Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

In this exercise, participants create a fictional business based on a set of randomly generated words. This challenge requires participants to exercise creativity, while reinforcing the business concepts learned in class. The exercise has four steps: (1) generating a prompt of three random words, (2) designing a fictional business based on this prompt, (3) answering questions applying the concepts being taught, and (4) making presentations and discussion. The exercise is followed by a debrief that includes group discussions and critical thinking activities. We illustrate the exercise with examples from a strategic management course. The exercise can be applied in a variety of topics in business and organizations, student levels, and modes of instruction. Students report that the exercise is challenging, enjoyable, and effective in increasing understanding of the concepts taught.

Keywords

versatile exercise concept application constrained creativity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Angelo

T. A.

Cross

K. P.

(1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. Jossey-Bass.

Edwards

Ketchen

Short

(2014). Mastering strategic management. University of Minnesota Libraries, ISBN: 13: 9781774200094. https://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/textbooks/mastering-strategic-management-1st-canadian-edition

Elmes

M. B.

(2019). Working with(in) the shadow of experiential learning. Journal of Management Education, 43(1), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918804587

Farjoun

(2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202-225. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.2.zok202

Giddens

(1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.

Haught-Tromp

(2016). The green eggs and ham hypothesis: How constraints facilitate creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000061

Kirschner

P. A.

Sweller

Clark

R. E.

(2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1

Kolb

D. A.

(2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.

March

J. G.

(1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

10.

Stokes

P. D.

Fisher

(2005). Selection, constraints, and creativity case studies: Max Beckmann and Philip Guston. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2&3), 283-291. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1702&3_13

11.

Weick

K. E.

(1998). Introductory essay: Improvisation as a mindset for organizational analysis. Organization Science, 9(5), 543-555. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.5.543

12.

Wurdinger

S. D.

Carlson

J. A.

(2010). Teaching for experiential learning: Five approaches that work. Rowman & Littlefield Education.

“But It’s So Random!”: A Versatile Constrained Creativity Exercise for Application of Business Topics

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References