Barriers to Adopting Games in Corporate Environments

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 - by Karl M. Kapp

Send to Kindle

On the surface, it would seem that the adoption of a game-based approach for corporate training and educational initiatives would be a no-brainer. Games are engaging, immersive and provide instantaneous feedback on learner actions, and they encourage repetitive practice of techniques and actions. Well-designed games expertly combine content knowledge with critical mental skills, such as identifying and solving problems.

In short, games contain the instructional approach necessary to engage and educate learners. Yet, the resistance to using games as a learning vehicle is widespread. Line managers and executives are famously resistant to using games within organizations. To overcome this resistance, we must first understand why managers and others are reluctant to allow games to be used as learning tools.

Many of the objections are not openly voiced but, instead, objections are articulated as a lack of resources or an outright rejection of the concept of game. While many barriers to game adoption exist, here are some of the more common ones encountered.

Perception of games as only entertainment

People have grown up with the understanding that games and interactive experiences are the realm of fun, play time, or vacation; education is the realm of receiving information in a serious, no-nonsense, static, non-interactive fashion with little feedback or immediate consequences for incorrect assumptions or answers other than a red mark on a paper.

People tend to accept and hold in high esteem past experiences with which they are familiar. Most people making decisions about how to craft instruction in a corporate or academic environment have never learned formally via a game or simulation. They have no familiarity with the process, the techniques, or the nuances necessary to learn via an interactive game or simulation and so they dismiss it as an invalid method of instruction.

As a result, they hold classroom instruction up as the single best model for instruction because they learned that way and because it is so common. This is the idea that game is a four-letter word. Lack of experience learning via games and simulations combined with playing games only for fun leads to a perception that games/simulations arent a serious way to learn.

Unfamiliarity with development process

Creating linear content for a deck of slides is familiar and common for most organizations. They understand creating objectives, teaching to each objective by providing content, and testing to the objective in a very linear style. This is not how a game or simulation works; instead there are variations, tangential content, and non-linear interactions.

Instructional design teams are not familiar with this process and many entertainment game designers dont want to dabble in corporate or academic game design (not enough mass market). So, the unfamiliarity with the development process causes hesitation and, almost more importantly, causes high costs.

The design team typically consists of subject matter experts who dont understand how to create a game or the nature of non-linear content and thus causes delays, false starts and cost overrun. This is due in a large part to the first point, which is that they dont have experience learning from games, and their educational models are lecture-focused and centered on linear delivery of content.

Not understanding of the mechanisms in games that make them educational

It is important to understand that a game is not educational just because it is a game. Instead, a game is an effective educational tool primarily because of the high level of interactivity and instant feedback. Well-designed games engage the learner in a constant decision making process. The learner is forced to interact and think through the content and then witnesses immediate or near immediate feedback based on his or her actions.

The most critical aspect is not the technology, which is the focus of many when thinking about games. Rather, the most critical aspect is the design. The design must be interactive and provide realistic or corrective feedback as the learner progresses and the game must maintain a balance between anxiety and boredom which is known as the elusive flow state which is the ideal mental condition between a task being too difficult or too easy. Adding different levels of difficulty can help make the game or simulation effective for different levels of learners.

Lack of understanding of how to integrate games into the curriculum

Games and simulations are most effective when they are integrated into a larger curriculum. Simply having a game available to learners doesnt mean it will be effective. Intelligently integrating a game into a curriculum provides the correct context, the right prerequisite knowledge, and the proper level of debriefing for learning.

The goal is to provide a complete learning experience that includes all the elements necessary for the application of knowledge to address organizational learning goals. But including a game as an add-on and not an integral part of the instructional process trivializes the game and lessens the instructional impact. This perception of a game being an add-on and not really necessary means that if budgets are tight or time is limited, the game will be the first item cut.

Perception that playing games is easy and, therefore, not valuable

People often mistake interesting graphics and different game play elements as signs of an easy instructional experience. They think because this is a game, it must not be difficult or hard. In fact, that is not the case. Items like time constraints, the accumulation of points, and competition against others can actually make learners work harder to achieve goals than more traditional learning environments such as the classroom.

Many times, the experience of playing a well-designed game results in frustration and cognitive dissonance until the player learns the concepts and knowledge required to be successful. Cognitive dissonance is the mental process of trying to fit new, unfamiliar knowledge into a persons mental picture of how things should when the new information conflicts with existing perceptions. This can be extremely important in helping to change a persons behavior or thoughts in a particular area such as customer service or sales.

The process of reducing the dissonance is not simple and can cause frustration. Its important to set the proper expectation so the learners understand that game elements exist in the learning process but they will have to work hard to achieve desired results.

Overcoming the barriers

These barriers are not trivial. They can derail a worthwhile effort and delay the integration of games into the curriculum of an organization. However, they are not insurmountable; to overcome these variables, try a three-fold approach.

1. Educate line managers and others on the elements of games that make them instruction. Describe the various ways in which technology provides immediate feedback, problem-solving skills, and reinforcement of desired activities and behavior.

2. Develop a game. Start with a small game to teach one specific skill and work through the process. This will help the organization learn the game development process. This can be facilitated by working with a skilled vendor who has created a number of educational games or working with a consultant to help guide the process to a successful outcome.

3. Integrate existing commercial games into your curriculum. Games can be used to help teach leadership, communication skills, and other valuable business skills. Exposing games to learners in a serious environment with defined educational objectives can help people to understand the value of games and how they can positively impact their own learning.

Excluding games from an organizations toolkit of educational offerings is really not an option given the incredible potential games have to teach crucial skills such as problem-solving and creativity. Not using games means an organization is not taking advantage of the engaging, immersive aspects of the game. But to introduce games into an organization, you must first understand the barriers indicated and begin to work on overcoming those barriers.

Barriers to Adopting Games in Corporate Environments

Communities of Practice:   Learning Technologies

Authored By:

  • Karl M. Kapp

    Karl M. Kapp is a professor of Instructional Technology in Bloomsburg University's Department of Instructional Technology in Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, and the assistant director of Bloomsburg University's acclaimed Institute for Interactive Technologies. He has authored or co-authored five books on the convergence of learning and technology:The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for Education, Integrated Learning for ERP Success, Winning e-Learning Proposals, and Gadgets, Games and Gizmos for Learning and Learning in 3D.

    Follow Karl on his widely-read "Kapp Notes" blog at www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes.