In my last posting I mentioned the idea of "Gamification" and Anna thoughtfully pointed out that we need to " define what "gamification" means to learning development. " I couldn’t agree more and I have spent the last year exploring that concept to see what Gamification does mean to learning and development professionals. For more on this, see my posting In Defense ofthe Term Gamification as used by Learning Professionals on Kapp Notes, and be sure to read the insightful and provocative comments. So on this posting, let’s define Gamification."Gamification is using game-based mechanics, aesthetics and game thinking to engage people, motivate action, promote learning, and solve problems."Now, when most people think of "gamification" they think of rewards, points, and achievements and how artificially incentivizing people to do things based solely on rewards is a losing proposition (and most of the time it is), so let’s look at the characteristics of video games that are useful, exciting, and engaging in terms of learning and, it turns out, in terms of video game play.  Here are few examples of game-based thinking we can apply to our instruction, this is an abbreviated list. I explore many more in The Gamification of Learning and Instruction which will be out in May and in my talk at TechKnowledge 2012—coming up shortly. StoryGames are interesting and motivating because they have a story, they provide a context in which actions need to take place. Many learning courses provide no context, no reason for actions. We need to use story elements, plot, characters, resolution, scene setting to help put learning back into context. Training, and the educational system, has removed training or learning events too far from the actual application of the knowledge. Stories bring context back. Additionally, research indicates that people remember facts better when they are in a story than when they are presented in a bulleted list. FeedbackAnother element in games is immediate feedback. When you play Pac Man, you know right away how you are doing; you visually see the number of dots left to be eaten and how close the ghosts are to cornering you.  From a learning perspective, feedback is a critical element for facilitating learning. Providing frequent opportunities for students to respond during a lesson helps with learning as shown in research. Most of our learning courses do an extremely poor job of providing immediate feedback. Additionally, the feedback typically is not based on action or activity, it’s based on knowledge—how well the learner could "temporarily" remember what was covered earlier in the course. This isn’t meaningful feedback. Gamification can provide, in the form of points or "health" or "lives" feedback on progress. Games provide meaningful and immediate feedback far more effectively and efficiently than a classroom instructor. Game-based thinking and mechanics can help learning designers think about continuous corrective feedback.Freedom to Fail and ChanceIn an instructional environment, failure is not a valid option. In games it’s encouraged with multiple lives and attempts. Games overcome the "sting of failure" specifically by doing things like giving multiple opportunities to perform a task until mastery and through the introduction of chance or randomness (two elements that schools and corporations work hard to eliminate). In fact, research indicates that gaming uncertainty can transform the emotional experience of learning improving engagement and, more importantly, improving encoding and later recall.LevelsGames do a great job of providing personalized experiences. In many games I can choose an entry point of easy, intermediate, or difficult. Most online learning experiences are developed for "one-size-fits-all" with no consideration of different skill or knowledge backgrounds. Why can’t we design learning to accommodate different skill levels just like video games? Two things I’d like to mention before signing off for this post. First, notice I did not mention points, rewards, or achievements. We can apply game-based thinking without having the elements of points or rewards. We don’t need to use points or rewards as motivation—however, we can use points and rewards as feedback on progress. So, let’s not abandon all mention of points or rewards because we fear they may undermine intrinsic motivation, the research is not as specific on this point as many would like. In fact, some research indicates that intrinsic and extrinsic rewards exist side-by-side in classroom environments and that they are not, indeed, opposite ends of a continuum. Second, when I mention "gamification" people often caution me that we must "get it right" or we can cause a lot of harm and that getting gamification right is tricky. I don’t disagree but designing any type of learning event effectively is tricky and, unfortunately, learning professionals often mess that up. One example is the continued, unscientifically supported use of learning styles. So, I don’t believe the argument that we should abandon the use of gamification because it is hard to do and because we might do it wrong. If that was the case, 40% of all corporate learning could have to be thrown out because the objectives are wrong, the instructional strategies are wrong and the assessment of knowledge is wrong. You don’t throw out a method because in some cases it might be incorrectly used, instead, we need to educate people on the correct usage of the concept. Gamification is an exciting addition to an instructional designer’s toolkit but it should not be foreign or strange to learning and development professionals we have been using many of the techniques for years (check out the last link in the resources list).. OK, this post is already longer than I anticipated. Here are some resources to further your thinking on the subject and if you are going to TechKnowledge, look for my session on Wednesday, 01/25/2012 from 11:00AM -12:15PM, Room Miranda 7/8. The description title of the talk is What Research Tells Us About 3D Avatars, Storytelling and Serious Games for Learning and Behavior ChangeAdditional posts of interest:Great Gamification Video by Sebastian DeterdingCombining Zombies and Running…Gamification of ExerciseTwo Interesting videos on games from Google Tech TalksWhat the Gamificaiton of Learning and Instruction is NotGoogle Talk on Gamification: Designing the Player JourneyGamification Sounds Like What Instructional Designers Have Done for Years

In my posting on Learning Circuits Blog, a reader left a thoughtful and interesting comment about points and the use of the term gamification and the Blogger software won't let me write my entire comment (too many characters) so I am posting my comment here. See Kathy Sierra's comments under What is Gamification and Why it Matters to L&D Professionals.First, Kathy, as always, thanks for your thoughtful comments on the topic of Gamification. You always help to expand my thinking on the topic. Although, I have a couple of points of clarification that I'd like to make. You define gamification as "based entirely on operant conditioning, using +r in the form of rewards to reinforce behavior, especially the behavior of ‘engagement’."   Your definition reminds me of the old folk story that originated in India where a group of people in the dark all touch an elephant to learn what it is like. Each one feels a different part, but each only one part and they come up with different descriptions. One feels a leg and says the elephant is like a pillar; and one feels the tail and says the elephant is like a rope, etc. Later they compare notes and are in complete disagreement because none of them has seen the entire elephant. (source)I think you are only feeling one part of the elephant. While points and rewards can be framed as operant conditioning and as a game-mechanic, it is only one part of gamification—one element, one piece. Not the entire definition of gamification.  If points or rewards were the single engaging element of games then the game Progress Wars  where you just click a button to get points would be the most popular game ever. In almost every legitimate definition of gamification the term "game-based thinking" is used. This term encompasses ideas like challenge, story, instructive feedback, levels, characters and freedom to fail. These are not elements of a Skinner Box or operant conditioning. These are elements of  engaging games like Angry Birds, Civilization V, Red Dead Redemption and Monopoly. All enormously popular games that do not rely on points for motivation or engagement.It is disingenuous to state that "virtually ALL game scholars, game researchers, and professional game designers are passionately against gamification." Serious and knowledgeable individuals like Sebastian Deterding and Amy Jo Kim and other well informed people are passionately for gamification—as properly defined. Sebastian Deterding discusses gamification in terms of meaning, mastery and autonomy—concepts closer to Self-Determination Theory (a theory of intrinsic motivation) than operant conditioning. (Source) Amy Jo Kim discusses gamification as the design of the player journey where the player progresses over time, giving people something to master and building in emotional engagement. (Source) Again, she is not discussing a Skinner Box approach to gamification, instead it is a thoughtful approach focusing on the overall experience and progress of an individual through some type of experience leading toward mastery.  Serious, well informed people are advocating for gamification beyond the concept of adding points to experiences.But even points are not all bad or DEmotivational. It is true that points can, in some cases, be construed as extrinsically motivating; but they can and often are intrinsically motivating as well. Research articles by Deci & Ryan, 1985 and Lepper & Henderlong, 2000 (some of the same researchers you mentioned  in your comment) indicate that in one sense something like desiring good grades can indicate that children are engaging in academic behaviors merely as a means to some extrinsic end.BUT in another sense grades provide useful information about competence and mastery, and desiring this sort of feedback may reflect an intrinsic interest in the material or activity rather than an extrinsic orientation.So are grades intrinsic or extrinsic? By extension then, are points, scores, and certain game rewards informational and, therefore, intrinsic and not extrinsic?  Giving points to someone (as a form of information about competence) is actually intrinsically motivating. Giving someone a reward related to a specific achievement that gives them information about their level of mastery related to the achievement is intrinsically motivating.  Informational-based points, rewards and achievements are intrinsic motivators, they are not operant conditioning.Another interesting concept related to extrinsic motivation is that, over time, it might be possible that extrinsic motivators actually become intrinsic motivators. This is called "internalized motivation." In the above mentioned article by Lepper and Henderlong, (2000) they state "One issue not addressed is the development of internalized motivation—those originally external motives that have over time become incorporated into one’s personal goal or value systems." They go on to state that there is some suggestion in the literature that internalized reasons gradually supplant extrinsic reasons for engaging in disliked behaviors (Chandler & Connell, 1987) and that there are specific teaching practices that facilitate internalization (Deci, Eghrari, Patrick, & Leone, 1994)." Meaning that extrinsic motivations could eventually lead to intrinsic motivation—an area worthy of further study and a compelling reason not to dismiss points outright as dangerous. They, like almost any other instructional element, can be used appropriately or used inappropriate. Points are not inherently demotivational—it’s how they are used, it’s the design of the points system. Again, well designed systems of learning lead to positive results, poorly designed systems of learning lead to poor results. Just like every other instructional design element.Your argument against points as solely extrinsic motivation needs be more nuanced than simply stating points undermine intrinsic motivation. In fact, points may actually be intrinsic motivators in many cases thus providing an excellent tool for learning and development professionals to leverage for instruction and motivation of learners.Finally, given the idea that gamification is more than "operant conditioning, using +r in the form of rewards to reinforce behavior, especially the behavior of ‘engagement’" then adding game elements to something like negotiation skills is gamification. If I take the content associated with negotiation skills and I add the elements of challenge, a story, instructive feedback, levels, characters and freedom to fail in the form of "The Negotiation Game" then that is the gamification of teaching negotiation skills.  How is adding game elements to a serious topic like negotiation skills not gamification given that it includes game-based thinking? It is adding game-based thinking, game mechanics and a game-based approach to learning—that is gamification. (Notice, I didn’t even add any points or rewards.)Perhaps it’s just the word "gamification." So a growing trend now is to use the term "gamefulness" which may be less controversial as a term for discussing the concept of game-based thinking. Regardless of what you call it, more game-based thinking can only improve the current state of mind-numbing, page turning e-learning--not harm it. Thanks again for your thoughtful comments about the subject of gamification. References:Chandler, C. L., & Connell, J. P. (1987). Children’s intrinsic, extrinsic, and internalized motivation: A developmental study of children’s reasons for liked and disliked behaviours. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5, 357-365.Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.Lepper, M. R., & Henderlong, J. (2000). Turning "play" into "work" and "work" into "play": 25 years of research on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 257-307). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

As the doors open to a new era of mobile learning and performance support, it's a good time to step back and think about the new mindset required when designing for mobile.Although a mobile pedagogy will continue to evolve, we already know quite a bit about how people use mobile devices and some of the advantages of mobile learning.Mobile is SupportiveIt doesn't take much deep thought to realize that mobile devices are an ideal medium for supporting performance at work. When an employee runs into an unsolvable problem, requires information to complete a task or needs step-by-step advice, this type of need can often be filled through mobile performance support.Mobile is CollaborativeLearning and support at work can be provided through one's network of professional colleagues, both internal and external to the workplace. Using mobile devices, the geographically dispersed workforce can help each other solve problems and make decisions in real time when the desktop is isn't convenient. And of course, mobile devices can also be used for voice communication. That's an old-fashioned and highly collaborative approach.Mobile is GesturalThe gestural user interface (UI) for interacting with a smartphone or tablet seems like another universe when compared to one-finger clicking on a mouse. The gestural UI removes the intermediary device (mouse, pen, etc.) so that users can directly manipulate objects on the screen. Objects are programmed to move and respond with the physics of the "real world." This opens up a new world of design possibilities for creative imaginations.Mobile is Learner-centricLearner-centric experiences occur when a person seeks the answer to an internal question. At this moment of need, the individual is highly motivated to learn and remember. When this occurs, it circumvents the need for extrinsic motivational techniques. Instead, it demands more effective information design, to provide quick and searchable access to content.Mobile is InformalAlthough there are bound to be an increasing number of Learning Management Systems that track mobile learning events, the mobile medium seems better suited to informal learning. Because mobile devices are often ubiquitous as well as always connected, they are ideal for learning in a variety of ways to fit a particular time and place. Mobile is ContextualUnlike other types of learning, mobile learning on a smartphone or tablet can occur in context. Only 3D simulations come close to this. Mobile learning may be initiated in the context of a situation, such as a few minutes of instruction prior to a sales call or quickly looking up a technical term at a meeting.Mobile learning may be initiated in the context of a location, such as augmented reality to learn about a place while traveling or getting directions to the next technical service call. And if employees "check in" to a location-based site, they can find each other anywhere around the world.Mobile is User-GeneratedBy taking advantage of smartphone and tablet hardware, users can generate content by taking photographs and recording video and audio. Through these multimedia capabilities, your workforce can send and receive information from the field.A healthcare worker in a rural area can send photos of a patient's skin condition and ask for help with a diagnosis. An agricultural expert can create a photo album for farmers, showing conditions that indicate soil erosion. Rather than take notes, a trainer can voice record his or her thoughts on how to improve a workshop. Then use this recording back at the office.Mobile is FunThe most popular apps in iTunes are games. With mobile devices, games don't need to be limited to the phone. They can take in the larger world and be situational. For example, at a call center technicians receive digital badges through a mobile app for every satisfied caller. Badges are cashed in for various rewards. Think about ways to improve performance through challenges, team competitions and gamification.Mobile is Sensitive and ConnectedTake advantage of the hardware features of mobile devices. They have sensors for detecting touch, motion and device orientation. There is hardware for connecting through your carrier's network, and through WiFi and Bluetooth.Some mobile devices can be used for tethering, which involves connecting the phone to a laptop with a cable and using the carrier as a modem to connect to the Internet. Mobile devices are also beginning to use Near Field Communications (NFC), so that devices can transmit information by touching them or coming into close proximity.Conclusion How can we leverage all that's unique about mobile devices and their use and at the same time, avoid the pitfalls? It will take time, thought and a high-level strategy to get it right. Your thoughts?Connie Malamed (@elearningcoach) publishes The eLearning Coach, a website with articles, resources, reviews and tips for learning professionals. She is the author of Visual Language for Designers and the Instructional Design Guru iPhone app.

Last week, we kicked off Measurement Month with a discussion of why measurement matters. This week, we’ll dig into connecting measurement and design to build the metrics in from the beginning.Throughout this post I’ll use an example from a training program I worked with earlier in my career to illustrate how the measurement models can be put to work in training.The Alaska Example: Job Training for TeensIn a my last job, I worked with Anchorage Youth Employment in Parks (YEP), a program hiring Anchorage teens to complete park improvement projects while learning job skills in trail building, construction, and habitat restoration. In partnership with a variety of community organizations, this program accomplished two key goals: Complete park improvements and train teens in in-demand job skills.As program partners secured public job training funds for this program, it was essential to ensure YEP was successfully developing employment-ready teens. After the program’s pilot year, program partners worked with a University of Alaska sociologist to create a data model to measure the YEP program’s effectiveness and continually improve the program.YEP used the Theory of Change model to guide the development of program metrics and evaluation. The Theory of Change model offers program designers a helpful guide for planning and measuring learning and development. The Theory of Change looks like this (from "How does the Theory of Change Process Work?"):Step One: Identify GoalsStart your program design with the basics: Goals. Ask yourself and your stakeholders straightforward questions: What skills must participants have when they finished the program? What new responsibilities will they be qualified to take on next? To develop specific and measurable goals, conduct stakeholder interviews and focus groups. As you design your program goals, make sure you have a thorough understanding of your target audience to design initiatives that meet both their needs and the professional growth they wish to accomplish for themselves.In the YEP example, the goals for the students were to develop competency in several professional outdoor skills: Forest maintenance, trail building and streambank restoration. Participating teens were required to demonstrate technical competence in these professional skills as well as leadership and teamwork abilities.Step Two: Connect the Preconditions and Identifying the ChangesEach program goal will have a chain of needed preconditions, which in turn require changes from the baseline data. The program design phase is an exploration of each step needed to achieve the preconditions necessary for the end goal.In the YEP example, program managers worked with experts in each of the subject areas (trail-building, forestry, and watershed restoration) to assess the competencies necessary to reach the desired end goals for the teens. We developed activities (both training programs and work projects) that would enable participating teens to explore different skills and apply them to real work environments. We made sure our summer-long program connected all of the dots between participating teens’ beginning qualifications and our desired end goals.Step Three: Develop IndicatorsThe next step is to create a data framework for the "before and after" states achieved through a training program. In the Anchorage example, this meant a case study of the target audience of our training program. We identified their likely background, education, and their desired outcomes from the program, and created scales to measure where an individual would stand within that range at the beginning of the program and the end.We included measurement of both teens’ soft skills, like leadership, communication, and cooperation, and their specific job skills, in trail-building, forestry, and watershed restoration. We developed detailed assessments for teens to complete at the beginning and end of the program and a shorter, simpler questionnaire that they filled out on a weekly basis. Teens were asked for both self-assessment and for qualitative feedback, to which we later assigned data values. We also asked teens for feedback about the program itself.In addition to asking the teens to assess themselves and the program, we asked both crew leaders (team leaders) and the program supervisor to complete detailed assessments of the teens’ skills and abilities at the beginning and end of the programs. All of these assessments were used to create our data framework.Finally, we created long-term goals and measurements for the teens’ success after participation in the program, including employment in our target sectors, college attendance, career-readiness and also advancement in the program in returning years. We designed annual surveys to check in with program alumni and assess their long-term progress.Step Four: Write the NarrativeThe final step in the program design phase of the theory of change model involves creating a narrative: A model describing how your initiative will create change to achieve your program goals. This is more than just a pretty story: This is your opportunity to test your logic in plain English. When you create your narrative, this is a document you will share with your stakeholders to make sure that the steps you outline make sense - and that the data measures you identify connect accurately to the program goals. (In the next post, I’ll share some sample narratives to help guide your program design process.)Step Five: Implement, Iterate, ImproveThis last step is where the really good stuff happens. Once you’ve designed a program, it’s time to implement it, collect data, and use data to make adjustments and improvements.In the Youth Employment in Parks example, program managers used the Theory of Change model to provide both structure in the program design and metrics to measure its effectiveness. We found the data invaluable in enabling us to continually improve the program, by adding training in specific areas or reducing or removing unneeded components. We ultimately reduced the time spent in content study and achieved greater mastery of the content. This was a positive feedback loop, and achieved improved results continuously as participant feedback enabled us to iterate and improve.Next week we’ll examine the process of building your measurement model.Further reading:"Making Your eLearning Initiative a Bestseller", Mark Sheppard"Measuring the Impact of Training and Development", Paul Bernthal"Project Superwoman Theory of Change", ActKnowledge (must create account to access free download)

See below for the entire list of tour stops!The blog book tour has started as ASTD and I kick-off a 25 stop blog book tour for the ASTD co-published book The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. The book is available at the ASTD Book Store. The tour includes stops at several ASTD chapter web sites including Philadelphia, New York and Houston, Texas. You are welcome to join the tour, no...you are urged and encouraged to join the tour. Leave a comment on this posting linking to your blog and it will "officially" become part of the tour. The tour currently includes some well known bloggers and some bloggers you really need to know but we want to expand it with your input, ideas and concepts related to Gamification. Here are all the tour stop dates. The blog book tour is a virtual tour so you can just follow along stop by stop. If you don't have the book yet, stop by the ASTD book store a pick up a copy. The Twitter hashtag for the tour is #gamiLIThere is a Pinterest page for the tour. And a Facebook page for the tour, stop by and give it a LIKE:)Here are the tour stops, the day of the stop and a link to the stop are indicated below. You can follow along by going blog to blog and leaving a comment. If you stop at every stop and leave a comment, you will receive a free whitepaper "The First Five Steps to Gamification of Content, Curriculum and Courses."Also, on April 26th, Join Karl at the Houston ASTD Chapter's Webinar for a live chat and presentation by the author. Week One:Oops, already had a change in venue as my scheduling abilities appear to have been less than stellar, please see below for today's stop. April 16: Learning Circuits Blog. April 17: Gamification Facebook PageApril 18: Jane Bozarth's Bozarthzone April 19: Kevin Kruse, Keven Kruse Blog. He is NY Times bestselling author of We: How to Increase Performance and Profits through Full EngagementApril 20: Rich Mesch Performance Punctuated and he will be joined by Judy Unrein OneHundred Forty Words .Week Two:April 23: Clark Quinn LearnletsApril 24: Karl Grieb ASTD Philadelphia ChapterApril 25: Webinar Presentation for Houston ASTD Chapter "What Research Tells Us about Games, Gamification and Learning" Join the webinar.April 26: Debbie Richards Take an e-Learning Break And a live appearance by Karl at the NY ASTD Chapters combined SIG Meeting. If you are in NY, you may want to register and attend.April 27L Connie Malamed The eLearning Coach.Week Three:April 30: Amy Lui Abel New York ASTD Chapter Blog. May 1: Cammy Bean Learning VisionsMay 2: Tom Kuhlmann Word of Mouth May 3: Koreen Olbrich Learning in Tandem May 4: "Surprise Blog Appearance" Week Four:May 7: Mike Qaissaunee Frequently Asked QMay 8: Larry Hiner drlarryhinerMay 9: Catherine Lombardozzi Learning JournalMay 10: Brent Schlenker Elearning Development May 11: Zaid Ali Alsagoff Zaid Learn Week Five:May 14: Andrew Hughes Designing DigitallyMay 15: John Rice Educational Games Research May 16: Christy Tucker Experiencing E-LearningMay 17: Justin Brusino ASTD Learning Circuits Blog (we come full circle to discuss the tour and the gamification concept) May 18: Karl Kapp Kapp Notes. The author provides reflections and lessons learned from the tour. So join us for this exciting tour and social media event to discuss the pros and cons of Gamification and what it means to learning and development professionals. And follow us on Twitter at #gamiLI.Gamification of Learning and InstructionPromote Your Page Too

Week One Recap The first week of the blog book tour has ended and it has been a fantastic week with informative blog posts, information  and opinions about gamification and even a bit of controversy. The week opened with a posting of the tour stops on the Learning Circuit’s Blog and the Kapp Notes blog and then introduced everyone to the Facebook page for the book and then the discussion really ramped up with Jane Bozarth talking about the how the book takes a common sense look at the subject. Next, New York Time’s bestselling author Kevin Kruse told us how articles appearing within the last year in notable publications such as BusinessWeek, Forbes, Fortune and even the Harvard Business review are talking about how gamification is impacting marketing, service and employee satisfaction (notice training seems to be absent.)Then on Friday Judy Unrein discussed how the book can benefit instructional designers and Rich Mesch made us all hungry when he reminded us that just like Chocofication (adding chocolate to everything) is not a good idea, neither is gamification of all content a good idea. In some areas it doesn't work or even make sense to add "Gamificaton". We need to be careful how we apply "Gamification." It is not a universal cure-all. Issues with Gamification and It’s ImplicationsAnother guest on the tour, although not a scheduled stop, has been Kathy Sierra who is a self-confessed gamification curmudgeon and author of a widely popular series of test preparation books to help people pass Java tests to become certified and not only does she prepare people to pass those tests, she has created certification exams that are used to certify programmers. Her test preparation books are some of the best selling on the topic. Kathy has brought the perspective that gamification is not good--at all. She doesn’t like the word "gamification" and she had her "heart broken" because so many people that she respects are involved in this tour talking about gamification. She is worried about my insistence on using the word "gamification" (including my urging of others to "take back the word")." She states that "nearly every game scholar and professional game designer (real games, not just Zynga game-like things) is adamantly opposed to the word for many reasons including how misleading it is by including the word 'game'".She was also "offended" that during the tour I offered a whitepaper for anyone who wanted to leave a comment on every blog entry. She felt that was a crass use of gamification and that I was clearly using an extrinsic reinforcer offering a reward in a feeble attempt to market the book. She felt that in an industry where knowledge is valued that withholding knowledge to shape behavior or action was wrong. Kathy felt that technique was "LEAVE a COMMENT for POSSIBLE WIN scheme" and that it appealed to the basest aspect of Gamification.In Defense of the Term GamificationHer concerns are not without merit but I think there is another perspective to consider, especially with her dislike of the term"Gamifiaction"  While "nearly" every game scholar and professional game designer is against gamification and some who initially were proponents of the term have backed off, these people are not controlling the discussion about gamification within businesses and corporations. The CEOs, Vice Presidents, executives and managers are not tapped into the game developer industry; for the most part they don’t attend the Game Developer’s Conferences, they don't read game developer magazines or blogs.  Instead, they read reports from Gartner that indicate 70 percent of Global 2000 organizations will have at least one gamified application over the next five years. And reports that say the overall market for gamification is predicted to grow to $1.6 billion in the next ten years. (we all know Gartner analysis are fabulously optimistic in their predictions but someone is reading those reports and paying for the analysis).Additionally, as NY Times bestselling author Kevin Kruse told us, CEOs, VP’s, executives and managers read Forbes, the Harvard Business Review, BusinessWeek and Newsweek which all within the last year have carried articles about gamification. Like it or not the "Gamification" term is out of the bag and it’s not getting back in or disappearing or falling out of favor with executives. The gamification message is targeted toward the major decision makers within organizations and is not being lead by major scholars or figures within the game industry. It's being lead by vendors, marketers and others who can, and are, getting  the word out about gamification and its working.Learning and development professionals must now react to requests for Gamification, we are not driving the discussion--we are forced to react. And many times we are not even in the discussion at all. In fact, many proponents of gamification feel learning and development professionals have nothing to contribution to the conversation about gamification at all. Actually we have the most to contribute. We understand human motivation and how people process information and how they learn and how to shape behavior so it lasts. We should be in the conversation or it will go in unhealthy directions and have negative consequences for us.Two ChoicesNow we have two choices, one is to "Just Say NO to Gamification." We can ignore it, we can rally against it, we can talk about how no "serious" game developer believes in gamification but, at the end of the day, business leaders are bombarded by gamification messages in magazines they read religiously by organizations that have the funds to spread the gamification message.The "anti-gamification" tribe has little funding, organizational structure or reach into CEOs and VPs. So waging a war against the term "gamification" will, ultimately, not be productive. We will just be ignored or bypassed when "serious" gamification issues need to be discussed--you know the kind mentioned in the Harvard Business Review. We may not like it but it’s already happening.In fact, if we learning and development professionals turn our back on gamification, refuse to take part in this narrowly defined if/then extrinsically motivated movement, then the CEOs, the business managers and executives will go somewhere else. My fear is that a CEO will walk into a training department after having read an article in the Harvard Business Review about Gamificaiton and demand that the training department create a gamification program to train sales reps. Then the training department either doesn’t know anything about gamification (because learning and develop professionals refuse to use the term and its not talked about by the major voices in the field) or they say "no" we don’t do gamification under any circumstances.The CEO shakes her head and then goes to the marketing department and says, "Can you create a sales training program around gamification?" and they say "Of course!" Now non-learning and development professionals are using gamification, perhaps at its most extrinsic level to create training. And, if it works or even appears to work, the learning and development professionals lose credibility and relevance. We will be out of the loop and away from business discussions.We can’t sit with the C-Suite people or in meetings uninformed about this thing called "Gamification." Sure, we can decide to name it something else like "Gamefullness" or "Activityification" but then learning and development professionals will be speaking a different language than executives. We already have this problem by the ton. We can't decide to make it worse by creating a substitute word for "gamification." Learning and development professionals should have learned by now that we have to use the language of business to work with the leaders of business to obtain credibility to have influence.Inventing another term or refusing to discuss that low-brow "gamification" concept doesn't help the profession one bit because we  appear out of touch or not in sync with the business units.The other choice, the one I have chosen, is to educate ourselves about this thing called Gamification and to expand and broaden the definition—not so that the definition or term is meaningless—but so that when the CEO comes to us and says "can you do gamification of a sales training program", we can say "yes." And then we intelligently add story elements, challenges and the main tenants of Self-Determination Theory autonomy, competence and relatedness to the training.. The elements of games that actually make a difference, that actually add intrinsic value instead of a crass use of points, rewards or badges. And we can still call it gamification.We have then met the needs of the CEO and created a meaningful learning experience. Additionally with this approach, we are not left out of the loop. We can shape the gamification discussion about the sales training to be more instructionally sound than if we were not involved or left out. By learning about gamification we become part of the conversation and are not isolated on the sidelines. Why Respected Individuals are Talking About GamificationThe reason I enlisted so many respectable people in the learning and development field and the reason I think they agreed to participate is because we can’t hope the term gamification goes away. We need a general discussion within the field of the term, its positive and negative aspects. The term won’t go away no matter how much some of us hate it.We must talk about Gamification and examine it and see how it can fit into what we are doing. We must be participants in the conversation about gamification and try, in some way, to shape the term. If we don’t, the entire concept and application it will go into a direction that, from an instructional standpoint, is untenable.We have the ability to influence the application of gamification in the field of learning and instruction right now. If we wait or hesitate we will loose our opportunity. It’s not too late as some would have us believe.Gamification Resources for L&D Professionals In fact, before "The Gamification of Learning and Instruction" was released, the learning and development field had no book about gamification that focused on the learning theories behind gamification or a listing of what gamification is or is not from a learning perspective.  The purpose of the book is not to "glorify" gamification or to get people to be "quotable for having said useful, positive things about gamification." The purpose is to have a measured, civil discussion about gamification and how it applies or doesn’t apply to learning situations.The goal is to create competence within the learning and development community to be able to speak intelligently about gamification and decide when it is appropriate and when it is being used to manipulate people and, at times, the distinction can be tricky.For example, Kathy Sierra rightly pointed out that I was using an extrinsic motivator in terms of proposing a reward (a whitepaper) in exchange for an activity (leaving a comment). I agree that creating that type of arrangement was a crass use of extrinsic motivation. I admit my error and will make the whitepaper available freely to anyone (of course I have to write it first—it will be available end of May).Helping me to see and correct my use of extrinsic motivation is the point of having open, civil conversations  about things like external motivators. Sometimes we need others to point out how we might unwittingly use external motivators to influence behavior and we might not even be aware of it. Certification Exams as External MotivatorsEven the most intelligent people can unwittingly fall into the "trap" of relying on extrinsic motivation to spur learning results. For example, I wonder how consciously aware Kathy is of her use of  strong external reinforcers in her creation of certification exams and in her creation and marketing of test prep materials that support those exams.When people study for these extrinsically motivating events known as certification tests (or in gamification parlance "badges") do these people perceive that that they've been manipulated into preparing to pass these tests? Do they realize their intrinsic motivation to learn a programming language is being systematically and methodically undermined because, as Kathy has suggested, the result of rewarding someone for something they would have done anyway is ultimately de-motivating. In fact many believe the original intrinsically motivated behavior will disappear after the extrinsic reward is removed.To paraphrase a wise and informed person on the topic of extrinsic motivation: while the programmers Kathy urges and encourage to read her books to earn the badge/certification are all smart, savvy, brain aware people it makes no difference because that knowledge does not protect them from the damaging effects of putting such weight and value on the EXTRINSIC reward of certification. The negative, undermining effects all happen at a level of conscious processing for which Kathy’s poor readers lack the "security clearance" to access let alone override.This If/then proposition inherent in Kathy's test prep books is the exact same offense Kathy correctly and accurately accused me of committing with my whitepaper. Kathy is extrinsically motivating people to buy her books so they obtain the reward of certification. She isn’t marketing these test prep books as a way to learn programming or as a way to develop a love of programming or as a way to build competence in programming; she is marketing them as a way to obtain an external reward--to pass a test.So I urge Kathy to do the same thing I have done. I divorced the reward from the action; I am offering the whitepaper freely on the web for no cost. Kathy, please seriously consider offering anyone who wants certification a free copy of your book. Or consider dropping the certification. Or, only write books which tap into intrinsic motivation. I urge you to become the model for which you want others to follow—don’t use external rewards as a motivational tool. Show learning and development professionals how to use only intrinsic motivational techniques so that your readers develop a competence level in programming that is so high, no certification is needed.Abandon your test prep books and write more books fostering the love of programming through intrinsic devices like autonomy, competence and relatedness. Stand up and no longer present the proposition to your readers that if they buy your book, they will ace the certification exam and receive the extrinsic reward of certification. Be the change you hope to see in others.SummaryThis week has certainly been a great first week for the tour and next week is a great line up as well. I have learned a great deal and hope you have too. The interest in the tour is growing and next week we’ll be announcing new tour stops, webinars and other events that have joined the tour.This upcoming week, we have Clark Quinn who I purposefully asked to be one the stops because he doesn’t like the word "Gamfication" and I wanted everyone to know of his concerns and perspective. And, in light of this discussion it will be interesting to read what he thinks. We have the Philadelphia Chapter of ASTD with Karl Grieb making an appearance as well as Debbie Richards of Texas with her blog Take an e-learning break.I am doing a live appearance in New York at at Special Interest Group meeting and my friend Connie Malamed of The eLearning Coach will discuss her view of the subject of gamification.I look forward to their postings and hope that you too decide to post as well. Now that the LEAVE a COMMENT for POSSIBLE WIN scheme  has been removed (and I do apologize if that offended anyone), I urge you to freely post your ideas and thoughts.Let the community know what you think,  Should we ignore the term "gamification"?  Should we denounce the term as crass if/then behavioral reinforcement? Should we attempt to shape the term and concept or should we find another term?See you on the tour and if you want to learn more, pick up the book at the ASTD Book store or check out the Pinterest page for Gamification Happenings.

TODAY'S STOP:April 27: Connie Malamed The eLearning Coach: Are you a Gamification Wizard This week promises to be an exciting second week of the Gamification Blog Book Tour. Here are the stops for this week.April 23: Clark Quinn LearnletsApril 24: Karl Grieb ASTD Philadelphia ChapterApril 25: Webinar Presentation for Houston ASTD Chapter "What Research Tells Us about Games, Gamification and Learning" Join the webinar.April 26: Debbie Richards Take an e-Learning Break And a live appearance by Karl at the NY ASTD Chapters combined SIG Meeting. If you are in NY, you may want to register and attend.April 27: Connie Malamed The eLearning Coach.

TODAY"S BLOG STOP:  May 4: UL EduNeering Online Compliance Training BlogThe blog book tour has been a lot of fun, with interesting comments and exciting dialogues and some in-person stops. Here are the stops for week three (with a few changes) and a recap of week two.April 30: Enid Crystal New York ASTD Chapter BlogMay 1: Jeanette Brooks Word of Mouth blog.May 2: Cammy Bean Learning VisionsMay 3: Koreen Olbrich Learning in TandemMay 4: I am appearing "live" at the Eduneering Knowledge Summit in Baltimore, MD. Complete with book signing. The blog for the day will be UL EduNeering Online Compliance Training Blog which will have slides and information from the session.Recap of Week TwoClark Quinn started the week off at Learnlets with a discussion of the word "gamification" (he would prefer a more meaningful term like "engagification" especially since "gamification" does seem to carry some negative connotations. He provided a balanced and well described critique of the book. You can read Clark's post Kapp’s Gamification for Learning and Instruction.Next Karl Grieb of the ASTD Philadelphia eLearning SIG provides a description of the content of the book. He describes the break down of the elements of games and points out the section describing ADDIE versus Scrum as a development process. He also highlights the writing about different types of motivation including John Keller's ARCS model. Read the post here.Then Debbie Richards from Take an e-Learning Break wrote about four themes from the book including "matching game results with game design. She also talked about the Cisco Binary game. I also did webinar for the Houston Chapter of ASTD arranged by Debbie. You can see the slides here.The week ended on a fun note with Connie Malamed of The eLearning Coach creating a game/post called Are you a gamification wizard? Play the game. See how well you can do. There were also some live appearances. New York City I traveled to New York City and presented at a joint ASTD Special Interest Group (SIG) meeting of the NYU Higher Ed SIG and the eLearning SIG. It was a great time and I met some wonderful folks. Here are a few pictures of our interactive session. I'd like to thank Amy Lui Abel and Enid Crystal for making that meeting happen. Here are some pictures from the event.You can see the slides for the presentation here.Lehigh ValleyAs part of the tour, I severed on a panel about gamification for the Lehigh Valley Chapter of the Association of Information Technology Professionals. The title was "The Computer Game Industry: Not for Kids Any More." We had a great panel discussion with lots of questions and engaging conversation. The panel included myself, Jason Brozena of Caronet which is a hosting company that provides data center services to organizations, including numerous game companies. Having a data center's perspective helped to broaden the attendees understanding of how games are being hosted and other back-end services/technologies. And Larry Wolfe of LiquidInt. Larry will introduce Liquid Mobility Bridge™. This tool was designed to work across various mobile platforms. Larry will also discussed the concept of gamification of business applications. I'd like to thank Mary Rasley, Steve Steven Weitz and Thiep Pham for including me as a panel member.

TODAY'S BLOG BOOK TOUR STOP:May 11: Zaid Ali Alsagoff Zaid Learn And if you missed a couple of recent stops, check out Mike Qaissaunee's post Gamification of Learning and Instruction and Koreen Olbrish's The Shamification of Gamification . And Larry Hiner at drlarryhiner as well as Catherine Lombardozzi at her Gamification Whistle Stop.The Gamification of Learning and Instruction blog book tour has been a lot of fun, with interesting comments and exciting dialogues and some in-person stops. Here are the stops for week four and a recap of week three.Week Four:May 7: Mike Qaissaunee Frequently Asked QMay 8: Larry Hiner drlarryhinerMay 9: Catherine Lombardozzi Learning JournalMay 10: Brent Schlenker Elearning Development May 11: Zaid Ali Alsagoff Zaid Learn Recap of Week Three During the week, there was a review of the book published at Learning Solutions Magazine. You can read the review here. Enid Crystal of the New York Chapter of ASTD started off the week by summarizing my in-person visit to the joint NYU Higher Ed and eLearning SIG joint meeting. The meeting was a lot of fun. We started the evening by playing a game to get everyone familiar with the various elements of games such as challenge, roles and feedback. We then discussed various examples of gamification. You can read the posting here.Next, the tour stopped by the Word of Mouth Blog, sponsored by Articulate. The tour stop was titled Using Gamification To Transform Your Learners from Angry Birds into Learning Ninjas. The post had to be moved from its originally scheduled date because of the long awaited release of Articulate's Storyline which was scheduled on the same day as the original blog tour stop on Word of Mouth. So we did a little switch. The posting is great with several clever examples of using game-elements to enhance instruction.Cammy Bean at Learning Visions was the next stop. Cammy, as always, gave an insightful look at the subject of Gamification in her stop called Karl Kapp Book Tour: The Gamification of Learning and InstructionWe then skipped a stop. Hey, it happens.And moved right to Friday which was an in-person tour stop date.  I stopped by the UL Eduneering event known as the Knowledge Summit and spoke about busting e-learning myths as we played a game called "Fact or Fishy". A link to my slides and resources from the presentation was posted on the UL Eduneering blog in a posting titled Busting Learning Myths: Fact or Fishy Here are some images from my in-person book signing.If you are interested in the book, you can purchase a copy at the ASTD Book Store.

TODAY'S BLOG BOOK TOUR STOP:May 1: Games Teach!Also, today would be a good day to revisit some of the great posts of this week. Stop by and see the post at Designing Digitally about the book.Check out John Rice's stop on the tour, I want to thank John as I included some ideas on understanding elements leading to higher learning in videogames which he outlined in a paper published a few years ago in the Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. And don't forget Christy Tucker's stop Research in Gamification of Learning and Instruction and also check out her posting Ruth Clark Claims "Games Don’t Teach" part on an interesting debate I plan to weigh in on tomorrow.Stops for Week FiveMay 14: Andrew Hughes Designing DigitallyMay 15: John Rice Educational Games Research May 16: Christy Tucker Experiencing E-LearningMay 17: Gamification Happenings at PinerestMay 18: See my post, "Games Teach!"Plus we have added a few new dates and stops (stay tuned) we are also having a webinar event with Dan Bliton who challenges attendees to the game "Are you smarter than Karl Kapp". Dan will be hosting the game and conducting an interview with me on the 24th of May during BAH open webinar at 1:00 ET.Recap of Week Four Week Four was an exciting week. We had many activities going on related to the tour. We had a very interesting stop with Mike Qaissaunee's post Gamification of Learning and Instruction. Mike gave the perspective of a technology educator and someone who is not an instructional designer and explained how gamification impacts him and the difficulties associated with gamification when your teaching load is heavy.  Koreen Olbrish's The Shamification of Gamification  posting discussed how we should "focus on the challenge of educating the market, not vilifying a word." She also commented on the chapter she contributed to the book.Larry Hiner at drlarryhiner talked about the Intersection of games, learning, and organizational psychology providing an interesting and thought provoking perspective.Catherine Lombardozzi at her Gamification Whistle Stop discussed what someone will learn when they read the book and what people mean when they talk about "gamification" and the factors that transform engaging learning into game play.Zaid Ali Alsagoff created a post called Gamify to Amplify the Learning Experience. He talked about gamification to of personal learning and sharing and the gamification of teaching. As always, he provided great graphics and visual insights.We also had two book reviews one by Connie Malamed at eLearn Magazine and another book review by Jennifer Neibert of Learning Solutions Magazine. Allison Rossett mentioned Gamification in her interesting post titled My Commencement Address for the Workforce Learning Class of 2012.And I somehow missed this before but Ruth Clark wrote a provocative piece called Why Games Don't Teach which discusses one research article that found the game used for learning didn't teach what it was supposed to teach. There are other studies, of course, that show that games do teach (many are cited in the book) and even serveral meta-analysis studies (studies of studies) that show games do teach. So, right now I say it depends on the study and research design as well as game-design as to how effective the game is for achieving desired learning outcomes.One thing that Ruth Clark did bring up that I think is important is that "we [need to] cultivate a more refined approach to categorize the features of games that best match various instructional goals." I agree and have put such a hierarchy into chapter 8 of the book. That is where I identify types of games and which type is best for teaching which type of content. It's a start. If you have a chance, read Ruth's article. It is good to keep a balanced perspective when thinking about games for learning. They are not the answer to every instructional problem.