Get in the Game: How Credit Unions Can Engage Members, Solve

Innovation Brief
Get in the Game:
How Credit Unions Can Engage
Members, Solve Problems, and
Improve Skills with Game Thinking
Matt Davis
ideas grow here
Innovation Director
Filene Research Institute
PO Box 2998
Madison, WI 53701-2998
Phone 608-665-8550
www.filene.org
PUBLICATION #273 (4/12)
About Us
The Filene Research Institute provides credit
unions with research, future-focused thinking,
and practical innovations to enable them to
prosper today while preparing for tomorrow’s
opportunities.
Progress is the
constant replacing of
the best there is with
something still better!
— Edward A. Filene
The name of the Institute honors Edward A. Filene, founder of the
Filene’s Department Store chain, who is considered the father of the
United States credit union system.
Since the Filene Research Institute’s inception in 1989, this 501(c)(3)
not-for-profit institute has collaborated with over 100 academic
institutions and credit union system partners to publish hundreds of
research studies. The entire research and innovation library is available online at filene.org.
Copyright © 2012 by Filene Research Institute. All rights reserved.
Printed in U.S.A.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank PSCU Financial Services for its generous
support of this innovation research and our other innovation efforts.
I’d like to acknowledge Tim McAlpine, Ben Rogers, Brent Dixon,
and George Hofheimer for their generous contributions of time,
ideas, and support for this project.
iii
Executive Summary and Commentary
by Matt Davis,
Innovation Director
Your level 79 Barbarian hacks, slashes, and “berserks” his way
through the Durance of Hate to find Mephisto, the first of the three
prime evils that torment the land of Sanctuary. As you run out of
health potions, your playing partner, a level 82 sorceress, teleports
over to land a critical meteor strike that brings the demon to its evil
knees. This isn’t the first time you two have beaten Mephisto, but it’s
the most rewarding time. After five hours making “Meph runs” to
level up, the experience points gained in this latest quest finally turn
your avatar into a level 80 warrior. Even better, Mephisto dropped
the nearly impossible-to-­find Mara’s Kaleidoscope amulet, which will
help your partner become even better on the next run. A feeling of
accomplishment and euphoria rushes over your body.
You have no idea that it is 3 a.m. and that you have to be at work
in five hours. You have never felt so valuable, so brave, or so accomplished. At this strength, your team can consider making runs to kill
the much tougher, but much more rewarding, Diablo. It’s time to
destroy some more demons!
This is the game player in a state of flow, or optimal experience—an
everyday experience for many of your credit union members.
What Is the Research About?
As credit unions struggle to improve member financial behavior,
skills, and capacity; engage audiences; and optimize organizational
performance, a key question should be asked: Should we be thinking
more like game designers?
The Filene Research Institute has spent considerable resources over
the past decade studying, piloting, and researching ideas that leverage game thinking. Our work with Save to Win uses the appeal of
lottery-­type games to encourage low-wealth consumers to develop
positive savings habits. The i3 Idea Savings Challenge took advantage
of game dynamics to encourage families to reduce debt and increase
savings. A 2012 pilot with Save to Win is studying how game thinking can encourage better financial behaviors.
This innovation brief puts the theory and practice of game thinking to work for credit unions. You will learn how game designers
approach solving problems and engaging audiences, the psychology
of game players, and practical examples that your credit union can
implement right away.
iv
Figure 1: Hours per Month Playing Games or Using
Computer for Leisure by Age
30.0
Hours per month
28.0
22.5
21.8
15.0
12.5
7.5
11.6
9.4
6.6
9.3
11.0
13.3
0
Total
(15 and
over)
15–19 20–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65–74
75+
Age group
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011 American Time Use Survey data.
What Are the Credit Union
Implications?
Worldwide, three billion hours are spent playing video games each
week.1 The five million “extreme” gamers in the United States play
an average of 45 hours per week, more than the average worker
spends earning a living.2 In contrast, consumers spend only 2.6 hours
per month on financial planning and budgeting.3
Why? Games are fun, while personal finances are boring or overwhelming. Games are engaging; personal finances are simply unwelcome chores. Games help people escape reality; personal finances
force an outright confrontation with it.
Gamification, the application of “game thinking and game mechanics to engage audiences and solve problems,”4 has helped Ford Motor
Company improve fuel economy, Weight Watchers inspire better eating habits, and Nike create a thriving community for physical fitness.
It can help credit unions as well.
Key findings for credit unions include:
• Keep score and design effective leaderboards. Game players
expect feedback for nearly every action they take. They want to
know how they have done, how they stack up against their peers,
and how much they have improved over time. Credit unions
must shorten the feedback loop associated with positive (and
negative) member financial behaviors, employee performance,
and board participation.
v
• Ideal self versus real self. Game players are more likely to enjoy
and become intrinsically motivated to play a game when it allows
them to experience ideal self characteristics. This force is even
stronger for players with a large difference between their ideal and
perceived actual selves.5 Online banking experiences, loan applications, and balance inquiries serve as blunt reminders of reality.
Gamified financial services may motivate consumers by allowing
them to experience, and learn from, their ideal selves.
• Outcome certainty is boring. The prize-linked savings program
Save to Win proves the power of uncertain outcomes. A chance
to achieve something new, win a valuable prize, or gain a new
experience adds excitement to ordinary tasks.
If disengaged members, misaligned incentives, boring experiences,
and unmotivated audiences are the demons of traditional financial
services, gamification may be the Doombringer Champion Sword
that can return hope to the credit union village. Fun is a magical
potion. Use it wisely and abundantly.
vi
About the Author
Matt Davis
Matt Davis believes cooperation, collaboration, resourcefulness,
and a little bit of creativity are at the heart of making the mutual
self-help model of credit unions work. Matt is a credit union Swiss
Army knife (with a background in public relations and marketing).
As director of innovation at the Filene Research Institute, Matt helps
credit unions put i3 ideas into action, develop an innovation competency, experiment with new ideas, and learn from big thinkers inside
and outside financial services.
His creations, such as What Are You Saving For?, CU Water Cooler,
and Football Pick’em, have earned Matt international recognition, including features in Fast Company and on Yahoo! Finance
and Bankrate.com. Matt was named one of Triad Business Journal ’s
40 Business Leaders Under 40. He was a member of Filene’s 30
Under 30 group, he authors the Credit Union Warrior blog, and he is
the editor in chief of cuwatercooler.com.
Matt earned a BBA-­Marketing from the College of William & Mary
and completed basic cadet training at the US Air Force Academy.
He earned his CUDE designation from the National Credit Union
Foundation in 2009. Matt lives in Madison, Wisconsin, with his
wife and two sons.
vii
Figure 2: Hours per Month Playing Games or Using
Computer for Leisure by Age
30.0
Hours per month
28.0
22.5
21.8
15.0
12.5
11.6
7.5
9.4
6.6
9.3
11.0
13.3
0
Total
(15 and
over)
15–19 20–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65–74
Age group
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011 American Time Use Survey data.
Figure 3: US Mobile App Consumption,
Time Spent per Category
Social networking
30%
Games
49%
Other
8%
Entertainment
7%
News
6%
Source: Flurry Analytics, December 2011.
75+
Worldwide, three billion hours are
spent playing video games each
week.6 Active gamers in the United
States, a staggering 183 million people of all ages, play video games for
more than 56 hours per month.7,8
Americans spend on average
6.6 hours per month playing video
game consoles (Nintendo Wii, PS3,
etc.).9 The five million “extreme”
gamers in the United States play an
average of 45 hours per week, more
than the average worker spends
earning a living.10
Games consume nearly half (49%)
of all time spent on mobile apps
in the United States.11 While the
23 hours per month this represents is no surprise to
Angry Birds players, by any measure this is a significant
expenditure of Americans’ time. A full 64% of mobile
app downloads are games, with 93% of consumers willing to pay for those apps.12
Consumers spend much less time with their finances.
Americans in debt spend only 2.6 hours per month on
financial planning and budgeting.13 This is one-fifth of
the time the average American spends playing games or
using a computer for leisure.14 These statistics are surprising only in that the gap is not even wider. To be sure,
games are fun and personal finances are decidedly not
fun. Games are engaging; personal finances are simply
unwelcome chores. Games help people escape reality;
personal finances force an outright confrontation with it.
It is little wonder, then, that games have emerged as conspicuously
as they have. Still, misconceptions about games persist. Consider the
following stats from the Entertainment Software Association:
• The average game player is 37 years old and has been playing
games for 12 years.
• The most frequent game purchaser is on average 41 years old.
• 42% of all game players are women.
• 29% of Americans over the age of 50 play video games, an
increase from 9% in 1999.15
Gaming is no longer simply young, male, or new. Gaming is
ubiquitous.
2
Likewise, gaming has become big business. Consumers spent
$16.6 billion (B) on game content in 2011.16 Call of Duty: Modern
Warfare 3 grossed $1B in sales in the game’s first 16 days on the
market, one day quicker than
the highest-grossing film of
all time, Avatar, reached that
Gaming has become big business. Consumers spent $16.6B on
threshold.17,18 Activision enjoys
game content in 2011.
over $1.2B in annual revenue
for massive multiplayer online
role-­playing games (MMORPG) alone, driven primarily by its wildly
popular World of Warcraft series, which boasts 12.1 million paid
subscribers.19 Zynga, the firm responsible for online games like Farmville, Words with Friends, and Hidden Chronicles, raised over $1B
in its 2011 initial public offering.20
The gaming gravy train doesn’t stop with video games. Some offline
board games have enjoyed a resurgence since the Great Recession.21
Upstart board game manufacturer Mayfair Games saw a 35%
increase in Settlers of Catan sales in 2011 and has sold nearly 25 million copies despite its steep price point ($42 MSRP).22 The classic
board game Monopoly has sold 275 million copies since 1933,
facilitating an estimated one billion games.23 Chess continues to be
the world’s most popular game with 700 million players worldwide,
45 million of whom are American.24
What is it about games that captures our attention? What makes
games fun? Why should credit unions care? By understanding the
power of games, the psychological impact of game dynamThe purpose of this innovation brief is to help credit unions
ics, and the implications of a
understand how games work, how gamification is transforming
hyperconnected world, perhaps
the business world (for better and for worse), and how credit
financial institutions can harunions can put these concepts to use.
ness game thinking to create
a more engaged, financially
capable, and mutually beneficial class of consumers. The purpose of this innovation brief is to
help credit unions understand how games work, how gamification is
transforming the business world (for better and for worse), and how
credit unions can put these concepts to use.
Gamification
“Gamification,” defined by subject expert Gabe Zichermann as the
application of “game thinking and game mechanics to engage audiences and solve problems,” has become a bona fide business buzzword.25 It has also become big business. Corporations are expected
to spend as much as $2.8B a year on gamification by 2016.26 Since
3
engaged audiences and solved problems promise relevance, revenue, and reward in the business world, these investments are not
surprising.
The promise of gamification goes deeper than financial returns, however. Many are leaning on this concept to transform the way employees are motivated, students learn, humanitarian issues are solved, and
people are brought together in the name of progress. The challenge is
to inspire business, government, community, and thought leaders to
think about the world like game designers. A little bit of fun can go a
long way.
To think like a game designer, it is important to understand what a
game is. For the purposes of this publication a game is defined as a
structured play activity governed by a system of rules and set objectives with an uncertain, but quantifiable, outcome. In tic-tac-toe the
objective is to place three X’s or O’s in a row, column, or diagonal of
a three-by-three matrix before the opponent does. The rules dictate
that the players place one symbol at a time, alternate turns, and place
no more than one symbol in any space. Players can deploy various
strategies to help determine the outcome of each game, but the outcome is unknown until after the game is played. At the end of each
game the outcome is quantifiable: A player wins, loses, or draws.
Futurist Aaron Dignan describes play as “the act of deploying the scientific method on the world around you.”27 Just as scientists experiment, measure, learn, and experiment again, a game player takes an
action (in basketball, shoots a ball toward the hoop), receives feedback (did the shot go in?), learns (maybe a closer shot is necessary to
be effective next time), and performs another action (sprints for the
rebound).
A game, then, is essentially a state machine. A player during a certain
game state is responsible for a system input (action) into the game’s
“black box.” Based on the rules of the game, the action triggers a
state change, and players receive feedback
Figure 4: A Game as a State Machine
to react to indicating the change the action
made to the game state. In an effective
game system this process creates a loop in
“Black box”
Action/
Feedback/
which players are motivated to continue to
Input
Output
take further action to generate more state
Rules
changes and feedback.
State
Source: Adapted from Marc LeBlanc, “Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics: A Formal Approach to Game
Design,” lecture at Northwestern University, April 2004, algorithmancy.8kindsoffun.com/MDAnwu.ppt.
4
The feedback necessary to generate engagement with a game system depends highly
on the players themselves. A game designer’s
key objective is to generate a desired output, or aesthetic. For most
game systems the desired aesthetic is fun. Fun, however, is often in
the eye of the beholder. What is fun to one person could be excruciatingly boring to another. Game designer Marc LeBlanc argues that
there are multiple types of fun (aesthetics) gameplay can create:
• Sensation—Game as sense pleasure; players get excitement from
sensory stimulation.
• Fantasy—Game as make-believe; players have fun with imaginary
experiences.
• Narrative—Game as drama; players see central conflict as a dramatic tension that builds toward climax and resolution.
• Challenge—Game as obstacle course; players test abilities with
demanding tasks.
• Fellowship—Game as social framework; players enjoy intimacy,
togetherness, friendship, and/or community.
• Discovery—Game as uncharted territory; players enjoy finding or
learning something new, unique, or unknown.
• Expression—Game as self-­discovery; players get the opportunity
to creatively display or exert themselves.
• Submission—Game as pastime; players become part of a greater
structure or simply pass the time.28
Games can generate any or all of the above aesthetics. A card game
like Spades may introduce narrative (if gambling is present), challenge (opponents are very good), fellowship (a reason to get together
with friends), discovery (learning how to play a new game), expression (giving you an opportunity to break out a custom-­designed deck
you created), and submission (you don’t necessarily want to play,
but the other three people at the party do) depending on the players
and associated playing styles. Not surprisingly, the reasons people
play games could very well be at odds. Even within the same game,
different players have very different reasons for playing, each having
divergent definitions of what is fun. As an example, a soccer game in
which half the players are fellowship seekers and the other half are
challenge seekers could become unpleasant for everyone involved.
Thus, it is imperative that a game designer understand not only the
aesthetics a gamified system should create but also the types of players she is trying to attract to the system to begin with.
5
MDA Model of Game Design
If aesthetics are the feelings gameplay generates, what are the components that create them? Hunicke, LeBlanc, and Zubek suggest
that games use a framework of Mechanics, Dynamics, and Aesthetics
(MDA).31 Mechanics are the functioning components of gameplay
like rules and actions. Dynamics are how players interact with those
components.
While a player’s objective should be to learn the mechanics of a
game as quickly and thoroughly as possible, a game designer must
first determine which aesthetics are desired through gameplay. Once
target aesthetics are established, a game designer can then turn to a
Bartle Types
Richard Bartle, the cocreator of the game
Multi-User Dungeon, created a taxonomy
Figure 5: Bartle Player Types in MMORPG
Environments
of player types based on their tendencies
within MMORPG environments. He identi-
Acting
fied four player types: Killers, Socializers,
Achievers, and Explorers.29
Killers
Achievers
• Killers—Want not only to win but also
to humiliate other players by interfer-
Players
ing with standard game play or the play
World
Socializers
experience of others.
Explorers
• Socializers—Enjoy connecting with other
Interacting
players, telling stories within the game
world, and helping others achieve within
the game.
• Achievers—Driven to beat rules-based
reasons for playing. Interestingly, a player’s
challenges of games to accumulate
classification can change over time.30 A
points, achieve goals, or acquire status
player may begin as a Killer, grow tired of
tokens.
fighting other players, and start exploring.
• Explorers—Enjoy interacting with the
game environment, exploring its every
detail and discovering/creating challenges that may seem random to other
players.
After exploring for a while, the player may
decide that he has discovered enough
of the game environment and would like
to start achieving within it. After time and
accomplishment as an Achiever, the player
then might decide to enjoy the game
These player types not only have different styles of playing, they have different
6
by interacting with other players as a
Socializer.
Figure 6: MDA Model of Game Design
Mechanics
Rules, actions,
game components
Dynamics
How players and the game
system interact with the rules,
actions, and game components
Aesthetics
The emotions players feel
while playing the game
Game players experience a game from the left to the right of the MDA framework, while game designers should
construct game systems from right to left. By first determining the aesthetics of a gamified system, a designer
can prioritize and consider the mechanics and dynamics that can create those emotions.
menu of dynamics that can create those emotions. Only then can a
designer prioritize mechanics that will support those dynamics.
Common Game Mechanics
Points
An essential component of games is a scoring system that rewards
points for certain actions. Points can take many forms. In the game
Monopoly, dollars and properties are points. In basketball, points
could be the number of fouls or wins or the assigned value to successfully converted shot attempts. Points are the number of “likes” a
Facebook post receives, the number of tickets you receive from playing Skee-Ball, the number and value of bids you receive on an eBay
listing, a student’s SAT score, and the number of miles a frequent
flier has flown on Delta Airlines. Points allow a player to, among
other things, track performance, make comparisons to others, and
gain a sense of accomplishment.
Leaderboards
Leaderboards are tables that rank players across various scoring
(points) systems. Well-designed leaderboards allow players to track
their performance within the game system and game designers to
help players prioritize desired behavior. They can also encourage
engagement as players seek to improve their performance and move
up in the rankings.
Poorly designed leaderboards can have the opposite effect. Imagine
playing your best game of Pac-Man ever, with an amazing score of
215,000 points. Just as you start to celebrate, the top 20 leaderboard
pops up. You discover that the pizza parlor you played the game in
is the stomping grounds of Billy Mitchell, the game’s world record
holder. Mitchell’s perfect score of 3,333,360 is followed by 19 other
scores that make your performance look, at best, amateurish. The
leaderboard in this example is demotivating to many players.
7
Leaderboard subsets allow players to track their performance in different ways. Instead of being reminded after every game how much
worse you are at Pac-Man than Billy Mitchell, a leaderboard subset
may display how your score compares to your 10 best friends, how
your score compares to your personal best, the percentage of players who score worse than you, etc. Successful leaderboard design can
improve engagement, motivation, satisfaction, and skill improvement within a game.
Levels
Levels are indications that game players have reached certain milestones. A person’s job title, academic degree, class of credit card, or
karate belt color changes as she “levels up.” As game players increase
in level they often see an increase in respect, status, and/or opportunity. In most games a player’s level is dictated by the amount of
points they have accumulated. A level 76 amazon in the video game
Diablo II, for example, has earned many more experience points
than a level 45 necromancer.
Quests
Quests are specific tasks that players complete to gain points, earn
rewards, increase in level, add satisfaction, or progress in a game.
They give players a sense of direction within the game. Completing
quests gives players a sense of accomplishment and can add depth to
gameplay.
A “bucket list” for a golfer may include many quests: achieving a
hole-in-one, playing a round at Augusta National, driving the ball
300 yards, playing in a Pro-Am, scoring an eagle, scoring in the 80s,
etc. While the overall quest is to get a little white ball into a hole in
the earth with as few strokes as possible, these side quests can make
the game infinitely interesting.
Trophies/Badges
Trophies and badges are conspicuous indications that a player accomplished certain goals within a game. Military personnel wear medals
and ribbons on their uniforms for various acts of valor, courage, and
fulfillment of duty. Girl Scouts wear various badges, patches, awards,
and insignias to display their progress through the program. A
frequent flier may attach a gold keychain to his luggage to show the
world how much pain he endured over the past year.
Zichermann and Linder call badges the “ultimate passive-­aggressive
status symbols since . . . a badge that no one can see has limited
value.”32 Social media regulars have no doubt seen friends and
acquaintances post Foursquare, Farmville, or MafiaWars badges
in their social streams. These badges not only serve as public
8
recognition for the player receiving them, they can encourage others
to engage in a gamified system.
Virtual Goods
Virtual goods are items that are purchased with real or virtual
currencies for use in online communities or games. Players in the
first-person-­shooter (FPS) game Call of Duty can trade in points for
new weapons, uniforms, and capabilities. World of Warcraft players can purchase companions at the in-game “pet store.” Scramble
with Friends players can use tokens to purchase “power-ups” that can
dramatically improve their ability to score points. LittleBigPlanet
players have hundreds of ways to customize their game experience by
downloading costumes for their Sackboy characters.
Virtual goods allow players to express themselves creatively, encourage deeper engagement, provide another layer of competition,
and continually customize gameplay. Amazingly, the virtual goods
economy has impacted the real world economy in a big way. Americans are expected to spend $2.9B on virtual goods in 2012.33
Common Game Dynamics
Reward Schedules
Reward schedules define the frequency and delivery mechanisms of
a game’s various points, virtual goods, level-ups, and other rewards.
B. F. Skinner’s studies on reinforcement and operant conditioning
constructed the basic framework most game designers use to motivate with rewards in gamified systems. Rewards can be triggered
every time a desired action occurs (continuous reinforcement) or
only some of the time (partial reinforcement). A bricklayer who
gets paid an hourly wage is subject to a continuous reward schedule,
while a bellhop may only receive tips on a partial reward schedule.
Partial reinforcement schedules have four basic subtypes. Fixed-ratio
reward schedules reward a player every nth time a desired action
takes place. Variable-­ratio reward schedules reward players for desired
actions after an unpredictable number of actions are performed.
Fixed-­interval reward schedules reward players after a specified
amount of time passes. Variable-­interval reward schedules reward
players for desired behavior after an unpredictable amount of time
passes.
Positive and Negative Feedback Loops
Feedback loops can dramatically change the competitive balance of
a game. With positive feedback loops, successful gameplay allows
players to be even better. In Monopoly a player who is successful
enough to place several hotels on Boardwalk and Park Place has
9
Figure 7: Reward Schedule Samples
Fixed ratio
Variable ratio
Player receives reward after set number of actions are performed
Example
Caribou Coffee’s “Stay Awake for the Summer” program gives
customers a sticker for each drink they buy. After seven stickers are
collected, customer receives a free drink or food item.
Strength
• Players know exactly what actions are required to earn specific
rewards
Weaknesses
• Loss of interest between rewards
• All actions until the final action have a 0% chance of reward
• Perceived value of final reward must exceed the perceived pain of
cumulative actions
Impact on behavior
Actions are consistent, with a pause after each reward. Actions stop
quickly when reward mechanism stops.
Fixed interval
Player receives reward for a certain percentage of actions, but the
number of actions required to receive that reward is unknown
Example
The odds of buying a winning “Pure Gold” scratch-off ticket from the
North Carolina Education Lottery are 1 in 4.7. A player who buys five
tickets, however, could hold 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or even 5 winning tickets.
Strengths
• Players are engaged with every action
• Reward has chance to dramatically exceed its associated cost
Weaknesses
• Value of reward has chance to fall dramatically short of its
associated cost
• Engagement requires players to be optimistic about their chances
Impact on behavior
Actions are consistent, with a pause after each reward. Actions continue
for a while even if reward mechanism stops.
Variable interval
Player receives reward for action after a set period of time
Example
An estimated 226 million Americans spent $52B on Black Friday
weekend in 2011. Some shoppers camped outside retail stores for days
or weeks to be first in line.
Strengths
• Possibility for short-term engagement
• Reward has chance to dramatically exceed its associated cost
Weaknesses
• Highest engagement happens only when reward is about to be
given
• Perceived value of reward must be big enough to encourage the
unengaged to engage
• If intervals are too spaced out, players lose interest
Impact on behavior
Few actions until just before reward is delivered. Actions cease when
reward stops.
Player receives reward after a period of time, but the amount of time is
unknown and variable
Example
Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas conducts seven inspections of
housekeeping personnel each month, but the time and day are
unknown to the staff. Perfect attendance and a performance score of
93% over the month earns staffers a $100 bonus.
Strengths
• Great for reinforcing already established behaviors
• Players must consistently perform well to have a chance at reward
Weakness
• May not necessarily fairly reward the highest performers, especially
in the short term
Impact on behavior
Actions are consistent and continue for a while even if rewards stop
the opportunity to be even more successful when his hard-luck
opponents land on one of those spaces. This positive feedback loop
makes the game progressively easier for front-­runners and increasingly harder for laggards. In a negative feedback loop, game systems
handicap front-­runners or provide laggards with assistance to level
the playing field. In Mario Kart, the best weapons and other items
are given to drivers well behind the leading pace, while the leaders
become targets of a seemingly endless stream of attacks. Not surprisingly, achievers and socializers will have very different reactions to
these feedback loops. Achievers will enjoy positive feedback loops
and hate negative feedback loops, while socializers will have the
opposite opinion of both.
10
Communal Discovery
The communal discovery dynamic inspires entire communities
to work together to overcome a challenge. In Foldit (www.fold.it)
players contribute to protein structure prediction and design to
help find treatments for HIV/AIDS, cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease
just by playing the game. Communities at Kickstarter.com help
creative projects get off the ground by making financial contributions. Google Image Labeler allowed players to label random images
to improve image search results. During the “Coins for Change”
campaign, players in the Disney Club Penguin online community
worked together to accumulate and donate virtual coins to support
and prioritize various charitable causes. As a result $6.5 million (M)
over the past five years have been given to humanitarian and environmental causes around the globe.34
Time Pressure
When players in a game system feel time pressure, they feel dramatic
tension. The introduction of a timer to a chess match or a shot clock
to a basketball game fundamentally changes players’ approach to
gameplay. In musical chairs, players are constantly on edge because
they know that as soon as the music stops, they’ll have to quickly
find a seat. In the game Gauntlet, a player’s health decreases with
each passing second, encouraging constant, productive action. The
game Perfection would not be very challenging at all without a time
limit. The introduction of time pressure to Perfection causes players
to frantically place the game pieces in their proper slots before the
game board pops up to indicate the time limit has been reached.
Status/Influence
A player’s esteem in social, professional, or gaming circles can influence the behavior of others. To varying degrees, most people desire
status as well as the fame,
attention, and respect that come
with it. Status and influence in
A player’s esteem in social, professional, or gaming circles can
a gamified system are achieved
influence the behavior of others. To varying degrees, most
in many ways. Leaderboards,
people desire status as well as the fame, attention, and respect
levels, badges, and social promithat come with it.
nence are easy ways to gauge a
player’s status. As a general rule,
the more engaged, skilled, and successful a player is in the gaming
system, the more influence they will have within that system.
Progression
The progression dynamic encourages players to perform itemized tasks by offering them feedback about how the completion of
each task impacts their progress toward larger goals. This dynamic
11
encourages Boy Scouts to become Eagle Scouts, donors to make a
final push to help a charity meet its fund-­raising goal, and euchre
players to play until the 10‑point threshold is reached. Subway
restaurants were so successful using this dynamic that their Sub Club
loyalty program had to be ended—too many consumers were taking
advantage of it. In the program, “players” received a stamp for every
six-inch submarine sandwich they bought (or two stamps for a footlong sub). When a player accumulated eight stamps, she received
a free sandwich. Players could readily see their progress toward
the larger goal because the stamps on their loyalty card served as a
progress bar. They were driven to continue completing tasks (buying
sandwiches) so they could reach the larger goal (the eight-­sandwich
threshold).
Over-Gamified?
Figure 8: Screen Capture
from the iPhone App
EpicWin
Some theorists believe that we are headed toward a completely gamified society, where every action humans perform can and should be
encouraged by game thinking. The iPhone app EpicWin allows players to gamify their lives. The system lets you create quests, define the
characteristics needed to accomplish them (Strength, Stamina, Intellect, Social, or Spirit), and earn points for completion. In a test, my
dwarf, Thorin Awesome (the game named him), earned 100 experience points for starting this innovation brief and 300 experience
points for finishing it. EpicWin helps players track progress by tracking experience points, gold collected, items discovered or purchased,
level advancements, and key characteristics exhibited.
Executed properly, gamification can make nearly anything fun. With
Farmville, Zynga found a way to get hundreds of millions of people
to spend countless hours farming in a virtual world. As necessary and
respected as farming may be, it certainly could not be described as
an enthralling exhibition of merriment. The same is true for cutting
a rope, finding water, or slicing fruit. Regardless of how boring those
actions may be, game designers have turned them into best-­selling
apps on iTunes.35 Many of you have your own stories about how
tasks like stuffing envelopes, making sales calls, or picking up trash
have been turned into an engaging and enjoyable experience.
Still, way too many businesspeople believe that gamification’s purpose is simply to get consumers to buy things or promote commercial enterprise. Groupon, as an example, has done an amazing job of
leveraging human tendencies with game thinking. They have similarly encouraged far too many people to buy products and services
they simply do not need, want, or use.
Source: Supermono Limited.
As a response, the critics of gamification are becoming more and
more vocal—and creative. Progress Wars (www.progresswars.com) is
12
an online game created to parody typical gamification tactics. With
marketing claims like “Watching progress bars change has never
been this much fun” and “Like Progress Quest for people who aren’t
old,” Progress Wars displays random missions to complete by simply
clicking the “Perform mission” button (which happens to be the only
thing to click on the site). Ian Bogost created a game called Cow
Clicker in which the only action a player can take is up to one click
on a cartoon cow every six hours. Each time a player performs this
action, he receives a point—a “click.” The only other way to earn
clicks is to invite friends to sign up, join your “pasture,” and play
the game (click on cows). “I didn’t set out to make it fun,” Bogost
said in an interview with Wired ’s Jason Tanz. “Players were supposed to recognize that clicking a cow is a ridiculous thing to want
to do.”36 Clearly created as a critique of the exploitative nature of
popular social games, Cow Clicker was surprisingly successful. Over
50,000 players mindlessly clicked cows in the game before its 2011
“Cowpocalypse.”
Imagine if credit unions approached gamification differently. While
game thinking can certainly drive people to transact business, its
potential is much greater than that. By taking the time to understand why people play games and pushing ourselves to maximize the
positive impact of gamified systems on happiness, productivity, and
general societal progress, we may discover that gamification can drive
people to make better choices—financial and otherwise.
By taking the time to understand why people play games and pushing ourselves to maximize the
positive impact of gamified systems on happiness, productivity, and general societal progress, we
may discover that gamification can drive people to make better choices—financial and otherwise.
Flow
Properly aligning game aesthetics, dynamics, and mechanics to the
audiences and problems a game system is trying to address can have
fascinating results—especially if they create what Dr. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi terms “flow.” Flow is what people experience when they
lose themselves in a book, a project, a hobby, a relationship, or a
job—an optimal experience that fully engages, inspires, and satisfies.
People in a state of flow experience intense concentration, feelings of
competency and accomplishment, the loss of self-­consciousness, and
a distorted sense of time.37 Flow is so gratifying that people will put
themselves in harm’s way to experience it. It is motivating, pleasing,
and exciting. Remarkably, flow also improves skills.
The key to achieving flow is optimizing the relationship of challenges to the skills necessary to overcome those challenges. If the
13
Figure 9: Optimizing the
Relationship between Skills
and Challenges to Create
Flow
(High)
Challenges
Anxiety
A3
Flow
channel
A4
A1
A2
(Low)
Skills
(Low)
Boredom
(High)
Source: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The Psychology
of Optimal Experience (New York: Harper & Row,
1990), 74.
challenge is too difficult for a person’s skill set, she will feel anxious.
If the challenge is too easy for a person’s skill set, she will feel bored.
A person in the state of flow tackles a challenge that is a reach for
her skill level, almost impossible without really stretching herself. As
time goes on, those challenges need to become progressively harder
in order for a flow state to occur, because the person’s skills have
improved. Flow, then, becomes a virtuous circle in which a person
continuously and progressively feels gratified, improves skills, and
overcomes challenges.
A game designer, then, must make sure that the challenges presented
are dynamically aligned with a player’s abilities. While the ideal state
may be a constant process of gauging a player’s skill level and customizing challenges accordingly, a workable solution may be to look
at experiences in three phases: onboarding, intermediate skill level,
and extreme use. During onboarding, it is important that players
understand the basic tools and rules of the game. In an MMORPG
a new player may be tasked to click an inventory item, let’s say an
axe, then receive a reward. After that is accomplished, the player is
instructed to swing the axe at a nearly harmless villain. Then another.
“Congratulations,” a message appears along with a small reward,
“You have learned how to use a weapon! Now let’s go fight some
terrifying monsters to save the village.” The basic formula is: action,
reward, action, action, reward, action, action, action, action, reward.
As players progress, the challenges get harder, their skills improve,
and their attention remains captured.
It may seem crazy to believe that games can improve skills, but
research proves that they do. A recent Wall Street Journal article
reported the following:
• Surgeons who play video games for at least three hours a week
make 37% fewer errors.
• Action game players make correct decisions 25% faster than players trained with slower-­paced games.
• The more middle-­school children play video games, the higher
they score on creativity tests.
• Skilled online strategy-­action game players think and move up to
four times faster than others, performing up to 400 actions per
minute of gameplay.38
Successfully gamified systems can create flow. If you have ever
watched a teenager play Call of Duty, experienced the feeling of
finally beating your father at chess, or learned a foreign language, you
have seen this for yourself. Imagine helping employees, members,
community members, or volunteer boards experience a sense of flow,
and imagine what that would mean for productivity, satisfaction,
personal growth, and overall success.
14
Self-Determination Theory
Self-determination theory argues that individuals are “growth-­
oriented organisms who actively interact with their environments”
as opposed to passive and reactive beings who are controlled by
their social environment with no inherent desire to grow.39 Further,
the model insists that people are intrinsically motivated to make
choices that satisfy three human needs: competence, autonomy, and
relatedness.40 Self-­determination theorists would argue, then, that a
gamified system need not necessarily provide extrinsic motivation to
players. Instead, the system must simply provide players with a structured framework in which their inherent needs can be met:
• Competence—Players want to control their outcomes and master
the skills necessary for success.
• Autonomy—Players want free choice.
• Relatedness—Players want to be connected with others.
Ideal Self
For most of us there is a significant discrepancy between our “actual
self ” and our “ideal self.” The allure of many games lies in how they
allow us to experience the latter. In video games I can be a warrior
who saves princesses and entire villages with might and wisdom.
I can be a professional basketball player who wows crowds with
gravity-­defying slam dunks, a quick-witted detective who cracks mysteries no one else can, or a fearless Air Force pilot who guns down
Nazi Messerschmitt Me 262 fighter planes by the dozen.
While these experiences are pure fantasy, their impact is real.
Research by Dr. Andy Przybylski and his team at the University
of Essex found that players are more likely to enjoy and become
intrinsically motivated to play
a game when it allows them
3
to experience ideal self characThe 2007 i Idea Virtual Finance encouraged the creation of
teristics. Further, this research
Mo’doh Island, an interactive game through which schools can
found that this force is even
deliver personal finance curricula in a Second Life virtual envistronger for players with a large
ronment. Learn more at filene.org/home/innovation/i3ideas/
difference between their ideal
navigate/34.
and perceived actual selves.41 In
other words, people enjoy playing games that help them become, or experience, their ideal selves—
especially if they believe they have significantly missed that mark.
This is a powerful finding with endless implications for financial
services. Online banking experiences, loan applications, and balance
inquiries serve as blunt reminders of reality. Gamified financial services may motivate consumers by allowing them to experience, and
15
learn from, their ideal selves. What if credit union members could
play out “what if ” scenarios with custom avatars they build and
progress through a virtual world? They could simultaneously experience their real and ideal selves while transacting business through
online or mobile channels. Would they more readily engage with
their finances? Would they improve their real-life abilities? Would
they make better financial choices?
Gamification Examples
When all of the pieces are put together properly, game thinking can
have a dramatic impact on human behavior and development. The
following are great examples of organizations that have successfully
solved problems and engaged audiences with this concept.
Ford Motor Company
As the price of gas has increased and consumers have become more
eco-­conscious, automakers have focused on improving the fuel mileage of their vehicles. While the weight,
mechanics, and aerodynamics of a car
Figure 10: Gamification and Fuel Economy
are huge factors in fuel economy, so,
too, is how the car is driven. Ford Motor
Company worked with Johnson Controls
to create SmartGauge with Eco­Guide, an
eco-gauge installed in the Ford Fusion
Hybrid that serves as a constant feedback
mechanism for drivers to see how their
operation of the car impacts fuel consumption. The system displays “efficiency
leaves” to graphically represent how the
The Ford Fusion Hybrid uses efficiency leaves to graphically represent how a
driver's actions are impacting fuel economy. University of California, Riverside,
driver is doing. If the leaves stay green and
researchers have found that eco-gauges can improve fuel economy by up to 6%.
on their vines, the driver is being ecofriendly. If the leaves fall off, the driver is
not optimizing the car’s fuel mileage. The
display also includes the overall fuel mileage the car has enjoyed during the trip. In effect, the system creates
a feedback loop with a dynamic scoreboard that improves driving
behavior. Researchers at the University of California, Riverside,
found that eco-gauges improve fuel economy by 6% in the city and
1% on the highway.42
Weight Watchers
The weight-loss program Weight Watchers is one of the most visible
examples of a successfully gamified system. The comprehensive program applies game thinking to every aspect of the user experience.
Participants have a clear point system with PointsPlus, which scores
16
every food based on how it impacts health and weight loss. As food is
consumed, participants track their point totals, trying not to exceed
the daily limit. Participants also attend meetings to get emotional
support from other participants and nutrition experts. The program
also leverages the most vital weight-loss scoreboard—the scale. This
is a powerful combination of goal setting, scoring systems, social
pressure, feedback loops, and motivation. Not surprisingly, it works.
One research study found that Weight Watchers participants lost
twice as much weight as people who followed weight-loss advice
from their doctors.43
HopeLab and Nike
HopeLab created a device called the Zamzee to improve the health
behaviors of young people. The device monitors a person’s physical activity throughout the day. At the end of each day the device
is synced to a computer, which converts the amount of activity to a
point total that can be redeemed for various rewards. A pilot study
found that Zamzee users were 30% more active than non-users.44
Nike has created a community around a similar device called Nike+.
The program tracks physical activity with a chip that is integrated
with Apple iPods, iPhones, and other
devices. Information from each workout is
Figure 11: Nike+ Revolutionizes Physical Fitness
then uploaded to the Nike+ Community,
through Gamification
which helps users set physical fitness goals,
track their activities, get valuable insight
into their performance, discover better running routes, challenge others with running
times or distances, learn from others, and
share successes with friends. Like Zamzee,
Nike+ allows users to convert physical activity into virtual currency redeemable for various rewards. The Nike+ experience during
a workout is equally powerful. The system
gives constant feedback about running pace,
calories burned, time, personal records,
and other performance measures to inspire
consistency, performance, and improvement. Custom music play­lists
allow users to devise workout plans supported by the appropriate
rhythms and beats in their personal music collections. The system
even allows you to play a virtual game of tag with friends and family.
Gamification in Financial Services
Financial institutions have gotten in on the gamification fun as well.
The following are some examples of gamified systems in the financial
services space.
17
Save to Win
Uncertain outcomes are exciting. That is what makes the NCAA
basketball tournament so intriguing, slot machines so fun to play,
the ups and downs of the stock market so gripping, and skydiving
so exhilarating. How boring would a game be if we always knew the
outcome before we played it? When it comes to consumer savings,
however, banks and credit unions have made milquetoast seem
exuberant. The Save to Win program is changing that mentality by
applying game thinking to a traditional savings program.
In 2009, eight Michigan credit unions launched Save to Win, a
collaborative effort supported by the D2D Fund, the Michigan
Credit Union League, the Center for Financial Services Innovation,
and the Filene Research Institute to test the viability, feasibility, and
desirability of prize-based savings accounts. For every $25 deposited
into a Save to Win account, savers received a chance to win prizes,
including a $100,000 grand prize. The combination of an uncertain
outcome, an effective reward schedule, and a powerful scoring system
prompted overwhelming consumer support in its first year:
• 11,700 new accounts.
• $8.6M in savings deposits.
• 56% of participants were non-savers prior to their Save to Win
experience.
• 44% of participants were from low- to moderate-­income
households.
• 39% of participants were asset poor.
That success has continued. In 2010 the number of participating credit unions blossomed to 36, yielding 16,200 Save to Win
accounts and nearly $30M in deposits. Forty-three credit unions
participated in Save to Win in 2011.
SaveUp
Inspired by the success of Save to Win, SaveUp constructed an
online tool that rewards a variety of financial behaviors with chances
to win prizes. Users link their financial accounts to SaveUp and
receive virtual currency (credits) for making loan payments and savings deposits, consuming financial education, and other activities.
These credits can then be used to play a variety of games, including
instant-win tickets, raffle-­style drawings, and Powerball-­style jackpots. The program is currently being piloted by 25 credit unions in
18 states to test its impact on consumer behavior, member engagement, and return on investment, but early successes have already
been experienced.
18
PiggyMojo
One of the best ways to save money is to stop spending it. Unfortunately, the feedback loop associated with not spending money
is broken. When you resist buying that candy bar at the checkout
counter, the $5 strawberry Frappuccino at your favorite coffee shop,
or a $15 iTunes download, all you are left with is a faint sense of
accomplishment. The program PiggyMojo addresses this problem
head-on. PiggyMojo allows users to set specific savings goals to reach
and then encourages them to send a text message (or Tweet) to PiggyMojo each time an urge to spend is averted. Each “impulse save” is
tracked, progress is displayed online by gradually revealing a picture
of the savings goal, and a notification about the success gets sent to
the user’s savings partner. PiggyMojo even makes it easy to turn those
impulse savings into real savings with account transfers.
This gamified system is executed very well. Users have instant feedback each time an action takes place, social pressure/relatedness with
each text message, a scoring system that lets them know how they are
doing, and a reward system that creates an emotional connection to
achievement.
Wright-Patt Credit Union’s Patronage Dividend
Patronage dividends can be a key differentiator for credit unions.
Wright-Patt Credit Union’s ($2.3B, Fairborn, Ohio) Special Patronage Dividend program does that and more. Instead of simply calculating each member’s annual dividend as a rebate of interest paid
or bonus to dividends earned, Wright-Patt’s program has a detailed
scoring system that aligns the credit union’s goals with member
contributions toward those goals. While eligible members do receive
a patronage dividend based on their average daily loan and deposit
balances, they can earn additional bonuses for having a business
loan, first mortgage loan, or financial planning relationship with
the credit union. Members can also receive bonuses for having an
active debit card, using electronic statements, or taking advantage of
remote account access tools. While the time between the action and
the reward in a patronage program is quite long for most gamified
systems, Wright-Patt has created an amazing example of an effective point system. They also encourage members to spread the word
about the program by making the point that “when more member-­
owners use and contribute to the credit union, more value and benefits can be returned to all our members. So, why not encourage your
family and friends to use Wright-Patt Credit Union?”45
Members Credit Union’s CU at the Movies
In 2004, Members Credit Union ($229M, Winston-­Salem, North
Carolina) created an employee incentive program called CU at the
19
Movies. Each department and branch became the cast of a movie—
mock movie posters were even created. Department heads, branch
managers, and senior executives played the producer/director role
and laid out their expectations for cast performance, including
things like accounts opened, teller balancing, loans closed, monthly
perfect attendance, and new members. Based on the performances,
“thumbs up” stickers (think Siskel and Ebert) were given out at the
end of each month. Stickers were worth a certain number of tokens.
Employees also had their own rolls of stickers and were empowered
to spot excellent peer behavior and reward it. These stickers were
also worth a certain number of tokens. At the Oscars-­themed annual
employee appreciation dinner, the credit union held an auction for
large prizes. Employees bid on the items with the tokens they had
earned.
Opportunities
So how does your credit union get started with gamification? First,
think about a problem you are trying to solve and the audience you
are trying to engage. Define the problem and the needs set of the
audience, and consider the aesthetics that would best address both.
What dynamics can drive those feelings? What mechanics can be
used to support those dynamics? How will you keep score? How
should you design a leaderboard that will promote engagement by
players of all skill levels? How will you design challenges to inspire
flow? How will you reward success? How will success be manifested?
These questions do not have right or wrong answers. Instead, they
inspire experimentation. Think “versions” or “iterations,” not “set it
and forget it.” Trial and error are necessary in creating a successful
gamified system.
Have each member of your team talk about a favorite game. What
did you enjoy? How was the game played? How did the rules create
fun? How did you develop as a player over time? How can the game
thinking involved in that game be applied to getting members to
read a newsletter, board elections, online banking design, community
involvement, service pricing, or employee performance?
Other thoughts:
• Consumers can smell exploitation a mile away. Focus on their
benefit, not yours.
• Shorten the time between action and feedback.
• Break large missions into smaller quests.
• Game players want structure and autonomy. Make sure you
provide both.
20
• Action, reward, action, action, reward. Make sure challenges
are aligned with skills, challenges get progressively harder, and
accomplishments are rewarded.
• Badges, points, and virtual currencies only have value if they are
actually accomplishments. (My first brown ribbon in cross country was cool. My sixth one was not.)
• If you aren’t having fun, your audience isn’t, either.
The possibilities for applying game thinking to financial services are
endless, and their implications may be revolutionary. Credit union
members in their prime borrowing years have played video games
their entire lives. Even your
most ambitious employees have
spent countless hours flinging
The possibilities for applying game thinking to financial serbirds at green pigs, harvestvices are endless, and their implications may be revolutionary.
ing digital crops, roaming the
Credit union members in their prime borrowing years have
world of Azeroth, crashing
played video games their entire lives.
down DK Mountain, or collecting 200 Monopoly dollars
by passing “Go.” Game thinking is everywhere and is being applied
to seemingly everything. With the opportunity to engage audiences,
solve problems, improve skills, and have fun, credit unions are doing
themselves a disservice by ignoring this reality.
Imagine a lobby scoreboard that lights up when a member makes a
deposit: “John Skolaski is the 15th best saver in the credit union over
the past month.” Some members cheer. Others sneer, determined to
unseat Mr. Skolaski by the end of the year. Imagine a point system
that gives the biggest prizes to members who have completed the
most actions with your credit union, as opposed to sign-up bonuses
that only reward the first transaction. Imagine building a community
of savers or borrowers who simultaneously battle against and learn
from each other. Imagine having a timer and a leaderboard at every
workstation with statistics on each employee’s most productive day,
current progress toward that threshold, and how that productivity
compares to the rest of the organization. Imagine qualifying for a
promotion, better rates, a new car, or a special parking spot based on
experience points. Imagine experience points being a component of
board elections.
The problems that face consumers and credit unions during this
turbulent economic time are real. Their implications are undeniably
serious. Still, the impact of game thinking makes a world in which
the lines between play and reality are so grayed that better financial
decisions can be fun, responsible behaviors can be rewarding, and
productive work can be exhilarating seem not only possible, but
plausible. Fun is powerful. Let your credit union and its members
have more of it. Get in the game.
21
Endnotes
1.Jane McGonigal, Reality is Broken (New York: Penguin Press,
2011).
2. Sean Dromgoole, “A View from the Marketplace: Games Now
and Going Forward,” GameVision Europe, March 2009,
www.scribd.com/doc/13714815/Sean-Dromgoole-CEO-SomeResearch-Gamevision.
3. PRWeb, “Daily Time Americans in Debt Spend Worrying
About Debt: 198 Minutes; Time Spent for Financial Planning:
5 Minutes,” December 2, 2010, www.prweb.com/releases/
2010/12/prweb4779574.htm.
4. Gabe Zichermann and Christopher Cunningham, Gamification
by Design (Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, 2011), xiv.
5. Andrew K. Przybylski, Netta Weinstein, Kou Murayama,
Martin F. Lynch, and Richard M. Ryan, “The Ideal Self at Play:
The Appeal of Video Games That Let You Be All You Can Be,”
Psychological Science 23 (1; January 2012): 69–76.
6.Jane McGonigal, Reality is Broken (New York: Penguin Press,
2011).
7. Peter Warman, “Newzoo Games Market Report: Consumer
Spending on Key Platforms and Business Models—Summary,”
Newzoo, 2009/2010, corporate.newzoo.com/press/
GamesMarketReport_FREE_030510.pdf.
8. NPD Group, “Extreme Gamers Spend Two Full Days per
Week Playing Video Games,” May 27, 2010, www.npd.com/
press/releases/press_100527b.html.
9. Paul Tassi, “Nielsen Says Americans Spend a Mere 13 Minutes
a Day on a Video Game Console,” Forbes.com, April 4, 2011,
www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/04/04/nielsen-saysamericans-spend-13-minutes-a-day-on-a-video-game-console.
10. Sean Dromgoole, “A View from the Marketplace: Games Now
and Going Forward,” GameVision Europe, March 2009,
www.scribd.com/doc/13714815/Sean-Dromgoole-CEO-SomeResearch-Gamevision.
11. Charles Newark-­French, “Mobile App Usage Further Dominates Web, Spurred by Facebook,” Flurry Blog, January 9,
2012, blog.flurry.com//bid/80241/mobile-app-usage-furtherdominates-web-spurred-by-facebook.
12. NielsenWire, “Play Before Work: Games Most Popular Mobile
App Category in US,” July 6, 2011, blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/
online_mobile/games-most-popular-mobile-app-category.
13. PRWeb, “Daily Time Americans in Debt Spend Worrying About Debt: 198 Minutes; Time Spent for Financial
22
Planning: 5 Minutes,” December 2, 2010, www.prweb.com/
releases/2010/12/prweb4779574.htm.
14. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Time Spent in Leisure and Sports
Activities for the Civilian Population by Selected Characteristics, 2010 Annual Averages,” US Department of Labor,
June 22, 2011, www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t11.htm.
15. Entertainment Software Association, “Industry Facts,”
www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp.
16. NPD Group, “U.S. Video Game Industry New Physical Retail
Content Sales Reach $9.3 Billion,” January 12, 2012, www.
npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/pressreleases/pr_120116.
17. The Telegraph, “Call of Duty: MW3 Breaks $1bn Sales Record,”
December 12, 2011, www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/
video-games/8951477/Call-of-Duty-MW3-breaks-1bnsales-record.html.
18. T. C. Sottek, “Modern Warfare 3 Sales Edge Out Avatar by
Reaching $1 Billion in Record Time,” The Verge, December 12, 2011, www.theverge.com/2011/12/12/2629959/
call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-record-sales.
19. Activision 2010 Annual Report, investor.activision.com/
annuals.cfm.
20. Shayndi Raice and Randall Smith, “Zynga IPO Set at $10 a
Share,” The Wall Street Journal, December 16, 2011,
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203893404
577099293401936570.html.
21. Cheri Lawson, “No Batteries Required: Board Game Sales
Soar,” NPR, December 24, 2009, www.npr.org/templates/
story/story.php?storyId=121841016.
22. Scott Keyes, “Settlers of Catan: How a German Board Game Went
Mainstream,” The Atlantic, June 7, 2011, www.theatlantic.com/
entertainment/archive/2011/06/settlers-of-catan-how-a-germanboard-game-went-mainstream/239919.
23. “Advance to Go and Collect £90k: Earliest Surviving Monopoly Set Fetches Whopping Auction Figure,” The Daily Mail,
MailOnline, February 24, 2011, www.dailymail.co.uk/news/
article-1360221/Monopoly-Earliest-surviving-set-fetches90k-auction-figure.html.
24. Rich Rice, “The Hunt for the Elusive Chess Norm,” Chessdom, March 17, 2010, reports.chessdom.com/news-2010/
spice-chess-norms.
25. Gabe Zichermann and Christopher Cunningham, Gamification
by Design, (Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, 2011), xiv.
23
26. Jason Tanz, “The Curse of Cow Clicker : How a Cheeky Satire
Became a Videogame Hit,” Wired, December 20, 2011,
www.wired.com/magazine/2011/12/ff_cowclicker/all/1.
27. Aaron Dignan, “Why the Future of Work is Play,” presentation, PSFK Conference, New York City, April 8, 2011,
vimeo.com/23167866.
28. Marc LeBlanc, “Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics: A Formal
Approach to Game Design,” lecture at Northwestern University,
April 2004, algorithmancy.8kindsoffun.com/MDAnwu.ppt.
29. Bart Stewart, “Personality and Play Styles: A Unified Model,”
Gamasutra, September 1, 2011, www.gamasutra.com/view/
feature/6474/personality_and_play_styles_a_.php.
30. Richard Bartle, “Virtual Worlds: Why People Play,” mud.co.uk/
richard/VWWPP.pdf.
31. Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, and Robert Zubek, “MDA:
A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research,”
www.cs.northwestern.edu/~hunicke/MDA.pdf.
32. Gabe Zichermann and Joselin Linder, Game-Based Marketing
(Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2010), 75.
33. Eric Eldon, “US Virtual Goods Market to Hit $2.9 Billion in
2012, with Facebook Games Maturing, Mobile Booming,”
Techcrunch, December 7, 2011, techcrunch.com/2011/12/07/
us-virtual-goods-market-to-hit-2-9-billion-in-2012-withfacebook-games-maturing-mobile-booming.
34. Disney Club Penguin, “Coins for Change 2011 Results!”
www.clubpenguin.com/parents/coins-for-change-2011.htm.
35. Apple iTunes, Paid Apps chart, March 6, 2012, www.apple.com/
itunes/charts/paid-apps.
36. Jason Tanz, “The Curse of Cow Clicker : How a Cheeky Satire
Became a Videogame Hit,” Wired, December 20, 2011,
www.wired.com/magazine/2011/12/ff_cowclicker/all/1.
37. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience (New York: Harper & Row, 1990).
38. Robert Lee Hotz, “When Gaming Is Good For You,” Wall
Street Journal, March 5, 2012, online.wsj.com/article/SB10001
424052970203458604577263273943183932.html.
39. Anja Van den Broeck, Maarten Vansteenkiste, and Hans De
Witte, “Self-­Determination Theory: A Theoretical and Empirical Overview in Occupational Health Psychology,” in J. Houdmont and S. Leka (eds.), Occupational Health Psychology:
European Perspectives on Research, Education, and Practice (Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press, 2008), 63–88.
24
40. E. Deci and R. Ryan, Handbook of Self-­Determination Research
(Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2002).
41. Andrew K. Przybylski, Netta Weinstein, Kou Murayama,
Martin F. Lynch, and Richard M. Ryan, “The Ideal Self at Play:
The Appeal of Video Games That Let You Be All You Can Be,”
Psychological Science 23(1; January 2012): 69–76.
42. Kanok Boriboonsomsin, Alexander Vu, and Matthew Barth,
“Co Eco-­Driving: Pilot Evaluation of Driving Behavior
Changes Among U.S. Drivers,” University of California, Riverside, August 2010, www.uctc.net/research/papers/UCTC-FR2010-20.pdf.
43. Susan A. Jebb, Amy L. Ahern, Ashley D. Olson, Louise M.
Aston, Christina Holzapfel, Julia Stoll, Ulrike Amann-­Gassner,
Annie E. Simpson, Nicholas R. Fuller, Suzanne Pearson,
Namson S. Lau, Adrian P. Mander, Hans Hauner, and Ian D.
Caterson, “Primary Care Referral to a Commercial Provider for
Weight Loss Treatment versus Standard Care: A Randomised
Controlled Trial,” The Lancet 378 (9801; October 22, 2011):
1485–1492.
44. Gavin Corley, “Zamzee Activity Monitor Rewards & Socializes Teenage Physical Activity,” Medgadget, August 31, 2011,
medgadget.com/2011/08/zamzee-activity-monitor-rewardssocializes-teenage-physical-activity.html.
45. Wright-Patt Credit Union, “Refer-a-­Friend,” www.wpcu.coop/
patronagedividend/Refer-a-Friend.aspx.
25
Innovation Brief
Get in the Game:
How Credit Unions Can Engage
Members, Solve Problems, and
Improve Skills with Game Thinking
Matt Davis
ideas grow here
Innovation Director
Filene Research Institute
PO Box 2998
Madison, WI 53701-2998
Phone 608-665-8550
www.filene.org
PUBLICATION #273 (4/12)