Easy to work with. Insightful students. Great experience overall!

Great work! Lots of useful research and analysis, thanks

The team assigned was really professional, inquisitive and creative. They provided very thoughtful analysis and recommendations on the business questions our business asked. It was a pleasure to work and learn from this team and look forward to collaborating with students from this class in the future.

I enjoyed working with our project team! I especially liked how diverse the group was. As an organization looking to eventually grow global, they provided some great insight and perspectives because of the team's diversity.

Overall feedback. Overall, we are very satisfied with the project at the time of completion. This was our first Riipen project and we believe that we may have been overly ambitious in terms of scope, but we have taken this into account and we can say that our experience has been positive and valuable to xSensa. We want to thank the team and the professor for working with us. In reading the rest of our feedback, please keep in mind that the detailed points listed are places where we saw space for improvement. It was very evident that certain team members were doing the lion’s share of the work. This was especially true for section 7. If the other sections were of the same caliber, this report would have been of immense value to the company. There was a bit of a disconnect with the project in the sense that the team for the most part viewed the product as consumer-facing, rather than being part of a micro-targeted pre-launch elite service package. Product tryouts and feedback: The team did a good job in testing the product. In the report, it would have been helpful for them to have as a team prioritized on most important feedback. E.g Sections 2.1-2.3 provide feedback from individual team members, but there is no attempt to consolidate and prioritize. PESTEL analysis. This section was neither requested by us nor informative. It is also an example of an analysis that is more appropriate for a consumer product. Section 3.4 is to general and has no direct applicability to wearable EEG. Regarding CSR it is not clear what is the relevance to a product at this stage and of the type that it is. The Industry Regulation section is very good and informative and we will use this information to drill down a bit further. Licenses & Permits – section it is not clear what are the recommendations for xSensa. SWOT analysis. Strengths – good summary. Weaknesses – it would have been helpful to provide links Opportunities – good but incomplete, we would expect a lot more opportunities explored Threats – same as above. We have provided the team with access to our existing research, however, this section does not reflect the full spectrum of our competition, including the most obvious one, the Muse. STP Model There were some great discoveries in this section. The main criticism for sections 5.1 and 5.2 is that it seems that our direction towards individuals in the $350K+ range was not taken into account. Go to Market Plan This is not an actual Go to Market plan. It has some elements, but not a roadmap. A good plan normally addresses the “why?” and “how?” and in what order. Pricing The min reference used is very old (2008) and while we recognize that the team does not have access to a full set of reports, we still think that some effort could have been made to get a more recent benchmark / comparable service. 6.3 Sales. The provided tier structure is missing rationale. The suggested system was also different than what we have indicated. 6.4 Missing action items/recommendations. Sales Development This is the most valuable and developed part of the report and something that we can use in practice. Very comprehensive. This section for xSensa was the most practical, usable information provided in the entire report. It is clear that whoever worked on this section invested far more time than all of the other sections combined. Summary Once again we want to congratulate the team on the successful completion of the project and lots of good thinking in the process. Wishing you all well.

Great students with great ideas. I enjoyed connecting with them and hearing their ideas.

Great to work with the Queen's University students. Initial project introductions were clear and concise. Students were organized, methodical, and delivered a strong final report. They met and, to some extent, exceeded our expectations. We've now worked with a few Riipen institutions. This one currently stands out as one of the best so far.

We enjoyed working with the Queens students and thank you for the effort that you put into the project.

Great students. Mature, focused, dedicated, and hard-working. They did an awesome job on the marketing project.

Matthew Wright and Almendra Delgado easily understood the tasks and gave great feedback in our first meeting. They were very honest about the areas in which they could add value, and Matt’s rich background in advertising added a lot to the strategy. Matt and Almendra’s understanding of Business Strategy and Planning was impressive, and they provided many details in their final report. Their SWOT and competitive analyses were extremely well thought through. A brilliant team! The students did quite a bit of targeted research and interviews. They presented it well and very thoroughly. Their research and recommendations were appropriate, innovative, and well thought through to the target market. It was apparent that Matt and Almendra drew from quite a bit of previous knowledge and experience. They were brilliant, professional, and a true pleasure to work with. Not knowing about their previous courses, we felt we learned more from them than vice-versa. They deserve a full 100% on their submission.