Knowledge Sharing in Business Education

The paper aims to investigate the evolution of the theme of knowledge sharing in business education in academic literature. Based on an extensive search, it can be stated that this is the first systematic review of this topic. The method employed in this study was a systematic review that covered publications from 1997, when the first paper relating the theme was published in the selected databases, to 2020. The analysis was based on 306 articles. Four periods were identified: embryonic, emergent, growth young and growth highest. One of the findings is that knowledge sharing in business education is growing in virtual environments, especially in the last year, where the COVID 19 pandemic restricted the option of face-to-face education in classrooms. It is recommended that business schools decrease the percentage of time they spend in lectures and increase the time and strategies in which students share knowledge, discuss problems and make decisions based on collective reflection.


Introduction
Knowledge sharing is a process of knowledge management fundamental in the context of business education [1]. Knowledge management impacts business education through the mediation of the academic curriculum and the influence of the business environment [2]. Knowledge sharing is essential in the development of skills used in organizational environments-for example, teamwork [3], leadership [4], culture management [5], human resources practices [6], and sustainable innovation [7,8]. Knowledge sharing is also essential in the development of competences for business education. Some of the most relevant skills in business education that can be developed through knowledge sharing are problem-solving, creative thinking, teamwork, decision making, communication, negotiation, critical thinking, leadership, and creativity.
Knowledge sharing is defined as the process where individuals mutually exchange their tacit and explicit knowledge and jointly create new knowledge [9]. It is also the ability to transfer framed experiences, information, and expert insights into practices [10]. Knowledge sharing is the interaction between human actors where the raw material is knowledge [11]. This behavior is the act of making self-knowledge available to others. Knowledge sharing is critical for the creation and application of knowledge and solving complex problems. Sometimes, knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer are used as interchangeable terms [12]. However, Chou and Tang [13] found that knowledge transfer emerged earlier and has a more general scope that covers multidisciplinary subjects, while knowledge sharing is more focused on the knowledge management context.
A blocker of knowledge sharing is knowledge hoarding, which is defined as an individual's deliberate and strategic concealment of knowledge [14]. This occurs when a worker purposely keeps critical knowledge to him. According to Bilginoglu [15], the knowledge hoarder fears that the more he shares, the more he gives power away. Hoarding knowledge is a common inclination of employees in organizations where competition is There are related works such as bibliometric studies on knowledge management [40][41][42][43], bibliometric works on knowledge sharing [44], a review of knowledge sharing in education [45], and a review of knowledge sharing in higher education [46]. The next part of this article has the following structure: the method of the study, the results associated with the purpose of the research, the conclusions, and some practical implications from the results.

Methods
The method employed in this study was a systematic review, covering knowledge sharing in business education publications from 1997, when the first paper relating the topic was published in the selected databases, to 2020 (inclusive). The methodology proposed by Tranfield, Denyer, and Smart was followed [47]. The research protocol addressed the following question: how has literature on knowledge sharing in business schools evolved from 1997 to 2020?
The study used two databases to obtain the literature associated with the research question: the Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus. The search string for the Web of Science was: (("business education" OR "business school" OR "master business administration" or mba OR "business facult*") AND ("knowledge sharing" OR "knowledge exchange" OR "knowledge management" OR "knowledge transfer")).
The search string for Scopus was: TITLE-ABS-KEY (("business education" OR "business school" OR "master business administration" OR mba) AND ("knowledge sharing" OR "knowledge exchange" OR "knowledge management" OR "knowledge transfer")).
To identify the evolution of the topic knowledge sharing in business schools, the lifecycle theory was applied [48], which claims that areas of knowledge develop according to an S-curve operationalized in four stages: emergent, growing, maturation, and saturation. Because the issue of knowledge sharing in business schools is not yet in maturation, this article defined the following stages: embryonic, emergent, growth young and growth highest. To identify the development of the relationship in time, the performance measures used were the number of articles and, to generate the S-curve, the accumulated number of articles.
A complementary analysis of lifecycle was implemented using the methodology developed by Mogee [49], which uses two performance indicators to define the stages of the evolution of a topic: the number of publications and the number of authors per year.
To identify seminal articles or those that can be considered foundational in the generation of the literature on knowledge sharing in business schools, two bibliometric indicators based on social network analysis were used: degree centrality, which indicates the number of times that a document was referenced by other documents in the analyzed network, and node-betweenness centrality, which indicates the capacity of nodes to connect different clusters and research areas [50].
In each stage, the most important articles were recognized using the methodology followed by Betancur, Villa-Espinal, Osorio-Gomez, Cuellar and Suarez [51]. In this methodology, to normalize and avoid discrimination by the age of the articles, the total forward citations were identified each year and compared with those of the articles analyzed for the total number of citations in the year of publication. Additionally, at each stage, trends were analyzed using unsupervised clustering methodologies, a machine learning approach that permits the identification of the main topics of each period [52][53][54]. Additionally, bibliometric techniques oriented to the recognition of publication frequency and based on pattern analysis were used.
Finally, an analysis of key terms was developed in which the core ones were identified by their H index. Emergent topics were those that had recently appeared for the first time in titles, abstracts, and keywords. Declining topics were also recognized-those that had not featured as much in the literature as in previous years. Growing topics were those that have augmented in publications in recent years. Some techniques used in this research were KNIME for data mining, data cleaning and data filtering [52], Gephi for social network analysis [53], and Vosviewer for generating topic analysis for each stage [55].

Results
Below are presented several analyses, such as the number of publications in the field from 1997 to 2020, the main authors and articles, the lifecycles stages, and the keyword map.

Publications on Knowledge Sharing and Business Education
The first report is about the number of articles published on knowledge sharing in business education. The range of publication goes from 1997 to 2020 and is presented in Figure 1. Based on the traditional lifecycle methodology, articles per year were taken as a measure of growth. The figure shows the evolution in the development of the topic knowledge sharing in business education. In this sense, it was found that between 1997 and 2002, this field went through an initial phase of low scientific production and from 2003 to 2020, it has been in a growth phase characterized by a relevant production of knowledge, except in the years 2004, 2009 and 2015. time in titles, abstracts, and keywords. Declining topics were also recognized-those that had not featured as much in the literature as in previous years. Growing topics were those that have augmented in publications in recent years. Some techniques used in this research were KNIME for data mining, data cleaning and data filtering [52], Gephi for social network analysis [53], and Vosviewer for generating topic analysis for each stage [55].

Results
Below are presented several analyses, such as the number of publications in the field from 1997 to 2020, the main authors and articles, the lifecycles stages, and the keyword map.

Publications on Knowledge Sharing and Business Education
The first report is about the number of articles published on knowledge sharing in business education. The range of publication goes from 1997 to 2020 and is presented in Figure 1. Based on the traditional lifecycle methodology, articles per year were taken as a measure of growth. The figure shows the evolution in the development of the topic knowledge sharing in business education. In this sense, it was found that between 1997 and 2002, this field went through an initial phase of low scientific production and from 2003 to 2020, it has been in a growth phase characterized by a relevant production of knowledge, except in the years 2004, 2009 and 2015.

Main Articles and Authors
To recognize the articles that can be considered as building blocks and seminal in the field, and thus can identify the roots of knowledge sharing in business education, a network of backward citations was developed with the papers obtained by the search equation ( Figure 2). The figure shows that certain articles are the theoretical bases of the field (A, D and C). Other relevant bridging papers are W, Y, R, X and $.
From the total number of articles in this review, the most relevant ones were filtered by citations (Table 1). Some articles have a high number of citations and simultaneously fulfill the role of a bridge, such as A, B, C, and D.

Main Articles and Authors
To recognize the articles that can be considered as building blocks and seminal in the field, and thus can identify the roots of knowledge sharing in business education, a network of backward citations was developed with the papers obtained by the search equation (Figure 2). The figure shows that certain articles are the theoretical bases of the field (A, D and C). Other relevant bridging papers are W, Y, R, X and $.  [HIGHLYCITED] [F] [62] [HIGHLYCITED] [G] [63] [HIGHLYCITED] [H] [64] [HIGHLYCITED] [I] [65] [HIGHLYCITED] [J] [66] [HIGHLYCITED] [K] [67] [HIGHLYCITED] [L] [68] [HIGHLYCITED] [M] [69] [HIGHLYCITED] [N] [70] [HIGHLYCITED] [O] [71] [BRIDGE] [P] [72] [BRIDGE] [Q] [73] [BRIDGE] [R] [74] [BRIDGE] [S] [75] [BRIDGE] [T] [76] [BRIDGE] [U] [77] [BRIDGE] [V] [78] [BRIDGE] [W] [79] [BRIDGE] [X] [80] [BRIDGE] [Y] [81] [BRIDGE] [Z] [82] [BRIDGE] [*] From the total number of articles in this review, the most relevant ones were filtered by citations (Table 1). Some articles have a high number of citations and simultaneously fulfill the role of a bridge, such as A, B, C, and D.  Table 2 presents the stages, years, mean of the number of records, and mean of the number of authors of research on knowledge sharing in business education. It was found that the study of the topic is currently in the highest stage of growth. The first stage, the embryonic, presented the beginning of the study of knowledge sharing in business education. This stage occurred between 1997 and 2001 (color blue in  Table 2 presents the stages, years, mean of the number of records, and mean of the number of authors of research on knowledge sharing in business education. It was found that the study of the topic is currently in the highest stage of growth. The first stage, the embryonic, presented the beginning of the study of knowledge sharing in business education. This stage occurred between 1997 and 2001 (color blue in   Figure 4 presents the most important authors in the four proposed stages using two bibliometric indicators-the number of publications (X-axis) and the accumulated citations (Y-axis). In the embryonic stage, the two authors with the highest number of accumulated citations were Birkinshaw [83] with the work entitled "why is knowledge management so difficult?" and the one of Cheng [84]. In the emerging stage, the most cited authors were Wilson [85] with a critical article on knowledge management and  Figure 4 presents the most important authors in the four proposed stages using two bibliometric indicators-the number of publications (X-axis) and the accumulated citations (Y-axis). In the embryonic stage, the two authors with the highest number of accumulated citations were Birkinshaw [83] with the work entitled "why is knowledge management so difficult?" and the one of Cheng [84]. In the emerging stage, the most cited authors were Wilson [85] with a critical article on knowledge management and Gray [86]. In the growth young stage, the most cited authors and works were Kanawattanachai [71], which is about the impact of knowledge coordination on virtual teams, and Bason [87], on public sector innovation. In this stage, Chen [73,86] stood out for the number of studies, especially the article about college students' use of e-learning systems. In the highest stage of growth, the most cited authors were Hidalgo and Albors [88] about innovation techniques, and the author with the highest number of articles was Doctor [89][90][91], with works on users of knowledge repositories in a management institute, the dynamics of knowledge sharing in a management institute, and capturing intellectual capital in a business school institution. Gray [86]. In the growth young stage, the most cited authors and works were Kanawattanachai [71], which is about the impact of knowledge coordination on virtual teams, and Bason [87], on public sector innovation. In this stage, Chen [73,86] stood out for the number of studies, especially the article about college students' use of e-learning systems.

Lifecycle Stages
In the highest stage of growth, the most cited authors were Hidalgo and Albors [88] about innovation techniques, and the author with the highest number of articles was Doctor [89][90][91], with works on users of knowledge repositories in a management institute, the dynamics of knowledge sharing in a management institute, and capturing intellectual capital in a business school institution. On the other hand, the different coauthorship networks were analyzed ( Figure 5). This work was carried out in a transversal manner to observe the community that has been built on this topic, which cumulatively allows us to recognize authors who serve as bridges between communities and key authors due to their degree of collaboration. For this examination, the social network analysis and the indicators betweenness centrality and degree centrality were used as the methodology. This showed that the research on knowledge sharing in business education is a rising topic and that there is no large formal community. The most important network is made up of 13 authors; the second most important network is formed by eight authors. According to this analysis, the most relevant authors are Chen, C. [92], Bontis [93] and Levin [94,95]. On the other hand, the different coauthorship networks were analyzed ( Figure 5). This work was carried out in a transversal manner to observe the community that has been built on this topic, which cumulatively allows us to recognize authors who serve as bridges between communities and key authors due to their degree of collaboration. For this examination, the social network analysis and the indicators betweenness centrality and degree centrality were used as the methodology. This showed that the research on knowledge sharing in business education is a rising topic and that there is no large formal community. The most important network is made up of 13 authors; the second most important network is formed by eight authors. According to this analysis, the most relevant authors are Chen, C. [92], Bontis [93] and Levin [94,95].

Embryonic Stage
In the embryonic stage, 13 articles were published. Although the number of articles is small, Figure 6 shows the most significant topics: the problems that business schools have with information flows, the offer of courses and the generation of tools to teach knowledge management in universities and the skills in knowledge management that business students should develop.

Embryonic Stage
In the embryonic stage, 13 articles were published. Although the number of articles is small, Figure 6 shows the most significant topics: the problems that business schools have with information flows, the offer of courses and the generation of tools to teach knowledge management in universities and the skills in knowledge management that business students should develop. Concerning the most representative articles identified in the embryonic stage (Table  3), Hafstad [96] reported results of a knowledge management project at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. Birchall and Smith [97] discussed the opportunities afforded by multimedia and groupware to create enhanced learning opportunities with MBA students using a dynamic case analysis. The purpose of the article of Ruth, Theobald and Frizzell [98] was the diffusion of knowledge management concepts and cases into university courses. Cheng [84] developed and tested a model of perceived transfer of knowledge of MBA students to the job. Birkinshaw [78] identified the most frequent problems in knowledge management and suggested five steps to resolve them. Baladi [99] documented the recognition of Ericson Business Consulting for more globalization and knowledge sharing. Finally, Albert and Thomas [100] explored the Open University Business School´s new course on knowledge management which included synchronous dialogue via an online tutorial.  Concerning the most representative articles identified in the embryonic stage (Table 3), Hafstad [96] reported results of a knowledge management project at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. Birchall and Smith [97] discussed the opportunities afforded by multimedia and groupware to create enhanced learning opportunities with MBA students using a dynamic case analysis. The purpose of the article of Ruth, Theobald and Frizzell [98] was the diffusion of knowledge management concepts and cases into university courses. Cheng [84] developed and tested a model of perceived transfer of knowledge of MBA students to the job. Birkinshaw [78] identified the most frequent problems in knowledge management and suggested five steps to resolve them. Baladi [99] documented the recognition of Ericson Business Consulting for more globalization and knowledge sharing. Finally, Albert and Thomas [100] explored the Open University Business School's new course on knowledge management which included synchronous dialogue via an online tutorial.

Emergent Stage
In the emerging stage, 47 articles were published. Some of the emphases were: skills associated with knowledge sharing, knowledge transfer in MBA students, knowledge creation based on communities of practice and active learning based on knowledge sharing in business school students (Figure 7).

Emergent Stage
In the emerging stage, 47 articles were published. Some of the emphases were: skills associated with knowledge sharing, knowledge transfer in MBA students, knowledge creation based on communities of practice and active learning based on knowledge sharing in business school students (Figure 7). In the emergent stage, six of the most relevant articles are presented below (Table 4). Wilson [67,85] examined the concept of knowledge management in the presentation of business schools. Barack and Rafaeli [83,101] provided evidence that web-based undertakings promote active learning and knowledge sharing. Gray [68,86] recommended that policymakers should support small enterprises started by graduates. Tho and Trang [84,102] proposed that knowledge learned from business schools by students and their intrinsic motivation affect the transfer of knowledge from business schools to organizations. Tippins [85,103] identified barriers that inhibit knowledge management within the college context. Liyanage and Poon [86,104] argued that technology and innovation management education should be critical areas in business schools.  In the emergent stage, six of the most relevant articles are presented below (Table 4). Wilson [67,85] examined the concept of knowledge management in the presentation of business schools. Barack and Rafaeli [83,101] provided evidence that web-based undertakings promote active learning and knowledge sharing. Gray [68,86] recommended that policymakers should support small enterprises started by graduates. Tho and Trang [84,102] proposed that knowledge learned from business schools by students and their intrinsic motivation affect the transfer of knowledge from business schools to organizations. Tippins [85,103] identified barriers that inhibit knowledge management within the college context. Liyanage and Poon [86,104] argued that technology and innovation management education should be critical areas in business schools.

Growth Young Stage
At this stage, 95 publications were found. The main topics identified by the text mining analysis were: the relationship of knowledge sharing with social networks and managerial practices, knowledge management and its relationship with competitive advantages in business schools and MBA students, transfer of knowledge in educational programs, the experience of companies with business schools about knowledge exchange, business schools and virtual learning, information management systems and knowledge acquisition, communities of practice and knowledge sharing (Figure 8).

Growth Young Stage
At this stage, 95 publications were found. The main topics identified by the text mining analysis were: the relationship of knowledge sharing with social networks and managerial practices, knowledge management and its relationship with competitive advantages in business schools and MBA students, transfer of knowledge in educational programs, the experience of companies with business schools about knowledge exchange, business schools and virtual learning, information management systems and knowledge acquisition, communities of practice and knowledge sharing (Figure 8). Five of the most outstanding articles in the growth young stage are described in Table 5. Kanawattanachai and Yoo [53,71], working with virtual teams of MBA students, found that at the end of the project, task-knowledge coordination emerged as a construct that impacted team performance. Chen, Wu, and Wu [74,92] investigated the coproduction of knowledge and dialogic relationships via the collaboration between business practitioners and academic researchers. Chen, Chen and Kinshuk [55,73] using a field survey of college and MBA students found that attitude, subjective norms and web self-efficacy were good predictors of knowledge sharing intention. Redpath [87,105] disputed the assumption that online classes lack the necessary interaction and collaboration to support a quality business education. Wright, Piva, Mosey and Lockett [54,72] identified challenges to business education schools to transfer knowledge to enable academic entrepreneurship. Five of the most outstanding articles in the growth young stage are described in Table 5. Kanawattanachai and Yoo [53,71], working with virtual teams of MBA students, found that at the end of the project, task-knowledge coordination emerged as a construct that impacted team performance. Chen, Wu, and Wu [74,92] investigated the coproduction of knowledge and dialogic relationships via the collaboration between business practitioners and academic researchers. Chen, Chen and Kinshuk [55,73] using a field survey of college and MBA students found that attitude, subjective norms and web self-efficacy were good predictors of knowledge sharing intention. Redpath [87,105] disputed the assumption that online classes lack the necessary interaction and collaboration to support a quality business education. Wright, Piva, Mosey and Lockett [54,72] identified challenges to business education schools to transfer knowledge to enable academic entrepreneurship.

Growth Highest Stage
At this stage, 151 articles were published. Some of the most studied topics were: knowledge sharing and institutional repositories, social capital and knowledge exchange, knowledge networks in business schools, knowledge transfer between business managers and students of these schools, and the skills associated with knowledge sharing (Figure 9).

Growth Highest Stage
At this stage, 151 articles were published. Some of the most studied topics were: knowledge sharing and institutional repositories, social capital and knowledge exchange, knowledge networks in business schools, knowledge transfer between business managers and students of these schools, and the skills associated with knowledge sharing (Figure 9). This is a sample of the most relevant articles in the growth highest stage (Table 6). Hernaus, Cerne, Connelly, Vokic and Skerlavaj [82] contributed to research by focusing on academic situations where colleagues respond to explicit requests by hiding This is a sample of the most relevant articles in the growth highest stage (Table 6). Hernaus, Cerne, Connelly, Vokic and Skerlavaj [82] contributed to research by focusing on academic situations where colleagues respond to explicit requests by hiding knowledge. Levin, Walter and Murnighan [95], in a study with MBA students, suggested that dormant relationships can be a valuable source of knowledge and social capital. Hidalgo and Albors [88] provided evidence to support that business schools are developing innovative methodologies and tools based on knowledge. Ungureanu and Bertolotti [106] suggested that if business schools loosen their programs' infrastructure and encourage trial and error interaction they can increase knowledge sharing between academics and practitioners. Perry-Smith and Shalley [107] in a study with MBA teams concluded that both outside ties with nationality-heterogeneous individuals and weak outside ties independently facilitate team creativity. Finally, Charosky, Leveratto, Hassi, Papageorgiou, Ramos-Castro and Bragos [108] presented results of a learning experience carried out by three universities. They found that engineering students increased their ability to ideate more disruptive solutions based on their interactions with business and design students. Table 6. Main papers in the stage of highest growth.

Title
Publication

Keywords
Based on the tool developed by Lee, Lee, Seol and Park [109], a keyword map, divided into four quadrants to visualize the evolution of concepts about knowledge sharing in business education, was created. A topic is considered core according to the relevance given by the H index. A topic is declining when it is important in the embryonic and emerging stages, but not in the growth stages. On the other hand, a theme is defined as growing when it has increased in the last stages. Finally, a subject is emerging when it appeared in the last stage with relevance. Table 7 presents the analysis of keywords according to four criteria. The most representative core keywords were knowledge management, knowledge transfer, knowledge sharing, business education, knowledge creation and knowledge exchange. The three more frequent growing keywords were knowledge sharing, higher education and e-learning. The emerging keywords were entrepreneurship education, management, intellectual capital and problem-based learning. The declining keywords on publications on knowledge sharing in business education were human resources management and curriculum development.

Discussion and Conclusions
In the research on knowledge sharing in business education, four stages were identified in the period 1997-2020, which were called: embryonic, emergent, young growth and high growth. The number of articles published has been increasing. The current period, high growth, so far includes 151 articles.
Concerning networks of authorship, the number is still low. Only two of them are considered significant. According to the analysis that was carried out, there are no large clusters of thematic axes on the subject of knowledge sharing in business education. In the embryonic stage, articles were published on the problems that business schools have with information flows, the generation of tools to teach knowledge management and the skills in knowledge management that a business student should develop.
In the emergent stage, there were no topics with a significant volume of articles. Some themes were: teaching knowledge management in business schools, active learning and knowledge sharing, the motivation of business students to transfer knowledge, barriers that inhibit knowledge management and the relevance of technology and innovation management education in business schools.
In the growth young stage, although no topic was a trend, there is a nascent interest in tools for knowledge sharing in business education. The main themes identified were knowledge sharing in social networks, knowledge management, transfer of knowledge in educational programs, the experience of companies with business schools about knowledge exchange, business schools and virtual learning, and communities of practice.
In the growth highest stage there is a marked interest in tools associated with knowledge sharing in business education. Some current topics are social capital and knowledge exchange, knowledge networks in business schools, knowledge transfer between business managers and students of these schools, skills associated with knowledge sharing, and knowledge sharing versus knowledge hiding in academic situations.
Based on the keyword analysis, the considered core words are knowledge management, knowledge transfer and knowledge exchange; the main emerging words are entrepreneurship education and problem-based learning; the principal declining words are human resource management and curriculum development; finally, the main growing words are higher education and e-learning.
In conclusion, knowledge sharing in business education is a rising research topic, where there are still no strong networks of researchers. Additionally, the identification of the best tools to share and build knowledge in the training process of business education students is under development. Finally, research on knowledge sharing as a means for generating innovations in the context of business schools is incipient.
From this study, further research is recommended on some topics: knowledge networks between students from different business schools, knowledge sharing between organizational managers and business students, innovative tools for sharing knowledge in times of the COVID 19 pandemic and the development of knowledge sharing competences in students applied to changing organizational contexts.

Practical Implications
There are multiple lessons from this research that can be applied to universities and institutions dedicated to training students in business education who, once graduated, will manage companies and public organizations.
Knowledge sharing is essential in the development of skills in business students that will later be used in organizations-for example, teamwork, leadership, culture management, and sustainable innovation. In complex contexts such as the current one, knowledge sharing is the main mechanism to design collaborative solutions tailored to respond to environmental needs. Additionally, in their role as leaders, administrators must constantly interact with their work teams to influence them in the strategies planned to achieve results. In the same direction, culture management requires persuasion skills, which are based on the exchange of ideas and beliefs. Innovation is another field where knowledge sharing is necessary to design or improve products and services.
There is evidence that the knowledge exchange improves academic achievement, the quality of interpersonal interactions, and attitudes to work with others. As a consequence, business schools should decrease the percentage of time they spend in lectures and increase the time and strategies in which students share knowledge, discuss problems and make decisions based on collective reflection. Some examples of techniques are discussion of business cases, group simulations, workshops, challenges, and projects.
Knowledge sharing has been growing in virtual environments, especially in the last year, where the COVID 19 pandemic restricted the option of face-to-face education in classrooms. Online education research has studied the role of cooperative learning through discussion and has found effectiveness in students' performance. The motivation of students increases when they participate in online group activities. Online sharing also contributes to focus the attention of students on the class topic.
According to research, one of the main blockers of knowledge sharing in business education is teacher-centered habits, where the main expected role of students is to be absorbers of information. Universities should promote online materials and webinars to their professors about how to move from traditional teaching to learning focused on participants. Students learn by doing, exchanging knowledge, expectations, and beliefs about reality. When students are active in their learning, content retention increases.
There is evidence that students increase their ability to ideate more disruptive solutions based on their interactions with members of organizations. Another practical implication of this review is the recommendation for universities to design experiences in which students transfer their skills to applied environments. Business students may interact with members of firms and public organizations to contribute to defining problems, propose solutions and participate in the design and improvement of products and services.