Industrial Partnership Prosperity Game{trademark} Page: 26 of 118
This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
PLAYER EVALUATIONS 17
Table 3: Importance of business development and
marketing by group.
Industry Sandia Line
to Company 4.44 3.96
to Organization 4.22 3.57
to Self 4.15 3.74
development and marketing activities were more or less
important than they had thought at the start of the
game. Figure 9 shows that nearly 50% of the players felt
that these activities were of more or much more impor-
tance than they had felt previously. Given that the aver-
age pre-game response was higher than 4 on a 1-5 scale,
this indicates that the players feel very strongly that
business development and marketing activities are criti-
cal to their success.
o.2
Q Industry (Avg=0.81)
y SNL Line (Avg=0.56)
e 0 Other (Avg=0.70)
0
0.1
0
0
.omuch
lessless the
samemore much
moreFigure 9. Post-game: "I now think that business
development and marketing are off impor-
tance than I did before playing the game."
GENERAL OBJECTIVES
During the course of developing and conducting Pros-
perity Games'"', a fairly standard set of evaluation ques-
tions has been developed. These have been useful in
assessing both game design and conduct, as well as the
attitudes of the players. The range for all questions was
a 1-5 scale from low to high. Mean responses to these
questions are shown as the colored bar data in Figure
10, where they are compared against aggregate data
from all previous games. The average responses for the
Industrial Partnership Prosperity Game"' range from very
near to significantly greater than the average response
from all previous games for all questions. In addition,this game received either the highest or second highest
response ever for six of the fifteen questions (over the
dozen games for which these questions have been con-
sistently used). This game also received the highest
overall average score (average of all questions) we have
ever received (4.08). The previous median, high and low
overall averages were 3.80, 4.08, and 3.48, respectively.
Figure I l shows the team-by-team responses to each of
these questions. One strong observable trend can be
seen from these data: teams tend to vote consistently
from question to question. For instance, the DOE team
voted consistently low on most questions (average over-
all response of 3.2), while the Industry 4 team voted
consistently high on most questions (average overall
response of 4.6).
WRITTEN COMMENTS
In addition to the polling data, written comments and
suggestions were solicited from the players. A represen-
tative sampling of these comments is provided here.
LESSONS LEARNED
Industry players:
" Sandia line organizations need to cooperate more
(and compete less) with each other.
" Sandia needs a single point of contact (POC) to
escort a new company through the whole Ipartner-
ship process.
" Empowerment of Sandia line organizations and
establishing POC's with corporate level coordination
would improve partnering.
" Sandians need to improve communication skills:
fewer acronyms; better explanations of terminology.
" Sandia needs to carefully explain how different types
of agreements really work. Identify steps and con-
tacts.
" Sandia should work with DOE to simplify and speed
up the partnering process.
" Some Sandians concentrated solely on their lab mis-
sions. jEd. the inference here is that there was little
customer focus.]
" Congressional and DOE restrictions are barriers.
Sandia players:
" IThe game] demonstrated some of the real-world
problems Sandia has when working both with indus-
try and each other.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Boyak, K.; Berman, M. & Beck, D. Industrial Partnership Prosperity Game{trademark}, report, February 1, 1998; Albuquerque, New Mexico. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc690137/m1/26/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.