Multi Player, Internet and Java-based Simulation Games: Learning and Research in Implementing a Computerized Version of the "beer-distribution Supply Chain Game"

We describe the development and implementation of a Java-based, multi player, multi-group, distributed simulation and game. The Supply Chain game described here is based on the famous "Beer Distribution Game" (Sterman, 1989). Group, synchronous, distributed Java-based applications are both feasible and useful for gaming and management simulation processes in both learning and research capacities. Early results from actual running of the "Supply Chain game" are in line with data reported by Sterman (1989, 1992a,b). The Supply Chain game can be used as a teaching and research tool, generally in organizational processes and especially for e-commerce applications. Traditional board games are location-bound, administration-laden, and less motivating or attractive because they require many manual calculations and transactions. Early LAN-based computerized implementations are still limited in a variety of ways. Our approach is Internet based and integrates several technologies: Both player and administrator interface with a Java applet. We used Java RMI (Remote Method Invocation) and JDBC (Java Data Base Connectivity) for the players synchronization and back-server SQL (Standard Query Language) database (Oracle) connection, respectively. Supplemental materials, including movies of the game, are available at http://hulia.haifa.ac.il (a web site supporting this paper). INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE Surfing the web constitutes a "pull" process. By using a browser and input devices (i.e., keyboard, mouse etc.) the surfer actively searches for the information. In contrast, "Push" is a different method to receive information: In a "push" environment, the user is passive while the provider plays a more central role. Active channels, Netcenter and portals are a few examples of push products. The push and pull dichotomy serves well in understanding simulations and games. Traditional teaching systems are "push". Students have little or no control in the process. Games, on the other hand, are "pull". Here, learners are pulled into the learning process and encouraged to participate. Learners actually determine the learning process when they use simulations and simulation-games. Simulation and simulation-games are experiential learning processes where knowledge is created by the transformation of experience (Saunders, 1997). Usually the process is cyclic. There are six basic underlying assumptions: 1) learning is defined by the process and not by the outputs; 2) learning is based on experience; 3) learning must include conflict; 4) learning is a process of adopting a discovered “world”; 5) feedback between the learner and the environment is required; 6) learning creates knowledge. Over half of the companies studied were found to use simulations in their organizational training. (Training, 1994) Following are attributes of simulations that need to be considered when constructing simulations to be used in training: • Realism: the more realistic the “game world” the more effective the simulation will be. (Redfern, Fairweather & Watson, 1996; Stumpf, Watson & Rustogi, 1994) • The player’s experience needs to be added to the game reality. (Redfern, Fairweather & Watson, 1996; Lehaney et al., 1998) Attributes related to the nature of the simulation: • Simulations enable time compression. We can simulate a period of months in a few minutes. (Filipczak, 1977; Butterfield & Pendegraft, 1996; Faria & Dickinson, 1994; Gilgeous & D’Cruz, 1996; NSC, 1996) • Feedback can be immediate. (Faria & Dickinson, 1994; Fripp, 1997) • Simulations are an inexpensive training tool. (Gilgeous & D’Cruz, 1996) • Simulations can be familiar since they are well spread. (Lehaney et al., 1998) • Realism motivates (Manzoni & Angehrn, 1998) • Realism adds new perspectives to uncertainty. (Gilgeous & D’Cruz, 1996) • Simplification enables focus on the main issues (Keys, Fulmer & Stumpf, 1996; Butterfield & Pendegraft, 1996) • Simulation permits inexpensive experimentation. (Faria & Dickinson, 1994; Gilgeous & D’Cruz, 1996; Fripp, 1997; NSC, 1996) Conclusions and lessons from simulation-games: • Participants make strong and stable connections between theory and reality (Redfern, Fairweather & Watson, 1996; Manzoni & Angehrn, 1998) • Simulations teach analytical methods (Faria & Dickinson, 1994) • Simulations provide unbiased results (Thavikulwat, 1995; NSC, 1996) • Players tend to continue to search for relevant information, even after the game is over. (Manzoni & Angehrn, 1998) • Lessons survive for longer time periods. (Manzoni & Angehrn, 1998) COMPUTERIZED AND INTERNET ENABLED GAMES Despite their utility, the main inhibiting reasons for not using simulations in the classroom are the logistics of games, the time consumed by simulations and the special difficulty in simulating social situations. Following is a discussion of how computerizing simulations and placing them on the Internet can provide added value. Well-developed computerized simulations can remove many of these inhibitors. Computerizing games add value by controlling unintended errors, reducing cheating errors, increasing result precision, easing the administration chores, cutting down on setup and explanation time, teaching more by reducing the cognitive load, allowing the player to focus on decision making, enabling easy manipulation of the game parameters, and creating a more amenable infrastructure for evaluation and development research. Internet computerized games allow even more advantages. Networked games place developers much closer to their costumers, enabling faster customization and parameter tweaking. Internet-based delivery allows international distribution of games, and international participation. Play itself is no longer limited to a single location. Internet-based delivery of simulations allows asynchronic games, and enables the meeting of players from a variety of linguistic and cultural backgrounds.