Talk I gave at the European Organisation Design Forum 2013 Vienna Conference

1. Game Based
Organization Design
Jeroen van Bree, PhD (@jeroenvanbree)
European Organisation Design Forum
2013 Vienna Conference

2. KPMG INTERNATIONAL
Confronting Complexity
Managing complexity
is important to my
company’s success
Research Findings and Insights
94%
6%
kpmg.com
SECTORS AND THEMES
MAY 2011
Title set in
univers 65 bold
33pt on 36pt
leading, white
Increasing complexity
is one of the biggest
challenges my company faces
70%
0
20
Agree
30%
40
60
Disagree
Source: KPMG International, 2010
Additional infor Univers
45 light 12pt on16pt leading
kpmg.com
Credits and authors in Univers
45 light 12 pt on14 pt leading
http://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/complexity-research-report.pdf
80
100

3. Stand out in a complex world
Figure 5
Capitalizing
on Complexity
The complexity gap
While eight out of ten CEOs anticipate significant complexity ahead,
less than half feel prepared to handle it.
Expect high/very high level of complexit
ears
79%
Feel prepared for expected complexity
49%
30%
complexity
gap
Insights from the
Global Chief Executive
Officer Study
Learning from top performers
“Really, I am not af
complexity at all. O
this just motivates
Jacques Pellas,
http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/ceo/ceostudy2010/

4. Volume 16(2): 227–247
ISSN 1350–5084
Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications
(Los Angeles, London, New Delhi,
Singapore and Washington DC)
Exploring the Edges of Theory-Practice
Gap: Epistemic Cultures in Strategy-Tool
Development and Use
Johanna Moisander
Helsinki School of Economics, Department of Marketing and Management,
Helsinki, Finland
Sari Stenfors
SCANCOR, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Abstract. This paper takes a strategy-as-practice perspective on the study of
strategy tools and the theory-practice gap in strategic management research.
Based on a case study, the paper argues that differences in epistemic culture
may complicate communication and co-operation between academics and
practitioners. These differences may also result in management scholars
producing knowledge and strategy tools that lack practical pertinence for
corporate actors, particularly in the context of modernist management
scholars and contemporary post-bureaucratic knowledge organizations
(PBOs). In PBOs, where flexibility, participative management style and
consensus building dialogue are emphasized, modernist strategy tools
designed for rational problem solving by individual decision-makers may
be inadequate. In PBOs, practical strategy work calls for tools that support
collective knowledge production, promote dialogue and trust, and function
as learning tools. Overall, the paper concludes that the development of
strategy tools that actually support practical strategizing calls for a more
social model of knowledge and strategy work. Key words. epistemic culture;
management tools; sociology of technology; strategic management; strategy
as practice
DOI: 10.1177/1350508408100476
http://org.sagepub.com
http://org.sagepub.com/content/16/2/227.short

5. Volume 16(2): 227–247
ISSN 1350–5084
Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications
(Los Angeles, London, New Delhi,
Singapore and Washington DC)
Exploring the Edges of Theory-Practice
Gap: Epistemic Cultures in Strategy-Tool
Development and Use
Johanna Moisander
Helsinki School of Economics, Department of Marketing and Management,
Helsinki, Finland
Sari Stenfors
Tools designed for
rational problem solving
by individual decisionmakers
SCANCOR, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Abstract. This paper takes a strategy-as-practice perspective on the study of
strategy tools and the theory-practice gap in strategic management research.
Based on a case study, the paper argues that differences in epistemic culture
may complicate communication and co-operation between academics and
practitioners. These differences may also result in management scholars
producing knowledge and strategy tools that lack practical pertinence for
corporate actors, particularly in the context of modernist management
scholars and contemporary post-bureaucratic knowledge organizations
(PBOs). In PBOs, where flexibility, participative management style and
consensus building dialogue are emphasized, modernist strategy tools
designed for rational problem solving by individual decision-makers may
be inadequate. In PBOs, practical strategy work calls for tools that support
collective knowledge production, promote dialogue and trust, and function
as learning tools. Overall, the paper concludes that the development of
strategy tools that actually support practical strategizing calls for a more
social model of knowledge and strategy work. Key words. epistemic culture;
management tools; sociology of technology; strategic management; strategy
as practice
DOI: 10.1177/1350508408100476
http://org.sagepub.com
http://org.sagepub.com/content/16/2/227.short

6. Volume 16(2): 227–247
ISSN 1350–5084
Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications
(Los Angeles, London, New Delhi,
Singapore and Washington DC)
Exploring the Edges of Theory-Practice
Gap: Epistemic Cultures in Strategy-Tool
Development and Use
Johanna Moisander
Tools that support
collective knowledge
production, promote
dialogue and trust, and
function as learning
tools
Helsinki School of Economics, Department of Marketing and Management,
Helsinki, Finland
Sari Stenfors
Tools designed for
rational problem solving
by individual decisionmakers
SCANCOR, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Abstract. This paper takes a strategy-as-practice perspective on the study of
strategy tools and the theory-practice gap in strategic management research.
Based on a case study, the paper argues that differences in epistemic culture
may complicate communication and co-operation between academics and
practitioners. These differences may also result in management scholars
producing knowledge and strategy tools that lack practical pertinence for
corporate actors, particularly in the context of modernist management
scholars and contemporary post-bureaucratic knowledge organizations
(PBOs). In PBOs, where flexibility, participative management style and
consensus building dialogue are emphasized, modernist strategy tools
designed for rational problem solving by individual decision-makers may
be inadequate. In PBOs, practical strategy work calls for tools that support
collective knowledge production, promote dialogue and trust, and function
as learning tools. Overall, the paper concludes that the development of
strategy tools that actually support practical strategizing calls for a more
social model of knowledge and strategy work. Key words. epistemic culture;
management tools; sociology of technology; strategic management; strategy
as practice
DOI: 10.1177/1350508408100476
http://org.sagepub.com
http://org.sagepub.com/content/16/2/227.short

8. Games_

9. Games
Play_

10. Games
Play
RUles_

11. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design_

12. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

13. 1972

33. http://www.newzoo.com/infographics/infographic-2012-uk/

35. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

36. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

37. Michael L. Baird, flickr.bairdphotos.com

40. ‘ordered play is not play’

41. Mandatory Fun: Gamification and the
Impact of Games at Work
Ethan Mollick*
Nancy Rothbard*
Management Department, The Wharton School
University of Pennsylvania
June 5, 2013
PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBJECT TO CHANGE
*Authorship order is alphabetical as both authors contributed equally to this manuscript.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2277103
Note: We thank Sigal Barsade, Matthew Bidwell, and Adam Grant, for their helpful comments

42. Drawing on several theoretical perspectives, we argue that the impact of games is due to
their ability to engage workers who consent to play the game. However, the externally imposed
exploring these questions in an organization, rather than a lab setting, allows us to make stronger
nature of gamification makes it vulnerable to the paradox of mandatory fun, where games that
inferences about how these initiatives influence people at work.
CONCLUSION
are imposed by management require worker consent in a way that games generated organically
Drawing on several theoretical perspectives, we argue that the impact of games is due to
their ability to engage workers who consent to play the game. However, the externally imposed
by workers do not. In our field experiment, we find that games, when consented to, increase
nature of gamification makes it vulnerable to the paradox of mandatory fun, where games that
are imposed by management require worker consent in a way that games generated organically
positive affect at work, but, when consent is lacking, decrease positive affect and performance.
by workers do not. In our field experiment, we find that games, when consented to, increase
positive affect at work, but, when consent is lacking, decrease positive affect and performance.
This work offers a first attemptattemptmeasure impact of the type of games the type of games imposed by
This work offers a first to to measure the the impact of imposed by
management on employees, and to theorize about the role of games at work. With the increasing
management on employees,ofand in all aspects of life, and the harnessing of games at of games at work. With the increasing
ubiquity games to theorize about the role work through
gamification, this topic will only grow in importance. Future studies are needed to understand the
ubiquity of games in all aspects of life, and the harnessing of gameselucidate
boundary conditions under which workplace games produce their effects, and to further at work through
the mechanisms through which games generate engagement. However, our findings serve as both
gamification, this topicencouragement and agrowfor those using games to generate changes in employee affectare needed to understand the
will only warning in importance. Future studies or
performance: games can have powerful effects that can be either positive or negative, depending
boundary conditions underunderlying consent of the game players.
which workplace games produce their effects, and to further elucidate
on the
the mechanisms through which games generate engagement. However, our findings serve as both
encouragement and a warning for those using games to generate changes in employee affect or
performance: games can have powerful effects that can be either positive or negative, depending
32
on the underlying consent of the game players.

44. ‘play is not real life’

47. Playing a game is the voluntary
effort to overcome unnecessary
obstacles.
- Bernard Suits

48. Fevi in Pictures

50. lusory attitude

52. http://hbr.org/2004/05/learning-to-lead-at-toyota/ar/1

54. ஽ Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2011, Vol. 10, No. 3, 507–527. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0048
........................................................................................................................................................................
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1838283
Games Managers Play:
Play as a Form of
Leadership Development
RONIT KARK
Bar-Ilan University
In recent years, organizations have expended considerable effort and resources to
develop and improve managers’ leadership skills through various forms of play. I explore
the role of play in leadership development processes. Drawing on theories of leader and
leadership development and theories of play, I develop a conceptual framework,
suggesting that play can contribute to different components of leader and leadership
development processes (i.e., leadership identity, cognitive abilities, and behavioral skills).
Furthermore, the role of creating safe play spaces in leadership development processes is
highlighted. The discussion examines the implications and applications of play for
leadership development processes, points to the dangers of misuse of play, and outlines
directions for further empirical research.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0953-4814.htm
........................................................................................................................................................................
“At some point as we get older . . . we are
made to feel guilty for playing. We are told
that it is unproductive, a waste of time, even
sinful. The play that remains is, like league
sports, mostly very organized, rigid, and competitive. We strive to always be productive.
This is not the case. . . the truth is that in most
cases, play is a catalyst. The beneficial effects of getting just a little true play can
spread through our lives, usually making us
more productive and happier in everything
we do” (Brown, 2009).
focus on ways to develop individuals’ capacity to
engage effectively in leadership roles (e.g., Day &
Zaccaro, 2004; McCall, 2004). This has resulted in
various methods, training programs, and workshops designed for this purpose. Many organizations view leadership development as a major
source of sustainable competitive advantage and
place leadership development at the core of their
corporate culture (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002).
Leadership development programs and processes
have become instrumental in many organizations,
and they have fostered an industry that generates
vast sums of capital and offers a broad range of
possibilities (e.g., Arthur, Bennett, Edens, & Bell,
2003; Salas & Cannon-Bowers, 2001).
Over the past decade, research attention has
been devoted to the theory and practice of leadership development (e.g., Avolio & Hannah, 2008;
Collins & Holton, 2004; Day, Zaccaro, & Halpin,
2004; DeRue & Ashford, 2010). The general consensus is that different managerial populations need
different kinds of learning opportunities, but little
theoretical and empirical guidance exists to help
practitioners and HR personnel select or combine
methods that are best suited to each group (Guillen & Ibarra, 2009).
Some leadership development programs consist
of experiences that span just a few hours, while
others may last several days, or even take the form
of extended seminars. In addition, the nature of
“A child in play acts ‘as though he were a
head taller than himself’” (Vygotsky, 1978:
102).
In recent years, organizations have expended a
great deal of effort and resources in an attempt to
teach managers how to lead (e.g., Industry reports,
2000). Recent approaches to leadership challenge
the notion that individuals are born as leaders and
I am grateful to Irit Feldman-Levy for her meaningful and creative contribution to this paper and to Sim Sitkin and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback. I thank Moran
Anisman, Tal Ben Shahar, Yair Berson, Avi Carmeli, Jacob
Eisenberg, Shaul Fox, and Rivka Tuval Mashiach for their helpful comments on earlier versions. I also thank my children—
Omer, Ofri, & Clil for reminding me of the importance and
enjoyment of play.
JOCM
23,1
A case study of a ludic learning space
Alice Y. Kolb and David A. Kolb
26
Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University,
Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose an experiential learning framework for
understanding how play can potentially create a unique ludic learning space conducive to deep learning.
Design/methodology/approach – The framework is developed by integrating two perspectives.
First, from multidisciplinary theories of play to uncover the underlying play principles that contribute
to the emergence of the ludic learning space are drawn. Then the formation of a ludic learning space
through a case study of a pick-up softball league where for 15 years, a group of individuals diverse in
age group, gender, level of education, and ethnic background have come together to play are examined.
Findings – The case study suggests that play in a ludic learning space can promote deep learning in
the intellectual, physical, spiritual, and moral realms.
Originality/value – This paper uses the play literature to inform the experiential learning concept of
the learning space.
Keywords Experiential learning, Learning processes, Ball games
Paper type Case study
507
Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. Users may print, download, or email articles for individual use only.
http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/67074189/gamesmanagers-play-play-as-form-leadership-development
Learning to play, playing to learn
Journal of Organizational Change
Management
Vol. 23 No. 1, 2010
pp. 26-50
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0953-4814
DOI 10.1108/09534811011017199
1. Introduction
The cultural historian, Huzinga (1950) contends that from the very beginning, cultures
evolved in forms of play. The instinct of play pervades all human endeavors: in law,
science, war, philosophy, and in the arts. Through the eyes of Huizinga, humans emerge not
as Homo sapiens, the man who knows, but primarily as Homo Ludens, the man who plays.
Play encompasses a wide range of activities and forms both in human and animal
world. From the play-fight of kittens, imaginary play of a child, to the more abstract
play of adult games and organized sports, it permeates our lives as a significant source
of creativity, imagination, and fun. While play has undoubtedly been a unique and
universal human experience across cultures, it has also been the subject of scholarly
inquiry across diverse fields of social science with a substantial accumulation of
theoretical and empirical evidence about its significance in the process of individual
expression and adaptation (Callois, 2001; Dewey, 1990; Erikson, 1950; Freud, 1965;
Gadamer, 1992; Mainemelis and Ronson, 2006; Miller, 1974; Piaget, 1962; Sutton-Smith,
1997; Turner, 1974; Vygotsky, 1966; Winnicott, 1971).
Recently, Singer et al. (2006) emphasized the importance of play in human cognitive
and social-emotional growth by issuing the bold statement that play ¼ learning.
While play has been characterized as “older and more original than civilization”
Huizinga (1950, p. 1) and has been defined as a distinct form of behavior possessing
serious biological, developmental, functional, and evolutionary implications in animal
life (Bekoff and Byers, 1998; Darwin, 1965, 1981; Fagen, 1981, 1984, 1994; Goodall, 1995;
Groos, 1898; Lorenz, 1971) in reality, play has been devalued and continues to be
squeezed out of our formal educational institutions under the misguided view that

55. lusory space

56. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

57. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

58. Playing a game is the voluntary
effort to overcome unnecessary
obstacles.
- Bernard Suits

60. the spoilsport

64. the cheat

67. gaming the system

71. ‘these are the rules’

73. design flaw

74. lusory space
gaming the system

76. rules

77. game play
rules

78. game play
declarative content
rules

80. simple rules

81. complex game play
simple rules

82. Tristan Martin

84. descriptive rules

88. prescriptive rules

90. http://hbr.org/2001/01/strategy-as-simple-rules/ar/1

93. circumscriptive rules

95. Space of
Possibilities

96. lusory space
gaming the system
underspecification

98. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

99. Games
Play
Rules
Game Based Organization Design

100. http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=1448

102. A primary danger in
designing is overdesign.
Life persists when designs
are underspecified.
- Karl E. Weick

104. game design

105. declarative content

106. game play
declarative content

107. game play
declarative content
rules

108. game play
rules

109. test
game play
rules

110. test
game play
adjust
rules

111. Second-order Design
test
game play
adjust
rules

112. © 2012 Eric Zimmerman

113. paper prototype
© 2012 Eric Zimmerman

114. © 2012 Eric Zimmerman

115. playtesting
© 2012 Eric Zimmerman

116. Second-order Design
test
gameplay
adjust
rules

117. game design

118. game based organization design

119. Rules

120. © 2012 Eric Zimmerman

121. © 2012 Eric Zimmerman

122. Space of
Possibilities

123. lusory space
gaming the system
underspecification

126. co-creation

128. organizational
designer

129. co-designers
organizational
designer

130. stakeholders
co-designers
organizational
designer

131. co-designers
all stakeholders
organizational
designer

132. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer
playtesting, round 1:
adding rules
obtaining additional
information
playtesting, round 2

134. corporate strategy

135. corporate strategy
rule set
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype

136. corporate strategy
rule set
new structures
& processes
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype

137. corporate strategy
rule set
new structures
& processes
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype
change
management

139. tool for training or change management

140. tool for training or change management
design tool

141. tool for training or change management
game is finished product
design tool

142. tool for training or change management
design tool
game is finished product
game is paper prototype,
conduit for understanding

143. tool for training or change management
design tool
game is finished product
game is paper prototype,
conduit for understanding
players are not involved in design of game

144. tool for training or change management
design tool
game is finished product
game is paper prototype,
conduit for understanding
players are not involved in design of game
game is co-created

145. tool for training or change management
design tool
game is finished product
game is paper prototype,
conduit for understanding
players are not involved in design of game
game is co-created
detailed representation

146. tool for training or change management
design tool
game is finished product
game is paper prototype,
conduit for understanding
players are not involved in design of game
game is co-created
detailed representation
abstract representation (rules),
complexity comes from players

148. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework

150. How can we encourage our clients
to adopt a healthy lifestyle?

151. How can we encourage our clients
to adopt a healthy lifestyle?

153. what does our strategic vision mean for our
business processes and structures?

154. what does our strategic vision mean for our
business processes and structures?
what should our way of working look like as our
start-up company grows?

155. what does our strategic vision mean for our
business processes and structures?
what should our way of working look like as our
start-up company grows?
how can we achieve the goals we
have with our IT community?

156. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework

157. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
filling out the framework

158. lusory space
gaming the system
emergence

159. • 3 forms of healthy behavior
• 7 stakeholders on this playing field
• 10 indicators of a healthy lifestyle
• 60 reasons not to adopt a healthy lifestyle
• 75 drivers for a healthy lifestyle

160. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
filling out the framework

161. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms

163. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms

164. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer

166. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer

167. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer
playtesting, round 1:
adding rules

168. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer
playtesting, round 1:
adding rules
obtaining additional
information

169. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer
playtesting, round 1:
adding rules
obtaining additional
information
playtesting, round 2

171. lusory space
gaming the system
emergence

172. corporate strategy
rule set
new structures
& processes
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype
change
management

173. co-designers
all stakeholders
organizational
designer

174. co-designers
all stakeholders
35 interventions
organizational
designer

175. co-designers
all stakeholders
35 interventions
organizational
designer
15 interventions

176. co-designers
all stakeholders
35 interventions
organizational
designer
15 interventions
2 interventions

178. corporate strategy
rule set
new structures
& processes
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype
change
management

180. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer
playtesting, round 1:
adding rules
obtaining additional
information
playtesting, round 2

181. co-designers
setting goals and
establishing framework
all stakeholders
filling out the framework
envisioning core
mechanisms
building paper prototype
organizational
designer
playtesting, round 1:
adding rules
obtaining additional
information
playtesting, round 2
re-design organizational system

182. corporate strategy
rules
new structures &
processes
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype
change
management

185. corporate strategy
rules
new structures &
processes
peripheral
strategy
paper
prototype
change
management

186. Game Based
Organization Design
Jeroen van Bree, PhD (@jeroenvanbree)
European Organisation Design Forum
2013 Vienna Conference

187. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work under the following conditions:
Attribution
You must attribute the work to the presenter by mentioning his website, http://movablemind.com
(but not in any way that suggests that he endorses you or your use of the work).
Noncommercial
You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
No derivative works
You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.