Go To Market Simulation

Apply segmentation, targeting and positioning to a market-entry decision

Students segment the US protein-bar market, select viable targets, launch regions, and build a differentiated market position.

1.5 - 2-hour single-player simulation
Launch strategy
In-class, online or hybrid delivery

A complete STP teaching activity

The Go-to-Market Strategy Simulation is a two-hour, single-player competitive marketing simulation in which each student acts as the founder of a protein-bar company entering the US market. Students apply Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning to divide the market, select target segments, launch regions, choose an access channel, and build a differentiated positioning strategy covering the value proposition, price, pack format and promotional message.

Segmentation

Use customer needs, buying behaviour and evidence to decide how the market should be divided.

Targeting

Select one target segment, two launch regions and an access channel.

Positioning

Align the value proposition, point of difference, price, pack format and promotional message.

At a glance

Duration

1.5 - 2 hours

Plan one complete teaching session covering the introduction, gameplay and final reflection.

Format

Individual and competitive

Each student develops an individual strategy while class and competitor information creates a shared competitive context.

Level

UG, PG and MBA

Suitable for marketing, strategy, product management and entrepreneurship teaching.

Professor tools

Dashboard included

Manage participants, control the timeline, adjust timings, send alerts and review results.

Prerequisites

Beginner accessible

No required prerequisites. Basic familiarity with the STP framework is advantageous.

Delivery

In class, online or hybrid

The web-based simulation supports live delivery and a split hybrid format.

Assessment

Optional evidence

Run it as an ungraded applied activity or use platform data to support a wider assessment approach.

Course fit

Marketing and strategy modules

Suitable for Marketing Management, Strategic Marketing, Go-to-Market Strategy, Brand Management and Entrepreneurship courses.

From segmentation to a coherent go-to-market strategy

Students connect segmentation, targeting and positioning to decide who to serve, where to compete and how to differentiate. Strong go-to-market decisions depend on the consistency of the full STP strategy, not on any single choice.

Diagram showing segmentation to a coherent go-to-market strategy

Go To Market simulation gameflow and stages

1. Briefing | Intro stage: 7 minutes

Students watch the introduction, review the company mission and examine the product and US market context. They begin with a defined product, limited launch resources and the objective of building a focused strategy through STP.

2. Gameplay | 90 minutes:

i. Segmentation - Understand the market:

Students analyse customer motivations, buying behaviour, benefits sought and evidence quality. They decide how the market should be divided and establish the strategic route that will guide later decisions.

ii. Targeting - Choose where to focus:

Students compare segment economics, region fit, accessibility and competition. They choose one primary target segment, two launch regions, a targeting approach, an access channel and a market-entry posture. Initial responses also contribute to live class research.

iii. Positioning - Compete and differentiate:

Students review customer pain points and competitor information. They select a positioning theme, frame of reference, point of difference, value proposition, price, pack format and promotional message.

3. Reflection | no time limit:

Students review their score, rank and final strategy summary. They compare region, segment and pricing patterns across the cohort and consider the coherence and differentiation of their route.

When continuous Play is allowed to run, the simulation can advance to Reflection when the configured duration finishes. For a coordinated class reveal, the professor can pause or stop the activity before Reflection and resume when the class is ready.

Why professors use it

Apply the complete STP sequence

Students move from segmentation bases and customer evidence to target-market selection and positioning, showing how each stage influences the next.

Make target-market trade-offs concrete

Students balance segment size, growth, price tolerance, region fit, access and competition before deciding where to focus.

Compare strategy coherence in the debrief

Strategy summaries and class charts show where decisions align, where they conflict and where several competitors occupy the same position.

What the experience looks like

The professor dashboard supports preparation and session control, while the student interface guides each learner through the decisions forming the final strategy.

Control the session timeline

Set the pace, adjust stage timings and use Play, Pause or Stop to respond to class progress. Continuous Play supports automatic progression, while Pause and Stop allow the professor to coordinate explanations, interruptions or the final reveal.

Access guidance inside the platform

The Admin Guide gives professors direct access to Setup & Facilitation guidance, Teaching Notes and the approved Gameflow Diagram. Player Management can be used to manage access or open a student view, and alerts can communicate neutral instructions to the class.

Run and manage the session

Play starts automatic progression. Pause holds the timer in the current stage. Stop locks student screens.

Case materials students work with

All students receive the same core company and market context. The material combines quantitative market evidence with qualitative information about customer needs, behaviour, product fit and access.

Product baseline

Students begin with a defined product rather than designing one without constraints. The baseline presents product specifications, production cost, shelf life, customer response and the limits affecting the launch.

Segment economics

Students compare four potential segments through market size, expected growth, price tolerance, margin and repeat behaviour. No single measure provides the answer, so the complete pattern must be interpreted.

6 mins

Student Intro Video

Watch a short introduction to understand the company, market challenge and your role before the timed simulation begins. You will also see how the Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning stages connect.

Assess the coherence of the complete strategy

Assessment is optional. Professors may run the simulation as an ungraded applied activity or use its platform-generated data as supporting evidence within a wider assessment approach. The score is based on student inputs, but its underlying formula is not publicly disclosed. Scores and rankings should support academic judgement rather than automatically replace it.

What professors can assess

• STP strategy coherence
• Competitive differentiation

How to interpret the results

• Interpret the rank within the cohort
• Read the score alongside the submitted strategy

What professors can assess:

STP strategy coherence: Consider whether the student’s segmentation basis, target segment, launch regions and positioning choices form one clear and consistent strategy supported by customer needs, market opportunity and the selected access route.
Competitive differentiation: Consider whether the strategy creates a credible distinction from competitors without becoming different solely for the sake of difference.
Optional individual assessment report: Students may be asked to submit a short written report outside the platform once they have reviewed and reflected on their scores. This is not automatically captured or graded by the simulation.

How to interpret the results:

Interpret the rank within the cohort: Leaderboard position compares students participating in the same session and facing the same case context.
Read the score alongside the submitted strategy: The score summarises performance based on student inputs. Review it alongside the complete set of Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning choices.

Professor setup and delivery

The simulation can progress automatically, but the professor retains control of participants, stage timings and session progression. Coaching is optional.

Step 1

Set up participants

Add participants through Player Management and confirm student access. Each participant develops an individual strategy from the founder perspective, so no team or role assignment is required.

Step 2

Configure timings

Review the two-hour teaching window and the confirmed Intro, Gameplay and Reflection timings. Use Adjust where the configured stage timing needs to fit the class schedule.

Step 3

Start and manage the simulation

Use Play to begin or resume. Pause temporarily holds the timer. Stop holds the timer and locks student screens. Submitted data is retained when Play resumes the session.

Step 4

Monitor and prepare the debrief

Check progress, provide neutral clarification where useful and decide how the class will enter Reflection. Continuous Play can advance automatically; Pause or Stop can coordinate a later reveal.

Professor Resources

Everything needed to prepare, run and debrief the Go To Market simulation is organised within the resources below.

Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning
Market-segmentation bases
Customer needs and buying behaviour
Evidence quality
Benefits sought
Segment attractiveness
Target-market selection
Market-entry region selection
Access-channel choice
Go-to-market strategy
Competitive positioning
Frame of reference
Point of difference
Value-proposition development
Pricing and differentiation
Product and pack format
Promotional-message alignment
Strategic coherence

Creators of the Go To Market Simulation

These industry professionals were involved in the inception, creation, development, testing and optimisation of the simulation.

Investment banking, capital markets, PE, and corporate ratings experience at Morgan Stanley, S&P, and HPS Investment Partners. Holds a PhD in Quantitative Finance.

Gerhard Wörtche

Structured finance, credit derivatives, and NPL expertise. Portfolio Director at a private equity impact fund and active VC investor. Holds CFA and FRM qualifications.

Raushan Kretschmar

Worked in the finance department of Precomp Tools. Studied Engineering and holds an MSc in Corporate Finance from Bayes.

Aatmay Upponi

Corporate finance experience across M&A, structured finance, credit risk, and leveraged finance at Morgan Stanley, SMBC, and Citi. Holds a BSc in Economics.

Georgi Naydenov

FAQs

A marketing plan gives students broad freedom to research and propose a complete strategy, often over several weeks. The simulation focuses attention on a defined US protein-bar launch and requires each student to make a connected sequence of STP and marketing-mix decisions within a shorter session. Because everyone works from common evidence, professors can compare choices and rationales directly and discuss why different routes to market emerged from the same case.

Students first interpret customer and competitor evidence, then select a target segment before making regional, channel, positioning, pricing, packaging and promotional decisions. Each later choice should reinforce the needs and behaviour of the selected customer. A strong individual decision can therefore weaken the overall strategy if it conflicts with the rest of the marketing mix. Professors can use the final review to ask whether the complete route to market tells one consistent story.

A customer segment does not become a route to market until the company decides where and how it will reach that customer. Regional demand, competition and practical access can make the same positioning more or less viable, while the channel affects availability, economics and the customer experience. Requiring students to select two launch regions and an access channel helps professors connect STP theory to execution rather than ending the exercise with a descriptive customer profile.

The score reflects the submitted combination of decisions, but the rationale shows whether the student understood why those decisions fit the case. A high score can result from an intuitively good combination even when the explanation is generic, inconsistent or unsupported. Professors should review the evidence selected, the links between decisions and the student’s ability to defend trade-offs. The platform outcome is therefore useful assessment evidence, but it should not replace judgement about the quality of the reasoning.