Changing the game: a case for gamifying knowledge management

Abstract

Purpose This exploratory paper investigates gamification as a medium for knowledge workers to interact with each other. The purpose of this paper is to open the discussion around the sustaining impact that gamification might have on knowledge management (KM). Design/methodology/approach The paper employs an exploratory literature review investigating the current state of the art in relation to KM and gamification; this literature review serves as the starting point of subsequent theorizing. Findings Based on the literature review the authors theorize that the use of gamification in KM can go far beyond the motivational aspects. To name just a few uses of gamification, it can help in: supporting flexibility, facilitating transparency and therefore improving trust, visualizing skills and competences as well as generating requirements for new competences and promoting a collaborative environment among the knowledge workers. Research limitations/implications This paper opens the discussion around KM and gamification and suggests a wide range of areas for further research. Practical implications In this paper the authors argue that by looking at gamification as more than just a set of tools for improving motivation and engagement a company can address some pitfalls of a particular type of knowledge workers. Originality/value Gamification is a new, but increasingly popular approach, which has been shown to be powerful in many areas. This paper is novel in that it initiates a dialogue around the impact that gamification might have on KM.

Gamification in human resource management—Status quo and quo vadis

“…A number of studies ( n = 6) consider the use of game design elements in knowledge management activities (e.g. Abedi et al, 2018; Shpakova et al, 2017; Swacha, 2015; Tsourma et al, 2019). According to recent studies, game design elements such as points, badges, and potential rewards for knowledge sharing are helpful tools to enhance the quality of knowledge sharing and cooperative behavior, when the corporate culture is characterized by feedback and openness (e.g.…”

Investigating the potential for using gamification to empower knowledge workers

“…A variety of game elements classifications have offered taxonomies of the elements (Blohm & Leimeister, 2013;Deterding et al, 2011;Werbach & Hunter, 2012;Zicherman & Cunningham, 2011). Many frameworks are based on a commonly accepted MDA (Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics) model, developed for game design (Hunicke, LeBlanc, & Zubek, 2004), however, most of them interpret incorrectly the levels of this model (see Shpakova, Dörfler, & MacBryde, 2017 for more detail).…”

Gamifying the process of innovating

“…Most researchers classify game elements by their levels of abstraction, varying from two (Blohm & Leimeister, 2013) to five (Deterding et al, 2011). These classification are predominantly based on the (re-)interpretation of the MDA (mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics) framework of Hunicke et al (2004) developed for game design; however, these levels are not always interpreted the same way (Shpakova, Dörfler, & MacBryde, 2017). In this paper we have adopted the framework of Werbach and Hunter (2012), because it is aligned with the MDA framework and suggests a logical hierarchy of game elements, starting from the components (elements we interact with), through mechanics that bind them together, to the dynamics that suggest the types of behaviour that we want the system to nurture (Figure 2).…”