PRODUCTION/OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

International Study Tours: Options and Approaches

Keong Leong,
Fisher College of Business,
The Ohio State University

Some business schools are turning to study tours as an educational vehicle for expanding students' global awareness. Previous Decision Line articles have addressed the advantages of these programsțin this article we will highlight differences in approaches. As we build our own experiences and exchange ideas with colleagues, we have come to recognize that there are vast differences in the ways in which these tours may be managed. Each approach has its merits, particularly when it matches the style of the faculty member, the interests of the students, and the objectives of the tours. The following discussion is based on our own recent experiences at Seattle University (SU) and The Ohio State University (OSU). Table 1 contrasts the major differences in our two approaches.

The examples presented in Table 1 represent a limited set of the alternatives available to those planning study tours. The reason that these options are shown is that they depict the actual approaches taken by two successful study tour programs. The left column describes Keong Leong's approach at Ohio State and the right column describes Karen Brown's approach at Seattle University. Both approaches have been effective and in both cases the faculty have continuously strive to fine-tune our programs. Our two approaches, set in the context of our most recent experiences, are detailed below.

Seattle University: Karen Brown's Experience

In March of 1996 I led a group of 26 students and three faculty colleagues on a one-week study tour to Mexico City and Puebla. This was my third year leading such a tour, but my first year for these two destinations. My previous tours had been to the state of Baja California, just south of the U.S. border.

Class Focus and Preparation. For all three years, our focus has been on manufacturing operations. Students have prepared by reviewing their knowledge of the characteristics of "world class" manufacturing, and practice their observational or benchmarking skills during local company visits. This year we met in five formal sessions prior to the tour. I find that the specialized nature of the class has tended to draw students with common interests and has allowed me to tailor readings and preparatory sessions to address manufacturing issues in the context of Mexican culture, politics, economics, and history. Students were assigned to study groups, and each team focused on a particular industry. Their assignment was to visit an equivalent plant to one that was to be visited in Mexico and to serve as industry experts for the class. Prior to our departure for Mexico, each group gave a short presentation to the class highlighting the operational processes for their assigned industry and informing the rest of the group about what to look for during the tours in Mexico. An additional group was assigned the title of the "Benchmarking Team." It was their responsibility to develop a benchmarking rating form that would be filled out by all students after each tour. This group tallied group responses and these results served as the basis of our class discussions in Mexico and after our return. The preparation and focus on objective assessment mechanisms really paid offțparticipants came away from the experience with a significantly improved understanding of operations strategy and practice.

Instructor Role. My role as instructor of this class has been one of organizer, scheduler, and facilitator. Although I have shifted toward greater and greater student involvement in the process, I find that I prefer to be the one who makes all of the arrangements for travel, meals, cultural activities, and plant tours. With a seven-day window of time (the duration of our spring break), sequential relationships among activities become highly interdependent. This is undoubtedly because I pack in so many activities (my dean says, "Karen does a two-week tour in one week"). We typically visit two plants per day on working days, and I attempt to ensure maximum coverage of cultural experiences during evening and weekend/holiday periods. Although it might be feasible to extend the tour by a few more days and deintensify the schedule, such a change would probably not be attractive to our students. Most of them work full-time and must take the study tour as vacation time.

The careful orchestration of our seven-day itinerary is quite a challenge, and would be difficult if student groups were each assigned to arrange a separate tour. When changes in plant availability occur, I am able to shuffle the schedule from a big picture perspective. I also find that by arranging the cultural experiences myself, I eliminate the potential for group disagreements regarding destinations. (The downside is that when I pick a lemon the students can, and do, blame me.)

This year, I engineered group activities even more than I have in the past. For each evening's dinner, I assigned dinner companions, making sure that there was sufficient rotation to allow students to get to know each other. Additionally, I made sure that each faculty member had an opportunity to have dinner with each student at least once. I did this in response to my experience from previous yearsțsome students formed cliques, others seemed to be left out, and there were some with whom I had very little contact. One of the great things about an experience such as this one is the opportunity to get to know students on an individual basisțthe rotation didn't work perfectly, but for the most part I was able to have much more contact with students than I have in the past. Participants responded very well to this arrangement, and it made for a positive and inclusive group culture.

The final benefit that I derive from making arrangements myself is that I am able to ensure positive relations with the companies we visit. Given that I have chosen to focus on one country, I find some advantage to rotating my tours to various destinations, with returns to some plants every few years. As these relationships have evolved, plant managers encourage us to return and have become friends to the school. One plant has now hosted two student interns and we have plans to expand these sorts of interchanges.

The Itinerary. This year, we visited BMW, Volkswagen, Hylsa (steel), two family-owned textile plants, CANACINTRA (the Mexican chamber of commerce for manufacturers), Walmart, and a Uriarte Talavera. In addition, we managed to tour the pyramids of the sun and the moon at Teotihuacan, spend an afternoon at the floating gardens of Xochimilco, enjoy the folkloric ballet, and experience Mexico City's historic district. The students especially liked having the opportunity to stay on the beautiful campus of Universidad de las Americasțit was a real treat for them to learn about another university and to meet students from Mexico. We also squeezed in time for three "in country" seminars, wherein we discussed our observations from the previous day or two. This allowed students to exchange ideas and perspectives while the experience was still fresh in their minds. The class schedule didn't end when we arrived back in SeattlețI held a three-hour wrap-up session two weeks after our return. This gave us a chance to view slides and videos and to reflect on our experiences in Mexico.

Managing the activities of an intensive study tour such as this one requires careful forethought. A schedule such as the one we have followed would not be possible without a driver/guide and bus. For three years we have been fortunate to have a delightful bilingual guide who is familiar with local addresses and can help us with interpretation when we arrive at the gates of manufacturing plants. These guides have also filled us in on cultural issues en route to our plant destinations. Sack lunches have been a must for keeping on scheduleța stop at a restaurant with 30 gringos would, in most cases, have made us late for our afternoon tours. Most days our "official" activities extended for about 16 hours. I suppose that one could argue for a more flexible schedule, but I find that keeping them busy has real advantages.

Student Response. Student response to the SU operations study tours has been phenomenal. All feel that they have learned more than they ever would have in the classroom, and several have indicated an interest in participating again. This year, the group "jelled" to such an extent that I hear them all expressing that they miss each other and wish they were still all together. Additionally, it seems that we have a group of 26 students who are now much more bonded to Seattle University, and who will provide very positive word-of-mouth advertising about our programs.

The Ohio State University: Keong Leong's Experience

Over the holiday break between the winter and spring quarters this year, I led a group of 16 graduate students (15 Masters in Business Administration and one Masters in Public Administration) on an eleven-day field trip to Sao Paulo, Brazil. Last year I took 14 graduate students on a similar field trip to Mexico City. Students sign up for the course in the winter quarter. The focus at Ohio State University is visiting companies in big emerging markets. Since both first and second year MBA students take the course, the objective is to visit a country different from that visited in the preceding year. The decision on which country to visit is based on student interest, project cost, and contacts available in that country.

Class Focus and Preparation. The title of our independent study was "International Field Study of Emerging Markets." This is the second year that the international field study is being treated as an independent study course. Due to the success and interest generated by those first two "pilots," it will now be offered as a regular elective course for the next year. This year we had 35 students apply and selected 16 students based on an application and personal interview to assess the student's expected contribution to the project and our desire for as diverse a group as possible. We tried to achieve equivalent distributions between first-year and second year students and international and domestic students. Efforts were also made to have representation across majors. Since we were drawing on students from a variety of functional backgrounds, we arranged to have senior executives from the manufacturing as well as the marketing and finance departments talk to the group during the company visits.

To prepare for this trip, in the winter quarter, we met each week for two hours. Students were divided into groups of three and assigned to research a company that we would be visiting. Students in each of the groups were responsible for gathering company data and to make contact with the company regarding the company visit and topic of presentation during the field trip. This year we made local visits to Schuler in Columbus and the Honda auto manufacturing plant in Marysville to expose students to world- class manufacturing environments. After the Brazil field trip, students put together six case reports based on information accumulated during the company visits. The case reports were then sent to the company for their approval before being released for use in the classroom. The six cases derived from the Mexico project will appear in a case book on international management in emerging markets to be published by West Publishing.

Instructor Role. My role is somewhat different from that assumed by Karen Brown at Seattle University in that I act as an advisor to the students. Students make most of the field trip arrangements and decisions. We are fortunate that we could count on administrative support from The Center for International Business Education and Research (CIBER) this year. Students line up the companies to visit after consultation with me. Personal contacts with companies play a major role in determining which companies to visit. Last year, in Mexico City, we visited companies such as Mercedes Benz, AT&T, Ford, and Grupo Uniko. One of our objectives is to have a locally owned company included in the list of companies visited. This approach allows us to get a good feel for how locally owned companies in emerging markets are being managed compared to other multinational companies. To cater to the diverse needs of our students, we have a much broader agenda at each company. Several of the companies we visited required travel time of two hours or more each way. After taking travel time into account, we decided that it was best to visit only one company a day. Anyone who has traveled to Mexico City or Sao Paulo will understand the traffic problems in these cities. In preparing schedules, a "safety" time factor must be included. Thus far, we have been warmly received by each of the companies visited. This is due in part to the personal contacts with these companies.

Trip Funding. The expenses are determined based on the location selected. Over the autumn quarter, I worked closely with the students to choose the country of visit and estimate the cost of the trip. Students are expected to pay 50 percent or more, depending on the costs involved. We are fortunate to have access to some private gift funds ($15,000 each year, for the next five years) to help defray costs of the international field trip. In addition, the MBA Policy Committee was prepared to cover costs of up to $3,000. This project is listed as one of CIBER's many activities to promote international business education. As such, CIBER provided funding for the cost of the faculty advisor's expenses plus up to $3,000 for the students.

The Itinerary. In Brazil, we visited Philips, Dana Corporation, ABB (Asea, Brown, and Boveri ), Schuler, and Cofap. We also had discussions with the American Chamber of Commerce and the Japanese Chamber of Commerce. The visit to the two Chambers of Commerce allowed us to contrast the investment philosophies of American and Japanese firms. Typically, the company visits involved presentations by one or more senior executives about the company's strategy and their operations, followed by a plant tour. In many instances, we had another session after the plant tour to wrap up any questions we might have. Each of the companies visited provided us with lunch, which was a big cost savings for the students.

As pointed out earlier, this type of field trip requires good local transportation arrangements. We realized that a full-sized bus would be too big for a group of 17, and the cost too prohibitive. In Mexico City we were fortunate to rent a mini-bus with a driver that could accommodate up to 20 passengers. However, we were not as lucky in Sao Paulo. As such we went with two Volkswagen vans with two student drivers. This arrangement did meet our basic transportation needs at an economical cost, but was very stressful because the heavy traffic made driving a real challenge, and keeping the two vans together even more difficult.

We had plans to meet up with several alumni of the Fisher College of Business for dinner. Unfortunately, due to time commitments we were able to have dinner with only one of the alumni we contacted prior to the trip. We had a great time with the alumnus talking about his experiences in the six months he was in Sao Paulo. The group also had dinner with a Brazilian doctoral student in operations management whom we were recruiting. These activities provide further benefits and value to the university. While the weekdays were occupied with company visits, the weekends allowed us to experience the local culture. We spent a day visiting the rain forest and spent time on a deserted beach at the Caminhada Ecologica. In addition, we had the opportunity to experience a Brazilian Samba Carnival where people were dancing in the streets to music blasting from vehicles moving slowly along the carnival route. The visit to a local professional soccer game was a treat since we had a chance to see Brazilians play an aggressive style of soccer. Our visit to Walmart was for shopping and to experience the layout and different types of products sold at the facility. The cultural experiences were arranged based on group consensus.

Student Response. As a result of the success of the first international field trip to Mexico City, the number of students who were interested in going to Sao Paulo this year was overwhelming. We had to disappoint many students because the funding available allowed only sixteen students to make the trip to Sao Paulo. This year we had four students from the Mexico City project returning for the Brazilian trip. Several comments from the students were:

We never know in advance what you are going to learn from an on- site face to face visit. We obtained a far more complete picture of the firms' operations by speaking to executives and employees in Brazil than we obtained from remote data sources here in the U.S. Corporate culture is probably the biggest single learning point in any visit.

The Brazil project is a unique opportunity for international and American students to gain expertise, working in teams, exploring the opportunities and threats inherent to developing markets. We learned, first-hand, about currency risk, hyperinflation, transfer pricing, international organizational structures, cross- border logistical difficulties and costs, expanding consumer classes, global brand awareness, trade barriers, cultural differences, and many other factors involved in international business.

The quality, level, and range of access from our visit partners was unbelievable. We met with high-level decision makers at nearly every facility we visited. We were given the chance to discuss day-to-day operations with plant managers, and long-term strategy with corporate presidents and vice presidents. Our discussions were frank, open, and revealing.

Concluding Remarks

In summary we have seen that there is more than one approach to international study tours. The advantage of focusing on one country is that over time one can develop long-term relationships with the companies visited. Karen has found this approach works well for her because the time spent in preparing for the trip is minimized. At Ohio State University, since the country visited changes from year to year, there is a tremendous amount of learning and setup time involved. However, there is great student interest because of the change in venue. Each trip brings with it new learning experiences. Since the students' are intimately involved in the country selection process, they tend to be satisfied customers.

There are three forces that affect the way the trips are organized. First, students at SU pay the full cost of the trip, while students at OSU receive a subsidy from the university. Second, the course at SU is focused on operations management, while the focus at OSU is on international business. Finally, SU's students are full-time working MBAs, while students at OSU are full-time MBA students. The full-time working MBAs at Seattle University favor an intensive tour that maximizes their time.

In short, students are the beneficiaries of international study tours--whether these tours are student-directed or fully organized by the faculty.

***************************************************************** For copies of tables or figures mentioned in this article, contact the Managing Editor at hjacobs@gsu.edu. *****************************************************************

***************************************************************** KAREN A. BROWN is a professor of operations and director of Operations in the Albers School of Business and Economics at Seattle University. Her research interests focus on the interactions between social and technical factors in manufacturing and service operations, and her most recent publications have appeared in Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Operations Management, Operations Management Review, Academy of Management Journal, and International Journal of Production Economics. She is an active member of the Decision Sciences Institute.

KEONG LEONG is an associate professor of operations management at The Ohio State University. His current research interests include international manufacturing and operations strategy. His research articles have appeared in Decision Sciences, Journal of Operations Management, Interfaces, Journal of Management, European Journal of Operational Research, and International Journal of Production Research. He is the co-author (with Peter Stonebraker) of Operations Strategy: Focusing Competitive Excellence. He has served as chair of the Innovative Education Committee as well as track chair for strategic management at the Third International Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute in Puebla, Mexico. He is currently serving as associate editor of the Journal of Operations Management and associate director for Professional, Student, and International Programs of the Center for Excellence in Manufacturing Management, The Ohio State University. Dr. Leong is a Fellow of the Institution of Engineers, Malaysia.

Dr. G. Keong Leong
The Ohio State University
College of Business
Department of Management Sciences
1775 College Road
Columbus, OH 43210-1399
e-mail: leong.1@osu.edu