I’ve written a couple of blogs about gamification’s real motives. The time tells the truth, the points that I stressed earlier come out of the surface and today it’s obvious that the bricks, Cement and windows don’t make a whole house. Of course I don’t intend to repeat my earlier statements, I’d rather define gamification activities from a different perspective.
The games motivate employees, when we gamify a process, it gets more engaging, fun and motivating; right? Well, not exactly. You’ll try to correct a painful process, but isn’t it obvious that the process won’t be anything other than a “Killing Joke” unless you try to remove the pain? Could you play football on a spiked field? Or did you try to throw a dart with your mouth? Maybe it’s easier to make a basket when you sit within audiences and the ball’s in other people’s hands? Confess it, how many times in a day have you been in such situations? Numbers may vary but only a bunch of people can say Zero, I believe.
Of course, as an employee, your demands should be reasonable. Turning a workday routine into a game is too much to expect from your employer, but how would you feel if they gave you a xsilophone to dial numbers instead of your normal phone? Would it be really that
fun? OK, I know the answer well. What I’m trying to tell is the qualities of a potentially motivating routine must be, well, motivating. So the routine needs such design that the applicant should both do the work as efficient as possible and he/she should have fun. We are speaking about the fun factor in a way that the process should be “game-like fun” but we forget the “teacher yell” factor here. What makes games addictive can’t be explained only by motivation and engagement. So, rather than driving the gamified application to a static game perspective, it’d be a better idea to inspect which feelings people have to feel urged to play games.
So, when you change the method from gamifying to actually create a game from business procedures, you’ll have to engineer all business processes. After that, you’ll have to modify some to make a game out of a process collection.
When I gather all these information, it’s clear that job analysis will be the most important case for game design. That is a trend that was changing since job descriptions, competencies and may procedural and long HR applications are preferred to be brief, understandable and effective. With the possible rise of gamification and serious games, we’ll have to talk about designer minds that are eager to set up a game and/or play a game. If you think these are not new sentences, let me be clearer: The trend doesn’t appear to be about getting a piece of an act and make it gamified. The trend looks like analyzing ajob and gamify the base of it.