A Study of Cognitive Results in Marketing and Finance Students

Abstract

Background. It is undeniable that human capital is a highly valued resource in today’s increasingly competitive and interconnected world. Management education involving decision-making is a fundamental issue in today’s education systems. Particularly, the marketing audit improves the decision-making process based on the assessment of the marketing performance and the analysis of the market results. Although marketing audits are not widely used among organizations yet, marketing control mechanisms have become more important in organizational performance studies and must be integrated into marketing and finance education programs.

Method. This quasi-experimental study followed a pretest/posttest design to measure differences in the scores 281 marketing and finance students in Colombia taking part in a game of marketing audit.

Results and conclusion. All students significantly improved their higher grades after taking part in the game. Marketing and finance students also improved their responses. For the students in the final semester and for the male and mixed groups, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the game can improve their cognitive results. Decisions between marketing and finance professionals must be reinforced, to allow academic organizations involved in developing markets and characterized by low levels of competitiveness improve their education levels.

Keywords

marketing game management education marketing audit market results marketing performance marketing control

Introduction

In an increasingly dynamic, uncertain, complex, and interconnected world, the ability to make effective decisions is a highly treasured value. As such, education is a precious resource that is increasingly valued by companies, particularly in these highly competitive times, which is why decision-making skills are in high demand and form an essential part of today’s education systems. Managers, for instance, must show how marketing investments affect their company’s financial results and boost shareholder value (Rust et al., 2004). Decision-making based on detailed and quantitative information improves the effectiveness of organizations and makes it easier for management to justify the allocation of scarce and valuable resources (Petersen et al., 2009). As a result of increasing pressure from the capital market and growing doubts about the effectiveness of decision-making processes, professionals must acquire skills that align their decisions to current professional practice (Stewart, 2009) and improve their organizational competitiveness. From an academic point of view, there is a need to integrate shared subjects in educational programs in business administration, to improve their quality and increase the levels of competitiveness of both professionals and organizations.

According to the Colombian Institute for the Evaluation of Education (2018), in 2017, the average qualification for a quantitative reasoning test applied among last-semester business administration students, measured on a 0 to 300-point scale, was 140.6 (SD = 13, Maximum = 174); for the specific organizational management test, the score was 140.3 (SD = 16.6, Maximum = 194), while for the financial management competence, it was 141.3 (SD = 16, Maximum = 234).

These results indicate that there are limitations to the educational processes involving the business administration students. The global competitiveness index (World Economic Forum, 2018), meanwhile, indicates that the perception of quality in Colombian business schools has an average rating of 4.3 on a 1 to 7 scale, with countries like South Africa (4.5) and India (4.6) showing similar results. At the same time, students in developed countries like Switzerland (6.4), the United States (5.9) and Singapore (6.0) tend to perform better, which indicates that the quality of the training received by business administration students affects their competitiveness and management skills.

On the other hand, the global competitiveness index presents some interesting results regarding the marketing-related decision-making skills of professionals (World Economic Forum, 2018), one of which involves consumer orientation. In the case of Colombia, this indicator has an average of 4.9, which is close to countries like South Africa (5.4) and India (4.7), but less than Switzerland (6.1), the United States (5.8) and Singapore (5.7). Another relevant indicator is the level of product differentiation, where Colombia has an average of 4.4, again close to India (4.5) and South Africa (4.9), while countries like the United States (6.0), Switzerland (5.8) and Singapore (5.2) again show a higher average performance. The result in consumer orientation, as well as in product differentiation in the case of Colombia should not be underestimated. On the contrary, they are indicators of the market orientation that companies have and, therefore, of the increasingly strategic role that marketing departments play in organizations.

According to the results presented above, it would appear to be necessary to strengthen the academic programs of future business executives in developing countries, to improve their levels of competitiveness. To that end, schools must implement teaching methods that promote effective decision-making and bring students closer to business reality.

Various didactic tools that can be used to teach people new skills (Wiese & Sherman, 2011). There are traditional tools, like face-to-face lessons, paper and pencil learning or case studies, but there are also innovative tools like computer-driven (digital) games and haptic games, the latter being the type used in this study. These have been given a new impetus thanks to new technologies and used to realize a variety of different curricular objectives. Earlier studies indicate that students feel more motivated by and committed to games, which they perceive as being an effective learning tool (Girard et al., 2013; Hainey et al., 2011; Vos & Brennan, 2010). As a result, students can retain information longer, which in turn improves their learning process. Game-based learning tends to motivate students to learn, provides them with new opportunities to explore and acquire valuable knowledge (Qian & Clark, 2016; Wellington et al., 2017) and confronts them with the kind of complex situations that they will encounter in organizations later in life.

From a cross-functional perspective, the relation between finance and marketing within companies has become crucial for the decision-making process in marketing departments (Verhoef & Pennings, 2012). As a result, financial professionals establish marketing management assessment criteria to determine the allocation of resources, which cannot be based on financial results alone, but also has to take planned long-term actions into account, as well as consider the importance of investing in collecting environmental information to calculate indicators that measure the objectives of marketing processes, which means that financial departments also have include a marketing audit in their planning exercise, which constitutes an optimal criterion for the allocation of resources.

Literature Review

One of the basic components of the management process in businesses is control, which is more important when it comes to marketing planning, which involves a negotiation with the financial department about the optimal allocation of resources and a demonstration of the value of marketing decisions (Moorman & Day, 2016). Marketing control can be formal or informal. Formal controls are established by organizations themselves, while informal controls emerge when people interact in the execution of their tasks. According to Malek et al. (2018), formal marketing controls can be divided into input, process, and output controls. Input controls are the measures taken prior to the implementation of activities, for example criteria selection, training programs, workforce allocation, strategic plans and other forms of resource allocation. In the case of process controls, organizations try to influence the means used to achieve results, while focusing more on behavior and activities rather than on the results as such. Finally, output - or result controls are exerted when performance standards are established, and results evaluated. These results are market-based because they are associated with customer and brand management. Financial results related to sales and net profit, among other things, are also analyzed (Katsikeas et al., 2016). When the expected goals are not realized, the marketing audit process can be used as a control mechanism for the results.

The marketing audit emerged as an area of study in the 1950s, when various companies began evaluating the performance of their marketing activities. Since then, the concept has included four fundamental characteristics: the “Comprehensive” audit (1), which analyzes the environment and the business model; the “Independent” audit (2), which is implemented by someone outside the marketing process; the “Systematic” audit (3), which follows a logical order of implementation; and the “Periodical” audit (4), which is carried out with some regularity (Kotler & Keller, 2016, p. 635).

In marketing, it is common to measure results using indicators derived from financial reports, including sales, gross margins, and profitability (Sampaio et al., 2011). However, as shown in Table 1, there is a wide variety of authors who have studied the relationships between the marketing mix metrics, customers and brand, and financial results and organizational value.

Table 1.

Market and Financial Indicators.

Marketing Programs	Author (s)
Perceived quality of products
Number of products launched
% of products launched considered to be innovations	Barwise and Farley (2004)
Satisfaction with distribution channels	Farley et al. (2008)
Channel loyalty	Sampaio et al. (2011)
Relative pricing	Hacioglu and Gök (2013)
Investment in advertising
Purchasing attitude generated by advertising
Clients	Author (s)
Customer’s lifetime value
Customer disposition to recommend products
Customer satisfaction
Referred customer value	Petersen et al. (2009)
Word of mouth	Domínguez and Muñoz (2010)
Customer acquisition value	Kumar and Umashankar (2012)
Customer retention value	Katsikeas et al. (2016)
Lost customer rate
Customer’s purchases compared to other products in the same category
Brand	Author(s)
Brand value
Brand perception	Keller and Lehmann (2006)
Quality perception	Srinivasan et al. (2012)
Attitude towards brand	Edeling and Fischer (2016)
Brand awareness
Market share
Financial – Income	Author(s)
Sales revenue
Sales revenue growth
Financial – Profit
Profitability
Variation in profitability	Katsikeas et al. (2016)
Profit margin
Return on investment – ROI -
Return on assets – ROA -
Return on sales – ROS -
Return on equity – ROE -
Return on capital – ROC -

In recent years, academic literature has shown the interest organizations have in marketing audit activities. Lipnická and Dado (2013) demonstrate that the marketing audit is most effective when there is enough information available and the auditor has extensive experience. In addition, it is very important for the auditor not to be too close the marketing process being evaluated, to avoid bias. On the other hand, Wu et al. (2015) point out those organizations with a proactive marketing strategy are more willing to implement marketing audits and that contributes significantly to their overall marketing performance. To improve marketing performance, the marketing audit consists of different dimensions, including the company’s marketing knowledge, its commercial and market strategy, its brand image, as well as how it acquires its clients and identifies their needs (Bolisani & Scarso, 2014).

All this means that financial departments need to establish marketing management assessment criteria for the allocation of resources. The criteria are not based exclusively on financial results, but also take on board the planned long-term actions and the importance of investing in the collection of environmental data to identify indicators to measure marketing objectives. It is in that context respect that marketing audit provides relevant information and allows the financial and marketing departments to align their decision-making process.

Hypothesis

Business games have become popular in recent years because they bring students face to face with the complex relationships of marketing systems (Caruana et al., 2016). As such, games have been proposed to increase social marketing learning (Russell-Bennett et al., 2016) and to improve people’s understanding of the life cycle of products (Bascoul et al., 2013) and the product portfolio decision-making process (Wellington et al., 2017), and highlight the importance of the financial tools students need to master, for instance in the case examined by Brennan and Vos (2013), where students had to perform different numerical and financial calculations to motivate them to show the return on marketing investment. These studies show that there is an interest in bringing students closer to the decision-making process by using financial data. Consequently, games can involve students having to make decisions about a shared problem, for instance in the case of decisions based on a marketing audit, which includes the interaction of professionals in marketing and finance, because they make it possible to show the return on investment and improve the criteria for an optimal budget allocation.

People who take part in games are faced with a real-life or unrealistic situation, and have to apply their knowledge and skills to make decisions (Vos, 2015; Vos & Brennan, 2010), in the way it also happens in the workplace (Qian & Clark, 2016). Game features include rules, structures, voluntary play, unexpected results, conflict, and solution (Xu et al., 2017), which encourage people to take part actively and stimulate learning. However, some studies indicate that there may be a lack of consensus regarding the positive effect games have on learning.

Generally speaking, it has been proven that games are an effective teaching method, with students indicating that, through games; they can learn faster and develop a variety of skills (Russell-Bennett et al., 2016; Vos, 2015). Games allow constructive and experimental learning, and improve people’s cognitive results (Girard et al., 2013). Because cognitive engagement is combined with emotional and motivational engagement, games have a positive impact on learning (Annetta et al., 2009; Papastergiou, 2009). In addition, games activate students’ cognitive processes, because they challenge them to solve situations and questions (Loon & Bell, 2018). Likewise, when students receive feedback, their knowledge increases, because they can compare their initial response to the feedback they receive (Van der Kleij et al., 2015). Although emotional and motivational commitment are factors that influence learning, cognitive commitment reflects the scope of curricular objectives more closely, which is why we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): There are significant differences in cognitive outcomes before and after taking part in a marketing audit game.

The extent to which significant learning takes place is also analyzed based on certain conditions involving the participants. Other studies have indicated that a student’s perception of the effectiveness of a learning method can vary based on certain demographic variables (Brennan & Ahmad, 2005), for instance gender, which has proven to be associated with different learning preferences during games in certain dimensions for which the games are designed (Garber et al., 2018). Wehrwein et al. (2007) show that women prefer unimodal learning and men multimodal learning, which affects the selection of teaching tools and, therefore, the results. In addition, a study among university students showed that individual differences between students (such as their level) are relevant when it comes to learning a foreign language (Chen, 2009). It has been shown that demographic variables affect the level of game-based learning (Tarhini et al., 2016).

It is also to be expected that marketing students, although they are familiar with control systems, will learn better from taking part in an audit game, because marketing control mechanisms have not been widely linked to decision-making processes (Liang & Frösén, 2020). Finance students, on the other hand, are more familiar with formal control mechanisms because of the use of financial indicators, while the need to ensure an optimal allocation of resources and to promote corporate sustainability gives them a deeper understanding of the dynamics of the marketing process (Verhoef & Leeflang, 2009).

In this context, there is evidence to suggest that demographic variables like gender, advanced professional programs and which semester student has reached are responsible for differences in the results of game evaluations (Landers, 2014) which leads us to propose the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 2a (H2a): There are significant differences in cognitive outcomes between marketing students and finance students before and after taking part in the marketing audit game.

Hypothesis 2b (H2b): There are significant differences in cognitive outcomes between men and women before and after taking part in the marketing audit game.

Hypothesis 2c (H2c): There are significant differences in cognitive results between students who are in the seventh, eighth and ninth semesters before and after they take part in the marketing audit game.

Hypothesis 2d (H2d): There are significant differences in cognitive results between groups of players made up of women, men, and mixed groups before and after taking part in the marketing audit game.

Methodology

This quasi-experimental study followed a pretest/posttest design to measure differences in the scores of students in a business school. Given the need to improve the skills involving quantitative reasoning, organization management and financial management of future marketing and finance professionals, a marketing audit game was designed as a short-term exercise, with the aim of bringing students closer to the decision-making processes they may one day encounter in a real-life context characterized by pressure, teamwork and the need for time efficiency. Before implementing the game, it was tested among undergraduate and graduate students.

To validate the game’s learning level assessment questionnaire, eight undergraduate and graduate instructors were contacted: three Marketing Plan teachers, two Marketing Audit teachers, two Marketing Strategy teachers and a Statistics teacher. The experts used a 1 to 3 scale evaluation for each question, based on the relevance and wording, to determine whether the questions adequately represented the game’s objectives. The evaluation made by the teachers indicated 1 = eliminate the response, 2 = modify the response and 3 = maintain the response. No adjustments were suggested for question 5, while in question 1, one of the response options was modified; in question 2, the question heading was changed and one of the experts proposed adding another question to evaluate the marketing audit components. In question 3, the wording of one of the response options was corrected. In question 4, the word “indicators” was replaced by “marketing indicators” in the heading of the question, while one of the possible answers, which also happened in the case of with question 6. A number of changes were made to question 7. It should be noted that the modified response options in the questions did not match the correct option, so new response options were drafted, which made the questions more difficult. Only one of the 6 teachers accepted all the questions without any comments.

A pilot test was conducted to test how well the questionnaire worked. For this, four teams of students were formed; two teams with two men each and two teams with three women each. Before starting the game, the participants filled in the survey (the players were also asked to indicate their age, gender, undergraduate studies and whether or not they had previous marketing knowledge); 2 of the 7 questions received the correct answers before and after playing the game, despite the fact that two players had no prior marketing knowledge. Consequently, it was concluded that these questions presented a deductive-response design that did not imply the marketing audit’s concept apprehension, and these questions were therefore considered highly obvious. For one question, the scores were worse after people played the game, due to due to a mistake in the way the question was worded, which led to misinterpretation. The other three questions showed different results before and after the game, so they remained part of the questionnaire. The adjustments to the questions were made to ensure that, the participants’ evaluation of the game was attributed exclusively to the marketing audit concepts and not to the general aspects of topics studied in other courses (like organizational control or strategic planning) and from which the audit is derived.

Additionally, because of the number of questions, the participants spent a great deal of time filling in the questionnaire, and the game connotation became lost as a result, which was why some of the questions were eliminated. The two questions that had been considered ‘very obvious’ were ultimately left out; three questions were left in because they assessed the characteristics of the audit (comprehensive, systematic and independent), in addition to two questions assessing the relationship between the objectives and the indicators (see Online Appendix B). All the questions are multiple-choice questions, with four options and only one correct answer. All the answers were provided anonymously.

The game consists of six phases, each of which has an established time frame, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Phases of the game.

In the first phase, the students were asked to fill in a questionnaire within 5 minutes, consisting of 5 questions about key marketing audit concepts. Each question is scored 1 if the answer is correct and 0 if it is incorrect, which produces a discrete rating scale with a maximum value of 5 points. In the second phase, participants are divided into a maximum of 4 teams. Some of the teams are made up of women, some of men and some are mixed according to the composition of the class. The participants were then asked to read a general presentation about a company that was the subject of a marketing audit (5 minutes), explaining the company’s mission and vision, as well as its corporate history, along with its product portfolio and the challenges it faces, after which they had to analyze the results of the marketing audit. To do that, they must assemble a puzzle of 9 valid pieces from 18 available pieces in the third phase of the game (12 minutes); each piece contains results of the marketing audit. The puzzle (see Online Appendix A) must be assembled systematically based on an understanding of the organization’s context, in accordance with the nine dimensions of the marketing audit being evaluated: mission, vision, opportunities, threats, strengths, weaknesses, market segments, competitors and marketing investment. When the time is up, teams must turn the puzzle over and see the image that appears on the back. If the audit results are assembled correctly, there will be an image; a fuzzy image will appear if correct results and incorrect results have been mixed, while a third image will appear if the results are incorrect. Based on the image that appears, each team will be given a score.

In the fourth phase, three card sets have to be assembled from four available sets (10 minutes). Each card set consists of three cards, one for market objectives, another one for non-financial indicators and a third one for achieved goals (see Figure 2). The three cards should be combined in a consistent manner, taking into account the company’s presentation, the results of the marketing audit and quantitative reasoning. Each card has a code that is recorded on an answer sheet, which makes it possible to assign a score based on the combination being selected.

Figure 2.

Set of Cards.

In the final phase of the game, the results of the puzzle and the combinations of the cards are included in an Excel sheet, which automatically provides the results for each team (10 minutes), after which the results are explained to the participants, along with the aspects requiring further study. Finally, the participants once again fill in the questionnaire that has been issued at the start of the game (5 minutes). To avoid response bias, the questions were presented in different order and using different words without changing their meaning and scope, to avoid response bias.

The Sample

The game was introduced at a business school in Medellin, Colombia and was approved by the Institutional Review Board. The school was asked to provide a list of marketing and finance students registered in any of the three most recent semesters of their programs, to ensure they had already completed the subjects related to the game’s object. An e-mail was sent to the teachers of the students involved, asking them for some time with their students to apply the test. In addition, the teachers agreed to give the students additional points for taking part in the test (to motivate and compensate them), which meant that both teachers and students were motivated to take part. The teachers who agreed to our request were informed about the date and time the researcher and assistants would attend their class to implement the game. In total, 16 groups with 281 students were contacted, while four records of students who did not complete the post-game evaluation questionnaire were deleted. The sample distribution is presented in Table 2, which also shows that 40 players (23 women and 17 men) did not register their age, distributed among the semesters in a similar way to the remaining sample (11, 21 and 8 respectively). These findings suggest that non-response was caused by a reluctance by certain people to reveal their age.

Table 2.

Sample Characterization.

Gender	n	% of population	Age	n
Women	208	53,2	19–25	135
Men	69	41,8	26–30	63
Programs			31–35	31
Marketing	149	45,4	36 +	8
Finance	128	56,1	NR	40
Semester			Group
7	70	36,3	Women	32
8	127	65,1	Men	6
9	80	44	Mixed	17

Results

To analyze the data and test the hypotheses, we used the IBM SPSS 23 statistical software. The results of the evaluations before and after the game were subjected to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test (Hair et al., 2014, p. 65). It was determined that the distribution of the results was not normal (P = 0 <0.05). Since the distributions were negatively symmetric, the data was transformed using the square root (Hair et al., 2014, p. 69), and logarithm. However, normality tests indicated that the distributions of the transformed variables were also not normal, which is why the Wilcoxon test was used to determine any significant differences between the samples.

Table 3 shows that, for both the marketing and the finance students, there were significant differences in the cognitive results of the game. Likewise, as far as women and seventh and eighth semester students were concerned, there was evidence of significant differences before and after the game. Regarding the genders of the different groups, the female groups also showed significant differences in the results. The difference of the medians was always 1 for each group.

Table 3.

Wilcoxon Test Results.

	Wilcoxon test
	P-value	Ranges +	Ranges -	Tied	Decision
General	0,00*	128	59	90	H1, accepted
Marketing	0,02*	60	37	52	H2a, accepted
Finance	0,00*	68	22	38
Women	0,00*	104	39	65	H2b, partially accepted
Men	0,35	24	20	25
Sem_7	0,00*	45	10	15	H2c, partially accepted
Sem_8	0,02*	53	31	43
Sem_9	0,13	30	18	32
G_Women	0,00*	89	29	49	H2d, partially accepted
G_Men	0,23	9	7	12
G_Mixed	0,45	30	23	29

p-value<0.05

All the participants showed higher scores after the game and the difference was significant, which confirms hypothesis 1. After analyzing the results in the selected programs, it can be concluded that both marketing and finance students improved their responses, which also confirms hypothesis 2a. As far as gender was concerned, both men and women achieved better results after the game, although the difference was only significant for women (average = 3.44; p <0.05), which partially confirms hypothesis 2b.

When looking at the different semesters, the difference in the grades is statistically significant only for the seventh (average = 3.6; p <0.05) and eighth (average = 3.35; p <0.05) semesters, which partially confirms hypothesis 2c. Finally, looking at the different compositions of the teams, we see that teams that consisted only of women obtained significantly higher grades, which partially confirms hypothesis 2d.

As shown in Figure 3, the score was always higher after the game for all the demographic variables under analysis, while the highest scores were obtained by seventh-semester students and groups composed only of men.

Figure 3.

Comparison of results before and after the game.

Discussion

The findings of this research both reiterate and contradict the results of previous studies (Caruana et al., 2016; Geithner & Menzel, 2016; Vos & Brennan, 2010). For example, it has been proven that marketing-related games do improve the cognitive results linked to teaching objectives and help with the development of attitudes and skills (Caruana et al., 2016; Vos & Brennan, 2010). Games that reflect actual business cases more closely are likely to provide an effective learning tool (Geithner & Menzel, 2016).

As far as gender is concerned, this research contradicts earlier studies that argue that gender is not a determining variable in games that are used as learning tools (Acevedo & Rocha, 2011; Wang et al., 2008). The differences in this case may be linked to inherent characteristics of developing countries, where economic conditions increasingly motivate women to study economic-administrative programs, with the aim of creating companies and achieving a balance between work and family, and thus avoiding the restrictions and problems they face in the traditional workplace (Demartino & Barbato, 2003).

Other studies have shown that the type of game (similar to the one used in this study), like cards, puzzles and even educational games, are more readily accepted by women, provided the games have a moderate level of duration (Bonanno & Kommers, 2005; Lucas & Sherry, 2004). Men, on the other hand, tend to prefer computer-mediated games and feel motivated to spend more time. As a result, it is not only the thematic content of the game that is a determining factor in selecting the players, but also the medium involved, which means it is important to understand that other variables associated with the different types of games also determine the results of the games, which could motivate their further exploration (Garber et al., 2018).

With regard to the academic level of the participants, the findings show that students who are more advanced actually obtain more moderate results in the post-game evaluation, possibly because students who are less advanced may be more open to learning about things they have not yet encountered. This could also explain why finance students performed better after the game compared to marketing students, or they could simply more used to solving problems based on quantitative data (which was a required skill in the fourth phase of the exercise).

In the fifth phase of the exercise, the participants identified the main sources of their mistakes and inaccuracies. Regarding the pre- and post-game evaluation, the recognition of the marketing audit as an independent and systematic process stands out. The two marketing-related questions showed the best results in post-game evaluation. On the other hand, from a conceptual perspective, the participants had a better understanding of the role of marketing indicators in terms of measuring the extent to which objectives are realized. Based on the puzzle they had to assemble, the participants admitted they needed to interpret the findings of the marketing audit in a neutral way and understand the context in which the company operates if they were to implement the correct decision-making process. On the other hand, in assembling the cards, the participants gave fewer correct answers. As a consequence, and from a practical perspective, the players reiterated the need to design both the marketing objectives and the indicators in a more rigorous and coherent way in order to generate more solid criteria to support the effects marketing decisions have on a company’s results.

There are opportunities for educational institutions when it comes to using the concept of a marketing audit as a decision-making tool for marketing and finance students and integrated it into a game. From an academic point of view, it is necessary for the marketing and finance students (as well as, in fact, students in other various disciplines) to be involved in this type of exercise, where situations they are likely to encounter in actual organizations are simulated. In this way, the professionals of the future can understand the importance of aligning various decision-making processes. In this sense, our study uses the ability of marketing students to identify market opportunities and the ability of finance students to perform quantitative analyses. It is also important for the contents of the marketing programs to integrate subjects that encourage students to analyze quantitative data that allow a more robust approach to marketing and increase the level of rigorous academic analysis. Likewise, the contents of finance programs must include marketing control themes that provide enough criteria for the financial evaluation of the marketing management and an optimal allocation of marketing resources.

In accordance with the results of the tests among advanced marketing and finance students (Colombian Institute for the Evaluation of Education, 2018), the scores in the cognitive test of the game were relatively low (maximum average 3.6), indicating a need to reinforce the practice of quantitative reasoning, as well as organizational and financial management, in teaching students marketing-related decision-making skills.

It should be noted that the game applied in this study improves the performance of marketing and finance professionals in organizations (Hallinger & Snidvongs, 2008). Firstly, the game encourages teamwork, because all the members of a given team play a certain role in assembling the puzzle and the cards. Some of them focus on classifying information, others on assembling the puzzle and cards, while they all focus on evaluating the systematics of the marketing audit information and the connections between the objectives, indicators, and results. While participants are assembling the puzzle and cards, the game administrator supervises and observes the behavior of players. In addition, the game teaches people to work under pressure, because of the rigorously enforced time restrictions. Furthermore, the game requires the participants to follow instructions in order to achieve the desired results within a given time frame. Finally, the game promotes competition, because the best team in each group will get a better extra grade in the subject related to the game.

Conclusions

In this study, we found that marketing and finance students improved their cognitive skills by taking part in a marketing audit game. In addition, it can be concluded that, to improve the understanding and competitiveness of marketing and finance professionals, the respective decision-making processes must be more closely aligned, so that academic organizations in developing markets that are characterized by low levels of competitiveness improve their teaching programs. This alignment is a consequence of placing greater value on marketing management, integrating qualitative and quantitative information related to financial and organizational objectives. In addition, it is also recommended that professionals recognize the market analysis and non-financial indicators and goals as key elements of organizational planning and learn to allocate their budgets accordingly.

Limitations and Suggestions for Further Future Research

This study has some limitations, one of which is related to the level of the students taking part, some of whom were close to graduation, which in turn means that there is a chance they may already be familiar with the subject matter being used in the game. Another limitation is that, compared to other marketing games, the scope of this game is limited to the characteristics of the marketing audit, to the coherent relationship between the objectives, to non-financial indicators and to the intended objectives, making it a less complex learning tool. However, that very simplicity is also an advantage, in light of the fact that other studies have indicated that including too much information can cause anxiety and frustration, at the expense of the learning process (Vos & Brennan, 2010).

For future research, it is recommended that audit games (and marketing result control games in general) be used to encourage marketing and finance students to interact, perform calculations and make decisions together. At the same time, applying this type of educational tool in actual organizations can also be used to measure people’s knowledge, not only based on evaluation formats, but also on variations in the results regarding the management indicators. Furthermore, because the game used in this study involved a short-term exercise, we suggest also using a more complex and realistic game to increase the level of difficulty and analysis in integrating more joint marketing and finance decisions.

Supplemental Material

Appendix_SAG_925854 – Supplemental material for A Study of Cognitive Results in Marketing and Finance Students

Supplemental material, Appendix_SAG_925854 for A Study of Cognitive Results in Marketing and Finance Students by Paola Andrea Ortiz-Rendón, Luz Alexandra Montoya-Restrepo and Jose-Luis Munuera-Alemán in Simulation & Gaming

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Paola Andrea Ortiz-Rendón

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biographies

Paola Andrea Ortiz-Rendón is PhD student at Universidad Nacional de Colombia and marketing profesor at Institución Universitaria Esumer in Medellín, Colombia. Her research concerns marketing control and marketing strategy, linking quantitative results into marketing performance.

Contact: portiz@esumer.edu.co

Luz Alexandra Montoya-Restrepo is an associate profesor at Facultad de Minas, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Medellín. Her research interests include consumer behavior, organizational development and neuromarketing.

Contact: lamontoyar@unal.edu.co

Jose-Luis Munuera-Alemán is a full marketing profesor at Facultad de Economia y Empresa, Universidad de Murcia in Spain. His research covers marketing strategy, new product development, research and development.

Contact: munuera@um.es

References

Acevedo

Rocha

(2011). Estilos de aprendizaje, género y rendimiento académico [Learning styles, gender and academic performance]. Journal of Learning Styles, 4(8), 71–84.

Annetta

L. A.

Minogue

Holmes

S. Y.

Cheng

M. T.

(2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, 53(1), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.020

Barwise

Farley

J. U.

(2004). Marketing metrics: Status of six metrics in five countries. European Management Journal, 22(3), 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2004.04.012

Bascoul

Schmitt

Rasolofoarison

Chamberlain

Lee

(2013). Using an experiential business game to stimulate sustainable thinking in marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 35(2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475313491497

Bolisani

Scarso

(2014). Marketing audit for knowledge intensive business Services. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(1), 3–13.

Bonanno

Kommers

P. A. M.

(2005). Gender differences and styles in the use of digital games. Educational Psychology, 25(1), 13–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341042000294877

Brennan

Ahmad

(2005). Using case studies in managment education: the student perspective. The International Journal of Management Education, 4(3), 21–30. http://doi.org/10.3794/ijme.43.124

Brennan

Vos

(2013). Effects of participation in a simulation game on marketing students’ numeracy and financial skills. Journal of Marketing Education, 35(3), 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475313482928

Caruana

La Rocca

Snehota

(2016). Learner Satisfaction in marketing simulation games: Antecedents and influencers. Journal of Marketing Education, 38(2), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475316652442

10.

Chen

M.-L.

(2009). Influence of grade level on perceptual learning style preferences and language learning strategies of Taiwanese English as a foreign language learners. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 304–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2009.02.004

11.

Colombian Institute for the Evaluation of Education. (2018). Resultados agregados Saber Pro [Aggregated results for Saber Pro] 2017. http://www.icfes.gov.co/instituciones-educativas-y-secretarias/saber-pro/resultados-agregados/resultados-agregados-2017

12.

Demartino

Barbato

(2003). Differences between women and men MBA entrepreneurs: Exploring family flexibility and wealth creation as career motivators. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 815–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00003-X

13.

Domínguez

Muñoz

(2010). Marketing Metrics (2nd ed.). ESIC Editorial.

14.

Edeling

Fischer

(2016). Marketing’s impact on firm value: Generalizations from a meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(4), 515–534. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0046

15.

Garber

L. L.

Hyatt

E. M.

Boya

. (2018). Constituting, testing and validating the gender learner profiles of serious game participants. International Journal of Management Education, 16(2), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2018.02.005

16.

Geithner

Menzel

(2016). Effectiveness of learning through experience and reflection in a project management simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 47(2), 228–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878115624312

17.

Girard

Ecalle

Magnan

(2013). Serious games as new educational tools: How effective are they? A meta-analysis of recent studies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00489.x

18.

Hacioglu

Gök

(2013). Marketing performance measurement: Marketing metrics in Turkish firms. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 14(Suppl. 1), S413–S432. http://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2012.729156

19.

Hainey

Connolly

T. M.

Stansfield

Boyle

E. A.

(2011). Evaluation of a game to teach requirements collection and analysis in software engineering at tertiary education level. Computers & Education, 56(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2010.09.008

20.

Hair

Anderson

Tatham

Black

(2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.

21.

Hallinger

Snidvongs

(2008). Educating leaders: Is there anything to learn from business management? Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 36(1), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143207084058

22.

Katsikeas

C. S.

Morgan

N. A.

Leonidou

L. C.

Hult

G. T. M.

(2016). Assessing performance outcomes in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 80(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0287

23.

Keller

K. L.

Lehmann

D. R.

(2006). Brands and branding: Research findings and future priorities. Marketing Science, 25(6), 740–759. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1050.0153

24.

Kotler

Keller

(2016). Dirección de marketing [Marketing Management] (15th ed.). Pearson Educación.

25.

Landers

R. N.

(2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(6), 752–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114563660

26.

Liang

Frösén

(2020). Examining the link between marketing controls and firm performance: The mediating effect of market-focused learning capability. Journal of Business Research, 109, 545–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.021

27.

Lipnická

Dado

(2013). Marketing audit and factors influencing its use in practice of companies (from an expert point of view). Journal of Competitiveness, 5(4), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2013.04.02

28.

Loon

Bell

(2018). The moderating effects of emotions on cognitive skills. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42(5), 694–707. http://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1311992

29.

Lucas

Sherry

J. L.

(2004). Sex differences in video game play: A communication-based explanation. Communication Research, 31(5), 499–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204267930

30.

Kumar

Umashankar

(2012). Enhancing financial performance: the power of customer metrics. In Ganesan

(Ed.), Handbook of marketing and finance (3rd ed., p. 336). Edward Edgar Publishing Limited.

31.

Malek

S. L.

Sarin

Jaworski

B. J.

(2018). Sales management control systems: Review, synthesis, and directions for future exploration. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 38(1), 30–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2017.1407660

32.

Moorman

Day

G. S.

(2016). Organizing for marketing excellence. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 6–35. http://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0423

33.

Papastergiou

(2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.004

34.

Petersen

J. A.

McAlister

Reibstein

D. J.

Winer

R. S.

Kumar

Atkinson

(2009). Choosing the right metrics to maximize profitability and shareholder value. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.004

35.

Qian

Clark

K. R.

(2016). Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023

36.

Russell-Bennett

Leo

Rundle-Thiele

Drennan

(2016). A hierarchy-of-effects approach to designing a social marketing game. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 28(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2014.988081

37.

Rust

R. T.

Ambler

Carpenter

G. S.

Kumar

Srivastava

R. K.

(2004). Measuring marketing productivity: Current knowledge and future directions. Journal of Marketing, 68, 76–89. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.4.76.42721

38.

Sampaio

Simões

Perin

Almeida

(2011). Marketing metrics: Insights from Brazilian managers. Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.005

39.

Srinivasan

Hsu

Fournier

(2012). Branding and firm value. In Ganesan

(Ed.), Handbook of marketing and finance (3rd ed., p. 203). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

40.

Stewart

(2009). Marketing accountability: Linking marketing actions to financial results. Journal of Business Research, 62, 636–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.02.005

41.

Tarhini

Elyas

Akour

M. A.

Al-Salti

(2016). Technology, demographic characteristics and e-learning acceptance: A conceptual model based on extended technology acceptance model. Higher Education Studies, 6(3), 72. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v6n3p72

42.

Van der Kleij

F. M.

Feskens

R. C. W.

Eggen

T. J. H. M

. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314564881

43.

Verhoef

Leeflang

(2009). Understanding the marketing department’s influence within the firm. Journal of Marketing, 73, 14–37. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.2.14

44.

Verhoef

Pennings

(2012). The marketing-finance interface: An organizational perspective. In Ganesan

(Ed.), Handbook of marketing and finance (pp. 225–243). Edward Edgar Publishing.

45.

Vos

(2015). Simulation games in business and marketing education: How educators assess student learning from simulations. The International Journal of Management Education, 13(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.01.001

46.

Vos

Brennan

(2010). Marketing simulation games: Student and lecturer perspectives. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 8(7), 882–897. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634501011086472

47.

Wang

(2008). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00809.x

48.

Wehrwein

E. A.

Lujan

H. L.

DiCarlo

S. E.

(2007). Gender differences in learning style preferences among undergraduate physiology students. Advances in Physiology Education, 31(2), 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00060.2006

49.

Wellington

W. J.

Hutchinson

D. B.

Faria

A. J.

(2017). Measuring the impact of a marketing simulation game. Simulation & Gaming, 48(1), 56–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878116675103

50.

Wiese

N. M.

Sherman

D. J.

(2011). Integrating marketing and environmental studies through an interdisciplinary, experiential, service-learning approach. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475310389154

51.

World Economic Forum. (2018). The global competitiveness report.

52.

W.-K.

Chen

H.-C.

Huang

Y.-X.

(2015). Antecedents and consequences of marketing audits: Empirical evidence from Taiwanese firms. Asia Pacific Management Review, 20(3), 156–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2014.09.001

53.

Buhalis

Weber

(2017). Serious games and the gamification of tourism. Tourism Management, 60, 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.11.020

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.23 MB