Gamification and Value Capture: Objectifying the Subjective
This writing is based on my understanding of T Chi Nyugen’s work, "Game: Art as Agency."
Games motivate players by making play entertaining and
engaging. Players aim to achieve temporary goals, like scoring in football or
winning in chess, by overcoming arbitrary obstacles (rules). This motivation
inversion makes games fun. However, applying this concept to real life can be
problematic. Games have simple rules, clear motives, and scoring systems, while
real life is more complex and fluid.
The problem arises when we intentionally use gamification in
real-life activities. We try to map the pleasures of games onto our daily lives
by mimicking game-like rules and scoring. For example, academic research
quality is often measured by the number of citations, turning a subjective
measure into an objective fact. Similarly, school exams focus on grades rather
than actual learning, and performance scoring systems in organisations can
obscure the true quality of work.
In games, we temporarily adopt a mindset where only one goal
matters, and we don’t need to consider others' interests. However, behaving
this way in real life can make us selfish and unsocial.
Simplified Rules vs. Real Life Complexity
Games have simple rules, clear motives, and scoring systems.
Real life, however, is complex and fluid. When we try to apply game-like rules
to real life, we often oversimplify and miss the nuances of real-life
situations. For example, academic research quality is often measured by the
number of citations, turning a subjective measure into an objective fact.
Similarly, school exams focus on grades rather than actual learning, and
performance scoring systems in organisations can obscure the true quality of work.
Intentional Gamification in Real Life
The problem of transference occurs with the introduction of
intentional gamification – using knowledge and understanding of gameplay
motivation in real-life activities. We try to map the pleasures of games onto
our daily lives by mimicking game-like rules and scoring. For example, academic
research quality is often measured by the number of citations, turning a
subjective measure into an objective fact. Similarly, school exams focus on
grades rather than actual learning, and performance scoring systems in organisations
can obscure the true quality of work.
When organisations use performance scoring systems,
especially for subjective tasks, they often apply game-like scoring systems.
For example, in government-funded healthcare systems, efficiency and funding
may be based on the number of patients treated rather than the complexity of
the illness and the quality of care. This use of objective measurement can
obscure the true quality of care, which is subjective.
Performance Scoring Systems in Organisations
When organisations use performance scoring systems,
especially for subjective tasks, they often apply game-like scoring systems.
For example, in government-funded healthcare systems, efficiency and funding
may be based on the number of patients treated rather than the complexity of
the illness and the quality of care. This use of objective measurement can
obscure the true quality of care, which is subjective.
Attributing Success Factors
Success factors like intelligence, hard work, and discipline
are often attributed based on position, title, status, income levels, and
wealth. This has its roots in gamified simplicity. We value capture all
attributes that we consider valuable and necessary for success in terms of
simple measurements like income, wealth, title, and status. These metrics are
simple and quantify what may be highly subjective elements that need to be
considered.
Neuro-Diverse Achievements
A neuro-diverse person with learning difficulties achieving
five C grades in GCSE results would be quantified and ranked in global
statistics as a low achiever when the average is seven C grades. Achieving five
C grades for a person with learning difficulties might be a significantly
higher achievement, qualitatively speaking, than the average shown by the
statistics.
Charitable Contributions
A person with an income of a thousand, who spends half of it
on helping others, is quantified as having sacrificed five hundred. Another
person with an income of ten thousand, who spends a thousand on the same, is
ranked higher in charity. Ignoring the context would place the second person at
a higher rank of charity than the first.
Moral Ambiguity
In opinions and decisions involving human conditions or
feelings, clear moral guidance is rare. Issues are rarely black and white;
there is a wide area of grey in between. Objective measurements abhor grey
areas and push the needle to the extremes of black or white rather than
considering the grey.
Dangers of Transposing Gamification
Transposing gamification and using objective criteria for
subjective matters can lead to suboptimal outcomes. Exams should evaluate
learning, not just performance on the test. Academic efforts should advance
knowledge, not just attract students. Performance measurement in organisations
should show gaps and improve them, not just use simple scoring systems. When we
use objective measurements to assess subjective matters, we focus on
superficial issues rather than addressing the real challenges of life.
Comments
Post a Comment