Load this file when the CEO needs to test a strategic move against likely competitive responses before committing.
"No plan survives first contact with the enemy." — Helmuth von Moltke
Most strategic plans assume competitors will stand still. They won't. War gaming forces you to:
- Predict competitor reactions before they happen
- Discover vulnerabilities in your strategy before deployment
- Build robust strategies that work across multiple competitive responses
- Prepare contingency plans for the most dangerous responses
- Reduce strategic surprise by 60-80% (McKinsey estimate)
Famous failures from NOT war gaming:
- Kodak's digital strategy assumed competitors would also be slow
- BlackBerry assumed iPhone was a consumer toy, not an enterprise threat
- Blockbuster assumed Netflix would stay a DVD-by-mail niche
Step 1.1 — Identify Your Proposed Move Clearly articulate the strategic action being considered:
- What exactly are we doing? (e.g., "Launching a free tier to capture market share")
- What's our timeline?
- What resources are committed?
- What does success look like? (quantified metrics)
Step 1.2 — Identify Key Competitors (2-4) Select the most relevant competitors to simulate. For each:
| Competitor | Market Share | Key Strengths | Known Strategy | Resources | Culture / Speed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Competitor A | 35% | Brand, distribution | Defend share, premium pricing | $500M war chest | Slow, bureaucratic |
| Competitor B | 15% | Technology, innovation | Disrupt, land-grab | $50M, lean | Fast, aggressive |
| Competitor C | 10% | Niche expertise | Deepen niche | Limited | Conservative |
Step 1.3 — Map the Competitive Dynamics
- Who competes with whom? (Not all competitors compete with each other)
- Are there potential allies or unexpected entrants?
- What market trends affect everyone? (regulation, technology shifts, customer behavior)
Before simulating, gather current intelligence on each competitor. Use available search or browsing tools to find:
For each competitor, research:
- Recent moves (last 6 months): Product launches, pricing changes, hires, partnerships
- Financial position: Revenue, funding, cash reserves, burn rate
- Leadership signals: CEO interviews, blog posts, conference talks — what are they telegraphing?
- Known strategy: Annual reports, investor presentations, analyst commentary
- Capability gaps: What can't they do that we can? What can they do that we can't?
- Response speed: How fast do they typically react to market changes?
Intelligence template per competitor:
## Competitor: [Name]
**Recent Moves (last 6 months):**
- [Move 1 — source]
- [Move 2 — source]
**Financial Position:**
- Revenue: $X / Funding: $X / Cash: ~$X
- Burn rate / profitability status
**Leadership Signals:**
- CEO said "[quote]" at [event] — suggests [interpretation]
**Known Strategy:**
- Primary: [e.g., "Land and expand in enterprise"]
- Secondary: [e.g., "Build platform ecosystem"]
**Capability Assessment:**
- Strengths: [1, 2, 3]
- Weaknesses: [1, 2, 3]
**Response Speed:** [Fast/Medium/Slow] — Evidence: [past examples]
**Predicted Response Tendencies:**
- To price cuts: [likely reaction]
- To new features: [likely reaction]
- To market entry: [likely reaction]
For each competitor, simulate their most likely response to your proposed move.
Step 3.1 — Role-Play Each Competitor
Put yourself in their shoes. Ask:
- "How would this move affect MY business?" (their perspective)
- "What are MY strategic priorities right now?"
- "What resources do I have available to respond?"
- "How quickly can I respond given my organization?"
- "What response would my board/investors expect?"
Step 3.2 — Generate Response Scenarios (3 per competitor)
For each competitor, generate:
- Most Likely Response (60%) — Based on their known strategy and culture
- Aggressive Response (25%) — If they perceive existential threat
- Unexpected Response (15%) — The creative/unconventional move
Response template:
### Competitor A: [Name] — Response Scenarios
**Scenario A1: Most Likely (60%)**
- Response: [What they do]
- Timeline: [How quickly]
- Impact on us: [How this affects our move]
- Our counter: [How we respond to their response]
**Scenario A2: Aggressive (25%)**
- Response: [What they do]
- Timeline: [How quickly]
- Impact on us: [How this affects our move]
- Our counter: [How we respond to their response]
**Scenario A3: Unexpected (15%)**
- Response: [What they do]
- Timeline: [How quickly]
- Impact on us: [How this affects our move]
- Our counter: [How we respond to their response]
Step 3.3 — Cross-Competitor Dynamics
Consider how competitors' responses interact:
- If Competitor A cuts prices, does Competitor B follow?
- Could two competitors collaborate against us?
- Does our move trigger a market-wide race to the bottom?
Don't stop at one round. The most valuable insights come from round 2-3.
Round 1: Our Move → Their Response
- We launch [action]
- Competitor A does [response]
- Competitor B does [response]
Round 2: Our Counter-Response → Their Escalation
- We respond with [counter]
- Competitor A escalates with [action]
- Competitor B pivots to [action]
- New dynamics: [what's changed]
Round 3: Steady State
- Where does the market settle?
- Who gained share? Who lost?
- What's our position relative to where we started?
- Was the original move worth it, given the full game tree?
Simulation Summary Table:
| Round | Our Move | Comp A Response | Comp B Response | Net Position |
|-------|----------|-----------------|-----------------|--------------|
| 0 | Status quo | — | — | Baseline |
| 1 | Launch free tier | Match pricing | Ignore, focus niche | +5% users, -10% ARPU |
| 2 | Upsell premium | Bundle features | Partner with Comp A | +3% revenue, stable users |
| 3 | Steady state | Price war fatigue | Niche dominance | +8% revenue vs baseline |
Step 5.1 — Robustness Test
A strategy is robust if it works across multiple competitive responses. Score your proposed move:
| Competitor Scenario | Our Outcome | Score (1-10) |
|---|---|---|
| Comp A: Most likely + Comp B: Most likely | [outcome] | 7 |
| Comp A: Aggressive + Comp B: Most likely | [outcome] | 4 |
| Comp A: Most likely + Comp B: Aggressive | [outcome] | 6 |
| Comp A: Aggressive + Comp B: Aggressive | [outcome] | 2 |
| Worst case all competitors | [outcome] | 1 |
**Average Robustness Score:** X/10
- Score ≥ 7: Strategy is robust — proceed with confidence
- Score 4-6: Strategy has risks — develop contingency plans
- Score < 4: Strategy is fragile — reconsider or modify
Step 5.2 — Identify No-Regret Moves
Some moves are good regardless of competitive response:
- Building capabilities that help in ALL scenarios
- Actions that are reversible if competitive response is unfavorable
- Moves that generate information/learning even if they "fail"
Step 5.3 — Decision Gate
Present to the CEO:
## War Gaming Results: [Strategic Move]
**Robustness Score:** X/10
**Strategy works well when:**
- [Condition 1]
- [Condition 2]
**Strategy is vulnerable when:**
- [Condition 1] — Mitigation: [action]
- [Condition 2] — Mitigation: [action]
**No-Regret Elements:**
- [Move 1 — good in all scenarios]
- [Move 2 — good in all scenarios]
**Recommended Modifications:**
- [Adjustment 1 to improve robustness]
- [Adjustment 2 to reduce vulnerability]
**Kill Criteria (stop if):**
- [Condition 1]
- [Condition 2]
**Recommendation:** [PROCEED / MODIFY / ABORT]
When full war gaming isn't feasible:
- 5 min — State your move clearly
- 10 min — For each of 2-3 competitors, predict their MOST LIKELY single response
- 5 min — Predict your counter-response and where the market settles
- 5 min — Score robustness: Does your strategy still work if competitor responses are 2x more aggressive than expected?
- 5 min — Identify top 2 contingency plans
- Assuming competitors are stupid — They have smart people too
- Only simulating one round — The second-order effects are where surprises hide
- Ignoring new entrants — The biggest threat may not be current competitors
- Projecting your values onto competitors — "They would never do that" is often wrong
- Anchoring on current market structure — Markets shift; today's rival might be tomorrow's partner
- Not using real intelligence — Always search for current competitor data before simulating