Influencing Pedagogy through Value-Based Business Models

1. Introduction

Over the last decades, there has been a disconnect between evidence-based practices and value-based practices because what constitutes values is not fully categorized [1], particularly in a quantitative form. In Latin America, the teaching of value-based content [2] — social responsibility, business ethics and environmental sustainability — has then gained ground in business schools. A similar situation has been observed in Finland as well, with a revamp of 2 degree programs in economics and marketing, namely Responsible Economics & Finance and Sustainable Marketing, as a start. While evidence-based practices are transferrable [3], so should be value-based practices.

Realizing the modern education crisis [4] and society negativity [5], no planned value education program established on formal learning to foster intercultural understanding, comprehension, social cohesion, and inclusion [6,7], as well as need for value oriented programs focusing on cost-effective pedagogy due to the conflicting thinking modes in the population [8,9], I sought ways to fill the absence of a value-based design of its strategic functions relevant and engaging to realize education excellence, or optimization in the business term, to harmonize between organizational interest and society interest with professionalism and standards [10] and to the mediating effect of self-efficacy and awareness of a value-based education en route to ethical decision making [10] vital for refining value-based education strategies and identifying best practices, ensuring its efficacy in learning processes [12] and reconstructing societies and countries [13,14] for civilization.

2. Materials and Methods

According to Hazel Messenger [15], the pedagogical pattern was founded on the teachers’ values and intentions towards meeting the needs of their students, consisting of four integrated elements: (i) the development of trust, (ii) developing roles, relationships and a sense of community, (iii) active confrontation and challenge and (iv) using pedagogical time and space. While supporting the use of deliberate attempts can alter the basic motivation level of teachers and learners to expose them to available knowledge to modify their values, attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors in their respective learnings, professions, organizations, and formal associations and to inculcate an intensive positive commitment, dedication, enthusiasm, and contribution [16], change management with a value-based learning environment starts from teachers to learners to elucidate joint effects of impactful content and quality relationships [17]. Therefore, I have begun by formulating and applying the following business models with a value-based approach for both national and international educators [18] that is quantifiable not only in business but education as well [19,20,21,22]: 1) value positioning: critical thinking, AI-oriented, typically adverbs mounting; 2) value delivery: actionable thinking, enquiry-oriented, typically verb mounting; 3) value capture: analytical thinking, sustainability-oriented, noun mounting; 4) value proposition: creative thinking, project-oriented, typically adjective mounting. This framework, typically used to develop new business ventures, provided a clear and structured framework for understanding complex ideas in any system, including education, business, justice, health, nursing, etc. systems that have been struggling with clarity [23,24,25,26]. Following this framework, it helps educators to foster how perceptual decision-making modes can be integrated into the standard mode of value-based decision making [27] to be receptive and to develop adaptation skills to social and professional activities [28,29] by providing cost-effective management of quality training [30] as well.

2.1. Content Analysis

To apply its feasibility, I conducted content analysis, a research method for analyzing written verbal or visual communication messages and a relevant strategy for conducting practice-oriented research [31], to identify patterns, themes, biases, and meanings. The standard research steps were followed accordingly: 1) define research questions or hypothesis; 2) select the content to be analyzed; 3) develop a coding scheme; 4) sample the content; 5) code the content; 6) analyze the data; 7) interpret the results; 8) report the findings.

2.1.1. Research Hypothsis

The primary research hypothesis of this content analysis is assuming the proportions of the value concept - value positioning, value delivery, value capture, and value proposition - is similar in business schools in Finland and in top 2 universities in the world.

2.1.2. Study Samples

I firstly chose the purposive (in business analytics only) and systematic (across the entire Finland) sampling methods that include all courses offered in the international master’s degree program of business analytics in University of Oulu: https://opas.peppi.oulu.fi/en/programme/40008?period=2024-2025 and Aalto University: https://www.aalto.fi/en/programmes/masters-programme-in-business-analytics/curriculum-2024-2026 (accessed on 20.6.2024) for a comparison. I then compared it with the top 2 universities, namely Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT): https://mitsloan.mit.edu/master-of-business-analytics/explore-program and Imperial College of London (ICL): https://www.imperial.ac.uk/business-school/masters/business-analytics/#programme-content (accessed on 20.7.2024) in the world as well.

2.1.3. Coding Scheme

I used ChatGPT as the text analytics tool to analyze and to categorize courses into 4 groups, namely value positioning, value delivery, value capture, and value proposition. The scope of each category is listed below.

- Value Positioning (mutually-understanding): Courses that focus on understanding markets, competitors, and consumer behavior. These courses help position the business effectively in the market.

- Value Delivery (well-being): Courses that involve the execution of strategies, implementation of processes, and management of operations. They focus on delivering the value promised to customers.

- Value Capture (bookkeeping): Courses that deal with financial aspects, cost management, and how the business captures value from its activities and ensures profitability.

- Value Proposition (branding): Courses that focus on the core offerings of the business, innovation, and development of new products or services.

I additionally gave an additional labelling for each group including “mutually”-understanding (adverb), well-“being” (verb), bookkeeping (noun), and branding (adjective), to represent the focuses of the courses that bring.

2.2. Statictsial Analysis

Since the aim is to categorize business analytics courses into 4 value-based groups, only descriptive statistics including frequency (number) and percentage (%) is used.

3. Results

3.1. Business Analytics Courses in Finland

According to the rationale of grouping courses described in the Methods section, Table 1 shows the results of course groupings in both University of Oulu and Aalto University parallelly. There are 28 courses offered in University of Oulu and 37 courses offered in Aalto University. At University of Oulu, there are 4 courses (14%) belonging to the value positioning group, 11 courses (39%) belonging to the value delivery group, 5 courses (18%) belonging to the value capture group, and 8 courses (29%) belonging to the value proposition group. At Aalto University, similarly, there are 5 courses (14%) belonging to the value positioning group, 16 courses (43%) belonging to the value delivery group, 7 courses (19%) belonging to the value capture group, and 9 courses (24%) belonging to the value proposition group.

As we can see, both universities offer similar values in courses in business analytics. Minor differences (highlighted in yellow in Table 1) are that Data Protection is taught in Aalto University belonging to the value capture group and Global Responsible Business and Internship are taught in University of Oulu belonging to the value proposition group.

3.2. Business Analytics Courses in MIT and ICL

According to the rationale of grouping courses described in the Methods section, Table 2 shows the results of course groupings in both MIT and ICL parallelly. There are 11 courses offered in MIT and 24 courses offered in ICL. It is apparently less than in Finland. At MIT, there are 2 courses (18%) belonging to the value positioning group, 5 courses (46%) belonging to the value delivery group, 3 courses (27%) belonging to the value capture group, and only 1 course (9%) belonging to the value proposition group. At ICL, however, there are 2 courses (8%) belonging to the value positioning group, 11 courses (46%) belonging to the value delivery group, 7 courses (29%) belonging to the value capture group, and 4 courses (17%) belonging to the value proposition group.

As we can see, both universities offer similar values but in different proportions in courses in business analytics. Minor differences (highlighted in yellow in Table 2) are that From Analytics to Action is taught in MIT belonging to the value proposition group and Text Analysis for Business and AI Ventures are taught in ICL belonging to the value delivery group and proposition group, respectively.

4. Discussion

4.1. Main Findings

Overall, in Finland there are fewer courses in University of Oulu (n=28) than in University of Aalto (n=37). The proportions of the value-based groupings are very similar between University of Oulu and University of Aalto, with the largest groups in value delivery (35-45%) and value proposition (20-30%) and the smaller groups in value capture (15-20%) and value positioning (<15%). The majority of courses at both universities fall under the ‘Value Delivery’ category, emphasizing the importance of actionable thinking in business analytics education.

Overall, in world top 2 universities, there are fewer courses offered than in Finland (MIT=11 and ICL=24). It is similar to the Finnish universities with the highest proportion of value delivery (46%), but higher than in Finland. However, the second largest group is value capture, rounding up to 30%, which is the simialr propotion in value proposition in Finland (see Tabel 3). While the smallest proportion is value proposition group in MIT (9%), the smallest propotion is value positioning group in ICL (8%). Nevertheless, the majority of courses at both world top 2 universities fall under the ‘Value Delivery’ category, primarily emphasizing the importance of actionable thinking in business analytics education.

4.2. Value-Based Learning Outcomes

While course titles are categorized into value-based groupings, namely value positioning, value delivery, value capture, and value proposition, it helps identify the core focus of the course that determines the main topics and skills to be taught. Lecturers and teachers could define course learning outcomes solely for single value-based group, disproportionately, or equally for each value-based group that are measurable and achievable within the course to represent the result of learning [32,33]. When value-based pedagogy becomes integrated into the formal curriculum rather than being viewed as something extra or separate to teach [7], it can achieve optimal decision-making in performance evaluation that is cost-effective for long-term rather than short-term [34].

Learning outcomes are indicators of success of skills and competence academically and practically for learners, teachers, evaluators, and accreditors. By reimagining our curriculum through this lens, I help educators and learners see the practical applications of their teaching and learning and bridge the education gap by solving practical implementation challenges that educators and policymakers are facing [35,36]. The Values need to be highlighted, i.e., articulated when the problem-solving goal is formulated as the desired outcome. In this way, a problem solver is asked consciously to take responsibility for the values-based choice of the goal/desired result as bridge makers [37,38], and collaboration is not falling into a set of language games emerging between the consultants, the project manager and the project participants [39]. This approach not only improves engagement but also fosters a deeper understanding of the subject matter than previously thought [40].

4.3. Strengths and Limitations

This is the first study quantifying the percentages of the value-based groupings of the business analytics courses in higher education. The primary strength of conducting this study is to steer the direction of course improvement and optimization with the value-based groupings. By identifying the category that the courses are in, it firstly clarifies where and how the course design focuses on. It is to lead and support where and how lecturers and teachers navigate the lesson development for improvement and optimization, namely from which value-based focus to which value-based focus. The secondary strength of this study is to connect students and learners with value development and therefore skill competence for their learning ownership. There are also some limitations. The primary limitation of this study is that there are only 2 universities in Finland that offer business analytics courses at the master’s degree level for comparison. Therefore, the results here might not be generalizable to other countries for homogeneity internally. The secondary limitation is the short existence of business analytics courses, given the fact that business analytics is a young discipline. Therefore, it is not yet possible to include follow-up analysis with the updates on course improvement and optimization.

4.4. Future Research Directions and Policy Implications

Although the homogeneity of business analytics education in Finland meets the welfare state culture in Finland internally, it might not serve the education purpose in cultivating various talents for different societies across the globe with choice ownerships because of the high percentage of self-proclamation in value proposition. ICL in the UK is also behind MIT in USA with a slightly higher percentage in self-proclamation in value proposition. Consequently, the implication is that the business analytics education offered in Finland and the UK might be less practical than in USA. This secures low to middle level jobs for graduates but is unable to hold decision-making power in value positioning globally. In the near future, the challenge is to integrate across these values, promoting a holistic learning experience that can better prepare students for real-world complexities. As market demands evolve, regularly updating the curriculum to reflect new industry standards, technologies, and methodologies is crucial. In addition, implementing robust feedback mechanisms from students and industry partners to continually refine and optimize the curriculum will ensures the education provided remains relevant and effective while aligning clear metrics to assess the success of the value-based learning outcomes by tracking graduates' career progression, student satisfaction, and practical skills and decision-making application in professional settings.

5. Conclusions

This study represents a pioneering effort to quantify the integration of value-based business models into higher education pedagogy, particularly within the field of business analytics. By categorizing courses into four value-based groups—Value Positioning, Value Delivery, Value Capture, and Value Proposition—we provide a clear framework for course design and development. This approach provides a structured and quantifiable aid to educators in aligning course content with specific educational objectives and market demands, ultimately enhancing student engagement and learning outcomes. Educational leadership could explore the implementation of these models in diverse educational settings and comprehend their own status or position in the global market over time.