With risk of starting another definition war of gamification vs. game-based learning, just for the sake of this blog, let me argue that learners don’t really care about the definition. In fact, from the learner’s perspective, only one thing matters: the experience.
In this blog, I’m going to share a business challenge and the applied solution. By the end, you may decide whether you want to call it gamification or game-based learning. In the meantime, I’ll just refer to the learning process as “game thinking.”
The Challenge
Marketing messaging guidelines are an important part of any company’s consistent communication strategy. At Comcast, the task was to increase the knowledge of the top three features of each product among staff.
Traditionally, the information was provided in one comprehensive PDF document that also included our apps, along with our products available for customers. However, the PDF required frequent updates, which posed some challenges in terms of speed to market and shelf life. In addition, the solution’s primary targets were iPads.
Meanwhile, in blended learning new hire programs, it was also desirable for the facilitator to get real-time feedback on how the class is performing at recalling the top three features.
Enter game thinking.
The Solution
Game thinking forces designers to approach learning from an action perspective. Players interact with content via action and receive instant feedback to reinforce learning.
The solution was a three-level HTML5 solution (which works on iPads) that applied many game elements to address the challenges listed above. Learners start out as a company owner (story telling) in a run-down neighborhood (dynamic game aesthetics: houses, trees, playground, and so forth).
The first-level challenges learners to match the top three marketing messages with each product. As a positive reinforcement for correct matches, the neighborhood changes (bigger houses, trees bloom, and so on). In this scenario, bigger houses represent more subscribers. The learner’s goal is to be accurate in matching (gaining subscribers), but speed counts as well (gaining more customer satisfaction). Incorrect matches not only cost points and satisfaction, but the bad news spreads in the neighborhood—just like in real life.
The second level of the game focuses on apps and their features. The third level is about competitive advantages.
Final scores are recorded and fed into a simple leaderboard. In our solution, there’s only one “top” spot on the leaderboard. Don’t let learners get discouraged to see only the best of the best. At the end of the game we provide the learner’s score and rank, but also include the “next best” result—so learners can see how much they should improve to move up on the leaderboard. We found that learners are encouraged by this information and to try again to improve their rank.
The Results
Clearly, the solution was built to increase learner engagement. But we also wanted to address the frequent content changes. To that end, we implemented a central database that holds the actual content, while the game itself contains the logic. Every time the game is launched, it checks the server for content updates. This way, no matter how frequently we receive modifications of the original PDF document, we can make the change instantly. All games (on every iPad) will launch the updated content next time someone plays the game.
Also, in addition to recording scores for the leaderboard to see top performers, trainers can filter scores based on location or class. On top of that, we also record incorrect actions in the game, which enables developers to review data to see trends where further interventions or clarification is needed.
My next blog will introduce the game engine we used and discuss how you can create an exciting learning solution by combining the use of a game engine with a traditional e-learning authoring tool.
