Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation
Games in the Production Domain using Technology
Acceptance Models
Phili...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
 Context of the Work & Motivation
 What determines performance...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
2016-07-31
page 3
 Human-Human & Human-Technology communication...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Context: Part of the Cluster of Excellence
“Integrative Producti...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Our research objective:
Optimize cross-company cooperation
 Opt...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Our research objective:
Optimize cross-company cooperation
Infor...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
What determines performance in
Complex Cyber-Physical Production...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
How can Human and Interface factors be investigated?
Business Si...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Development of business simulation game
 Extends „Beer Distribu...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
The Quality Management Game’s interface
 Web-based game environ...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Business Simulation Games as a
Research Lab for Understanding Sy...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Business Simulation Games as
Tools for Game-based Learning (GBL)...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Experimental Setup
 7 Dimensions from UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al. ...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
UTAUT2
2016-07-31
page 15
P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Effica...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Experimental Setup
 7 Dimensions from UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al. ...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Description of the Sample
 66 participants
– both experts and s...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Results
Qualitative findings
2016-07-31
page 18
P. Brauner et al...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Qualitative Feedback
 mostly positive feedback on the overall g...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Results
Quantitative findings
2016-07-31
page 20
P. Brauner et a...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Determinants for Increased Game Interaction
 The number of chan...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Determinants for Acceptance
2016-07-31
page 22
P. Brauner et al....
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Determinants for Acceptance
 Strong positive relationship of mo...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Determinants for Acceptance
 Due to small sample size the appli...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Subsumption and Outlook
 Overall acceptance of serious games fo...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Subsumption and Outlook
 Guidelines for Business Simulation Gam...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Subsumption and Outlook
 Guidelines for Business Simulation Gam...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
 Brauner P, Runge S, Groten M, et al (2013) Human Factors in Su...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Thank you four your attention!
 Questions?
Dipl.-Inform. Philip...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Appendix
Additional slides
page 30
2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. ...
RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
Evaluation of user interfaces:
 Research question:
– Do interfa...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games – AHFE 2016

71 views

Published on

Globalized markets, product complexity, and increased requirements on quality lead to growing complexity of business and manufacturing processes. Game-Based learning environments and business simulation games offer great potential to prepare employees the increasing complexity. As it is unclear who profits most from these learning environments, we did a study with 66 participants on a game for conveying Production Planning and Control and Quality Management. In our research model we combined personality attributes and two common technology acceptance models to determine factors projecting performance in the game and projected later use of business simulation games in general. We found that main drivers for usage are performance expectancy and transfer of skill, i.e., the perceived applicability of the learned knowledge and skills for the later work. The attained performance is unrelated to the projected use. The article concludes with guidelines to increase the likelihood for the later use of business simulation games and for increasing their overall efficacy.

Published in: Data & Analytics
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
71
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I am Philipp Brauner from the Human-Computer Interaction Center at Aachen University in Germany. I am here to present the article I have written together with Martina Ziefle on an ongoing research project for which we developed a new research methodology based on serious games…

    But first, what is the Human-Computer Interaction Center?
  • Usage scenarios for game-based Learning in Manufacturing and Business
  • The Human technology center at RWTH Achen University is an interdisciplinary research instute were researchers from different diciplines meet and collaborate.

    We focus on technology mediated communication between humans, as well as communication between humans and technology

    In short, we design, develop and evaluate interactive systems with a focus und requirements engineering, usability and user epxerience, as well as technology acceptance and risk perception of small to large scale technologies.
    We do human factors research with a focus on user diversity, especially in regard to the aging populations.
  • Although many processes can be automated, humans still are responsible and make the final decisions. Refrence to the talk of my colleague André from yesterday.
  • Although many processes can be automated, humans still are responsible and make the final decisions. Refrence to the talk of my colleague André from yesterday.
  • Tests in the field: High external validity, low internal validity, and low generalizability
    Test in the lab: High internal validity, low external validity, little transferability

    I also have a lab study in the talk later
  • Über 20 Parameter über Zustand von Unternehmen und Lieferkette les und interpretiertbar.
    Drei notwendige Entscheidungen.

    Immer noch übersichtlich im Vergleich zur Realität, aber deutlich Komplexer als Forresters Bierspiel!
  • Now the example of the interface evaluation
  • Game based learning environment effetive tool to
    * increase performance over time through training
    Raise awarness for specific supply chain and disposition topics
  • Trust in Automation, perceptual speed nötig?


    Perceptual speed 18 – 19 points, ∅ 24.7±5.0 pt
    Trust in Automation 2.5 – 5.2 points, ∅ 4.0 ± 0.9 pt
  • Trust in Automation, perceptual speed nötig?


    Perceptual speed 18 – 19 points, ∅ 24.7±5.0 pt
    Trust in Automation 2.5 – 5.2 points, ∅ 4.0 ± 0.9 pt
  • Astonishing insofar, as there are some perceptual processes that are not processed linearly, but in total.
  • Astonishing insofar, as there are some perceptual processes that are not processed linearly, but in total.
  • Astonishing insofar, as there are some perceptual processes that are not processed linearly, but in total.
  • Astonishing insofar, as there are some perceptual processes that are not processed linearly, but in total.
  • Astonishing insofar, as there are some perceptual processes that are not processed linearly, but in total.
  • 1)
    Decsion Support Systems are a good think, as long as they work correctly. => Increase accuracy and decrease reaction times.
    Especially in more complex environments with more data to be considered.

    2)
    Decsision Support Systems can be deflecting if they do not work correctly.
    Despite the participants knowing of the defect (immediate feedback), they partialy relied on the DSS. While the reaction times were just slightly lower compared to the baseline, the accuracy dropped. Especially in more complex environments.

    3)

  • 1)
    Decsion Support Systems are a good think, as long as they work correctly. => Increase accuracy and decrease reaction times.
    Especially in more complex environments with more data to be considered.

    2)
    Decsision Support Systems can be deflecting if they do not work correctly.
    Despite the participants knowing of the defect (immediate feedback), they partialy relied on the DSS. While the reaction times were just slightly lower compared to the baseline, the accuracy dropped. Especially in more complex environments.

    3)

  • 1)
    Decsion Support Systems are a good think, as long as they work correctly. => Increase accuracy and decrease reaction times.
    Especially in more complex environments with more data to be considered.

    2)
    Decsision Support Systems can be deflecting if they do not work correctly.
    Despite the participants knowing of the defect (immediate feedback), they partialy relied on the DSS. While the reaction times were just slightly lower compared to the baseline, the accuracy dropped. Especially in more complex environments.

    3)

  • Dies kann zum Deskilling, also Verlernen der eigentlichen Tätigkeit oder zur sogenannten „OOTLUF” führen, zur „out of the loop unfamiliarity”, welche dadurch definiert ist, dass der Entscheider auf sich plötzlich verändernde Rahmenbedingungen nicht adäquat reagieren kann (Wickens et al. 2013: S.388 ff)
  • Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games – AHFE 2016

    1. 1. Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models Philipp Brauner Ralf Philipsen Martina Ziefle Human-Computer Interaction Center RWTH Aachen University, Germany Philipp Brauner , Ralf Philipsen, Martina Ziefle, Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain Using Technology Acceptance Models, Advances in Ergonomics of Manufacturing: Managing the Enterprise of the Future, Volume 490 of the series Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing pp 607-620, Springer International Publishing (2016)
    2. 2. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center  Context of the Work & Motivation  What determines performance in production environments?  Study on the usage intention of business simulation games in the production domain. – Determinants of  interaction  performance  acceptance  Discussion and Outlook Agenda page 2 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    3. 3. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center 2016-07-31 page 3  Human-Human & Human-Technology communication  Design, development, and evaluation of interactive systems – Requirements analysis – Usability & User Experience – Technology Acceptance and risk perception – Human Factors, User Diversity & Aging population  Interdisciplinary team, 20 researchers Human-Computer Interaction Center at RWTH Aachen University, Germany P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    4. 4. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Context: Part of the Cluster of Excellence “Integrative Production Technology for High-Wage Countries”  Goal: Strengthen competitiveness of high wage countries  Engineering of future production systems – New materials and processes – Improved and smarter machinery – Optimize assembly cells, shop floor, cross-company cooperation  > 25 Institutes, > 100 researchers, > 60M€ page 4 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    5. 5. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Our research objective: Optimize cross-company cooperation  Optimize cross-company supply chains (SC) – Technical factors influencing performance of SCs – Human Factors influencing performance of SCs – Interface Factors on SCs performance – Interrelationship of technical, interface, and human factors  Why are humans considered? – Humans make final decision – Overview over not explicitly modelled relationships (e.g., closed-world assumption) – Complexity and uncertainty increases, less time for making decisions Information flow flow of goods Supply Chain page 5 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    6. 6. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Our research objective: Optimize cross-company cooperation Information flow flow of goods Supply Chain page 6 2016-07-31 Goal 1: Understand system and user factors that influence efficiency, effectivity, and user satisfaction in Enterprise Resource Planning Systems, Supply Chains and Quality Management. P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016 Goal 2: Supporting decision makers in production networks by providing appropriate user interfaces, decision support systems and training tools.
    7. 7. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center What determines performance in Complex Cyber-Physical Production Systems? 2016-07-31 page 7 Domain expertise Personality states & traits Trust, Self-efficacy, Motivation, … Uncertainty, randomness Non-linear interactions Disruptions & Seasonal changes Feedback loops, … Interface Design Visual complexity Information visualization Decision Support, … Efficiency, Effectivity, Profit, Quality, Satisfaction of Workers and Customers USERSYSTEM INTERFACE PERFORMANCE  P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    8. 8. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center How can Human and Interface factors be investigated? Business Simulation Games!  Convergence between field and laboratory study  Simplified & controllable (game-based) environments  Experimentally manipulate complexity and interface  Empirical methodology to quantify human performance – Identify and measure influencing personality factors – Identify and measure influencing interface factors – Build a formal model that explains performance  Side-effect: Usable for game-based learning (GBL) in education and professional trainings Test in the field (ecological validity) Controlled experiment in laboratory (internal validity) We are here page 8 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    9. 9. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Development of business simulation game  Extends „Beer Distribution Game“  Based on System Dynamics model  Includes product quality – Product intact or broken – Supplier's quality varies – Internal production quality varies  Increased complexity (tradeoff 3 parallel tasks) – Management of stock levels – Investment in incoming goods inspection – Investment in internal quality management  Over 20 variables in the user interface  Players must infer state of the production Part of the game’s simulation model: Stock level at a given time t: S(t) = S(t-1) + O(t-1) – D(t) Net profit: P(t) = R(t) – cStock×S(t) – Iigi(t) – Iipq(t) – C(t-1) – … page 9 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    10. 10. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center The Quality Management Game’s interface  Web-based game environment – Accessible across the world (scale) – Laboratory studies (scope)  Captures all metrics and interactions  Controllable conditions – Varying supplier’s quality, own production quality, customer’s demand, user interface, …  Map game performance and other metrics to Human-Factors – Identification of attitude, aptitude & motivation – Evaluation of the game, interface, … page 10 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    11. 11. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center
    12. 12. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Business Simulation Games as a Research Lab for Understanding System, Interface, and User Factors  Interactive Business simulations – Forrester’s Beer Distribution Game, Goldratt’s Game – Quality Management Game  Several studies – Do System, Interface, and Human factors influence performance?  Questions addressed – Replication of similar studies? ✓ – Raises awareness for Quality Management? ✓ – Do human factors exist that explain performance? ✓ – Which human factors influence performance? ❓ – Do interface aspects influence performance? ✓ – Which interface aspects influence performance? ✓ – How can users be supported to make better decisions? ❓ 2016-07-31 page 12 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    13. 13. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Business Simulation Games as Tools for Game-based Learning (GBL) in Education and Professional Trainings  Research Questions: – What are crucial factors for the use of serious games for knowledge dissemination in quality management, mechanical engineering, and production engineering? – What are determinants for interaction with the game, performance and acceptance (behavioral intention BI)? 2016-07-31 page 13 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016 Study approach based on technology acceptance model research. Survey- based study combined with playing the Quality Management Game.
    14. 14. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Experimental Setup  7 Dimensions from UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al. 2012) – Performance expectancy, Effort expectancy, Social-influence, Price-value, Hedonic Motivation, Facilitating conditions, and Habit  4 Dimensions of SG-TAM (Yusoff et al. 2010) – Reward, Learner Control, Transfer of Skills, and Situated Learning  Time-Value  Self-efficacy in interacting with technology (Beier 1999)  Attitude Towards Serious Games  Need for Achievement (Nicholls 1984) 2016-07-31 page 14 Interaction Performance Acceptance P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    15. 15. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center UTAUT2 2016-07-31 page 15 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016  Predict Use of consumer technology  Intention To Use and Use governed by – Performance Expectancy (PE) – Effort Expectancy (EE) – Facilitating conditions (FC) – Social Influence (SI) – Hedonic Motivation (HM) – Habit (H) – Price-Value (PV)  Mediated by – Age – Gender – Experience
    16. 16. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Experimental Setup  7 Dimensions from UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al. 2012) – Performance expectancy, Effort expectancy, Social-influence, Price-value, Hedonic Motivation, Facilitating conditions, and Habit  4 Dimensions of SG-TAM (Yusoff et al. 2010) – Reward, Learner Control, Transfer of Skills, and Situated Learning  Time-Value  Self-efficacy in interacting with technology (Beier 1999)  Attitude Towards Serious Games  Need for Achievement (Nicholls 1984) 2016-07-31 page 16 Interaction Performance Acceptance P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    17. 17. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Description of the Sample  66 participants – both experts and students in the field of quality management in production  Age 20 – 56 years Median: 24 years  Gender 8 female, 57 male, 1 unspecified 2016-07-31 page 17 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    18. 18. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Results Qualitative findings 2016-07-31 page 18 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    19. 19. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Qualitative Feedback  mostly positive feedback on the overall game: “[…]is really good and useful for understanding the concepts of PPC.” (Production planning and control) “Game was great… need more such games with different concepts. It encourages involvement and understanding real life scenarios.” “[…] is one of the best way[s] to learn practical industrial problems. This is [a] very nice Game.” 2016-07-31 page 19 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    20. 20. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Results Quantitative findings 2016-07-31 page 20 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    21. 21. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Determinants for Increased Game Interaction  The number of changes to the controls in the game varied from 3 to 39 (mean 22.6±10.6, median 22).  Self-efficacy in interacting with technology single explanatory variable influencing the number of changes. People with higher SET did significantly more changes [ρ=.367, p=.028<.05]. 2016-07-31 page 21 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016 Determinants for Performance  Most independent variables did not relate to the achieved Performance in the game.  Only the attitude towards serious games ASG [ρ=-.327, p=.051<.1] and the need for achievement NA [ρ=-.329, p=.050<.1] had a negative influence of performance.
    22. 22. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Determinants for Acceptance 2016-07-31 page 22 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016 EE PE HE FC SI PV TV REW LC TOS SL BI EE — .732** .780** .447** .466** .601** .693** .698** .684** .434* .603** PE — .671** .502** .630** .516** .733** .372* .834** .790** HE — .497** .419* .309 .782** .495** .720** .289 .619** FC — .280 .357* .365* .498** .463** .548** SI — PV — .717** .417* .633** .317 .415* TV — .594** .359* REW — .417* .745** .595** LC — .354* .432** TOS — .747** SL — SET .588** .410* .574** .399* .419** .472** .486** .372* .534** .407* .401* ASG .398* .477** .357* .309 .491** .682** AM .319 .334* .349* .441* .480* .470** .405* Spearman’s ρ-correlation coefficients for the user factors and the UTAUT2 / SGTAM model dimensions (listed if p<.1, *<.05, **<.001).
    23. 23. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Determinants for Acceptance  Strong positive relationship of most variables on the intention to use the game (BI).  The three strongest influencing factors: – Performance Expectancy PE [ρ=.790] – Transfer of Skills TOS [ρ=.747] – Hedonic Motivation HE [ρ=.619]  No influence on BI by: – Facilitating Conditions FC – Social Influence SI – Learner Control LC – Situated Learning SL 2016-07-31 page 23 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    24. 24. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Determinants for Acceptance  Due to small sample size the application of multiple linear regressions yielded only in a single significant model for the user factors and for the models’ factors: – User Factors: Attitude towards serious games (ASG) single predictor for intention to use the game, explaining 61.7% of the variance in BI (r2=.617, β=.792) – Model Factors: Performance Expectancy (PE) explains 59.2% (r2=.592, β=.778) of the variance in BI. 2016-07-31 page 24 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    25. 25. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Subsumption and Outlook  Overall acceptance of serious games for conveying knowledge of production planning and control and quality management was high.  Combination of the UTAUT2 and the SG-TAM model to investigate the acceptance of the QM-Game and business simulation games in general seems to be very promising: – both models complement each other and may in combination contribute more explained variance in BI and later USE than each individual model.  Further studies needed to research isolated influence of interwoven factors 2016-07-31 page 25 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    26. 26. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Subsumption and Outlook  Guidelines for Business Simulation Games: 2016-07-31 page 26 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016 Priority Guideline 1 Provide clearly visible short-term benefits of using the game. E.g., by making clear that the conveyed skills will be beneficial for an upcoming exam. (Based on PE) 2 The player must perceive the presented environment as a simulacrum of the reality. E.g., by portraying realistic production processes. (Based on TOS) 3 Consider learner diversity, especially in regard to different levels of inclination towards games. E.g., by augmenting the game environment with traditional forms of knowledge dissemination. (Based on ASG)
    27. 27. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Subsumption and Outlook  Guidelines for Business Simulation Games: 2016-07-31 page 27 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016 Priority Guideline 4 Create enjoyable learning environments. E.g., by including potential players in the development to ensure target specific aesthetics and playfulness. (Based on HE) 5 Avoid unnecessary complexity of the user interface and the simulation model, and provide a focused learning experience. E.g., by reducing the perceived effort for mastering the game through guided tutorials, help functions etc. (Based on EE) 6 Provide adequate and immediate feedback on the learning performance. E.g., by linking the learning objectives with the company’s profit or by adding motivational incentives (badges, leaderboards, …). (Based on REW)
    28. 28. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center  Brauner P, Runge S, Groten M, et al (2013) Human Factors in Supply Chain Management – Decision making in complex logistic scenarios. In: Yamamoto S (ed) Proceedings of the 15th HCI International 2013, Part III, LNCS 8018. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp 423–432  Brauner P (2014) Understanding Human Factors in Supply Chains and Quality Management by Using Business Simulations. In: Brecher C, Wesch- Potente C (eds) Proceedings of the Conference of the Cluster Of Excellence “Integrative Production Technology For High Wage Countries” 2014/1, 1st edn. Apprimus Verlag, Aachen, Germany, Aachen, Germany, pp 387–396  Hering N, Meißner J, Runge S, Brauner P (2014) Exzellenzcluster: Was bestimmt die Performance meiner Supply-Chain? – Eine Untersuchung technischer und menschlicher Einflussfaktoren im Hinblick auf die Effizienz von Lieferketten. Unternehmen der Zukunft - Zeitschrift für Betriebsorganisation und Unternehmensentwicklung 27–28.  Philipsen R, Brauner P, Stiller S, et al (2014a) The role of Human Factors in Production Networks and Quality Management. – How can modern ERP system support decision makers? First International Conference, HCIB 2014, Held as Part of HCI International 2014, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, June 22-27, 2014. Proceedings, LNCS 8527. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp 80–91  Philipsen R, Brauner P, Stiller S, et al (2014b) Understanding and Supporting Decision Makers in Quality Management of Production Networks. Advances in the Ergonomics in Manufacturing. Managing the Enterprise of the Future 2014 : Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, AHFE 2014. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 94–105  Stiller S, Falk B, Philipsen R, et al (2014) A Game-based Approach to Understand Human Factors in Supply Chains and Quality Management. Procedia CIRP 20:67–73. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2014.05.033  Brauner P, Ziefle M (2015) Human Factors in Production Systems – Motives, Methods and Beyond. In: Brecher C (ed) Advances in Production Technology. Springer International Publishing, pp 187–199  Mittelstädt V, Brauner P, Blum M, Ziefle M (2015) On the visual design of ERP systems – The role of information complexity, presentation and human factors. 6th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics and the Affiliated Conferences, AHFE 2015. pp 270–277  Calero Valdez A, Brauner P, Schaar AK, et al (2015) Reducing Complexity with simplicity - Usability Methods for Industry 4.0. 19thTriennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2015).  Ziefle M, Brauner P, Speicher F (2015) Effects of data presentation and perceptual speed on speed and accuracy in table reading for inventory control. Occupational Ergonomics 12:119–129. doi: 10.3233/OER-150229  Brauner, P., Philipsen, R., Fels, A., Fuhrmann, M., Ngo, H., Stiller, S., Schmitt, R., Ziefle, M.: A Game-Based Approach to Meet the Challenges of Decision Processes in Ramp-Up Management. Quality Management Journal. 23, 55–69 (2016).  Calero Valdez, A., Brauner, P., Ziefle, M.: Preparing Production Systems for the Internet of Things The Potential of Socio-Technical Approaches in Dealing with Complexity. In: Dimitrov, D. and Oosthuizen, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Competitive Manufacturing 2016 (COMA ’16). pp. 483–487. CIRP, Stellenbosch, South Africa (2016).  Brauner P, Ziefle M. How to train employees, identify task-relevant human factors, and improve software systems with Business Simulation Games. Procedings of the International Conference on Competitive Manufacturing 2016, COMA ’16. Stellenbosch, SA; 2016. p. 541–6.  Brauner, P., Calero Valdez, A., Philipsen, R., Ziefle, M.: Defective Still Deflective – How Correctness of Decision Support Systems Influences User’s Performance in Production Environments. Proceedings of the Human-Computer Interaction International 2016. (in press)  Brauner, P., Philipsen, R., Ziefle, M.: Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models. Proceedings of the Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics Conference (AHFE 2016). (in press)  Brauner, P., Philipsen, R., Calero Valdez, A., Ziefle, M.: On Studying Human Factors in Complex Cyber-Physical Systems, Workshop HFIDSS 2016, Mensch &Computer 2016 (in press) Publications page 28 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    29. 29. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Thank you four your attention!  Questions? Dipl.-Inform. Philipp Brauner Human-Computer Interaction Center Chair for Communication Science RWTH Aachen University, Germany eMail: brauner@comm.rwth-aachen.de page 29 2016-07-31 Funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Cluster of Excellence “Integrated Production Technology for High Wage Countries” (EXC 128). P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    30. 30. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Appendix Additional slides page 30 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016
    31. 31. RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center Evaluation of user interfaces:  Research question: – Do interfaces influence player’s performance?  Interface optimizations based on user feedback – Better spatial layout – Key Performance Indicators (e.g., stock level)  Method – Study (N=40) with old vs. new interface, surveys  Results – Users preferred revised user interface – Higher profits and higher product quality w. new interface  Conclusion: – Good interfaces crucial for performance (V = 0.263, F1, 38 = 13.548, p = .001 < .05*) revised interface first interface page 31 2016-07-31 P. Brauner et al. – "Projecting Efficacy and Use of Business Simulation Games in the Production Domain using Technology Acceptance Models" - AHFE 2016

    ×