Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
References

Gamifying situated learning in organisations

Profile image of Viktor DörflerViktor Dörfler

2022, Management Learning

https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076211038812
visibility

…

description

22 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Gamification is an emerging area in research and practice that has sparked considerable interest in management studies. The attention to gamification is amplified by the ubiquitous nature of digital technologies and augmented reality which touches on how people work and learn socially. Consequently, gamified tools' affordances affect situated learning in working environments through their implications on human relations in practice. However, the dynamics between gamification and situated learning have not been considered in the literature. Thus, drawing on the synthesis of gamification and situated learning literatures, we offer a model of gamifying situated learning in organisations. Thereby, our discussion explains the role of gamified affordances and their socio-material characteristics, which blend with situated learning as people indwell on such tools in their work. Moreover, gamified tools can afford the technological support of communitybuilding and networking in organisations. Such gamified communities and networks, in turn, can be seen to existing within a gamified altered reality as part of which the physical distance and proximity of situated learning activities become inevitably bridged and joined together.

Related papers

Ready, Study, Share: An Inquiry into the Didactic Approach of Gamification with a Special View to the Possible Application in Higher Education
Gábor István Bíró

In this article i study gamification as a didactical method and the possible application of gamification theory in higher education. Recently it became important to create a scientific basis of gamification in order to be able to differenciate between the various approaches and interpretations as the general concept started to diversify in the last two years. Gamification is also seen as a new marketing tool (Zichermann, 2010), a new trait of the employee in the 21st century (McGonigal, 2011), and a method to reach a higher level of motivation and engagement in the workplace (Zichermann, 2011) or at the school (Kapp, 2012). Unfortunately these theories handle gamification as a completely new phenomena and do not try to make a comprehension with previous didactical methodologies or concepts. This article intends to map the theory of gamification in a didactic approach by making comparison with other didactical theories, and put some remarks regarding the similarities and the differences of the concepts which will help to dispose gamification on the canvas of science. The article also address the current pedagogical situation in higher education with a special view to the most significant tendencies and analyse how the application of gamification would affect the problems and conflicts induced by them. The article concludes by framing possible directions to study the application of gamification theory in higher education and suggest to research these topics intensely.

View PDFchevron_right
Gamification, serious games, simulations, and immersive learning environments in knowledge management initiatives
Michael Sutton

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to provide an in-depth and critical review of the literature and theories on knowledge, knowledge management (KM) as well as the concepts and approaches relating to organizational learning and the knowledge-based economy. The paper also provides more details and definitions of various issues around gamification. Design/methodology/approach-Several sources have been reviewed and consulted including various mainstream referred journals focusing on KM and gamification as well as books, online databases, governmental reports, and statistics, etc. Findings-Game-based learning (GBL) in business must align with the learning goals and outcomes of training and development, and clearly demonstrate that learning can be evaluated and achieved. Serious game experiences drive personal change and transformation by generating an attitude of acceptance of the challenge, motivation to achieve, and constant innovation through participant commitments. Simulations push the participant into experiencing an immersive environment. Finally, gamification, as a collection of techniques, may be applied to the educational and workplace activities, or used as a wrapper for GBL, serious games, and simulations. Research limitations/implications-We are on a unique and unusual path to revitalizing and reinvigorating the educational experience. This new path is not about throwing a LMS at faculty and hoping it sticks. This new path is about creating faculty who are mentors, coaches, and lifelong learners who understand the research implications of applying game-based learning in the classroom, as well as the workforce. Practical implications-Higher educational teaching as well as corporate LTD (Learning, Training, and Development) are being significantly disrupted. The innovation taking place in teaching requires more experiential learning, the kind of learning stimulated with serious games, simulations, immersive learning environments, and gamification. This issue will help to outline disruptive approaches that work. Originality/value-This paper provides a review of the emerging trends and cases where gamification, simulations, serious games, immersive learning environments, virtual reality, and augmented reality are applied to the deployment of knowledge-based initiatives.

View PDFchevron_right
Investigating the potential for using gamification to empower knowledge workers
Viktor Dörfler

Expert Systems with Applications, 2020

The increasingly popular trend of gamification has proved powerful in many areas, such as education and marketing, and has started making its way to the corporate environment. This exploratory study is focused on a particular part of corporate applicationsusing gamification to empower knowledge workers and to help them to interact with each other. Based on a review of the extant literature and an exploratory case study, we conceptualise different ways in which gamification supports knowledge workers and influences the dynamics of their interactions. The case study we present is that of online retailer Zappos who have been pioneers in this field. This paper is intended as the beginning of a journey towards utilising gamification in various aspects of knowledge work. Through studying the Zappos case, we draw out key learning points that can be used by other organisations in their journey to use gamification to empower knowledge workers. The paper also identifies areas for further research relevant to expert and intelligent systems, including the potential for synergies between gamification and intelligent systems, and the use of gamification in intelligent systems implementation.

View PDFchevron_right
The Feasibility and Expediency of Gamification Activities in Higher Education
Gundeea Gundeea

International Journal of Education and Practice, 2019

This study aimed to identify the feasibility and expediency of gamifying activities in higher education institutions, for which an original methodology was used. However, gamification is complex and carries a high degree of risk in achieving organizational efficiency. It is therefore advisable to adopt a fragmented approach and selectively gamify individual processes and features, focusing on educational and research activities. When introducing gamification, top management should provide conceptual and regulatory support and HR specialists coordination. Using a distribution model of managerial functions for gaming activities and determining priorities, taking the use of artificial intelligence into account, is shown to be expedient. Contribution/Originality: For the first time, this study is investigates the adoption of modern gamification technologies to increase the effectiveness of educational organizations. In particular, the most suitable areas of activity and management levels for gamification in higher education institutions are proposed. Recently, increasing attention has been paid to gaming technology: the use of gaming techniques in various fields and situations arising during the labor process. The problem with gamification, though, lies in the viewpoint of theorists and practitioners worldwide. analysis review of the literature reveals that researchers are not taking into account systematic studies of the gamification of activities in business and public sector organizations in general and higher education institutions in particular (Vinichenko et al., 2016b; Alvarez et al., 2017; Rogach et al., 2017). Other problems are associated with the introduction of gamification include age and gender (Martí-Parreño

View PDFchevron_right
(2020) "Desperately seeking the artefacts and the foundations of native theory in gamification research: Why information systems researchers can play a legitimate role in this discourse and how they can better contribute," European Journal of Information Systems
Jan Leimeister, Paul Benjamin Lowry

European Journal of Information Systems, 2020

Gamification has taken the world by storm. Regardless of where one stands on gamification, it can aptly be described as interesting but also galvanising and controversial. We are pleased to write a provocative editorial to kick off this special issue on gamification in the European Journal of Information Systems. Our position is that the information systems (IS) discipline has the opportunity to play an outsized role in navigating the discourse of gamification—an increasingly influential, interdisciplinary discourse in research and practice. We assert that active engagement in the gamification discourse is a compelling IS research opportunity, given the growing, globalised platform-based economy. Consequently, we frame our editorial with the knowledge we have gained as IS researchers who engage in gamification research in an effort to share what we have learned about artefacts and original theorisation with both IS and gamification scholars. We do so by proposing a pragmatic path forward for gamification and IS researchers who wish to contribute to these related discourses, both individually and in the form of the combined IS–gamification discourse. We propose a framework of three practices that we are confident can more systematically generate the key theoretical artefacts needed to generate native theory in the IS–gamification discourse and hence to improve the associated research and practice. Foundational to this framework is our paradigm, which advocates active engagement with IS–gamification research and practice, as bridged by a strong focus on design thinking and generating artefacts that are foundational to theory generation.

View PDFchevron_right
Gamification Reshapes the Global Economy and Modern Business Management: The new era which transforms the industrial revolution to a global knowledge revolution
Panos Markopoulos, Evangelos Markopoulos

The race towards developing technologies, systems and management models to support organization development, leadership and prosperity created a complexity hard to manage with the existing workforce especially in the developed world. The need for simplicity, mobility, accessibility were the major drivers towards creating new discipline that can make technology gamified towards for it to be used in a secured and controlled environment by many or everyone. Gamification can be seen as a new element in the technological revolution that can change the way people interact with technology and the way technology gets integrated with the current needs of the global economy and society. Gamification is not about making games, but a new culture driven by motivation and activation factors towards moving the gaming experience in the industry. This paper attempts to identify the role of gamification in the global economy, redefine the gamification concept under new uses of game technologies and indicate its significant impact in modern organizational management.

View PDFchevron_right
The role(s) of gamification in knowledge management
Jill Macbryde

2016

Gamification is a new, but an increasingly popular approach, which proved to be powerful in many areas, such as education and marketing, and has entered the area of internal corporate applications. This exploratory study is focused on a particular part of corporate environment – gamification being a medium of interactions of knowledge workers with each other. By providing a literature review of gamification and combining it with the exploratory case-study of an online retailer, Zappos, we demonstrate the ways in which gamification helps to identify various types of knowledge workers and influence their dynamics, as well as we open a wide range of areas for further research.

View PDFchevron_right
Gamification for Human Factors Integration: Social, Education, and Psychological Issues A volume in the Advances in Human and Social Aspects of Technology (AHSAT) Book Series
Janice Anderson
View PDFchevron_right
Gamification in organizations: learning processes and meaning-making
Jussara Jéssica Pereira

Cadernos EBAPE.BR

Resumo Este estudo apresenta uma visão dessa gamificação como possibilidade de aprendizado via construção de sentido. Para tanto, adotamos a seguinte pergunta de pesquisa: como são percebidos os processos de aprendizado e a construção de sentido da gamificação como ferramenta organizacional? A partir dos relatos de seis expertises na área e por meio da análise temática, chegou-se a dois níveis de análises: a) o nível organizacional e b) o nível individual. Tais níveis foram apresentados em três dimensões: a organização, o time/a equipe e a individual do trabalhador. Foi identificada a existência de bons resultados para os níveis organizacional e individual. Assim, destaca-se na dimensão organizacional a melhoria na produtividade, na aprendizagem e nos processos de inovação e update organizacional. Na dimensão de time/equipe, notaram-se melhorias no clima organizacional, na comunicação e no trabalho colaborativo. Na dimensão individual, houve desenvolvimento do trabalhador, autonomia...

View PDFchevron_right
Conceptual scope and structuring axes of the applicability of gamification in professional and technological education
Jose Anglada

Brazilian Journal of Development, 2021

The study aims to elucidate the structural axes necessary to consolidate gamification in professional and technological education. The method used was the conceptual bibliography, which consists of four stages: a) definition of the research questions; b) data collection; c) organization and analysis of data and; d) generation of responses. The results show teacher training, reframing pedagogical practices, and technological infrastructure as the necessary axes for the aggregation of gamification in teaching and learning practices. The conclusion shows that these axes increase the learning interest of students in vocational and technological education.

View PDFchevron_right

References (111)

  1. Armstrong MB, Landers RN and Collmus AB (2016) Gamifying recruitment, selection, training, and perfor- mance management: Game-thinking in human resource management. In: Gangadgarbatla H and Davis DZ (eds) Emerging Research and Trends in Gamification. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference, 140-165.
  2. Aromaa S, Väätänen A, Hakkarainen M, et al. (2017) User experience and user acceptance of an augmented reality based knowledge-sharing solution in industrial maintenance work. In: International confer- ence on applied human factors and ergonomics. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Los Angeles, CA, 17-21 July 2017, pp.145-156. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
  3. Autio E, Kanninen S and Gustafsson R (2008) First-and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs. Research Policy 37(1): 59-76.
  4. Baharom SN, Tan WH and Idris MZ (2014) Emotional design for games: The roles of emotion and percep- tion in game design process. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering 9(10): 387-398.
  5. Baralou E and Tsoukas H (2015) How is new organizational knowledge created in a virtual context? An eth- nographic study. Organization Studies 36(5): 593-620.
  6. Barata G, Gama S, Jorge J, et al. (2017) Studying student differentiation in gamified education: A long-term study. Computers in Human Behavior 71: 550-585.
  7. Beane M (2019) Shadow learning: Building robotic surgical skill when approved means fail. Administrative Science Quarterly 64(1): 87-123.
  8. Bechky BA (2003) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organization Science 14(3): 312-330+350.
  9. Brown JS and Duguid P (1991) Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science 2(1): 40-57.
  10. Brown JS and Duguid P (2001) Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science 12(2): 198-213.
  11. Burke GT and Wolf C (2021) The process affordances of strategy toolmaking when addressing wicked prob- lems. Journal of Management Studies 58: 359-388.
  12. Cardador MT, Northcraft GB and Whicker J (2017) A theory of work gamification: Something old, something new, something borrowed, something cool? Human Resource Management Review 27(2): 353-365.
  13. Carlsen A (2006) Organizational becoming as dialogic imagination of practice: The case of the indomitable Gauls. Organization Science 17(1): 132-149.
  14. Carlsen A (2016) On the tacit side of organizational identity: Narrative unconscious and figured practice. Culture and Organization 22(2): 107-135.
  15. Collins SG, Dumit J, Durington M, et al. (2017) Gaming Anthropology: A Sourcebook From #Anthropologycon. Arlington, VA: Anthropologycon.
  16. Contu A and Willmott H (2003) Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science 14(3): 283-296.
  17. Contu A and Willmott H (2006) Studying practice: Situating talking about machines. Organization Studies 27(12): 1769-1782.
  18. Cooren F (2018) Acting for, with, and through: A relational perspective on agency in MSF's organizing. In: Brummans BHJM (ed.) The Agency of Organizing. New York, NY: Routledge, 142-169.
  19. Cornelissen JP, Holt R and Zundel M (2011) The role of analogy and metaphor in the framing and legitimiza- tion of strategic change. Organization Studies 32(12): 1701-1716.
  20. Dale S (2014) Gamification : Making work fun, or making fun of work? Business Information Review 31(2): 82-90.
  21. Deterding S (2019) Gamification in management: Between choice architecture and humanistic design. Journal of Management Inquiry 28(2): 131-136.
  22. Deterding S, Dixon D, Khaled R, et al. (2011) From game design elements to gamefulness. In: Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference on envisioning future media environments - MindTrek'11, Tampere, Finland, 28-30 September 2011, pp.1-7. New York: ACM.
  23. Domínguez A, Saenz-de-Navarrete J, De-Marcos L, et al. (2013) Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education 63: 380-392.
  24. Fahy KM, Easterby-Smith M and Lervik JE (2014) The power of spatial and temporal orderings in organiza- tional learning. Management Learning 45(2): 123-144.
  25. Faraj S, von Krogh G, Monteiro E, et al. (2016) Special section introduction-online community as space for knowledge flows. Information Systems Research 27(4): 668-684.
  26. Flyverbom M and Reinecke J (2017) The spectacle and organization studies. Organization Studies 38(11): 1625-1643.
  27. Friedrich J, Becker M, Kramer F, et al. (2020) Incentive design and gamification for knowledge management. Journal of Business Research 106: 341-352.
  28. Furnari S (2014) Interstitial spaces: Microinteraction settings and the genesis of new practices between insti- tutional fields. Academy of Management Review 39(4): 439-462.
  29. Garcia A (2020) Gaming literacies: Spatiality, materiality, and analog learning in a digital age. Reading Research Quarterly 55(1): 9-27.
  30. Gberardi S (2000) Where learning is: Metaphors and situated learning in a planning group. Human Relations 53(8): 1057-1080.
  31. Gherardi S and Nicolini D (2000) The organizational learning of safety in communities of practice. Journal of Management Inquiry 9(1): 7-18.
  32. Gherardi S and Nicolini D (2002) Learning in a constellation of interconnected practices: Canon or disso- nance? Journal of Management Studies 39(4): 419-436.
  33. Gherardi S, Nicolini D and Odella F (1998) Toward a social understanding of how people learn in organiza- tions: The notion of situated curriculum. Management Learning 29(3): 273-297.
  34. Gioia DA (2004) A renaissance self: Prompting personal and professional revitalization. In: Stablein RE and Frost PJ (eds) Renewing Research Practice: Scholars' Journeys. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 97-114.
  35. Hadjimichael D and Tsoukas H (2019) Toward a better understanding of tacit knowledge in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annals 13(2): 672-703.
  36. Hamari J (2017) Do badges increase user activity? A field experiment on the effects of gamification. Computers in Human Behavior 71: 469-478.
  37. Handley K, Sturdy A, Fincham R, et al. (2006) Within and beyond communities of practice: Making sense of learning through participation, identity and practice. Journal of Management Studies 43(3): 641-653.
  38. Hatch MJ and Cunliffe AL (2013) Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  39. Herzig P, Ameling M and Schill A (2015) Workplace psychology and gamification: Theory and application. In: Reiners T and Wood LC (eds) Gamification in Education and Business. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 451-471.
  40. Hodson R (2010) Work group effort and rewards: The roles of organizational and social power as context. Organization Studies 31(7): 895-916.
  41. Holzer A, Kocher B, Bendahan S, et al. (2020) Gamifying knowledge sharing in humanitarian organisations: A design science journey. European Journal of Information Systems 29(2): 153-171.
  42. Huizinga J (1949) Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  43. Hutter K, Hautz J, Füller J, et al. (2011) Communitition: The tension between competition and collaboration in community-based design contests. Creativity and Innovation Management 20(1): 3-21.
  44. Jennett C, Cox AL, Cairns P, et al. (2008) Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 66(9): 641-661.
  45. Jorge CFB and Sutton MJD (2017) FUNIFICATION 2.0: Knowledge mobilization model for corporate and educational game-based learning. World Journal of Science Technology and Sustainable Development 14(2/3): 84-110.
  46. Kakavelakis K and Edwards T (2012) Situated learning theory and agentic orientation: A relational sociology approach. Management Learning 43(5): 475-494.
  47. Kirkman BL, Cordery JL, Mathieu J, et al. (2013) Global organizational communities of practice: The effects of nationality diversity, psychological safety, and media richness on community performance. Human Relations 66(3): 333-362.
  48. Landers RN (2014) Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation & Gaming 45(6): 752-768.
  49. Lave J (1988) Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  50. Lave J (2011) Apprenticeship in Critical Ethnographic Practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  51. Lave J (2019) Learning and Everyday Life: Access, Participation, and Changing Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  52. Lave J and Wenger E (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  53. Lazzaro N (2004) Why we play games: Four keys to more emotion without story. In: Game developer confer- ence (GDC), 8 March 2004, pp.1-8. San Jose, CA: Informa Tech.
  54. Lee JJ and Hammer J (2011) Gamification in education: What, how, why bother? Academic Exchange Quarterly 15(2): 146-150.
  55. Lindkvist L (2005) Knowledge communities and knowledge collectivities: A typology of knowledge work in groups. Journal of Management Studies 42(6): 1189-1210.
  56. Lombardi S, Cavaliere V, Giustiniano L, et al. (2020) What money cannot buy: The detrimental effect of rewards on knowledge sharing. European Management Review 17: 153-170.
  57. Macpherson A and Clark B (2009) Islands of practice: Conflict and a lack of 'Community' in situated learn- ing. Management Learning 40(5): 551-568.
  58. McGonigal J (2011) Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. New York, NY: The Penguin Press.
  59. McLure Wasko M and Faraj S (2005) Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribu- tion in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly 29(1): 35-57.
  60. Mekler ED, Birk MV, Rank S, et al. (2016) Designing for emotional complexity in games: The interplay of positive and negative affect. In: CHI PLAY 2016 -Proceedings of the annual symposium on computer- human interaction in play companion, Austin, TX, 16-19 October 2016, pp. 367-371. New York: ACM.
  61. Menon T, Thompson L and Choi H-S (2006) Tainted knowledge vs. tempting knowledge: People avoid knowledge from internal rivals and seek knowledge from external rivals. Management Science 52(8): 1129-1144.
  62. Metiu A and Rothbard NP (2013) Task bubbles, artifacts, shared emotion, and mutual focus of attention: A comparative study of the microprocesses of group engagement. Organization Science 24(2): 455-475.
  63. Mørk BE, Hoholm T, Ellingsen G, et al. (2010) Challenging expertise: On power relations within and across communities of practice in medical innovation. Management Learning 41(5): 575-592.
  64. Morschheuser B, Riar M, Hamari J, et al. (2017) How games induce cooperation? A study on the relationship between game features and we-intentions in an augmented reality game. Computers in Human Behavior 77: 169-183.
  65. Mullins JK and Sabherwal R (2020) Gamification: A cognitive-emotional view. Journal of Business Research 106: 304-314.
  66. Nicolini D (2011) Practice as the site of knowing: Insights from the field of telemedicine. Organization Science 22(3): 602-620.
  67. Nicolini D (2012) Practice Theory, Work, and Organization: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  68. Nicolini D and Meznar MB (1995) The social construction of organizational learning: Conceptual and practi- cal issues in the field. Human Relations 48(7): 727-746.
  69. Nicolini D, Reinecke J and Ismail MA (2021) You're grounded! Toward a theory of enactive legitimation, materiality and practice. In: Lounsbury M, Anderson D and Spee P (eds) On Practice and Institution: New Empirical Directions (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 71). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, 87-115.
  70. Nofal E, Panagiotidou G, Reffat RM, et al. (2020) Situated tangible gamification of heritage for supporting collaborative learning of young museum visitors. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 13(1): 1-24.
  71. Nordby A, Øygardslia K, Sverdrup U, et al. (2016) The art of gamification; teaching sustainability and system thinking by pervasive game development. Electronic Journal of e-Learning 14(3): 152-168.
  72. Oborn E and Dawson S (2010) Learning across communities of practice: An examination of multidisciplinary work. British Journal of Management 21(4): 843-858.
  73. Orlikowski WJ (2002) Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science 13(3): 249-273.
  74. Orlikowski WJ (2006) Material knowing: The scaffolding of human knowledgeability. European Journal of Information Systems 15(5): 460-466.
  75. Orlikowski WJ (2007) Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies 28(9): 1435-1448.
  76. Orlikowski WJ and Scott SV (2008) 10 sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals 2(1): 433-474.
  77. Orlikowski WJ and Scott SV (2015) Exploring material-discursive practices. Journal of Management Studies 52(5): 697-705.
  78. Orr J (1996) Talking About Machines: An Ethnography of a Modern Job (Collection on Technology and Work). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  79. Paik Y and Choi DY (2005) The shortcomings of a standardized global knowledge management system: The case study of Accenture. Academy of Management Executive 19(2): 81-84.
  80. Paroutis S, Franco LA and Papadopoulos T (2015) Visual interactions with strategy tools: Producing strategic knowledge in workshops. British Journal of Management 26(S1): S48-S66.
  81. Pattinson S, Preece D and Dawson P (2016) In search of innovative capabilities of communities of practice: A systematic review and typology for future research. Management Learning 47(5): 506-524.
  82. Petersen SI and Ryu HB (2015) Gamification in concept design: Applying market mechanisms to enhance innovation and predict concept performance. Journal of Design Business & Society 1(1): 95-110.
  83. Polanyi M (1962) Personal Knowledge. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  84. Polanyi M (1966) The Tacit Dimension. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  85. Pyrko I, Dörfler V and Eden C (2017) Thinking together: What makes communities of practice work? Human Relations 70(4): 389-409.
  86. Pyrko I, Dörfler V and Eden C (2019) Communities of practice in landscapes of practice. Management Learning 50(4): 482-499.
  87. Raelin JA (1997) A model of work-based learning. Organization Science 8(6): 563-578.
  88. Raz AE and Fadlon J (2006) Managerial culture, workplace culture and situated curricula in organizational learning. Organization Studies 27(2): 165-182.
  89. Roan A and Rooney D (2006) Shadowing experiences and the extension of communities of practice: A case study of women education managers. Management Learning 37(4): 433-454.
  90. Roth S, Schneckenberg D and Tsai CW (2015) The Ludic drive as innovation driver: Introduction to the gamification of innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management 24(2): 300-306.
  91. Schatzki TR (2002) The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.
  92. Schatzki TR (2008) Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  93. Shpakova A, Dörfler V and MacBryde J (2017) Changing the game: A case for gamifying knowledge man- agement. World Journal of Science Technology and Sustainable Development 14(2/3): 143-154.
  94. Shpakova A, Dörfler V and MacBryde J (2020) Gamifying the process of innovating. Innovation: Organization & Management 22: 488-502.
  95. Simon B (2007) Geek chic: Machine aesthetics, digital gaming, and the cultural politics of the case mod. Games and Culture 2(3): 175-193.
  96. Spanellis A, Dörfler V and MacBryde J (2020) Investigating the potential for using gamification to empower knowledge workers. Expert Systems with Applications 160: 113694-113713.
  97. Spanellis A and Pyrko I (2021) Gamifying communities of practice: Blending the modes of human-machine identification. In: Vesa M (ed.) Organizational Gamification: Theories and Practices of Ludified Work in Late Modernity. London: Routledge, 90-108.
  98. Stierand M (2015) Developing creativity in practice: Explorations with world-renowned chefs. Management Learning 46(5): 598-617.
  99. Swan J, Scarbrough H and Robertson M (2002) The construction of 'communities of practice' in the manage- ment of innovation. Management Learning 33(4): 477-496.
  100. Tsoukas H and Chia R (2002) On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science 13(5): 567-582.
  101. Tyre MJ and von Hippel E (1997) The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations. Organization Science 8(1): 71-83.
  102. Välikangas L and Carlsen A (2020) Spitting in the salad: Minor rebellion as institutional agency. Organization Studies 41(4): 543-561.
  103. Vesa M (2021) Organizational Gamification: Theories and Practices of Ludified Work in Late Modernity. London: Routledge.
  104. Vesa M, Hamari J, Harviainen JT, et al. (2017) Computer games and organization studies. Organization Studies 38(2): 273-284.
  105. Voelpel SC, Dous M and Davenport TH (2005) Five steps to creating a global knowledge-sharing system: Siemens' ShareNet. The Academy of Management Perspectives 19(2): 9-23.
  106. Vroom G (2006) Organizational design and the intensity of rivalry. Management Science 52(11): 1689-1702.
  107. Warmelink H (2014) Online Gaming and Playful Organization. New York, NY: Routledge.
  108. Wenger E (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  109. Wenger E, Trayner B and de Laat M (2011) Promoting and Assessing Value Creation in Communities and Networks : A Conceptual Framework. Dutch, The Netherlands: Ruud de Moor Centrum.
  110. Wenger-Trayner E, Fenton-O'Creevy M, Hutchinson S, et al. (2015) Learning in Landscapes of Practice: Boundaries, Identity, and Knowledgeability in Practice-Based Learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
  111. Werbach K and Hunter D (2012) For the Win: How Game Thinking Can Revolutionize Your Business. Philadelphia, PA: Wharton Digital Press.

Related papers

GAMIFICATION: THE MAGIC CIRCLE OF TECHNOLOGY
Lyuba Encheva

A dissertation presented to Ryerson University and York University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the program of Communication and Culture, 2017

In recent years gamification has emerged as a design trend in customer relationship management, marketing, education and governance. It promotes the use of game design principles in the organization of every day environments, tasks and interactions. As an offspring of advanced communication technologies, gamification relies on the unhindered use of networked devices that transforms every experience into a user experience. Borrowing on the ubiquitous popularity of video games, the premise of gamification is the technologically enabled relationship between virtual causes and real-life effects, and its promise - a mutually beneficial coordination of corporate and personal interest. This dissertation outlines the socio-political implications of the concept of gamification through a critical examination of its content and intended meanings. The unpacking of gamification as an aspiration and a worldview reveals that as soon as we take for granted the equality of the sign and the signified, we also accept that life experiences do not exceed the signs we use to describe them. Therefore, to play life as a game, as gamifiers urge, is to live life by design. The definition I coin considers gamification from the perspective of political consequences, rather than practical application and mechanics. I work towards this definition by focusing on the rhetoric of gamification as an expressed intention that constructs motives and renegotiates beliefs. Hence, the theoretical model I apply draws on the work of two major theorists. American rhetorician and philosopher Kenneth Burke offers a theoretical apparatus for the study of the form and rhetorical devices of addressed messages. French semiotician and social theorist, Jean Baudrillard, informs the deconstruction of the claims gamification makes. The treatment of language as intention and action that is necessarily subjective and interested, offers a liminal stand-point from where the vision of a gamified world can be seen as an ideology which normalises itself by rhetorical means. Thus, I propose that the concept of gamification, whether applied in practice or not, is a political act. It constructs an ideology that seeks to reconcile the myth of the sacrosanct freedom of the Western individual with the constant imposition of corporate and government demands for compliance, accountability and efficiency.

View PDFchevron_right
I PLAY AT WORK—ten principles for transforming work processes through gamification
Florin Oprescu

Frontiers in Psychology, 2014

View PDFchevron_right
Didactics 2.0: A Pedagogical Analysis of Gamification Theory from a Comparative Perspective with a Special View to the Components of Learning
Gábor Biró

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014

However the term gamification has swept over the horizon of management sciences like a comet in recent years, the scope of the development of the theory remained strictly attached to raise the level of engagement in the learning (Zichermann, 2011; or purchasing (Bogost, 2011) process or define a new marketing tool to reach the customer of the twenty-first century (Zichermann, 2010). Unfortunately the theory has not been studied as a learning theory nor a complex pedagogical phenomena until now, despite many elements of gamification might also be interpreted as principles of a unique and innovative theoretical basis to address and handle the new generation of learners and interpret the components of the learning process. This article intends to study gamification as the 5th learning theory by making comparison with the behaviourist, cognitivist, constructivist and connectivist approaches along each element of the learning process. As the real value of the theories can only be judged by the following effects mainly based on the response to contemporary problems and challenges of society, the social, cultural, economic and technological environment must not be underestimated and should be taken into account from the beginning if the aim is to make grounds for a new finding, such as gamfication as a learning theory which is a completely new interpretation. So the first part of the article explains the social and cultural trends, which could be better addressed by the application of gamification theory in education than with the previous concepts. The second seeks to raise gamification among the learning theories, and the third makes suggestions to launch further research based on the new insights and frame some possible ways to the future application.

View PDFchevron_right
Exploring the use of Gamified Systems in Training and Work Environments
Felix Hamza-Lup, Ioana Goldbach

International Conf on eLearning and Software for Education, 2018

Gamification has been described as the employment of game thinking and game mechanics to support long-term user engagement, behaviour change and problem solving. It has driven novel approaches in diverse industries ranging from education, healthcare, sales, or travel, opening up disruptive channels of interaction and enriched means to foster motivation. In the business world, gamification can be put into action in a wide variety of areas within an enterprise, such as recruitment, training, project management, performance management, employee collaboration, team-building, etc. The role of gamification is to enable goals to be reshaped in order to make them more appealing and achievable for end-users (learners, employees, or customers). The golden rule behind gamification is to motivate users with a challenging blend of contests, quests, and good performance incentives. Even if the concept of gamification is widely popular, it remains a very specific challenge to engage individuals in a smart way and be innovative in the process. To better comprehend how gamification can revolutionize daily activities (training/learning, hiring, team-building, performance management, staff evaluation), this paper explores the perception of gamification and opportunities for its exploitation in work environments. Based on the case study carried out, the authors present examples of gamification systems that can be applied in training and work environments.

View PDFchevron_right
Gamification: What it is, and how to fight it
Jamie Woodcock, Mark R Johnson

The Sociological Review, 2017

‘Gamification’ is understood as the application of game systems - competition, rewards, quantifying player/user behaviour - into non-game domains, such as productivity and fitness. This is meant to motivate the user towards certain tasks. Such practice is deeply problematic for it represents the capture of ‘play’ in the pursuit of neoliberal rationalisation and the managerial optimisation of working life and labour. However, applying games and play to social life is also central to the Situationist International, as a form of resistance against the regularity and standardisation of everyday behaviour. We explore both meetings of games and work, and the antithetical political and cultural agendas they come with. We argue that ‘situations’ represent a truer gamification than ‘gamification’, for they transform non-games into games, rather than transferring game elements out of playful contexts and into managerial ones. Since the original ‘gamification’ term is now lost, we develop two alternatives for distinguishing between these two practices of introducing game elements into socioeconomic life: ‘gamification-from-above’ (motivational neoliberal optimising and rationalising) and ‘gamification-from-below’ (playful Situationist anti-work practice). We conclude with a renewed call for the latter, which is an ideal form of resistance against gamification-from-above and its capture of play in pursuit of work.

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved