Real World Challenges. Simulated
Browse our examples of bespoke simulations. Each was built by our AI framework and assessed by a separate AI model.
// AI Assessment: Claude
BrightBank: Building the Future
Sector: Financial Services | Audience: Graduate Intake
The Brief
A UK retail bank faced a persistent challenge with its graduate intake: while academically qualified, new hires struggled to grasp the holistic operations of a bank outside their silos. Traditional training on concepts like Net Interest Margin (NIM) and capital ratios provided theory but failed to convey the visceral difficulty of strategic trade-offs.
The Goal: The stakeholder required a clear behavioral shift: graduates needed to instinctively ask, “What does this decision do to our NIM, capital position, and cost-to-income ratio?”
Key Objectives: Understanding Banking Economics, Regulatory Reality, Channel Strategy, and Systems Thinking.
The Solution & Mechanics
Teams take control of BrightBank, a mid-sized UK retail bank with £68 billion in assets. Over three simulated years, they navigate market shocks and manage five interconnected KPIs on a physical dashboard.
Core Mechanic: Physical Capital Constraint To solve the issue of “abstract” regulation, the simulation uses physical capital tokens. Each team has 30 tokens (representing £3bn regulatory capital). If tokens run out, they cannot lend. This transforms a dry compliance rule into an immediate, physical limitation that shapes every discussion.
Secondary Feature: Dynamic Market Events A deck of 24 event cards introduces external shocks—interest rate hikes, competitor moves, and a guaranteed Year 3 crisis. All teams face identical events but respond independently, allowing for rich comparative debriefs.
Visual Components
Team Dashboard: Tracks NIM, Cost-to-Income, and Capital Ratio with color-coded scales for immediate feedback.
Central Market Board: Displays the shared economic climate (Boom/Recession) and current interest rates.
AI Assessment & Specs
Assessment (Vetted by Claude)
Alignment with Learning Objectives: The physical token system successfully addresses the brief’s requirement for graduates to “feel” constraints rather than just calculate them. The five tracked metrics (NIM, Cost-to-Income, etc.) map precisely to the banking fundamentals identified as essential learning. The strategic positions create genuinely differentiated pathways, ensuring no single “winning” strategy exists.
Facilitation Design: The design enables general L&D professionals to run the session without specialist banking knowledge , thanks to the comprehensive manual and 15-minute banking primer.
Summary Specifications
Duration: 4 hours (Half-day)
Participants: 12–16 (4 teams of 3–4)
Complexity: Medium-High (Graduate level)
Physical Components: Capital tokens, team dashboards, central market board, decision cards, event cards
Facilitator Requirement: L&D professional with moderate facilitation experience
// AI Assessment: ChatGPT
NHS A&E: The First Year
Sector: Healthcare | Audience: Clinical & Operational Leads
The Brief
A fictitious NHS Trust identified a critical gap in its leadership pipeline: newly appointed Emergency Department managers understood the language of safety and targets, but not the lived tension between them. They tended to chase the 95% 4-hour waiting standard reactively, often at the expense of clinical quality and staff wellbeing.
The Goal: The simulation needed to drive a specific behavioral shift. Under pressure, managers should stop asking “How do we hit the target?” and start asking “What is the impact of this decision on safety, staff sustainability, and system constraints?” .
The Solution & Mechanics
Teams manage a single NHS Emergency Department through four quarters of operation. They face identical external pressures—flu spikes, recruitment delays, and bed block—but make independent decisions on staffing, pathways, and crisis response.
Core Mechanic: The Triangle of Impossibility The simulation models an explicit three-way tension between 4-Hour Performance, Clinical Safety, and Staff Morale . Every “fix” has a cost. For example, opening a “Fast-Track Pathway” boosts performance but reduces safety oversight. Relying on agency locums increases capacity but destroys the budget and staff morale.
Secondary Feature: Cascade Thresholds Failure is meaningful. If Morale drops too low, staff resign (reducing capacity further). If Safety drops, the CQC intervenes. This forces participants to balance short-term survival against long-term collapse.
AI Assessment & Specs
Assessment (Vetted by ChatGPT)
- Alignment with Learning Objectives: The simulation shows strong fidelity to the brief. The “Triangle of Impossibility” ensures the core tension (Targets vs. Safety) is mechanically unavoidable.
- Systemic Thinking: Whole-hospital flow and bed capacity are treated as dominant external constraints, forcing teams to realize that ED performance cannot be fixed solely within the ED.
- Facilitation: The materials exceed expectations for generalist trainers, providing detailed scripts that translate mechanical outcomes (like a safety breach) into realistic NHS scenarios
Summary Specifications
- Duration: 3.5 hours (including debrief)
- Participants: 12–16 (4 teams of 3–4)
- Complexity: Intermediate-Advanced
- Physical Components: Team dashboards, master tracking board, decision cards, event cards, tokens
- Facilitator: L&D professional (NHS expertise helpful but not mandatory)
