Business War Games
Who Should Play
What situations call for our war game?
You need to draw a plan, decide on a strategy
The success of the plan depends on the real world moves and countermoves of competitors (and other third parties)
You don't have direct information of those intended moves
You are not interested in a theoretical modeling of the market but in accurately predicting what competitors are most likely to do to your plan
Planning failure will be costly
Examples: new product launch, brand revival plan, defense against new competitor, entering a new market,
global planning with regional adjustments, better market penetration, new sales campaign, account bidding.
What internal conditions must be met before you run a game?
Your boss has the gumption to confront reality
The existing strategy or plan can still be modified if needed
You are not afraid of exposing some "elephants in the room"
Who should play in a war game?
The mix of people taking part in a game changes according to the game's scope. Global strategy games call for a
wider multi-function participation (crossing silos). Product or brand games call for the core market team plus
selected functions relevant for later execution (sales, production, etc). Games can be intimate or large but the
optimal range is between 12-48 participants. To benefit from our war games, a company should aim to tilt
the game's mix heavily towards middle management level.
There is an art to selecting the right people to ensure a successful game. Our considerable experience should help
you in identifying who to invite to a war game.
How many teams?
A war game can accommodate fruitfully up to 6 teams: one host team and 5 competitor teams. However, if the situation
involves more than 5 significant competitors, we offer the use of Strategic Clustering methodology to lump some
competitors together. Contact us for more details.
Who to stay away from?
What should people bring to the game?
Our war game philosophy is radical: we think product managers, brand directors, sales executives and project
leaders can actually beat the competition if they understand it well enough. Since they know their market better
than any outsider, all they need are rigorous frameworks to work with, and they can "competitor-proof" their plans.
So what should participants bring to the game?
Motivation to think hard; Lazy managers make lousy plans.
Belief in their ability to contribute; Shying away from debate does not make better plans.
Interest in affecting strategy; if you leave it all to consultants or Ad agencies, pay them your salary.
An understanding that strategy requires external focus and entrepreneurial perspective; MBA is not a requirement.
A belief in their ability to win in the market. War gaming is serious business.
Now you understand why our games are so intense?