Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Ppp Of Simulation Development2
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Ppp Of Simulation Development2


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • Transcript

    • 1. The Three P's of Simulation Development ROI: Prototype, Prototype, and Prototype Shon Bayer Managing Partner Bjorn Billhardt CEO Ben Katz Content Developer
    • 2. Session Agenda
      • Today we’ll talk about:
      • Horror stories from the trenches
      • How to develop a prototyping strategy
      • Who to get involved in prototyping
      • Hands-On examples of prototypes
      • We won’t talk about:
      • Prototyping software simulations
      • ROI Analysis
    • 3. Who are You?
      • How many of you prefer the term game to simulation?
      • How many of you are simulation developers?
      • How many of you are simulation consumers?
      • How many of you are new to simulations?
    • 4. Simulation Types and Development Costs Reference: Simulation Type 2D Game (10-15 min) Team-Based Business Simulation (1 day) Customized Board Game (4-8 hours) Branching Simulation (30 min - 1 hour) Spreadsheet Simulation (1-2 hours) Average Price 1. $75K-$125K 2. $50K-$100K+ 3. $250K-$500K+ 4. $100K-$250K 5. $20K-$40K
    • 5. Executive Challenge: Case Example
      • Executive Challenge™ - Leadership Development Simulation
      • Team-based, multiplayer simulation
      • Used by organization such as Bank of America, Alltel, Pitney Bowes, and MIT – Sloan
    • 6. A Cautionary Tale
    • 7. Lessons Learned
      • Think about the “experience” early
        • Team size 22?
      • Be prepared for emergent features
        • Ethics  Leadership
      • Don’t develop in the echo chamber
        • Put the sim in front of “real” users soon and often
      • Don’t lose focus on low-priority features
      • Throw out the design document
    • 8. Two Process Models Standard Process Iterative Prototype-Driven Process Concept Beta Final
    • 9. A Different Way to Develop Simulations
    • 10.  
    • 11.  
    • 12. What Does Failure Look Like?
      • Interface and mechanism confusion
      • Difficult to learn, long ramp-up time
      • Boring, non-engaging experience
      • Doesn’t align with learning objectives
      • Doesn’t mesh into overarching program
      • Significant additional development effort to “fix” sim
    • 13. Tools to Prototype With
      • Choose an approach that aligns with the goals of the simulation, development team skill sets, and resource needs
      • There is no “right” approach:
        • Thought Experiments
        • Paper Based Prototypes
        • Excel Based
        • Iterative Computer Based
        • Hybrid Approach
        • Rapid Development Tool
    • 14. Hands on Prototyping Examples Paper + Excel Prototypes Excel Prototype Paper + Excel + Web Prototype Executive Challenge Supply Chain Management Simulation Finance Leader Simulation
    • 15. Best Practices for Prototyping
    • 16. The Two Key Ingredients
      • The right prototype
      • The right audience
    • 17. The Right Prototype
      • Design team should have a clear notion of what needs to be tested:
        • Game mechanics
        • Data entry
        • Realism
        • Balancing
        • User Interface
        • Motivational strategies
        • Alignment with learning objectives
        • Fun
        • How to Learn the Simulation
        • Pacing, Rhythm
        • Facilitation
      Single player versus multiplayer Difficulty
        • Paper versus computer-based
    • 18. What to Test and When
        • Game mechanics
        • Data entry
        • Realism
        • Balancing
        • User Interface
        • Motivational strategies
        • Alignment with learning objectives
        • Fun
        • How to Learn the Simulation
        • Pacing, Rhythm
        • Facilitation
      Single player versus multiplayer Difficulty
        • Paper versus computer-based
      Prototype Stage Early
      • Fundamental Game Design (Single player vs. multiplayer, paper vs. computer based)
      • User interface
      • Motivational strategies
      • Game mechanics
      • How to learn the simulation
      • Alignment with learning objectives
      • Pacing and rhythm
      • Facilitation
      • Fun
      • Realism
      • Balancing
      • Difficulty
      • Program Integration
    • 19. The Right Prototype (cont)
      • Don’t be afraid to test a single game mechanic or learning objective in a playtest
      • Build in complexity over time (but don’t be afraid to keep it out altogether)
    • 20. What a Playtest Might Look Like Early Prototypes Later Prototypes 15 minutes Context and Vision Setting 15 minutes Articulate Learning Objectives 30 minutes Communicating Rules 15 minutes Communicating Rules 2 hours Play 1 hour Play 30 min Debrief Experience 30 minutes “ Real” Debrief 1 hour Brainstorm New Ideas + Consensus on next steps 1 hour Play 1 hour Debrief Experience
    • 21. The Right Audience Prototype Stage Audience Profile Early (Concept)
      • Designers (Visual and Instructional)
      • Gamers
      • Subject Matter Experts
      • Sponsors
      Middle (Details)
      • Subject Matter Experts
      • Stakeholders
      • End Users
      Late (Polish)
      • Quality Assurance
      • Expert Players
      • End Users
    • 22. Case Example: Pitney Bowes
      • Simulation focused on changing behavior of sales managers from a quota-based mindset to a P&L-based mindset
      • What we did right:
        • Buy-in from executives, stakeholders and SMEs
        • Open design process, great communication
      • What we did wrong:
        • No prototyping – expectation gap between Design Document and Alpha was immense
        • Alpha was made up of executive sponsors with collective P&L responsibility of $4B+
        • Beta was made up of end users
    • 23. Other Best Practices
      • Have specific objectives for each prototype, but embrace uncertainty
      • Always keep the goals of the simulation (learning objectives, experience) at front and center
      • Be clear in communications as “reality” changes
    • 24. About Enspire Learning
      • Enspire delivers exceptional simulation experiences that help our clients address strategic learning challenges
      • Our Austin-based team of 60+ learning professionals provides best practices in design, development, and delivery of e-learning, simulations, and blended learning
      • Our award-winning solutions have delivered value to some of the most demanding and prestigious organizations around the world
      © Copyright 2006, Enspire Learning Page “ The Enspire team who worked with me from the initial point of contact through implementation was exceptionally professional, friendly, helpful and detail-oriented. The simulation itself was a big success.” -Dr. Corrine Bendersky, Professor of Management, UCLA Anderson School of Management
    • 25. | [email_address] Questions?