Program Pivot — Realigning EADA-Lima's Executive-Education Portfolio

A four-round, advanced exec-ed strategy simulation set inside Escuela de Alta Dirección Andina (EADA-Lima), the executive-education unit of a respected Peruvian business school in San Isidro, running on PEN 28,000,000 of annual revenue at a 32% target contribution margin. The model rests on a portfolio of open-enrollment short courses and custom/in-company programs — but 68% of revenue comes from traditional face-to-face functional courses (finance, marketing, leadership) now squeezed from three sides: global online platforms teaching the same content at a third of the price, corporate clients demanding custom, applied, outcome-measured programs, and demand tilting toward emerging skills (data/AI, sustainability, digital leadership) the catalog underweights. The trigger: the spring 2026 open-enrollment intake comes in 24% below plan, flagship courses fill at only 62% against an 80% break-even, blended fill rate has fallen to 64%, course leaders are discounting 15-20% and dragging open-program margin from 38% toward 26%, learner NPS has slipped from +42 to +28, and two anchor corporate clients (combined PEN 6,000,000) have issued RFPs for custom digital-leadership and sustainability programs. Playing the Executive Education Director with a PEN 4,000,000 fixed portfolio-investment budget and a board mandate to defend margin while realigning toward demand, you make the coupled choices of topic mix, delivery mode, and build/buy/partner across four rounds. Round 1: diagnose the catalog into grow/fix/retire on demand, margin, fill rate and NPS, and decide whether to discount to fill seats. Round 2 (the heart): build next year's portfolio — launch emerging-skill programs vs defend the legacy functional catalog, assign face-to-face/online/blended delivery, choose build vs buy/license vs partner for the data-AI and sustainability capability gaps, and set the investment level under the PEN 4,000,000 cap. Round 3: price and design the two custom RFPs to win the PEN 6,000,000 at or above the 32% margin hurdle, respond to a live competitor price attack on the online functional programs without a margin death-spiral, build outcome measurement into the winning bid, and sequence the launch within faculty/partner capacity. Round 4: present the realigned portfolio to the dean and board, state a portfolio philosophy, and defend the build/buy/partner and delivery-mode choices. The math rewards demand-driven realignment, mode-to-audience fit, partnering for speed when the budget cycle is tight, custom bids that clear the margin hurdle, and a built-in demand-monitoring loop — and punishes the five classic errors: defending the legacy face-to-face catalog, discounting to fill seats, building everything in-house and missing the cycle, underpricing custom bids, and one-size delivery. Final KPIs track blended contribution margin (%), portfolio fill rate (%), learner NPS, and budget allocated (S/ of 4,000,000), applying Jessica Arce Valencia's demand-driven exec-ed portfolio-design lens.