Limits of Gamification

I was recently described as a “Kneejerk Devil’s Advocate”. Intended as constructive criticism, with a possible emphasis on the critical, I rather like it. It’s useful in my professional research to always take another point of view, to seek the other interpretation.

Right now there’s a buzz about Gamification. There has been for a little while now, which means that the idea isn’t going away. Given my approach, it’s natural that I come here not to bury it, but not simply to praise it either.

With any new idea, you will soon get the full range of:

•  Probable over-claims about the efficacy (I just don’t buy that all – even a majority – of change projects will now succeed with its addition)
•  Extensions that rather stretch the concept (this seems to suggest a nightmare-ish world where you’re CONSTANTLY pushed to new tiny targets)
• Things given the badge Gamification that maybe have little to do with it (this really seems to be about better collaboration between remote colleagues)

The more sensible applications recognise that :

"gamification is exciting because it promises to make the hard stuff in life fun"

It can help with recognition, it can help with learning, a variety of ways to build understanding. I love this example of a great creative execution to raise the profile of an unknown employer.

So, while I have reservations about articles like this that promise it’s the future, it does get to the heart of it: engagement. The problem is that whilst it makes the link between productivity and engagement, it mixes them.

For me, gamification can be best used to get people to understand and engage with ideas, so that they will do new/different/more things. I think it’s problematic when it misses out the understanding and moves straight to the doing.

Bankers were highly incentivised and encouraged to achieve targets without understanding the effects or considering the bigger picture. The effects of that are still all around us.