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

Popular posts from this blog

The Flood - Then & Now

The Median Reality: Somewhere Between the Absolute Yes or No Lies the Truth(s)

Databank and Polls - Limitations and all That