Use Cases

CapsimOps caters to a diverse audience, including corporate trainers, business school educators, and professionals within government and non-profit sectors, who seek a deeper understanding of operations management within business strategy.

In the "Operational Depth" Role, CapsimOps distinguishes itself by:

• Enhancing Operational Understanding: Ideal for creating an immersive learning environment that goes beyond traditional teaching methods, CapsimOps encourages participants to engage deeply with the intricacies of operations management, making learning more dynamic and impactful.
• Cross-Disciplinary Integration: CapsimOps is particularly effective for professionals in fields like engineering, technology, and healthcare, offering them a comprehensive insight into how operations management is integral to overall business strategy, thereby fostering a holistic view of business operations.
• Developing Strategic Thinking: By simulating complex operational scenarios, CapsimOps serves as a platform for developing critical competencies such as strategic planning, decision-making, and problem-solving, crucial for today's fast-paced business environments.
• Building Cohesion and Networking: CapsimOps can act as a touchstone for shared experiences in leadership programs, workshops, or industry conferences, promoting collaboration, networking, and peer learning among participants.

In the "Specialized Learning" Role, CapsimOps is utilized for:

• Advanced Business Training: Suitable for both introductory and advanced levels, CapsimOps can be integrated into specialized courses or modules focusing on operations management, supply chain management, or logistics, providing a practical, hands-on approach to learning.
• Inter-functional Synergy: CapsimOps excels in demonstrating the interconnectedness of various business functions, making it an invaluable tool for courses that aim to illustrate the impact of operational decisions on finance, marketing, human resources, and more.
• Executive Education and Professional Development: For seasoned professionals and executives, CapsimOps offers an opportunity to refine strategic operations management skills, adapt to evolving business landscapes, and drive organizational success through effective operational strategies.
  
  
  

Overview

Scenario: The government has just broken up a monopoly into 2-6 identical companies. The monopoly masked many problems, ranging from inefficiencies to structural weaknesses. Teams are tasked with fixing these problems while building competitive advantages within a coherent business strategy. CapsimOps presents:

• A scenario that students can grasp quickly yet maps easily onto other industries.
• A “widget-like” product that will not spark preconceived ideas about the product or customers.
• Three functional areas - marketing, production, and finance. Decisions are set at the policy level.
• Their company looks good on paper, but in truth the monopoly masked many problems.
• Three industry characteristics force teams to act: competition, industry growth, and technological change.

Delivery options: Both corporate seminars and collegiate classroom environments. In person, online, and blended formats. CapsimOps is a software as a service product.

Support: Instructor and student support. New instructors receive on demand training and support from our dedicated Customer Relationship Consulting group. Our CRCs train, coach, and support your delivery. 

Editions: Tournament and Footrace. All editions ADA and GDPR compliant. Most LMS systems supported - free integration into unsupported systems. 

Teams: Students are in teams that can be as small as three people or as large as seven with an ideal size of five. That said, there are exceptions. We have seen instructors create teams upwards of 12 people to work on organizational themes. If the student has previous experience with the simulation, the student can be promoted to “CEO” and manage the company alone. 

Industries: An "industry" consists of companies competing head-to-head. Companies can be managed by human teams or the computer, and instructors often configure industries to include both. The standard industry size is six companies, but instructors can configure the industry to accommodate up to ten companies. For the very small or very large class, the instructor sets up an industry for each human team that consists of one human team versus five computer managed teams, with each computer team playing a distinct strategy. A typical class ranges in size from 12 to 70 students in one industry. 

Rounds: Decisions are made in “rounds” which correspond to one year. Competitions last a maximum of eight rounds. 

Easy delivery: It is a computer simulation, and computers do the grunt chores. They analyze, predict, process, print reports, share displays in virtual meetings, and prepare debriefs. Technical requirements are routine - a laptop and an Internet connection. Interfaces are designed to look like common business tools - spreadsheets, reports, email systems, and presentations. 

• Corporate and academic venues
• Class sizes from 1 to over 1000 students
• 1-day workshops to semester long courses
• On site, online, and blended formats
• Developing soft skills and hard skills
  
  

Learning Objectives

CapsimOps begins with Foundation’s learning objectives and then expands into operational objectives.

Objectives In Common with Foundation

• Strategic Analysis: Undertake detailed internal and external assessments utilizing frameworks such as SWOT, PESTEL, and Porter’s Five Forces.
• Business Planning: Formulate an all-encompassing business strategy, considering elements like market positioning, competitive edge, and avenues for growth.
• Performance Measures: Select key performance indicators, targets, and assessment methods to align and drive the company’s actions in accordance with the business strategy.
• Functional Decision Making: Exhibit decision-making proficiency across business sectors to address both immediate challenges and long-term strategic goals.
• Implementation and Execution: Understand strategy complexities and devise methods to execute these strategies effectively.
• Project Management: Design and implement projects to forge competitive strengths, encompassing various business functions.
• Team Development: Understand the stages of team maturation and apply leadership tactics to optimize team performance.
• Change Management: Understand organizational change dynamics and strategize to lead transitions effectively.
• Communication with Stakeholders: Articulate the organization’s mission, vision, strategies, and decisions with clarity and precision, adapting the message to resonate with diverse audiences in both written and verbal forms.
• Prework for an Accreditation Exam: Refresh knowledge, fill gaps, and hone skills developed during the degree program as preparation for an accreditation exam.

Expanded Operational Learning Objectives

• Supply Chain Management: Optimize end-to-end supply chains to enhance value creation, considering both upstream suppliers and downstream distributors.
• Quality Management: Implement quality assurance methodologies to elevate product and service standards, ensuring customer satisfaction and loyalty.
• Inventory Control: Utilize inventory management techniques to balance demand with supply, reducing overhead costs while ensuring product availability.
• Operational Human Resource Management: Apply HR strategies in operations to recruit, retain, and develop talent, fostering an environment of productivity and continuous improvement.
  

Similarities with Sibling Simulations

Our design philosophy is built around the concept, "Make the instructor's job easier." To use an analogy, if you rent a vehicle at a car rental, the controls look the same, but the vehicle's purpose can range from basic transportation to moving furniture. The driver can expect minor differences in the controls, but major differences in the mission. Our simulations are the same - similar controls, different missions. Further, all of our business simulations are teaching platforms, as opposed to business simulators (which are unique to an industry or company). Teaching platforms consider issues like "participant's technical vocabulary", "related conceptual spaces", and "delivery constraints". (See "Business Simulations: Bridging Theory and Practice for Transformative Learning." For business simulators, see Capsim Inbox.)

By design, CapsimOps looks like its siblings. Our simulations use similar scenarios, report layouts, interfaces, charts, etc. For example, all of our simulations are set in a "sensor" industry, albeit not the same sensor industry. Industries have lifecycles. We set both CapsimOps and Foundation in an early growth stage. Each simulation varies the sensor industry, learning objectives, and mission.

Instructors familiar with any of our simulations feel at home with CapsimOps. The controls are the same. It is easy to find information. But the application and teaching goals are tailored to different skill levels and purposes. 

When students play our simulations in sequence - CapsimCore, Foundation, CapsimOps, Capstone, CapsimGlobal - students recognize that they are building upon their earlier skill set. They approach the more sophisticated simulation with confidence and a desire to dig deeper into the content. 

With this background, let's compare CapsimOps with its closest siblings, Foundation.

Differences with Sibling Simulations

The CapsimOps scenario is more complex than Foundation. Onboarding and play times are about 133% of Foundation, and directly comparable to Capstone.

CapsimOps explorers these initiatives:

• Supply chain. Teams set policies that trade off local versus global supply chains. Local suppliers offer a faster R&D cycle and higher production yields at a higher cost. Global suppliers offer lower costs but slow down product development and produce more scrap. Multisource options bring mixed benefits and downsides.
• Process quality initiatives. Financial investments in manufacturing processes directly impact production yield and product quality.
• Product quality initiatives. Financial investments reduce material and labor costs while increasing demand.
• Inventory control. Financial investments in automated inventory control tools reduce carrying costs and labor costs.
• HR Training. Training to build assembly teams increases quality and improves productivity.  
• HR Recruitment and retention. These initiatives result in faster product development, product updates, and perceived quality.
• HR Salesforce. These initiatives compensate sales teams, improve customer accessibility, and reduce employee turnover.

• Material cost
• Labor cost
• R&D cycle time
• Demand
• Accessibility
• Productivity
• Employee turnover
• Inventory carrying cost
• Production yield

Deep Dive

Let's dive into CapsimOps from an instructor's perspective.

Our audience sophistication varies greatly. At the low end we could have students with no formal business training. At the high end we could have business school students that are about to graduate, or managers with roughly five years of experience. For advanced audiences we can skip over basic terminology, but for beginner audiences we need to present basic frameworks and use labels and examples to shape participant's understanding.

CapsimOps splits companies into three functional domains - marketing, production, and finance. It organizes computer displays and reports around these functions. Some natural coordination between functions must occur. Even beginners understand that products and services must be marketed, delivered, and tracked in some sort of accounting system. Core points:

• A scenario that students can grasp quickly yet maps easily onto other industries.
• A “widget-like” product that will not spark preconceived ideas about the product or customers.
• Three functional areas - marketing, production, and finance. Decisions are set at the policy level.
• Their company looks good on paper, but in truth the monopoly masked many problems.

CapsimOps emphasizes the coordination of operations across functional boundaries with four cross-functional modules:

• R&D. Students update and reposition products to match customer needs. They can invent entirely new products.
• TQM.  Students can invest in a variety of projects with outcomes that range from reduced costs to increased demand.
• HR. Optional. Students can invest in HR programs to develop workforce competencies in each of the functional areas.
• Internet of Things. Optional. Teams add a new dimension to their products - the ability to connect to a cloud-based platform for data collection and exchange. The theme is technological convergence. Outcomes include increased unit costs, longer R&D cycle times, but higher demand.

Three industry characteristics force teams to act. They are:

• Competition. The old monopoly masked many problems. Fixing them can lead to competitive advantages.
• Industry growth. The scenario is set during the industry life-cycle’s growth phase. However, different segments within the market grow at different rates. Teams must invest to keep up with growing demand. Teams that can capture the growth marginalize teams that cannot.
• Changing technology. Customers expect sensors to become smaller and more powerful as time passes, like many electronic products. 

Opportunities for competitive advantage are found in:

• Product line - positioning, product extenders
• Awareness - making customers aware of the product and its benefits
• Accessibility - making it easy for customers to shop, take delivery, and get support
• Capacity - having sufficient production capacity to meet demand without waste
• Automation - driving down costs through automation
• Financial structure - aligning capital investments with market opportunities
• HR (optional) - developing a robust, flexible workforce
• TQM (optional) - initiatives to improve processes, cost structure, and customer satisfaction

Strategic thinking is driven by a perceptual map, which can be compared to a chess board. On the map the vertical axis represents "Size". Customers want smaller sensors, and as technology improves, they expect miniaturization. The horizontal axis represents "Performance". Customers want more efficient, sensitive sensors. As the years pass, customers expect sensors to become smaller and perform better.

The perceptual map divides customers into two segments - High Tech and Low Tech. These are represented as circles on the map. If a product is outside a segment's circle, it has no demand. Within each circle there is an "ideal spot", a point where demand is highest. However, this ideal spot is constantly marching towards the lower right corner of the map. Participants must plan ahead. 

Companies begin the simulation with one product placed in the overlap between High Tech and Low Tech - a one size fits all commodity identical to their competitors.

The two segments care about four buying criteria - Positioning (proximity to the ideal spot), Price, Reliability, and Age of design. Each segment has different expectations for these criteria.

Instructors are now in a position to teach segmentation, differentiation, positioning, and product concentration, and apply them to five generic strategies:

Broad Differentiator - Both segments, emphasizing customer satisfaction. The orange stars represent future products. Because new products require their own production facilities, this strategy invests heavily in capacity.

Broad Cost Leader - both segments, emphasizing cost leadership. Because this strategy relies upon a cost advantage, it invests heavily in automation. 

Niche Differentiator - Focus on dominating the High Tech segment at the cutting edge of technology. We label it "differentiator" because this segment responds to differentiation tactics more than cost leadership tactics. The High Tech segment is small but fast growing. This strategy requires capacity investments.

Niche Cost Leader - Focus on dominating the Low Tech segment. It is most responsive to cost leadership tactics. The segment is larger but slower growing. This strategy requires automation investments. 

Product Life Cycle - Invent products in High Tech eventually become Low Tech as the industry matures. This strategy starts products with limited capacity and automates as the products mature.

In practice, any of these strategies can "win". Success depends upon execution. The starting position - a strategically misaligned set of identical companies - is unstable and chaotic. It is a perfect environment for teaching business strategy and developing business acumen. 

Sample Agendas

CapsimOps is delivered in corporate seminars and collegiate classes, and in on-site, online, and blended environments. Our CRCs (customer relationship consultants) are adept at helping instructors design and plan agendas, and here are a few examples. (For a complete description of all types of deliveries, see "How to Deliver a Simulation.") 

Let's begin with a seminar that blends on-site and online. The on-site component looks like an ordinary seminar. It can occur at the beginning, the end, or in the case below, both. At Capsim we love blended deliveries. They offer the best features of both environments. In this example the online component uses synchronous class meetings with virtual team breakout rooms designed by each team. The instructor visits teams in their breakouts to coach. However, rounds 3-7 could easily be asynchronous, with teams scheduling their own meetings and coaching appointments.

The next agenda presents a traditional, on-site business acumen seminar for professionals and middle managers without a business degree. We need to incorporate time for debriefs and mini-lectures on topics like competitive advantage and performance measures. In seminars like these, an ideal environment keeps teams in the same room, including breaks, working lunches, etc. The instructor works the room looking for the magical "teachable moment". 

Finally, let's look at an academic, semester-long, on-site agenda in an operations course. This agenda assumes a leisurely pace, but more compressed module or quarter-based agendas are easily accommodated - if CapsimOps can be delivered in a two-day seminar, it can be delivered in any collegiate environment. Most academic campuses today support blended learning, and we heartily recommend it. Completely online courses work well in the hands of a seasoned instructors, but for first-time deliveries, we recommend using our CRCs for your planning and setup, as today's technologies present golden opportunities (AI, recorded debriefs, team meetings, etc.) that require familiarization. 

Tournaments vs Footraces

Instructors can set their class up in two competition styles - tournaments or footraces. To understand the tradeoffs, we must consider company types, team sizes, and industry configurations.

Company types. A company is, of course, the business entity, but they come in two types - human and automated. Human teams want to compete with other human teams, but automated companies provide the instructor with several useful options. Automated companies can:

• Flesh out an industry when the class is small.
• Serve as a strawman during a debrief.
• Play one of the known generic strategies. 
• Play at a weak, average, or strong skill level.

Team size. The instructor will split the class into teams. Small teams do not offer much diversity of opinion. Large teams risk fragmenting into factions. Experienced professors will set team size at four, five, and six participants. Teams of three and seven participants work but require a bit more coaching. Teams of two are possible in a pinch. Teams of eight or more should be avoided unless the instructor has a behavioral agenda in mind that requires large groups. 

Industry configurations. Foundation Version 1 limits industries to six companies. Foundation Version 2 can expand industry size to ten companies. The more companies in an industry, the more difficult it is for human teams to do competitor analysis. For this reason, nearly all instructors set industry size between four and six companies. Indeed, a majority of instructors will set up their industries with exactly six companies, using automated companies to flesh out smaller classes. This works fine for classes with up to 42 participants - six teams of seven participants. 

But what about larger classes? Instructors can opt for two or more industries, but each industry needs a debrief. Usually, the time available for debriefs is limited, and splitting that time between industries reduces the quality of the feedback. Foundation Version 2 configured with ten teams expands the class size to 70 participants, and most instructors will choose that over two industries. When there are more than 70 participants, the lead instructor will either employ junior instructors or structure a footrace.

Tournaments. A tournament pits companies against companies in a free for all. Companies start at identical positions. (“The government just broke up a monopoly.”) Students love tournaments. They engage all of the senses in a highly charged emotional environment, and that anchors the learning. They are fun to teach. 

Most tournaments consist of one industry. In practice 90%+ of classes are below the 42 student threshold - six teams of seven participants. Here are a few examples:

• 8 participants. Two teams, four automated companies.
• 12 participants. Three teams, three automated companies.  Or four teams of three, and zero to two automated companies. 
• 30 participants. Five teams of six players, one automated company. Or six teams of five players. 
• 42 participants. Six teams of seven players.
• 48 participants. Eight teams of six players.
• 70 participants. Ten teams of seven players. 

Footraces. Footrace editions automate each team’s competitors. The industry consists of a human team and five automated companies playing five distinct strategies. Teams compare their results across identical industries.

The automated companies within each industry always play the same strategies. For example, the "B" or Baldwin Company always plays the same generic strategy. The debrief can draw teaching points about an automated company and know that it applies to all human teams. 

Footraces are not quite as emotionally charged as a tournament, but the competitive elements are still in place. Students compare performance measures across the entire class.

Footraces are often employed for large events and competitions. For example, at the end of each semester Capsim offers a Capsim Challenge to currently enrolled students. Upwards of 1000 individuals and teams compete in a footrace. The top six qualify for a tournament to declare an overall winner. 

Delivery Steps

CapsimOps is a Software as a Service (SAAS) product, meaning that processing occurs in a secure, online, 24/7/365 environment. It is delivered in both seminar and academic venues, and in live, blended, and online environments.

For an all-encompassing discussion of deliveries, see “Delivering a Business Simulation”. Here we will focus on CapsimOps alone. 

Registration. Students need to be able to identify teammates and competitors on the website and reports, so it is important to register all students. 

• Students are either bulk registered before the simulation begins, or they self-register with a coupon (a “registration number”) or a credit card.
• We recommend providing students with registration or login instructions before the simulation begins either in email or a syllabus. 
  

Onboarding. In seminars instructors usually do a hands-on introduction and practice round, although online materials are available for pre-work. 

For traditional classes the onboarding materials make delivery and scheduling extraordinarily flexible, and they reduce the instructor burden by automating routine tasks like team formation. Students are provided with a comprehensive online onboarding package that includes a variety of resources - videos, tutorials, demonstrations, quizzes, and practical exercises.

When students log in, their first menu item is “Getting Started”. Assign those items that you want students to do before your introduction. They include:

• An Introductory Lesson (video) and quiz.
• The Team Member Guide (booklet describing scenario and rules)
• The Industry Conditions report (parameters specific to this simulation)
• Rehearsal Tutorial (walks students through the decision support software)
• The Reports (The reports for the starting round)
• Join a company (if they are self-registering)
• Situation Analysis
• Pick a strategy (an overview of the generic strategies)
• Add-in modules and case modules (describes options selected for this iteration.)

Students should take advantage of the same resources they have on the job, including AI and social media. During the introduction, we suggest that instructors:

• Demonstrate an AI by asking it a few questions relevant to the simulation.
• Play at least one YouTube video about the simulation that some student somewhere has posted.
• Demo a search for opinions and advice on Reddit or other social media platforms about how to win the simulation.

We want students to seek out any competitive advantages they can find. It will not harm the learning environment; it will enhance it. For perspective, consider sports. Will teams research, watch videos, or seek opinions before a game? In seminars that Capsim delivers, we make two points about winning. First, it is a matter of degree. If Team A achieves cumulative profits of $43 million, and Team B achieves $42 million, it would not matter in the real world, and it only matters in the seminar because we award coveted coffee cups as a prize to the "winning" team. Second, suppose that an AI recommends teams adopt, say, the "Broad Cost Leader" strategy. If five of six teams follow the AI's advice faithfully, the sixth team will win, because it did something different while the other five arbitraged away their competitive advantages. Execution matters, and that is a dance with competitors and the marketplace that begins in the first round.

Of course, we like to think that students can find answers to any question on the Capsim website. We routinely scour the Internet looking for good ideas that we can pass along. But we want students to research. Perhaps an external opinion will trigger a response in the student. Good advice? Bad advice? There is plenty of both online. We want participants to think, to angst, to experiment, and to argue a perspective with their teammates.

What matters is how the team responds to their industry as it evolves. So long as all teams have the same information resources, the competition will be fair and meaningful.

Introductory lecture. 0-60 minutes. Tailored to the audience. In principle, Getting Started can onboard students independently. In practice, students expect some form of instructor interaction as the simulation begins. 

Team Analysis Exercise. 60 minutes. Recommended but not required. The exercise serves two purposes - team building and team comprehension of the business issues they face. It explores the simulation parameters while people take the measure of their teammates. Variations on the assignment ask each student to analyze a product, a segment, or a functional area, then report their findings to the team. We recommend a team building instrument like TeamMATE with this exercise. 

Rounds. 60-150 minutes. Allow more time for early rounds, less for later rounds unless you insert case modules. The basic simulation block is a decision round, which covers one year of simulated time. A round begins with a debrief, usually instructor led, that presents the starting situation or the results from the previous round. Teams meet to make decisions. At the deadline, the simulation processes under manual or automatic control. At the instructor’s whim, students can access results immediately or wait for the debrief.  

• Practice Rounds. Strictly speaking practice rounds are optional. The first practice round familiarizes teams with the rules and process. The second lets them experience the consequences of actions they took in the first round. Practice rounds three and four provide time to introduce optional modules or add-ins  
• Competition Rounds. Instructors can schedule up to eight competition rounds. Instructors can increase the complexity as the simulation evolves by adding in optional modules and add-ins, typically one per round. Modules offer opportunities to create competitive advantage. However, these take time to develop before reaping benefits. Ideally add 2-4 rounds beyond the last optional module. Add-ins explore themes within business.

Debriefs. As much for dramatic effect as for analysis, teams want their instructor to announce results to the class and make observations about the industry’s evolution. Debriefs are also used to introduce new modules and add-ins.  

Additionally, students can self-debrief using online reports and tools available on the website. 

Team Presentations. In “backdrop” applications, team presentations are optional. In “integration” applications, expect that students will want to talk about their experiences, their mistakes and successes, and what they have learned. 

Communication with stakeholders is one of CapsimOps' learning objectives. Students want to talk about their experiences, their mistakes and successes, and what they have learned.

• We recommend that teams use an AI presentation software platform (several are free), and that they begin writing slides in competition round 1 to capture high points during the simulation.
• Live seminars are time constrained. Teams have 30 minutes to create their presentation. Worst case, teams fill out a canned slideshow that covers the important learning points and performance outcomes. Limit delivery time to 10 minutes per team.
• Online and blended environments have the luxury of time, which lends itself to creativity. Perhaps you can entice local businesspeople to sit on a “board of directors” that asks teams questions about their strategy and tactics. Or perhaps teams can pitch their company to a virtual “shark tank”. In all cases teams must cover the important business topics, which generally reinforce the learning objectives. Expect 10-15 minutes per team presentation.

Final Debrief. 5-30 minutes. Teams want to know, “Who won, and how did we do?” CapsimOps offers two scoring methods, the Balanced Scorecard, and for instructors wishing to emphasize the performance measure learning objectives, a nuanced methodology for allowing teams to select their own performance measures. The final debrief looks at the last round’s results, then rank orders the teams to declare an overall winner.

Support

Capsim has been training instructors that are new to simulations for over 25 years. Our Customer Relationship Group can provide you with sample schedules, syllabi, slide shows, assignments - any materials you need to succeed in the classroom. 

We routinely go over simulation results with new instructors before their debrief. We can shadow you online during your first deliveries. 

We take questions from students by email and by scheduled call.

Often new instructors are specialists, not generalists. They are not comfortable teaching materials outside their specialty. No problem. From our perspective, we hear the same questions from students class after class. We go over those questions with you. Our goal is to make your teaching experience routine.  

If you are in a corporate environment and plan to deliver a few seminars and then stop, chances are failure-is-not-an-option. No problem. Capsim can provide experienced, talented instructors drawn from planet Earth’s finest schools. 

We also provide on-demand facilitators drawn from our CRC department, the same people that train-the-trainer. Facilitators insure that your seminar is free from technical challenges and that instructors can concentrate on teaching instead of logistics.  

Large event? Capsim has delivered events with upwards of 1000 people. We can work with you at every stage, from planning to clean-up.