Lessons learned by educator and students through experiential entrepreneurship

Background to the module

Working part-time in my first year as a lecturer, I delivered a year 3 undergraduate module entitled ‘Managing Your Business’. However, I found its content far removed from my experience of what it takes to start and run a business. How could something as dynamic and practical as starting a business be presented as dry and theoretical? This was learning about entrepreneurship without any real understanding of why or how. Students appeared unengaged throughout the module, which equipped them with few entrepreneurial capabilities. Very disappointing. But if this E&E module were not fit for purpose, how should it be changed?

Inspiration came from a small pop-up activity towards the end of the module. It was isolated from the other content and was not assessed, but it was the only part of the module in which I observed enthusiastic students talking and acting in a business-like manner. I knew from my own experience that essential business activities like decision making, problem solving, teamwork, buying, selling and making a profit or loss can all be experienced in a very real way, even by the smallest of entrepreneurial activities. I therefore decided to place the pop-up concept at the heart of the module redesign.

As a novice educator I sought guidance from my line manager and was given support for the idea and freedom to experiment with delivery, as long as the existing learning outcomes for the module were met. I now realise that this freedom to innovate was in some part due to the fact that the module was elective, so it was not ‘owned’ by any course and no one saw what I was doing; thus my experiment proceeded without any academic oversight.

The elective 20-credit module was delivered in the 2017/18 academic year over two semesters at a UK university. Thirty-four students took the module, of whom 28 were UK nationals living within a 30-mile radius of the university and six were visiting Chinese nationals. Approximately one in three was female. Because this was an elective module, the students had made a conscious decision to study issues relating to business start-up.

Module delivery

When I received my teaching contract I had just a few days to prepare, so the simplest option would have been to carry over the old content from the previous year. In fact, if strict adherence to the university’s quality systems were the goal, then all delivery and assessment decisions would have been made and published many weeks before I received my contract. Instead, I sketched out a new structure and often created new content on the day of each weekly session. In hindsight, this lack of planning helped because I could adjust the topics covered and the approach taken depending on how the new format was progressing. For example, it became clear that most teams were unsure about how to approach pricing their products or events, so I created a session on pricing to provide some structure for their decision making.

I introduced the module concept in the first week, informing students that they were required to work in groups, which drew some inevitable rumbles of discontent. These were third-year students who did not want their degree grade disrupted by less motivated or less able team members. The mood soon changed, however, as I introduced the pop-up concept. Working in groups of six they were to run two pop-up shops or events, one in each semester. To add realism, I secured £300 from the business school to invest a £50 ‘seed fund’ into each of the six teams. The money could be spent on anything that contributed to the pop-up but had to be paid back on completion of the module. At that point there was a tangible buzz in the room, a real feeling of excitement. The idea of the business school not just teaching students, but investing in them, seemed to instantly grab attention and created substantial buy-in to the task. From that point on, it was striking how few interpersonal issues arose with any groups compared to other group activities on other modules I teach.

Students formed teams based on who they happened to be sitting with on the first day. It was an elective module for many courses, so each team consisted of some friends and some strangers. In the first session the newly formed teams had an hour to start thinking about what their pop-up shop or event could be. Little restriction was placed on the activities that could be chosen, as long as they were legal, ethical and practical. I did not want to be too prescriptive, as I knew the decision-making process would provide a valuable learning opportunity. The fall-back position was a standard cake sale, but I encouraged students to be more creative, especially in the opening session when time was on their side.

As the first session progressed, I could see that students seemed genuinely excited, which was a great relief to me. Although I thought this was a good idea, I had been nervous when starting the session, unsure about how it would be received, especially given my lack of teaching experience and training. But my excitement about delivering a ‘proper’ practical entrepreneurship experience seemed to be matched by students’ appetite for it. In fact, there was a frenzy of pop-up ideas being thrown around, creating a cacophony in the room that was only just big enough to house its occupants. With some reluctance, and no little difficulty, it was time to bring the first session to a close by encouraging students to keep their ideas flowing outside the classroom, so that the better concepts could be discussed in more detail the subsequent week.

In the weeks that followed, my role was closer to that of a small business coach than a lecturer; a role I was happy to take on. I rotated between groups discussing and assessing different ideas, pointing out various strengths and weaknesses, along with what issues they should consider before deciding which idea to go ahead with. Students were encouraged to think of potential problems associated with some ideas, or the opportunities that other ideas presented, such as coinciding with key dates like the build-up to Christmas or Valentine’s Day.

There was often an understandable naivety in thinking through the practical implications of potential pop-up options, with students frequently underestimating the complexity of early ideas. I attempted to strike a balance between steering them away from poor decisions, while also allowing them to discover issues themselves, and so learning from them. For example, some teams became set on ideas that had clear challenges, which were pointed out to them – but ultimately the decision was theirs.

In fact, difficulty in decision making was a common problem. Many students were so concerned about making wrong decisions that they took far too long to make simple choices, which then had a knock-on effect on their schedule. I did not want to solve problems for them, so I encouraged a pragmatic approach focused on taking action and learning quickly from any mistakes. Many students commented positively on this aspect of decision making. One said:

I feel I have significantly developed my ability to make important decisions through gaining experience across both pop-ups by making mistakes and learning from them.

The pop-up activities ranged from raffles, quizzes, Nerf gun shooting and online FIFA tournaments, to selling Chinese pancakes – and, yes, one cake sale. The idea I had most concerns about initially was the FIFA tournament, due to my lack of knowledge of this kind of gaming activity and the tournament business model, which used a percentage of entry fees as prize money. I questioned the team carefully about the activities and logistics, including how entry fees would be collected and prize money given out, and was impressed with their detailed answers and obvious enthusiasm, so I was happy for the team to proceed. This turned out to be a very successful pop-up and the only one that used technology to make a physical venue unnecessary.

All profits made by the pop-ups were to be paid to a charity chosen by the team. The primary reason for this was to avoid any possible issues with non-UK student visa restrictions on running a business. It also reduced the risk of funds being misused, as proof of payment to a charity was required in the final assessment. The charity selection process was designed to be viewed from a business perspective. Factors like a charity’s brand awareness among students and the availability of point-of-sale materials were to be considered to mimic aspects of choosing a franchise. However, in practice, group discussions often revealed very personal reasons behind the charities closest to different students, which had a significant bonding effect on some teams. This had not been anticipated but appeared to be more beneficial than choosing a charity based simply on marketing or branding criteria. Later, I noticed that very personal charity connections, by providing an altruistic purpose to the commercial activity, seemed to embolden students to sell their products or events to customers (mostly students) with greater confidence.

The £50 seed funds were given out in week 3. Handing over the cash to each team felt like a very significant moment, both for me and for the teams. Every team member signed a ‘team contract’ which reinforced the requirement to pay back the investment. I was pleased to see how this formality added further authenticity to the task, as did the responsibility the students had to use the funds effectively. Deciding how best to spend hard-earned investment funds to return a profit is at the very core of the entrepreneurial experience and undoubtedly stuck a chord. This realism was appreciated and commented on by many students, as exemplified by the following:

Becoming an entrepreneur and owning my own business has always been my dream. This experience was like a trial to me, it gave me feel of what it would be like operating my own business. It put me in the right mindset of a real entrepreneur.

The university business incubator provided a bookkeeping workshop so that each team could maintain accurate records of expenditure and sales, enabling calculation of profit or loss. Here I started to see another unplanned positive. Bookkeeping and accounts are a necessary but often disliked activity; however, out of each team emerged a happy, even proud student willing to take responsibility. Gradually I became aware of other tasks being aligned very effectively with personal preference and capability. Some students took on customer facing roles making bookings or selling products, while others beavered away behind the scenes researching or making the products. Thus, less academically gifted students were finding roles every bit as valuable to their team as students with strong scholarly skills, so another form of inclusivity had unexpectedly been achieved.

As the weeks progressed, and with some encouragement, each team became more organised. Ideas became more focused, decisions were made and actions taken. Most students managed this transition well and began talking and acting in a more business-like manner.

Each pop-up event or shop took place outside the classroom, and this is where I believe the greatest E&E education took place. I was not able to visit every pop-up, but the activities, and the learning from them, were well documented in the two written assessments. I began reading about typical business problems, such as suppliers letting teams down, hard work, mistakes, frustration and last-minute efforts into the night. But I also read of enjoyment, teamwork, pride and satisfaction.

One student wrote about the quiz night pop-up her team had run. This feedback encapsulates the essence of what I had hoped the redesign would achieve – the experience of hard work and personal fulfilment related to starting a new business:

Being involved in the formation and operation of a business idea devised by myself was truly rewarding. The amount of time and hard work it took to develop and execute this plan was very much worthwhile when I saw students coming together on a night out, enjoying themselves, having fun, whilst also creating money for a good cause was beyond great satisfaction.

The teams that had worked very effectively on the first pop-up struggled to repeat the levels of energy and performance they had previously. In contrast, the teams that had encountered significant problems or performed poorly on the first pop-up seemed more determined to make amends second time around. There appeared to be greater motivation to fix problems or rectify mistakes than to achieve higher performance and larger profits.

The two written assessments, required by the module descriptor, were not necessarily best suited to evaluating entrepreneurship. As a result, students with the strongest academic writing skills out-performed others with stronger entrepreneurial skills. For example, the team that made and sold traditional Chinese pancakes found, close to the date of the pop-up, that they were not allowed to prepare food in the university space they had booked. This potentially disastrous situation was turned around by building a simple online ordering app, allowing them to deliver pancakes they made off-site. This highly effective innovation led to more sales and bigger profits than those of any other team, so this team was the clear winner according to the traditional measure of entrepreneurial success. Naturally, I applauded their entrepreneurial actions and anticipated an excellent write-up for the assessment. Disappointingly, their inability to write effectively about their wonderful experience resulted in distinctly average marks.

Furthermore, a well written, critical and insightful reflection of a poorly run, loss-making pop-up gained high marks for the student. As an entrepreneur, I found this deeply frustrating. However, to balance the debate, one student provided some wonderful insight when reflecting on the educational value of being able to experiment and make mistakes, enabling them to better explore their entrepreneurial capabilities:

It is better to learn where we go wrong in business this way than in the real work environment in the future. It is best to learn now while we have the resources and support to improve and be willing to take risks.

Outcomes

From a task point of view, each group successfully paid back the £50 investment, which was then set aside to fund the next year’s delivery. This process has been repeated in following years, so the original £300 has now funded 4 years of delivery, indicating the module design can be self-financing following the initial investment. Additionally, just over £900 profit was generated by the student teams and donated to their chosen charities.

Academic attainment improved with average grades rising from 54 prior to the changes to 62 afterwards. This advanced the average student from 2:2 to 2:1, with the improved attainment level maintained in following years.

But the greatest success in this classroom was the overwhelmingly positive impact on the students, which they expressed through reflective statements. The volume, quality and insight of the feedback were quite surprising and clearly demonstrate the value gained by students from this approach. A small sample of unedited excerpts are included throughout this AoP.

It was interesting just how effective learning through entrepreneurship was, and how something as simple as a pop-up shop could embed learning so effectively:

I have read about creating a business before, but until experienced for myself, it did not quite resonate. I now know what would be expected and have a frame of reference to look back on if I choose to create another business.

Delivery insights

The significantly improved academic results and remarkable student feedback indicate that this exercise, in which students learned through entrepreneurship, provided considerable educational and developmental value. As an E&E educator I found delivering this module exhilarating, especially once I had seen the student feedback, which confirmed the positive reactions I had already observed. What could be more rewarding for an educator than students performing well, while valuing and enjoying what they are learning and the way they are learning it?

I would like to think that any E&E educator with a keen interest in entrepreneurship could deliver this module successfully. In fact, a colleague with considerable enterprise experience but little teaching experience taught the most recent deliveries of this module with similar success, despite the onset of Covid-19. So it appears that the design of the pop-up tasks with the seed fund provides a strong and repeatable delivery platform.

Frustratingly, further developments have been limited by the kind of work restrictions many academic readers will be familiar with. Unfortunately, several factors contribute to the possibility that the changes described in this AoP may be abandoned in the future. The university’s quality processes stipulate that significant changes to a module starting in September must be approved 9 months earlier in January. This is sensible for course administration, but it conflicts with experimentation. No matter how promising changes may appear in their first delivery, it would be premature to commit to them 100% when the test is just 50% complete, as was the case with this two-semester module. As a result, changes to learning outcomes to facilitate greater alignment of assessment with entrepreneurial outcomes could not be completed for the second delivery.

I also encountered a reluctance to commit in writing to the £50 team investment, which was a vital part of the module experience and probably the most successful innovation. The cost was considered administratively and financially problematic, as the module is delivered across three campuses, one of which is an international campus outside the UK. However, the original £300 acquired in 2017 remains in circulation and the investment of £50 per team spread over 4 years now equates to just £12.50 per team and just a few pence per student.

Unfortunately, workload pressures on other courses necessitated my move away from the module after two deliveries, despite my desire to continue its development. The new module delivery lives on at one campus, but it is not formally documented so its future is not secure. I have informally passed on the lessons I learned to another lecturer, but I fear for the module’s future unless the new features can be more formally adopted through the periodic course review process.

Regardless of the future of the redesigned module, however, my experience with the module has greatly enhanced my development as an E&E educator. Drawing inspiration from the outstanding student feedback I wrote a small, informal case study for the business school to share the enthusiasm students had for this style of learning and its positive impact on attainment. The case study progressed to several conference presentations, a successful Higher Education Academy fellowship application and now a journal article. To paraphrase an entrepreneurship mantra, it has been a good academic return on investment.

On reflection, it is interesting that an entrepreneur with limited teaching experience, no teacher training and little academic support was able to diagnose the problem with an E&E module and to implement a successful solution. Academics excel in theory, which in many ways is their raison d’être, but this can create a predilection for teaching about entrepreneurship, the problem I set out to solve for this module. My natural inclination as an entrepreneur was to prepare students for entrepreneurship by focusing on behaviours, attitudes and competences acquired by learning through entrepreneurship. I hope this example will allow others to draw inspiration from a simple yet effective structure for E&E education.

I believe the QAA guidance perfectly summarises the aim of E&E education and what E&E education should help students to achieve: ‘in short, having an idea and making it happen’ (QAA, 2018: 9).