmented Reality Goggles to experience the history of the Citadel, thereby
eliminating the need for guide books. The Goggles will come equipped with builtin digital camera eliminating the need to carry a personal camera. Moreover, it
can act as a shade replacing normal sunglasses.
City of 6th of October:
•
Arab Cultural Wheel in cooperation with El Sawy Cultural Wheel;
•
‘Personal shoppers’ to provide help on appropriate style for Gulf women; and
•
Introduce mobile Arab communities.
Khan Khalili tourist market:
•
Create cards with price ranges for typical tourist goods;
•
Create card with short Arabic vocabulary on the back; and
•
Create signposts for Meeting Points and make maps with them.
Metro Underground:
•
Color coding destination stations;
17
•
Charge tickets to mobile phone bill using NFC technology; and
•
Add creative handrails (freeform abstract design) with hooks inside the train
compartments to accommodate people of varying heights as well as allow them
to hang their bags.
Mohandessin district:
•
Create floor plans and rest stations for Hilton shopping area;
•
Create locker rooms for purchases with delivery; and
•
Quick ‘hair-styling’ service for youth.
Private health club:
•
Provide lockers with coins were members will pay per hour; and
•
Create a website for online reservation of sports courts.
The final, Action part of the 3A cycle consisted of writing letters and making presentations
to the concerned parties such as Ministry of Tourism or supermarket’s and park’s
management.
Some
of
student’s
suggestions
are
now
being
considered
for
implementation.
As a whole, this practice-based learning experience produced tangible outcomes for all
stakeholders. The course was enthusiastically received by the students and the
companies involved. In their anonymous course evaluation comments, the students
mentioned this course as the most valuable experience in their many years at the
university (some of them had several degrees from the same institution).
“I learned a new approach to life that is Awareness, Analysis and Action. In
our lives, we become aware of many things, our minds start to analyze and
give reasons, but not always do we take actions about it. It is only with our
actions that change can be made.”
"This was one of the few courses where you learn something different from
what you learned in the undergraduate."
18
“My main lesson is that an idea, which is not implemented, never becomes
bigger than the brain cell it occupies.”
“It opened my mind to the concept that team work is a necessity we can't
dispense with while trying to come up with ideas. It has raised the daring
gauge inside my personality. It made me think about starting my own
business. It brought my attention to the fact that if I want to succeed; I should
come up with something novel, practical, and with a relatively low cost and I
need to design a plan before making any action or setting a solution for a
problem.”
The new course ‘Strategic Management of Innovation’ has shown that the School of
Business is committed to enact its new motto of ‘Entrepreneurship, Innovation and
Leadership’ in all our students, academic and research activities consistently with AUC
culture of leadership, lifelong learning, continuing education and service among its
graduates, and are dedicated to making significant contributions to Egypt and the
international community in diverse fields.
DISCUSSION
The 3A ideas of scanning of the environment (to increase awareness), systematic
analysis of the opportunities and the imperative for action, are themselves not new. The
innovation brought about by the 3A approach is combination of them in one coherent
model that can be used a guide to follow in all walks of life, from personal situations to
professional endeavors.
Conceived in 2007, 3A approach has been tested by me in several universities in China,
Turkey and Egypt and has produced significant outcomes. I was very inspired by these
results which confirmed my initial intuition that MENA region is a fertile ground for practicebased management learning approaches. The described initiatives were conducted over
the period of 8 months and had almost 200 students and 20 companies involved in various
activities. This in itself is a manifestation that 3A approach can be effectively deployed in
practice within a limit time and with limited resources. An indirect sign of its success is that
the top graduating MBA student this summer has chosen 3A as the motif for her
graduation
speech
in
June
2010.
19
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Apaydin, M. 2008. Making a Case for the Case Method in Turkey, Journal of Management
Development, Special issue “Transition in the Age of Anxiety: The Turkish Case,” 27 (7):
678-692.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D.A. 1974. Theories in practice. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Auerbach, E. 1953. Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature.
Translated by Willard R. Trask. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Barthes, R. 1970. S/Z. Paris: Seuil.
Bettencourt, L. A. & Ulwick, A.W. 2008. The Customer-Centered Innovation Map. Harvard
Business Review, May 2008, 109-114.
Bunge,M. 1997. Mechanism and explanation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences,
27(4):410-465.
Crossan, M.M. & Apaydin, M. 2009. A Multi-dimensional Framework of Organizational
Innovation. Journal of Management Studies (forthcoming).
Crossan, M.M., Lane, H.W. & White, R.E. 1999. An organizational learning framework:
From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 522-537.
DeGeus, A.P. 1988. Planning as learning, Harvard Business Review, 66(2): 70-74.
Hall, E. & Hall, M. 1990. Understanding Cultural Differences, Intercultural Press,
Yarmouth, ME.
Hendry, J., & Seidl, D. 2003. The structure and significance of strategic episodes: Social
systems theory and the routine practices of strategic change. Journal of Management
Studies, 40(1): 175–196.
Hofstede, G. 1980, Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related
Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
20
Inkpen, A.C. & Crossan, M.M. 1995. Believing is seeing: joint ventures and organizational
learning, Journal of Management Studies, 32(5): 596-618.
Jarzabkowski, P. 2005. Strategy as practice: An activity-based approach. London: Sage.
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. 2007. Strategizing: The challenges of a practice
perspective. Human Relations, 60(1): 5-27.
Johnson, G., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. 2003. Micro-strategy and strategizing towards an
activity-based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1): 3-22.
Miller D. 1996. A Preliminary Typology of Organizational Learning: Synthesizing the
Literature, Journal of Management, 22(3): 485-505.
Mone, M. A., McKinley, W. & Barker, V. L. 1998. Organizational decline and innovation: a
contingency framework. Academy of Management Review, 23: 115–32.
Orlikowski, W. 1996. Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated
change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1): 63–92.
Seidl, D. 2007. General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: A
systemic–discursive perspective. Organization Studies, 28(2): 197–218.
Senge, P. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization,
Doubleday, New York.
Whittington, R. 2006. Completing a practice turn in strategy research. Organization
Studies, 27(5): 613-634.
Zona, M. 2010. Innovation-As-Practice: Examining the Relationship Between Leaders’
Espoused and Enacted Innovation, and Innovation Outcomes and Firm Performance.
Doctoral Dissertation. The University of Western Ontario, London (Canada).
21