This deck is based on a paper we wrote for the SAMRA 2011 conference. It's a short introduction to some of the ideas underlying the concept of "gamification".
It also details the results from a simple experiment we conducted to measure the effectiveness of gamifying an online community. We were restricted by a tight deadline and the existing capabilities of the online platform we partnered with, but the results are still pretty clear (although small base sizes makes it difficult to draw solid conclusions). To follow up these tantalising results, we are writing another paper for ESOMAR Congress that collects more numbers describing the effectivness of gamification.
I had a lot of fun illustrating the deck. Hope you enjoy reading it.
Beyond The Badge: Architecting Engagement Through Game Design ThinkingDustin DiTommaso
Let’s face it, the buzz surrounding Gamification has reached critical mass in the marketing industry with the bulk of attention directed to points & badges as a panacea for customer engagement and loyalty. While these tools certainly have their place in drafting an engagement plan, there’s more to unlock - much more. By examining the tools game designers use to incentivize and motivate players and mapping these tools to their psychological underpinnings we can arm ourselves with a model for architecting user engagement, directing behavior and satisfying business goals.
This presentation is appropriate for anyone looking to level up their understanding of game design thinking, the current state of gamification and how to move it Beyond the Badge.
Beyond Gamification: Architecting Engagement Through Game Design ThinkingDustin DiTommaso
Gamification is the process of applying game design elements to non-game contexts in order to drive user engagement, influence behavior and improve the user experience associated with digital products and services. Over the past year, the practice of gamification has exploded, fueled by marketing hype, media curiosity and spirited debate. While much of the discussion has revolved around extrinsic reward mechanisms as a panacea for customer loyalty and engagement, the most important and effective motivational dynamics of games have been left on the table.
In this presentation I’ll cut through the hype and draw from the fundamentals of game psychology, double-tapping into the techniques game designers use to motivate, engage and guide players through a game’s lifecycle. In doing so, I’ll lay out a model for architecting user engagement, directing behavior and satisfying the needs of both users and business alike.
We presented this deck at the ESOMAR Congress 2011 conference in Amsterdam where it was nominated for "Best Methodological Paper".
The meat of this deck is a collection of case studies showing the efficacy of gamification in various BUSINESS contexts. It took us ages to contact and collate these various examples, so hopefully having them all in one place will save you time.
A big thank you very much to the various folks who helped us put this piece of research together!
If you have any questions, comments, requests, or are interested in the original paper that this deck is based on, please feel free to drop us a line :)
Enterprise gamification is a hot new idea that has great potential for benefit (and misuse). Common misconceptions create the risk of getting it wrong. We (Rypple) share some of our lessons learned on making it work.
My grumpy talk on "badge measles" and the confusions, side effects and missing parts of gamification at Playful 2010, September 24, 2010 in London, Conway Hall.
Beyond The Badge: Architecting Engagement Through Game Design ThinkingDustin DiTommaso
Let’s face it, the buzz surrounding Gamification has reached critical mass in the marketing industry with the bulk of attention directed to points & badges as a panacea for customer engagement and loyalty. While these tools certainly have their place in drafting an engagement plan, there’s more to unlock - much more. By examining the tools game designers use to incentivize and motivate players and mapping these tools to their psychological underpinnings we can arm ourselves with a model for architecting user engagement, directing behavior and satisfying business goals.
This presentation is appropriate for anyone looking to level up their understanding of game design thinking, the current state of gamification and how to move it Beyond the Badge.
Beyond Gamification: Architecting Engagement Through Game Design ThinkingDustin DiTommaso
Gamification is the process of applying game design elements to non-game contexts in order to drive user engagement, influence behavior and improve the user experience associated with digital products and services. Over the past year, the practice of gamification has exploded, fueled by marketing hype, media curiosity and spirited debate. While much of the discussion has revolved around extrinsic reward mechanisms as a panacea for customer loyalty and engagement, the most important and effective motivational dynamics of games have been left on the table.
In this presentation I’ll cut through the hype and draw from the fundamentals of game psychology, double-tapping into the techniques game designers use to motivate, engage and guide players through a game’s lifecycle. In doing so, I’ll lay out a model for architecting user engagement, directing behavior and satisfying the needs of both users and business alike.
We presented this deck at the ESOMAR Congress 2011 conference in Amsterdam where it was nominated for "Best Methodological Paper".
The meat of this deck is a collection of case studies showing the efficacy of gamification in various BUSINESS contexts. It took us ages to contact and collate these various examples, so hopefully having them all in one place will save you time.
A big thank you very much to the various folks who helped us put this piece of research together!
If you have any questions, comments, requests, or are interested in the original paper that this deck is based on, please feel free to drop us a line :)
Enterprise gamification is a hot new idea that has great potential for benefit (and misuse). Common misconceptions create the risk of getting it wrong. We (Rypple) share some of our lessons learned on making it work.
My grumpy talk on "badge measles" and the confusions, side effects and missing parts of gamification at Playful 2010, September 24, 2010 in London, Conway Hall.
A brief overview on the gaming industry, the types of games we play, and how elements from game design are being used outside of the consoles in order to influence our behaviour in the real world...
FreeForm is a evening of discussion on technology, the non-traditional and cool stuff held by Saatchi & Saatchi London.
Getting2Alpha: Turbo-charge your product with Game Thinking by Amy Jo KimNaresh Jain
Do you want to harness the deeper power of games – the power to drive long-term engagement? Are you ready to look beyond the silver bullets & Skinner boxes – and learn to think like a game designer? In this talk, you’ll learn the foundations of Game Thinking - brought to life with front-line stories from eBay, Ultima Online, The Sims, Rock Band, Covet Fashion, Happify, Lumosity and Slack. You’ll come away with a smarter approach to innovative product design - and practical, actionable design tips you can use right away to turbo-charge your path towards product/market fit.
More details: https://confengine.com/agile-india-2016/proposal/1961/getting2alpha-turbo-charge-your-product-with-game-thinking
Video: http://goo.gl/oKMFm // Are points and badges mere indulgences for the faithful looking for redemption in loyalty programs? In nine (and a half) theses, this talk will walk you through the history, definition, and issues of “gamification,” and point out what is worth salvaging for designers and researchers.
An Introduction to what gamification is. Examples of gamification applications, platforms, and methods.
I put these slides together for a lecture I've given at the University of Waterloo, July 2016.
Gamification: The reality of what it is and what it isn'tTNS
Kyle Findlay, TNS Global Brand Equity Centre, South Africa and Kirsty Alberts, TNS Global Brand Equity Centre, South Africa
"Gamification" is a buzzword currently reverberating across the internet - but how much of it is hype vs. reality? Sitting at the cross-roads between behavioural economics and video games, gamification brings behaviour change methodologies into the digital age by explicitly providing us with the mechanics to improve user engagement. In theory, "gamifying" any process, from filling in tax forms in the real world to shopping on Amazon.com, should increase user engagement and overall satisfaction. The presentation will test these claims. It will investigate just what gamification really is and what it is not. The presenters will highlight recent research they have conducted into this topic along with interviews with various members of some of the tech companies that are at the forefront of this trend.
Are play and work opposites? In this invited keynote at the Control Systems 2016 conference in Stockholm, I argue that we hold three common misconceptions about work, play, and motivation that have us misjudge how work may be made more playful.
At least since the first new economy, playful design has invaded the working world. Today, the offices of startups, digital agencies, and web companies like Google often look more like playgrounds than work spaces. According to a recent survey in the UK, 80% of managers believe that playful office spaces can motivate employees. On closer look, however, their playfulness often bottoms out in bright colors, round shapes -- and the proverbial slide. This talk asks what it might mean to make work environments truly playful, what effects it has on well-being -- and whether we can make people play. Presentation given at Stanford University mediaX, May 10, 2016.
Detailed presentation covering the fundamentals of gamification, helping business owners understand the process and crucial elements required to gamify their businesses product or service. GamifyConsultant.com offers gamification consultation services.
Google Tech Talk given on January 24, 2011 in Mountain View, CA on gamification and how to get three »missing ingredients« right: meaning, mastery, and autonomy.
A brief overview on the gaming industry, the types of games we play, and how elements from game design are being used outside of the consoles in order to influence our behaviour in the real world...
FreeForm is a evening of discussion on technology, the non-traditional and cool stuff held by Saatchi & Saatchi London.
Getting2Alpha: Turbo-charge your product with Game Thinking by Amy Jo KimNaresh Jain
Do you want to harness the deeper power of games – the power to drive long-term engagement? Are you ready to look beyond the silver bullets & Skinner boxes – and learn to think like a game designer? In this talk, you’ll learn the foundations of Game Thinking - brought to life with front-line stories from eBay, Ultima Online, The Sims, Rock Band, Covet Fashion, Happify, Lumosity and Slack. You’ll come away with a smarter approach to innovative product design - and practical, actionable design tips you can use right away to turbo-charge your path towards product/market fit.
More details: https://confengine.com/agile-india-2016/proposal/1961/getting2alpha-turbo-charge-your-product-with-game-thinking
Video: http://goo.gl/oKMFm // Are points and badges mere indulgences for the faithful looking for redemption in loyalty programs? In nine (and a half) theses, this talk will walk you through the history, definition, and issues of “gamification,” and point out what is worth salvaging for designers and researchers.
An Introduction to what gamification is. Examples of gamification applications, platforms, and methods.
I put these slides together for a lecture I've given at the University of Waterloo, July 2016.
Gamification: The reality of what it is and what it isn'tTNS
Kyle Findlay, TNS Global Brand Equity Centre, South Africa and Kirsty Alberts, TNS Global Brand Equity Centre, South Africa
"Gamification" is a buzzword currently reverberating across the internet - but how much of it is hype vs. reality? Sitting at the cross-roads between behavioural economics and video games, gamification brings behaviour change methodologies into the digital age by explicitly providing us with the mechanics to improve user engagement. In theory, "gamifying" any process, from filling in tax forms in the real world to shopping on Amazon.com, should increase user engagement and overall satisfaction. The presentation will test these claims. It will investigate just what gamification really is and what it is not. The presenters will highlight recent research they have conducted into this topic along with interviews with various members of some of the tech companies that are at the forefront of this trend.
Are play and work opposites? In this invited keynote at the Control Systems 2016 conference in Stockholm, I argue that we hold three common misconceptions about work, play, and motivation that have us misjudge how work may be made more playful.
At least since the first new economy, playful design has invaded the working world. Today, the offices of startups, digital agencies, and web companies like Google often look more like playgrounds than work spaces. According to a recent survey in the UK, 80% of managers believe that playful office spaces can motivate employees. On closer look, however, their playfulness often bottoms out in bright colors, round shapes -- and the proverbial slide. This talk asks what it might mean to make work environments truly playful, what effects it has on well-being -- and whether we can make people play. Presentation given at Stanford University mediaX, May 10, 2016.
Detailed presentation covering the fundamentals of gamification, helping business owners understand the process and crucial elements required to gamify their businesses product or service. GamifyConsultant.com offers gamification consultation services.
Google Tech Talk given on January 24, 2011 in Mountain View, CA on gamification and how to get three »missing ingredients« right: meaning, mastery, and autonomy.
The gaming industry is huge, and it can keep its audience consumed for hours, days and even weeks. Presentation shows how it all started, some best and worst practices and main principles of gamification.
Gamification is transforming the way businesses engage customers and motivate employees. By applying the same principles that inspire people to play games (achievements, status, and rewards) to websites and other online experiences, businesses can dramatically increase the size of their audience, boost engagement, and increase revenue.
This month, Kasey McCurdy, Director of Engineering at Bunchball, will discuss how game mechanics can engage your fans and users, increase customer loyalty and sales, and motivate employees and partners.
Bunchball is the industry leader in gamification and has provided solutions for customers like Warner Bros., Comcast, NBC Universal, ABC Television, Stella & Dot and LiveOps.
Kasey will cover the history of gamification, why it works and sometimes doesn’t, and how the combination of data, motivation, and gamification can strengthen loyalty. He’ll also discuss customer and employee engagement, how to motivate the unmotivated, and what the future of human motivation looks like.
More Than Points: Architecting Engagement Through Game Design ThinkingDustin DiTommaso
The buzz surrounding gamification as an engagement platform is reaching critical mass in our industry with the bulk of attention directed to shallow, superficial layers of points & badges but there’s more to unlock. Lot’s more.
By considering the psychological underpinnings of engagement driven by intrinsic player motivation, meaningful interactions and yes - mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics we can create a framework for architecting passionate user engagement, guiding behavior and ethically satisfying business goals.
Free Hugs — Praising developers for their actions [ICSE2015]Roberto Minelli
My slides for the presentation of our vision at ICSE 2015 (International Conference on Software Engineering).
Abstract–Developing software is a complex, intrinsically intellectual, and therefore ephemeral activity, also due to the intangible nature of the end product, the source code. There is a thin red line between a productive development session, where a developer actually does something useful and productive, and a session where the developer essentially produces “fried air”, pieces of code whose quality and usefulness are doubtful at best. We believe that well-thought mechanisms of gamification built on fine-grained interaction information mined from the IDE can crystallize and reward good coding behavior.
We present our preliminary experience with the design and implementation of a micro-gamification layer built into an object-oriented IDE, which at the end of each development session not only helps the developer to understand what he actually produced, but also praises him in case the development session was productive. Building on this, we envision an environment where the IDE reflects on the deeds of the developers and by providing a historical view also helps to track and reward long-term growth in terms of development skills, not dissimilar from the mechanics of role-playing games.
Alternative Approaches to Educational ExperiencezSpace
Alternative Approaches to Educational Experience
Introduction and History
Motivation: The Problem
Development of Gaming Environments for STEM education
Educational Game Development
Current Status of Game Systems for Education
Forthcoming Design and Development
Research on Effectiveness of Game Environments
Recap and Next Steps
GAMES USER RESEARCH: Guest Lecture in UX Design Class at Wilfried Laurier Uni...Lennart Nacke
In this talk, I describe several games user research methods from the Oxford University Press book: Games User Research. I talk about UX maturity levels of game development companies and the game design iterative development cycle and where Game UX fits into that space. I finally present several games user research methods.
Games are fun, exciting and engaging but do they belong in the classroom? Can they actually be educational? There is evidence that students and trainees participating in simulation game learning experiences have higher declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge and retention of training material than those participating in more traditional learning experiences. But, what elements make games appropriate for learning and how can those elements be integrated into the classroom. In this webinar, Karl will share practical examples of how to apply game dynamics, or “gamification”, as part of your instructional tool kit helping you to engage students and create an active learning environment.
How to conduct a social network analysis: A tool for empowering teams and wor...Jeromy Anglim
Slides and details available at: http://jeromyanglim.blogspot.com/2009/10/how-to-conduct-social-network-analysis.html
A talk on using social network analysis as a team development tool.
This deck summarises some of our research into the "shape" of conversation maps (i.e. interaction networks) on Twitter. We find that the shape, or pattern, of brand and campaign conversations tend to sit on a continuum from centralisation to decentralisation. The shapes often evolve along this continuum as brands adopt more organic, two-way conversation patterns rather than the one-directional broadcasting techniques so common in traditional channels such as television and radio.
This presentation is based on a paper that won the Best Methodological Paper award at the 2015 ESOMAR Congress conference. You can access the paper here: https://www.esomar.org/web/research_papers/Innovation_2714_The-Shape-of-Conversations.php
Using network science to understand elections: the South African 2014 nationa...Socialphysicist
This presentation describes our research into the roughly one million tweets that we collected in the run-up to the 2014 national elections in South Africa. It uses a mixture of network theory and data science to unpack the main communities and topics of conversation. The paper won the Gold Award for Best Paper at the 2015 SAMRA conference.
This presentation looks at how gamification taps into how our brains work. It focus on the role of reward schedules and uncertainty in creating engagement. It also briefly discusses whether or not the term 'gamification' itself is a fad or not.
NOTE: Apologies for the low image quality of the slides. The only way I was able to upload the deck without producing visual artifacts during the SlideShare conversion process was to upload each slide as an image :(
Beneath the Surface: The Hidden World of Individual Buying DynamicsSocialphysicist
This deck describes how people actually buy brands based on an analysis of several million purchase events over a period of 5 years across three different categories in the United Kingdom.
It was presented at the ESOMAR Congress 2012 conference in Atlanta, USA in September 2012.
I'm particularly proud of the illustrations in the presentation... although the fundamental nature of the research is pretty cool too :)
A deck presented at the MRS 'Maximising the Value of Big Data' conference in London, January 2013.
Presents my view of big data and the potential it gives us for mapping the systems that we deal with on a day-to-day basis. Big data holds the promise of providing us with a meta-view of the systems that we all think we are so familiar with. I think we will find that the woods look nothing like the trees.
This deck briefly outlines the work we did mapping the South African Twittersphere for the 2012 SAMRA conference, including some analyses we did based on the structure of the network. Specifically, we identified people with the potential for influence based on their betweeness centrality and Authority (HITS). In addition, we also used a modularity algorithm to identify 5 clearly distinct communities within the graph. The results are for interest-sake only and should be interpreted within the limitations of the data."
This presentation reviews how attention works in our brains. It answers questions like:
1) How do we process our environment?
2) What is the path that stimuli go through?
3) What are the factors that capture our attention?
4) What about stimuli that we don’t consciously process?
5) And more...
This is my second presentation from the SAMRA 2011 conference. The first presentation on "gamification" can be found here: http://www.slideshare.net/ervler/gamification-future-or-fail
Negative Publicity: How People Process It and How Brands Should Respond to It...Socialphysicist
This deck presents case studies and a review of the cognitive theories behind how people process negative information about a brand, and suggests factors that a brand should consider before responding to a scandal.
PLEASE NOTE:
1. See speaker notes for more info on each slide
2. Drop me an e-mail if you would like a copy (e-mail address on front slide).
3. Link to full paper - it's behind a paywall unfortunately :(
http://www.esomar.org/web/publication/paper.php?id=2171
This presentation outlines how market share forms from a network perspective.
It is based on an oldish paper I wrote for the 2009 Southern African Marketing Research Association (SAMRA) Conference. It subsequently won the WPP Atticus "Research in Practice" award.
Please drop me an e-mail if you have any questions, comments or would like a copy of the deck.
Note that the SlideShare conversion process has corrupted some of the slides (e.g. slides 20, 26)
Branding in the nth Dimension (Systems Theory in Branded Markets)Socialphysicist
The purpose of this presentation was to introduce market researchers to nonlinear systems theory in the context of branded markets by helping them to visualise the systems they work in every day.
NOTE: Read the notes along with each slide to get the maximum out of this deck.
NOTE: SlideShare screwed up some of the formatting on certain slides (word bubbles, font size, squashed images, etc.). Bad SlideShare :(
An introduction to power law distributions, with a focus on branded markets.
Somewhat text-heavy by today's standards, but presentation was created in late 2007.
Buy Verified PayPal Account | Buy Google 5 Star Reviewsusawebmarket
Buy Verified PayPal Account
Looking to buy verified PayPal accounts? Discover 7 expert tips for safely purchasing a verified PayPal account in 2024. Ensure security and reliability for your transactions.
PayPal Services Features-
🟢 Email Access
🟢 Bank Added
🟢 Card Verified
🟢 Full SSN Provided
🟢 Phone Number Access
🟢 Driving License Copy
🟢 Fasted Delivery
Client Satisfaction is Our First priority. Our services is very appropriate to buy. We assume that the first-rate way to purchase our offerings is to order on the website. If you have any worry in our cooperation usually You can order us on Skype or Telegram.
24/7 Hours Reply/Please Contact
usawebmarketEmail: support@usawebmarket.com
Skype: usawebmarket
Telegram: @usawebmarket
WhatsApp: +1(218) 203-5951
USA WEB MARKET is the Best Verified PayPal, Payoneer, Cash App, Skrill, Neteller, Stripe Account and SEO, SMM Service provider.100%Satisfection granted.100% replacement Granted.
"𝑩𝑬𝑮𝑼𝑵 𝑾𝑰𝑻𝑯 𝑻𝑱 𝑰𝑺 𝑯𝑨𝑳𝑭 𝑫𝑶𝑵𝑬"
𝐓𝐉 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐬 (𝐓𝐉 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬) is a professional event agency that includes experts in the event-organizing market in Vietnam, Korea, and ASEAN countries. We provide unlimited types of events from Music concerts, Fan meetings, and Culture festivals to Corporate events, Internal company events, Golf tournaments, MICE events, and Exhibitions.
𝐓𝐉 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐬 provides unlimited package services including such as Event organizing, Event planning, Event production, Manpower, PR marketing, Design 2D/3D, VIP protocols, Interpreter agency, etc.
Sports events - Golf competitions/billiards competitions/company sports events: dynamic and challenging
⭐ 𝐅𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬:
➢ 2024 BAEKHYUN [Lonsdaleite] IN HO CHI MINH
➢ SUPER JUNIOR-L.S.S. THE SHOW : Th3ee Guys in HO CHI MINH
➢FreenBecky 1st Fan Meeting in Vietnam
➢CHILDREN ART EXHIBITION 2024: BEYOND BARRIERS
➢ WOW K-Music Festival 2023
➢ Winner [CROSS] Tour in HCM
➢ Super Show 9 in HCM with Super Junior
➢ HCMC - Gyeongsangbuk-do Culture and Tourism Festival
➢ Korean Vietnam Partnership - Fair with LG
➢ Korean President visits Samsung Electronics R&D Center
➢ Vietnam Food Expo with Lotte Wellfood
"𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐚 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐲. 𝐖𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐚 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬."
Enterprise Excellence is Inclusive Excellence.pdfKaiNexus
Enterprise excellence and inclusive excellence are closely linked, and real-world challenges have shown that both are essential to the success of any organization. To achieve enterprise excellence, organizations must focus on improving their operations and processes while creating an inclusive environment that engages everyone. In this interactive session, the facilitator will highlight commonly established business practices and how they limit our ability to engage everyone every day. More importantly, though, participants will likely gain increased awareness of what we can do differently to maximize enterprise excellence through deliberate inclusion.
What is Enterprise Excellence?
Enterprise Excellence is a holistic approach that's aimed at achieving world-class performance across all aspects of the organization.
What might I learn?
A way to engage all in creating Inclusive Excellence. Lessons from the US military and their parallels to the story of Harry Potter. How belt systems and CI teams can destroy inclusive practices. How leadership language invites people to the party. There are three things leaders can do to engage everyone every day: maximizing psychological safety to create environments where folks learn, contribute, and challenge the status quo.
Who might benefit? Anyone and everyone leading folks from the shop floor to top floor.
Dr. William Harvey is a seasoned Operations Leader with extensive experience in chemical processing, manufacturing, and operations management. At Michelman, he currently oversees multiple sites, leading teams in strategic planning and coaching/practicing continuous improvement. William is set to start his eighth year of teaching at the University of Cincinnati where he teaches marketing, finance, and management. William holds various certifications in change management, quality, leadership, operational excellence, team building, and DiSC, among others.
Remote sensing and monitoring are changing the mining industry for the better. These are providing innovative solutions to long-standing challenges. Those related to exploration, extraction, and overall environmental management by mining technology companies Odisha. These technologies make use of satellite imaging, aerial photography and sensors to collect data that might be inaccessible or from hazardous locations. With the use of this technology, mining operations are becoming increasingly efficient. Let us gain more insight into the key aspects associated with remote sensing and monitoring when it comes to mining.
Explore our most comprehensive guide on lookback analysis at SafePaaS, covering access governance and how it can transform modern ERP audits. Browse now!
Cracking the Workplace Discipline Code Main.pptxWorkforce Group
Cultivating and maintaining discipline within teams is a critical differentiator for successful organisations.
Forward-thinking leaders and business managers understand the impact that discipline has on organisational success. A disciplined workforce operates with clarity, focus, and a shared understanding of expectations, ultimately driving better results, optimising productivity, and facilitating seamless collaboration.
Although discipline is not a one-size-fits-all approach, it can help create a work environment that encourages personal growth and accountability rather than solely relying on punitive measures.
In this deck, you will learn the significance of workplace discipline for organisational success. You’ll also learn
• Four (4) workplace discipline methods you should consider
• The best and most practical approach to implementing workplace discipline.
• Three (3) key tips to maintain a disciplined workplace.
Personal Brand Statement:
As an Army veteran dedicated to lifelong learning, I bring a disciplined, strategic mindset to my pursuits. I am constantly expanding my knowledge to innovate and lead effectively. My journey is driven by a commitment to excellence, and to make a meaningful impact in the world.
India Orthopedic Devices Market: Unlocking Growth Secrets, Trends and Develop...Kumar Satyam
According to TechSci Research report, “India Orthopedic Devices Market -Industry Size, Share, Trends, Competition Forecast & Opportunities, 2030”, the India Orthopedic Devices Market stood at USD 1,280.54 Million in 2024 and is anticipated to grow with a CAGR of 7.84% in the forecast period, 2026-2030F. The India Orthopedic Devices Market is being driven by several factors. The most prominent ones include an increase in the elderly population, who are more prone to orthopedic conditions such as osteoporosis and arthritis. Moreover, the rise in sports injuries and road accidents are also contributing to the demand for orthopedic devices. Advances in technology and the introduction of innovative implants and prosthetics have further propelled the market growth. Additionally, government initiatives aimed at improving healthcare infrastructure and the increasing prevalence of lifestyle diseases have led to an upward trend in orthopedic surgeries, thereby fueling the market demand for these devices.
[Note: This is a partial preview. To download this presentation, visit:
https://www.oeconsulting.com.sg/training-presentations]
Sustainability has become an increasingly critical topic as the world recognizes the need to protect our planet and its resources for future generations. Sustainability means meeting our current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. It involves long-term planning and consideration of the consequences of our actions. The goal is to create strategies that ensure the long-term viability of People, Planet, and Profit.
Leading companies such as Nike, Toyota, and Siemens are prioritizing sustainable innovation in their business models, setting an example for others to follow. In this Sustainability training presentation, you will learn key concepts, principles, and practices of sustainability applicable across industries. This training aims to create awareness and educate employees, senior executives, consultants, and other key stakeholders, including investors, policymakers, and supply chain partners, on the importance and implementation of sustainability.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. Develop a comprehensive understanding of the fundamental principles and concepts that form the foundation of sustainability within corporate environments.
2. Explore the sustainability implementation model, focusing on effective measures and reporting strategies to track and communicate sustainability efforts.
3. Identify and define best practices and critical success factors essential for achieving sustainability goals within organizations.
CONTENTS
1. Introduction and Key Concepts of Sustainability
2. Principles and Practices of Sustainability
3. Measures and Reporting in Sustainability
4. Sustainability Implementation & Best Practices
To download the complete presentation, visit: https://www.oeconsulting.com.sg/training-presentations
Affordable Stationery Printing Services in Jaipur | Navpack n PrintNavpack & Print
Looking for professional printing services in Jaipur? Navpack n Print offers high-quality and affordable stationery printing for all your business needs. Stand out with custom stationery designs and fast turnaround times. Contact us today for a quote!
RMD24 | Retail media: hoe zet je dit in als je geen AH of Unilever bent? Heid...BBPMedia1
Grote partijen zijn al een tijdje onderweg met retail media. Ondertussen worden in dit domein ook de kansen zichtbaar voor andere spelers in de markt. Maar met die kansen ontstaan ook vragen: Zelf retail media worden of erop adverteren? In welke fase van de funnel past het en hoe integreer je het in een mediaplan? Wat is nu precies het verschil met marketplaces en Programmatic ads? In dit half uur beslechten we de dilemma's en krijg je antwoorden op wanneer het voor jou tijd is om de volgende stap te zetten.
Discover the innovative and creative projects that highlight my journey throu...dylandmeas
Discover the innovative and creative projects that highlight my journey through Full Sail University. Below, you’ll find a collection of my work showcasing my skills and expertise in digital marketing, event planning, and media production.
5. LEVEL 1: What is it? Definition “The integration of the mechanics that make games fun and absorbing into non-game platforms and experiences in order to improve engagement and participation” ~ The Authors
6. LEVEL 1: What is it? Example mechanics Appointment dynamic Achievement Community collaboration
7. LEVEL 1: What is it? Haven’t we seen this all before? Behavioural theories Control theory Cybernetics Behaviour change Behavioural economics
8. LEVEL 1: What is it? What’s in a name? Gaming dynamics Game mechanics Serious games Game theory Game design Pooh Badgification
9. LEVEL 1: What is it? Hijacking the brain, or, “How does it work?” Experience systems Rapid, frequent feedback Rewards for effort Uncertainty Short- and long-term goals Other people
10. LEVEL 1: What is it? “Facebook Addiction Disorder (FAD)”
29. Game mechanics included: 1. A virtual currency 2. Parallel goals 3. Badges 4. Progress bar 5. Appointment dynamic LEVEL 3 Experiment Design
30. Imagery e.g. simple vs. complex, words vs. graphics? Cultural references vs. originality Shirt cut e.g. trendy vs. comfort? Design placement e.g. side, front back, use of space/negative space, etc. LEVEL 3 Experiment Design
35. MARKET RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS Interference with data integrity Unsolicited responses Surveys too complex for mobile execution
36. CONCLUSIONS Gamification appears to work Its more subtle that just making something look like a video game, and… …it’s something we’ve always done to some degree Now we’ve just articulated it, giving us a powerful tool
Gamification is a very new term and the field has not had time to settle on accepted definitions. As a result, some confusion can arise as to what gamification is, and what it is not. We have already discussed what it is, so let us now look at what it is not. There are two main things that gamification is not. Gamified experiences are not simply video games. Similarly, just because something looks like a game, does not imply that it is. For an experience to be considered a game in Day’s mind, it needs to include the following elements:“Voluntary restrictive rules that people agree to follow in order to be "playing" the game. We know we're playing.Sets of interesting choices that players must make in order to engage in the act of "play". We have to feel like we're the ones doing the playing, not that we're being "played".Players construct, test and refine mental models of the processes, strategies and systems that make up a single "game" experience. If we're not learning, we're not playing.” Ewing expands further, suggesting that real games incorporate:“The idea of “play”: when a task becomes enjoyable or distracting for its own sake as well as what it’s trying to achieveThe idea of competition, against others or one’s previous achievementsThe idea of rules – that there’s a ‘game environment’ with artificial and pre-determined things you can and can’t do. The extent to which the environment acknowledges the breakability of these rules is an important factor in what type of game is being played. I’d say that rules and competition are what separates “play” from “game” maybe?The idea of imagination – there’s a creative, fictive component to gameplay which is probably the most untapped by marketers, at least consciously” The absence of these kinds of elements means that the experience probably isn’t a compelling game, even if it is decked out in all the trappings of a game.
Video gamesThe term “game” conjures up very strong emotions for people, often of frivolous fun, an absence of work and possibly the shirking of one’s duties. However, an experience does not need to look overtly like a game in order to be compelling and engaging. For example, Facebook is probably the most successful non-game game ever invented. It has implemented game mechanics and reward structures that keep a large portion of the world’s population coming back several times a day. Yet, Facebook has no mascot, complimentary colours, traditional level structures or anything else that we would usually associate with a game.
Gamification refers to the “gamifying” of traditionally non-game processes and experiences through the purposeful introduction of mechanics that are designed to elicit specific, predictable behaviours, while simultaneously absorbing individuals in the experience by making it engaging and compelling. It is important to make the distinction upfront between what we traditionally mean by “games” (e.g. video games, board games, party games, etc.) and a “gamified” experience. Gamification does not entail the turning of a traditionally serious experience (such as filling out your tax return or a research survey) into a gaudy, frivolous entertainment experience. Instead, it is the identification of the subtle mechanics that make traditional games motivating, rewarding and engaging; and the incorporation of these elements into experiences that currently lack them. The potential value of gamification for business is an increased level of customer engagement. In a market research context, gamification potentially allows researchers to improve respondent engagement through methodologies that respondents find compelling rather than fatiguing, thus eliciting deeper and more valuable insights. This paper is not about creating the next FarmVille or Super Mario Bros.
Gamification author, Gabe Zicherman [2010] points out that gamified experiences are long-term engagement systems that require care and nurturing. They are not instant fixes. Zicherman imagines a future where every company will have a "Chief Engagement Officer" tasked with managing user engagement around company offerings. It is possible to argue that marketers, sociologists, game designers and policy makers have been doing this for years anyway. The difference that gamification brings to the table is twofold:The experience of the video game industry, which makes more money than Hollywood, and……millions of people who have grown up playing games, with an implicit assumption about how an experience should work in terms of structure and reward In evolutionary terms, this means that the video games industry has honed the business of making experiences fun and engaging through a process of natural selection involving repeated trial and error to arrive at system mechanics that work.
Examples of such mechanics might include: Achievement: People like to win and have a feeling of control or mastery over their actions. This is a very basic human drive that can be harnessedAppointment dynamic: “A dynamic in which to succeed, one must return at a predefined time to take some action.” e.g. happy hour at your local pub [Priebatsch, 2010]Communal Discovery: “wherein an entire community is rallied to work together to solve a riddle, a problem or a challenge. Immensely viral and very fun.” [Priebatsch, 2010]See Appendix 1 in the written paper for an extensive list of game mechanics.
But Haven’t We Seen This All Before?For as long as they have been around, scientists and business people have tried to manipulate the way that people behave. Many fields are devoted to this, for example:Cybernetics is an inter-disciplinary field first developed in the mid 20th century. It is concerned with creating a rule structure for a system (natural or social) such that the rules define the shape of the system, and thus dictate the behaviour of the parts within the system. Control Theory is closely related to cybernetics, but has been specifically applied in engineering and mathematics, where rules are put in place to regulate dynamics systems by defining their operating space. It relies on feedback to control its input variables in response to output.Behaviourist theories, like those espoused by B.F. Skinner, sought to change behaviour through the use of reward and punishment schedules, where individuals are either rewarded for performing a desired action or punished for performing an undesirable action.Behaviour Change is generally associated with public health policies (e.g. obesity, spread of HIV, etc.). Its focus is on the effective implementation of policies designed to encourage individuals to make healthier lifestyle choices [Wikipedia, 2011].Behavioural Economics recognises our brains’ limited capacity to process decisions and that our cognitive biases often steer us away from purely rational decisions. Behavioural economics employs social, cognitive and emotional factors to affect economic behaviour. As we can see, there is much overlap between existing areas of science and the goals of gamification, which include the engagement of an individual in an experience or process that guides them in a desired direction to a preferred outcome. Gamification, whether deliberately or not, borrows many concepts from these established fields.
What’s in a name?Even within the realm of gamification, there is not a 100% consensus on the term and its definition. According to Jesse Schell, the term “gamification” is just the tip of the iceberg of an idea that has far larger implications for society [Gamespot, 2011]. Other terms that are often associated with the trend, either rightly or wrongly, include:Game mechanics which refers to the actual rules and mechanisms that are employed to create the structured experience. Examples of such mechanics might include: Appointment dynamic: “A dynamic in which to succeed, one must return at a predefined time to take some action.” e.g. happy hour at your local pub [Priebatsch, 2010]Communal Discovery: “wherein an entire community is rallied to work together to solve a riddle, a problem or a challenge. Immensely viral and very fun.” [Priebatsch, 2010]See Appendix 1 for an extensive list of game mechanics.Gaming dynamics are related to game mechanics but recognise that different people respond to the same incentives and rewards differently. Whereas game mechanics are static rules put in place to define the shape of an experience, game dynamics adjust the rules and mechanics in response to the player’s performance and the current game state. Game theory, which has very little to do with gamification. Game theory is an area of mathematical economics developed in the mid-20th century in order to predict individual choices within specific real-world and hypothetical scenarios (such as the Prisoner’s Dilemma).Serious games refer to experiences where the outcome has a real-world impact and, thus, is more than just a game played for personal enjoyment. Examples include game researcher, Jane McGonigal’s, Evoke, an alternate reality game (ARG) created for the World Bank Institute wherein participants create social and technological innovation and development.Badgificationorpointsification is a pejorative term that describes the implementation of shallow aesthetics and mechanics (e.g. badges, bright colours, progress bars) without giving due attention to the underlying mechanics which are the true driving force behind real engagement. Game design is the process of creating a game, often purely for entertainment purposes.
Hijacking the Brain: How does gamification work?Gamification it taps into the deep-seated, primal tendencies and biases that have been sculpted over time by evolution to maximise our chances of survival. 10,000 years ago, we used these deeply ingrained biases and tendencies to effectively navigate our natural environment. Today, games have become adept at pushing these same buttons to create sensations of enjoyment and reward. Tom Chatfield [2010] identifies several ways in which games push our buttons: Experience systems give us a sense of achievement for reaching milestones and keep us working towards them. For example, the LinkedIn progress bar shows how much profile information you still need to provide and outlines the simple steps you need to take to achieve that goal.Short- and long-term goals in parallel allow us to achieve on a micro scale while simultaneously making progression towards the macro goal seem more manageable. Rewards for effort (i.e. positive reinforcement) trigger releases of feel-good chemicals in our brain, which train us towards desired behaviour. For example, Foursquare rewards users with badges for checking in the most times at a specific venue (mayor badge).Rapid, frequent, clear feedback in response to a user’s actions which also sets off the reward centres in our brains. For example, Facebook is addictive partly because it allows its users to receive real-time feedback in response to their comments and Likes.An element of uncertainty is crucial for an effective reward scheme. Gamblers become addicted to slot machines due to the unpredictable nature of the pay-offs [see Montague & Berns, 2002]. It is the element of uncertainty that has people constantly checking to see whether an email has arrived in their Inbox or whether someone has commented on their Facebook status.Other people (i.e. social elements) probably provide our brains with the greatest rewards. Humans are social creatures by nature. Adding other people into your experience is a no-brainer as evidenced by the rise of social media in the form of Facebook, Twitter, etc. According to Gavin Marshall, Head of Innovation for Mxit, South Africa’s largest social network, MXit users’ rewards are mostly social in nature.
Facebook is a great example of an experience/platform that hi-jacks our brains
RewardsEffective rewards cost designers relatively little but are highly valued by users. Less effective rewards cost designers more for the same level of user valuation as a more effective reward. Reward types are listed below in order of decreasing effectiveness [CNET, 2010]:Status is probably the most effective reward. It costs designers next to nothing and is highly valued by users as it taps into our social natures. Zicherman [2010] suggests that status has replaced material rewards such as cash, and that the less status rewards a game doles out, the more material rewards it needs to hand out to keep users engaged.Access to restricted features, options and areas e.g. VIP room in a nightclub or member-only analytics on a website.Power is an effective incentive for some e.g. community moderators that can ban users, remove status or shift points around; voting to change contents of front page of a website; etc.Stuff, both material (e.g. cash prizes) and virtual (e.g. game weapons or FarmVille seeds). Material stuff is costly to provide, whereas virtual goods are often free.According to Day, “you can sculpt [a] psychological reward-scape to some degree, but ultimately the best rewards are the ones in the minds of your players”.
Examples of mechanics:Facebook includes rapid and uncertain feedbackFoursquare includes badges for achievementTwitter implicitly confers status and achievement by follower numbersLinked In includes a progress bar showing how close a user’s profile is to completion in terms of personal info
FlowThe Holy Grail for most game experiences is the creation of a state of “flow” in its users. ‘Flow’ describes the experience of full submersion in a process, which creates a sense of energized focus and 100% engagement [Csíkszentmihályi, 1991]. Being in a state of flow is often referred to as being “in the zone”, “on the ball”, “in the moment” or “in the groove”. It is the moments while performing a task where we feel totally capable and rewarded for the effort we are putting in. A state of flow can often be a reward in itself as humans find the state incredibly fulfilling and motivating. Flow is induced when performing tasks that are challenging but within our capabilities to complete. If a challenge is beyond our skill it becomes frustrating. If a challenge is too easy, it becomes boring. Inducing a state of flow is an important aspect of a successful game-like experience.
Gamer typesAs touched on in the “game dynamics” section, people behave in different ways. Different people are motivated in different ways. To account for this, Zicherman [2010] suggests thinking through different usage scenarios and designing specific streams into the game structure. According to Bartle [1997], there are four main player types, each of which needs to be catered for when designing a game experience. Achievers (10% of users) focus on the big rewards with the most recognition and status (e.g. an illustrious title or large number of contributions). Socializers (80% of users) make up the undergrowth of the community. They support and nourish the other player types with their recognition and adoration. Socializers are non-confrontational, are looking to engage and will easily reciprocate.Explorers (9% of users) take pride in mapping a system in terms of its features and decision spaces. They thrive on the social credit that they receive for their discoveries. Day suggests building achievements into your game-space that reward users for exploring the platform in novel ways, for example by using an unpopular feature.Killers make up 1% of the community. They are similar to Achievers in that they go for the big rewards, but with a subtle difference. When they win, someone else has to lose publicly so that the community can recognise their actions (e.g. forum trolls and comment killers). Killers are highly active and engaged and can be dealt with by harnessing their energy by putting them onto rails (step-wise progressions that are built into the system) that shape their behaviour by following a path intended by the designer.Jane McGonigal [2008] points out that most communities follow a power law curve in terms of engagement (similar to the 80-20 rule). A few users contribute most of the content while the majority are relatively passive. This syncs up with what we know about Bartle’s Player Types, where the vast amount of Socializers support and nourish the highly active users in the form of Achievers, Explorers and Killers. McGonigal [2008] goes on to point out that emotional goals differ between players, using Lazzaro’s framework to make the distinction between four main emotional categories: Fiero (an Italian word that describes the rush of emotion that one feels right after the moment of success), Curiosity, Amusement and Relaxation. Figure 6 has a detailed breakdown of the various emotions that fall into each category.
While the notion of gamification might seem appealing by way of its simplicity, in practice there are many potential pitfalls.
Possibly the most common oversight is that game mechanics are often implemented without carefulconsideration of their relevance or appropriateness [Kim, 2010]. Ewing [2010] describes how individualdifferences in life stage, playing style (see Bartle’s Player Types) and attitude toward risk make itdifficult to gamify a task in a way that rewards and motivates a diverse (and thus representative)community. A particular gamified task might engage and reward certain types of people and playingstyles, whilst simultaneously discouraging others. Take, for example, the stable, well-documenteddifferences between men and women. Women prefer less risky, non-competitive tasks and they are alsomore attuned to the social impact of their actions. As such, different game aspects are likely to appeal toeach sex [Deterding, 2010]. Strategic Synergy [2010a] advocates diversity as key to the success of gamemechanics, citing Blizzard’s World of Warcraft as an example of the successful implementation ofmultiple motivations to cater to all needs and personality types. An ideal design should cater to a widerange of personalities, interests and moods. Clearly, insight into the target audience, coupled withcareful and informed design are essential.
Misinformed parties are also prone to falling into the trap of mistaking games for mindless fun andintroducing superficial measures that do little to achieve the desired result. As Deterding [2010] pointsout, it takes more than simply throwing in elements from games to make something enjoyable for theuser i.e. “badgification” or “pointsification” [Gigaom, 2010]. Danny Day of QCF Design says that “as agame designer, I know that if I simply give my players a constant stream of rewards with no substanceor struggle, they’ll quickly tire of their ‘earnings’. It might work for a while”, he argues, “if all you wantto do is create noise about something… but it will only rarely create actual creative engagement inplayers”. It takes good design to inspire true enjoyment, and ultimately, engagement. Good design involvesbuilding in instrinsic motivators like experiences of competence, self-efficacy and mastery rather thanrelying on extrinsic rewards. Rewards themselves are not equivalent to achievement.
Those looking to implement game mechanics to enhance participation should also be cognisant ofcompetition when it comes to ‘participation bandwidth’, a term coined by Jane McGonigal in 2008 todescribe the capacity to contribute to participatory networks. McGonigal is of the opinion thatparticipation bandwidth is a finite resource, as there are only so many potential contributors with alimited amount of time and energy to devote to participation. What this means for businesses trying togamify tasks is competition from other participatory endeavours that draw users in. In order to winparticipation bandwidth, your task will need to be interesting and engaging enough to draw people awayfrom something else [McGonigal, 2008].
When trying to use game mechanics to influence behaviour, there are limits to how much one canrealistically control, giving way to the possibility of undesirable emergent behaviours. An example is that of BMW’s location-based game prototype intended to encourage fuel-efficientdriving by challenging drivers to beat fuel efficiency records set by others driving the same route. Whilethe game achieved its purpose of lowering the fuel consumption of test drivers, undesirable drivingbehaviours like skipping red lights emerged, as drivers realised that stopping and then accelerating againused more fuel [Deterding, 2010].Unintended behaviour can also surface when participants try to manipulate the system to maximise thepayoff for themselves – a phenomenon referred to as ‘gaming the system’ [Deterding, 2010]. StrategicSynergy [2010b] recommends building in a mechanism for continual feedback (through analytics, forinstance) to enable the designer to evolve the game mechanics in such instances.
It can be argued that certain tasks are better left untouched by game mechanics. One of the reasons forthis is that excessive competition can undermine the core purpose of the task or community [Face,2010]. Sometimes the addition of explicit rules to existing behaviours can interfere with implicit socialnorms and meanings already in place. An example of this is Akoha, an online service that assignsrewards for acts of kindness in the real world. Some argue that this system detracts from what makessomething altruistic in the first place [Deterding, 2010]. Putting a value on something intangible,something considered to be ‘priceless’, creates a kind of dissonance that is the result of blending a socialexchange with a market exchange [Strategic Synergy, 2011b].
Gamification in some form has been around for a long time, but until now we simply have not labelled it as such. Take, for example, what could be called the gamification of commerce through credit card rewards like air miles or retailer discounts; or gamification for the purpose of training, sometimes referred to as ‘serious games’. Employers have for years been using game-like simulators as training instruments, as seen with the airplane simulators used to train pilots
Farmville, an online social networking game in which one manages a virtual farm, is an obvious application of gamification. You can earn ribbons for having lots of friends, being a good neighbour, etc. Farmville looks like a game, feels like a game…. It is a game.
Foursquare is a more subtle application of game mechanics. Foursquare is a location-based social networking site that rewards users for reporting their location via GPS. The user who checks in most frequently to a given location is awarded the status of mayor of that location. This looks a little like a game, but isn’t actually a game in itself. It’s more like a gamification layer imposed on top of an existing behaviour
An even more subtle example is that of Klout, a web service that measures one’s online influence by pulling data from your Twitter profile, Facebook etc. You are given a Klout score, which can then be compared to that of your peers. Klout goes beyond measuring and also tries to influence, for instance, by offering perks for increasing your Klout. Klout is by no means a game, but there are game mechanics at play.
Having review the gamification literature, we realised that there is not much out there in the way of hard data either supporting or refuting the efficacy of gamification. So we decided to conduct an experiment to test this for ourselves.
We wanted to test whether gamifying an online experience affects user behaviour in terms ofengagement and the nature of the contributions made. To do this we ran an experiment over the courseof 2-3 weeks in partnership with the online crowdsourcing platform, Evly.com.We hypothesised that the addition of gamification elements would create higher engagement levelsamongst participants in terms of:• An increased number of contributions per user and overall• Longer and higher quality contributions (i.e. posts and comments)• More discussion around the topics• More activity for the lifetime of the discussionWe decided to build our experiment around the overall question of “What makes the perfect T-shirt?”.This question was chosen in order to tap into an existing T-shirt community run by the Evly team atSpringleap.com. We posed this question to two independent groups, a control group (no gamificationelements) and an experimental group (with gamification elements). Springleap is a community-driven T-shirt design companythat uses crowdsourcing to source winning T-shirt designs.
We recruited participants by mailing out invitations to10,000 members of the Springleap community (5,000 forthe control group and a further 5,000 for the experimentalgroups) using the official Springleap marketing account. Inaddition, we mailed prominent T-shirt bloggers, created twoFacebook adverts (one for each group, combined they received1.15 million impressions but only 432 click-throughs), andmentioned the experiment daily via the official Springleap and Evly Twitter and Facebook accounts. Wedecided to offer a small prize of three Springleap T-shirts to the overall winner of each of our twogroups. We did not want to make the prize too large for fear of biasing the results. We wanted people tocontinue engaging with the experiment for intrinsic reasons rather than an extrinsic reward in the formof a large material prize.
We set up two independent discussion groups that were invisible to each other. For the most part, thetwo groups were nearly identical i.e they had similar page layouts and graphics (see Appendix 2 for anexample screenshot). However, our control group was only given the ability to answer questions andcomment on other’s answers. Our experimental group was exposed to several gamification mechanics,including:1. A virtual currency (they could accrue “points” by others voting on their answers)2. Parallel goals (sub-questions were posed in parallel to the overall question – see below)3. Badges (for answering each sub-question and for receiving the most votes for a sub-question)4. A progress bar indicating the progress of the overall discussion5. An appointment dynamic (participants had to answer each sub-question within the 3 day limit,although this was only enforced for sub-questions 3 and 4)Our hypothesis was that the experimental group would demonstrate higher user engagement and activityas a result of the inclusion of these game mechanics.
The macro question of “What makes the perfect T-shirt?” was split up into four sub-questions relating to specific characteristics of T-shirt design, including: Sub-question 1: Cultural references vs. originality Sub-question 2: Shirt cut e.g. trendy vs. comfort? Sub-question 3: Imagery e.g. simple vs. complex, words vs. graphics? Sub-question 4: Design placement e.g. side, front back, use of space/negative space, etc. We described each question in more detail and provided example images to frame the discussion (see Appendix 2 for the example images we used for each sub-question). We posted a new sub-question every three days. The experimental group was told to expect this structure. However, from the control group’s perspective, they were simply receiving new questions at intermittent intervals without it being clear that there was an overall structure in place. The timeline of the experiment was as follows: Introduction & ‘on-boarding’ (3 days) Sub-question 1 (3 days) Sub-question 2 (3 days) Sub-question 3 (3 days) Sub-question 4 (3 days) We used the first three days as an initial “on-boarding” period in which participants were able to discuss the macro question. In hindsight, this was probably a mistake as the largest flurry of activity over the life time of the two groups occurred in this period. We should have instead launched straight into the sub-questions at this stage to lock participants into the process.
To measure engagement, we looked at metrics such as the average number of posts per user, averagepost length per user, number of return visits per user, etc.Unfortunately, despite our extensive recruitment efforts, our final sample sizes were below expectation.However, we still found a consistent trend between the two groups; with higher scores on most of ourengagement metrics being observed for the gamified experimental group. This lendssome support to our initial hypothesis that gamification improves user engagement in onlinecommunities.It was not possible to pull out any noticeable differences between the content of thediscussions within each group. The ephemeral concept of “design” was the most mentioned in each asevidenced by the word clouds above.
Specifically, we found that the gamified experimental group…1. ……had a higher average number of posts per participant (2.3 vs. 1.5)
2. …had more members who contributed responses (83% vs. 68% of members)
3. …were more likely to start discussions, as a greater proportion of posts were in response to othermembers’ answers rather than directly to our structured questions (37% vs. 3% of posts werecomments in response to other members’ answers)All in all, we found these results to be encouraging. Due to the small base sizes, we are limited in terms of how the conclusions we can draw from this experiment, but it does lend some support to our hypothesis that gamification can indeed enhance engagement.
The challenges of gamification within market researchBeyond the documented pitfalls of gamification in general, gamification within a research context poses some unique challenges. Face Group’s D’Orazio cautions that “In my experience game mechanics have massive potential in the research industry but low-grade gamification is only going to distort social interaction and skew research outputs”. Crucially, one ought to consider if and how gamification might interfere with the objectives of the research and the integrity of the data collected. After all, gamification is about influencing behaviour and, as researchers, our intention is usually to minimise influence on behaviour. By incentivising with badges and points, we risk biasing results [Face, 2010]. Adding to this, Ewing [2010] points out that in research, we try to observe people in their natural state expressing their authentic selves – and this can be contrary to some game environments where players express themselves through an avatar or virtual self (although it’s debatable which represents the true self). Ewing [2010] describes how gamification might encourage unsolicited responses in surveys. For instance, simple stimulus-response game mechanics might reward the routinised patterns of responses that are undesirable in panels. When asked by the authors to comment on gamification in online communities, Ewing responded that “particularly for research purposes… things like hierarchies and post counts can be totally counter-productive and fix things in stone which don’t need fixing”, observing also that “hierarchy and play evolve naturally in successful communities without needing codifying”. According to Ewing [2010], mobile is the most promising platform for gamifying tasks, but success in the mobile environment demands that activities are simple and modular, and can be completed quickly. In their current state, research surveys and tasks do not conform to these requirements. A fundamental shift will be required if we are to approximate the conditions necessary for success in the mobile environment. As Day puts it, “In order to truly turn something into a game, it often needs to change so much in order to facilitate player agency that few people are willing to begin the process.”
In this paper, we have introduced the reader to the concept of “gamification”. We have looked at its pros and cons and we have provided examples. We have also spoken to several leading industry figures about its implications to get their views on this emerging trend. In addition, we conducted our own experiment to tease out the effects of gamifying an online experience, the results of which were encouraging, although much work still needs to be done before we can truly hail the concept as the Holy Grail of engagement and behaviour change. Gamification is an interesting trend that appears to be peaking in terms of the hype cycle. At the moment, people and businesses are jostling to jump aboard the bandwagon. At its heart, there appears to be a solid idea, but, as with any bubble, a crash is likely to come before the area stabilises its position in science and the business world. Like preceding buzz-terms such as behavioural economics and crowdsourcing, gamification seems to have something to offer. Now if we could only cut through the hype and get on with it, it will be very exciting to see where it leads us.
EPILOGUE: Acknowledgements & References AcknowledgementsA big thank you to the folks at Evly.com for their tireless efforts in helping to set up and run our experiment, especially:Maike Schulze Amy AbrahamsMehulSanghamEranEyal Eric Edelstein Also, a big thank you to the people who agreed to be interviewed by us, including: Gavin Marshall Danny Day Tom Ewing Finally, thank you to the following for your great feedback and advice on earlier drafts of this paper: Butch Rice Lesley van der Walt Philip Collier