Rochester Institute of Technology

RIT Scholar Works

Theses

Thesis/Dissertation Collections

1993

The Hotel management simulation/game: An

Evaluation of game mechanics and learning
outcomes
Angel E. Dominguez

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses

Recommended Citation
Dominguez, Angel E., "The Hotel management simulation/game: An Evaluation of game mechanics and learning outcomes" (1993).
Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion
in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact ritscholarworks@rit.edu.

'THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT SIMULATION/GAME:

AN EVALUATION OF GAME MECHANICS AND

LEARNING

OUTCOMES"

by

Angel

E.

Dominguez

A thesis submitted to the

Faculty

of

the School of

Food, Hotel

and

Travel

Management

at

Rochester Institute of

in

partial

Technology

fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree
of

Master

of

Science

February, 1993

1993
Angel Eduardo Dominguez

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

FORMK
ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
School of Food, Hotel and Travel Management
Department of Graduate Studies
M.S. Hospitality-Tourism Management
Statement Grantin2 or Denyin2 Permission to Reproduce ThesisfProject
The author of a thesis or project should complete one of the following statements
and include this statement as the page following the title page.
Title of thesis/project:

"THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT SIMULATION/GAME :AN EVALUATION OF

GAME MECHANICS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES"

I,

ANGEL DOMINGUEZ

, hereby

(~3J!t, ~)

permission to the

Wallace Memorial Library of R.I.T., to reproduce the document titled above in

whole or part. Any reproduction will not be for commercial use or profit.
OR

I,

,' prefer to be contacted each time a

request for reproduction is made. I can be reached at the following address:

f)~.//:,h~
I

Date

'

Signature

Abstract

Hospitality
provide

skills

education, as a vocationally oriented field

the student not only with theoretical concepts, but also

that the student will use in the

analysis and

business

decision making, team building,

gaming techniques
skills.

(Occupancy, Profits

variables

In

are

thought to be

actively involved in the

processes of

Management Simulation/Game is
successfully

and procedures

It

was

in

used

hospitality

(mechanics)

affect

the

goals.

To

been

introduced

learning
solve

of

this problem,
the

of

relationship

problem

the hotel

Guest Satisfaction). Simulation

develop
job

and are

has been

technique that

simulation

these

The Hotel

and skills acquisition.

training. However its instructions

perceived as

understanding

of

the achievement

several changes of

game

include

actions required on the

education and

process and

by

skills

with a series of

effective methods to

learning

have been

believed that thedegree

and the

and

very

imitate

simulations participants

These

work place.

study, must

of

unfriendly

by

participants.

the game mechanics

of

would

the game's instructional

the game's mechanics have

administrators

at

Rochester

Technology. The objective of the present study is to

answer

Institute
the

of

following

question:

Does the Hotel Management Game's

outcomes

(such

understanding

as problem

of

the

solving

and

mechanics

affect

its

learning

decision making, team building,

relationship among

occupancy,

profits

and

and

guest

satisfaction), and the general pleasantness of the experience?

A true
questions.

different

experimental research was conducted

Two

groups of

versions

hotel

(Treatment

to give

an answer

to these

management students were exposed to two

"A"

and

"B")

of

Game. Both treatments differed only in the

the Hotel Management/Simulation

game's mechanics.

Instruments

were applied

to

measure

Acquisition, 3) General

5) Willingness

Participants'

were

perception of a

Perception

less

positive

understanding

of

structured version

Perception

of

Skills

4) Teamwork,

and

show

correlation

Feedback

(0.4380,

Strong

and

significant
students'

treatment "A").

that there is no relationship between the

0.5004

of

correlation

of

p<0.05).

Results

an effective

for the hotel business.

between

degree

general pleasantness

coefficients

Skills Acquisition

(0.3593, p<0.05)

Management Simulation/Game is
skills

favored

They

original version or

the game's mechanics and the

Receive Feedback

and

However, statistically

questions.

(the

coefficient

between Participant's Perception

and

Skills Acquisition, Fun, Teamwork

the skills and the game mechanics, but it did find a

the experience (p<0.01).

Give

of

found only in individual

perceived acquisition of

with relevant

game

the experience,

the two treatment groups.

Pearson's Correlation Analysis

strong

of

the

the T-tests show that there was not any significant difference at

of

Feedback, between
differences

(fun)

pleasantness

Participants'

2)

of

understanding

to give and receive feedback.

Results

0.05, in

1) The

each groups:

(independent variable),

mechanics

a:

in

and

were

and their

found

suggest

technique to

of

also

Willingness to

between Teamwork

also

(fun)

of

abilities

that the

provide

Hotel

the learner

FORM I
ROCHESlER INSTITUTE OF lECHNOLOGY
School of Food, Hotel and Travel Management
Department of Graduate Studies
M.S. Hospitality-Tourism Management
Presentation of ThesislProject FindinKs
Name:

Date: 02-17-935S#:

ANGEL EDUARDO DOMINGUEZ

Title of Research:

"THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT SIMULATION/GAME AN EVALUATION OF

GAME MECHANICS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES"

Specific Recommendations: (Use other side if necessary.)

Thesis Committee: (1)

2

Dr. Charles Plummer

(3)

Dr. Richard Marecki

()

OR

Faculty Advisor:

-I) -

---.....E.....
i .....
gbu..lt--->..(......
8 .....
)

93

Date

Committee Chairperson's Signature

J//7/93 _ _-,date

Dr. Edward Stockham

Number of Credits Approved:

( Chairperson)

---:D::;..;r:,...:.'--=E...:::.dw.:.;.a;::.:r:;,."d:......:::S...:::.t.:::.;oc=..:k:::..:.h=.::a""'m'--

Department Chairperson's Signature

Note: This form will not be signed by the Department Chairperson until all corrections,
as suggested in the specific recommendations (above) are completed.
cc:
Departmental Student Record File - Original
Student

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LIST OF TABLES

vii

viii

CHAPTER 1. Introduction

Introduction

Background

Problem Statement

Purpose

Significance

of

the study

Hypothesis

Assumptions

Scope

and

10

Limitations

10

CHAPTER 2. Literature Review

Hospitality

Education

Simulation

and

Simulations

and

Gaming

and

12

Experiential

Learning

Hospitality

Education

17

Games in

Research Design and Instrumentation in Simulation/Games

CHAPTER 3.

and

29
31
35

Methodology

Research Design
Population

12

35

Sample

38

Instrument Design

39

Data Analysis

45

CHAPTER 4. Results

CHAPTER 5. Conclusions

47

and

Recommendations

77

Conclusions

77

Recommendations

78

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

80

APPENDIXES

Appendix A. Instruments

Solving Situations
Demographic Survey Results

Appendix B. Problem
Appendix C.

Appendix D. License Agreement

87

96
102
107

Dedication

"Pepe'"

To the memory of my father Jose

champion and my first teacher and guide in the

VI

Dominguez,

hospitality

a true

business.

service

Acknowledgments

A
showed
open

special

me

the fun and excitement

for me,

orientation

thank you to a great advisor, Dr. Edward

and

and

of

research, and whose doors were

to Dr. Charles Plummer and Mr. David

help

while

Stockham,

always

Crumb, for

playing the different treatments

of

the

who

their

Hotel

Management Simulation/Game.
The
and

author

gratefully

acknowlege the assistance of

the students of Hotel Operations (Winter Quarter

collection and of

logistics

the

personnel of

Mr. Warren Sackler

1992) in

the data

the Physical Education Department for the

support.

VII

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1
The Role
.

of

the Teacher in the Traditional and

the Experience Based Classroom

28

Table 2.

Experiment Time Frame

37

Table 3.
Team Composition

40

Table 4.
Mean Scores

Main

of

Treatment Groups

"A"

"B"

and

48

variables

Table 5.
Mean Scores
Participants'

of

Treatment Groups

Perception

of

"A"

"B"

and

Skills Acquisition

50

Table 6.
Treatment Groups
Game Mechanics and Fun
Mean Scores

Table 7.
Mean Scores

"A"

of

Treatment Groups

"B"

and

of

55

"A"

"B"

and

57

Team Work
Table 8.
Mean Scores

of

Treatment Groups

"A"

"B"

and

59

Feedback

Table 9.
Criterion Reference Performance (Game

Scores)

61

Table 10.
Mean

scores of

Game Scores

Group

and

Treatments

"A"

"B"

and

Event Impact

65

Table 11.
General

results on

the Instruments

66
viii

Page

Table 12.
Pearson's Correlation Coefficients

Among

Main

variables

70

Table 13.
Facilitators'

(First

Evaluation

of

the Groups
71

Day)

Table 14.
Facilitators'

(Second

Evaluation

of

the Groups.

73

Day)

Table 15.
Participants'

Recommendations and Impressions

Game's Strengths and Weaknesses

IX

of

the

76

CHAPTER 1
Introduction

There is
nineties, has

working for

tremendously
Fewer

years.

service-suppliers

has

doubt that the

no

created a more

affected the

customers

a wide

offering

market

demanding

variety

reality

way the

the eighties and early

of

hospitality industry

find in the

marketplace

is

industry

educated personnel at

1. Well trained,
customers'

solve

2. A
solve

new

efficiently the

strategy formulation

evolve

only

facing

To

"hostile"

environment

the challenge of

achieve this goal the

becoming really

industry

requires a

every level:

creative

front-line

people who could

be

empowered to

problems and meet their requirements.

breed

Therefore,

This

and cost sensitive type of customer who wants

service and customer oriented.

highly

many different

of amenities at competitive prices.

to get more value for his money. In order to survive in this

the hospitality-tourism

had been

of managers

corporation's overall challenges

and

can

through the process of

implementation.

education and

from its traditional

training in

orientation

with theoretical models

decision making and

that understand the market reality and

but

to

the hospitality-tourism sector have to

one

based

on

providing the learner

also with practical experiences

guest relations skills

in

not

managerial

to be applied in the workplace.

In

to meet this need, Colleges offering programs in

order

tourism management

use several

teaching

and

training

demonstrations, seminars, conferences, panels,

role

Hospitality-

lectures,

methods:

playing,

case

studies,

projects and simulations.

Among

these

teaching

and

to be the most effective for

simulation enables

weakness

The trainee hears

training

passes

(Tansey
imitate

and

skills'

view

which applies with

is that information is

about

simulations are thought

development: "In

the broad company

different way from that

latter, the

training techniques,

training it is held

to be passed on to the trainee in a

the lecture method

passed on

only

of

at the

training. In the

intellectual level.

the job but does not participate in it. The content

to him not

as a

Unwin, 1969).

actions required oa

skill, as it does

In simulations

that

with simulation

but

of

his

concept."

as a

training becomes "real". Trainees

the job and are actively, involved in_the

learning

process.

Background

Similar
used

techniques.-

in different

areas:

Simulations

and

educational

business, international relations, sociology

planning, among others. In the past decade an

finding

According

to Wilbert McKeachie "It may

games

educational games will replace

television."

increasing

have been
and urban

number of

teachers

to be an important part of their educational resources.

have been

on

games

many

(Mc Keachie, 1986).

of

well

be that

within

the next decade

the noneducational game shows now

Different Colleges
identified this

need and are

(Chase, 1968). In this

game

Game"

is based

separate

environment.

on

systems,

Emphasis is

D. Duke

and was copyrighted

Management

of

to

research

operate

of

to make decisions

used

framework

and

is

that

and

by

and

of

It

was

"Multilogue".

the School of

Technology

the

business

so participants can explore and

in

as

Crumb

was

Richard

and

game

year

Travel
Dr.

and

licensed for the

selected

was

and

by

Plummer

for this

(1991)

training

as

since

it

decision making scenarios in the hotel

provides

abilities

external

the same

Food, Hotel

technique for hotel management education and

decision making

the

designed

During

Laboratory

by Stockham,

student with a series of

as

presented

is interpreted

bought the

it. The Hotel Management Game

considered

Wing Cheong

The Hotel Management Game is the

the Simulation Systems

because it is

a valuable

Laboratory

Rochester Institute

Charles Plummer

is

finance.

presentresearch.

in 1989

"CHASE"

or

Ng, 1985).

and

Game.-

technique used in the

the Simulation Systems

select

Exercise"

placed on the physical system which

The Hotel Management

to

games such as:

"The physical, the financial,

(Sculli

have

management

Dominic Sculli

by

a conceptual

units."

simulation

and

developed

a series of related work

rights

Tourism

currently using different

hotel pricing, marketing, operations

Ng. This

and

game the simulation technique

2. The "Hotel

three

Food, Hotel

"Cornell Hotel Administration Simulation

1.

about

of

exercise

their

a simulated environment.

solving

and

Another important reason

the Hotel Management Game as the subject

fact that this gaming technique has been successfully

problem

of

this study lies on the

used

for

several years

by

in the School

faculty

Laboratory

of

Food, Hotel

Travel

and

the Rochester Institute of Technology. The game's

at

management

computerized

Game

is

therefore

and

administered,

easily

inexpensive, in

administration

for its

characteristics and cost are other major considerations

Hotel

Simulation Systems

and the

similar

The
non

portable,

very

contrast to

selection:

computer

simulations.

The

the subject gaming technique

overall goal of

developer Dr. Richard Duke

original

"The Hotel Management

necessity for hotels in

jointly

hotel business

apply

following

Game impresses

a chain to

on

be extremely

identified

by

its

terms:

hotel
well

managers

the

coordinated and

cooperative, yet retain an individual competitive sharpness which

maximize

will

in the

(1989)

was

profits, in order ta excel in the enormously competitive

world.

relevant

The

game also allows managers

techniques, behaviors

and

strategies

to explore and

in

simulated

environment."

The designer has

Increase

also

identified three

main objectives of

Capacity (Occupancy)

of

the given

2. Improve the Guest Satisfaction Index (G.S.I.

the game as follows:

hotel,

),

and,

3. Improve the hotel's Profit Index (P.I.).

The
move

exercise

into a

new

begins

territory.

with new

The

hotel

chains which

players'

performance

have recently

is judged

not

made the

only

against

that achieved
other

by

the other hotels in a given chain, but also against that of the

Each

chains.

region

belonging

hotel has

each

Each has

structure and capability.

hotels in the

and

chain

to this chain, and

for the functions

Sales

Marketing. The exercise is controlled

and

Executive Vice-President.

"Each team

and

the

responsible

Beverages,

and

facilitator, known

handle

how to

about

that include food and

affect a

quality

hotel. The
of a

beverage,

the

rooms management,

uncontrollable external events

results of their strategic

-solution-

as

and

representative

marketing, hotel maintenance, customer relations, operations,

human resources, and

for the

has three discipline

each

Facilities, Food

by

organizational

1989).

decisions

makes

problem situation

Rooms

(Duke,

identical

Regional Vice-President

managers

of

an

to the problem,

projected performance of each

hotel

an

decisions

finance,

that periodically

are scored on

the

element of chance, and the

division."

(Stockham, Crumb

and

Plummer, 1991).

Stockham, Crumb
studies

whose

Proceedings."

and

Plummer

results were reported

They

collected

students, community college

faculty

versions

objectives can

of

be

conducted

slow

and

working

undergraduate

managers who

had

researchers concluded

achieved and evaluated

increases

of

graduate and

as the

instructors

They

made

played

that higher

through the use

the Hotel Management Simulation-Game.

overall ratings made

a series

in the "1991 Annual CHRIE Conference

feedback from

Hotel Management Game. These

learning

(1991) have

also

of

the

order

modified

found that

improvements to

the original

version

the game and gained more experience in running it.

of

These improvements to the

feed-back

difficulties to

who reported

original version of
managerial

participants'

original version were motivated

programs for the

a series of modifications

introduced

several

changes

to

as a

game's

Beginning

mechanics,

cumulative experience and an analysis of the students

new version of

Plummer. John

the Hotel Management Game

Tiby

Systems Laboratory,
new version.

This

and

assisted with

problem

Crumb

solving

solutions and

the

and

Crumb

new printed

for team
of

the

have been

situations

for evaluating

mechanics could

on

by

the

game.

Dr. Charles

materials and

presentations.

Food, Hotel

modified

and

In

School,

use.

the

recording

conjuction

Travel

for academic

of

with

two

Stockham,

Plummer have clarified criteria for scoring problem solving creative

and

of

their

on

the design and development process

incorporates

also, made

Professors Stockham

developed

was

need

in 1990 they

based

feed-back

began

Kristan Beatt, Research Assistants in the Simulation

version

forms. Provision is

game

facilitators felt the

RIT,

to the game.

the

technique in

training

hotel industry. Once the

to be used for educational purposes at

introducing

The

understand the game mechanics.

the game was designed to serve

development

by

self

be listed

tutoring

student presentations.

Modifications

of

the game's

as:

manual

that emphasizes

on

the steps to be followed

by

participants.

2. Improvement

of record

3. The introduction
which

takes

participants

place after

have

of a

keeping

and

scoring

"Game Analysis

procedures.

and

Strategy Setting Stage",

the two first rounds of the game.

During

this stage the

the opportunity to review the game mechanics and

try

to

the

identify

among the

relationships

the participants

are encouraged

to

game's main variables.

develop

After their

analysis

Strategic Plan for the following

rounds of the game.

4. Participants are provided

Operations overview,

and

solving

hand-out

strategy setting,

material:

and

Hotel

information

hand-outs.

systems

For the

purpose of

to as "Treatment

Materials

problem

with extra resource

used

A"

this study the game's

original version will

and the modified version will

in both treatments

be known

as

be

referred

"Treatment B".

were:

The Facilitator's Manual,

2. Participants material,
and

Role Descriptions,

play

and

decision

3. Event

which contains a

Game Handout, RoJe

Cards,

and

In treatment B,
was

strategy setting

assignment objectives, steps to

Accounting Forms,

4. The Game's Paraphernalia

Debriefing

Pregame hand-out, Scenario,

(Dice,

all materials other

more

structured

and

colored

flow pens,

wall charts).

than the initial scenario, were rewritten.

extensive, group presentations and

occured.

Problem Statement

The

mechanics of

the Hotel Management Game's original version was

"unfriendly"

perceived

by

learners

as

which means

that instructions were not

clear

and

had to invest

students

All

procedures.

instructional

of

lot

time understanding the

of

this was believed to affect the

goals of

The

the game.

process and the

learning

problem addressed

game

in this study

could

be

stated as:

Does the Hotel Management Game's

outcomes

(such

as problem

of

understanding

the

solving

and

mechanics

affect

its

learning

decision making, team building,

relationship among occupancy,

satisfaction), and the general pleasantness

of

and

profits

and

guest

the experience?

Purpose

The

purpose of

had

mechanics

the

an

this study is to evaluate

Significance

The

of

the few

for the

service

solving

and

game's

perception of skills acquisition

through

the

general pleasantness of

the

experience.

the Study

present research

one of

the

of

learners'

impact in

simulation exercise and

the changes

simulation

is

study

since

it deals

with

techniques used in service industries and education

industries. It

decision

considered as a relevant

would

be very important to

making techniques, team

relationship among occupancy,

profits and guest

evaluate

building

if

skills

problem

and

the

satisfaction, could be taught

through the use of this educational/training technique.

If

an effective simulation

technique is identified through this study and it is

later

be

applied

in

Students

perceived.

will

be

hospitality training

designed to

could

be

key

Also the

the

This

will

industry

they

behaviors

learning

and strategies

making

with more confidence and

skills.

These

experience,

which

to succeed in their careers.

hospitality industry

count on more skilled

and skills

experimental

positive results might

results of this project since

their managerial and decision

develop

students will enter

education, several

benefit from the

will

direct

provided with

and

benefit from this study because it

would

human resources

can

have developed behaviors

who would

in decision making through the improved Hotel Management Game.

ultimately increase productivity

within

the hotel industry.

Hypothesis

Since it is believed that the

better that the

original game

the

new version of

(treatment A), the

game

(treatment

researcher sets

the

B) is

following

hypothesis:

Null Hypothesis: The

Game is

perceived

by

new version

students

as

(treatment B)

an

technique than the original version (treatment

providing the learner

skills

with a

gaming

experience at

A)

better understanding

in problem-solving/decision-making

or

equally

and

of

the Hotel Management

less

powerful

teaching

to achieve the objectives of

of

the hotel

team

building,

business, develop
and

to enjoy the

the same time.

Alternative Hypotesis: The

new version of

the Hotel Management Game

(treatment B) is
original version

better or more powerful instructional technique than the

(treatment

the hotel

business,

and team

building

to

A)

to provide learners

develop

and to

with a

better understanding

of

their skills in problem-analysis/decision making

enjoy the gaming

experience at the same time.

Assumptions

For the
valid.

the

However,

original

assumed

bearing

defining

that the

skills of problem

on

the

Duke

provided

the issues

research

populations were

solving

and

of

no

validity

evidence

and

It
of

that the

variances are

was assumed

in the

sample

homogeneous in terms
as well as

values, and formal knowledge of the hotel business.

assumes

homogeneous in

that the subject

to be

simulation

and reliability.

population

decision making,

assumed

by Dr. Plummer,

than previous evaluation data collected

other

designer Dr.

documentation

When

this study, the underlying model was

purpose of

all

population

the
of

treatment

follows

their

in their

Therefore,

researcher

previous

attitudes and

the

researcher

groups.

a normal

distribution

frequencies.

Scope

and

The
perception

Limitations

this

scope of

of

skills

work, creativity and

research

focuses

development in

leadership

in

on

problem

hospitality
10

learning

principles and

learner's

solving, decision making, team

management.

This

Approach", in

According
the

game

applies

research

which

different

"gaming

Wolfe

defines

(1985)

situations"

"Contingency

as

(or treatments)

will

be tested.

to Wolfe several different variables intervene in a gaming

structure,

instructor's expertise,

background, duration, pacing

The

what

main

limitations

of

and

game

attitudes, among

environment,

the proposed research are defined

the original

(or the way it is played)

rather

student

others.

by

the Hotel Management Game's Copyright-license document.

and modifications to

situation:

the terms

of

Enhancement
"form"

version were made

only

than on its basic model

11

or

on

the

game's

underlying

principles.

CHAPTER 2

Literature Review

Hospitality Education,
games used

in

hospitality

Education

Hospitality

Evolution

hospitality
to a

long

of

evolution.

instructional design,

research and

instrument design for

section.

Experiential

and

Learning

Education.-

Hospitality

Since the inception

of

the first

than one century ago, this discipline has been subject

program more

manpower

training

education, and

discussed in this

simulations are

and

simulation, gaming

Hospitality
for the

Education

needs of the

was

first

conceived as a program

food

and

lodging

businesses.

for

During

"hands-on-experience"

this early stage,

all over

the

academic

(Pavesic,

(ie. cooking

country,

its evolution,

courses and schools appeared

several

Hospitality
units

college

and

Programs
such

as

1991). Current trends

waiting

schools).

could

be found

business
seem

During
as

education

or

the
part

next stage of

of

home

to favor a recognition of

traditional
economics

Hospitality

Education as an independent discipline:

"Hospitality
more

freedom to

hospitality

declining
in

administration continues

organize and structure

programs

over

colleges of

to evolve as a discipline and needs

located in

the past

business.

its

curriculum.

colleges of

Today, the

percentage

12

percentage of

business has been steadily

In 1987, 30%

several years.

The

of the programs were

has dropped to 24.5%.

Programs located in

affairs, human/professional services, etc.

public/urban

hospitality

all

(Pizam

year."

Theoretical

programs

Experiential

versus

and

training in
food

training

oriented

field

of

study is

universities

education

is

while

the

other

must

Pavesic

be built

should also provide

should

not

institutions

directly

"skills"

related

much of what

to

what

that Hotel and

a

vocationally

is taught

the voice of the

which

hospitality

educational

dominate

industry, these

programs of

for assessing
tried

program

to

research

identify

merit

the

order

to

the future

educational

conducted

to describe

competency-based testing.

general outcomes of

13

not

(Quinton, 1988).

has been

quality through

theory

"True, industry

Equally true,

programs."

educational

Extensive

do

foundation. However, in

programs.

the

Quinton.

programs of

the student with solid skills in certain areas.

Outcome.-

Researchers have

programs

in his study that

by

the student, as a future

(Dennington, 1989). Wayne

upon a sound academic

should not

process

education

advocates of

has traditionally been

workplace"

concludes

dominate

Program
the

hospitality

more general and theoretical

usually the

are

is seeking low level training

cognizant of

remain

whether

has lead

evolution

that the inference in the debate is that one party is seeking

college credit.

future

over

Currently

not new.

employee, will encounter in the

says

of

increasing every

(Pavesic, 1991). The idea

areas

management

The field's

broader,

boards

"practical"

colleges and

(1988)

or a

Industry advisory

specific

service

for 57%

account

have been

and

Learning.-

controversies

should stress specific skills

knowledge base.

nationwide

economics,

Milman, 1988).

and

debates

to different

business, i.e. home

colleges other than

learning

as

well as

specific

to Grondlund

According

knowledge, intellectual
and appreciations.
required

for

(1983),

management

learning

most

Jonker

and

Jonker

graduate.

"Bringing Guest Service Into

service."

and

Jones

manufacturing

orientation

These

authors

base their

hospitality industry,
customer relations

professional.

Most

"theater":

role play,

holistic

Techniques.-

Many

of

view of

education

by hospitality

of

students

has

will

The

be

current

of

of managers

the

in the

personnel

and

in

field,

effective

new

methods

and

hospitality

based

on

the

in detail in this chapter),

studied

encouraged

14

guest

of effective management skill.

learning

provision, and

programs.

Guest

the service industries.

the jobs

and practical exercises,

service

industry:

that this

the needs of the

them stress the need of

hospitality

of

of

article

different instructional devices

meet

Simulations (which

resolution,

administration principles

demonstrate the importance

which

our

They believe

the studies

of

many existing hospitality

tomeetthe needs

research on

drama, debates

or co-operative

needed

order

in

business

approach.

have been identified to

designs

of

in

on

function and the development

Instructional

ideas

operations

must change

suggest that

skills

programs address what

dimension

job

(1988)

interests,

knowledge

the importance

that "few

and regrets

strongly based

management courses are

and

categories:

Kathleen Iverson in her 1989

states

important

most

are:

conflict

motivation,

Classroom"

the

Hospitality Education,

Bareham

graduates.

the most important

to them, these

According

leadership,

principles,

many believe is the

fit into four

outcomes

(1990) identified

performance evaluation and guest service.

Service in

to its

hospitality industry

abilities and skills, general skills and attitudes,

hospitality

the

by

required

outcomes

order

to create a more

work-related experiences

development

different

of

the skills

approach

with

an

emphasis on theater and the

flexible

reaction

manager

Personal Skills

following

topic

appropriate ways of

have

personal qualities and

been

always

successful and effective performance

of a

develop

to staff and customers. (Bareham and

to these authors both the

hospitality

ability to

encouraging

Jones, 1988). According

interpersonal skills

recognized

in this industry.

an

as

They

intrinsic

propose

the

part

analysis; on-the-job

training

of

creation

course component whose syllabus would comprise

areas: operational

the

of

the

skills; managing

meetings; negotiating skills; managing the service encounter; approaches to

social skill

All

of

training; managing change;

these contents are in many

Several

and games.

Education
field

of

programs

learning,

managing innovation

and creativity.

to the objectives

of simulations

ways similar

authors agree with the

(or Cooperative

Education

Hospitality

and

and a real view of

-Co

by providing

op-

idea

of

implementing

Education)

the student

with

Experiential

help

which would

the

hands-on-experience

the industry., Pauze, Johnson and Miller

(1989)

say

that these Experiential Education programs must be "a balanced triangular

commitment

also

from the university, the

experiences,

grading

hospitality industry
in his

article

ingredients for

of

work

program

mechanisms.

These

authors

to

Hospitality

Practitioners
learning.

Education Needs",

which are:

based

competency

of experiential

Program"

the

of

Quinton,

identified the

General education, business

education, field experiences and quality students.

the importance of

background

in the

statement,

the importance

"Responding

"Five Star

mission

evaluation

and

also asses

industry

emphasizes

experience

the

with

congruence

education,

student."

the basic components of the model: quality commitment, structural

identify

(1988)

and the

industry

field

experience and

with opportunities

industry including

to discover the

directed training
15

defines it

and

as

He

"A practical

day-to-day- real
world

education

in

most

departments

of

the

concentration

for

career

industry by

evaluation of

Case Studies
Education to
use

for

that the "case

and

useful

teaching

(1989)

frames,

the aid of

Philip Wright (1988)

in the

study

to

in two

doing'

approach

is

material

on

an

-as

incidents

case

presentation

and

to

are

skills

Hart

(1986)

years.

It is

an

and other subjects

appropriate."

Surrey, England have

that presents

ways

example

Spizigen

teaching business policy

classroom

world"

has been in favor for many

of

for teaching

proper

him,
and

work

include decision making

which

useful

According

analysis."

University

shell

With

Hospitality

says that the

effective tool

an

students.

the group

method

for

Gamble

put together a

to students structured as a

processes

to be solved

with

tutorial advice in the form of expert systems. This

instructional device known as the "Computerized Case

Shell", is based

of

areas

performance, and

recommended

theme and as a "real

'learning by

spreadsheets or

sophisticated

or

detailed

more

technique for

computerized case

series of

topic

developing

predominately

Lockwood

hospitality

presented material.

necessary for longer,

where a

techniques

the case incident can be

specific

vehicle

extremely

teaching

to senior

illustrate previously

selected

of attitude and

incidents has been found to be

introduction to a

on

students."

management, he says,

state

emphasis

placement, evaluation

are also

concepts

"an ideal

special

with

recreate real world situations.

of case

business

industry,

Study

the idea that:

"In a

management

early

stages of a

world

to their

school,

degree

students.

faculty may

program

This

model

spend a great

communicating

is

useful

16

for

deal

hidden

structured

of

time in the

model of

teaching

the

and

is

reassuring to

Basically it

technique,

case

study developed for the

London Docklands hotel

Other

education"

affiliated

of

Education

institutions

by

rapidly expanding French hotel

of

Purdue University,

the Council on

of

required

and

instruction

in

48%

conducted a

of

food

service

the

major results of

in 34%

usage

graduate

core

and computer-assisted

hospitality

be

of

the

usage

and

Institutional

in hotel

and, food

the study indicated that the

of

the undergraduate core

Computer-assisted

courses.

drafting
viable

and

design

systems

instructional tools for

education.

Gaming

and

Concept.-

among different

in

and

chain.

study using the 108

Restaurant, Hotel,

have been found to

professional education

Simulation

The

computer

(Jaffe, 1989),

(Lambert, 1989)

a rule-based,

(Dennington, 1989). Lloyd J. Dennington

service management education.

courses

it is

shell concerned the proposed take

Education in the United-States to determineeomputer

respondents

orderly

students with a set of

for "Computer integration in hotel

authors call

management

Department

an

with an application

an efficient way.

is designed to equip

is

problems."

tools for solving

over of a

in

will resolve problems

reductionist approach which

The first

proposes that the world

that a logical assembly of facts associated

place and
of

students.

Defining

simulation and games

authors and researchers

17

in

has been

education and

a common concern

instructional design.

James Mc
as

Kenney (1962)

"competitive

development
Misshauk
makes

mental

of

the

University

Harvard, defined

an

Carlson

and

vehicle or technique

that

economic

specifically designed to

in the business

Szocki

business

defines

word game

opponents compete through the

say that gaming is "a teaching

situations

the

strategy."

of

environmental conditions

(1989)

of

wherein

activity

implementation

and

(1972)

use

of

world."

simulation

On the
"a

as

the

represent

other

role

hand,

actual
Foucar-

where

play

the

participant's performance resembles an actual situation or skill and where the

outcome of

simulation

on

upon

the decisions made, certain results

Evolution.-

the

performance of

UCLA developed

(McKenney,

In that

year

During

the

to investigate

same

Schubert, 1986). By 1973 the field's

games

and

by 1980,

research

of

year

1970's.

(Butler, Markulis

major source

development,

outlets show

the

and

two

game..."

of

problems.

Management

(Miles, Biggs

and

book described 209 business

games.

research

Strang, 1988). According

evolution

educational

logistics

"American

the

Horn and Cleaves listed 228

and

the field of

certain

Simulation & Games, have been actively publishing

two

participant.

the Management Science Research Project

a simulation model

1967).

origin of

Association developed the first practical business

area

the

occur."

1956 seems to be the

simulations and games.

at

is dependent

stated, the participant is placed in the role of a decision-maker and,

Simply
based

the

(Wolfe, 1985). In the

outlets,

ABSEL

research since

to these

and

the early

authors, these

the academic discipline of Simulation and

Gaming:

18

"This

process consists of a series of stages

frequently
in

an

in the form

data

and/or

theories,

incremental fashion. Furthermore,

distinguishing
characterized

degree
human
an

of

new

whereby

knowledge,

are added to the

each stage often

has

characteristics. For example, the initial stage

by

high level

of enthusiasm

of expectations with respect

advancement...

emphasis

on

Along

methodologies.

to how the field

Research in the

heavy
with

and

this

for the field

second stage

is usually
high

as well as a

is

characterized

call

for

to

theory building

frequently

finds

with

particular, quite

which a

established"

(Butler, Markulis

Different types
respect

of

and

simulations.-

classifies

Underlying

the

use of

broader,

more

definite theory

can

be

Strang, 1988).

J. Barton Cunningham

taxonomy

Different Types

(1984)

of simulations.

of

Simulations",

says

in this

In his

work

this author

the different types of simulations as:

1. Experimental

Simulations,

which

include

laboratory

experiments and

game theoretical experiments or experimental games applied

and

to coalesce empirical studies into a

that there is no generally accepted

"Assumptions

by

is

and paradigm construction... there

researchers and scholars

holistic framework from

by

and

narrow, aspects of the general field... The third stage is characterized

more attention

to

techniques

research emphasis one

that researchers are almost entirely preoccupied

certain

can contribute

research

rigorous

discipline

bargaining

to competition

2. Predictive simulation, that comprises mathematical games, machine

games, board and

bookkeeping

games and

19

heuristic exercises;

3. Evaluative simulations, that include Incident

individual's ability to

simulations which asses an

would

normally

occur

the

during

object

of

our

research

thought. This

particular

which

situations

Simulations

Gaming

have been defined the type

"gamed"

type

to

that

includes Role playing simulation,

Simulations.

Gaming

and

life but has

replicates real

respond

In-basket

job; and,

4. Educational simulations,
structural experiences and

simulations and

decision

elements

focuses

of simulations

are

the

of simulation

that

provoking interaction

and

transferring theory

and

on

knowledge. (Cunningham, 1984).

Components
researchers

have tried to

simulation game.

that represents
which

is the

P.J.

"1
2.

Games.-

Simulation

the

the

Validity. How

that its three basic components are a model,

in the

manipulation of the model, and

the simulation,

finally

the game,

the participants in relation to the simulation.

of

criterion used

to estimate the merits of a given model,

work

Abt Associates

truly

representative of the real

Coverage. How

Different

the basic components and characteristics of a

says

for the

the activity

quotes

present

identify

of

an abstraction. of arLeconomic environment,-

establish

Tansey

Characteristics

McKenney

set of rules

which governs

To

and

much of what

(1965),

that enumerates them:

life

situation

is important in the

real

is the

life

model?

situation

is

model?

3. Comprehensibility.

How easy is the

conversely how easily

are

modeled understood

model

to

the significant processes

from the

model?

20

understand
which

and

have been

Experiential Utility.

4.

How

be

permitting the

in

model

the real life processes in

experimental manipulation of

may

is the

useful

investigated in changing

conditions

order

that

differing

under

and

they

circumstances?

5. Applicability, is the

understanding
are

depicted

P. J.

any

"1

the

it

as

real

life

assists

in the

conditions

that

also

the three

characteristics

to describe

the degree of competition, 2. the degree of structure,

Schubert

inconclusive

(1986)

to be

reaHyieach,-

what

and

if

reverse

what

by

type

type of outcome may be expected.

found that

superior

addressed

they do,

to other forms

to be true;

studies

comparative

contradictory findings: "Some

and

have found the

One issue that has been

simulation?

takes place and

simulations

Outcome.-

is if

researchers

control of

far

so

of participation".

Learning

and

identifies

Tansey (1969)

3. the degree

in

it?."

simulated process :

process

possibly in the

and

by

model significant

of

of

of

learning

Miles, Biggs

have

generated

the studies have found

pedagogy

still other studies

numerous

whereas other studies

have found

no

differences

pedagogies."

However

among the varying

reviewed seem

and

some

simulations

(Roberts

(1961)

of

which

of

the

research

papers

to agree that simulations are very efficient educational devices

these studies stated that for some

have

and

most

objectives

management

a unique advantage over traditional methods of

Field, 1975). These

while

authors cite

cautioning the

the work of Cohen and Rhenman

reader about

21

instruction.

the lack of objective evidence,

stated a number of educational concepts

in

"1

facts

the

are meant not

facts,

only facts,

concepts and generalizations

Learning

the process simulated

by

3.

Learning

the relative costs and

benefits,

alternative strategies of

On the

at all".

the effectiveness

reviewing 22

unequivocally known

Rowland

value of

after

gaming for

education.

is the only justification for

fairly

but skills),

risks and potential rewards of

They

computer-based

reached

very

of educational simulations and

rigorous studies concluded that

also took a

concluded

Wyman

and

business

about what

Gardner in 1973,

and

(by

the game,

hand, in 1973 Greenlaw

other

These authors,

was

which are often

making."

decision

pessimistic conclusions about

"little

learning

expressed in the game context and dynamics

2.

games.

of

a simulation:

Learning

through business

obtainable

In 1968 Abt identified three different types

gaming.

present

possibly

games

very

taught, if anything

pessimistic view of the

that favorable

business

games.

student reception

"However,

at

the

1974 meeting of the Association for Business Simulation and Experiential

Learning Byrne

and

Wolfe

same meeting,

Fritzsche

information to

student

about

1975).

increased

activities

are

experiences.

memory,

and

excellent

In that

which suggests

that if

and

Goosen

knowledge through
Tipple

(1982)

vehicles

same

learning

study,

in

a simulation class.

At the

that a game centered course committed more

reported

student

Glenn, Gregg

reported greater

for

reported

his

gaming."

students

quoted the work of

specific skills are

(Roberts

feelings

and

agree that simulations and

involving

they

subjective

role-play

in problem-solving
Van Siclkle in 1978,

to be taught using a simulation or

22

Field,

role-

students

playing activity,

demonstrate their knowledge

how

about

play

participating in

Advantages
decision making

role-play

Glenn, Gregg

to substantiate the

suggest

that a role-play activity

decision-making

them specific

(1990)

not

to

(1990)

involve

two

(1982)

explore

suggest

simulations

as

only to

managerial

that

during

change a

may learn

In their

work

Simulations

develop

management

situation

23

say that

and

Chanin

integrate

that

also explore

the need

decision processes in the

skills

processes.

might

setting for studying

making.

use

that may teach

and games seem

researchers

a controlled research

they

how to

also

Affisco

making

decision making

decision making

They

study

stimulate student

only

group decision

of their

students

skills.

research

decision

specific

effective strategy.

learning

that

of simulation and

The findings

decision making

concepts.

conclude

explicitly teaching

student active

of

problem analysis and

the advocates

and test realistic models of managerial

vehicle not

2.

that simply

to

not enough

of ^activities^may not

models

behavioral

feedback

conclude

develop

activities.

the most

simulations and games.

of

interesting
also

also

proposed

develop

form

is

problem analysis and

mathematical and

to

model

without

properly used, these.type,

interest, but may

Tipple

claims of

participating in these

skills

when

and

suggest that students

making

the

They
is

or simulation

of simulations and games to

activities who

by

model."

receive

play,

a problem.

analyzing

skills.-

still

using the

are

to

prior

concepts

the concepts, and 3.

of

role-play activity

student's method of

findings have

they

well

"1. learn basic

must

to be a very

in participants, but

Prohaska
use

total

and

Frank

enterprise

management

decision

Importance

cohesiveness. team

of group

to Jaffe and Nebenzahl

According

(1990)

of

building

the Bar-llan

University in Israel,

"past research has shown that team cohesiveness is positively

performance

in

business

In

their

associated with

investigated

they

study

important during the team formation

cohesiveness was more

of

games."

settino.-

and goal

at an

if

stage

early

the game, throughout the game or toward the end. Results showed that teams

which were

successful.

more cohesive than task oriented at an

Fand, Richardson

business policy

Conner

and

"are not instructed

courses

and

effectively

cohesiveness

in terms

together expressed

to how a group

capture

can

the attraction,

of

individual

by

satisfaction and

They

members.

already been found in.

effect of goal

business

simulation.

setting intervention
while

Profits.

group

that a strong

higher levels

reduced

expressing

simulations and

gaming.

Richard Teach

profits generated

have been

has

functioning

the

explored

team experience while competing in a computerized

exhibited

issue in

simulation

remain

Their findings demonstrated that "teams receiving

Planning

work

the desire to

previous research.^These authors also

on

setting

learn to

and

levels

of

Forecasting

of cohesiveness

conflict, than

(1990)

during

of

the course of play

by

An important

forecasting

Technology found

companies

used as a surrogate measure of

that

of

perceived

teams."

of profits and

the Georgia Institute

goal-

control

Games.-

in Business

gaming is the importance

and

in

He

gained

by

measuring

says

and

business

the managerial ability of

other measures of managerial

analyzing

errors

24

in

in

that

members."

team

in

group

also suggest
and

used

defined

They

group

relationship between cohesiveness, productivity

"the

that simulations

(1990) say
as

stage were more

synergy."

together

success,

early

forecasting,

and

ability

could

concludes

be

that

this type

of measurement would

making in business

simulations.

Contingency

Approach.-

conditions

issue in

in

which

learning

improve

The idea

occurs

fact that in many

same

for every

and

in

They

games.

host

Gagnon,

who

experience; the nature

experience

of

games

These

in 1979 talked

of circumstances: what

the

has been

the person is

cited

is

the

(1981)
not the
of

work

about the multiple realities possible

learns from any

anyone

important

an

Greenblat

and

authors

decision

environmental

complex ways a given game

participant.

say that "what

realism of

investigating

in business

acknowledged the

Greenblat

of

gaming theory. Bredemeier

simulations and

experience

the quality and

looking for;

experience

depends

on

the detailed

shape of

the

the person; opportunities to practice; similarities

of

that

to other experiences; the intrinsic pleasantness/unpleasantness of

experience."

The

the

Wolfe (1985). In his

teach, the field

understand

the

concept of

work

he

should adopt a

contingency

stated

contingency

"rather than simply

approach.

environmental conditions and

effective."

In the

less

that

same research

by

approach was also recognized

testing if

Research

factors that

games

must attempt

to

make games more or

paper, Wolfe summarized the effectiveness

elements of simulations:

1. Game design

integrative,

characteristics:

single

function

versus

functionally

complexity, algorithm validity and random events.

2. Administration

characteristics:

selection, team accountability,

within-course

placement, and

3. Player

and

group

duration,

learning

Starting

pacing, trial

position, team size, team

or practice

runs,

debriefing,

objectives.

characteristics:

25

motivation,

aptitude

and

decision-making

achievement, attitude, cognitive style, participation,

method,

team structure.
4. Administrator characteristics: Game

experience

involvement,

and

motivation, and subject matter familiarity.

The Roles

very few

Remus

games.

is

quite

Field

articles

(1975)

Roberts

focus
and

on

positive

and

business

Field

Different

games

appeared

reactions about

and

in their

Jenner

and

may

often

that

business

relation_to

opinion

other

found that

(1981)

Roberts

do

research

was

had

not...

paper

played a

overwhelmingly

traditional

methods

students'

expectations

they

and

experience

in the

of

for

game

that students brought to the game a set of high educational

business policy

and

way to

course.

in this

the

in

data

hand Thatcher
with

on

student

learning, specially

(1986)

pointed out that

the role of facilitator and

excerpt:

created and the students

no control over

order

believed that

(1986)

resources,

have been

them, the teacher has

are used, nor over

other

learning

are shown

resources

Schubert

collect comparative

On the

manager of

His findings

"Once the

student

In their

students who

differ from the realities

Miles, Biggs

the teacher is a

in

^simulation

84

attitudes."

study: "studies

gaming."

business

found that

They

perceptions were a valid

organizer.

about

authors argue

that "although the literature on gaming

examined the opinion of

game.

Remus

expectations.

(1981) say

reached the same conclusion

toward the

education.

in

Student.-

the

and

student attitudes

Jenner

student opinion

management

it

the Teacher

extensive, only a few articles focus on student

examine

and

of

which

the speed at

the student

26

which

will move

introduced to
the resources
through them.

It is up to the teacher to
simulation, to facilitate the
and reflection,

in

other

flow

assist the

debriefing,

or

dynamic

of

the game

and thus to promote

words, to enable the

discussion

to be

resources

or

used as

possible."

effectively

as

Linda Costigan Lederman

in the

studied the

in "the experience-based

students and teachers

change

(1984)

communication paradigm

relationships

of experience also affects

the relationship between teachers and students. Table

role

number

the teacher in the experiential classroom and that

of

She found that

classroom".

in this type

between

of

the

contrasts

the traditional

teacher.

Importance

the

published

The

has-been

learning

experience-based

1984, Lederman

debriefing.-

of

-assessed.

article

She

concludes

the

success

importance

of

that the

of

the

of game/simulation

points out

taken

In

researchers.

effective use".

She

students and teachers.

by

lies to

power of simulations and games

and

Thatcher

session.

defines it

as

"the

is examined, discussed

debriefing

process.

According

27

process

some extent

(1990) discussed
by

and turned

the importance of reflection in the

the stages in the

the

the post-experience analytic process and offers a

debriefing

debriefing

in

debriefing

critical reexamination of

implications for its

framework to examine the roles

conceptual

of

different

by

the article: "Debriefing, A

post-experience analytic process with

discusses in her

importance

debriefing

which

in

the

the experience

into learning". He
session and

also

identifies

to him these stages are:

TABLE 1
The Role

of

the Teacher in the Traditional and Experience-Based Classroom

TRADITIONAL CLASSROOM

1.-

Position

of

EXPERIENCE-BASED CLASSROOM

the Instructor

Position

Expert

of the

Facilitator

of

Instructor

Learning

Leader

Helper

Judge

Resource Person

Evaluator
Tester

2. Instructor demonstrates

expertice.

2. Instructor demonstrate expertice by:

by:

Selecting
Providing

right

and

Answers

meaningful

experiences

Asking

the right questions

3. Student's Participation:

3. Student's Participation:

Stimulate

Require Attention

Mere

providing

Thinking

Encourage

Listening

(Adapted from Linda Costigan Lederman,

28

1984)

Talking

1.

Identifying

2.

Identifying

the impact of the experience on each

considering the

and

individual,

processes which were developed in

the simulation,
3.
related to

4.

facts, concepts,

the ways in

Identifying
for

individual

each

Identifying

the nature

of

Simulations

in

research

hospitality

or

papers

in

developed for

have

high

been-

or

figured in the

as a whole,
of

few

is

quite

about ^simulations

hand, only

handful

featuring

hospitality

Purdue

applications were

and

In 1984 Hamidi-Noori

games

of simulations

governing the development

a

health

programs

care

wrote

for the

have been
her

article

have taken

this type of

being

University found
used

in

11

implementation

advantage of simulation and

techniques to their

teaching
of

the

Department

of

that 5 different gaming computer

different
29

and

facility.

In his 1989 survey Lloyd J. Dennington

of

extensive, very few

contact service organization, a simulation study", which

have incorporated

and

education

written

other

main principles

of a simulation game

Education

hospitality

service organizations

discussed the

curricula.

for the group

on simulation and games

industry. On the

Very

and

involved in

the processes and the experience.

and games

"Scheduling

which emotion was

the different views which each of the participants formed

Although literature

games

and principles which were used

the simulation,

simulation

5.

the

Clarifying

hospitality

programs

in the US.

Among

the

Simulation
Simulation

packages

Exercise)

Exercise)

and

based

computer

by

(Cornell

CRASE

The

other

Hotel Administration

They

were

packages used

Dr. Robert M. Chase

simulation

of

Administration

Restaurant
cited

were

(Dennington, 1989). The CHASE

one respondent each

designed in 1968

(Cornell

the most popular.

were

respondents each one.

CHASE

reported,

by

six

different

mentioned

only

by

simulation game was

Cornell University. This

game

is

that offers the participant the opportunity to explore

the factors that affect hotel sales and profits while making different pricing,
marketing, operations and finance decisions and its parameters were designed

to

and

reward

competitive

penalize

of

positioning

training"

areas

understand manageriaLeconomics of

Chase's

main characteristics are:

hotel

(1973)

education and

functional decision

of

to Zuckerman

According

marketplace.

Simulations/Games for
awareness

strategic

in

concept

purpose

hotel property

hoteLbusiness. This

Horn's Guide to

and

its

within

is to

as

develop

well

as

to

guide mentions that

"Competitive, deterministic, free form

role

play, quantitative outcomes, team play, play involves decision making and
strategic

thinking, [it involves] top

Horn, 1973). CRASE is

which

focuses

and

other

simulation exercise

its

main purpose

into

(Zuckerman

a single

Another

simulation

used

"The Restaurant Simulation",

According
as a

to Foucar-Szocki

teaching too,

developed

is the "integration

strategy."

areas

(Zuckerman

in

which

(1989)

and

30

Chase,

competition

of major

education

used

for

is the

years at

"in considering the validity

end-of-the-term evaluations

and

functional

Horn, 1973).

hospitality
has been

Dr.

by

"corporate entities involved in food service and

on

firms"

with

another

management..."

and middle

have been kept

one

known

as

Michigan State.

of

the simulation

since

1978.

The

has scored

restaurant simulation
management

The
in

of

only heard

researcher

University

of

who

belong

game was

Kong. In their 1985

Hong

framework for the design

The framework is

the financial and the

business

help

in

their

present

separate

Emphasis is

designers

Literature

learning (and

be

developed

by

games

conceptual

the output is in the form

of

systems, the physical,

placed on

as a series of related work-units.

game

Engineering

with a problem of

the

The

physical

work-unit

determining

They

used

the

the hotel

them to illustrate the discussion presented in

paper.

Research Design

and

in teaching

Domenic Sculli

by

Industrial

resources required-for a given output requirements plan.

management game

...

"Designing business

which

three

external environment.

is intended to

paper

of

researchers

games

presented as

is interpreted

system which

concept

of

developed

to the Department

for the service industries". These two

a service.

scale

of one more simulation game exercise used

This

courses.

Wing Cheong Ng

the

5.0

on a

making."

decision

hotel management

and

4.86

an overall

on

Research

stated

grouped

research

and

Stanley

designs

that

research

into three

control over sources of

Campbell

Design

Instrumentation in

and

specifically in simulation/gaming) is

Strang (1988)
broadly

Instrumentation in Simulation/Games.

and

are

invalidity
who

in

rather scarce.

designs in

classes

along

present

1966

in the

said

pre-experimental

31

Butler, Markulis

simulation and

a continuum of

experiential

gaming "can

the amount of

study."

They

quoted the work of

that the three broad classes of

designs,

quasi-experimental

designs,

and experimental

the

following

designs. Then

they defined

each

type of

research

designs in

terms:

"Pre-experimental designs include those

subjects and/or

treatments), (2) generally lacking

the treatment variable; and

Such

group.

of controls

(3) frequently lacking

studies represent

for alternative

weak

allow

in

randomization

experimental control of

an explicit comparison

which

established...

the

researchers

have

them to rule out many threats to

these designs are also marked

most of

(of

designs in that little in the way

have been

are those

that

established some controls

However,

very

explanations

Quasi-experimental designs

validity.

(1) lacking

by

lack

of

randomization...

Experimental

equalizing

treatment,

and

(3)

in

other

designs,

experimental

design

by (1)

with groups

of

the

results,
prior

that experienced the effect

(2)
to
of

that were equal to the treatment

Experimental designs, to

a greater extent

internal

validity."

Strang. 1988).

(1981),

could

experimenter

subjects

offer safeguards against problems of

and

William E. Remus

randomization

comparison of groups

all other respects.

(Butler, Markulis

are characterized

of variables and observation of

through

groups

independent variable

groups

than

designs

(and manipulation)

control

and

research

bring

explains the problems that the

lack

of a good

about, and concludes that "even the most

32

sophisticated methods cannot remove the effects of a lack of experimental

He

control".

factors

that could bias the

of variance

Other
gaming.

measure

is to

provides some practical advises on how to avoid non-relevant

major subject of

Past

studies suggest

instructional

measure the

the application

this research is instrumentation for

that three

instructional

Tipple

decision-making

skills

simulation and

have been developed to

The first trend

effectiveness of simulations and games through

competency based test. They

of a

and

major methods

effectiveness of this instructional technique.

intended to be taught through the

Glenn, Gregg

research results.

(1982)

is later

game

this type

used

acquisition

in

researchers presented participants with a

test if the

applied

of

given

in

model which

a similar context.

instrumentation to
In

simulation.

problem, and a set

measure

this

allowed students

The

to

select

free-choice

model

model

that

their own particular sequence of solving the problem.

method

second

used a

study

of choices related

to the issue. The choices paralleled those. used in the problem-solving

included in the role-play activity, however the test

is

to

measure

the effectiveness

of

simulation

technique is through the use of student evaluations of instructional quality.

Marsh, Fleiner

and

data. "Proponents
qualified

to

Thomas
contend

evaluate

the

(1975)

being

popularity

offered,

and other

using this type

of

are

best

while opponents contend

that

that students, as consumers of

product

student evaluations reflect

studied the convenience of

factors

instruction,

unrelated

to

teaching

that students evaluations are valid

excellence".

These

measures of

instructional quality and provide useful feedback to the instructor.

This type

evaluation seems

of

authors

concluded

to

be

the one used the most

33

by

researchers.

Schermerhom, Sekaran

and

Ramaprasad

instructional feedback focuses primary

related administrative

been

used

issues. Student

found that literature

Schubert, 1986). These

Cohesiveness

and

attention on student evaluations, and

evaluations of

The third

teaching

questionnaires

instructional quality has

(Remus

method

(Fandt, Richardson
and

techniques

have

Task Orientation (Jaffe

team success

student attitudes

and

and

performance

been

Nebenza, 1990),

conflict,

profits,

(Fandt, Richardson

economic measure as

and change

and

34

which

portfolio value,

Conner, 1990),

The Hotel Management Game's

(Duke, 1989).

in

others.

to measure instructional effectiveness of a

of

and

measure

used

Conner, 1990)

Jenner, 1981), among

rank, in the form

reports

(Miles, Biggs
to

also

technique is using the criterion reference performance,

corporate

on

to measure the overall effectiveness of the simulation/gaming

technique as compared to other

perceived

(1985)

simulation

is the team

midgame or
or

any

other

guest satisfaction

final
non-

index

CHAPTER 3
Methodology

This

chapter

description

of

analysis of the

includes

an explanation of

the type

of research

design

the population of the study and the sampling techniques

instrument

and a

description

of

the data analysis

an

procedures.

Research Design

The

research

Research"
.

It fulfilled

Strang, (1988)

Experimenters

in this study

was

three requisites mentioned

'True Experimental

by Butler,

Markulis

and

validity:

controlled variables and observation of results,

were equalized

through randomization of the subjects prior to

and

3. Comparisons
independent
each other

in

Game
guarantee

all

used

to safeguard the research against problems of internal

2. Groups

treatment,

method

variable

were made of groups

(game

mechanics or

that experienced the effect

different treatment) but

of an

were equal

to

all other respects.

administration

its similarity in both

characteristics
groups.

They

35

were

include:

controlled

in

order

to

1. Team

An

size:

equal

group (A

assigned to each

and

number

B). All teams

roles and number of participants each

2. Duration: Both treatments

sessions of two

gaming

(2) hours

of

of

(hotels)

in the

(seventeen)

were

had the

same

game

(four).
the game were played

Table 2

each.

participants

shows

over

two days in

the time frame of the

subject

experience.

3. Class setting: The two

groups

had their training

sessions and played the rounds of the game

the experience

divided in two

was

by

a room

divider

Contact between

members

playing the

Both

game.

happened to be bigger
was assigned

in

conducted

of

which

isolated

each

had

group from

equally furnished but

better illuminated than the

Most

which

was

one another.

while

one part of the room

other.

room

of

Treatment B group

because

the bigger

of

this group had to employ.

4. Facilitators: All four facilitators had

and

room

restaurant-like

to the bigger ;and better iHuminated

amount of written material

mechanics

a similar environment.

the two different groups was avoided

rooms were

and

large

in

debriefing,

and

previous experience

a good

understanding

administering the

of

game.

the game

Three

of

them had conducted previous studies of the Hotel Management game. In order

to

guarantee

were allowed

in the School
grading

similarity in the grading system, only two

four facilitators

to grade the event results. These two facilitators were both

of

criteria

A to group B

out of the

Food, Hotel

for

and

each event.

by

Management,

and

These two grading facilitators

and vice-versa, so

their event results graded

Travel

that participants were

both

of

them.

36

given

had

faculty

put together a

rotated

from group

the chance to have

TABLE 2

Experiment Time Frame

Event

Dav 1:

Day

2:

Group

Treatment

"A"

Group

Treatment

(Wednesday)
Orientation

1 hour

1 hour

Week 1

30

minutes

30

minutes

Week 2

30 minutes

30

minutes

Week 3

30

30

minutes

Strategic Pulse
(Strategie Setting

this

(Following
Wednesday)
minutes

Not included in

15 minutes

version.

Stage)
Week 4

30

minutes

25

minutes

Week 5

30

minutes

20

minutes

Scoring

10

minutes

10

minutes

Dav 3: (Following

Monday)
Debriefing

1 hour

1 hour

37

"B"

Population

four

Thirty
1992),

Sample

and

where

randomly

two groups of eighteen

Chains Harriet

The

(with the

use of a random

(treatment A

participants each

Since the

an

introductory

game was a class

and subsequent performance would not

final

for the

grade

The

had four

(2)

employed

one

class

activity

no

be

used

to the Hotel

incentive

viewed

the

was

game

participation

in

in calculating the

Regional Vice-Presidents

Regional Vice-Presidents for the

hotels

(4)

or

course.

experiment

two

B,

and treatment

experience, therefore

educational

supplementary

the game

totaling

digits generator) to

respectively).

Hotel Operations is

curriculum.

(Winter Quarter

course

to attract participant students. The course instructor

as a

strictly

Lariat,

course of

Management
required

and

assigned

(17)

Operations"

the "Hotel

students of

by

ruled

whole experience.

General Manager

(eight

each

per

group,

Each

for the

chain

whole

experiment).

Roles
participants

were

assigned

GPA, PFOS,

and

based

on

the

experience

in hotel

course

in hotel

management.

participants'

experience

simulations

before

and

previous

Data

exposure

on

to

techniques was collected through a questionnaire administered

role

Managers

management

instructor judgment,

assignments

were

randomly

mentioned random

digits

were

made.

assigned

generator.

General Managers

to a team (or

hotel)

Discipline

through the use

Student data confidentiality

38

and

of

the

and participant

was maintained.

anonymity

Table 3

experience was not considered

that none

of

shows the

final team

in this table because the instrument

the participants had relevant experience in hotel

Field

composition.

showed

management.

Instrument Design

Six different instruments

administered

in the form

The

1.

experience

first

in hotel

the

of

applied

were

following

questionnaire

simulation/gaming techniques. It

questionnaires

designed

was

management and

in this

operations,

research

(See

to

and

were

"A"

appendix

identify

):

participants

and previous exposure

was administered

before

to

role assignments

were made.

2.

The

second

evaluation"

and

simulation/game

perception

of skills

is

questionnaire

acquisition

was

through

"Hotel

called

designed to
fourteen

Management
participants'

measure

(14)

questions

(Plummer,

1990). Four types of data are collected through this instrument:

a) Original developer's
through

(questions 1

5);

b)
team

stated educational objectives

work skills

c)
understand

Usefulness

of

the technique to

develop

problem

solving

and

(questions 6,7,8,9,11);
Perceived

future

role

usefulness

in the hotel

of

the

technique to

industry (questions

39

10

and

visualize

12);

and

and

LL

CD

LL

CO

cz

CO

Q^

J_

CO

>
CD

LL LL LL LL

_l

o
1

"O

CO

LU
_J

CD

CO

"co
o
Q.

o
CO

CO

O Z3
Q_ E

Z.

-z.~z.-z.-z.

CO
CO

O CD CO
ON CO

o o o o
IfilflOO

CO

CO

CM

>

UJ CO

CD o

CO

< O

u_
0_

t^

CM

t^

-r^

t^-

CO
.0)

Z3
~3

o CD CJ
o

CO

CO

lO

CD

c
o

_l

(0
CD

<
4

**^

4-*

UJ

'co

fl)

CD

O
X

<
X

c
CO

it;
=

CO

TJ

Q_
CO

CD CD CD
D) D) D)
CO CO CO

CD
ITI

5
CO

c
CO

co

.-

CO

CD

CD
0>

"

CD
O

CD

..

>

<

CO

CO

c
CD

o
O

CD DC

CO

LL CO

CD
>
CD

CO

CO
sz

40

c
co

&

J?

Q.
O

CO
CO

c?

i-E g>~
:=

CD

CD

CD

cf
CO

E
co

CD "5
CO ^

co -o co

-^

CO

CO

CO

c
CD

o
O

o J?
o CO

CD X

LL CO

CO

5
co

3 $

CO

-r^

CD CD CD
CDDJQ
CO CO CO

i_

CZ
CD

o o o
o o o

CJ CJ CM

CD

DC

I-

cvj

CO

E
UJ

i-

i-

iq

CD

ro

CD
>

CO

LL

CO

cv

TJ
c

CO

'CO

CD

Q.

> Z Z

z z z z

1_

CO

>

CO

CO LL CO LL

-3

LL -r>

_l

O-

o
TJ
CO

cz

to

o ZJ
Q. E

oj

$ S

> > z z:

z > z z

CO

UJ
_i

o
Q.

LU CO

CQ o
<o

CO
o o
o o

CO o o
CO O CO

*-

Cd o w

CO
o

.<J>

"c
z:

h-

<

OJ JZ CO
to oo

OCON
o m co

cj

OJ

0_

in

CD

CO CJ

t-

o
v_

>-

CD
CD
D) O) DJ
CO CO CO
c
c
co eg co

CD
D) D) O)
CO CO CO
c

CO

E
CO

5
222

CO

222
CO
>-

CO

CD

O)
cz

i-E 2>~
CD

LU

:=

CO

CD

-*

o
sz

Q.
O

CO
CO
c
CO

_l
_cz

:j

LU
1-

o
x

cz

o
CO

JO

E
c

TJ
o o
o o

CD X

to

CO

CO
-92

cz

CO
co

cB

E
c

o;

co

'k.

LL CO

<

CD X

c>-s>

CO

LL CO

>

<
X

"

+-

4*

41

CO

CO

c-

CZ

CO

l_

CO

Z Z Z

Q_

i>-

A.

LL LL CO LL

LL LL LL LL

TJ.2

co

o
"+*
CO

LU
_l

"55
o
Q.

>-

CD

O ZJ
- E

z z z

.E

LU CO

m o
<o
i-

CO

o
CD

o o
O CO CO

O O CD O
O O CD O

co

"<fr cj

CO CO C\i CO

T-

CO
o

H
cz
Z3
~3

CD

co
CO

LO r^ CJ) h
LO
LO

o o CD
o o CD CO

CO

CO oi

CO CO oj cj

-i-

t-

h-;

T-1

CJ

O
i_

1-

1_

1_

CD
D) 5> o>
CO CO CO
c
c
CO CO CO

CD

O)
co
cz
CO

2 22
c
0)

LU

CO
CU

_l

_^

LU

^
CO

'l_

X
|

CO
-J

<

TJ

>

cz

S*'-55

"tzz

CO

CO
1_

CD

CO
CO

o
o
co

Q.
Q.

<

CZ
CO

cB

-n

o
o

CD X

cz

CO

CZ
CO

"J

O)
c

'*'

rj)--

'rzz

C0

CD

m
w

o
o
CO

CO TJ
cz
CO

"CO
1_
cz

cB

ZJ

o
o

LL CO

CQ

CD X

o
sz

a.
o

co

co
CO

LL

CO

CO

sz
CO

cz LL

CO

CD
CJ) CJ)
CO CO

D) O
CO co

CO
c LL
CO TJ

cz

+"*

O)

ffl

i_

2 22

O
CO

CO

r-

CO

CO
[4*

i_

LL

o
O

CO

LL CO

>

c
CO

*-*

42

CO

CO

o-

TJ
O)
cz
_
'cB
CO a.

ci)

>-

i_

>

CO

CO

z z

LL LL LL

X CO LL LL

_J

O-

o
TJ

c
o
'*

CO

LU
-J

CO

o
Q.

to

CZ

To

o ZJ
Q.

z Z z Z

z z z z

co
CO

cd

LU CO

to

O)
c

CD

CO o
<o

CO

1-

LL

.-

O
X

CO CO o CO
CO LO o CO

O
O

CO cj CO CO

S3

CO

cq

CD

T^

T3
c

re

CO

a>

in

o
c

Z3

re
rt

<

t-

LO LO O CO
OJ
CO OJ

CD CJ
cj cd oj
Tf

t-

co

CD

oj

co oi

oi oj

CD
tD
l_

A.

CD

i_

1_

k-

1_

CD

CD
O)
CO
cz
CO

O)
CO
cz
CO

O)
cO
CZ
CO

0)0)0)
CO CO CO
^
c
CO CO CO

222
CO

CO

CD

CD

LU

CO

o)
CZ

i-E ?'?=
~

J0

2
_

CO

TJ

o>
c

CD

CO

CO
CO

to

CO

CO

sz
co

to

CO
TJ

Q.
O

'co
CD

CO

m>

I-

o
c
re
C\J

_J

LU

5,
CD

222
CO

Q)
c
"L

_^

co
to

'

-^

CO

-o 2
o o
o o co
X x CO

CO

o
o

CO

cz

o
o

CO

CD X

TJ "

CO

-o
o
o

cz
"^

2
-3?

CO

x CO

'to
to

re

o
c
T3

>

<
X

CO

43

d) Overall

perceived value of

the

experience

on

the

(questions 13

and

14).

Open-ended

e)
weaknesses and

has been

curriculum at

inception

Evaluation

the

simulation

the Rochester Institute of

of

questionnaire

its Mechanics",

implemented in the

degree

includes

one question about

4. The fourth

its

Technology,

how

had previously

"adapted

Miller

comprises

of

the

by

five

by

and

reliability.

researcher

questions

its

to be

regarding the

participants

along the

the game. This instrument also

[it]

in

designed to

playing the

game

(fun).

measure team effectiveness.

from Fandt, Richardson,

from Seashore's

(1983)."

were given

has been

(Stockham, Crumb

participants enjoyed

questionnaire was

was adapted

this case scores

and

validity.

This instrument

by

It

designed

the rounds

during

session, and

as tested

technique in the Hotel

"The Hotel Management Game,

called

the game's mechanics

of comprehension of

researcher assumes

is

and was

present study.

practice

Index

of

perception of

therefore the researcher assumes its validity and

3. The third

The

participants'

to evaluate

used

to collect data reported in previous studies

Plummer, 1991),

and

strengths

recommendations.

skills acquisition since the

used

game's

students'

This instrument

Management

questions

Differently

Lickert

scale

44

and

Conner

(1990),

who

(1954) Group Cohesiveness

from these

form.

authors'

instruments, in

5. The fifth

questionnaire

feed-back. It

receive

four

comprises

is designed to measure

designed

was also

by Charles

willingness

to

give and

Plummer (1992),

and

questions.

6. Demographic data questionnaire.

Questionnaires two, three, four

a

Likert

scale

and

five had to be

answered

according to

(Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

and were administered after

the

debriefing

session

took place.

Data Analysis

The

following

variables of

cumulative

were

established

as

the

main

the study:

"Mechanics"

1.

measures

questions of

the

(independent

questionnaire

variable).

Averaged the first five

(5)

"The Hotel Management Game: Evaluation

of

Mechanics",
2. "Participant Perception
variable

that is

questionnaire

calculated

'Team-work"

(6)

Acquisition"

Skills

by averaging

all

fourteen

"Hotel Management Simulation/Game

(Dependent

3.
all six

of

question

of

(PPSA). Dependent

(14)

questions

the

Evaluation",

Calculated through the

variable).

of

average of

the instrument "The Hotel Management Game: Team

Cohesiveness Instrument", and

4.

"Feed-back"

the instrument called

(Dependent variable),

"Giving

and

Receiving
45

averaged all

Feedback".

four

(4)

question of

the dependent variable

Only

"Fun",

or general

experience, was studied from the result of only one

instrument "Hotel Management/Game: Evaluation

Once
SPSS

all relevant

program

data

it

was collected,

of

pleasantness

question

(number 6

was analyzed with

the

help

of

the means

measures.

was established at a

(Participants'

and

significant

some of

of

The test

and cumulative measure.

all

variables

was one

in group A

and

B,

prove

and

the

tailed test and significance level for

0.05 and 0.01.

3. Calculate Pearson's

Fun,

of a

cumulative measures,

4. Perform T-Tests for independent samples (pooled variables) to

PPSA

the

Mechanics.")

2. Provide frequencies variables per question,

cumulative

of

designed to:

Compute the

the difference

the

of

Perception

Willingness to

Coefficient

'Correlation'

ot

Skills Acquisition)

give/receive

46

of

among the

variables

Mechanics, Team-work,

feed-back, in

relationship is found between any two

the results of the T-tests.

order

them,

to study if any

which might explain

CHAPTER 4
Results

This

the results of the T-test and discussion on the

chapter presents

hypotheses,

criterion reference performance

of correlation

among the

(team scores),

results of

the tests

study's cumulative measures, general results on the

questionnaires, and facilitator's evaluation of the groups.

In

order

to accept

the hypothesis that the

Management Game (treatment

technique than the

is

original version

better understanding
analysis/decision

B)

of

the hotel

making

and

better

business,
team

the

original

On the
Table 5

shows

questionnaire

the

other

need

individual

be

this

well

instructional

learners

with

problem-

enjoy the gaming

receive

better

in

scores

all

(PPSA, Mechanics, Fun,

ocassion

this experiment fails to

hand, very interesting

T-tests for

results were

each

derived from this

individual

the

way

game

to

(Treatment

"B")

impress them

coordinated

competitive sharpness

and

was

with

jointly

for their
47

own

perceived

how hotel

by

It

shows

while

in

in

that

learners only

managers

cooperative,

hotel.

study.

question contained

2 (Hotel Management Simulation/Game Evaluate).

effective

to

on

the Hotel

hypotheses, (see table 4).

the results of

new version of

a more

However,

of

their skills in

to

and

had to

powerful

provide

develop

categories or cumulative measures

Team-work and Feedback).

support

to

building,

the same time,

five different data

or more

(treatment A) to

treatment^B"

experience at

new version

as

a chain

maintaining

(Significance level=

.006).

LU

>
UJ

LO
OJ
Tt
Tt

LO
o
o
CO

LO

co
LO

Tt

LO
co

LO

*t

OJ

LO
CO

OJ
CD

CO
CO

Tt

co

LU

o
CO

XI

_J

LO

TJ
CD

CQ TJ
-

T3
c XL

Is-

LO CD
CO CO

CD
CJ
LO 00

CO o
LO
cd r^.

Is-

CO

o Tt
LO
CO LO
CJ CJ

LO o
CD o
o
co o

00 LO

<

Tt LO
CJ CJ
00
C0 CO
i-

CD CO
OJ

CO CO

CO

Tt Tt

Tt

Tt

Tt

<CQ

<CQ

<C0

<CQ

i-

i-

1-

i-

Tt

CD h-

Tt CD
CO CO
CD LO

co

< 5
-

CO

Q.

E
D
,0)

LU

O
*r

t-

Is-

00

Tt

T-

s
X

r^

lo

Tt

r~
T-

Tt

+-

LU
_i

CD

IS

g
c

CO
o

CO
CD

c
CO

re
LU

cc

O
O

CD

CC

O
CD

CO

cz

co
a.
ZJ

4-

E E
s

CO

t;

CO

J>

1*_

1-

I-

E E
<

CO
CD

L.

CO
1

H H

cz

cz

ffl

ffl

<CQ
c
CD

cz

E E

E E

CO
ffl

CO
ffl

CO
ffl

CO
CD

CO

CO
ffl
JZ

t_

L_

h-

h-

1-

h-

H-

*-*

1-

'

E E
+

<

4<

O C7)

X
en x
O

co

>*-l^

c
J
a)

cd

CD

S 5

CO

CO

J*.

*n
J?

CD

CO

-1

>

o
c

'5

4"

Q.
.

a <
X

CO
X X
~ X
cz

CO

o
c

.Q-o

CO

.;

'cz
CO

2
.

<

cz
ZJ

48

ii

n
X3

re

re

CO

to

TJ

CO

CN

h~

o
CO
-O

.cz

i-

LO

On the

other

perceived

by

this table shows that the original version (Treatment

hand,

learners as a more efficient

teaching

technique in two

"A")

was

different

(2)

questions related to perceived skills acquisition:

1. Awareness

of

the difficulties involved in

to improve occupancy,

trying

rate, profit, and guest satisfaction at the same time. (Significance level=

2.

Participants in treatment

Simulation/Game

was

very

following

no

trends

Treatment

and professional

difference

at

0.05

was

found,

the

identified:

"B"

seems to

a) Students
management of a

study

.039).

significant

statistically

were

believed that The Hotel Management

relevant to their course of

development. (Significance level=

Though

"A"

.047).

hotel

or

be favored in the

perception

hotel

chain

of

following

creation

of

(question 9). This

questions:

ideas to improve

new

result was significant at

p<0.057.

b)
to

The degree in

Significance level

c)
whole

hotel

idea for

new

consider a

Understanding

of

how

(question 3). This

2. Treatment

in

improving

believed

they

management of a

persuaded others

hotel (question 7).

p<0.073.

system

Participating

which students

"A"

was

simulation

fit together into

result was significant at p<0.097.

favored
games

various components

p<0.068

at

is

(question 13).

49

in the

worth-while

following

learning

question:

experience

LU

>
LU

CD

LL

LO
LO

O
O

N
OJ
o

Tt

S3
CO

c
o
?3

CO
CD
3

UJ
z>

oo
CD

_l

CO
CO

oi

"co
3
K

cd
-

"2
!>
TJ

Q
CO

c
CO

O CD
eg
Tt lo

CD O
O O
CD LO

O) O
Tt 00
00 CD
o
o

< <
Q.Q.

2
O

VI
Q.

<
LU

oo
co
lo
o

o
o
o
lo

r^ lo
Tt OJ

Tt

"* Tt

O LO
LO OJ
O CD
ro
co ^

<

CO

< CO

<

CO

cz

cz

cz

cz

cz

T-

CD CD

.2

lo

_l

zz

CD

Ze C U

P
^

CO
CD

<

LU
cr

tn

o
co

i2
wC/>
CO

re

CL
Z)

cz

VI
a.

ffl

E E
to co

E E

E E

4<

CO

CO

co

co

cr

CD

H-

1-

1-

co

CO

.2

>

0)

S *
O

sz

"co

c
CO

-CZ

ffl
.o

o
CJ

CD

'

CL

TJ
-1-

CD
+-*

I?

?l

co

O
'

TJ
C

.b

OJ ffl

cz sz
+cz -j=

TJ
ca

LU

CO

CO
TJ *;
ffl
CO

Is
-

.E

CO

CO

5
*-

*-

ffl

CO

CO

"E

-c

to
TJ
cz

ZJ

co

"E

cz
.

i;

SI*
O)
CO

-a

CO

ffl
ffl
**

CN

CD

'2
CD

O
SZ

ffl CO
CL
o OI
o cz
o 'cz
cz
ZJ

c
CO
o jx:

'c

ZJ

50

CD
2

CZ *;
*CO

to

*-

TJ
CZ
ZJ

oo

cz

>,
CO
Q__

E 2

5
co

O
CO
rj

-C

co

ca

i:

cd

re

co

r^

CD

E 5
E E
CO

o
o

is

*-

O TJ

ffl
o
c
CO TJ
tz c
o CO
a.
c
E o

o
.E

LU

>
LU

o
LL

o
LO
o
CO

OJ

CO

Is-

Is-

OJ

LO

CJ
LO

IsTt

co

CO
c

o
Z
CO
CD
3

LU

Z)
_J

CO
Is-

o
Tt

co

3
TJ

ffl
3

i>
TJ

o
c
CO

Q
CO

CD oj
o Iscd r^

LO
CD 00
CO 00

Is- o
o o
LO O

Tt

CO Tt
Tt

Is-

CJ LO

o
o

< <
5

Q.X

VI
Q.

(0
w

<
LU

in

CD

CD CJ
r^. cd

CO LO
LO h-

Tt LO
o IsOJ CO
LO O)

CO

CO CO

CO CO

CO CO

< CO

< CO

< CO

< CD

Tt

Is-

Tt LO

.2

-3

uj
-I

oj lo
OJ IsLO CO
CO CJ

-S2

CD

ZJ

<

|t=

re

LU

cr

O
o
CO
Q.
Z)

!2

(0

cr

LO

4'

H--

cz

cz

o
o

E E
-4

co
CD

CO o
'3

CD

X
CO
c
CO

0.2

se

TJ

%3
o

>-

"6 E
O

2
LU

CO
iZ

to

CO

h-

sz

1-

I-

h-

<s

CD O
c x:

CO

CO

CO

ffl

CD
TJ

cfl

'to

to

*-

CO
>
cox:
c cz
IE <

.52

t!
CO
w
CO

ffl

*-

.E

co

cz

TJ

CO

co

TJ

IS

co

CD

2-i

>

CD

*=

o
-

CO

?
CO
=

SZ

s
LO

$
51

O)
CO

g
C

T3
a>

i2

E
CD

CD

cz

CO

-^

"c0

CO
|2

*-

o
O

CO

-*^
+-

TOO)
~

TJ -O

j3-

|-o
E
CO

E E

co

r-

.E

E E
4

VI
Q.

cz

co

0)

S
^

CO

co

i= CL

CL

co

co
CD

CC ^
CL CO
=J
o c

k.

cz

E E

4'

a.
CD
u

cz

ffl

CD

CO
CD

c
CO
CD

-t

cz

CO
u

co x:
-^

CD

.
-^*

CO

TJ

c?

TJ
CO
ZJ

I5

CL 3 CO
x cr 5
~

o
CO

CO

CO

O)
c

>
o

r--

cd

re

X)

Q.

L_

ffl
a. o
CO
ffl
Is- TJ

re

LU

>
LU
_J

LO
LO

LO

Is-

OJ
CO
OJ

LO
o

S5

LO
Is-

i^

Tt

OJ

OJ

OJ

O
CD

co
CO
c

o
+>

CO
ffl
3

LU

ZJ
_l

CO
CD

OJ
OJ

Tt
Is-

CD

"co
3
-

ffl

"2
i>

TJ

o
c

Q
CO

CO CO
OJ Tt
OJ Tt

IsTt

o
LO

o Is-

Is-

OJ OJ

CO OJ
00 Is-

oo Is-

1-

Tt

CO CO
O Tt

T-

Tt
o

CO

VI
Q.

< <
=

CO

<*s-

OlQs^
3

2
LO

o
+-

"^

LU

Tt LO
OJ Is00 CO
CO OJ

Is- LO
Tt OJ

Is-

LO

Tt CM

Tt LO

Tt

Is-

OJ i
OJ 00

CD CD
Is- LO

OJ OJ
OJ

Is-

CO CO

CO CO

co CO

Tt

Tt

CO CO

<CQ

<CQ

<C0

<C0

< CO

,_

LO

CD CO
O)

*-

UJ

<

CO

'3+*

CO
CD

J?

<

re

UJ
cr

O
o
CL
ZJ

"CO
CO
CD

cz

cz

CO

E E

4*

CO

CO

cr

ffl

c
CD

cz

cz

cz

cz

E E

E E

F E

CO
CD

CO
CD

to to

to to

co

I-

h-

VI
Q.

cz

E E

CO

CD
I-

h-

I-

h-

'

.2

*-<

ffl

Q-

CO

<*>

S8

cz

ffl
O)
CO

cz

cz

ffl

"g

OJ

co

cz

in
o

CO

T=

+-

ZJ

o.

'co
CO

CO

CO

-^

E
cd
>
o

E
J

CL

*-

CO

>
.2

x:

0.

.E

XJ

to

CO

0)

ffl

TJ

o
CL

ffl

tc
2

co

CD

CO
CO

E
52

CO

CO

CD

w
to

'co

2-o

re

XI

to 2
^

CD
=

o
ZJ
r--

CO

>

C
.E

OJ
CD O

CD

T-"S

CO

tj-5?

co
S,
ojjz

CD

CL CO
CO -o CO

TJ-2?
&E

CZ

is

_3

sz

o>

cz

>.

c?

ZJ

CL CO
.E

(-

ZJ

*.

CD

-f '

co
O)

CZ "D

2 T5

CO

CO

XI

CO
CO

CD

-E-

TJ

Ej*
^7o

XJ

&>

2b
tz CO
CO

co

%2

03

to
CO sz

2-5

LU

4*

ZJ
4

>

c
CO

CO
zj x:

OJ cz
e

"co

TJ

o.E

CM

CL

8s
XJ
CO

ZJ
o

2
re

UJ

>
LU
I

oo
CD
O

OJ
CO
o

CO
LO

CO
00

CM Tt
LO CO
Is- oo

OJ LO
LO r^-

<3
CO

CO
c
o

"3
CO
CD
3

LU

ZJ
_J

"5
-

ffl
s

3
TJ

!E
TJ

o
c
CO

Q
CO

Is-

IsO
O

VI
Q.

< <
=

CO
^

<
LU

CO LO
LO CM
CO
OJ 00
t-

r^-

Tt CO

< CQ

< CO

.2

,-E

CO

LU
-

o
O
LO

CO

Tt

lo

CO
LO
CO
cm

S"5

CD

i2
CO

CO
CD
i_

o
o

UJ

cr

O
o

"^

|=

re

CO
0.
Z>

CZ

CZ

ffl

E E

o
cr
cs

h-

E E

+-

CD

CD

CO

ffl

to

"3

VI
Q.

CO o
c
CO
CD

CD

to to

>-

cz

LO
O

CO

co

CL

CO

CD
O

Am

co
O)

CD

QL

gg
O

CD
IS '^

"co

**

c
CO

ZJ

CL

Q_
*

O
O

CZ
CD

CL

tD

CD

o-S

Z
^

>
^
-n

>

.2

ffl

CD

E
CO

.E

O
"3

CO
cz

*"

E E

Am

CO

C*<"C0

ojE

Q.

.E

UJ
I-

co

to

t=i
11
D-x:

>

J2

CO
CO

I--

Q.

I?
x:

I-

re xi

z z:

CO

re

>,
"c1

CO

_:

T*

CD

ZJ

53

Table 6,

which shows

about game mechanics and

that

by

five (end

week

the results of the T-test for individual

fun,

supports the

hypothesis that

the game) group A

of

needed

questions

believed

students

less

help

from the

facilitators than group B (p<0.0015).

Table 7 (Mean Scores for treatment Groups

questions

teamwork)

on

difference between
together

when

groups

difficulties

Results

shown

and

that there

B, in

arose while

better in this team

scored

was

and

the way members

playing the

game.

cohesiveness measure

compounded

of a

Members

team stuck
"A"

of

(Significance level

in table 8 (T-test for individual

results suggest

(in the form

more

significant

questions about
of

group
=

.022).

feedback)

the items that

the instrument "Willingness to give and receive feedback".

All these
structure

for individual

statistically

that no statistically significant difference was found in any

show

was

shows

"B"

"A"

of written

that the

that had a

version

instructions

and extra

facilitator dependent (treatment

A),

smaller

degree

hand-out resources)

of

and

was perceived as a superior

technique than the new version to understanding the relationship among the
game

main

develop
Also

variables

more

game

game, and

(Occupancy, Profits,

team-building

skills

mechanics were easier

perceived

(staying

and

Guest Satisfaction),

together

for them to

when

understand

difficulties

by

and

to

arose).

the end

of

the

the whole experience as more relevant to their profession.

54

LU

>
LU

d
ll.

LO

LO
o
LO
OJ

CD
Tt

OJ
Is-

OJ

co

LU

ZJ
_J

00
CD

ffl

CO
C
OJ 00
CM CO
OJ

.2

*-

CD

TJ

CD

CO

Q
CO

^
Tt

i-

T-

CO LO
Tt CM
CJ

1-

-I-

t-

o
o

VI
Q.

fl

CO TJ

<

si
CO t

=
u_

CO

8
co E
<

CO

o
CD

CO
c
CO
CD

s;
OJ

CO CO

CO CM

OJ CM

< CO

< CO

o
CM LO

t-

LO |^-

re

LU

cr

O
I-

00 LO
00 CM
LO
O CO

i-

LU

LU

OJ LO
CM OJ
LO
00 CO

<
*-

cz

CO

CD

0.
Z)

tn

CO

"ti

c
CD

4i

cz

VI
Q.

cz

ffl

E E

E E

to to
ffl

co

ffl

E E

co

4*

co

co

h-

p
I-

h-

to

O)
ZJ

CD

TJ

CO

is

CO

CD

cz

CD
SZ
*-^

TJ
CO c
E CO

k_

5 E

ZJ

x:

x:

TJ
O
O

k-

ZJ

o LL

CO
ffl

CO

r<

OJ c
CZ

o
CO
cz

LU

g
o
3

l+-*

CO
1

cz
ZJ

cz

o
CD

CM

CO >.
OJ
X)
o
3
TJ TJ
o
c
x:
E 3 tz
CO
cz CO
4
OJ
>
4
ffl

<

CO

CO

sz

o
o
o

>%

LU

x:
?

CO

55

OJ

!-,

CD

T\ T\
re

re

xi

LU

>
UJ
_l

d
LL

*
*

LO

LO

Isr--

00

o
o

Tt

CO

S2
co

LU

OJ

OJ
CO

_l

Tt

OJ

CO

CO
c

ffl

.2

"3

TJ
CO

CD

Q
CO

CO CD
OJ O
CO 00

00 O
LO
CD Is-

LO
CO CM
i-

Is-

i-

y-

o
o

VI
Q.

<
3
CO XJ

<
LU

LO O
CO LO
CM CM
CO

CD O

T-

i-

Tt

Tt

CO CO

<

CD

<

CQ

CZ

cz

cz

cz

Ist-

00 LO

o
LO
CJ

t-

r-

Is-

00

Tt

1-

Tt

Tt

-2T
UJ

Qj

is
3 U.
CD
,2-

12
c

H CO

8
to "E
a)

CO

cr

< CO
cz
CD

co
a.
z>

CO
CD

CO

CO

4"

CO

cr

i_

i_

k_

CD

r-

r-

h-

H-

VI
a.

E E

E E

E E
4

-1

CO

CO

1-

1-

co

CD

CO

LO

LU

<

1-

re

co

CO

ffl

Sz

co

co

CO

* o"g

3
k_
*

CO

co

o
o

sz

ex

cj
3

*'

+-

i_

co
-_.

CD

^ E
cT1
'

co
OJ

ffl

CO
x:

LU

p
"ilz
*=

2.

CD

CD
CZ

CZ
3

O)
cz

">^

CO

CO

c
cz
3
H

-g

TJ
CO

r^

to

re

xi

CL
CO

CO

"O to
CD Z
tj ffl
m
^
ffl TJ

is
O

ffl TJ
> ffl
ffl
XJ

<*

CO

>

g
5

CO
OJ

tz

+'

CL

I-

Ik-

>

O
c

to -3

56

CO

UJ

>
LU
_l

d
LL

CO

LO

LO

Is-

CM
OJ

OJ

CO

UJ

Z)

00

_I

CM

CJ

o
CO

Is-

00
CO

z5

m
Q
CO

TJ
cB

OJ o
o o
Is- LO

LO Tt
O CO
Is- 00

IsI-

Is-

CD
o
CO

OJ o
LO
t-

Is-

Iso

VI
Q.
-

co

CO
g>

<
CD

LU

OJ
CM
LO
CO

O
LO
OJ
CD

00 LO

Tt

Tt

T-

co o
O LO
cm

00 LO
t-

00

T-

Tt

T-

Tt

T-

Tt

Tt

Tt

Tt

Tt

Is-

i-

00

Tt
Tt

r--

1-

Is-

CO
CO 3
CD TJ

+*

LU

re

Q.TJ

LU
cr

< =>J=

H2

CO

CO

o
CL
z>

o
cr

LO

< CO
cz

< CO

cz

< QQ
cz

cz

< CD
cz

VI
ex

cz

CD

E E
4

CO

E E

CO

CO

CO

E E

E E

co

to to

4"

co

i_

i_

l_

i_

1-

h-

h-

1-

h-

CD

CD

k_

i_

r-

)-

e
o
O

CO
CD

OJ
CZ
"k_
3
TJ

CO H
c
CO
CD

to

to
4

cz

CO

CO

is

XJ

CO
CD

'

-'

CO

x:

r-

CD

03

O)
cz
CO
x:

oj
CZ

O
i

xi

o
o
c

LU
r-

OJ

cz

E
CO
OJ

at

CO

r-

x:

CD
X

CO

ffl
TJ

TJ

>,
CO

:=

>s

TJ

CL

--CC

CZ
*~

i.

g
CZ

k
cz

CN x:

OJ

re

Z
1

57

to

\\ *n
xi

z z
re

LU

>
LU
_J

d
LL

CD

LO
IsIs-

CM
CM
O

OJ

CO

LU
z>
_l

O
CD

CM

ffl
Q
CO

TJ
ci

Tt CD
CM
CD 00
-i-

T-

Tt

>-

*~:

r-.
o

VI
Q.
-

CO

S3

<

go

UJ

Tt O
OJ O
CM o
LO o
Tt

Is-

CO
CO 3
CD TJ

CD

CLTJ

CO L
oj

ri:

co

Tt

Tt Tt

< CO

< CO

4->

re
LO
O

LU

< =>

H2

o
o

cr

O
o

cz

cz

cz

co

CD

CL
z>

E E

CO

E E

CO

cr

CD

VI
Q.

cz

CO
ffl

h-

k_

r-

\-

*-*

CO
ffl

k_

E
O
O

CO
CD

CO H

to

c
CO
CD

(S

ffl

CO =
-2?

ffl

ffl

+-

CO

co

o
u

CO

ffl

UJ
I-

CD
CL
^

CD
CD

E =E

^
3

xj

cd

-o

cz
-

cd

ffl

CO
OJ

El

h-

co

xz

k_

2^
cz

oj

Q.

CD

to
CD

Q.

58

to
11
xi

co

x:

>,
OJ CO

CD
C

O
CO

ffl
XJ

co

is

TJ TJ
ffl ffl

re

UJ

>
LU

o
LL

LO
LO

Tt
Tt

CM

00
OJ

Tt

OJ
LO
OJ

CO

LU

ZJ
co
CD

_J

LO

CO

CD
00

Is-

c
o
+->

CO
CD
3

m O
TJ C
C =
CO TJ
s

Q
CO

<

Is-

LO

CD
O
O 00
i-

T-

I-

CO CO
00 Is-

00 Tt
CM O
CJ Iso

VI
Q.

<
UJ
v

E1
<o

d
CO

"1

CO

?;
CO CO

CM

>

4->

c
cd

Is-

CD LO
O IsIs- CO

co o
LO O

Tt

Tt

CO o
CM O

CO o
LO o
CO o
OJ o

Tt

Tt

Tt

Tt

Tt

Tt

CD LO

CO

Tt

Tt

Is-

CM
T

rj
re
LU

CLU.
3
o
>>

w
CJ
k_

cc

-ffl

cr

o
CO
CL
z>

LO
O

<C0
cz
CD

CO
CD

cr

k_

1-

<CQ
cz

cz

<C0
cz

cz

CD

E E

4*

<C0

E E

E E

CO

CO

CO

CO

k_

k_

k_

k_

k_

r-

r-

y-

1-

h-

CO
ffl

4*

VI
Q.

E E
4

CO
CD

CO

h=

>

wo
c
CO

o
CO
X5

in

CO
CD
c
OJ
c

co
,13

-^

TJ

o
CO
XJ

TJ

>

**

CD

-*

CD

co

XJ

'
o

^
o
CO

TJ

>

XJ

'oj

TJ

o
.

UJ

CO
CO

CO
CO

cz

OJ
cz

OJ

Q_
3

o
OJ

cz

>

'
O

3
o

O) >

o
*

r-.

'

CO
CO
cz

x:
4

CO

CM

co

59

O)
cz
=-

x:
*-

to

CO
n
xi

k_

*^

CO

Q.

cz
oj
cz

oi

re

Table 9
seen

shows

teams scores (criterion

in this table that the game's highest score

"B"

Hotel in group

(181.37),

scores

in

between

impact.

event

subject

simulation/game

educational contents.

for both

groups

problem

The

was

the highest

simulation

no

Group

reaction

was

is

very

average

scores.

(174.35)

groups

was

found

(table 10).

the game) suggests that overall, the

efficient

way to teach

Occupancy, Profit

learning

of

higher

order

Skills Acquisition

segment, questions related to

general

Participants

while

both

group

difference

Participant's Perception

3.946. In this

worth

the Appaloosa

also achieved the highest

significant

statistically

on

"B"

be

can

had

also

experience

and

Guest Satisfaction,

strong

and

perception

that this

was

the

very

to their course of study. Questions related to the applicability of the

relevant

ones

(173.75).

solving, relationship among

received

model

"A"

However,

(General

by

"B"

criterion reference performance of

Table 11

was obtained

and the overall chain score of

little higher than group

was a

It

reference performance).

to

real

life

situations and possible

future

professional

roles,

were

the

that received the lowest scores.

Participants
usefulness

highest

to

and

perceived

develop

that the greatest strength of the

simulation was

its

team-work skills. This was the category that received the

most consistent scores

(4.313)

They

also

felt that

during

the

experience, both themselves and others, were willing to give and receive

feedback (4.227).

60

h-

Z
LU

co

co

T)"

CM

>

o
Tf

CM

LU

LO
r-

CO

CD

00

o
CO

o
co

Tl"

O)

TT

CM

lO
CO

LO

(M
LO

CO
LO

OJ

cd

tn

CD

CO
to

Tl"

LO

CO

CO

to

ca

CO
r~.

LO

00

to
CO
CO

CO

CM

T
T

00

UJ

CO

CM

CD
>

CO
LO

00

CD

CD

LU

<
z>

LU

DC

CM

Tf

UJ

LL

cr
UJ
CL
UJ

co

LO

JJ

Q
Z

CD

CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

LU

rr

O
rr
LU

<

r-

o
co

--

tC

CO

CD

i-

CQ

3
CO

_l

<
z

1-

LL
LL

tD

CO
Z>
Z

LL

LU
LL
LU

DC

_i

<

CC

"m

o
z

co

_J

z
z

LU

co

CO

CO

TT
tT

CO

CM

<
X
o

cr

o
UJ

CD

G)

CO

r--

TT

Tf

Tf

LO

CM
LO

tn

CO

CO

to

CO

CD

LO

ca

CO

o
co

CM

o
CJ)

CO

ci

o
LO

CM

CM
CO
00

_i

CO

<

o
CO

E
to

CO

o
co

co
oo

00

Tf

00
oo

CD

CD

X
CD

<

CM

CO

Tf

JC
CD

^.

CD

CD

CD

CO

LO

X
UJ

Q
Z

CD

CD

CD

CD

_i

_i

cr

<

"ca

CD
CD

LU

o
co

<

_l

<
z

o
h-

LL

61

CO

LL
LL

a
h-

CD CD

Z>
CO

CO

3
Z

CD
<
cr
LU

>
<
z

<
I
o

v-

z
LU

CO

Tf

CO

Tf

Tf

00

CD

CO

>
LU

CD

O)

CD
CO

CM

LO

CO
LO

CO

I--

CM

CO

CD

0)

co
LO

LO

CM

Tf

o
CO

LO

LO

O)

LO

CO

CD

00
CD

00

O)

CM
LO

CM

CT>

CO

co

o
CM

CD

CO

r-:

CO

OJ
00

CD

O
i

CD

<

CM
LU

Q
z

u
nJ

C
H

4-1

c
o

CO

Tf

LO

^C

_*:

LU
LT

co

.*:

CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

cu

<

f-

<
h-

"cd
_J

_l

o
CO

CO

CD

ci

<
z

LL
LL

Q
CO
3
Z

CO

LL

en

1-

CU

LU
X>

>

cd

LU

Tf

r-~

r-

r~-

Tf

CO

CD

CM

Tf

CO

CD

CD
c

o
CM

CM

o
LO

CD
CO

o
LO

CM

LO

LO

LO

LO

LO

LO

CO
CO

CO

CM

LO

CM

CO

CD

CM

00
LO

r-:

CO

CO

CD
T

00

r-

00

co

Tf

LO

CO

X.

"ra

CD
CD

CD

CD

CD
CD

CD

LO

o
co

co

"o

CD

Tf

O
CM

cd

c
z

CD

03

CD
CD

LU
cr

<

<

o
o
CO

41

_j

_l

o
1-

5:

CO

CD

CD

&

_J

<
z

LL

r-

62

CO

LL
LL

Q
CO

z
z

ml

LU

CO

Tf

CD
Tf

Tf

>

o
CM
co

UJ

LO
CO

CO

o
co

co

CO

co

CO

CO

Tf

CD

LO

LO

LO

CO

CM

to

r-

LO
LO

CD
LO

LO

00
If)

o
CD

CM

LO
CO

LO

Tf

o
o

CD

cd

LO

CO

CM
CO

00

00
o

LO
00

Tf

CM

CO

CD
i

UJ

CM

CO

Tf

LO

CO

X
c

UJ

a
z

-2

XL

XL

CD

CD

CD

CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

"to
_l

<

o
r-

_l

<

o
o
CO

CO

CD

CO

<

3
Z

m>

o
Tf

Tf

i--

co
CM

2i

Cu
I

Tf

CD
Tf

43

CO

o
co

CO

CM

CO

Tf

LO

CM

LO

LO

LO

LO

LO

CO

CM

CO

CD

co

C3)

o
LO

CO
CO

r-.

CO

o
CD

O
tfl
co

o
o
CO
CO
-1

CO

CD

CO

CD

Tf

r--

CO

00
CO

CD

CO

00

CM

a
a.

<
LU
CM

CO

Tf

LO

CO

cr

XL

xl

la

CD
CD

CD
CD

8
CO

m>

LU

<

a
z

Z
<
X
o

CO

CD

cfl

lii

^.

CD

CD

CD

CD

CD
CD

_l

< H

_l

<
z

LL

f-

63

<
X

CJ

Tf

LU

CQ

LU

cr

l-

LL

r-

a
<
>

co

LL
LL

_l

<

r-

4J

LU
LT

_l

<

CO

CD

c5
m
3
CO

LL
LL

Q
CO

3
Z
Z>

LU

co

Tf

CO

r-

co

r-

CO

LU

o
o

CD

>

CM

a>

CD

CD

CO

CD

Tf

LO

CM

Tf

CD

o
LO

CD

Tf

LO

LO

LO

LO

CO
CO

CM

LO

LO

LO

CD

CM

CO

Tf

LO

CO

XL

XL

XL

XL

XL

"(0

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD
CD

CD

CD

00

CO
LO
CM

Tf
Tf

CO

LO

CM
CO

CO
CO

00

00
o

LO

CO

CD

CM

CO

CD

CD

Tf

CO

LU

X
UJ

Q
z
c
o
H

4-)

CD

<
h-

l-

_l

<

cr

o
o
CO

CD
a H
m

CO

3
CO

_l

<
z

LL
LL

Q
CO

3
z

LL

pi
I-l

4J

o
u

LU

CO

Tf

r-

r-

>

CM
CM

Tf

Tf

UJ

cd

co

LO

CO

co
co

o
o

CO

CD

CM
LO

Tf

CO

LO

CM
LO

LO

LO

CM

co
r--

CM
CD

CD
CO

T3

CD

CD

CD

CO

CM
LO
CD

Tf

CM

00

CO

CO
o

Tf

CD

CO

CD

CO

CO
CO

Tf

Tf

00

Tf

CD

CM

CD

LO

XI

>

CM

co

Tf

LO

CO

XL

XL

XL

"re

s
CD

CD

CD

CD

CD

CD
CD

CD

CD

X
a

a
z

_l

<

1-

h-

C
r-

UJ
LT

_l

<

0
c
CO
<

z
a

64

CO

CD

o
LX

z
CO

U.
LL

a
CO

z
z

LU

>
LU
_1

o
LL

LO

LO
CO
CO
eg

TJ

Tt
Tt

CO
Is-

CD
CO

LU
LO

TJ
C
CO

Q
CO

cd

CD
OJ CD

CD Tt
LO O
CO CO
CO

Tt

O LO
O CM
LO Tt
Is- CO

O LO
O CM
O CD
LO O

CO Tt

Is-

Tt

Ist-

o
o
LO
CO

o
o

o o
o o
LO LO
Is-

Is-

CO CO

t-

i-

< CO

<

CO

LO
OJ

>

CO LU

?
c

-1

h-

r^

Is-

VI

LU

<

LO LO

<

*-"

CO CD
r-- co
Is- OJ

_,

<SL

LU

CO LO
CM CM
O CO

CM
O

CM
O

CD

CL CO

CD

o
o
"

ffl

o
o

UJ

2
o
o

LO

LU

< CO

CZ

cz

CO

CD

CD

D.
Z3

CV)

CD

CD

E E
4

CO
CD
k_

4;

03
CD
k_

< CO
cz
CD

cz

cz

cz

cz

CD

CD

CD

CD

CD

E E

E E

4'

'

4'

-1

CO
CD

k-

k_

L_

V-

r-

V-

h-

h-

CO
CD

kZ

I-

H-

kZ

*>

03
CD

CO
CD

CL

E E

CO
CD

CO
CD

VI

CO

CO

CO

.tu

c
CO
ffl

CD

CD

CO
CL

CD
O)
CO

CD
>

CD
>

LU

<

|2

+-*

+
CD
k-

LU

o
o

CO

CD
k.

o
o

lo

CO

cz

CZ

O
CO
Cl

"^

CO

65

CO

CL

c
CD
>

cz
CD

LU

LU

CO

CN

CO
4

>

Tf

Tf

xi

CO

TABLE 11
General Results on the Instruments (N=33)
Acquired Skills, Game Mechanics, Fun, Team-Work
Willingness to Give and Receive Feedback

ITEM

MEAN

and

SD

PARTICIPANTS PERCEPTION OF SKILLS

ACQUISITION (PPSA):

impressed

was

a chain need

with

to be

how hotel

managers

well coordinated and

in

4.273

.517

jointly

cooperative,
maintaining individual
competitive sharpness for their own hotel.
while

2. 1 feel I

understand

the importance

4.636

of

communication, cooperation, and teamwork

running
3

hotel.

I have

.549

in

better understanding of how various

fit together into a whole hotel system.

3.879

.781

components

4. 1

am more aware of

the difficufties involved in

--

4.152

.712

trying to improve occupancy

satisfaction at

rate, profit, and guest

the same time.

5. I have learned something

of value which

a real

can

help

6. I

explored and applied relevant

enhance

behaviors
7

and strategies

persuaded others

started others

strategy to
9
a

or

techniques,
a

consider a new

thinking

.770

3.667

.777

hotel.

idea for

3.727

on a

3.909

.801

hotel.

about

agreeing

.723

achieve our objectives.

created new

hotel

to

3.697

hotel.

for managing

management of a

improving
8. I

managing

I believe

hotel

management of

3.545

professional role.

3.667

ideas to improve

.938

chain.

10. 1 explored a possible future

11.1 engaged in problem solving of certain

that might actually happen in the future.

66

events

4.212

.777

.781

TABLE 11

General Results on the Instruments (N=33)

Acquired Skills, Game Mechanics, Fun, Team-Work
Willingness to Give and Receive Feedback

clarified

and procedures

in managing

values and attitudes about strategies

my
a

.712

that could produce success

Participating in simulation
learning experience.
was

3.848

hotel.

1 3.

1 4. This

SD

MEAN

ITEM

1 2. I

and

very

relevant

games

is

a worth-while

to my course study and

4.030

.810

4.000

.791

development.

professional

3.946

AVERAGE PPSA

.355

"^~

MECHANICS:
1

experienced

responsibilities

few
of

my

2. Instructions to fill
(Paper

Work)

problems

for me, I

started

4.

By

by

out thDecision

were clear and

understood

of

Accounting

easy to

week

clear,

2.939

2.636

1.025

.1

the game for

them

Forms

.029

understand.

week

were

well enoughto get

5, very little help

understand

was needed

the game's

from the

4.485

.712

procedures.

5. Overall I believe that the instructions

a

myself.

instructors to

in

64

3.333

role.

3. Even though the rules

new

understanding the

were provided

3.182

.950

articulate way.

AVERAGE MECHANICS

3.315

6. Overall I had fun playing the game.

4.303

.680

FUN:

67

~
.684

TABLE 11

Results
Skills, Game

General

Acquired

on

the Instruments

Mechanics, Fun,

(N=33)

Team-Work

and

Willingness to Give and Receive Feedback

ITEM

MEAN

SD

TEAM WORK:
1

1 believe I

2. 1

always wanted

the play

acted as part of a

of

4.303

well.

4.303

.810

members of

member got

my team

along

stuck

together

while

4.303

.770

.728

events.

5. 1 think the

difficulties

during

.619

the game.

4. I think the

solving the

4.485

to stay in the same team

1 believe that my team

team.

my team
playing the

members of

arose while

6. 1 think team

stucktogether when

4.273

.761

game.

members assisted each other when we

4.212

.927

experienced problems.

4.313

AVERAGE TEAM-WORK

.592

WILLINGNESS TO GIVE/RECEIVE FEED-BACK:

1. Self. Willingness to

receive

4.455

feed-back.

4.121

2. Self. Willingness to give feed-back.

3.

Others/My

Others/

My

group.

group.

Willingness to

receive

Willingness to

give

feed-back.

feed-back.

4.121

4.212
4.227

AVERAGE FEED-BACK

68

.617

.960

.781

.820

.581

Students
are the

reported

instructions

average

grading

Since

of

and

that the

scoring

the

main weaknesses of

whole experience

(Mechanics). This item

procedures

received an

3.315.

of

none

hypotheses

the

be

could

through

supported

experiment, and participants still perceived mechanics of both

equally efficient, the

to see if the degree

variables

in any

ways

of

understanding

the participants perceived

Correlation Indexes among

main

learning

variables)

between these two variables, but it does

coefficient

between the understanding

pleasantness

coefficients

willing to
their

(fun)

were

give and

willingness

to

Facilitators'

of

also

the

the

different

cooperative

The

feedback

observations of

during

the

dynamics. Its

researcher

show a

strong

the

by

is

Strong
of

and

14.

and

positive

the

correlation

students are

building

skills.

the two groups

Facilitators

were

during

its Regional Vice-president.

failed to

develop

Vice-President did not take

found this data very important to

instrument.

69

Group

and with

B faced

competitive and

such

a real

understand

the

impressed

dynamics developed in group A

game and

general

outcome, and between

and their team

performance of

hinder

no correlation

feedback

learning

main

positive correlation

the game mechanics

in Tables 13

role assumed

problems

shows that there

receive, and the perceived

give/receive

mechanics

as

Table 12 (Pearson's

outcome.

foundbetweeo^thedegree

competitive and cooperative

leadership

the game

of

the experience (0.5004).

whole experience are shown

by

of

versions

the relationship among the

researcher studied

this

leadership

the

role.

results of

the

<
CO
I

Q
LU
LU

CO
OJ

CM

CM

Tt
Tt

Tt

LO

CO

CM

CO
CM

CO
CO

CO

Tt

Tt

o
o
o
o

LX

CO
CD
-O

CO

<
<>^i

'co
OJ
c

CO
0.
Q.
c
o

CM

< ll
=

w
*

I
_cz

c
.2

TJ
c
CO

Is-

CD
>

ID

C\l
CO

'CD

LL

CD

CO
CD

T>
C
CO

CD
>

co

Q.

O
ca

0.

CO
A.

CO
CD

0.

g
X

o
LU

OJ
CM
Is-

o
o
o
o

LO

CD
c
OJ

d
VI
Cl

k_

CO

CO
CO

CO

c
co

LO

O
O
O
O

co-

<
o

t_

O
O

CD

co

0.

Tt

tr

O"

Q.
*

LL

Q.

+3

VI

E
S?
o

"O
CD
CD

ZJ
cr c
O ZJ

CO

.a

]co

E
<

z
o
CO

"-^

o
o
o
o

r-

<

CO
CM

UJ

Am

CO

LO
CO
CM

<
CO
0_
CL

o
o
o
o

CO

LX

LU

_l

<

CO

<

<
CO
CL
Q_

CO

o
LU

3
LL

70

O
<

<
UJ
r-

LU
UJ
LL

TABLE 13
Narrative Table of

Evaluation

(Orientation,

and

-Had

Noise Level.

One

desorganization
desorientation.

GROUP

-Initial

and

and

-Loud, noisy.

3.-

Understanding

-Asked

material and

during

procedures.

and

the

questions

orientation

first two

desorganization

-Quiet.

many

rooms.

desorientation.

-Bigger

like

"B"

to change

-Had

-Initial

room.

Two)

and

"A"

to change rooms.

-Smaller

2.

-Weeks-

GROUP

Class Setting.

1.

the Groups

on

Rounds

ITEM

Facilitators'

-Had

room.

'The

room

felt

library".

to read

all

the

written material.

"weeks."

-Not

many

questions

asked.
-Facilitators

hoped

participants understood

the instructions.

4.-

Facilitator

material

5.-

or

dependent.

-Material

dependent.

dependent.

Questioning

model.

-Facilitator

the

-Questioned

to

procedures

estimate capacity.

-Questioned

dice-roll.

71

-No

the

questions about
model.

-Accepted

dice-roll.

TABLE 13
Narrative Table of Facilitators'
Evaluation on the Groups

(Orientation,

and

Rounds

ITEM

6.-

-Weeks-

GROUP

Explanation

about

-Team

confusion.

about

confusion

Two)

and

"A"

demanded

explanation

One

"B"

GROUP

-No

questions about

confusion.

and

desorientation: "Are
we suppossed

to be

confused?"

-Explanation

given:

"Previous managers
left the job, you are

taking

job

over new

responsibilities."

7.

Leadership

role.

-Vice-President

leader. Set

objectives.

goals and

Asked for

the end

facilitators

of week

started

wonder about

-Vice-President

take an active

plans, results and

-Concentrated

keeping.

two
to

the effect

removing the stress

(or pulse factor) from the

of

game.

72

did

not

leadership

position.

justifications.

Note:

By

acted as

on record

TABLE 14
Narrative Table of Facilitators'
Evaluation of the Groups
(Rounds
Three, Four and
-Weeks-

ITEM

1.-

Timing /Getting

organized.

2.

Understanding

the mechanics.

GROUP

-Started
-No

"A"

GROUP

time.

on

Five)

delays occurred.
-Bronco's Hotel G.M. did
not show up. Eg: Death
of a GM. Rooms and
Facilities Manager
promoted to GM.
-Some

team problems.

-Good

understanding

record

keeping

and

game's procedures.

"B"

of

information was
incorrect and confused

-Some

record

keeping

and

scoring.

3.-

Creativity.

-Not

very

creative.

-Group was "closer to

paper-work".

Were

encouraged to think
creatively.

4.-

Competition/
Cooperation.

-Evidence

of coopera

tion and competition

was evident

in both

versions.

-Evidence

was evident
versions.

73

of coopera

tion and competition

in both

TABLE 14
Narrative Table of

Evaluation

(Rounds

5.

Leadership

the Groups

of

Three, Four

-Weeks-

ITEM

GROUP

role.

Facilitators'

leadership

approach.
-Organized

set

Five)

"A"

-Vice-President

maintained a

and

GROUP

"B"

-Vice-President

laissez-faire

adopted

style.

-"Vice-President

meetings to

goals, educate team

educated

by

was

team-

members."

members, and ask for

results.

6. Paper

work.

-Just

the

tally

sheets.

-Participants

overwhelmed
work.

74

seemed

by

paper

Participants

recommendations, and their impressions of the game's

strengths and weaknesses are shown

in table 15.

They

agree on

strengths of the game, which are communication and teamwork.

acknowledged

recommended

the importance of guest satisfaction in the

the

main

Students

experience.

also

They

to improve the game mechanics in both treatments and make the

game more realistic.

75

TABLE 15
Participants'

Recommendations and Impressions of the

Strengths
(Listed from

Group

Treatment

most

Weaknesses
to least frequent responses)
and

"A"

Group

Treatment

"B"

Strengths:

Strengths:
1

game's

Communication,

1.

team work and

Communication,

cooperation.

cooperation.

2. Guest Satisfaction Index.

2. Realism.

3. Realism.

3.

Quality

of

team

information

work and

given.

4. Creativity.

5. Teachs how to

work under pressure.

Improve:

Improve:

1. Instructions.

2. Pacing.

2. Pacing/ Time frame.

3. Communications.

3. Realism of the

Instructions.

and of

4. Give

events prior

to

the dice

whole experience

roll.

goal setting.

4. Creativity.
5. Realism
and of

of

the

whole experience

5. Amount

the dice-roll.

of paper work and written

forms.
6. Give

academic credit.

General Comments:

General Comments:
1.

1. Good/worth

Nice Experience.

2. Practical/realistic.

2. Realistic.

3. Fun

3. Fun

experience.

experience.

4. Confusing.

4. Confusing.
76

while experience.

CHAPTER 5
Conclusions

Recommendations

and

Conclusions

While this experiment failed to

new version of

than

technique

accept the original

the Hotel Management Simulation/Game is a better

the

original

to

version

original version of

in the form

of written

the game,

instructions

instructional technique to

provide

and

the student

easier

participants

than

Group

was proved

These

to

in

understand

Group

they

students also

course of

study

On the
efficient

A had

B. Students in
that

that the
a

Group

stuck

main variables:

in the

new version:

a more adequate

hand the

of

the

Occupancy, Profit Index

original version seemed

At the
of

of

end

the

the

game

game mechanics

developed better group dynamics

also

found the technique

instructional

given

of structure

better understanding

better understanding

degree

together when difficulties arose better than

and professional

other

a smaller

with a

instructional

stated

material, showed to be

Guest Satisfaction Index. Instructions

to be

has

teaching

findings.

interesting

which

relationship between the hotel business

and

the

achieve

objectives, the present research shows very

The

hypothesis that the

as a more relevant

and

Group

experience

it

B.

to their

development.

new version of

technique

to

the game

provide

understanding of how hotel managers in a chain

77

the
need

showed

students

to be

to be a more

with

well

better

coordinated

and

jointly

their

own

be

maintaining individual

cooperative, while

hotel. In

more clear

other

for

competitive sharpness

words, the general purpose of the

simulation seems

to

in group B than in group A.

Correlation

is

analysis showed that there

Perceived Acquisition

of

Skills

redirect new

improvements

participants

understanding

the game

and

no

educational

game

goals,

problem/analysis and

This

mechanics.

the subject simulation, since it is

of

of

the game mechanics do not

outcomes, but it does affect the general pleasantness

Overall the

relationship between the

showed to

be

a good

decision making

of

way to

development

the

especially

(fun)

finding

clear now

experience.

high

develop

order

teamwork

of

that

learning

affect

the

must

and

skills.

Recommendations

1.

The

mechanics

game

should

understanding the instructions and record

general pleasantness of

keeping
the

and

scoring

students

overwhelmed

explanation

of

explanation

of

why

with

the

game.

too

paperwork

much

Another

participants'

computerize

and

potential

It

(eg. introduce

by

affects

to improve only

them),

and not

hand-outs
area

of

that

record

to provide

reportedly

provide

chance-factor cards

perception of a real world situation.

the

improvement is the

unexpected circumstances).

78

found that

was

procedures

to make it more realistic, and

real world,

affected

keeping

recommended

(maybe

the dice-roll
the

It is

procedures

students.

occupancy is

improve

the

improved.

be

that

This

better

explain

could

help

2.

Study

the influence of

This

and skills acquisition.

explore to what extent a

have

less

the most important factors that

groups.

structured game

It

would also

helps

be

students

interesting

to

their

develop

skills.

3. The
who

in team cohesiveness, pleasantness,

was perhaps one of

difference between the two

produced a

leadership

leadership

new version of

the game should be played

better understanding

more advantage of

decision making

models and could

take

the changes introduced in treatment B.

4. Reduce time
explanation of

of

with graduate students,

constraints.

The

researcher

believes that

more time

the game mechanics is required. It could also enhance the

for

game

results.

5. Changes
"pulse"

the

or

improvements to the

factor, that means,

stress

level,

experience.

79

game mechanics should not remove

noise and general playfulness of

the

REFERENCES AND

ABT

ASSOCIATES, Inc. (1965) "Report

Social, Political
and

BIBLIOGRAPHY

art:"

of a

the state

of

Simulations."

Economic Models

and

UNWIN, Derick (1969). Simulation

and

and

of

survey

Methuen Educational Ltd. London. 152

the

In TANSEY, P. J.

Gaming in Education.

pages.

ABT, C.C. (1968). "Games for Learning". In THATCHER, Donald C. (1986).

"Promoting Learning Through Games

Advancement
Used

by

Games

and

integrated

multicriteria

group decision

Simulation & Gaming. 21 (1

Society

and

for the

Training.

Games. September 1990.

and

CHANIN, Michael (1990).

and

Simulations".

Simulations in Education

Permission bv Simulation

AFFISCO, John

context".

of

and

"An

empirical

models

in

investigation

of

simulation/gaming

27-47.

SurveyResearch Methods. Second Edition. Wadsworth

BABBIE, Earl (1 990W

Publishing Company, Belmont, CA. pp

BAREHAM, Jon

and

JONES, Peter (1988). "Hospitality Management Education:

Theory, Technocracy
Journal. 12

and

Theatre".

Hospitality

and

12(3)

Research

we?

games, a synthesis

of

findings".

307-332.

BUTLER, Richard J., MARKULIS, Peter M.

on

and

GREENBLANT, Cathy Stein (1981). "The

effectiveness of simulation

Simulation & Games.

"Where are

Education

(2), 240-248.

BREDEMEIER, Mary E.
educational

395.

An Analysis

of

and

STRANG, Daniel (1988).

the Methods and Focus

of

the

Simulation Gaming". Simulations & Games. (19)1. 3-26.

80

research

CARLSON, John G.

H.

and

MISSHAUK,

Michael (1972). Introduction to

Gaming: Management Decision Simulations. John

New

RHENMAN,

and

E.

research"

education and

(1975). "Using

(1961)
In

(Proceedings

of

Buskirk Editor.

CUNNINGHAM,

"The

role of management games

ROBERTS, Ralph

student opinions in

Simulation Games

game".

& Sons, Inc.

1 84 pages.

York,

COHEN, K.,

Wiley

anri

evaluating

Experiential

the second national Absel

Bloomington, Indiana.

M.

and

FIELD, Steven E.

results with a

learning

in

in

business

action.

conference.

Richard H.

92-98.

J. Barton (1984). "Assumptions undelying the

types of simulations". Simulation & Games.

15(2)

different

213-234.

DENNINGTON, Loyd J. (1989). "Computer Integration in Hotel

Management Education". Hospitality Education

use of

and

and

Foodservice

Research Journal.

13(3), 61-71.
FANDT, Patricia M., RICHARDSON, Woodrow D.

(1990)

"The impact

Simulation

of goal

Gaming. 21

and

setting

(4)

and

CONNER, Hughlon M.

on team simulation experience".

411-422.

FOUCAR-SZOCKI, Reginald (1989). "The Restaurant Simulation". Hospitality

Education

and

GAMBLE, Paul R.

Study

Research Journal. 13

and

Integrating Hospitality

Education". Hospitality Education

GLENN, Allen D., GREGG, Daniel

to teach proble

& Games.

13(2)

415-425.

LOCKWOOD, Andrew (1989). 'The Computerized Case

Shell: A New Tool for

activities

(3),

and

Management

Research Journal.13

(3), 73-81.

TIPPLE, Bruce (1982). "Using role-play

and

solving.

Three teaching

199-209.

81

strategies".

Simulation

GREENBLAT, CS.
Design

and

R. DUKE (1975).

Application."

and

In

"Assumptions undelying the

Simulation & Games.

GREENBLAT, CS.

and

game."

realities

CUNNINGHAM,
use of

GREENLAW,
games

RS.

BREDEMEIER, Mary

E.

explorations on the multiple

and

F.P. WYMAN (1973). "The

in business

courses."

effectiveness of games
Update."

GREENBLANT, Cathy

of simulation

findings". Simulation & Games

and

of simulations".

15(9) 213-234.

Stein (1981). "The educational effectiveness

synthesis of

J. Barton (1984).

different types

GAGNON (1979). "Further

In

Simulation: Rationale,

"Gaming

12(3)

teaching

games, a

307-332.
effectiveness of

In J. WOLFE (1985). "The teaching

in collegiate business

Simulation & Games. 1

6(3)

251

courses.

A 1973-1983

-288.

GRONLUND, N.E. (1983). "Constructing Achievement Tests. In SNEED,

Jeannie

and

Assessing

CARRLLTH, Betty

Ruth. (1988).

"Accountability

Program Outcomes". Hospitality Education

and

in Education:
Research

Journal. 12(1). 21-29.

HAMIDI-NOORI, A. (1984) "Scheduling

simulation study".

high

contact service organization. A

Simulation & Games. 15(3) 315-327.

IVERSON, Kathleen (1989). "Bringing Guest Service Into

the Classroom".

Hospitality & Tourism Educator. Summer-Fall 1989, 10-33.

JAFFE, William F. (1989). "A Comparison

Instruction

with printed

Management

course".

instruction

of

the Effects of Computer-Assisted

on student

Hospitality Education

learning

and

in

Hospitality

Research Journal.

13(3), 53-57.
JAFFE, Eugene

and

NEBENZA, Israel (1990). "Group Interaction

Game Performance". Simulation & Gaming.

82

21(2)

and

133-146.

Business

JONKER, Pat

JONKER, Don (1990). "What Do Hospitality Graduates Really

and

Need? An

Industry

Perspective"

Hospitality & Tourism Educator.

3(1), 12-13.

KOLSTOE, Raplph H. (1973). Introduction

sciences.

The

Dorsey

LAMBERT, Carolyn (1989)

System to
and

support

Press.

"Using

to statistics for the behavioral

Homewood,

p.

157.

Computer-Assisted Drating

Hospitality

II.

and

Design

Design Instruction". Hospitality Education

Research Journal. 13(3). 493-501.

LEDERMAN, Linda Costigan (1984). "Debriefing, A

postexperience analytic process with

Simulation & Games.

and

Journal

of

implications for its

effective use".

15(4) 415-431.

MARSH, Herbert, FLEINER, Howard

"Validity

critical reexamination of the

Usefulness

of

and

THOMAS, Christopher S. (1 975).

Student Evaluations

of

Instructional Quality".

Educational Psychology. 67(6) 833-839.

McKEACHIE, Wilbert J. (1986). Teaching Tips. D.C. Heath

Lexington, MA,353

Simulation

Development. Division of

Gaming

for Management

Research, Graduate School

Administration, Harvard University. Boston, 189

and

Conceptualizing

Company.

p.

McKENNEY, James L. (1969)

McMULLAN, W. Ed

and

of

Business

pages.

CAHOON, Allan (1979). "Integrating Abstract

with

Experiential learning". Academy

of

Management

Review. 4(3). 453-458.

MILES, Wilford G., BIGGS, William D.

"Student Perceptions
Management

of

and

SCHUBERT, James N. (1986).

Skill Acquisition through Cases

and a

General

Simulation, A Comparison". Simulations & Games. 17(1).

7-24.

83

MILLER, Judy (1989). "Computer Applications in

Education

in

Four- Year

Hospitality Education

and

Hospitality

Management Programs".

Research Journal. 13(P)

MOREO, Patrick J. (1988). "Autonomous Hotel

Emerging

Foodservice Management

Model". Hospitality Education

and
and

1-6.

Restaurant Schools: An
Research Journal.

12(3)

69-86.

NORUSIS, Marija J. (1983). SPSS. Introductory

Book Company,

pp.

and

Mc Grow Hill

276.

PAUZE, E. Francis, JOHNSON, Wayne A.

strategy for

statistics guide.

and

hospitality Management

MILLER, Judy (1989). "Internship

Programs".

Hospitality

Education

Research Journal. 13(3). 301-307.

PAVESIC, David V. (1991) "Programmatic Issues in Undergraduate Hospitality

Education".

PIZAM, Abraham

Faculty

Hospitality
and

& Tourism Educator. 3(2). 38-51

MILMAN, Ady (1988). "Academic Characteristics

Compensation in U.S.

Hospitality Education

PROHASKA, Charles R.
investigate

and

and

Hospitality

and

Management Programs"..

Research Journal. 12(1). 93-101.

FRANK, Ellen J. (1990). "Using

management

decision

making'.

simulations

to

Simulation & Games. 21 (1 )

48-58.

QUINTON, Wayne (1988). "Responding to Hospitality Education Needs".

Hospitality & Tourism Educator. Soring. 1988. 32-33.

REMUS, William. (1981). "Experimental Design for Analyzing data

Or Even the best

statistical methods

Simulation & Games.

rnntrnl"

REMUS, William

and

12(1)

do

on games.

not replace good experimental

3-14

JENNER, Stephen (1981). "Playing Business Games,

Expectations and realities".

Simulation & Games. 12(4) 480-488.

84

ROBERTS,

Ralph M.

evaluating

business

results with a

Experiential
Absel

FIELD, Steven E. (1975). "Using

and

learning in

conference).

action.

student opinions

Simulation Games

game".

(Proceedings

in

and

of the second national

Richard H. Buskirk Editor. Bloomington, Indiana.

92-98.

ROWLAND, K.

and

GARDNER, D.M. (1973).

laboratory

education and

Steven E. (1975).
business

game".

(Proceedings

of

Buskirk Editor.

"Using

"The

uses of

business gaming in

In ROBERTS, Ralph M.

research".

student opinions

Simulation Games

and

in evaluating

Experiential

the second national Absel

and

FIELD,

results with a

learning

conference).

in

action.

Richard H.

Bloomington, Indiana. 92-98.

SCHERMERHORN, John R. Jr. (1985). "Error

feedback for instructional decision

tendencies in processing student

making".

Simulation & Games. 16(3)

311-323.

SCULLI, Domenic
for the

and

service

SNEED, Jeannie

and

Education:

NG, Wing Cheong. (1985) "Designing business

industries". Simulation/games for learning.

15(1)

games

1 6-27.

CARRUTH, Betty Ruth (1988). "Accountability in

Assessing

Program Outcomes". Hospitality Education

and

Research Journal. 12(1). 21-29.

SPIZINGEN, G.

and

HART, C.W.L. (1985) "Active learning

Practice."

Theory

and

for teaching

In PC Wright

undergraduates

in

(1988)

hospitality

and the

"The incident

Case Method:

as a technique

management and

food

Hospitality Education and Research Journal.

administration

12 (1)57-66.

85

STOCKHAM, Edward, CRUMB, Dave

"Application

of

and

Simulation/Gaming

PLUMMER, Charles (1991).

Instructional Strategies in the

Hospitality-Tourism Curriculum". 1991 Annual CHRIE Conference

Proceedings.

TANSEY, P.J.

and

Houston, TX, 219-220.

UNWIN, Derick (1969).

Simulation

Methuen Educational Ltd. London. 152

and

in Education.

Gaming

pages.

TEACH, Richard D. (1990). "Profits: The false

prophet in

business

gaming".

Simulation & Games. 21(1) 12-26.

THATCHER, Donald C. (1986). "Promoting Learning Through Games

Simulations".
Education

Society

and

for the Advancement

Training. Used

of

Games

by Permission by

and

and

Simulations in

Simulation

and

Games.

September 1990.

WEISS, Neil (1990). Introductory Statistics. SPSS Suplement. Adison-Wesley

Publsihing Company, Reading MA.

WOLFE, Joseph (1985). "The Teaching Effectiveness

of games

in Collegiate

Business Courses. A 1973-1983 Update". Simulation & Games. (16)3.

251-286.

WRIGHT, Phillip C. (1988). "The Incident

Undergraduates in

Hospitality

Hospitality Education

ZUCKERMAN, David W.
games

for

and

and

as a

Technique for Teaching

Management

and

Food Administration".

Research Journal. 12(1). 57-66.

HORN, Robert E. (1973). The

education and

training. Information

MA.

86

guide

to simulations/

Resources, Inc. Lexington.

APPENDIX

"A"

INSTRUMENTS

87

School of Food, Hotel and Travel Management

Department of Graduate Studies

SURVEY ON PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND

EXPOSURE TO SIMULATION GAMING/TECHNIQUES

LAST NAME:

SOCIAL SECURITY #:
Please
1

Do

read

you

the

following

have any kind

questions and check

of experience

the

appropriate

in the food, hotel

space(s)

or travel

industry?

( )Yes
( )No
2.-

If

do,

you

(
(
(
(
(
(
(

of experience

is that? (Mark

Other (Please

all

that apply)

) Kitchen assistant
) Station cook or chef
) Dish washer
) Waiter/waitress
) Host/Hostess
) Busboy/busgirl
) Cashier

Specify).

How long?

(
(
(
(
4.-

type

) Bell hop
) Front desk clerk
) Housekeeper
) Marketing and Sales
) Reservations
) Human Resources
) Hotel Development/Construction

( )
3.-

what

Have

(
(

)
)
)
)

1-6

Months

6-12 Months

1-3

Years

More than 3

years

you even participated

in

learning

)No
)Yes

When?

88

simulation/gaming

exercise?

HOTEL MANAGEMENT SIMULATION/GAME EVALUATION

Copyright 1991 by Charles M. Plummer, Ph.D./Simulation Systems Laboratory

Read

each statement and rate

number

that best represents

it

on each criteria

your

using the

CRITERIA

Strongly
Agree

was

impressed

managers

in

with

how hotel

a chain need to

coordinated and

jointly

be

well

cooperative,

maintaining individual competitive

sharpness for their own hotel.

while

I feel I

the importance

understand

of

communication, cooperation, and

teamwork

1 have

how

into

in running

hotel.

better understanding of

various components

a whole

hotel

fit together

system.

am more aware of

involved in

the difficulties

trying to improve occupancy

rate, profit, and guest

same time.

satisfaction at

the

I have learned something of value

I believe can help enhance
managing a real hotel.

which

6. I explored and applied relevant

techniques, behaviors and strategies
for managing

scale provided

below: Circle the

judgment.

hotel.

89

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly
Disagree

CRITERIA

Strongly

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

7. I persuaded others to consider a new

idea for improving management of a hotel.

8. I

started others

strategy to

on a

1 created

ment of a

about

agreeing

achieve our objectives.

new

hotel

thinking

ideas to improve
hotel chain.

manage

or

10.1 explored a possible future

professional role.

11.1

engaged

in

problem

solving of certain
actually happen in the

events that might

future.

1 2. I

clarified

my

values and attitudes^about

strategies and procedures

success

1 3.

in managing

Participating in

worth-while

1 4. This

study

very

relevant

by

is

experience.

and professional

Copryright 1991

hotel.

simulation games

learning

was

that could produce

to my

course of

development.

Charles M. Plummer

90

.5

Strongly
Disagree

Agree

My

role
_

was:

Regional Vice President

General Manager

Rooms and Facilities Manager

Food and Beverage Manager

Sales and Marketing Manager

Other (Specify).

My

Chain

My

Hotel

was:

was:

Harriet

Lariat

Chariot

Alexis

Aooaloosa

Aries

Beverly

Buckaroo
Clydesdale

Bronco

Caroline

Greatest Strength:

Improve This:

Comments:

Copyright 1991

by

Charles M. Plummer

91

Calais

THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT GAME: EVALUATION OF MECHANICS

Copyright 1993 by Angel Dominguez and Edward Stockham

School

Read

of

each statement and rate

that best represents

number

it

Food, Hotel

and

on each criteria

your

Travel

using the

Management

scale provided

below: Circle the

judgment.

CRITERIA

Strongly

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

1 1 experienced few problems

understanding the responsibilities
.

of

my

role.

2. Instructions to fill out the

Accounting Forms
Work) were clear and

Decision

(Paper

easy to

the

game

for me, I
to get

By

rules

week

understood

week

by

were new

them

well enough

myself.

5, very little help

was

from the instructors to

understand

for

started

needed

understand.

Even though the

of

the game's

procedures.

Overall I believe that the instruc

tions were provided in a clear, arti

culate way.

6. Overall I had fun playing the

Copyright 1993

by

game.

Angel Dominguez

and

92

Edward Stockham.

Strongly
Disagree

Agree

THE

Read

HOTEL MANAGEMENT GAME: TEAM COHESIVENESS INSTRUMENT

Copyright 1993 by Angel Dominguez and Edward Stockham
School of Food, Hotel and Travel Management

each statement and rate

best represents

number that

it

on each criteria

your

using the

scale provided

CRITERIA

Strongly

Agree

Agree

1 believe I

acted as part of a

2. 1 wanted to change teams

team.

during

the play of the game.

got

I believe that my team members

along

well.

4. I think the members

stuck together while

1 think the

of my team
solving the events.

members of

my team

stuck

together when difficulties arose while

playing the

game.

1 think team members

assisted

each other when we experienced

problems.

Copyright 1993

by

below: Circle the

judgment.

Angel Dominguez

and

93

Edward Stockham.

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly
Disagree

w'

"2

DC

(0

CO

to

o|

Ltsr

ca-

U
> <
LU

to

S?
Z CD

LU
*
-J

CD

< LU

LU
LL

CO
LU

E
'5

LU

15
OT
to

rx
CO

I-

-*

cr

go

to

y-

zc

to

rx

>PI

co

ca

-I
<

a.

o
co

oi
3

<
m

<

>,

UJ

E
E

CO

DC

_3

o_

to

LU
CC

CD

LU
LU
LU

>

CO

-o

E
E
w

i_

O
LU

a.

O
>>

S)

CM

c
CD

T3

<

>>

>

Q.
o

<!
Z

CO

CO
DC

CO

CL
CO
DC
UJ
a.

o
fc

C3

C5

CO

o>

LU

r5c3

CO
-C

LU

UJ

to

CD

LU
0_

DC
3

to

"^

(O

CD

CO
CO

1-

<

LU

CO
UJ

o
LU
_l

i a
O)

UJ
CO

DC

>

1^
O

(0

>

ffl

uj
CD

O
I

<

-^

LU

>-

to
3

rx
UJ
co
O
s>

CO

ffl

CL

UJ

>

CD

UJ

UJ
UJ
LL

u
LU

DC

tr

o o
Q
z

LU

>

(0
to

a>
c

E
3

E
'E

*:

o
<

CO

<
H
<
X

Q
LU

CO

LU
LL

>

Lm\

o
<

o
<

>

CD

LU

CC

CD

P-

(D

>

CO
DC
UJ

-?

LU

CO
CO
UJ

cs

94

LU

CO
CO

UJ
CO

CO

LL

LL

o
<

UJ

<

LU
LU

ic:

>

LU

uj

LU
LU
LL

LU

ffl

(0

o
<

LU

H
Z

CD

mm

z
==

CD
z
==

>

UJ
LU
LL

0.

LU

LU

ZJ

>

LU

LU

CO
CO
LU

CO
CO

CD
z
_J

CD
z
_1

DEMOGRAPHIC

Directions:

Year

of

Please

check the appropriate

Study:

space

for

each of

the items listed below.

Freshman
Sophomore

Degree Program in
you are

blank

SURVEY

currently

Junior
Senior
Graduate

which

enrolled:
.

Certificate Program
Diploma Program
Associates Degree
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Arts
Master of Science
Master of Arts

Name:

Sex:

Age:_
Marital Status:

Check the

one

Male

Female

Married
Single
Divorced
Separated
Widowed
blank

space

that

Single / Head of Household

Single Parent / Head of Household
Married with children

applies:

Married

95

with no children

APPENDIX

"B"

EVENTS PRESENTED IN THE GAME

(PROBLEM SOLVING

96

SITUATIONS)

EVENT 1

NAME:

MY CHAIN IS

MY HOTEL IS

(Circle one)

(Circle one)

Harriet

Lariat

(A)
(B)

Alexis
Apaloosa

Caroline
Clydesdale

Beverly
Buckaroo

Aries
Bronco

MY ROLE IS

(Circle one)
Regional Vice-President
General Manager
Rooms and Facilities Manager
Food and Beverage Manager
Sales and Marketing Manager

Happy
your

hour (with 2 for 1

drinks)

Hotel's has been fun

technique for

have been

and profitable.

our restaurant/lounge

Driving) recently

got

long

It has

established

institution,

served as a great

and

marketing

business. MADD (Mothers Against Drunk

the city to pass an ordinance prohibiting two-for-one drink

sales.

OPTION A: Your favor the

drinks but

offers a

OPTION B: You
a

different

OPTION

promotion of

"Hungry

Hour"

which

features

single

fancy buffet for free!

suggest

concoction

that a new special "Drink

being

offered each

C:

Code 8.

97

day.

of

the

Day"

be

created with

EVENT 2
NAME:

MY CHAIN IS

MY HOTEL IS

(Circle one)

(Circle one)

Harriet
Lariat

(A)
(B)

Alexis
Apaloosa

Caroline
Clydesdale

Beverly
Buckaroo

Aries
Bronco

MY ROLE IS

(Circle one)
Regional Vice-President
General Manager

Rooms and Facilities Manager

Food and Beverage Manager
Sales and Marketing Manager

Urgent

problems

forced to

close

force the remodeling

down the

OPTION A: You favor

of an older

south corridor with

having

all

discipline

75

wing

of

the Hotel. You

are

guest rooms.

managers restrict

business

and

reservations as appropriate.

OPTION B: You
necessary, but

OPTION

opt

for

a plan that closes

continues with

business

down

a part of the corridor as

as usual as much as possible!

C:

Code 9.

98

limit

EVENT 3
NAME:

MY CHAIN IS

MY HOTEL IS

(Circle one)

(Circle one)

Harriet
Laria

(A)
(B)

Alexis
Apaloosa

Beverly
Buckaroo

Caroline
Clydesdale

Aries

Bronco

MY ROLE IS

(Circle one)
Regional Vice-President
General Manager
Rooms and Facilities Manager
Food and Beverage Manager
Sales and Marketing Manager

Rising

costs of opeTatron

(inflation

at

10%)

continue to threaten the

profitability

of your operation.

OPTION A: You favor raising room rates

OPTION B: You

meeting

so

prefer

10

percent.

that the issue be raised at the

that the entire team can

pull

together

profitability!

OPTION

by

C:

Code 14.

99

next

Executive

with effective actions

committee

to return

EVENT 4
NAME:

MY CHAIN

IS

MY HOTEL IS

(Circle one)
Harriet
Laria

(Circle one)

(A)
(B)

Alexis
Apaloosa

Caroline
Clydesdale

Beverly
Buckaroo

Aries
Bronco

MY ROLE IS

(Circle one)
Regional Vice-President
General Manager

Rooms and Facilities Manager

Food and Beverage Manager
Sales and Marketing Manager

Your

this,

chain
you

has
have

stressed

been

hospitality,

as

.its

major

drawing

"extras"

guests

giving

many

card.

In

response

in the form

of

to.

daily

newspapers, courtesy coffee, etc. (costs 1% of total revenue). You are under
pressure

to imporve

profitability.

these items to reduce costs.

OPTION A: You favor cutting

all of

OPTION B: You favor raising

room rates

OPTION

to offset the cost of these amenities!

C:

Code 16.
100

EVENT 5

NAME:

MY

CHAIN IS

MY HOTEL IS

(Circle one)
Harriet

(Circle one)

(A)
(B)

Laria

Alexis
Apaloosa

Beverly

Caroline

Buckaroo

Clydesdale

Aries
Bronco

MY ROLE IS

(Circle one)
Regional Vice-President
General Manager
Rooms and Facilities Manager

Food
Sales

convention appears

competitor

are

very

for

Beverage Manager

and

Marketing

suddenly because

hotel. Facilities

grateful

and

are

Manager

of problems with

taxed, requiring 15%

more

staff, but the guests

your efforts!

OPTION A: You favor

hiring

the extra

staff

to

keep

staff and guests

OPTION B: You believe that the General Manager should

all

discipline

OPTION

neighboring

managers

to

coordinate

during

C:

Code 20.

101

call a

happy!

meeting

the overload situation.

with

APPENDIX

DEMOGRAPHIC

"C"

SURVEY

102

RESULTS

YEAR

YEAR OF STUDY

Value

value

Frequency

Valid

Cub

Percent

Percent

Percent
7S,3

ASHMAN

73.8

78.3

SOPHOKGRE

15.2

15.2

S3. 9

JUNIOR

.1

.1

IBB. 8

Total

33

18S.8

188.3

flean

1.273

otu

err

.108

fledian

Rode

1.886

Std dev

.574

variance

.338

Kurtosis

3.413

S E Kurt

.796

Skewness

2. 858

ilinisiuia

1.038

S 2 Skew
fiixifiue

valid

cases

.463

j.&yu

33

Range

2. 838

Sub

flissing

42.868

cases

103

1.88S

25-Jan-93 HOTEL F,AN.GErKT SIRULATIQK-GflhE EVALUATION

14:12:54

SPSS VAX/VMS Site

on

RALE

FEMALE

Percent

19

57.6

59.4

59.4

13

39.4

48.6

188.8

3.2

he an

1.486

Std

1.866

Std dev

Kurtosis
S

l.

-1.967

Skew

.414

i.vJcZ

PUa^UE

Valid

bTHiUb

err

S E Kurt
Range

ririKlT.^L

1.888

.868

Pledian

.499

Variance

.889

Skewness

1.688

.249

.401

1.388

fiiniauii

45.883

bur.'.

Missing

cases

Missing

188.8

Total

node

Perce;.'

Percent

Frequency

Value

LaDe^

VAXA::

cases

STATub

L-Uii;

So.

JO. 7

3.8

Hissing

168.8

ilean

1.963

Std

ilode

2. 888

Std dev

'\U.r--CSlS

3 t Ske*
fiaxitiuri

Valid

cases

32.888
.41s

b.

-^

32

ntulan

E Kurt-

.177

Variance

.863

bkenness

1,838

Ran oe
O'.'.fl

Hissing

188.8

ft 7*

err

.3.868

cases

104

166. d

."iinifBUiii

2.G86
.331

-5.657

i.tftSii

25-Jan-93 HOTEL ilAHAGEHENT SHIliLAilOh-GAfiE tvAL'JATIOr-.

14:12:53 SPSS VAX/VMS Site
on VAXA::

DEGREE

value

v'FiS

V5.5

DEGREE PROGRftB ENROLLED

Label

Value

Percent

Frequency

Valid

Cum

Percent

Percent

DIPLOMA

3.8

3.1

3.1

23

28

64.6

67.5

98.6

BA

3.1

9.4

188.6

o.6

oo

itj.&

iG^a*

flean

4.831

Std

fiode

4.886

Std dev

11.924

'UlTT-OSis

S E Skew

.414

fiaximus

/aiid

j.668

b2

cases

err

.474

Range

itju.u

4.868

ileoian

.364

Kurt

hissing

8u3

Variance

.225

Skewness

-1.62j

b.sBii

^inifiUD!

0.886

129.886

Sun

Hissing

cases

AGE

..fc

>cv_..t

lCl'Cx

r re -j

..CU'_/

43.

28.1

bb.3

b.

15.6

4.h

o.

'i

j.

87.5

0.

ti

b.i

33.6

J.

2.1

.6

Hi.L-

36. i

3,1

183.3

J.

,3

Fiissinu

188.8

"~->

fiean

j,

0,8
uou

Std

en

.476

rode

iS.u88

ouj

ueV

2.633

Kurtosis
b

E Skew

flaxitiUM

Valid

cases

b.627
.414

33.838

32

S E Kurt

.889

Range

Suia

fiissing

105

12.6553

633.368

cases

Fiedian

19.683

variance

7.o4

Skewness

2.496

riiniaiusi

18.833

25-Jan-93 HOTEL fiANAGEREHT SIFIUlATION-GARE EVAlJATICN

14:i2:54

SPSS VAX/VHS Site

HC'JSE

CHILDREN AMD HEAD OF HOUSEhO.

Value LaDsi

on

vaiue

VflS

VAXA::

Percent

rveq..enc>

r'srcent

v5.5

l-ercent

SINGLE

23

63.7

95.8

95.8

NARR. HO CHILD

3.8

4.2

188.8

27.3

Hissing

33

188.3

183.3

flean

1.125

oou

flode

1.633

Std dev

.612

Variance

.375

b L Kurt

.916

Skewness

4.639

ilinitauti

1.088

Kurtosis

S E 3,'iew
HaxuBur.!

Valid cases

24.668
.472

t.336

24

e.

3.388

Aange

27.683

bUR

Hissing

Median

.125

cases

106

i.688

APPENDIX

LICENSE

"D"

AGREEMENT

107

License Agreement -- HOTEL MANAGEMENT GAME

***
***
***
NOTICE -- IMPORTANT -- READ
***
***
You should carefully read the following tenns and conditions before using this game. Any
use uf this game indicates your understanding and acceptance of all the following terms
and conditions. If you do not agree with them, you may promptly return the R&D
Productivity Game and any associated documentation (collectively herein referred to as the
R&D Productivity Game) to MULTILOGUE.
.The R&D Productivity Game is the proprietary property of MULTILOGUE, DBA, and
is fully owned and protected by Richard D. Duke and Associates, Inc.. The materials are
protected by copyright, patent and trademark, and all rights are reserved. The R&D
Productivity Game is licensed (not sold) for use by a single individual or organization,
and is licensed only on the condition that you agree to the terms of the end user license
agreement. You accept responsibility for meeting the terms of this agreement:
I. USE. You may use this R&D Productivity Game for any educational purpose you
find appropriate, as long as no fee or other remuneration is charged the participants for the
R&D Productivity Game or the activities in which it is embedded. If a fee or other
remuneration is obtained, the user must reach a further written agreement with
MULTILOGUE, DBA; Richard D. Duke and Associates before using the R&D
Productivity Game.

2. COPY, MODIFY, AND MERGE. The R&D Productivity Game may not be copied,
modified, or merged or combined with other games or materials.
3. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN TillS AGREEMENT, ANY USE,
COPYING, MODIFICATION, MERGING-OR COMBINING OF THER & D
Productivity Game, INCLUDING DOCUMENTATION, OR TRANSFER OF THE R &
D Productivity Game AND liCENSE, IS PROHIBITED.
4. TERM. The license is effective until tenninated. You may terminate it at any time by
returning it to MULTILOGUE or by destroying the R&D Productivity Game with all
documentation. The agreement will also tenninate if you fail to comply with any tenn or
condition of this agreement.
5. GENERAL. This agreement will be covered by the laws of the State of Michigan.
YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ THIS AGREEMENT,
UNDERSTAND IT, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND
CONDITIONS. YOU FURTHER AGREE THAT IT IS THE COMPLETE AND
EXCLUSIVE STATEMENT OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND
MULTILOGUE, DBA; RICHARD D. DUKE AND ASSOCIATES, INC., WIllCH
SUPERSEDES ANY PROPOSAL OR PRIOR AGREEMENT, ORAL OR WRITTEN,
AND ANY OTHER COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN US RELATING TO THE
SUBJECT MATIER OF TIllS AGREEMENT.
'

..

MULTILOGUE
Richard D. Duke & Associates, Inc.; 32 I Parklake, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48 I 03 USA;
Phone 313 663-3690
mac/garnes/new HOTEL MANAGEMENT GAME manual

Copyright. 1989. An Rights Reserved: Patenl Applied for; Trademark Protected. 3/3/89
May not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission of (!!)MULllLOGUE.

108