WGU C218 Task 2 Guide + Example: Stockholder Report & Financial Analysis (2026)

Reading Time: 22 minutes

Dan Palmer, MBA · Updated on: Aug 28, 2026

You’ve finished several rounds of the C218 simulation, you’ve got a spreadsheet full of numbers, and now Task 2 is asking you to explain what those numbers actually mean. Collecting the data was never the hard part. The hard part is turning simulation results → business analysis → financial interpretation → stockholder-level recommendations, which is a different skill than reading a report.

This guide walks through exactly that process: what data to pull from your simulation, how to analyze it across financial statements, ratios, cash flow, and (where your course includes them) valuation and the Conscious Scorecard, how to organize it into a stockholder report, and how to review your draft before you submit. It’s built for working MBA students who need a workflow, not a wall of theory.

What Is WGU C218 Task 2?

WGU C218 Task 2 is typically a formal stockholder report analyzing your Capsim business simulation’s performance, covering financial results, strategic decisions, and business outcomes in enough depth to support real recommendations. The core skill it tests is turning raw simulation output into genuine analysis: not just reporting what a number was, but explaining why it moved, what it means for the business, and what management should do next.

It draws on your own simulation results specifically, so a generic answer or another student’s report won’t hold up under a rubric that grades on how well your analysis connects to your own company’s data. Exact required sections, quarter coverage, and format can vary by course version, so treat this guide as a framework and verify specifics against your current WGU task instructions and rubric.

If you searched c218 wgu, c218 task 2 wgu, or c218 task 2 pdf looking for this exact assignment, you’re in the right place; this guide covers the analysis itself, and a fully annotated example is included further down.

What Is the WGU C218 Capstone?

C218 is the capstone course for WGU’s MBA IT Management track, built around a business simulation rather than a proctored exam. You spend several quarters making strategic and tactical decisions for a simulated company, then your Performance Assessment tasks ask you to demonstrate what that experience taught you: Task 1 as an investor pitch on early performance, Task 2 as a deeper stockholder-level business analysis, and Task 3 as a career management reflection. Task 2 is where the financial and analytical depth of the course really shows up.

C218 Task 2 and the Business Simulation

Everything in your stockholder report should trace back to evidence from the simulation: your decisions, the financial results they produced, market performance, and any strategic pivots along the way. Later-quarter data (commonly Q4 through Q6, depending on your course’s structure) tends to carry the most weight in Task 2’s analysis, since it reflects the cumulative effect of your strategy rather than a single early snapshot. Don’t assume a specific quarter or report is mandatory without checking; verify exactly which quarters and reports your current task requires.

What C218 Simulation Data Should You Collect for Task 2?

Your current WGU assessment instructions determine exactly which of these are required for your submission. Treat this table as a collection checklist, not a list of mandatory rubric items.

How to Organize Your C218 Task 2 Data

Before you write a word of the report, get your source material organized. A simple folder structure:

• 01 – Simulation Decisions
• 02 – Financial Statements
• 03 – Market Data
• 04 – Scorecards
• 05 – Later-Quarter Results (whichever quarters your task actually covers)
• 06 – Task 2 Draft

Alongside it, a decision-analysis spreadsheet:

Filling this in as you go, rather than reconstructing it from memory at the end, is the single biggest time-saver for this task. If you already built a decision log for Task 1, extend the same one instead of starting over.

C218 Task 2 Stockholder Report Explained

A stockholder report communicates business performance to people with a financial stake in the outcome, which means it needs to read like something a business executive would actually hand to a board, not a student assignment summarizing a course. A strong report generally answers:

1. Where is the company now?
2. How did it get there?
3. Which decisions mattered most?
4. What do the financial results indicate?
5. What are the company’s strengths and weaknesses?
6. What should happen next?

Treat this list as the underlying logic of a good stockholder report, not an official WGU-required outline. Follow your current rubric’s actual required sections and structure.

If you want a second set of eyes on how you’re organizing your simulation data before you start drafting, message Gradevia on WhatsApp. We can help you work through what you’ve collected and figure out what your analysis should actually emphasize.

C218 Task 2 Strategic Decision Analysis

Decision → Reason → Result → Impact → Lesson

• Decision: What did management decide?
• Reason: Why was that decision made?
• Result: What actually happened?
• Business Impact: How did it affect revenue, profit, cash, market performance, operations, or stakeholders?
• Lesson: What should management repeat, change, or avoid going forward?

Run your most consequential decisions through this same sequence rather than describing them in a loose narrative. Consistency here makes your analysis easier to follow and easier to write.

C218 Task 2 Financial Analysis

Financial analysis is not copying figures out of a report. The upgrade path is:

Number → Change → Explanation → Business Meaning

A number on its own tells you almost nothing. What moved, why it moved, and what that means for the business is where the actual analysis lives.

Income Statement Analysis

Look at revenue, cost of goods or services, operating expenses, operating income, and net income, and pay attention to the trend across periods rather than a single quarter in isolation. A margin that’s improving tells a different story than one that’s flat or shrinking, even if both quarters show a profit.

Balance Sheet Analysis

Assets, liabilities, and equity describe the company’s financial position at a point in time. Investors care about this because it shows whether growth is being funded sustainably or through mounting debt, and whether the company could weather a rough quarter. Track how these change over the periods you’re analyzing, not just where they land at the end.

Cash Flow Analysis

Break cash flow into its three components:

• Operating cash flow: cash generated or used by core business activities
• Investing cash flow: cash used for or generated by long-term investments
• Financing cash flow: cash from or paid toward debt, equity, or dividends

Profit and cash are not the same thing. Hypothetical example, not simulation data: a company can report a solid net income while cash tightens because more of that income is tied up in inventory or receivables than in cash on hand. That gap is worth explaining, not glossing over.

C218 Ratio Analysis

Liquidity. Measures whether the company can cover short-term obligations. The current ratio (current assets ÷ current liabilities) is a common example; a higher ratio generally suggests more short-term cushion.

Activity. Measures how efficiently the company uses its resources. Asset turnover (revenue ÷ total assets) is a common example; higher turnover generally suggests more revenue generated per dollar of assets employed.

Leverage. Measures reliance on debt relative to equity. Debt-to-equity (total debt ÷ total equity) is a common example; higher leverage can amplify returns but also amplifies risk.

Profitability. Measures how effectively revenue converts into profit. Net profit margin (net income ÷ revenue) is a common example; higher margins generally indicate stronger cost control or pricing power.

For each ratio you use: define it, apply the general formula, state what the result generally indicates, and then connect it specifically to your own simulation data. Example interpretation: “Current ratio improved from 1.4 to 2.1 across the period, moving from a tight liquidity position toward a more comfortable cushion, consistent with the reduced short-term borrowing reflected on the balance sheet.” Don’t invent course-specific formulas beyond the general, standard ones; if your rubric specifies a particular calculation method, use that instead.

C218 ROI Analysis

A standard general formula:

ROI = (Return ÷ Investment) × 100

Return is the gain generated by a decision or investment, and Investment is the amount originally committed; the result is a percentage that makes it easier to compare the relative efficiency of different decisions. What matters more than the number itself is the interpretation: is this ROI strong relative to the risk taken, how does it compare across periods, and what does it suggest about the company’s trajectory. Connect your ROI figure to other financial indicators rather than presenting it in isolation, and use the exact calculation method your current rubric specifies if one is given.

C218 Company Valuation

Valuation generally reflects some combination of a company’s assets, earnings potential, and market position, and it matters to investors because it’s ultimately what they’re deciding whether to buy into. If your current C218 assessment specifies a particular valuation method or set of assumptions, follow that method exactly. There’s no universal WGU-specific valuation formula to fall back on here; the method your rubric requires is the one that counts.

C218 Cash Flow Analysis (Deeper Framework)

Cash Source → Cash Use → Trend → Risk → Recommendation

Hypothetical Example, Not WGU Simulation Data: Say a company’s operating cash flow grew steadily while a large capital investment pulled financing cash flow negative in the same period. Source: operations. Use: equipment investment. Trend: overall cash position still growing, but at a slower rate than revenue. Risk: reduced cash cushion if a downturn hit before the investment paid off. Recommendation: monitor the payback period on that investment closely before committing to further capital spending.

Use this same five-step sequence with your own actual cash flow data; the example above illustrates the structure only.

C218 Conscious Scorecard Analysis

Where your simulation includes a Conscious Scorecard or similar tool, the goal is to connect your company’s performance to a broader set of outcomes than pure financials, potentially including employees, customers, community, environmental impact, or quality, depending on what categories your specific simulation actually tracks. Only discuss categories your simulation actually reports on, and use your own scorecard results as evidence rather than fabricating numbers or writing generically about what a scorecard is supposed to measure.

C218 Business Performance Analysis

Financial Performance + Market Performance + Strategic Decisions + Stakeholder Outcomes

Looking at any one of these in isolation risks a misleading conclusion. Strong financials alongside shrinking market share tell a different story than strong financials alongside growing share; a good quarter that came from cutting R&D spending tells a different story than one that came from genuine demand growth. The strongest Task 2 submissions weave these threads together rather than covering each in a separate, disconnected section.

How to Analyze Bad C218 Simulation Results

Weak performance doesn’t sink a Task 2 submission by itself. What matters is whether you can analyze it honestly:

Problem → Cause → Evidence → Impact → Corrective Action

If revenue declined, profit was weak, cash dropped, or your ratios worsened, name it directly, identify what caused it, back that up with evidence from your own data, explain the impact, and propose a specific corrective action. Investors, real or simulated, trust a team that can explain a setback more than one that glosses over it. Hiding a bad result an evaluator can see plainly in your own numbers is far more damaging than addressing it head-on.

C218 Task 2 Answers: What You Should Know

If you’re searching for “c218 task 2 answers” or “wgu c218 task 2 answers,” here’s the straightforward version: generic answers won’t work, because every student’s simulation results differ, and Task 2 is graded on how specifically your analysis connects to your own company’s data. What actually helps is understanding the analytical frameworks well enough to build your own answers from your own numbers.

Financial Analysis Framework: “My company’s ______ changed from ______ to ______. This indicates ______. A contributing factor was ______. The result affected ______ because ______.”

Strategic Decision Framework: “The company decided to ______ because ______. The outcome was ______. This affected ______. In retrospect, management should ______.”

Ratio Analysis Framework: “The ______ ratio was ______, indicating ______. This is significant because ______. Combined with ______, the result suggests ______.”

Cash Flow Framework: “Cash from ______ increased/decreased because ______. This affected the company’s liquidity by ______. Management should therefore ______.”

These are learning templates to fill in with your own simulation data, not submission-ready answers.

C218 Task 2 Review: How to Check Your Work

Rubric alignment. Does every requirement in your current rubric have a corresponding section in your draft?

Data accuracy. Does every number in your report match your actual simulation output?

Analytical depth. Does each important figure come with an explanation, or is it just sitting there?

Evidence. Are your conclusions actually supported by data you’ve cited, or are they assertions?

Investor perspective. Would a stockholder reading this understand why the information matters to them?

Recommendations. Are your recommendations connected to the analysis you just presented, or do they feel bolted on?

Formatting. Check your current submission requirements for format, length, and structure before you finalize.

C218 Task 2 Common Mistakes

1. Copying another student’s answers. Your data won’t match, and it’ll show.
2. Using old C218 guides. Requirements shift between course versions; verify against your current rubric.
3. Reporting numbers without interpretation. A figure alone isn’t analysis.
4. Ignoring trends. A single data point misses the story a sequence tells.
5. Analyzing one financial statement in isolation. Income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow all inform each other.
6. Confusing profit with cash. They measure different things and can move in different directions.
7. Giving generic recommendations. “Improve marketing” isn’t a recommendation; tie it to your specific evidence.
8. Failing to explain strategic decisions. A decision without its reasoning reads as arbitrary.
9. Making unsupported assumptions. Every claim needs something behind it.
10. Hiding negative results. An evaluator who can see your data will notice what you left out.
11. Confusing correlation with causation. A metric moving after a decision doesn’t automatically mean the decision caused it.
12. Mixing actual results and projections. Keep what happened separate from what you expect to happen.
13. Using incorrect formulas. Double-check every ratio and calculation against a reliable source.
14. Failing to verify calculations. A single arithmetic error can undercut an otherwise strong analysis.
15. Ignoring the current rubric. The most avoidable mistake on this list, and the most consequential.

For each of these, the fix is the same: slow down at the exact point you’d normally skip past it.

C218 Task 2 vs C218 Task 1 vs C218 Task 3

Requirements can vary by course version; treat this as orientation and your current WGU task instructions as the authority. For the full breakdowns, see the WGU C218 Task 1 guide and the WGU C218 Task 3 guide, and the C218 MBA Capstone overview for how all three pieces fit together.

WGU C218 Task 2: Apex Cycle Co. Annotated Example

This sample is provided for educational reference only. Do not submit this document as your own work; every simulation run produces different numbers, and a rubric graded on specificity will notice a mismatch. Need a custom Task 2 built from your own simulation data? Message us on WhatsApp: +1 (564) 544-6924.

Seeing a complete, correctly structured example is often the fastest way to understand what depth of analysis a c218 task 2 wgu submission actually needs, so here’s a full annotated sample built around a fictitious company, Apex Cycle Co.

Executive Summary Example

Apex Cycle Co. completed its simulation run with cumulative net income of $42.6M and final-period revenue of $67.2M, a 136.6% increase from its starting position of $28.4M. The company held a 22.4% overall market share at simulation end, ranking second across the competitive field.

The most consequential strategic decision of the run was an early capacity expansion in the Traditional segment, which eliminated a stockout problem that had cost an estimated $10.6M in lost revenue. That investment, financed through long-term bond issuance, enabled market share growth from 14.2% to 27.4% over the simulation. A parallel R&D program improved High End product reliability (MTBF) from 14,000 to 18,400 hours, supporting a price premium that lifted gross margin from 34.2% to 41.2%.

The primary underperformance area was the Low End segment, where two competitors pursued more aggressive automation earlier in the simulation. By the midpoint, competitors held a $1.80 to $2.40 per-unit cost advantage that compressed Apex’s pricing flexibility and capped Low End market share at 15 to 17% for the remainder of the run. Closing that automation gap is the highest-priority recommendation for any future expansion period.

Financial Ratio Analysis Example

All ten ratios improved across the simulation. Worth flagging: Interest Coverage crossed the investment-grade threshold of 3.0x by the midpoint, signaling improved creditworthiness and reduced refinancing risk. Return on Equity exceeded the industry benchmark late in the run and closed at 22.8%, 4.8 percentage points above the 18% benchmark.

Balanced Scorecard Example

Financial Perspective. Revenue grew from $28.4M to $67.2M, a 136.6% cumulative increase, with a compound quarterly growth rate of 11.4%. Cumulative net income of $42.6M exceeded the simulation-field average of $31.2M by 36.5%. Gross margin expanded 7.0 percentage points, reflecting both the MTBF-driven pricing power and cost reduction through automation. Target met: all four financial KPIs exceeded benchmark or beat the field average.

Customer Perspective. Traditional segment market share grew from 14.2% to 27.4%, reaching second place in the field by the later periods. Customer satisfaction improved from 31 to 47 (index out of 100) as product positioning moved closer to the segment’s ideal spot; High End satisfaction reached 58 following the MTBF improvement. Gap identified: Low End customer satisfaction remained at 34, below the field average of 41, reflecting the price competitiveness gap from competitors’ earlier automation investments.

Internal Business Process Perspective. Plant utilization averaged 112% in the later periods, indicating efficient capacity deployment with minimal idle cost. Traditional segment automation reached 6.5 by the final period; Low End automation reached only 7.2, behind the top competitor’s 9.1. Stockout frequency dropped from two occurrences early in the run to zero after the capacity expansion. Target partially met: utilization and stockout metrics hit target; the Low End automation gap remains the primary internal process deficit.

Learning and Growth Perspective. Cumulative R&D investment of $14.2M improved High End MTBF by 31.4% and reduced average product age across all segments from 2.4 to 1.6 years. The High End R&D investment generated an estimated $8.4M in incremental gross profit through premium pricing. Target met: R&D as a percentage of revenue averaged 4.8%, within the recommended 4-6% range for an innovation-focused strategy.

Competitive Benchmarking Example

Apex outperformed the field on cumulative net income (22.4% above average) and ROE (22.8% versus 18.9% average), driven by the High End MTBF premium strategy and consistent cost reduction. Competitor A held the final-period revenue lead, largely through a more aggressive Low End automation program Apex didn’t match until later in the run.

That automation gap is Apex’s most significant competitive vulnerability going into any future period. Competitor A’s Low End automation advantage translates to an estimated $2.60 per-unit cost edge, enough to sustain pricing pressure that caps Apex’s Low End market share ceiling.

Ethical Leadership Reflection Example

The most substantive ethical tension in Apex Cycle Co.’s simulation run involved the Low End automation investment decision. Increasing plant automation reduced labor costs and improved competitive positioning, but the implicit effect, in a real manufacturing context, would be workforce reduction as machines replace human labor.

From a utilitarian perspective, the automation investment can be justified: reduced unit costs enabled lower prices for consumers, improved profitability for investors, and sustained the company’s competitive viability, outcomes that benefit a larger stakeholder group than the displaced workers alone. But utilitarianism requires that the total benefit to the many outweigh the harm to the few, which depends on whether displaced workers have alternative employment opportunities, an assumption the simulation doesn’t model.

From a stakeholder theory perspective (Freeman, 1984), the automation decision reflects an implicit prioritization of investors and customers over employees. A more ethical approach would incorporate transition support for affected workers, retraining, extended severance, or transition assistance, costs the simulation framework doesn’t require but that real organizations face.

The leadership lesson here is that simulation environments optimize for financial outcomes while real organizations have to optimize for a broader set of stakeholder impacts. Ethical leadership means deliberately expanding the decision frame beyond what the model measures.

Reference: Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

How to Finish C218 Task 2 Faster

Phase 1: Organize. Collect your simulation data into the folder structure above.

Phase 2: Identify. Find the major trends and the decisions that actually mattered.

Phase 3: Analyze. Run your data through the frameworks in this guide.

Phase 4: Draft. Write the stockholder report section by section.

Phase 5: Verify. Check every number and calculation against your actual simulation output.

Phase 6: Review. Compare your finished draft against the current rubric line by line.

Struggling to move from Phase 2 to Phase 3, from “I see the trends” to “I know what they mean”? That gap is exactly where Gradevia’s WhatsApp support tends to help most, walking through your specific numbers rather than generic financial theory.

C218 Task 2 Analysis Worksheet

Business Performance

• Revenue:
• Profit:
• Cash position:
• Market performance:
• Major trend:

Strategic Decisions

• Decision:
• Reason:
• Result:
• Impact:
• Lesson:

Financial Analysis

• Strongest indicator:
• Weakest indicator:
• Important ratio:
• Cash-flow observation:
• Financial risk:

Recommendation

• Problem:
• Evidence:
• Proposed action:
• Expected benefit:

Fill this out before you start writing prose. Having your thinking organized in worksheet form first makes the actual report draft go much faster.

C218 Task 2 “Data to Analysis” Example

Hypothetical Example, Not Actual WGU Data

Raw data: Net profit margin moved from 6% to 11% across two periods, while market share in the same segment slipped slightly.

Observation: Profitability improved even as market position softened.

Interpretation: The margin gain likely reflects a pricing or cost decision that traded some competitive positioning for profitability, rather than genuine efficiency gains alone.

Business impact: Short-term profitability looks strong, but a shrinking market position could compound over future periods if competitors continue gaining ground.

Recommendation: Investigate whether the pricing decision behind the margin gain is sustainable, and weigh a modest margin trade-off against defending market share going forward.

This is the shape of interpretation Task 2 is generally looking for throughout: not just what changed, but what the change plausibly means and what management should do about it.

What If You Don’t Understand Your C218 Simulation Results?

• Review your decision history from the start
• Compare results across quarters instead of looking at one in isolation
• Identify the biggest changes and work backward to what caused them
• Review the full set of financial statements together, not just one
• Check market indicators alongside financial ones
• Compare what you expected against what actually happened
• Think carefully about cause and effect before asserting either
• Use your course’s official resources for anything simulation-mechanics related
• Get legitimate academic guidance if you’re still stuck after working through the data yourself

WGU MBA Capstone Simulation Tips for Task 2

• Save your results after every quarter, not just at the end
• Maintain a decision log from the start of the simulation
• Annotate major changes when they happen, not from memory later
• Don’t wait until your final quarter to organize your data
• Keep actual results clearly separate from projections
• Track both your positive and negative outcomes equally
• Document your formulas and calculation methods as you use them
• Verify every calculation before it goes into your report
• Use your own simulation data, always
• Review your current rubric before you start drafting, not after
• Write your analysis while the reasoning behind each decision is still fresh

C218 Task 2 Submission Checklist

• Current WGU instructions reviewed
• Current rubric reviewed
• Simulation data organized
• Relevant reports collected
• Major strategic decisions identified
• Financial performance analyzed
• Market performance analyzed
• Ratio analysis completed where required
• Cash flow analyzed
• ROI/valuation calculations verified where required
• Scorecard analysis completed where required
• Recommendations supported by evidence
• Every calculation checked
• Formatting checked
• Submission requirements verified

Frequently Asked Questions About WGU C218 Task 2

What is WGU C218 Task 2? A stockholder report analyzing your business simulation’s financial and strategic performance, focused on turning raw results into real business analysis and recommendations grounded in your own data.

Is there a c218 task 2 pdf version of this guide? The annotated Apex Cycle Co. example and the frameworks above cover the same ground a PDF summary would; bookmark this page rather than searching for a separate download, since it’s kept current as course versions change.

What is the C218 stockholder report? The core Task 2 deliverable: a formal report communicating company performance and recommendations to stakeholders, built from your simulation’s financial statements, ratios, and strategic decision history.

What simulation is used in WGU C218? A business simulation where you make ongoing strategic and tactical decisions for a fictitious company, with results calculated each round.

How does the WGU C218 simulation relate to Task 2? The simulation generates the evidence, financial statements, market data, and decision history, that Task 2’s analysis is built from.

What financial information is important for C218 Task 2? Generally your income statement, balance sheet, cash flow statement, and any scorecard or market data your simulation tracks; confirm the exact required data in your current rubric.

What is C218 ratio analysis? Evaluating your company’s liquidity, activity, leverage, and profitability using standard financial ratios, then connecting each result to your specific simulation performance.

How do you calculate ROI for C218? A standard general formula is ROI = (Return ÷ Investment) × 100. Use the exact figures and method your current rubric specifies.

What is C218 company valuation? An estimate of your company’s worth based on assets, earnings potential, and market position; follow the specific valuation method your current course requires if one is specified.

How do you analyze C218 cash flow? By separating operating, investing, and financing cash flow, tracking the trend across periods, and explaining why cash movement differs from reported profit.

What is the C218 Conscious Scorecard? A tool for evaluating company performance across dimensions beyond pure financials, potentially including customer, employee, or community impact, depending on what your specific simulation tracks.

What are WGU C218 Task 2 answers? There’s no universal answer set. Strong submissions are built from your own simulation data using consistent analytical frameworks, not copied or generic content.

Can I use another student’s C218 Task 2 answers? No. Every student’s simulation results are unique, and a copied submission won’t match your data or satisfy a rubric graded on specificity.

How should I review C218 Task 2? Check it against your current rubric, verify every number, confirm every conclusion has supporting evidence, read it from a stockholder’s perspective, and check formatting and submission requirements.

What is WGU C218 Task 1? The earlier capstone deliverable: an investor pitch presentation built from your early-round simulation results. See the C218 Task 1 guide.

What is WGU C218 Task 3? The capstone’s career management component, covering professional competencies and career planning. See the C218 Task 3 guide.

How long does C218 Task 2 take? It varies based on how organized your simulation data is and how much revision your draft needs. Staying organized from the start saves the most time.

How can I finish C218 Task 2 faster? Keep a decision log throughout the simulation, organize your data by category as you go, and work through the analytical frameworks before you start writing prose.

What are the best WGU MBA capstone simulation tips? Save every report as it’s generated, track trends instead of isolated numbers, separate actual results from projections, and always base your analysis on your own simulation data.

Where This Leaves You

The workflow underneath everything in this guide is the same: simulation → data → analysis → financial interpretation → recommendations → stockholder report → review. Your own simulation results are the foundation the whole assessment rests on, no framework here substitutes for that. Verify your current WGU instructions and rubric before you finalize anything, since course versions do shift.

If you’re a working MBA student juggling C218 around a full-time job and want help turning your simulation data into a report you feel good about submitting, message Gradevia on WhatsApp at +1 (564) 544-6924. We can help you organize your analysis, work through the financial concepts, and review your draft against the current rubric before it’s due.

References

Abd Ghani, M. G., & Mohamad, N. (2025). Enhancing students’ business plan learning through experiential business plan simulation. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(5), 4721-4732. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.905000363

De Jesus Alvares Mendes Junior, I., & Alves, M. D. C. (2023). The balanced scorecard in the education sector: A literature review. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2160120. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2160120

Ferreira, C. P., González-González, C. S., & Adamatti, D. F. (2021). Business simulation games analysis supported by human-computer interfaces: A systematic review. Sensors, 21(14), 4810. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21144810

Pejić Bach, M., Ćurlin, T., Stjepić, A. M., & Meško, M. (2023). Quo vadis business simulation games in the 21st century? Information, 14(3), 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14030178

Vélez, A., & Alonso, R. K. (2025). Business simulation games for the development of decision making: Systematic review. Education Sciences, 15(2), 168. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020168