Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
DiGRA 2015 * Luneburg * Germany
Towards a Taxonomy for
Enterprise Gamification
Marigo Raftopoulos * Steffen Walz * Stefan ...
Hello 
Marigo Raftopoulos
PhD candidate: Year 3 ¾
Thesis - How organisations play: The
building blocks for successful ent...
Warning!
5 Death by PowerPoint Slides approaching…
The Research Gap
• Comprehensive enterprise gamification taxonomy did not exist
• Taxonomies are key tools for enterprise ...
Purpose of the Research
• Identify how the market defines and interprets enterprise gamification by
evaluating the artifac...
Methodology – Grounded Approach
1. Initial scan of self-identified examples of enterprise gamification (60)
– Conceptualiz...
Foundation built on serious games taxonomies
• SGs are already well versed in enterprise systems and processes
– Solving e...
Methodology - Limitations
• Self-identified not peer reviewed as focusing on industry interpretation
• Grounded approach i...
• Three orientations
– Market-based
– Technology-based
– Design-based
• Five key elements
– Primary purpose
– Target audie...
Proposed Taxonomy
Enterprise
Gamification
Taxonomy
Market based
Target Audience 5
Key Purpose 16 (6)
Technology Based
Game...
Market-Based Elements
Market-Based Elements
* Distilled from a list of 17 different items
Market-Based Elements
Technology-Based Elements
Secondary technologies
often used in parallel:
• Augmented reality
• Virtual reality
• Geo-locat...
Technology based elements
in close-up
Enterprise Platforms (46%)
46% of cases were identified as
enterprise platform solutions
Equally divided between vendor
supplied and self-built solut...
Games & Simulations (25%)
25% of cases identified as a
gamification project were either
games (19%) or simulations (6%)
Playful Experiences (8%)
8% of cases were identified as playful experiences (i.e. events,
scavenger hunts, gamestorming & other physical activities...
Product Modifications (20%)
20% of cases identified as having
modified their product/service offering
using gamification elements
BBVA optimized digit...
Design-Based Elements
Common Design-Based Elements
Core gameplay
• Collection (56%)
• Territory acquisition
• Prediction
• Survival
• Building
•...
• No new or novel design patterns
• Only simple forms of gameplay and game mechanics evident
– Practitioner skills and/or ...
• Self identified examples used in the research
– Lacked analytical/design rigor
– Marketing/public relations motivations ...
• Develop gamification taxonomies specific enterprise domains
• Tie to motivational affordances and psychological outcomes...
The components for enterprise gamification that have become apparent:
• A process AND an artifact AND an experience
• Enha...
All feedback welcomed and appreciated
Contact:
Email: marigo.raftopoulos@rmit.edu.au
Twitter: @marigo
Research papers: https://rmit.academia.edu/MarigoRaftopoul...
Enterprise Gamification Taxonomy
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Enterprise Gamification Taxonomy

2,599 views

Published on

This is a presentation I made at DiGRA 2015 in Luneburg Germany on my published research paper. The full paper can be found here:
https://rmit.academia.edu/MarigoRaftopoulos

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

Enterprise Gamification Taxonomy

  1. 1. DiGRA 2015 * Luneburg * Germany Towards a Taxonomy for Enterprise Gamification Marigo Raftopoulos * Steffen Walz * Stefan Greuter
  2. 2. Hello  Marigo Raftopoulos PhD candidate: Year 3 ¾ Thesis - How organisations play: The building blocks for successful enterprise gamification implementations RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia GEELab – Games Research Centre Supervisors: Associate Professor Steffen Walz, Associate Professor Stefan Greuter
  3. 3. Warning! 5 Death by PowerPoint Slides approaching…
  4. 4. The Research Gap • Comprehensive enterprise gamification taxonomy did not exist • Taxonomies are key tools for enterprise environments– IT, IS, KM, HR • To date, focus on enterprise gamification centered on motivational affordances, not on holistic enterprise systems and processes • Mixed messages on definitions and descriptions of what gamification is, what it does, and how it can be applied • Common language & terms of reference specializing in enterprise gamification
  5. 5. Purpose of the Research • Identify how the market defines and interprets enterprise gamification by evaluating the artifacts they have created • Locate where organisations are investing in gamification projects and for what purpose by looking at self-identified cases of gamification • Identify the design decisions they are making • Develop a classification system to form a baseline to compare (and inform) gamification design strategies and investment decisions • This was essential to the next phase of my research on capabilities and competencies required for successful implementations
  6. 6. Methodology – Grounded Approach 1. Initial scan of self-identified examples of enterprise gamification (60) – Conceptualization & categorization of key parameters – Open coding to explore emerging themes (code book) – 3 orientations, 5 key elements, over 40 sub-elements – Initial 60 examples (Glaser’s ‘theoretical saturation’ point) 2. Literature review – At the mid-point of the project – Data source on taxonomies; contextualize the data 3. Detailed industry survey or audit (304 examples) – ABI/INFORM, OneFile Gale, Google Scholar, Google Search (190k hits) – Filter examples to set criteria of ‘enterprise gamification’ – Coding of examples; analysis of results 4. Develop a theory of the taxonomy inductively
  7. 7. Foundation built on serious games taxonomies • SGs are already well versed in enterprise systems and processes – Solving enterprise problems – Integrate with enterprise systems – Already tested and validated in complex enterprise environments • Extensive literature review to evaluate different models – To contextualize the research on the survey/audit – Ongoing discourse in this domain (incl entertainment games) • Key sources for SG: Klabbers 2003, Sawyer et al. 2008, Djaouti et al. 2011, Bedwell et al. 2012, Pereira et al. 2012, Ratan et.al. 2009, Zyda 2005, Michael et al. 2005, Alvarez et al. 2008, Bergeron 2006, Robinson et al 2013 • Gamification schemas: Deterding et al. 2011, Kappen et al. 2013, Hamari et al. 2014
  8. 8. Methodology - Limitations • Self-identified not peer reviewed as focusing on industry interpretation • Grounded approach is interpretative & guided by researchers’ world view – Pragmatist research paradigm, design-science PhD • Some level of ambiguity is unavoidable in enterprise taxonomies – Organisational constructs are conceptual & contextual – Ditto for games studies and design • Not intended as a substitute for business acumen or creative design • Gamification is in part a create endeavor, therefore it cannot be completely codified
  9. 9. • Three orientations – Market-based – Technology-based – Design-based • Five key elements – Primary purpose – Target audience – Technology strategy – Core gameplay – Key game mechanics Enterprise gamification taxonomy elements Primary purpose Target audience Technology strategy Core gameplay Key mechanics Outline of Key Findings
  10. 10. Proposed Taxonomy Enterprise Gamification Taxonomy Market based Target Audience 5 Key Purpose 16 (6) Technology Based Games and simulations Mobile Web Game platforms Enterprise Platforms Vendor supplied Self built Product Modifications 2 Playful Experiences 2 Design Based Core Gameplay 12* Key Mechanics 10* Orientations Elements Sub-Elements
  11. 11. Market-Based Elements
  12. 12. Market-Based Elements * Distilled from a list of 17 different items
  13. 13. Market-Based Elements
  14. 14. Technology-Based Elements Secondary technologies often used in parallel: • Augmented reality • Virtual reality • Geo-location • Social media
  15. 15. Technology based elements in close-up
  16. 16. Enterprise Platforms (46%)
  17. 17. 46% of cases were identified as enterprise platform solutions Equally divided between vendor supplied and self-built solutions PHD Media gamified collaboration platform SAP CRM application
  18. 18. Games & Simulations (25%)
  19. 19. 25% of cases identified as a gamification project were either games (19%) or simulations (6%)
  20. 20. Playful Experiences (8%)
  21. 21. 8% of cases were identified as playful experiences (i.e. events, scavenger hunts, gamestorming & other physical activities) both digital and analogue that also offered real world experiences
  22. 22. Product Modifications (20%)
  23. 23. 20% of cases identified as having modified their product/service offering using gamification elements BBVA optimized digital service offerings Innovation challenge introduced new services
  24. 24. Design-Based Elements
  25. 25. Common Design-Based Elements Core gameplay • Collection (56%) • Territory acquisition • Prediction • Survival • Building • Chasing/evading • Trading • Puzzle solving • Social • Destruction • Racing • Spatial navigation Key mechanics • Points (43%) • Achievements (badges/trophies) (52%) • Leaderboards • Narrative • Missions/quests (29%) • Currency • Rewards (35%) • Social • Experiences • Progression
  26. 26. • No new or novel design patterns • Only simple forms of gameplay and game mechanics evident – Practitioner skills and/or organisational readiness – Availability of applied research limited – Often referred to as “experiments” – Still early days • Reinforce existing organisation constructs and management paradigms • Creating new constructs and paradigms not evident (but creating new processes and approaches within existing constructs is) • Reality is not really broken after all.. Reality Check
  27. 27. • Self identified examples used in the research – Lacked analytical/design rigor – Marketing/public relations motivations to report as gamification – Self justification bias in reporting • High level overview – limited deep application into specific enterprise domains (marketing, human resources, training, information systems, knowledge management, finance, compliance) • Taxonomies are human constructs, and are highly contextual and open to different interpretations Limitations
  28. 28. • Develop gamification taxonomies specific enterprise domains • Tie to motivational affordances and psychological outcomes for a more complex taxonomy • Detailed framework covering design orientations (game design patterns) • Convergence of other forms of games and play into a redefinition of enterprise gamification Opportunities for Further Research
  29. 29. The components for enterprise gamification that have become apparent: • A process AND an artifact AND an experience • Enhances a product, service, process or system • Affordances for gameful experiences through games, play and game design patterns • Integration of design, technology and organisational capabilities • Results in value creation for organisational stakeholders Towards a (re)definition?
  30. 30. All feedback welcomed and appreciated
  31. 31. Contact: Email: marigo.raftopoulos@rmit.edu.au Twitter: @marigo Research papers: https://rmit.academia.edu/MarigoRaftopoulos

×