1. Modular Education: an examination of Operations Management teaching in the UK
Des Doran
Brunel University
Abstract for Service Modularity Conference, Helsinki School of Economics, 20-21st January
2011
This paper explores the application of modular practices and principles within an
educational context. In particular the paper explores the provision of Operations
Management modules delivered at Universities located in the United Kingdom and assesses
the degree to which such modules demonstrate the characteristics of modularity
established within the manufacturing sector in terms of modular architecture, interface
capabilities and modular design protocol.
Whilst there is an abundance of literature examining the development and application of
modular principles and practices within a manufacturing context there is little evidence of
such application with the education sector where modularity and modular instruction has
been developing for over thirty years (Goldschmid & Goldschmid, 1973).
The expansion of modular education at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels has
gained impetus in the European Union (EU) as a result of the Bologna process which has
sought to bring uniformity to education provided within EU member countries in order to
accommodate ease of movement and transfer module credits from and between
institutions. Furthermore, Universities within the UK have used the modular approach to
design modular degree programmes and to standardise the way in which modules are
designed, assessed and delivered.
Research relating to Operations Management teaching (OM) within Europe has tended to
focus upon aligning OM teaching to the needs of industry (Hill, 1986, 1987; Nicholson,
1997), teaching Operations Management on Executive programmes (Goffin, 1998), the role
of simulations and technology (Smith, 1989; Richardson, 2000; van der Zee & Slomp, 2009),
POM teaching in Europe (Machuca & Luque, 2003), the importance of supply chain
management (2000) and the growing importance of service industries in OM teaching
(Armistead et al, 1986; Johnston, 1999). In terms of syllabus content, Voss (1984) and Hill
(1987) identified manufacturing policy, measurement of performance, international OM,
the application and use of technology, stock control, quality management, quantitative
approaches and service operations management were regarded as key topic areas in the
early eighties and manifest in both teaching and research activities. Clearly, much of this
content is still relevant in today’s operations environment and is likely to influence syllabus
content and delivery.
Email questionnaires were distributed to all Universities in the United Kingdom delivering
Operations Management modules on undergraduate or postgraduate degree programmes.
The findings indicate that the delivery of Operations Management modules demonstrates a
degree of uniformity aligned to the level of educational instruction and furthermore that

2. such modules exhibit modular characteristics in terms of learning outcomes, credit values,
topics studies, assessment strategies and indicative reading.
63 surveys were completed and returned during the period July to September 2010. Of this
total, 19 per cent of respondents taught OM at undergraduate level only and 30 per cent
taught at postgraduate level only; the remaining 51 per cent of respondents indicated that
they taught on both undergraduate and postgraduate OM modules. To avoid questionnaire
complexity, respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire by referring to
undergraduate or postgraduate only. 42 per cent of respondents chose to address the
delivery of undergraduate modules and the remaining 58 per cent of respondents elected to
focus on the delivery of OM on postgraduate modules delivered on MBA and MSc
programmes.
The findings indicate that close to 90% of respondents were involved in the design of
modules and that they had changed key elements of the module. The most popular changes
to modules included changes to module content (84%), assessment diet (71%), indicative
reading (68%), learning outcomes (46%) and module aims (41%). Such changes were
stimulated primarily by a need to reflect changes occurring in the field of Operations
Management (76%) and feedback from students (61%). The median value for credit value
associated with the module was 15 credits (43%) whilst the median value for the number of
module aims was between 1 and 3 (57%). The number of learning outcomes associated with
the module was generally between 4 and 5 (59%). In terms of module content there was
some degree of alignment between postgraduate and undergraduate programmes (Table I)
although there were a number of deviations (Fig I)

3. Table I – Module content
Content area Postgraduate Undergraduate All Ranking
(All)
The role of Operations 97% (1) 88% (3) 93% 1
Management
Operations Strategy 91% (3) 84% (5) 88% 3
Process design 81% (6) 96% (1) 88% 3
Job design and work 47% (9) 56% (8) 51% 7
organisation
Capacity management 88% (4) 80% (6) 84% 4
and control
Inventory 84% (5) 68% (7) 77% 5
management
Lean operations and 94 % (2) 92% (2) 93% 1
JIT
Supply Chain 94 % (2) 88% (4) 91% 2
Management
Project planning and 53% (8) 48% (9) 51% 7
management
Business process 60 % (7) 84% (5) 70% 6
improvement
techniques and tools
Global Operations 44% (10) 24% (10) 35% 8
Management
Ranking of content areas shown in parentheses

4. Figure I – Use of Content areas