Is winning the only thing ?

It has been a consolation this time for us in our Markops simulation game. We hit the rockbottom last time. This time though, we are three places up from the bottom. We brought in a new product and gave it some positioning and promotion. Also the other products gained market share. In the midst of this, we were shocked to find some of the strategies that other teams follow. Let me explain.

Markops is a simulation game we play as part of our Mktg. course. The game is a computer simulated one, with every team having its own version of the game. The game consists of 4 companies. Your team is one among them and the rest are computer simulated. So we have around 11 teams in the class. All the 11 teams have their own individual market place with their competitors. Whoever has the highest Share Price index (SPI) is the winner.

To promote each product, everyone gets 20MM, which the team needs to spend on Advertising, trade marketing and Promotions. Some of the other teams go in for the introduction of a new product, get the 20 MM, and use the 20MM on the promotion of their existing products. They leave the new product in the lurch. This becomes a Dummy product and the teams make use of the hefty money in their existing products. Assume it in a real life situation, you convince your Top management about the introduction of a new product, get yourselves the Production capacity and then on the day when you need to start producing, you say No. "We dont want to create the product. We did this just to get the 20MM marketing budget, which we will use it for the other products." Sounds logical ? I am not sure.

This was the topic of discussion yesterday in our class and it was quite hot. Everyone was in their own way defending/opposing this strategy. Yours truly was one of the vocal participant yesterday :-)). The Prof himself was undecided as how to treat this. Hmm thoughts to go on this....

But Think of it. Is it possible in a real life situation? The Marketing Department does not function on its own. The R&D comes up with a new formula, the strategic decisions are taken by the top management about the product launch and then Mktg goes ahead with the new product branding, promotion etc. I dont see the strategy being used anywhere in real life. When simulation games are simulations of real life, then why do we follow something that is totally impossible in real life? Am I ignorant here, of not knowing such strategies followed by companies in real life ?

Everyone plays the game fair. But when some team comes up with a strategy, which does not focus on Mktg, but on the creative aspects of Financing, then it is something that goes against the unwritten rules of the game. Will we do anything to get our way out of trouble and win ?

I disagree. There are many instances in my life where I preferred losing just to be on the right side. I know I am a winner in my own way. Had I gone ahead with any of these choices, I would have saved some bucks by fooling someone. But will my conscience allow me to take a peaceful sleep after it ? I doubt it. I just cant. Comparing those instances with just a simulation game may seem a too far. But just cant help the rant :-)

It is a long weekend this time. Hoping to finish some subject work. Ramesh is coming to Singapore. Will catch up with him this time. My ESSEC plans are getting finalised. I am gonna have fun @ France for the second time. I am looking forward to it.