Instructional Games: A Framework

A KNOWLEDGE PLATFORM WHITEPAPER – 2008

Abstract

In the last few years, there has been a lot of excitement about games in E-Learning. While everyone understands the concept of games (didn’t we all grow up playing games?), we see different interpretations of the word games when used in the context of E-Learning. The attempt in this paper is to demystify the concept of instructional games and provide a framework and taxonomy that will help designers design games for E-Learning courseware.

Introduction

In the last few years, there has been a lot of excitement about games in E-Learning. While everyone understands the concept of games (didn’t all of us grow up playing games?), we see different interpretations of the word games when used in the context of E-Learning. The attempt in this paper is to demystify the concept of instructional games and provide a framework and taxonomy that will help designers design games for E-Learning courseware. We also hope that this framework and taxonomy will help our clients select the type of game that works best for their needs.

Instructional Game: A Definition

Games, when used appropriately, provide an excellent learning aid. Games can help clarify abstract and difficult concepts, provide a fun way to practice what is learned, and provide the variability that is so necessary for holding attention. In short, games serve a two-fold purpose in the learning process.

• Learning and Understanding: Using games to teach helps learners practice essential formulas, facts and processes. Games can be used as a strategy to apply what the learners have learned. Games can also be used to address topics that learners have difficulty grasping.
• Motivation: Lack of interest in a topic or subject leads to a lack of motivation. Using games to teach such topics can make the topics more interesting, and adds a fun element to the learning process.

In this paper, we use the term instructional game to imply an activity that is embedded in any learning material for the purpose of enhancing the teaching-learning process and motivating the learner to go through the learning material.

Structure of an Instructional Game

Think about any game you have enjoyed playing. It must have had some ultimate goal, some way to keep score, some rules to constrain the game, some type of difficulty or challenge and some strategy element to increase your chances of winning.

Just like games have certain attributes, we can also identify specific attributes of instructional games. These are as follows.

• Score: This is the element of winning or losing. It is the core of any game, including the instructional game.
• Strategy: This element has a direct bearing on the score. If built into an instructional game, it allows the learner to manipulate the game so as to maximize his/her score. This element can be designed in the form of bonus points, rewards etc.
• Message: This element has a direct bearing on the learning objective of the learning material. In other words, if the game is designed to communicate a concept to the learner, we can say that it has a message component.

The Framework

Using the above structure as the base for instructional games, we can identify four types of games that are included in E-Learning. These types can be identified in the figure below.

In this figure, each quadrant represents a game type. The game type is based on the combination of the two components of instructional games, viz., strategy and message. Note that, within this framework, the score component is common to all game types. Let us look at each quadrant in detail.

Quadrant I: Score Only, No Strategy, No Message

A game type that falls in this quadrant captures score, but does not contain either a strategy or any instructional message. The game only has the score component, and the purpose of including it is to merely provide a jazz value to the E-Learning material.

Example:

In the sample below, we are using a basketball metaphor to provide options for selection. Upon clicking an option (a labeled basketball), the basketball either goes through the basket (if correct) or drops back. There is no relevance of the basketball game to the subject being tested.

Although one would think that Quadrant I games will not find many applications, several of our clients like such games to be included in their courses.

In the same quadrant, we identify another type of game, which doesn’t have a strategy or message, but has a strong context. For example, in a course on Information Security, we designed a course about protecting a gem from a thief. The game design did not have a strong focus on the message of information security, but in a subtle manner, the presence of a strong context reiterated that information assets are precious and must be protected.

Another example of this type of game is one based around catching a couple of money laundering criminals as they escape to various parts of the world. This game is used in an Anti-Money Laundering course. The context is very strong and relevant (that money launders are criminals), but there is no strategy and no message derived from playing the game.

Quadrant II: Strategy, No Message

A game type that falls in this quadrant has an additional element of strategy to increase motivation. The game by itself does not actually teach or communicate a message, but is included as a wrapper to motivate the learner to go through the content or quiz, that may otherwise be perceived as boring and dull. The strategy element allows learners to control the game based on some skill or technique that makes the exercise exciting and interesting.

Example:

In a course for investment bankers, we wrapped the traditional quiz in a format that allowed learners to place a bet before answering a question. They could view the question and choose to select a bet before answering it. This way, even without knowing all answers, they could strategize and gain a high score.

In another game used in an anti-money laundering course for casinos, learners spun the roulette wheel and selected a chip before viewing a question. Another example is a game in which learners can seek help from an expert 3 times, but the score they gain is lower than if they answered without help. Learners can choose to seek help strategically.

In all these cases, the element of strategy added to the “fun” element in the game, and encouraged learners to play it several times to improve their scores.

Quadrant III: Score and Message, No Strategy

A game type that fits into this quadrant has the message component, but no strategy. It is designed to help learners meet a learning objective - to demystify and simplify abstract concepts, and thereby make these easier to learn and understand.

Example:

To explain the concept of stages of money laundering and how it becomes more and more difficult to detect it as the money moves through the stages, we designed a game which had dirty money being washed in a washing machine. The objective was to detect and catch the dirty money as it spun in the washing machine. The game was so designed that in each progressive stage, it became harder and harder to detect dirty money and catch it. This drove home the message that it is very important to detect money laundering at stage 1, when the criminals first deposit money in a bank.

In another course that tackled the concept of objective setting for performance improvement, we designed a game in which learners were supposed to do something without being given any clarity and scoring instructions. What they chose to do (catch all golden apples) was based on their background and past experiences. In the next stage, clear instructions and scoring mechanisms were described. This drove home the message that unless objectives are set clearly and at the start of a year, staff will not be able to perform to their best abilities.

Quadrant 4: Score, Strategy and Message

A game type that falls within this quadrant has within the game itself, the two instructional components – strategy and message, apart from the core component, the score. This is the highest form of game design in this framework as it provides motivation, an opportunity to strategize while at the same time, learn something.

Example:

In a course on quality, we designed a game to explain the definition of quality, which is meeting customer requirements. We also wanted to focus on the message that if a customer’s requirements are not met, you are likely to lose him.

For this purpose, we designed a game in which learners took on the role of a florist, where they had to take orders from several clients and meet their requirements within a specific time. The element of strategy came from how one chose to remember the orders and what sequence of actions to use, since there were many possible ways in which to be successful.

In another course teaching the concepts of supply chain management, we designed a game in which learners had to manage a supply chain to meet requirements of all entities involved. The message is very strong and the element of strategy makes this game highly instructional.

Given below is a brief summary of the different types of games, and when, why and how you should design these. Note that the order in which they appear in the table also indicates the level of difficulty in game design.

Summary

To conclude, before you include a game in your learning material, find out the purpose for including it. While you may include games for providing a jazz value, it is important to know that such games do not really motivate or communicate an instructional message.
Motivation and communication of an instructional message are two important components for making a game instructionally meaningful. Either of these two components has to be present in a game for it to qualify as an instructional game. While motivation can be addressed by creating a game as a separate layer from the content and building a strategy within it, communication can be addressed by building the game as part of the main content layer itself.

About the Authors

Purnima has been working as the Head of Knowledge Platform’s instructional design function since 2003. She has almost thirteen years of experience in the field of computer-based training and instructional design. In addition, she has also designed and delivered many classroom training programs in instructional design.

Purnima has also written papers on instructional design and performance improvement, which have been published and presented in forums such as International Society of Performance Improvement (ISPI), American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) and Brandon Hall.

Puja Anand heads the E-learning business at Knowledge Platform. In the past, she has developed courses, taught instructional design and managed QA for large projects.

About Knowledge Platform

Knowledge Platform is one of Asia-Pacific’s leading instructional design, E-learning content development and learning technology solutions companies. Established in early 2000, Knowledge Platform has offices in Singapore, Tokyo, Delhi and Islamabad. By providing services such as E-Learning Content, Instructional Design, Training Solutions, and E-Learning Technology Solutions, Knowledge Platform helps its clients to increase their learning efficiency. Knowledge Platform has a rapidly growing, blue chip enterprise, banking, educational, and government sector client base.

The products division of Knowledge Platform specializes in creating generic and proprietary e-learning products on subjects relating to business processes that enhance operations and reduce risk. The company has demonstrated leadership as a valued resource, subject matter expert and service provider in the areas of compliance including information security and privacy, code of conduct and anti-money laundering. 

To know more about Knowledge Platform, feel free to visit http://www.knowledgeplatform.com/.

Corporate Universities and Learning Center: A Primer

A KNOWLEDGE PLATFORM WHITEPAPER – APRIL 25, 2011

Introduction

Over the past forty years, the learning and development function within corporations based in the United States, Japan and Europe has become increasingly mission-critical, sophisticated and centralized. This trend is now accelerating within corporations based in the rest of Asia and the Middle East.

Corporations such as Infosys in India, Huawei in China, Singapore Airlines in Singapore and Etisalat in the United Arab Emirates have well-established corporate universities or learning centers. Other Asian and Middle Eastern corporations, both large and small, are pouring impressive resources into strengthening their learning and development function, including establishing corporate universities or learning centers.

Indeed, according to Annick Renaud-Coulon, the founder and chairman of the Global Council of Corporate Universities (GlobalCCU), Paris: “A tidal wave of corporate universities has touched the shores of the developing world. There are about 4,000 such institutes in the world. The number has more than doubled in the last decade.”

This primer is intended to provide an overview of the definition and functions of, and best practices in establishing and deepening corporate universities and learning centers.

Definition

A Corporate University (also referred to as a Corporate College, Corporate Academy or Corporate Learning Center) is a centralized training or education function within a corporation focused on the integrated development of employees on a basis aligned with the corporation’s values and business requirements.

Such a function is rarely regulated or accredited and authorized to issue formal degrees, only occasionally has a separate legal identity and may or may not operate from a dedicated facility. Accordingly, such function may best be understood in the context of a spectrum of learning and development initiatives, ranging from training programs (which would generally not be considered within our definition), to Corporate Learning Centers (which may or may not come within our definition), to Corporate Universities.

In Europe, corporations tend to stay away from, and, in some countries such as Germany, are prohibited by legislation from, referring to their learning initiatives as “universities”. The degree of formality, practicality or comprehensiveness that a corporation wishes to convey with respect to its learning initiatives may also have a bearing on the manner in which such initiative is designated.

Set forth below is a description of the spectrum of learning and development initiatives, considered in terms of functions, degree of concentration, posture towards alliances and deployment of technologies.

 

Functions

A Corporate University may perform a wide range of functions and fulfill a wide range of purposes. These functions and purposes need to be well defined, properly prioritized and adequately resourced.  A taxonomy of such functions, considered in terms of advancing corporate objectives, advancing individual development and advancing human resource objectives is set forth below.


 CORPORATE UNIVERSITY FUNCTIONS

CORPORATE UNIVERSITY ELEMENTS

Critical Questions

Establishing a Corporate University is not a trivial task and will take up substantial management and financial resources and will require considerable contributions from business units and internal experts.  It should also be recognized that most corporations end up increasing their learning and development expenditures through a Corporate University. And, despite considerable drain on resources, the “death rate” for Corporate Universities is high.[1] In many cases, well-resourced and strongly backed initiatives, even at leading corporations such as ABB and Ericsson, have been quietly shelved or allowed to operate at a considerably diminished scope.

Accordingly, it is critical to be absolutely clear as to the reason, functions and purposes for establishing a Corporate University and as to stages that will be followed in the development of a Corporate University.  The following are some of the critical questions that should be satisfactorily considered in connection with establishing a Corporate University:

What are the primary needs that will be addressed by the Corporate University?

Corporate Universities that are established to fulfil a CEO’s need to establish a legacy or a management team’s sense of corporate arrival may flounder unless these institutions tap into deeper organizational needs.  Successful initiatives to establish Corporate Universities are grounded on clearly recognized and well-grounded needs such as: (1) the need to compete effectively by having a more capable work force; or (2) the need to retain employees by making them more ‘mobile’ across the corporation’s spectrum of job functions.  In a number of cases, Corporate Universities have been successfully launched and perpetuated in the context of a major, sustained change management exercise.  In these cases, the CorporateUniversity can serve as a visible, high touch institution that embodies the change program. Well-grounded needs that are closely addressed in the CorporateUniversity’s mandate are an important part of the formula for success.

What functions and purposes will the Corporate University serve?

As previously noted, Corporate Universities have been used to serve a wide range of functions and purposes. This does not mean that they can serve all these functions and purposes. It is important that a limited number of targeted functions and purposes are identified and prioritized.  This enables the management and curriculum of the Corporate University to be structured around coherent, achievable objectives.

Should the Corporate University start with a wide or lean focus?

A widely focused Corporate University (Singapore Airlines provides a good example) will address all types of learning and development requirements and a wide range of employees.  A leanly focused CorporateUniversity (for example, Seagate’s quality-focused initiative in Asia) will focus on a narrow curriculum range (such as leadership or quality) and a correspondingly narrower range of employees.  There are also a proliferation of hybrid models, such as a lean strategy that develops a rich range of programs (for example, on leadership), and a wide strategy through e-learning that reaches out on a shallower basis to a wide audience.

Who will lead the Corporate University and what role will management and experts play?

In a number of successful cases, corporations have looked outside their institution to recruit leaders for their Corporate Universities.  BAE, Charles Schwab and General Motors have even hired academics to lead their initiatives.  Whether internally or externally recruited, the four most important qualifications for leadership appear to be: (1) ability to articulate and communicate a commitment to individual excellence in the context of advancing corporate objectives; (2) an ability to conceptualize and deliver a high quality curriculum; (3) an ability to marshal human and financial resources; and (4) an ability to master and deploy a proliferating range of learning technologies and methodologies.  Equally, if not more important is strong commitment to the initiative by the corporation’s management and internal experts: at GE it is almost inconceivable that a senior leader can emerge who has not devoted a substantial amount of time to advancing its Corporate University.

What are the budgetary resources that may be allocated to the Corporate University and how should these be prioritized?

Funding and sustaining a Corporate University can be an extremely expensive undertaking.  On the one hand, it is important to obtain adequate resources for the initiative. On the other hand, it is important to not spend so much as to render the initiative an easy target for budgetary cuts when the need arises.  Most critically, any funds secured for the initiative need to be properly prioritized.  In our experience, the five most costly prioritization mistakes are: (1) spending far too much on facilities and physical infrastructure; (2) spending too much on external executive education programs that have a narrow benefit and are not adequately integrated with corporate objectives; (3) spending large amounts up front on information technology rather than incrementally; (4) not spending enough on incentivizing internal experts to become teachers and mentors; and (5) not spending enough on curriculum and content development.

What are the learning and development gaps that should be initially addressed by the Corporate University?
A thorough learning gap analysis, preferably conducted by a consultant to ensure an objective perspective and comprehensive review, is an essential best practice measure.  This exercise should include surveys and interviews of employees as well as key stakeholders.

How will the Corporate University build up an internal constituency?

Bringing on board internal departments and experts is critical to success.  This task includes internal marketing initiatives, small e-learning projects to provoke interest, incentive programs for participants and training and support programs for experts. For example, Siemens provides internal experts with considerable training and support for internal experts in order to help enhance their capabilities as teachers and mentors.  To enable experts to quickly develop online content, a leading initiative in South East Asia established an instructional design centre staffed with instructional designers, content developers, graphics artists, software programmers and project managers.

What kind of alliances should the Corporate University build?

A successful Corporate University inevitably involves a network of alliances with academic universities, individual experts and academics, corporate bonding service providers, instructional design firms, e-learning companies and technology service providers.  Best practices in building alliances include: (1) inclusion of partners in the process of formulating objectives and designing solutions; (2) ensuring deep integration of solutions provided by partners; (3) inclusion of partners in the measurement and review process; and (4) standardization of contracts to enable cross-deployment of IP assets.

What kind of measurement metrics and processes should the Corporate University utilize?

Some leading Corporate Universities (Caterpillar, Xerox) intensively use Return on Investment (ROI) and other metrics to evaluate the performance of their Corporate Universities.  Others believe that broader measurements are all that is needed and that the creative process is stymied by too much measurement.  It is important for each corporation to develop metrics and measurement processes that are tailored to its own objectives and culture.

CORPORATE UNIVERSITY TRENDS

Conclusion

As corporations expand and mature in Asia and the Middle East, they will increasingly look to strengthen their learning and development functions.  In some respects, the emerging corporate leaders in Asia and the Middle East are fortunate in that they can leverage the experience of other corporations both in the region and globally.  But they need to advance in measured ways to ensure effectiveness and sustainability of their initiatives.

Recommended Links

**Global Council of Corporate Universities (Global CCU) - http://www.globalccu.com 
**The Global Association of Corporate Universities and Academies - http://www.corporateuniversity.org.uk/acua/acua.htm 
**American Society for Training & Development - http://www.astd.org/ 
**The Masie Center - http://www.masie.com/ 
**CorpU - http://www.corpu.com/services/cu_design/ 
**Handbook of Corporate University Development (Paton, Peters, Storey & Taylor) - http://www.gowerpub.com/default.aspx?page=641&calcTitle=1&isbn=0566085836&sPassString=Y **Corporate Universities: Lessons in Building a World Class Work-Force (Jeanne Meister) - http://www.amazon.com/Corporate-Universities-Lessons-Building-World-Class/dp/0786307870 
**The Corporate University: Alive and Well Certainly the Old Model is Long Gone… But you should see what they’re doing now (Sue Todd) - http://www.corpu.com/site_media/journal/2006/1.pdf 
**Turn Your Corporate University into an Efficient Learning Organization Development Tool (Daniel Belet) - http://www.eclo.org/pages/uploads/File/ECLO%20Publications/Daniel%20Belet%20-%20Turn%20Your%20Corporate%20University%20Into%20an%20Efficient%20Learning.pdf 
**Business, Corporate Universities and E-Learning (John Jones) - http://www.techknowlogia.org/TKL_Articles/PDF/278.pdf 
**The Fujitsu Management Academy – Global approach with local flexibility (Liz Bert) - http://www.mannaz.com/articles/fujitsu-global-approach-with-local-flexibility 
**Allianz Corporate University - https://www.allianz.com/en/careers/develop-at-allianz/training-development/allianz-corporate-university/corporate-university.html 
**Corporate Universities: A catalyst for strategic human resource development? (Holland & Pyman) - http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1537561&show=abstract

About Knowledge Platform

Knowledge Platform is a leading next-generation learning solutions company. Headquartered in Singapore and with offices in Delhi, Dubai, Islamabad and Tokyo, Knowledge Platform’s learning solutions - Strategy, Enablement, Content, Technology and Communities of Practice – enable institutions to design, develop and deepen innovative and effective learning strategies.

For additional information visit www.knowledgeplatform.com or contact Carsten Rosenkranz at crosenkranz@knowledgeplatform.com or Michael Dalichau at mdalichau@knowledgeplatform.com.

---

[1] European Corporate Universities & Academies Network (ECU ANET) - An Overview of Corporate Universities (2006).

To know more about Knowledge Platform, feel free to visit http://www.knowledgeplatform.com/.

Pedagogic Overview of Compliance Training

A KNOWLEDGE PLATFORM WHITEPAPER – 2008

Compliance training is probably the fastest-growing corporate e-learning application. Given the increasing regulatory and corporate focus on compliance, this sector is likely to remain one of the most important corporate e-learning applications during the next few years. This paper attempts to define the pedagogical needs of compliance training and propose instructional strategies for creating an effective compliance training program.

Structural Deconstruction

As the first step towards defining the pedagogical needs of compliance training, let us look at the components of such training.

Challenges Posed by Compliance Training

Compliance training poses a unique set of challenges derived from the nature of the discipline. The principal goal of such training is for learners to be able to apply rules to real-life situations. For this, they may need to recollect the rules as well as spot problems in realistic situations.  

 

Typically, the main thrust of compliance training is to expose, correct and minimize failure modes (i.e., situations in which the laws, rules and policies are not appropriately applied). The following are the types of failure and success modes.

 
Instructional Design Strategies for Compliance Training

Given the components and challenges of Compliance training, we recommend deployment of an appropriate blend of Instructional Design strategies for effective compliance training. The following are some of the key strategies that may be deployed.

Scenario-Based Learning

In this paradigm, learners are immersed in work situations and required to make decisions at various steps. They learn concepts by participating in scenarios and receiving feedback on their decisions. 

This feedback can be prescriptive or include expert/practitioners perspectives. This is a highly effective Instructional Design approach in the compliance context, especially for first time learners.  

 

Case-Based Learning 

In this paradigm, learners are presented with real cases of non-compliance and are expected to analyze these at various levels. 

This is also a very effective Instructional Design approach, especially for returning users who have been trained in the basic concepts earlier. It requires a higher degree of application of rules to situations as compared to the first strategy of scenario-based learning. 

 

Games-Based Learning

In this paradigm, learners are required to compete to achieve a game-based result. They could compete against a standard or against each other. The learning occurs as part of the competitive process. This is a highly effective Instructional Design approach that helps increase motivation levels in learners.

 
Daily Learning / Incident Based 

In this paradigm, the learner is pushed (through e-mail or PDA) 3-5 minute modules on a daily or other periodic basis. This content can be a mix of concepts and current/relevant events. 

Content pushed in this manner ensures learner attention on a regular basis while avoiding a possibility of information overload. It also helps build a culture of compliance in the organization, by making it a part of the daily work life of employees. 


Just-in-Time Learning 

Learning is most effective when it is delivered when people need it. In this paradigm, learners access a learning centre on an as-needed-basis to obtain access to courses, Top 10 Lists, FAQs, Documents, News items and Expert Perspectives. This is another very effective way to build a culture of compliance in the organization. 

Conclusion 

The principal need of Compliance Training is for the learners to be able to apply rules to situations. For this to happen, learners need to recollect rules, interpret them and spot instances of non-conformance to these rules in scenarios and cases. In order to serve these pedagogical needs effectively, we recommend using a combination of several instructional and delivery strategies, such as scenario or case based learning and periodic or JIT delivery mechanisms. 

Authors 

This paper was authored by Mahboob Mahmood, CEO of Knowledge Platform and Puja Anand, CEO, Learning Solutions, Knowledge Platform. 

To know more about E-learning, visit http://www.knowledgeplatform.com