The Siege - your organisation is strong, mighty and under siege. How will your existing assets protect you against global trends, technological disruption, new business models and exponential competitors? What new assets must you innovate?




This is designed for 3-5 players

This will take you about 3 hours from start to finish.

Your going to need Kit number 1 to play this. Follow this link for show to obtain. LINK

How to Map the Future: The Siege
The essence:
Gamify your strategic planning by taking the role as either defender of your keep or attacker of a new market. Using different classes of miniatures and terrain pieces you put your business intelligence, partnerships, technologies and vision statements on the table - literally. With these illustrative assets and a simple set of rules you create an analog and interactive simulator for defining your organisation's strengths, finding its weaknesses and testing strategies for overcoming external threats. Let the game begin - it will take approximately three hours!

Desired outcome of workshop for The Defender:
* Define your organisation's Just Cause/MTP, or realise your lack thereof* Define who you serve (customer segment, type of citizen, partner)* Define how you can serve them better (channels, the mechanism of reaching those you serve)* Define what new/improved things you can do for them (products, services, value proposition, social contract)
* Learn what global meta trends that pose the greatest risk and/or opportunity to your organisation (climate change, Me Too-movement, populism etc)* Learn what exponential technologies that pose the greatest risk and/or opportunity to your organisation (renewable energy, blockchain, CRISPR, 3D printing etc)* Learn what specific organisations that pose the greatest risk and/or opportunity to your own organisation (companies, governmental bodies, acts of legislation)
* Simulate your different responses to these external threats using combinations of Technologies, Business Models and Consumer/Citizen Desirability (what people want)* Achieve alignment around an actionable high-level strategy for facing disruption with courage and proactivity
Desired outcome of workshop for The Attacker:
* Define your organisation's Just Cause/MTP, or realise your lack thereof* Define who you want to serve (customer segment, type of citizen, partner)* Define how you can serve them today, or soon (channels, the mechanism of reaching those you serve)* Define what you can do for them (products, services, value proposition, social contract)
* Learn what global meta trends that you can use to gain an advantage against The Defender (i.e. the incumbent whose people you seek to convert to your own cause)* Learn what exponential technologies that you can use to gain an advantage against The Defender * Learn what specific organisations that either threaten or may aid your ability to overcome The Defender (companies, governmental bodies, acts of legislation)
Necessary preparation:
* Find out whether the client has a Just Cause/MTP or similar* Research What the client does, How it does it and for Whom* Research what relevant strategic partnerships the client has* Research relevant global meta trends (as it pertains to the client AND those that the client seeks to serve), exponential technologies and competing organisations. * The better you do this, the better everything will become. Don't trust that the client will know any of this.
Game Master (head facilitator) Responsible for making sure that everyone follows the rules, see below, and keep the time. The Game Master takes the role of Opponent player (i.e. either Attacker or Defender), but not with the goal to win but rather challenge the client player to try harder and achieve better insights. ...
Game Chronicler (documentarian) Responsible for documenting key developments during the workshop by taking notes, photos and video. After the workshop, the Chronicler puts together an Expedition Report that retells the tale of what happened - capturing the conclusion and the path the players took to get there. This report serves as a memento for those who partook in the workshop, a report of their work and as basis for the client's own marketing and storytelling efforts.
Players (2-5 people, representing the client) Responsible for putting their organisation's strategical assets to work in trying to define relevant responses to external threats and changes. This means a willingness to lean in and play the game, as this exercise requires a willingness to be playful while also being serious.
Inventory:1 x Landscape board Representing the market you’re operating it. It could be green and lush, barren or perhaps cold as winter. 1 x Keep The Keep is a castle that has five available ways of defining what kind of keep it is. On top of the roofs there is a hole in which the player can place banners on which they have written defining descriptions of what the keep represents. These could be the organisations values, strengths of defining characteristics. 
In the middle of the keep there is a lighthouse allowing the players to place a definition of the organisations purpose. In other words, their Just Cause/WHY/MTP. They sentiment that describes why they exist. 
This allows the players to visualize a shared definition of how they experience the organisation they are working within.   3 x People These are representation of the people that you are serving today. The customers, users fanbase or any other concept used to describe those whom benefit from your existence. 1-3 Moats These are the advantages your organization has that makes it impossible or difficult for a challenger to take over the castle. 3 x CyclonesThese are representations of global trends that are driving change in the world. 3 x MeteorsThese are representations of Exponential Technologies that are being introduced to the world. 3 x Fires  These are representations of Business Models that are becoming viable as challengers to the established models used in business today. 10 x ObservationsThese are markers that makes it possible to place generic observations made that might not fit into any of the predefined concepts but are viable to the playing board that is being created. 1-3 Bridges Thes bridges consists of three different aspects that have the capability that on their own, or in groups, traverse the moats defending your organisation. Consumer DesirabilityThese are connected to the Cyclones (Global Trends) or observations that are surrounding the castle in the distance. Here the Global Trend is instanced as a new or accelerated need from potential or existing customers and consumers. Technical FeasibilityThese are connected to the Meteors (Exponential Technologies) or observations that are surrounding the caste in the distance. Here the Technology is instanced in a possible application of this technology that makes sense in the context. Business ViabilityThese are connected to the Fires (Business Viability) or observations that are surrounding the castle in the distance. Here the Business Viability is instanced in a context. 3 x Attackers These are existing organisations or start-ups that are making use of these new opportunities to challenge the moats that are defending the castle that is your own organisation. 3 x Defenders These are initiatives launched from your organisations meant to stand guard at the bridges defending it from being crossed by the attackers. 

How to PlayThere are different way to make use of How to Map the Future: The Siege. 
It could be a well prepared workshop executed in two hours made possible by extensive preparation by the facilitator and some constraints in regards of the level of detail of the activity. It could also be a way of tracking progress of an more in depth activity where the player engages in fieldwork, business intelligence and exploring activities where the results of these activities are tracked with help of the available assets. 
In short, either the preparation is done by the facilitator, or it’s part of the players responsibility which would then require more time from the player. 
Short versionThe player takes on the role of the defender while the facilitator takes on the role of the attacker. First to act is the defender in Round 1Round 1: Building your keep and defining the weatherThe Defender place their Just Cause/MTP/Why on the highest tower of the Keep, and their supporting values/belief system components on the other towers. Inside the Keep the defending players place their People, max 3 different types, last, but not least, the defender places their moat/moats. 

Once done the Attacker deploys relevant Weather Phenomenon around the Landscape. The distance between these and the Keep signify how pressing these change drivers are perceived to be for The Defender. In the same fashion, the Attacker then places relevant Exponential Technologies and Business Models. 
This creates the scenario which sets the outer perimeters for what will be considered throughout the rest of the workshop. Round 2:This round is initiated by the Attacker who makes use of the business intelligence and the information provided by the defender in regards of strengths and purpose of the keep. 
Now the attacker considers the global trends, exponential technologies and business models and sets them into context by defining what they might look when implemented. By making use of the bridges that define Consumer Desirability, Technical Feasibility and Business Viability the attacker defines how the grand trend are implemented, either on their own or in cooperation with each other. This is also done by taking the moats defined by the defender and defining how the bridges can be used to traverse the moats that is defending the keep. By doing this the attacker have challenged the moats that is defending the keep and it’s time for the defender to respond. 
Now it’s time for the defender to act. 

The Defender now responds to the business intelligence and threat analysis that have come alive around their Keep. They do so by deploying combinations of Technologies, Business Models and Consumer Desires onto the Landscape. These constellations form the basis for innovation initiatives that if they are placed within the boundaries of the Moats are Core Initiatives (based on the ExO methodology). If placed out in the wild they are Core Initiatives, similar in shape to Attackers with the goal of (constructively) disrupting the Keep. 
Additionally, The Defender may place these initiatives in direct proximity to any attacking assets in the Landscape in the attempt of establishing a partnership. In order to do so they must fill in a Partner Card that explains to the Attacker what value proposition the Defender has to offer to this specific asset. The Attacker can accept or deny this partnership offer, and will use their prepared business intelligence as the basis for this decision.
The Attacker responds to the moves of the Defender by moving each attacking assets (Weather Phenomenon, Exponential Technologies, Attackers) closer to the Keep and its Moats. How close depends on what the prepared business intelligence suggests are the most pressing forces of change. The Attacker may place any asset, or constellation of assets, inside the Moats or below the walls of the Keep but must justify to The Defender why these forces are able to overcome the outer defences. This is where the debating between Attacker and Defender should start to become intensified.
Round 3, final round:
The Defender must now respond to the complete threat/opportunity picture presented by The Attacker. They do so in two ways. Firstly, they take the opportunity to change or update their Just Cause and supporting values (the flags on the towers of the Keep) so as to better serve the People based on Why. Second, they place their final constellations of Technologies, Business Models and Consumer Desires on the actual walls of the Keep. These assets represent the core strategic innovation responses that address the most pressing changes and threats, i.e. those that are closest to the walls. This is how The Defender will serve their People with improved How and/or What.
The Attacker now seeks to outsmart The Defender by regrouping their assets (particularly Exponential Technology and Attackers) to perceived weaknesses along the walls. Every such move generates an articulated debate between Attacker and Defender, and it is the responsibility of the Game Master to make sure that these conversations are succinct.
The final round is a fluid exchange between Defender and Attacker, where every move leads to a countermove. The game ends when either player concedes, or when the Game Master deems that the team has scaled the strategic peak. The goal of the workshop is for the gathered players to align around an actionable strategy for responding to the most pressing threat and/or opportunity that face their organisations, and the final stages of the workshop should center on the realisation of the most important thing to do first. The Game Chronicler will have documented the journey with all its twists and turns towards this conclusion, enabling the team to not only retrace their steps and remember their learning path but also explain to others why their chosen strategy is the most applicable.