118 Gamifying StreamWork Poster AliMoradian

118 Gamifying StreamWork Poster AliMoradian
download 118 Gamifying StreamWork Poster AliMoradian

of 1

  • date post

    03-Apr-2018
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    212
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of 118 Gamifying StreamWork Poster AliMoradian

  • 7/29/2019 118 Gamifying StreamWork Poster AliMoradian

    1/1

    Introduction

    Engaging people to participate fully in an online collaborativedecision-making activity can be challenging. People are verybusy, juggling competing demands for their time. Gamificationhas been used in a variety of environments to incentparticipation and increase participation (Thom, 2012). In thisproject, we investigate how gamification can be used toincent and motivate people to participate in and contributeto collaborative decision-making activities.

    Our approach is to add game dynamics to decision-makingtools to see if game dynamics enhance peoples participationand experience in the decision making process. Wedeveloped two decision tools based on ThinkLets (Briggs,2003) (brainstorming and fast focus) and integrated theminto SAP StreamWork, a social media platform that supportsenterprise-wide and i nter-organizational group collaboration

    through common tools such as pro/con lists, ranking lists,SWOT tables, and polls (Kanaracus, 2010). We added gamedynamics to each of the tools. For brainstorming, we added aLeaderboard, Achievements, and a Progress bar. For the fastfocus tool which is designed to extract a clean list of keyissues at a useful level of abstraction from the results of abrainstorming activity, we added Points, a Leaderboard, andAchievements.

    We designed an experiment to test the following hypotheses:H1: Users will be more satisfied with the outcome of thecollaborative activity when game elements are used in theonline collaboration.H2: Users will be more satisfied with the process of thecollaborative activity when game elements are used in theonline collaboration.H3: Users will contribute more and engage more in thecollaborative activity when game elements are used.

    Evaluation

    Gamifying Collaborative Decision Making

    Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto

    Results

    References and Acknowledgements

    In two sections of a graduate level project managementcourse, we asked groups of 3-5 people to engage in a projectselection decision-making task using brainstorming followedby a clarification and reduction phase. Half of the groups (9)used non-gamified versions of the tools and half of thegroups (9) used gamified versions of the tools. We comparedthe two sets of groups according to measures such as:amount of time spent in the decision making activity; number

    of ideas put forward; and number of participants whocontribute. We invited participants to answer a survey tomeasure their satisfaction with the decision-making processand the outcomes.

    Brain Storming Phase

    List of Ideas

    ClarificationandReductionPhase

    Each user should Suggest at most one ideafrom their list

    The idea can be a verbatim copy of an idea,a rephrasing of oneof the ideas,or a combination of more than one of the ideas.

    Nil

    Group Discusses Each Suggestion

    Add to the final list ifaccepted by the group

    Final list...

    Reshufflethelistsandrepeatuntilyougetenoughideasinyourfinallist

    Final List of Ideas

    0%

    25%

    50%

    75%

    100%

    Groups of 3 Groups of 4 Overa ll

    Gamified BrainStorming Phase(Screenshots from our prototype)

    Motivate users by creating constructivecompetition

    Guide users by setting goals

    Gamified Clarification and Reduction Phase(Screenshots from our prototype)

    Encourage participation by giving points based onthe user activity

    Guide users by setting goals

    Survey Results

    Users were equally satisfied with the process and with the outcome.

    8 users in the Gamified version commented that they liked theexperience and the activity was great for them. Only one person inthe Non Gamified version made the same comment.

    A note on final participation

    Gamified Version

    29 Users consented to participatein study

    5 Groups of 4 and 3 Groups of 3

    23 users participated in the survey

    Non Gamified Version

    20 Users consented to participatein the study

    2 Groups of 4 and 4 Groups of 3

    17 users participated in the survey

    ?

    Guide users by providing real time feedback

    Guide users by providing real time feedback

    Computer ScienceUNIVERSITY OF TORONTOMohammad Ali Moradian ,

    moradian@cs.toronto.edu

    Kelly Lyons ,kelly.lyons@utoronto.ca

    Maaz Nasir ,maaz.nasir@utoronto.ca

    0

    1.42

    2.84

    4.26

    5.68

    7.1

    Groups of 3 Groups of 4 Overa ll

    GamifiedNon Gamified

    0

    2

    4

    68

    Groups o f 3 Groups o f 4 Overal l

    0

    329

    658

    987

    1316

    1645

    Groups of 3 Groups of 4 Overa ll

    0

    5.45

    10.9

    16.35

    21.8

    27.25

    Groups of 3 Groups of 4 Overa ll

    0

    98

    196

    294

    392

    Groups of 3 Groups of 4 Overa ll

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    Groups o f 3 Groups o f 4 Overa ll

    Number of Brainstorming IdeasGenerated Per Person

    Percentage of Users Generatingat least 5 Ideas in Brainstorming

    Number of Suggestions MadePer Group inClarification & Reduction Phase

    Number of SuggestionsPut in the Final List Per Group inClarification & Reduction Phase

    Average Time Spent on aDiscussion, Per Discussion

    (in Seconds) inClarification & Reduction Phase

    Average Length of Discussion,Per Discussion (in Characters) inClarification & Reduction Phase

    Average Lines of Discussion,Per Discussion inClarification & Reduction Phase

    References:Kanaracus, C. SAPs Virtual War Room tool gets a name: Stre amWork. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/192903/saps_virtual_war_room_tool_gets_a_ name_streamwork. html, May 2010.

    Thom, Jennifer, David Millen, and Joan DiMicco. Removing gamification from anenterprise SNS. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on ComputerSupported Cooperative Work.ACM, 2012.

    Briggs, Robert O., Gert-Jan De Vreede, and Jay F. Nunamaker. Collaborationengineering with ThinkLets to pursue sustained success with group supportsystems. Journal of Management Information Systems 19.4 (2003):31-6 4.

    Acknowledgments:This research was funded by an NSERC Collaborative Research and DevelopmentGrant with SAP.

    Rock LeungSAP Canada

    GamifiedNon Gamified

    GamifiedNon Gamified

    GamifiedNon Gamified

    GamifiedNon Gamified

    GamifiedNon Gamified

    GamifiedNon Gamified