Field Games

Field-based learning involves the direct observation and analysis of real processes in an authentic context, with clearly defined rules and roles. Students learn through action, decision-making and reflection on what they observe, while experiencing the variability and ambiguity of real processes. The learning follows a simple sequence: first observe, then analyze, and only then design solutions. This helps students work with facts, learn from experience, develop self-regulation and practise reflective thinking — all essential foundations for lifelong learning.

Field-based learning can take different forms depending on the purpose of the class. It may focus on observation, helping students learn how to “see” the elements that make up a process. It may be analytical, with students mapping the process and identifying problems. It may also be project-based, where students use data to propose improvements and develop action roadmaps.

In a more advanced version, these stages can be combined, guiding students from observation to the conscious design of change. This is particularly useful where observing a real process helps students understand complexity that theoretical models alone cannot show.

The most common pitfall is moving too quickly to conclusions and solutions before stu-
dents have genuinely observed and understood the process. When this happens, field-based learning loses its value and becomes guesswork rather than analysis.

Course: Lean Management
Topic: Analysis and Improvement of a Customer Service Process
Students work collaboratively to analyse a real process, drawing on previously developed
theoretical knowledge.

Stage 1. Process Observation (60 min)
Students work in teams of 4–6 and visit a shop to observe the customer service process at
the checkout. Each team member takes on a clearly defined observation role:
• one student identifies waste,
• another measures the duration of individual process stages,
• another analyses the working methods of the customer, cashier and supporting staff,
• another observes the workflow and relationships between activities.
Students do not interfere with the process; their task is solely to observe and record facts.

Stage 2. Analysis of the Current State and Makigami Mapping (180 min)
After the observation, teams create a map of the current process state. At this stage, they:
• organise the collected data,
• visualise the process flow,
• identify waiting points, disruptions and waste,
• compare the different perspectives of the observers.

Stage 3. Problem Analysis and Prioritisation (90 min)
Teams identify the key problems within the process and prioritise them based on:
• their impact on customer service time,
• frequency of occurrence,
• the possibility of eliminating or reducing them.
At this stage, the variability of the process and the influence of organisational and unpre-
dictable factors become particularly visible.

Stage 4. Future-State Design and Action Roadmap (120 min)
Based on the process goals and identified problems, teams design a future-state map showing
how the process could function after the proposed changes are introduced. They then create
an improvement roadmap, defining:
• proposed improvements,
• the sequence of actions,
• expected outcomes.
Students learn that designing improvements without careful observation leads to superficial
solutions rather than genuine process improvement.

• When the aim is to understand how a process actually works in practice.
• When students have theoretical foundations that they can compare with real-world observation.
• When the goal is to develop careful observation, teamwork and reflective thinking.

• When there is not enough time for reflection and discussion, narrow the scope of the analysis.
• When access to a real process is not possible, use semi-field observation instead, such as recordings or data-supported simulations.
• When the group does not yet have the necessary theoretical foundations, strengthen the preparation stage or limit the scope of the analysis.

• Students describe what “should” happen rather than what they actually observe → clearly separate observation from interpretation and solution design.
• Uneven contribution within the team → assign clear observation roles.
• Difficulty dealing with ambiguous data → emphasise that the absence of unequivocal answers is part of the learning process.

Easier → Narrow the observation to a single aspect of the process, such as time or waste only.
More Challenging → Introduce conflicting process goals or resource constraints.

• Always begin with the question: what did we actually observe?
• Remind students that different roles create different perspectives on the same process.
• Avoid correcting observations too early — use them as a basis for reflection.
• Encourage students to record doubts and uncertainties.
• Clearly separate observation from solution design.
• If the team is larger than the number of observation methods, assign the same method to two students so they can compare their observations.

Formative Assessment
During the fieldwork activity, the teacher reviews observation sheets, team notes, process maps, or draft Makigami maps. Developmental feedback is provided by identifying which observations are based on facts, where interpretation has been introduced too quickly, and what additional data should be collected. Students use this feedback to refine their observations, distinguish facts from conclusions, and deepen their analysis of the process.

Summative Assessment
Assessment focuses on the final process analysis together with a set of improvement proposals. The assignment should include a description of the observed process, the data collected, a process map or Makigami map, identification of key problems, prioritised improvement actions, and justified recommendations. Assessment criteria may include the quality of the observations, the accuracy of the analysis, the use of real-world data, the logical connection between identified problems and proposed improvements, and the practical relevance of the recommendations.