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

783
views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
783
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
22
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
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: http://clarkaldrich.blogspot.com/2007/02/costs-for-simulation.html 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
      Middle
      • Alignment with learning objectives
      • Pacing and rhythm
      • Facilitation
      • Fun
      • Realism
      Late
      • 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. www.enspire.com | [email_address] Questions?