Dedicated to all things Gamification

My son, who started high school in September, is “enjoying” a rite of passage this week; he’s taking his first set of mid-terms.

Come to find out, flashcards as a study tool may soon go the way of the Sony Walkman.

Enter Quizlet.

My son had a huge list of vocabulary words to learn. He logged on to Quizlet, and one of his Facebook friends had already created a quiz where the vocabulary words fly across the screen, inviting the user to race to type the definition as quickly as possible. With each round, the words got faster and faster.

I was convinced right away that this was a great way to learn – at least the type of learning that involves memorization.

Quizlet incorporates two elements into studying which make it more fun, and ultimately more effective.

These same two elements are on the cutting edge of market research as well.

Gamification:  Students can create a variety of games where the objective is to answer questions relating to their class material.

Social:  They can share the games they created with classmates and compete against them, and they can search for relevant games throughout the Quizlet site.

See for yourself.  Check out this demonstration video to see Quizlet in action.  As you watch the video, think about how some of these elements can enhance your next research project.

Editor’s Note: this post was originally published on our sister site, Research Access.

Over the last several years, I’ve written and spoken a lot about what I call “The Gaming Metaphor” – the notion of applying Gamification or game dynamics to everything we do in the world of business and technology.  As with all ideas, its reception has had an arc – from bewildered faces backing out of the room slowly thinking I’m a mad-man to appreciative audiences thinking I’m on to something to people agreeing wholeheartedly and asking immediately for a primer on the matter so they can dig into it on their own.

Gamification by DesignNow, I don’t know how generalizable my experiences are here – there are those who know this subject far deeper, who came up with the concept far before me, and who have taken it far beyond what I could dream of doing in my ivory tower.  As arrogant as I am, I have to give credit where it is due- people like Jane McGonigal, Gabe Zichermann, and Rajat Paharia have given flesh to the skeleton of Gamification.

But you know me.  I can’t shut up just because I am in the presence of masters!

So I am going to assume that everyone has had the same reception-arc as I have and, therefore, want to recommend a good primer – Gamification by Design by Gabe Zichermann and Christopher Cunningham.

Let me start by telling you what the book isn’t:  it’s not a philosophical treatise on games or a history of games.  Nor is it as expansive as Jane McGonigal’s masterpiece Reality is Broken.

The book is, however, very powerful because it encapsulates Gamification in a very simple to understand, highly-accessible manner in which the Game Mechanics are explained via their application in the Web-based and Mobile-application world.

As ideas progress from being conceptual to operational (later on to become institutional- read about this here) we need a vernacular, a common language to allow us to communicate.

Gamification by Design gives us that common language.  Please buy it and read it.

Mobile Gamification

On January 30th, 2012, Survey Analytics sponsored a webinar on Mobile Market Research Trends. The webinar was moderated by Esther LaVielle of Survey Analytics and featured Romi Mahajan, CMO of Metavana, and Chad Bhandari, co-founder of SurveySwipe.  Here is the full text of Part 1 of the webinar, which covered the topic of Mobile Gamification.  You can read the entire series at Research Access.

Esther LaVielle: Here are our trends that we’re going to be talking about; gamification, panel communities, passive data collection, HTML5, mobile ethnography, and hyperlocal surveys.

So the first topic we’re going to pose to our speakers today is about gamification. Why is gamification important? Why do you believe it’s important, and do you believe it’s the future of market research?

I’ll go ahead and direct this question over to you first, Romi.

Romi Mahajan: So first off, thank you very much for the opportunity to be on this webcast. This is my second webcast with the Survey Analytics family, and last time was very enjoyable, and we got some good feedback. So I do hope that those of you who are listening send us the bouquets or the brick bats depending on how well we do. And let us know if these are useful for you, or if you want to see more complexity in the way we do these and more detail.

So gamification I think is a trend that you’d have to have been under a rock not to have been reading about, right, recently. It’s really about the application of an age old construct, that of the game, to business, to web interactions, to financial services, to the medical field, to almost anything. And the notion here is that a game, when you break it down into its fundamental parts, is actually pretty easy to understand.

There’s an objective. There’s voluntary participation. There’s some level of feedback you get along the way. There’s an element of fun to it. And we’ve come to understand that’s the metaphor of gaming is applicable to people of all ages and all societies at all levels of the economic totem pole, et cetera. And as such, gamification has become a very powerful metaphor, again, for how we do business.

I think about gamification a couple ways when I think about market research, when I think about marketing in general. At the very, very basic, you think about the fact that each one of us has gotten a survey at some point in our life that says, fill it out, and you’ll be entered into a drawing for a $500 gift certificate, or a Ferrari, or some other artifact that that’s delightful. And that is a form of gamification as well, right? When we make a game out of interaction, and as such, people will participate.

As a parent, I remember gamifying the dining experience of my kids. The classic take your fork, put some food on it, and pretend it’s an airplane, and tell the kid that the airplane’s coming into the airport, right? So gamification has applicability to almost anything we do.

Doing it well, however, is difficult and I look forward to some of the other panelists talking about either examples of gamification that have not gone well or have gone well.

Esther LaVielle: So I do want to pose one question that I get a lot from clients that I’m talking to about gamification, and a lot of them are very resistant to it. So clearly, this goes against any traditional research techniques in a very aggressive manner. What would you guys say to those doubters to encourage them not to dismiss gamification as a fluke, but as another avenue to collect data in the future?

Romi Mahajan: So I think gamification, there are people, as you say, who think about it as a trivialization of research or anything else. And I think part of that is people being caught up in the notion of just the word itself, the game. Games, people tend to think of games as frivolous.

In fact, every good interaction when it comes to data collection, when it comes to the web, when it comes to moving a customer from one experience to the next, is gamified. We’re trying to create interesting experiences. We’re trying to help them understand what they can get at the end of participation, whether it’s greater knowledge, whether it’s some sort of monetary artifact. And so, in a way, we’re already doing gamification. The point of christening it as a category is to say, let’s do it better. Let’s think about some rules.

I look at the slide you have up there, and I see that we have badges up there. Badges clearly are working. Look at FourSquare, look at– I know there’s a company called BadgeFarm that you guys are working on. All of those are incredibly, very powerful, again, a metaphor for how business is done. And so to me, I would tell the naysayers that they’re probably already indulging in gamification. And if they believe that it’s a frivilous category, then they’re probably not doing it well.

So that would be what I would submit to them. Maybe breakdown the point at its beginning without actually debating the merits, because gamification is here, and it’s here to stay.

Chad Bhandari: I just want to kind of add to what Romi said about gamification on SurveySwipe. What we’ve done is SurveySwipe is built with the reward system built in, so panelists earn points when they take surveys. But that’s an example of the basics of gamification that we built into SurveySwipe.

And over time, we’re going to integrate BadgeFarm into SurveySwipe as well. In fact, we’re already on beta for that. So it’s definitely– BadgeFarm, gamification is going to be part of SurveySwipe.

Romi Mahajan: That’s great, Chad. I think that SurveySwipe is already such a powerful platform. I really enjoyed the demos that you guys have done for me and enjoyed thinking through the applications. On gamification, I guess my last point would be that for those people on the panel who are intrepid enough to read further on this, I would recommend Jane McGonigal’s book called Reality is Broken and the O’Reilly media book called Gamification by Design. Both are incredibly good and lucid expositions of gamification and their their application to different areas of business.  So we’ll go from there.

Chad Bhandari: Absolutely, be certain to read that book. It’s absolutely awesome.

Esther LaVielle:  Great. So let’s go and move on to the next topic here, which is panel communities. Basically, what are panel communities and what do you believe is its benefits to a company?

Click This Link to Get the Webinar Video and Slides.

Note: This post was originally published on our sister site, Research Access.

Misfits is a hugely popular TV show here in the UK hosted by Channel 4′s cool, younger channel ‘E4′.

It’s about 4 young people who have to take part in Community Service (which is reserved as a punishment for young petty criminals here in the UK) and through a stormy night, found themselves in posession of amazing super-powers. Although they still take part in Community Service in London, they find that their new super powers have got them in or out of trouble. The programme has been a massive hit here in the UK and the programme now has a Comic book and action figures it can assign to it’s marketing.

Misfits has it’s own page on the E4 website which let’s you understand the storyline of each character more, find them on Twitter (yes, the characters are STILL in character on Twitter!) and look at pictures, videos and of course catch up on older episodes you may have missed.

Misfits, however, take the marketing and brand engagement to the next level. By including the ‘community service’ game and their game App for smartphones, they have secured brand engagement and loyalty which other ‘one way’ marketing cannot achieve.

They also include the ‘Smart Arses’ quiz which questions viewers on how much they know about storylines and characters. Together with their intelligent use of language, they have created a gamified experience which goes perfectly with the brand image, persona of the characters in the programme and the ‘Londoner way of life’.

With a large library of 11 online games for the Misfits, it means audiences stay on their website for longer and get ‘inside information’ on what’s going to happen next through the games themselves. With game names like ‘Do a Runner’, ‘Spot the Shapeshifter’ and ‘Cheese Fondoom’ (which plays on one of the characters’ dairy intolerance) E4 has not only established that games are a brilliant marketing avenue for them, but THE marketing avenue for the E4 brand and Misfits TV show.

Have a play on: http://www.e4.com/misfits/ and download the Misfits app now to play.

Gaming your Marketing doesn’t have to be on the scale here that E4 have performed. Your game doesn’t even need to be that expensive to create. I strongly feel that as long as the language used is the same ‘voice’ as that of your brand and the aesthetic can be linked to the brand as well, you have a game which can hook your audience in.

There is a great conference called Games for Brand which I unfortunately missed this year but if the Misfits wasn’t mentioned, then they’ve missed out! Check out the Games for Brands on Linked In or online.

Authors note: I have not been paid to promote Misfits! It really is just such a useful case-study when talking about brand engagement through games!

Today, in about 30 mins BadgeFarm will be conducting a webinar to introduce BadgeFarm. I am really excited to oversee the launch of BadgeFarm – which has been under the wraps for quite a while.

If you are interested in Gamification and how is pertains to engagement, marketing and our everyday lives – you should check out the webinar.

Time: 8AM PST / 11AM Eastern – Tuesday December 6th.

Webinar Link: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/272957934

Presentation Link:

 

Tom Ewing is now Digital Culture Officer at BrainJuicer and worked with Kantar beforehand as their Social Media Knowledge Leader. Tom first posted this piece on his Blackbeard blog and was kind enough to let us repost it. Tom writes about the different ‘degrees’ of Gamification here, and we hope we can prove Tom wrong! Read on…

This time last year I was writing a talk for the inaugural Festival of New MR about surveys as videogames (you can read what I said here). The ideas in it had been bouncing around for a while but I realised there was mileage in exploring them at length.

I should say right now that I don’t want any credit for starting any kind of conversation around games in research: the word gamification had been around for a while already, and my theoretical musings were quickly trumped by more practical evidence from real pioneers like Jon Puleston. Besides, the stuff I worried and cared about most in the talk – about strategy, ideas emerging through play, unintended consequences – was the stuff nobody else seemed to run with.

And research commentators have, in general, run with games hard. Since then hardly a week has gone by without some gamification article in the research blogosphere, and no conference seems complete without some mention of it. The appetites for details, debate and debunking remain absurdly high.

It seems like a good time to take stock of the different directions ‘research gamification’ is going in right now. I’ve found four of them:

SOFT GAMIFICATION: When people talk about ‘gamification’ in research this is what they generally mean – the introduction of game or game-like elements into a project, often by means of framing a research activity (an open question, a community task, prompted recall) like a game. The people working on this have been the likes of Betty Adamou at Research Through Gaming, Jon Puleston at GMI and Tom DeRuyck at InSites. The main purpose of soft gamification is to increase engagement and richness of response, and the main objection to it is that it distorts response and is incompatible with existing norms. One crucial element of it is that participants are always fully aware that they’re doing a research project: soft gamification is NOT trying to design or invent games, it’s simply borrowing elements from them.

HARD GAMIFICATION: So if that’s “soft” gamification, what’s hard gamification? If soft gamification involves inserting game mechanics into a research project, hard gamification involves inserting research tasks into a game. In other words, participants experience the research as part of the game, rather than experiencing the game as part of the research. This approach is far rarer than soft gamification – in fact it mostly turns up as a misunderstanding or straw man by opponents of gamification asking “how are we meant to compete with Halo/Angry Birds/etc?”. Typically, research companies don’t even try and do this.

But examples do exist: Peanut Labs partnered with social game companies to offer in-game currency in return for survey completion, and we’ve begun to see start-ups mooting a survey/game fusion as a business model. Also, Research Through Gaming’s emphasis on passively collected paradata is an example of hard gamification in action. And arguably, the many post-FourSquare start ups which offer badges and points in exchange for user data are quintessential hard gamification experiences – so in the wider non-research market it’s a more dominant form.

CONTEXT GAMIFICATION: This approach shifts the focus away from trying to engage a participant, and instead embraces the idea that games can distort research data. Rather than this being a problem, runs the thinking, it offers us a chance to hack the research context by changing the emotional or behavioural states of players: for example, raising stress levels through competition in order to get truer responses about stressful household tasks or situations. The object of context gamification isn’t more data, but better data. BrainJuicer (where I work) has been pioneering this kind of thinking – my colleague Peter Harrison just won an ESOMAR award for it and is working on a quantitative pilot as we speak.

SANDBOX GAMIFICATION: And finally, a spin on gamification which might not currently really exist. Most gamification in research is essentially linear – focusing on improving or increasing responses within a pre-existing task structure. “Sandbox gamification” – calling back to my original talk last year – would be far looser, based on building ‘worlds’: environments and systems in which participants could work towards a goal using tools and materials of their choice without necessarily being railroaded into a task or question structure.

This approach exists outside research – obviously in games themselves but also in semi-planned environments like online communities, social networks, etc. (and it’s notable how play – the invention of new collaborative games – is so prominent an activity in these spaces). But research gamification is necessarily more rigid, so sandbox gamification is likely to remain more a possibility than a reality for now. Though I’d be delighted to be proved wrong!

 

 

Peter Harrison currently works as the Innovation Manager at BrainJuicer.

He has recently spoke in my Gamification sessions (the best session, as voted for by the delegates ;) at ESOMAR 3D so we’re very pleased to have him as a Guest Blogger today. Peter’s work on understanding the context gap also really supports Gamification in the understanding that utilising game-mechanics can also help create desired emotions and drive behavior, which in turn, can help to ‘close’ (or at least bring closer) the context gap.

The biggest challenge facing the market research industry is the context gap.

Put simply the ‘respondent’ is subject to a specific set of contextual influences (e.g. at home, bored, unrushed, on their own) that are generally not present when they are doing other activities such as shopping.  In fact we are always being influenced by a cocktail of contextual factors, which make our behaviors seem inconsistent and ‘irrational’.  This means that although we might be researching the ‘right people’ we are not researching them in the right moment, when they are under a corresponding set of contextual factors they face in the real world.

Why is this so important?

Over the last 10-15 years in particular, behavioral economists have been demonstrating that context does not only influence our behavior but also our ability to predict our future behavior.  For example; I may be convinced I am only going to have two drinks in the pub later but in the moment the accumulation of social influence, alcohol, and a more upbeat mood may soon turn two beers into six, or eight…

In one famous experiment Dan Ariely and George Lowenstein wanted to understand how sexual arousal affected people’s predictions of their behavior in certain sexual scenarios.  Perhaps unsurprisingly they found people in an aroused state (to find out how they triggered this state read ‘Predictably Irrational’) were far more adventurous than the unaroused; for example 25% more admitted they would have unprotected sex and there was a 136% uplift in propensity to commit immoral sexual activities. But this does not just relate to sexual arousal, as the authors state “These results apply most directly to sexual arousal and its influence on who we are; but we can also assume that other emotional states (anger, hunger, excitement, jealousy, and so on) work in similar ways, making us strangers to ourselves.”

As an industry that makes predictions based on unreliable respondents, this presents a significant challenge.    One of the ways to respond to this challenge is research games.

Games have the ability to create experiences; we’ve all seen someone getting stressed by Monopoly or absorbed by a crossword.  This is what fuels the main argument against research games, that the artificial experience they create alters responses.  However, I see this ‘problem’ as the single most important feature of research games.  Given everything we know about how context colors our predictions and behaviors, we can and should create research games that deliberately seek to create specific experiences for the players.  As an example if we want to understand if someone will buy our product in a supermarket we can create a game that rushes the respondents, perhaps it also distracts them from the task at hand.  By doing this we can ensure the responses we get back are closer to the in-the-moment decision making that we’re really interested in.

Behavioral economics is receiving a lot of attention and acclaim at market research conferences, but so far examples of research that benefit from its thinking have been rare.   Research games are two ways that we can harness this new insight to create more predictive research.

 

A widely acclaimed book ‘Elephants on Acid and other bizarre experiments’ also touches on the above points and discusses the results from many experimental research studies which look at changes in behavior by changing external factors (including a similar study on sexual arousal if anyone is interested!)

We spend so much time talking about Gamification and how other industries could do well by borrowing ideas from the Games industry. Oscar North, who has blogged for us before has spent some time creating an infographic to help us realise just how massive the industry is and who the big players are.

Oscar North is an Intern at Research Through Gaming, studying at City University London.

 

Thanks for watching!

I am in India – I had to make an emergency visit for family reasons. I came in on a one-way ticket. Now, I am looking for my return trip. As I am browsing and looking at tickets on Delta.com – I am a Delta SkyMiles member and have “Gold” Status – I cannot but help think about how smartly the airline industry has positioned its loyalty program.

They call it a loyalty program – but ask any business executive – its a game. It’s bragging rights. It’s not really about the “reward travel to Hawaii” – its entirely about status vis-a-vis my peers. I admit it. The only realistic benefit to airline status is free upgrades to First Class – which is also in a round about way – peer envy.

The most important lesson we can learn from the airline industry is the skymiles model is designed with 2 axes. One is a continuous linear scale (miles) and another is a step function – Silver, Gold, Diamond etc. As I look into my behavior as a Delta customer, I realize that I am playing an internal game.

I get points (miles) for every time I fly, use my AMEX card etc. These miles give me instant gratification that I am indeed accumulating something. Everytime I login to delta.com – the first thing I see is my Skymiles balance.

The second part, which is equally important is my membership/skymiles status. They’ve created these step functions that forces customers to aspire to the next “level.”

I am convinced that for optimal engagement, we must have both these models woven into a singular program. This gets the best of both worlds – it suffices the “instant and rewarding feedback” that Jane McGonigal talks about as well as creates an aspirational yearning to get to the next level by creating well-defined steps. You must get 50K miles to become a Gold Member etc – Once you are a Gold Member, its OBVIOUS that you are one – by getting early boarding, getting free upgrades while your peers are watching.

Delta also introduced this “Upgrade Watch List” – it shows ALL the users awaiting upgrades sorted by Level – so you know, If you were a “Diamond” member, you could have got a free upgrade etc. They also show you how many OPEN seats are there available for upgrades. This drives home the point!

OK – Need to get back to buying my ticket on Delta so I can become a Platinum Skymiles and get free unlimited bloody mary’s….

 

 

In a recent trip to the ESOMAR 3D conference in Miami, I took some time to visit the Wolfsonian Museum. As well as being a brilliant collection of artwork, sculpture and post-modern advertising, they have a library on their lower floor which displays some very old published books and postcards from as far back as 1935 with prints of the earliest examples of infographics I have ever seen.

“In the Soviet Union, striking, easily comprehensible statistical graphics were used to reach largely illiterate and a linguistically diverse public. Soviet officials mass-produced postcards and other printed materials with visually arresting statistics to claim and propagandize the success of their drive to industrialize the country and provide proof of the inevitable victory of socialism over capitalism”

Previous to ESOMAR 3D, at the Congress in Amsterdam, one of the Keynote speakers was David McCandless, (owner of Information is Beautiful and now also with Kantar media) who told us that data is the new s/oil. By and large, I think  most delegates sat in agreement and were completely fascinated and inspired by his talk. He showed us a string of his infographics which displayed data on anything from political party agendas to ‘what’s more popular than sex?’. But, as we can see from the Wolfsonian Museums Archive in Miami, it seems that infographics have been around for so long that many there in the Museum will soon be classified antiques.

When I heard David speak, I thought many things, but the first two were a) this dude needs a hair cut and b) that he was a genius, which may have affected his hair growth as noted in ‘a’. Anyone who can marry creativity with functionality and business acumen has my vote. I was so inspired by David so much that I hired a David all for myself. David is our ‘Information/Research guy’ and will be doing infographics for our customers.  “How great would it be,” I thought “If we could hire someone who was purely for research on  research and creating infographics as part of the feedback after projects. So instead of presenting clients with pages and pages of Excel and PowerPoint, they could have an infographic which represented all key findings and actions to take. They would love us for us! At last data clients could understand!”

Our David at R.T.G began by creating a moving infographic of the Gamification industry which in 24 hours received 890 views. Something tells me that had this been a document of statistics and text instead, it may not have been quite so popular.

It is interesting to me that the Wolfonsian describes the use of infographics to help illiterate people understand information. Not that McCandless has been in any way inadvertantly calling us all illiterate, but he, like Edward Tufte, have highlighted that actually there is a lot that we don’t understand when it comes to data because it is not clear enough for us to understand. We are illiterate perhaps in our impatience to understand something.

Today, I am personally using infographics to understand anything from how all Market Research companies are connected and their sizes to understanding the gamification industry. But I know now that none of this is new.

At least the Soviets were smart enough (if I can say that) to put infographics to ‘productive’ use in the political sphere. The Soviets used infographics for propaganda and so what if our Governments used infographics to help us understand the benefits of recycling for example? Or our household bills year on year? Or even how our child is spending their time in education?  Or what about where our taxes and council tax goes on to?

One bank in the U.K uses an online donut chart to help their customers visually understand where their spend is going which I believe is a great first move to helping people handle their finances. Let’s face it, manually writing down what you spend everyday whether on paper or in Excel is just too much work. Even then,  it doesn’t get you any closer to understanding what you spend your money on because it is not in a format we understand.

The resuscitation of old methods into the modern world got me thinking a lot about gamification. Humans using games to understand more about ourselves and each other is nothing new really, especially since McDonald’s has been using games to engage consumers since I was born.

The Volkswagen Fun Theory videos have been used to describe how making something otherwise deemed as a ‘chore’ can become exciting. They have videos on YouTube which show gamification being used for anything, from climbing the piano stairs to engaging people in recycling by adding arcade mechanics to bottle banks to reducing the speeds of cars of motorways. However, what many people have not noticed is that the fun in fun theory was created by a brand – Volkswagen. They used Gamification to engage audiences in their brand by creating this ‘Fun Theory’ competition which asked people to come up with ideas on how to make boring  things more fun. The winners got to have their idea on the VW website and YouTube. Therefore, VW gamified us without us even realizing it. They made the public think about gamification as part of their own gamification plan.

So even though playing games is nothing new, we have collectively given games new life and even a name – ‘Gamification’ didn’t exist before 2010 but here it is and has woken us all now with bright sparks of ideas.