There is growing interest in how gamification–—defined as the application of game design principles in non-gaming contexts–—can be used in business. However, academic research and management practice have paid little attention to the challenges of how best to design, implement, manage, and optimize gamification strategies. To advance understanding of gamification, this article defines what it is and explains how it prompts managers to think about business practice in new and innovative ways. Drawing upon the game design literature, we present a framework of three gamification principles –— mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (MDE) –— to explain how gamified experiences can be created. We then provide an extended illustration of gamification and conclude with ideas for future research and application opportunities.
Understanding Gamification of Consumer ExperiencesIan McCarthy
Robson, K.E., Plangger, K.A., Kietzmann, J., McCarthy, I., and Pitt, L.F. (2014) Understanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences, Advances in Consumer Research, 42, 352-356
Recently, organizations have begun to tout ‘gamification’ as an effective method of increasing motivation and engagement of employees, customers, patients, and students, among other stakeholders (Wingfield 2012). Nonetheless, despite projections that such gamification will become a widely adopted phenomenon, estimates are gloomy with respect to the real impact these projects will have on the experiences of ‘players’ (i.e., participants who are supposed to have fun), and on the organizations that would like to use gamification to improve the players’ behavior in their favor (Burke 2011). Gamification is difficult, and fraught with problems that can lead to strategic and resource-based problems for the firm. In this article, we present an experience framework in order to show the effect of gamification on consumers’ experiences that is illustrated through four extended examples. We conclude this article with a few implications for future research into, as well as practical application for the successful gamification of consumer experiences. But first, we discuss what gamification is and what it is not.
There is growing interest in how gamification–—defined as the application of game design principles in non-gaming contexts–—can be used in business. However, academic research and management practice have paid little attention to the challenges of how best to design, implement, manage, and optimize gamification strategies. To advance understanding of gamification, this article defines what it is and explains how it prompts managers to think about business practice in new and innovative ways. Drawing upon the game design literature, we present a framework of three gamification principles–—mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (MDE)–—to explain how gamified experiences can be created. We then provide an extended illustration of gamification and conclude with ideas for future research and application opportu- nities.
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamificationIan McCarthy
Managers are frequently tasked with increasing the engagement levels of key stakeholders, such as customers and employees. Gamification - defined as the application of game design principles to change behavior in non-gaming contexts - is a tool that, if crafted and implemented properly, can increase engagement. In this article we discuss how gamification can aid customer and employee engagement, and delineate between four different types of customers and employees who act as ‘players’ in gamified experiences. We include illustrative examples of gamification and conclude by presenting five lessons for managers who wish to utilize gamification.
The biggest disruption of the digital age is the need to extract insight from data in a way that engenders trust. To make the best use of data, executives need to educate themselves — and use this insight to plan their data strategy now.
This document proposes a framework to better understand and address: 1) How we extract insight from data, and 2) How we use data in such a way as to earn and protect trust: the trust of customers, constituents, patients, and partners
Download the full report at: http://pages.altimetergroup.com/what-do-we-do-with-all-this-big-data-report.html
A Time of Change: How CCOs and CMOs are Handling a New Presidential Administr...sjackson625
This paper is an analysis based on in-depth interviews with 22 senior communications and marketing executives in large companies about what they are doing differently with the new presidential administration. This is not a political piece advocating for any position; rather, this is a paper focused on what interviewees reported.
Understanding Gamification of Consumer ExperiencesIan McCarthy
Robson, K.E., Plangger, K.A., Kietzmann, J., McCarthy, I., and Pitt, L.F. (2014) Understanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences, Advances in Consumer Research, 42, 352-356
Recently, organizations have begun to tout ‘gamification’ as an effective method of increasing motivation and engagement of employees, customers, patients, and students, among other stakeholders (Wingfield 2012). Nonetheless, despite projections that such gamification will become a widely adopted phenomenon, estimates are gloomy with respect to the real impact these projects will have on the experiences of ‘players’ (i.e., participants who are supposed to have fun), and on the organizations that would like to use gamification to improve the players’ behavior in their favor (Burke 2011). Gamification is difficult, and fraught with problems that can lead to strategic and resource-based problems for the firm. In this article, we present an experience framework in order to show the effect of gamification on consumers’ experiences that is illustrated through four extended examples. We conclude this article with a few implications for future research into, as well as practical application for the successful gamification of consumer experiences. But first, we discuss what gamification is and what it is not.
There is growing interest in how gamification–—defined as the application of game design principles in non-gaming contexts–—can be used in business. However, academic research and management practice have paid little attention to the challenges of how best to design, implement, manage, and optimize gamification strategies. To advance understanding of gamification, this article defines what it is and explains how it prompts managers to think about business practice in new and innovative ways. Drawing upon the game design literature, we present a framework of three gamification principles–—mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (MDE)–—to explain how gamified experiences can be created. We then provide an extended illustration of gamification and conclude with ideas for future research and application opportu- nities.
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamificationIan McCarthy
Managers are frequently tasked with increasing the engagement levels of key stakeholders, such as customers and employees. Gamification - defined as the application of game design principles to change behavior in non-gaming contexts - is a tool that, if crafted and implemented properly, can increase engagement. In this article we discuss how gamification can aid customer and employee engagement, and delineate between four different types of customers and employees who act as ‘players’ in gamified experiences. We include illustrative examples of gamification and conclude by presenting five lessons for managers who wish to utilize gamification.
The biggest disruption of the digital age is the need to extract insight from data in a way that engenders trust. To make the best use of data, executives need to educate themselves — and use this insight to plan their data strategy now.
This document proposes a framework to better understand and address: 1) How we extract insight from data, and 2) How we use data in such a way as to earn and protect trust: the trust of customers, constituents, patients, and partners
Download the full report at: http://pages.altimetergroup.com/what-do-we-do-with-all-this-big-data-report.html
A Time of Change: How CCOs and CMOs are Handling a New Presidential Administr...sjackson625
This paper is an analysis based on in-depth interviews with 22 senior communications and marketing executives in large companies about what they are doing differently with the new presidential administration. This is not a political piece advocating for any position; rather, this is a paper focused on what interviewees reported.
Friending in High Places: Business Leaders On Facebook and InstagramBurson-Marsteller
Executive engagement on social media has become an integral part of the corporate communication mix, and Facebook and Instagram are making their way into executive floors and boardrooms of many global companies. For the last six years, Burson-Marsteller has studied how heads of state, governments and international organizations use social media
channels. For the last two years, it has produced reports specifically about world leaders’ use of Facebook. This year, in addition to studying world leaders, Burson-Marsteller conducted this study of business leaders to see how they connect with their audiences on Facebook and
Instagram.
Seventy-four percent of Americans believe CEOs are not paid the
correct amount relative to the average worker. Only 16 percent
believe they are. While responses vary across demographic
groups (e.g., political affiliation and household income), overall
sentiment regarding CEO pay remains highly negative.
Recently, the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford
University conducted a nationwide survey of 1,202 individuals—
representative by gender, race, age, political affiliation,
household income, and state residence—to understand public
perception of CEO pay levels among the 500 largest publicly
traded corporations....
For his final Portfolio Project, Tevin Green collaborated with Ashley Milano and Rassoull Shabazz, to come up with a business proposal to present to DC Entertainment.
This year’s edition highlights five critical trends for communicators in the next 12-18 months. Each is brought to life with real-world examples, implications for businesses and a carefully curated selection of classes from innovative institutions worldwide.
The Study Guide is designed as both a primer and a resource to allow for deep-dives. We hope it piques your curiosity and gives you fluency in new elements of modern media and communications.
This talk covers areas of responsible gambling, calling for greater transparency and fair access to data sharing amongst all stakeholders within a gambling ecosystem. Principles 5 and 12 of the EROGamb charter on Responsible Gambling are emphasised.
MSLGROUP Global Institutional Investors Insight Report 2014MSL
This landmark piece of research is one of the firsts of its kind to examine the tangible and intangible factors that influence the decision-making process of institutional investors and sell-side analysts around the world.
The report also sheds new light on this group’s motivations and offers perspective on how investor behaviour may evolve in the near future.
Follow #GIIIR2014 on Twitter for insights from the report.
Traditional institutions are undergoing a crisis of leadership as a result of reputational rows. Only one out of five people polled internationally for the Trust Barometer report carried out by Edelman every year believe that a business leader or a politician say the truth when facing a sensitive situation.
Alan Van der Molen, Edelman’s Global Vice President, believes that these data clearly reflect that while trust in institutions – companies and governments – is low, it is even lower with respect to those people who manage and represent these institutions: in the case of politicians and governments the difference is 28 ppt. That is why leaders are advised to change their leadership style and introduce more open, participative and inclusive elements in their leadership behaviour, thus encouraging dialogue, transparency and awareness of the opinions of different stakeholder groups.
This document was prepared by Corporate Excellence – Centre for Reputation Leadership and contains references to the statements of Alan Van der Molen, Edelman’s Global Vice President, Ángel Alloza, CEO of Corporate Excellence, Alberto Andreu, Telefónica’s Director for Corporate Reputation, Institutional Relations and Social Innovations, Alberto Artero, Director of Elconfidencial.com, and Ana Sainz, General Director of Seres Foundatio, made during the presentation of 2013 Edelman Trust Barometer 2013 held in Madrid.
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamificationIan McCarthy
There is growing interest in how gamification – application of game design principles in non-gaming contexts – can be used in business. However, academic research and management practice have paid little attention to the challenges of how to best design, implement, manage, and optimize gamification strategies. To advance understanding of gamification, this article defines what it is and explains how it is prompting managers to think about business practice in new and innovative ways. To this we draw upon the game design literature, and present a framework of three gamification principles – mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (MDE) – to explain how gamified experiences can be created. We then provide an extended illustration of gamification, and conclude with ideas for future research and application opportunities.
Dass sich eine Investition in Gamification lohnt, das versucht Scott Schnaars (Badgeville) anhand verschiedener Beispiele erfolgreicher Gamification-Programme zu zeigen. »Heutzutage tun die Kunden nicht das, was ich mir als Unternehmen wünsche, also muss ich ihr Verhalten ändern, um Waren zu verkaufen und sie an mich zu binden und genau das gelingt mir mit Hilfe von Gamification«, ist sich Schnaars sicher.
Este livro é fruto de parte de um extenso trabalho de pesquisa, de cunho teórico, reflexivo e prático, na busca de soluções que apontem para a criação e manutenção de processos motivacionais eficazes aos indivíduos. Por isso, é dedicado a explorar e discutir conceitualmente o fenômeno gamification, apontando direções e diretrizes para a aplicação desta prática independente das áreas: corporativa, mercadológica ou instrucional.
The ability of current statistical classifications to separateservices and ma...Ian McCarthy
This paper explores the performance of current statistical classification systems in classifying firms and, in particular, their ability to distinguish between firms that provide services and firms that provide manufacturing. We find that a large share of firms, almost 20%, are not classified as expected based on a comparison of their statements of activities with the assigned industry codes. This result is robust to analyses on different levels of aggregation and is validated in an additional survey. It is well known from earlier literature that industry classification systems are not perfect. This paper provides a quantification of the flaws in classifications of firms. Moreover, it is explained why the classifications of firms are imprecise. The increasing complexity of production, inertia in changes to statistical systems and the increasing integration of manufacturing products and services are some of the primary and interrelated explanations for this lack of precision. We emphasise, however, that such classification problems are not resolved using a ‘technical fix’. Any statistical classification method involves a number of tradeoffs.
Friending in High Places: Business Leaders On Facebook and InstagramBurson-Marsteller
Executive engagement on social media has become an integral part of the corporate communication mix, and Facebook and Instagram are making their way into executive floors and boardrooms of many global companies. For the last six years, Burson-Marsteller has studied how heads of state, governments and international organizations use social media
channels. For the last two years, it has produced reports specifically about world leaders’ use of Facebook. This year, in addition to studying world leaders, Burson-Marsteller conducted this study of business leaders to see how they connect with their audiences on Facebook and
Instagram.
Seventy-four percent of Americans believe CEOs are not paid the
correct amount relative to the average worker. Only 16 percent
believe they are. While responses vary across demographic
groups (e.g., political affiliation and household income), overall
sentiment regarding CEO pay remains highly negative.
Recently, the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford
University conducted a nationwide survey of 1,202 individuals—
representative by gender, race, age, political affiliation,
household income, and state residence—to understand public
perception of CEO pay levels among the 500 largest publicly
traded corporations....
For his final Portfolio Project, Tevin Green collaborated with Ashley Milano and Rassoull Shabazz, to come up with a business proposal to present to DC Entertainment.
This year’s edition highlights five critical trends for communicators in the next 12-18 months. Each is brought to life with real-world examples, implications for businesses and a carefully curated selection of classes from innovative institutions worldwide.
The Study Guide is designed as both a primer and a resource to allow for deep-dives. We hope it piques your curiosity and gives you fluency in new elements of modern media and communications.
This talk covers areas of responsible gambling, calling for greater transparency and fair access to data sharing amongst all stakeholders within a gambling ecosystem. Principles 5 and 12 of the EROGamb charter on Responsible Gambling are emphasised.
MSLGROUP Global Institutional Investors Insight Report 2014MSL
This landmark piece of research is one of the firsts of its kind to examine the tangible and intangible factors that influence the decision-making process of institutional investors and sell-side analysts around the world.
The report also sheds new light on this group’s motivations and offers perspective on how investor behaviour may evolve in the near future.
Follow #GIIIR2014 on Twitter for insights from the report.
Traditional institutions are undergoing a crisis of leadership as a result of reputational rows. Only one out of five people polled internationally for the Trust Barometer report carried out by Edelman every year believe that a business leader or a politician say the truth when facing a sensitive situation.
Alan Van der Molen, Edelman’s Global Vice President, believes that these data clearly reflect that while trust in institutions – companies and governments – is low, it is even lower with respect to those people who manage and represent these institutions: in the case of politicians and governments the difference is 28 ppt. That is why leaders are advised to change their leadership style and introduce more open, participative and inclusive elements in their leadership behaviour, thus encouraging dialogue, transparency and awareness of the opinions of different stakeholder groups.
This document was prepared by Corporate Excellence – Centre for Reputation Leadership and contains references to the statements of Alan Van der Molen, Edelman’s Global Vice President, Ángel Alloza, CEO of Corporate Excellence, Alberto Andreu, Telefónica’s Director for Corporate Reputation, Institutional Relations and Social Innovations, Alberto Artero, Director of Elconfidencial.com, and Ana Sainz, General Director of Seres Foundatio, made during the presentation of 2013 Edelman Trust Barometer 2013 held in Madrid.
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamificationIan McCarthy
There is growing interest in how gamification – application of game design principles in non-gaming contexts – can be used in business. However, academic research and management practice have paid little attention to the challenges of how to best design, implement, manage, and optimize gamification strategies. To advance understanding of gamification, this article defines what it is and explains how it is prompting managers to think about business practice in new and innovative ways. To this we draw upon the game design literature, and present a framework of three gamification principles – mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (MDE) – to explain how gamified experiences can be created. We then provide an extended illustration of gamification, and conclude with ideas for future research and application opportunities.
Dass sich eine Investition in Gamification lohnt, das versucht Scott Schnaars (Badgeville) anhand verschiedener Beispiele erfolgreicher Gamification-Programme zu zeigen. »Heutzutage tun die Kunden nicht das, was ich mir als Unternehmen wünsche, also muss ich ihr Verhalten ändern, um Waren zu verkaufen und sie an mich zu binden und genau das gelingt mir mit Hilfe von Gamification«, ist sich Schnaars sicher.
Este livro é fruto de parte de um extenso trabalho de pesquisa, de cunho teórico, reflexivo e prático, na busca de soluções que apontem para a criação e manutenção de processos motivacionais eficazes aos indivíduos. Por isso, é dedicado a explorar e discutir conceitualmente o fenômeno gamification, apontando direções e diretrizes para a aplicação desta prática independente das áreas: corporativa, mercadológica ou instrucional.
The ability of current statistical classifications to separateservices and ma...Ian McCarthy
This paper explores the performance of current statistical classification systems in classifying firms and, in particular, their ability to distinguish between firms that provide services and firms that provide manufacturing. We find that a large share of firms, almost 20%, are not classified as expected based on a comparison of their statements of activities with the assigned industry codes. This result is robust to analyses on different levels of aggregation and is validated in an additional survey. It is well known from earlier literature that industry classification systems are not perfect. This paper provides a quantification of the flaws in classifications of firms. Moreover, it is explained why the classifications of firms are imprecise. The increasing complexity of production, inertia in changes to statistical systems and the increasing integration of manufacturing products and services are some of the primary and interrelated explanations for this lack of precision. We emphasise, however, that such classification problems are not resolved using a ‘technical fix’. Any statistical classification method involves a number of tradeoffs.
Toward a Phylogenetic Reconstruction of Organizational LifeIan McCarthy
Classification is an important activity that facilitates theory development in many academic disciplines. Scholars in fields such as organizational science, management science and economics and have long recognized that classification offers an approach for ordering and understanding the diversity of organizational taxa (groups of one or more similar organizational entities). However, even the most prominent organizational classifications have limited utility, as they tend to be shaped by a specific research bias, inadequate units of analysis and a standard neoclassical economic view that does not naturally accommodate the disequilibrium dynamics of modern competition. The result is a relatively large number of individual and unconnected organizational classifications, which tend to ignore the processes of change responsible for organizational diversity. Collectively they fail to provide any sort of universal system for ordering, compiling and presenting knowledge on organizational diversity. This paper has two purposes. First, it reviews the general status of the major theoretical approaches to biological and organizational classification and compares the methods and resulting classifications derived from each approach. Definitions of key terms and a discussion on the three principal schools of biological classification (evolutionary systematics, phenetics and cladistics) are included in this review. Second, this paper aims to encourage critical thinking and debate about the use of the cladistic classification approach for inferring and representing the historical relationships underpinning organizational diversity. This involves examining the feasibility of applying the logic of common ancestry to populations of organizations. Consequently, this paper is exploratory and preparatory in style, with illustrations and assertions concerning the study and classification of organizational diversity.
Understanding the effects of outsourcing: unpacking the total factor producti...Ian McCarthy
Research on why firms should outsource and how they should do it has proliferated in the past two decades, but few consistent findings have emerged concerning the benefits of outsourcing. We argue that this is in part due to the lack of an adequate framework for measuring the effects of outsourcing. To address this, we present such a framework based upon the Cobb–Douglas productivity function. We explain how our framework can be used to unpack one component of the Cobb–Douglas productivity function, the ‘total factor productivity’, which represents the other numerous sub-variables that affect outsourcing productivity, beyond the capital and labour expenditures. We also demonstrate the framework using a simple illustrative example.
Technology Management - A Complex Adaptive Systems ApproachIan McCarthy
There are systems methods and evolutionary processes that can help organisations understand the innovative patterns and competitive mechanisms that influence the creation, management and exploitation of technology. This paper presents a specific model based on the evolutionary processes of variation, selection, retention and struggle, coupled with fitness landscape theory. This latter concept is a complex adaptive systems theory that has attained recognition as an approach for visually mapping the strategic options an evolving system could pursue. The relevance and utility of fitness landscape theory to the strategic management of technology is explored, and a definition and model of technological fitness provided. The complex adaptive systems perspective adopted by this paper, views organisations as evolving systems that formulate strategies by classifying, selecting, adopting and exploiting various combinations of technological capabilities. A model called the strategy configuration chain is presented to illustrate this strategic process.
Innovation in manufacturing as an evolutionary complex systemIan McCarthy
The focus of this paper is on innovation in terms of the new product development processes and to discuss its main features. This is followed by a presentation of the new ideas emerging from complex systems science. It is then demonstrated how complex systems provides an overall conceptual framework for thinking about innovation and for considering how this helps to provide understanding and advice for the organisation of new product development in different circumstances. Three case studies are quoted which illustrate the application of these new ideas.
New Product Development as a Complex Adaptive System of DecisionsIan McCarthy
Early research on new product development (NPD) has produced descriptive frameworks and models that view the process as a linear system with sequential and discrete stages. More recently, recursive and chaotic frameworks of NPD have been developed, both of which acknowledge that NPD progresses through a series of stages, but with overlaps, feedback loops, and resulting behaviors that resist reductionism
and linear analysis. This article extends the linear, recursive, and chaotic frameworks by viewing NPD as a complex adaptive system (CAS) governed by three levels of decision making — in-stage, review, and strategic—and the accompanying decision rules. The research develops and presents propositions that predict how the configuration and organization of NPD decision-making agents will influence
the potential for three mutually dependent CAS phenomena: nonlinearity, selforganization, and emergence. Together these phenomena underpin the potential for NPD process adaptability and congruence. To support and to verify the propositions, this study uses comparative case studies, which show that NPD process adaptability occurs and that it is dependent on the number and variety of agents, their corresponding connections and interactions, and the ordering or disordering effect of the decision levels and rules. Thus, the CAS framework developed within this article maintains a fit among descriptive stance, system behavior, and innovation type, as it considers individual NPD processes to be capable of switching or toggling between different behaviors — linear to chaotic — to produce corresponding innovation outputs that range from incremental to radical in accord with market expectations.
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary AnalysisIan McCarthy
To achieve the status of an agile manufacturer, organisations need to clearly understand the concept of agility, relative to their industrial and business circumstances and to then identify and acquire the appropriate characteristics which will result in an agile manufacturing organisation. This paper is not simply another discussion on the definition of agility, or a philosophical debate on the drivers and characteristics of agility. This paper presents an evolutionary modelling technique (cladistics) which could enable organisations to systematically manage and understand the emergence of new manufacturing forms within their business environment. This fundamental, but important insight is valuable for achieving successful organisational design and change. Thus, regardless of the industrial sector, managers could use cladistics as an evolutionary analysis technique for determining ``where they have been and where they are now''. Moving from a non-agile manufacture to an agile manufacture is a process of organisational change and evolutionary development. This evolutionary method will enable organisations to understand the landscape of manufacturing possibilities that exist, to identify appropriate agile forms and to successfully navigate that landscape.
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistic classificationsIan McCarthy
This article presents a case for the construction of a formal classification of manufacturing systems using cladistics, a technique from the biological school of classification. A seven-stage framework for roducing a manufacturing cladogram is presented, along with a pilot case study example. This article describes the role that classification plays in the pure and applied sciences, the social sciences and reviews the status of existing manufacturing classifications. If organisational diversity and organisational change processes are governed by evolutionary mechanisms, studies of organisations based on an evolutionary approach such as cladistics could have potential, because as March [March JG. The evolution of evolution. In: Baum JAC, Singh JV, editors. Evolutionary dynamics of organizations. Oxford University Press, 1994. p. 39±52], page 45, states ``there is natural speculation that organisations, like species can be engineered by understanding the evolutionary processes well enough to intervene and produce competitive organisational effects''. It is suggested that a cladistic study could provide organisations with a ``knowledge map'' of the ecosystem in which they exist and by using this phylogenetic and situational analysis, they could determine coherent and appropriate action for the specification of change.
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...Ian McCarthy
Outsourcing is a strategic activity that has long been central to operations management research and practice. Yet, there are still many outsourcing management challenges that remain. In this article, we explore two of the outsourcing challenges that motivated this special issue and are central to the 10 articles included. To do this, we develop a theoretical model that examines how variations in capability fit and information asymmetry combine to present firms with four different outsourcing contexts. We then explain how each of the articles included in this special issue relate to our theoretical model and explore several avenues for future research.
Why do some patents get licensed while others do not?Ian McCarthy
To understand why some patents get licensed and others do not, we estimate a portfolio of firm- and patent-level determinants for why a particular licensor’s patent was licensed over all technologically similar patents held by other licensors. Using data for licensed biopharmaceutical patents, we build a set of alternate patents that could have been licensed-in using topic modeling techniques. This provides a more sophisticated way of controlling for patent characteristics and analyzing the attractiveness of a licensor and the characteristics of the patent itself. We find that patents owned by licensors with technological prestige, experience at licensing, and combined technological depth and breadth have a greater chance at being chosen by licensees. This suggests that a licensor’s standing and organizational learning rather than the quality of its patent alone influence the success of outward licensing.
Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...Ian McCarthy
Research on how managers control R&D activities has tended to focus on the performance measurement systems used to exploit existing knowledge and capabilities. This focus has been at the expense of how broader forms of management control could be used to enable R&D contextual ambidexterity, the capacity to attain appropriate levels of exploitation and exploration behaviors in the same R&D organizational unit. In this paper, we develop a conceptual framework for understanding how different types of control system, guided by different R&D strategic goals, can be used to induce and balance both exploitation and exploration. We illustrate the elements of this framework and their relations using data from biotechnology firms, and then discuss how the framework provides a basis to empirically examine a number of important control relationships and phenomena.
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...Ian McCarthy
Creative consumers (defined as customers who adapt, modify, or transform a proprietary offering) represent an intriguing paradox for business. On
one hand, they can signify a black hole for future revenue, with breach of copyright and intellectual property. On the other hand, they represent a gold mine of ideas and business opportunities. Central to business is the need to create and capture value, and creative consumers demand a shift in the mindsets and business models of how firms accomplish both. Based upon their attitude and action toward customer innovation, we develop a typology of firms’ stances toward creative consumers. We then consider the implications of the stances model for corporate strategy and
examine a three-step approach to dealing with creative consumers: awareness, analysis, and response.
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...Ian McCarthy
As a fascinating concept, the mechanisms of complex adaptive system (CAS) attracted many researchers from a variety of disciplines. Nevertheless, how the mechanism-related variables, such as strategic resonance, accreting nodes, pattern forming, and catalytic behavior of organization, impact the firm product innovativeness is rarely addressed empirically in the new product development (NPD) literature. Also, there exist limited studies on the antecedents of the mechanisms of CAS in the NPD literature. In this respect, we identified and operationalized the adaptive management practices, which involve bonding, nonlinear, and attractor behaviors of management, as antecedents of mechanisms and firm product innovativeness. By studying 235 firms, we found that (1) strategic resonance and accreting nodes are positively related to firm product innovativeness, (2) bonding, nonlinear, and attractor behaviors of management positively influence the mechanism variables, and (3) market and technology turbulence impact the adaptive management practices. We also found that mechanisms of CAS partially mediate the relationship between adaptive management practices and firm product innovativeness.
Mediating Effects of Social Media on the Relationship between Human Skill and...inventionjournals
Social media is a new experience that change operates of business environment. The quality of accessibility and most cost effective marketing way are its gains today. Businesses are able to gain access to advantages that were otherwise not available to them. Meanwhile, the hotel industry is one of the rapidly growing labour intensive industry actively pursuing contemporary marketing strategies applicable as to remain competitive. Hence, hoteliers need to rethink their strategy of marketing to manage among others which includes the social media. This research is to study the mediating effects of social media on the relationships between human skill and competitive advantage in which 331 were the sample size of executive grade officers in Sri Lankan star graded hotels. In this study mainly use the primary data which were collected through questionnaire survey. The quantitative data were analysis using SPSS for correlation and Soble equation. Results indicated that the mediating effects on the relationship between social media and competitive advantage. There were positive correlations among the human skill, social media and competitive advantage.
Game on qualitative researchers: Using gamification to increase partipant eng...InSites Consulting
We believe gamification can be applied in 3 different phases of the research process; (1) during data collection, (2) during analysis and interpretation and (3) during reporting and presentation of the results. In this paper, we present an approach to gamification in online qualitative research. There is already ample research with respect to using gamification in quantitative research; however, a comprehensive approach for online qualitative research is lacking so far.
In this paper we will focus on using gamification during data collection and will briefly demonstrate how we apply gamification in the last 2 phases. At InSites Consulting, we identified 4 levels in an online community at which gamification can be applied to increase data quality, participant engagement and impact on the client side. From a question level to a community level, gamification helps, not only to increase participant engagement, but also to increase data quality.
This article examines the underlying of gamification, explores how brands can utilize gamification to engage and motivate consumers and examines some examples of brands that are successfully utilizing gamification.
DESIGNING A NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED SPORTS MARKETING MODEL FOR SMALL VENUESindexPub
In recent years, attention to small neighborhood-based venues as a key element in the development of sports, physical activities, and social interactions within local communities has increased. Managers of professional and university sports organizations must effectively address challenges such as high costs, intensely competitive markets, growing fan dissatisfaction, severed relationships, and the rapid growth of new technologies to survive in the sports business environment.
Emerging Learning and Development Models: Part OneSahil Parikh
Part one of ten in a series on emerging learning concepts from the areas of gamification and mlearning. In this post Dr. David Chandross discusses microlearning and intrinsic motivation.
Check us out at www.gameandtrain.com for more information and great content!
Similar to Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification (20)
The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...Ian McCarthy
Abstract: The mission of many business schools and their researchers is to produce research that that impacts how business leaders, entrepreneurs, managers, and innovators, think and act. However, this mission remains an elusive ideal for many business school academics because they struggle to design and produce research capable of overcoming the "research-practice gap." To help those scholars address this gap, we explain why and how they should use social media to be more 'open' to connecting with, learning from, and working with academics and other stakeholders outside of their field. We describe how social media can be used as a boundary-spanning technology to help bridge the research-practice gap. To do this, we present a process model of five research activities: networking, framing, investigating, dissemination, and assessment. Using recently published research as an illustrative example, we describe how social media was used to make each activity more open. We conclude with a framework of different social media-enabled open academic approaches (connector, observer, promoter, and influencer) and some dos and don'ts for engaging in each approach. This paper aims to help business academics rethink and change their practices so that our profession is more widely regarded for how its research positively impacts practice and societal well-being more generally.
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...Ian McCarthy
Despite significant academic and managerial interest in big data, there is a dearth of research on how big data impacts
the long-term firm performance. Reasons for this gap include a lack of objective indices to measure big data
availability and its impact, and the tendency of studies to ignore the costs associated with collecting and analyzing
big data, assuming that big data automatically delivers benefits to firms. Focusing on how firms create and capture
value from big data about customers, we use the resource-based view and three dimensions of big data (i.e., volume,
variety, and veracity) to understand when the benefits outweigh the costs. Relying on the number of downloads of
mobile device applications, we find that volume of big data has a negative effect on firm performance. This result
suggests that the “bigness” of big data alone does not ensure value creation for a firm, and could even constitute a
“dark side” of big data. Because big data variety—measured as the number of types of information taken per each
application—moderates the negative effects of big data volume, simultaneous high values of volume and variety
allow firms to create value that positively affects their performance. In addition, high levels of veracity (i.e., a high
percentage of employees devoted to big data analysis), are linked to firms benefiting from big data via value capture.
These findings shed light on the circumstances in which big data can be beneficial for firms, contributing to a better
theoretical understanding of the opportunities and challenges and providing useful indications to managers.
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...Ian McCarthy
We discuss how the standards emerge from an interaction between three main sources, the standards standard-setting organizations (SSOs), the competitive market forces, and the government. We present a framework (see Table I) that highlights how these sources differ and work together to shape the standardization in a digital and global context. Also, using this framework, we introduce the contribution of each article of this issue and their contribution to some of the major issues that the standardization is facing today in a digital and global world. We conclude with the suggestions of avenues for future research on this topic.
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...Ian McCarthy
Consumers often innovate with brand-related intellectual property (IP) without permission. Although firms often respond by exercising their legal right to stop such activity, there are a variety of situations in which consumers’ unauthorized use of brand-related IP can be desirable for a brand or in which enforcing IP rights can adversely affect a brand. This article illustrates situations in which managers may benefit from choosing to forgo exercising their IP rights. To assist managers, this article contributes a framework for understanding the managerial approaches to situations in which consumers use IP without permission.
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activitiesIan McCarthy
Guided group activities, where tourists consume with other tourists, are common and important. Although the
tourism and services literature suggests customer-employee rapport impacts customer satisfaction, the composition
and impact of tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities have received minimal attention. We use a
three-study mixed method approach to conceptualize and examine tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities.
Study 1 identifies two recognized dyadic dimensions of tourist-tourist rapport (enjoyable interaction and
personal connection) and two new group-based dimensions (group attentiveness and service congruity). Study 2
(video experiment) and Study 3 (field experiment) find that enjoyable interaction and personal connection
mediate the relationship between group attentiveness and service congruity with satisfaction. Thus, touristtourist
rapport in a group context is more multidimensional and complex than previously conceptualized for
customer-employee rapport and non-group contexts. Further, we find tourist-tourist rapport is a critical service
factor such that high levels satisfy, while low levels dissatisfy.
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaIan McCarthy
Research and practice have mostly focused on the “bright side” of social media, aiming to understand and help in leveraging the manifold opportunities afforded by this technology. However, it is increasingly observable that social media present enormous risks for individuals, communities, firms, and even for society as a whole. Examples for this “dark side” of social media include cyberbullying, addictive use, trolling, online witch hunts, fake news, and privacy abuse. In this article, we aim to illustrate the multidimensionality of the dark side of social media and describe the related various undesirable outcomes. To do this, we adapt the established social media honeycomb framework to explain the dark side implications of each of the seven functional building blocks: conversations, sharing, presence, relationships, reputation, groups, and identity. On the basis of these reflections, we present a number of avenues for future research, so as to facilitate a better understanding and use of social media.
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...Ian McCarthy
University-industry partnerships emphasise the transformation of knowledge into products and processes which can be commercially exploited. This paper presents a framework for understanding how social capital in university-industry partnerships affect knowledge transfer strategies, which impacts on collaborative innovation developments. University-industry partnerships in three different countries, all from regions at varying stages of development, are compared using the proposed framework. These include a developed region (Canada), a transition region (Malta), and a developing region (South Africa). Structural, relational and cognitive social capital dimensions are mapped against the knowledge transfer strategy that the university-industry partnership employed: leveraging existing knowledge or appropriating new knowledge. Exploring the comparative presence of social capital in knowledge transfer strategies assists in better understanding how university-industry partnerships can position themselves to facilitate innovation. The paper proposes a link between social capital and knowledge transfer strategy by illustrating how it impacts the competitive positioning of the university-industry partners involved.
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...Ian McCarthy
Purpose – This article explores how employees can perceive and be impacted by the fakeness of their company slogans.
Design/methodology/approach – This conceptual study draws on the established literature on company slogans, employee audiences, and fake news to create a framework through which to understand fake company slogans.
Findings – Employees attend to two important dimensions of slogans: whether they accurately reflect a company’s (1) values and (2) value proposition. These dimensions combine to form a typology of four ways in which employees can perceive their company’s slogans: namely, authentic, narcissistic, foreign, or corrupt.
Research limitations/implications – This paper outlines how the typology provides a theoretical basis for more refined empirical research on how company slogans influence a key stakeholder: their employees. Future research could test the arguments about how certain characteristics of slogans are more or less likely to cause employees to conclude that slogans are fake news. Those conclusions will, in turn, have implications for the
morale and engagement of employees. The ideas herein can also enable a more comprehensive assessment of the impact of slogans.
Practical implications – Employees can view three types of slogans as fake news (narcissistic, foreign, and corrupt slogans). This paper identifies the implications of each type and explains how companies can go about developing authentic slogans.
Originality/value – This paper explores the impact of slogan fakeness on employees: an important audience that has been neglected by studies to
date. Thus, the insights and implications specific to this internal stakeholder are novel.
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysisIan McCarthy
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce, apply and compare how artificial intelligence (AI), and specifically the IBM Watson system, can be used for content analysis in marketing research relative to manual and computer-aided (non-AI) approaches to content analysis.
Design/methodology/approach – To illustrate the use of AI enabled content analysis, this paper examines the text of leadership speeches, content related to organizational brand. The process and results of using AI are compared to manual and computer-aided approaches by using three performance factors for content analysis: reliability, validity and efficiency.
Findings – Relative to manual and computer-aided approaches, AI-enabled content analysis provides clear advantages with high reliability, high validity and moderate efficiency.
Research limitations/implications – This paper offers three contributions. First, it highlights the continued importance of the content analysis research method, particularly with the explosive growth of natural language-based user-generated content. Second, it provides a road map of how to use AI-enabled content analysis. Third, it applies and compares AI-enabled content analysis to manual and computer-aided, using leadership speeches.
Practical implications – For each of the three approaches, nine steps are outlined and described to allow for replicability of this study. The advantages and disadvantages of using AI for content analysis are discussed. Together these are intended to motivate and guide researchers to apply and develop AI-enabled content analysis for research in marketing and other disciplines.
Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to introduce, apply and compare how AI can be used for content analysis.
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitIan McCarthy
Abstract Many organizations are drowning in a flood of corporate bullshit, and this is particularly true of organizations in trouble, whose managers tend to make up stuff on the fly and with little regard for future consequences. Bullshitting and lying are not synonymous. While the liar knows the truth and wittingly bends it to suit their purpose, the bullshitter simply does not care about the truth. Managers can actually do something about organizational bullshit, and this Executive Digest provides a sequential framework that enables them to do so. They can comprehend it, they can recognize it for what it is, they can act against it, and they can take steps to prevent it from happening in the future. While it is unlikely that any organization will ever be able to rid itself of bullshit entirely, this article argues that by taking these steps, astute managers can work toward stemming its flood.
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...Ian McCarthy
Despite significant academic and managerial interest in big data, there is a dearth of research on how big data impacts long-term firm performance. Reasons for this gap include a lack of objective indices to measure big data availability and its impact, and the tendency of studies to ignore the costs associated with collecting and analyzing big data, assuming that big data automatically delivers benefits to firms. Focusing on how firms create and capture value from big data about customers, we use the resource-based view (RBV) and three dimensions of big data (i.e., volume, variety and veracity) to understand when the benefits outweigh the costs. Relying on the number of downloads of mobile device applications, we find that volume of big data has a negative effect on firm performance. This result suggests that the ‘bigness’ of big data alone does not ensure value creation for a firm, and could even constitute a ‘dark side’ of big data. Because big data variety – measured as the number of types of information taken per each application – moderates the negative effects of big data volume, simultaneous high values of volume and variety allow firms to create value that positively affects their performance. In addition, high levels of veracity (i.e., a high percentage of employees devoted to big data analysis), are linked to firms benefiting from big data via value capture. These findings shed light on the circumstances in which big data can be beneficial for firms, contributing to a better theoretical understanding of the opportunities and challenges and providing useful indications to managers.
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truthIan McCarthy
Many organizations are drowning in a flood of corporate bullshit, and this is particularly true of organizations in trouble, whose managers tend to make up stuff on the fly and with little regard for future consequences. Bullshitting and lying are not synonymous. While the liar knows the truth and wittingly bends it to suit their purpose, the bullshitter simply does not care about the truth. Managers can actually do something about organizational bullshit, and this Executive Digest provides a sequential framework that enables them to do so. They can comprehend it, they can recognize it for what it is, they can act against it, and they can take steps to prevent it from happening in the future. While it is unlikely that any organization will ever be able to rid itself of bullshit entirely, this article argues that by taking these steps, astute managers can work toward stemming its flood.
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitIan McCarthy
Many organizations are drowning in a flood of corporate bullshit, and this is particularly true of organizations in trouble, whose managers tend to make up stuff on the fly and with little regard for future consequences. Bullshitting and lying are not synonymous. While the liar knows the truth and wittingly bends it to suit their purpose, the bullshitter simply does not care about the truth. Managers can actually do something about organizational bullshit, and this Executive Digest provides a sequential framework that enables them to do so. They can comprehend it, they can recognize it for what it is, they can act against it, and they can take steps to prevent it from happening in the future. While it is unlikely that any organization will ever be able to rid itself of bullshit entirely, this article argues that by taking these steps, astute managers can work toward stemming its flood.
Although manipulations of visual and auditory media are as old as the media themselves, the recent entrance of deepfakes has marked a turning point in the creation of fake content. Powered by latest technological advances in AI and machine learning, they offer automated procedures to create fake content that is harder and harder to detect to human observers. The possibilities to deceive are endless, including manipulated pictures, videos and audio, that will have large societal impact. Because of this, organizations need to understand the inner workings of the underlying techniques, as well as their strengths and limitations. This article provides a working definition of deepfakes together with an overview of the underlying technology. We classify different deepfake types: photo (face- and body-swapping), audio (voice-swapping, text to speech), video (face-swapping, face-morphing, full body puppetry) and audio & video (lip-synching), and identify risks and opportunities to help organizations think about the future of deepfakes. Finally, we propose the R.E.A.L. framework to manage deepfake risks: Record original content to assure deniability, Expose deepfakes early, Advocate for legal protection and Leverage trust to counter credulity. Following these principles, we hope that our society can be more prepared to counter the deepfake tricks as we appreciate its treats.
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaIan McCarthy
Research and practice have mostly focused on the “bright side” of social media, aiming to understand and help in leveraging the manifold opportunities afforded by this technology. However, it is increasingly observable that social media present enormous risks for individuals, communities, firms, and even the whole of society. Examples for this “dark side” of social media include cyberbullying, addictive use, trolling, online witch hunts, fake news, and privacy abuse. In this article, we aim to illustrate the multidimensionality of the dark side of social media and describe the related various undesirable outcomes. To do this, we adapt the established social media honeycomb framework to explain the dark side implications of each of the seven functional building blocks: conversations, sharing, presence, relationships, reputation, groups, and identity. On the basis of these reflections, we present a number of avenues for future research, so as to facilitate a better understanding and use of social media.
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...Ian McCarthy
Licensing speed: There has been much research interest in the speed of innovation, although few consistent findings have emerged. In this study, we unpack the innovation process and focus on the commercialization stage to examine two questions: Which licensor and patent characteristics determine the speed of licensing? How does the speed of licensing impact the royalties and lumpsum payments to licensors? We addressed these questions by proposing that licensing speed is influenced by variables for licensor prominence (size and experience), licensor knowledge structuration (technological depth, technological breadth and experience), and patent appeal (forward citations, scope and complexity). We predict and find that these variables work to increase the size, complexity and duration of the licensing-out task, while also allowing licensors to take their time to review, negotiate and select agreements with higher royalty rates. These findings are counter to arguments for a fast-paced innovation strategy, as it suggests that for the commercialization stage of the innovation process the relationship between licensing speed and licensor royalty
rates rewards a ‘less haste, greater payoff approach.
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paperIan McCarthy
I use the steps in this presentation to:
(i) test research ideas for research papers,
(ii) shape research papers, and
(iii) help draft the Introduction section of a research paper.
For each step I draft one or two concise paragraphs.
I then present and share these with co-authors, collaborators and colleagues to test the ideas and get feedback on how interesting and valid they are.
I consider and work through these steps several times during the life of a research paper framed.
Digital Transformation and IT Strategy Toolkit and TemplatesAurelien Domont, MBA
This Digital Transformation and IT Strategy Toolkit was created by ex-McKinsey, Deloitte and BCG Management Consultants, after more than 5,000 hours of work. It is considered the world's best & most comprehensive Digital Transformation and IT Strategy Toolkit. It includes all the Frameworks, Best Practices & Templates required to successfully undertake the Digital Transformation of your organization and define a robust IT Strategy.
Editable Toolkit to help you reuse our content: 700 Powerpoint slides | 35 Excel sheets | 84 minutes of Video training
This PowerPoint presentation is only a small preview of our Toolkits. For more details, visit www.domontconsulting.com
RMD24 | Debunking the non-endemic revenue myth Marvin Vacquier Droop | First ...BBPMedia1
Marvin neemt je in deze presentatie mee in de voordelen van non-endemic advertising op retail media netwerken. Hij brengt ook de uitdagingen in beeld die de markt op dit moment heeft op het gebied van retail media voor niet-leveranciers.
Retail media wordt gezien als het nieuwe advertising-medium en ook mediabureaus richten massaal retail media-afdelingen op. Merken die niet in de betreffende winkel liggen staan ook nog niet in de rij om op de retail media netwerken te adverteren. Marvin belicht de uitdagingen die er zijn om echt aansluiting te vinden op die markt van non-endemic advertising.
Implicitly or explicitly all competing businesses employ a strategy to select a mix
of marketing resources. Formulating such competitive strategies fundamentally
involves recognizing relationships between elements of the marketing mix (e.g.,
price and product quality), as well as assessing competitive and market conditions
(i.e., industry structure in the language of economics).
Falcon stands out as a top-tier P2P Invoice Discounting platform in India, bridging esteemed blue-chip companies and eager investors. Our goal is to transform the investment landscape in India by establishing a comprehensive destination for borrowers and investors with diverse profiles and needs, all while minimizing risk. What sets Falcon apart is the elimination of intermediaries such as commercial banks and depository institutions, allowing investors to enjoy higher yields.
"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."
LA HUG - Video Testimonials with Chynna Morgan - June 2024Lital Barkan
Have you ever heard that user-generated content or video testimonials can take your brand to the next level? We will explore how you can effectively use video testimonials to leverage and boost your sales, content strategy, and increase your CRM data.🤯
We will dig deeper into:
1. How to capture video testimonials that convert from your audience 🎥
2. How to leverage your testimonials to boost your sales 💲
3. How you can capture more CRM data to understand your audience better through video testimonials. 📊
VAT Registration Outlined In UAE: Benefits and Requirementsuae taxgpt
Vat Registration is a legal obligation for businesses meeting the threshold requirement, helping companies avoid fines and ramifications. Contact now!
https://viralsocialtrends.com/vat-registration-outlined-in-uae/
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.
[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
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.
Business Valuation Principles for EntrepreneursBen Wann
This insightful presentation is designed to equip entrepreneurs with the essential knowledge and tools needed to accurately value their businesses. Understanding business valuation is crucial for making informed decisions, whether you're seeking investment, planning to sell, or simply want to gauge your company's worth.
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.
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification
1. Is it all a game? Understanding the principles
of gamification
Karen Robson a,*, Kirk Plangger b
, Jan H. Kietzmann a
, Ian McCarthy a
,
Leyland Pitt a
a
Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University, 500 Granville Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 1W6, Canada
b
King’s College London, University of London, Franklin-Wilkins Building, 150 Stamford Street,
London SE1 9NH, UK
1. Press play to start
Games are everywhere. We play games while trav-
eling, while relaxing, or while at work, simply to
create enjoyable experiences for ourselves and for
others. Firms, too, have long motivated their
employees and customers with game-like incentives
(e.g., competitions among financial traders, leader-
boards for salespeople, participation badges).
However, increasing engagement and rewarding
desired behavior with such incentives has always
been hard to perform at scale. Only now, at a time
when much of what we do is mediated by digital
technologies and social media, may firms change
that behavior by turning traditional processes into
deeper, more engaging game-like experiences for
many of their customers and for their employees.
This process is commonly referred to as gamifica-
tion.
Business Horizons (2015) 58, 411—420
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor
KEYWORDS
Gamification;
Experience;
Mechanics;
Dynamics;
Emotions;
Behavior change;
Motivation;
American Idol
Abstract There is growing interest in how gamification–—defined as the application
of game design principles in non-gaming contexts–—can be used in business. However,
academic research and management practice have paid little attention to the
challenges of how best to design, implement, manage, and optimize gamification
strategies. To advance understanding of gamification, this article defines what it is
and explains how it prompts managers to think about business practice in new and
innovative ways. Drawing upon the game design literature, we present a framework of
three gamification principles–—mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (MDE)–—to explain
how gamified experiences can be created. We then provide an extended illustration of
gamification and conclude with ideas for future research and application opportu-
nities.
# 2015 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All
rights reserved.
* Corresponding author
E-mail addresses: krobson@sfu.ca (K. Robson),
kirk.plangger@me.com (K. Plangger),
jan_kietzmann@sfu.ca (J.H. Kietzmann),
imccarth@sfu.ca (I. McCarthy), lpitt@sfu.ca (L. Pitt)
0007-6813/$ — see front matter # 2015 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.03.006
2. Gamification has potentially wide applications in
contexts such as healthcare, sustainability, govern-
ment, transportation, and education, among others.
For instance, more than 75 energy companies are
already using Opower, a service that equips homes
with sensors enabling residents to compare their
householdenergyconsumptionwiththatofneighbors,
and broadcasting their achievements on Facebook
(Wingfield, 2012). Samsung Nation, Pepsi Soundoff,
and other online loyalty programs use points, levels
(e.g., gold status), or badges to drive customer en-
gagement and deepen the relationships they have
with the brands they use or aspire to use. Drivers of
a Nissan Leaf can collect points for driving in an
ecologically friendly manner, and can compete with
theirfriendsonFacebook.Xeroxemploysgamification
to train managers who collaborate online to complete
quests, and Salesforce uses challenges and leader-
boards to increase sales. Microsoft has gamified the
relatively tediousbut important processoftranslating
its Windows 7 operating system into different lan-
guages and adapting it to work in different cultures.
Although studies suggest that 70% of the world’s
largest public companies will have at least one ga-
mified applicationin the next 2 years (Gartner, 2011),
thereare warningsthat about 80% ofcurrent gamified
applications will fail to meet business objectives
(Gartner, 2012), primarily because processes have
been inappropriately gamified. A likely reason for
this is a lack of understanding of what gamification is,
how gamification works and, more specifically, how
todesigngamificationexperiencesthatinspireplayer
(e.g.,employee,customer, citizen)behaviorchanges
and result in desirable outcomes.
However, the academic business literature offers
little direction to, or understanding of, gamifica-
tion, its design principles, and the key underlying
psychological motivations by which gamification
changes behavior and achieves organizational goals.
Thus, we begin by defining gamification and describ-
ing its application in organizations. Next, we explain
the psychology behind the promise of gamification.
We then introduce a framework, rooted in game
design, that includes three principles for creating
gamification experiences: mechanics, dynamics,
and emotions (MDE). Next, we link the MDE frame-
work to employee and customer engagement by
illustrating its application in the popular reality
television show American Idol. Finally, we present
concluding remarks on gamification and present
ideas for future research and application.
2. Gamification defined
The term gamification could be misleading, suggest-
ing that it represents the use of actual games,
real-world simulations (Keys & Wolfe, 1990), or
game theory in organizational settings (Camerer,
2003). It does not. Rather, gamification is the appli-
cation of lessons from the gaming domain to change
behaviors in non-game situations. ‘Gamified’ expe-
riences can focus on business processes (e.g., cus-
tomer acquisition) or outcomes (e.g., employee
sales). Moreover, these experiences can involve
participants–—or players–—outside of a firm (e.g.,
to co-develop products with customers) and/or
within it (e.g., to improve employee satisfaction).
While firms’ use of such game-like experiences to
control behavior and increase loyalty and engage-
ment is not new, efforts to date have neither sought
to learn from formal game design principles nor
been labeled gamification. In fact, the term gami-
fication only started to attract widespread attention
in non-gaming contexts in 2010 (Zichermann & Cun-
ningham, 2011). We suggest the heightened interest
in gamification today is the result of three recent
developments.
First, over the last 20 years with the growth and
importance of the computer game industry, game
designers and researchers have invested significant-
ly in studies to better understand what makes a
computer game engaging and successful. This has
led to a number of theories and lessons about the
design and management of gaming experiences, and
to frameworks about incentives that motivate indi-
viduals to play. In the next section, we build on this
work and introduce three important gamification
principles that are based on the gaming literature’s
lessons: mechanics (i.e., the goals, rules, and re-
wards), dynamics (i.e., how players enact the me-
chanics), and emotions (i.e., how players feel
toward the gamified experience).
Second, the pervasiveness of social media and
mobile and Web-based technologies has changed
how individuals and organizations participate in,
share, co-create, discuss, and modify any type of
experience (Kietzmann, Hermkens, McCarthy, &
Silvestre, 2011). Today’s firms can request and
generate previously unattainable amounts of data
about people and their opinions, feelings, and be-
havior. The quantity and quality of the resulting
insights has only now become useful for producing
gamified employment or consumption experiences
at scale, which in turn will yield new data.
Third, firms are continually looking for new and
impactful ways to better connect with, learn from,
and influence the behaviors of employees and cus-
tomers. Three recent developments provide a rich
landscape of opportunities to innovate in this re-
gard: (1) new knowledge about the design and
management of gaming experiences (2) combined
with the advent of social media and technology and
412 K. Robson et al.
3. (3) the heightened interest in providing more en-
gaging experiences.
3. Why gamification works
Gamification can change stakeholder behavior be-
cause it taps into motivational drivers of human
behavior in two connected ways: reinforcements
and emotions. First, both positive and negative
reinforcements encourage repetition of behaviors,
as operant conditioning (Skinner, 1938) and the law
of effect (Thorndike, 1905) show us. These ap-
proaches have long been used in psychology to
explain a range of human behaviors as well as
behavior modification. They also posit that behavior
changes can be motivated either through extrinsic
or intrinsic reinforcements. That is, while external
factors such as money or fame can certainly moti-
vate human behavior, emotions are also powerful
motivators for behavior change (Higgins, 2006). In
either case, behavioral learning theory and operant
conditioning argue that all behavior is motivated by
reinforcements. In addition, behaviors which lead to
satisfying outcomes are more likely to lead to re-
peated or ongoing behavior changes while ones with
unsatisfying outcomes are far less likely to be sus-
tained (Skinner, 1938).
Successful gamification involves the repetition of
desired outcomes. Through the motivational mech-
anisms of reinforcements and emotions, desired
outcomes become automatic behavioral processes
or habits (Duhigg, 2012). Habits are formed through
providing cues that elicit behaviors and then re-
warding the behavior, thus forming a behavioral loop
that requires less and less cognitive resources as the
desired behavior is repeatedly reinforced (Duhigg,
2012). Gamification can produce desired behavior
change through the formation of habits byreinforcing
the reward and emotional response of the individuals
participating in the experience, thus requiring fewer
cognitive resources each time the desired activity is
reproduced.
Gamification can create desired behavior change
in business contexts through rewarding desired em-
ployee and customer behaviors, thus leading to more
satisfying outcomes for employees or customers than
in a non-gamified context. The reinforcements that
motivate behavior changes can come in a variety of
forms, including extrinsic (i.e., prizes, money) and
intrinsic (i.e., fun, enjoyment) rewards. Regardless
of the form, the appropriate reinforcement or mix
thereof is key to motivating a successful behavior
change through inspiring affective responses from
individuals. Thus, a well-designed gamification
experience should include reinforcements–—whether
positive or negative, such as loss avoidance–—and
should generally lead to satisfying outcomes for
the players. Through this mix of rewards and emo-
tions, employees and customers in a gamified expe-
rience repeat the behavioral outcome desired by the
organization in a habitual or routine form (Duhigg,
2012). Through tapping into rewards and emotions,
an effective gamification experience will motivate
individuals’ behavior changes in business settings. In
order to understand how to design an effective ga-
mified experience, we examine the fundamental
principles that underpin gamification by introducing
the MDE framework.
4. Gamification principles: The MDE
framework
As with any emerging area of endeavor, the termi-
nologies central to gamification are still in flux and
are often used fluidly, without categorical separa-
tions. To move the practice and research of gami-
fication forward, in this section we introduce the
roles of game designers, players, spectators,
and observers, and we define three gamification
principles–—mechanics, dynamics, and emotions
(MDE)–—adapted from the game design literature
(Hunicke, LeBlanc, & Zubek, 2004). Specifically,
our MDE framework is developed from an approach
todesign gamesthat highlighttheneedtounderstand
game mechanics, dynamics, and aesthetics (Hunicke
et al., 2004). In game design, ‘aesthetics’ describes
the desirable emotional responses (e.g., fantasy,
submission, fellowship, discovery) evoked in players
when they interact with the game. As these aesthetic
responses are largely computer game-specific, we
use the term ‘emotions’ as it better links to the
engagement outcomes that businesses can attain
from employees and customers. In the coming sec-
tions, we provide specific recommendations on how
to apply each gamification principle and then discuss
how these collectively form the MDE framework that
creates a gamified experience.
4.1. Designers, players, spectators, and
observers
All parties involved in gamified experiences can be
described using two fundamental dimensions
adapted from Pine and Gilmore (1998): variations
in participation and connection with the gamified
environment. Player participation describes the ex-
tent to which the individual either actively contrib-
utes to the experience or is merely passively involved
in it. Player connection describes the type of envi-
ronmental relationship (absorption vs. immersion)
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification 413
4. that unites the individual with the experience. In
absorption, the experience unfolds before the person
and occupies the person’s mind, whereas in immer-
sion, a person becomes part of the experience itself,
either physically or virtually.
There are four types of people involved in gami-
fied experiences–—players, designers, spectators,
and observers–—all of whom vary in the extent to
which they are involved in a passive or active sense
and in whether they are predominantly absorbed or
immersed in the experience. First, players are those
who compete in the gamified experience. They are
the real performers, those who actively compete in
the experience and are highly immersed. Players
can include potential, new, or existing employees
and/or customers of a firm. Thus, players can be
internal or external to the firm.
Second, designers are the decision makers in
organizations who develop and design, as well as
often manage and maintain, the gamified experi-
ence. For instance, in the context of improving
employee engagement, these designers could be
human resource managers; or, in the context of
boosting customer engagement, these designers
could be customer relationship managers. It is these
designers who will need to understand the MDE
framework in order to design and implement an
effective gamification strategy. These designers
are highly active when setting up the experience,
but once the experience starts they are predomi-
nantly involved in a passive sense, overseeing the
experience and ensuring that it is meeting organi-
zational goals.
Third, spectators are those individuals who do not
directly compete in the gamified experience but
whose presence will influence how the gamified
experience works. Spectators are part of the gami-
fied environment (e.g., audience members) and are
therefore highly immersed in the experience. While
taking a mostly passive role, they indirectly impact
the experience by contributing to the atmosphere.
In a non-game setting, for example, a spectator
could include a supervisor who contributes to the
atmosphere by serving as a visible authority or a
source of support. Such a supervisor is not involved
in designing the gamified experience or in compet-
ing in the experience, but is present to ensure that
the experience progresses smoothly and, in doing
so, alters player behavior.
Finally, there are observers. These are outside
individuals who are passively involved and absorbed
in the experience. They have no direct impact on the
gamified experience and are merely able to watch
it from the outside. However, the presence–—and
quantity–—of observers will impact the popularity
of the experience. Furthermore, observers are
potential players or spectators, as they can assume
new roles by seeking out ways to become more active
or immersed in the experience. In a non-game set-
ting, an observer could include employees in other
departments or offices in the firm. These employees
have no direct contact with the players, but are
aware of the gamified experience and follow the
outcomes to see who wins.
Ofcourse,anypeopleinvolvedingamificationcan,
through their actions, change the extent to which
they participate in the experience and are connected
to it. A player, for example, can decide to watch and
cheer for another player; in doing so, he/she takes on
a more passive role and is more immersed in the
experience than absorbed by it, thus becoming a
spectator. Consider an employee whose shift is over:
he or she is no longer a player in the experience, but
he/she may assume a spectator role by supporting
and cheering on colleagues who are just beginning
their shift. However, we argue that the majority of
the roles these types of people play in a gamified
experience will fall onto one end of the spectrums of
passive versus active and immersed versus absorbed
(Pine & Gilmore, 1998). In sum, designers set up,
manage, and maintain the gamified experience that
the players compete in. Spectators are part of the
gamification environment and can influence player
behavior. Observers are outsiders who can witness
the experience, but do not impact the experience in
any way. Understanding the individuals that are in-
volved in a gamified experience is fundamental to
understanding gamification. Next, we turn to the
basic gamification mechanics essential to construct-
ing the experience.
4.2. Mechanics
Mechanics are the decisions that designers–—those
who wish to gamify a non-game context–—make to
specify the goals, the rules, the setting, the con-
text, the types of interactions (i.e., opponents), and
the boundaries of the situation to be gamified.
These gamification mechanics are known before
the experience starts and they remain constant.
In other words, they do not change from one player
to the next, and they stay the same each time a
player engages in the experience. In chess, for
example, the mechanics include decisions that have
determined the number of pieces, how pieces move
and take other pieces, the number and pattern of
squares on the board, and how a winner is decided.
In terms of organizational control theory, mechanics
equate to the organizational systems and technolo-
gies that managers can use to induce the required
behaviors and outcomes (McCarthy & Gordon,
2011).
414 K. Robson et al.
5. There are three different types of mechanics–—
setup mechanics, rule mechanics, and progression
mechanics–—which are tremendously important not
only for games, but also for gamified experiences.
Setup mechanics are those considerations that
shape the environment of the experience, including
the setting, what objects are needed, and how
the objects are to be distributed among players
(Elverdam & Aarseth, 2007). For example, the setup
mechanics will determine who a player is playing
against: Is the competitor known or unknown, in-
ternal or external, a single competitor or a group?
These decisions impact the overall context of the
gamified experience. Designers must consider spa-
tial dimensions to determine where in the real or the
virtual world the experience will take place, and
temporal dimensions to regulate when the gamified
experience will happen, whether it is real time- or
turn-based, or whether it has a finite end or infinite
play. Design choices regarding player structure limit
who can play and whether the experience is for
single or multiple players; allow single or multiple
teams; and include real friends, strangers, or even
computer-controlled allies and enemies.
Rule mechanics shape the concept or goal of the
gamified experience to be pursued (Elverdam &
Aarseth, 2007). They not only prescribe the actions
that are permissible but also the constraints (e.g.,
time restriction) that limit those actions in order to
create pressure for players (Kelly, 2012b). Some rule
mechanics are highly deterministic and invariably
produce the same result if the player input is iden-
tical each time. Other rule mechanics are non-
deterministic, especially when elements of chance
are involved or when players are allowed to interact
with each other. Rule mechanics can be topological,
too, and specify what happens when a player lands
on a specific real or virtual spot. Think about how a
player collects a reward for ‘passing Go’ in Monopoly
or how in a gamified geo-location setting people are
rewarded for going places and for checking in to
locations they’re visiting. Time-based rule mechan-
ics spell out whether players have to act within a
time period or how resources build up or deplete
over time. Objective-based rule mechanics specify
the effects of a specific circumstance being met
(e.g., completing one level unlocks the next).
Progression mechanics describe different types of
instruments that designers embed to affect the ex-
perience while it happens (Elverdam & Aarseth,
2007). In the context of gamification, progression
mechanics are particularly important: they dictate
the reinforcements present in the experience. That
is, as behaviors with rewarding outcomes are more
likely to be repeated (Rothschild & Gaidis, 1981),
appropriate progression mechanics are used to
increase the likelihood that certain behaviors will
be repeated in the future. To signal their progress,
achievement rewards are often used. These could be
virtual victory point systems that players accumulate
as they progress–—such as scores, levels, progress
bars, or resources (e.g., strength)–—but they can also
be real rewards (e.g., currency). In particular,
achievement rewards with social significance (e.g.,
badges, trophies, leaderboards) indicate the social
standing within a community and are powerful pro-
gression mechanics. Progression mechanics provide
important feedback that signals a player’s success
toward victory. However, the achievement rewards
must be desirable for the players; otherwise, the
experience loses its salience. The distribution of
extrinsic rewards is also an important aspect of
progression mechanics since they may be either
zero-sum (i.e., some players win and some lose) or
positive-sum (i.e., overall the rewards are above
zero). Designers must plan this distribution carefully,
as mistakes could be very costly to the organization
and possibly bankrupt the gamified application’s
budget. Furthermore, having too many rewards–—
especially top rewards–—may dilute the overall
strength of rewards and the meaning of player wins
and/or status levels.
Gamification mechanics are the foundational as-
pects of gamified experience: they determine who
the key parties are, how they interact, how to win or
lose, and where and when the experience takes
place. Mechanics form the structure that the gami-
fied experience exists in; however, on their own,
mechanics are not enough to create an experience
that will motivate behavior changes in target em-
ployees or customers. Emerging from this structure,
both dynamics and emotions animate the experi-
ence and are key dimensions in creating the desired
behavior change. This interdependent relationship
between the three gamification dimensions signal to
designers what changes, if any, need to be made to
the mechanics to ensure that the organization’s
goals are met. These components of a gamified
experience are discussed next.
4.3. Dynamics
Gamification dynamics are the types of player be-
havior that emerge as players partake in the expe-
rience. Contrary to mechanics that are set by the
designer, the gamification dynamics are produced by
how players follow the mechanics chosen by design-
ers. These dynamics describe in-game behaviors and
the strategic actions and interactions that emerge
during play (Camerer, 2003). In a game context, the
mechanics of the multiplayer card game Poker in-
clude shuffling, trick-taking, and betting, from
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification 415
6. which different dynamics like bluffing, cheating,
conspiring, and bragging can emerge. In gamifica-
tion, mechanics such as team-based player struc-
tures can lead to dynamics such as cooperation,
while an individual player structure may lend itself
to a more competitive dynamic. Beyond player
structure, the presence of both spectators and ob-
servers has a number of implications with respect to
player dynamics. For example, in negotiation games
when players know they are being watched–—by
observers or spectators–—Lewicki, Barry, and Saun-
ders (2014) suggest that a number of player behaviors
result. For example, players are more competitive
when they know they are being watched, as they do
not wish to look bad in front of others. Relatedly,
players are less willing to quit, concede, or settle.
Ultimately, possible dynamics include competition,
cooperation, coopetition, cheating, and many other
behaviors.
Gamification dynamics are difficult to predict and
thus can lead to unintended behaviors and out-
comes, which can be positive or negative in nature.
Designers do not know exactly what will happen
(LeBlanc, 2004). Consequently, the challenge for
designers is to anticipate the types of dynamics that
can emerge and to develop the mechanics of the
experience appropriately.
4.4. Emotions
Gamification emotions are the mental affective
states and reactions evoked among individual play-
ers when they participate in a gamified experience.
Emotions are a product of how players follow the
mechanics and then generate dynamics. As with
games, the emotions in a gamified experience
should be fun-oriented and appealing, not only on
a pragmatic level but also on an emotional level
(LeBlanc, 2004). Assuming that players will not
continue to play if they do not enjoy themselves,
creating player enjoyment should be seen as the
single-most important player engagement goal for
gamification (Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005). Such fun
and enjoyment can come in many different forms,
including positive emotions such as excitement,
amusement, amazement, surprise, wonder, and
personal triumph over adversity. While fun should
be part of the experience, a mix of emotions is often
felt by the players. This could include negative
feelings, such as disappointment at losing or sadness
at not achieving a reward.
In sum, the MDE framework outlines the interde-
pendent relationship of the gamification principles of
mechanics, dynamics, and emotions (Figure 1) and
illustrates how these principles can be applied to-
gether to create and extend the player experience. It
also shows how small changes in one principle can
impact the other two and create different experi-
ences.Furthermore,theMDEframeworkhelpsclarify
how designers and players perceive gamified expe-
riences differently (LeBlanc, 2004). Specifically, ga-
mification designers’ foremost focus is on selecting
appropriate mechanics in order to retain control over
the experience, followed by a focus on dynamics, and
lastly on players’ emotions. For players, on the other
hand, emotions are key. Theadrenaline rush resulting
from surviving a vicarious adventure or mastering a
mental challenge and the associated dynamics
is more important than the rules that make them
possible (Lazzaro, 2004). In optimized gamified
experiences, players’ emotional responses and
the dynamics that emerge during play shape the
mechanics that govern play and vice versa. As
a result, understanding gamification mechanics,
dynamics, and emotions and how these principles
relate to one another is key for successfully gamifying
an experience.
5. Gamification at work: The case of
American Idol
In what follows, we use a very well-known and
ratings-busting TV show in America, American Idol,
to illustrate how the different gamification princi-
ples can motivate desired behavior changes among
employees and customers. We use American Idol for
three reasons: (1) it exemplifies how to increase
engagement and change behavior through gamifica-
tion, (2) it demonstrates how to improve both
customer and employee engagement, and (3) it
illustrates how gamification can become a success
story.
Figure 1. MDE framework of gamification principles
416 K. Robson et al.
7. First, American Idol is not just an entertaining
show, but also an excellent example of how to
increase the engagement and change the behavior
of both employees (i.e., the artists who hope to
secure record deals) and customers (i.e., viewers
who watch and vote) through gamification. Tradi-
tional talent searches were much less engaging
because they relied on individual talent scouts to
bring their discoveries to recording companies in
hopes of securing a contract. Likewise, the older
model of engaging audience members was based on
the weekly popularity of songs as measured by radio
airplay and Billboard Charts–—which stimulated
sales. Simon Fuller and his team, the designers of
American Idol, cleverly gamified these two very
traditional practices, which we argue are not unlike
many other business processes. For instance,
American Idol is an example of gamifying traditional
human resource management: All contestants enter
into a contractual agreement with 19 Entertain-
ment, the production company behind American
Idol, before they ever set foot on a stage. Much like
other employees, they work on a probationary peri-
od before some of them receive continuing con-
tracts. As regards audience experience, we argue
that American Idol illustrates how traditional prod-
uct development and sales experiences can be ga-
mified. Firms often solicit the input of customers
during the development of a product or service
(e.g., in beta releases or usability tests). The audi-
ence of American Idol is in essence a very large and
highly engaged focus group where the opinions of
customers are collected to select and improve the
firm’s offerings.
Second, most gamification activities are focused
on improving either customer or employee engage-
ment. By including the talent search (i.e., engaging
potential new employees) and record sales (i.e.,
engaging customers) in one show, American Idol
demonstrates that these two can be combined.
The result is a two-sided gamified experience that
increases the engagement and changes the behavior
of employees and customers at the same time. This
is particularly interesting in the context of managers
looking to grow their engagement with communities
inside and outside the firm simultaneously to build
value for the brand internally and externally.
Lastly, American Idol illustrates how the resulting
gamified experience can become a success story in its
own right. American Idol has not only produced such
hugely successful entertainers as Carrie Underwood,
Kelly Clarkson, and Jennifer Hudson–—through
gamified employee engagement during the talent
search–—and sold millions of albums–—through gami-
fied customer engagement leading to sales–—but it
has also created a highly profitable TV show by
aligning the mechanics, dynamics, and emotions it
developed for contestants with those developed for
audience members (Amegashie, 2009; Ciulla et al.,
2012; Meizel, 2011).
5.1. American Idol mechanics
As designed by its setup and spatial mechanics,
American Idol hosts auditions online and in various
cities in the U.S., takes place in front of a live studio
audience of more than 7,000 members, and is broad-
cast to millions via television and the Internet.
Temporal mechanics are employed such that once
a week, for an average of 10 weeks, American Idol
contestants take turns performing songs based on a
weekly theme (e.g., Motown, Elvis, Number 1 hits).
Regarding player structure, American Idol creatively
combines some of the choices involving both con-
testants and their supporters (i.e., observers and
spectators) in the experience. Spectators include
members of the live studio audience and individuals
at home watching on their television who vote via
voice calls, SMS texts, or the American Idol website
(Amegashie, 2009; Ciulla et al., 2012). Observers
are those fans who are not part of the studio audi-
ence and who do not participate in the experience
by voting, but merely view the show for personal
enjoyment. The players, spectators, and observers
all consent to be involved in American Idol. This is
important, because when consent to participate
in games is present, positive affects increase;
when consent is lacking, positive affects decrease
(Burawoy, 1979; Mollick & Rothbard, 2014).
In the case of American Idol, setup mechanics
are plentiful and varied, and any number of com-
binations is possible. However, what these me-
chanics have in common is that they are all
decisions that influence the experience before it
commences. One of the most basic rule mechanics
for American Idol is that the popularity of contest-
ants is highly dependent on comparisons with other
contestants (Amegashie, 2009). Time-based rule
mechanics in American Idol spell out whether play-
ers have to act within a time period (e.g., when
spectators can vote, again and again, for their
favorite contestants on American Idol) and how
resources build up or deplete over time (e.g., votes
collected by each contestant cannot be carried
forward into the next round, and the score is reset
each week). Contestants at the top of the popu-
larity scale will move forward, making popularity
and votes from spectators key to the progression
mechanics of American Idol. The ultimate reward
in American Idol is being the finalist–—as voted by
spectators–—and thus receiving a lucrative record-
ing contract and fame.
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification 417
8. 5.2. American Idol dynamics
American Idol primarily leverages the contestants’
desire to win and spectators’ desire to see their
favorites succeed. For the contestants, time pres-
sure and opponent play are included to reward
competitive dynamics and motivate individual con-
testants to perform at their best in solo perfor-
mances. In other cases, winning conditions that
require working with other players (e.g., duets or
group performances) are included to drive collabo-
rative dynamics. Audience members as spectators
cheer on singers; their role is significant because the
audience contributes to dynamics of the experi-
ence.
5.3. American Idol emotions
Participants in American Idol undergo a number of
emotional responses. For contestants, emotions are
even more powerful–—often visible through the tears
of joy and sorrow–—and include nervousness, exhil-
aration, pride, and euphoria–—even frustration.
Spectators experience anxiety as the time to cast
votes runs out, and both spectators and observers
experience excitement when the winners are an-
nounced, followed by happiness and relief or sad-
ness, depending on the outcome of their favorite
contestant (Ciulla et al., 2012). Aspirations for
the emotions associated with a big win help over-
come smaller emotional disappointments that play-
ers experience–—which helps explain why people
continue to play even when they lose most of
the time. These desired and aspired mental states
are the reasons why players start and continue to
participate. But, of course, these emotions do not
emerge by themselves: They are shaped by the
interplay of mechanics and dynamics.
American Idol is a successful example of how a
gamified talent search can motivate people–—sing-
ers and numerous fans–—to participate actively in
the selection and marketing of the next pop star
(Amegashie, 2009; Ciulla et al., 2012; Meizel, 2011).
The setup mechanics are carefully designed (e.g.,
with its real-time and its online presence), as are
rule mechanics (jury member voting, viewer phone-
in balloting, and performers singing for survival or
elimination) and progress mechanics (posting the
voting tally in real time). Together these mechanics
fundamentally support the collaborative and com-
petitive nature of the talent search competition,
and in turn give rise to the powerful emotional
attachment felt by contestants and members of
the audience alike. The MDE alignment has resulted
in more than 100 million votes–—the record is cur-
rently 132 million votes during season 11–—that help
the show’s recording labels identify and sign popular
contestants. As of 2012, over 59 million albums and
110 million singles and digital tracks have sold in the
United States alone (Ciulla et al., 2012).
6. Game on! The value of gamification
All organizations need to motivate and engage
stakeholders, whether these stakeholders are vot-
ers, students, patients, employees, or consumers.
Gamification is an approach to achieving this: It
employs lessons from the gaming domain to create
experiences that motivate and engage individuals in
non-game settings. The goal of our article has been
to advance the understanding of gamification con-
cepts, applications, and impacts. To do this we have
provided three contributions. First, we defined ga-
mification and explained how it has been used to
design highly engaging processes in a range of ser-
vice industries. Second, we introduced the MDE
framework to show how gamification mechanics,
dynamics, and emotions are used to create gamified
experiences. Third, using the case of American Idol,
we illustrated how MDE was used to transition a
traditional talent search to an important cultural
phenomenon that engaged not only the contestants
but also a whole nation of viewers. From these
contributions we present five summary guidelines
to help firms capture value using our gamification
framework:
1. What’s the goal of the game? A process should
not be gamified simply for the sake of gamifica-
tion itself. It should be driven by goals that can
be financial, social, or environmental. Firms
should assess the potential to use gamification
to produce and adjust behaviors and outcomes
needed to attain those goals. Focusing on one
goal, not two or three, minimizes complexity and
ensures that mechanics, dynamics, and emotions
do not conflict or offset each other (Kelly,
2012a). Firms should also identify different ga-
mification measures and targets and understand
how the intended mechanics, dynamics, and
emotions would drive and moderate these mea-
sures. It is important to determine the causality
between the gamification measures and the busi-
ness goals.
2. Recognize all the different roles. Most gamifica-
tion examples focus only on the connection be-
tween the designer and the players. This is
important because it promotes an in-depth under-
standing of the links between mechanics, dynam-
ics, emotions, and player-related outcomes.
418 K. Robson et al.
9. However, it is also important to understand when
to incorporate spectators and/or observers and
how their participation can energize and direct
different behaviors and outcomes in a process.
Spectators and observers played a very significant
role in the success of American Idol.
3. Gaming the game. People will want to try and
cheat a gamified process. There will be players,
observers, and spectators who will try to game
the game by colluding and breaking the rules. It is
important to understand both the positives and
negatives of this human endeavor. On the one
hand, it can create dynamics that lead to unde-
sirable emotions (i.e., perceived injustice) that
could put off other players, observers, and spec-
tators. Furthermore, individuals might extract
excessive rewards that outweigh any benefits to
the firm using the gamification. However, there
can be positive learning and change that come
from rule breaking. For example, these behav-
iors can be the basis for modifying the mechanics
of a gamified process so as to attain deeper
loyalty engagement and improve the outcomes,
because when an innovation is produced by a
creative individual rather than the firm, the
adoption and use of that innovation is more
impactful and enduring (Berthon, Pitt, McCarthy,
& Kates, 2007).
4. Adjust and transition the experience. It is un-
likely that an organization will stand still once
players start playing, or that organizational de-
sires to transform behavior will remain the same
over time. As other aspects of the organization
change, so too should the gamified experience.
As in any strategic investment, keeping focus on
the managerial goals and strategic objectives is
important. This means that the gamified experi-
ence will constantly need to be monitored, both
internally (Does it still make sense?) and exter-
nally (Are players, observers, and spectators still
excited and engaged?). Mechanics should be
adjusted accordingly so that individuals will
continue playing and not move on to something
that is more exciting (in terms of emotions) or
more engaging (in terms of the overall experi-
ence).
5. What’s the endgame for the game? Eventually,
the gamified experience will come to an end.
Adjusting and transitioning the experience will
prolong its usefulness to the organization; how-
ever, managers should watch out for signs that
the experience has simply lost its appeal to
players. The endgame is the final phase in the
life of a gamified process. Designers must rec-
ognize that this phase exists, and they must be
able to adjust and conclude the process so that
players, spectators, and observers will be will-
ing to return and engage with new gamified
processes.
References
Amegashie, J. (2009). American Idol: Should it be a singing
contest or a popularity contest? Journal of Cultural Econom-
ics, 33(4), 265—277.
Berthon, P. R., Pitt, L. F., McCarthy, I., & Kates, S. M. (2007).
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing
with creative consumers. Business Horizons, 50(1), 39—47.
Burawoy, M. (1979). Manufacturing consent: Changes in the labor
process under monopoly capitalism. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in
strategic interaction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Ciulla, F., Mocanu, D., Baronchelli, A., Gonc¸alves, B., Perra, N., &
Vespignani, A. (2012). Beating the news using social media:
The case study of American Idol. EPJ Data Science, 1(1), 1—11.
Duhigg, C. (2012). The power of habit: Why we do what we do in
life and business. New York: Random House LLC.
Elverdam, C., & Aarseth, E. (2007). Game classification and game
design construction through critical analysis. Games and Cul-
ture, 2(1), 3—22.
Gartner. (2011, November 9). Gartner predicts over 70 percent of
global 2000 organisations will have at least one gamified
application by 2014. Available at http://www.gartner.com/
it/page.jsp?id=1844115
Gartner. (2012, November 27). Gartner says by 2014, 80 percent
of current gamified applications will fail to meet business
objectives primarily due to poor design. Available from
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=2251015
Higgins, E. T. (2006). Value from hedonic experience and engage-
ment. Psychological Review, 113(3), 439—460.
Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal
approach to game design and game research. Paper presented
at the Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in
Game AI, San Jose, CA.
Kelly, T. (2012a, November 17). Everything you’ll ever need to
know about gamification. Available at http://techcrunch.
com/2012/11/17/everything-youll-ever-need-to-know-
about-gamification/
Kelly, T. (2012b, December 8). Real gamification mechanics
require simplicity and, yes, game designers can do
it. Available at http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/08/
real-vs-fake-gamification-mechanics/
Keys, B., & Wolfe, J. (1990). The role of management games and
simulations in education and research. Journal of Manage-
ment, 16(2), 307—336.
Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S.
(2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the func-
tional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons,
54(3), 241—251.
Lazzaro, N. (2004). Why we play games: Four keys to more
emotion without story. Oakland, CA: XEODesign.
LeBlanc, M. (2004). Game design and tuning workshop materials.
Presentation at the Game Developers Conference: San Jose,
CA.
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2014). Negotiation.
New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification 419
10. McCarthy, I. P., & Gordon, B. R. (2011). Achieving contextual
ambidexterity in R&D organizations: A management control
system approach. R&D Management, 41(3), 240—258.
Meizel, K. (2011). Idolized: Music, media, and identity in
American Idol. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Mollick, E. R., & Rothbard, N. (2014, September 30). Mandatory
fun: Consent, gamification, and the impact of games at
work. The Wharton School Research Paper Series. Available
at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2277103
Pine, B. J., II, & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience
economy. Harvard Business Review, 76(4), 97—105.
Rothschild, M. L., & Gaidis, W. C. (1981). Behavioral learning
theory: Its relevance to marketing and promotions. Journal of
Marketing, 45(2), 70—78.
Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental
analysis. New York: Appleton-Century.
Sweetser, P., & Wyeth, P. (2005). GameFlow: A model for evalu-
ating player enjoyment in games. Computers in Entertain-
ment (CIE), 3(3), 1—24.
Thorndike, E. L. (1905). The elements of psychology. New York:
AG Seiler.
Wingfield, C. (2012, December 23). All the world’s a game,
and business is a player. The New York Times. Available at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/24/technology/all-
the-worlds-a-game-and-business-is-a-player.html?_r=0
Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by
design: Implementing game mechanics in web and mobile
apps. San Francisco: O’Reilly Media.
420 K. Robson et al.