Just as has been said for some time, there are principles that make gamification truly effective. For example, intrinsic motivation, the right type of challenges, and using narratives that are most appropriate for the desired goals.

However, one of the most important elements is personalization and segmentation. Not everyone is the same. Employees should be segmented into different groups and assigned specific objectives so that they have a sense of achievement of KPIs or eLearning.

Gamification does not motivate everyone in the same way.

Gamification does not generate the same motivation in everyone equally. The beauty of Closelly is that it is flexible enough to use the appropriate game dynamics for each individual or group of individuals.

Furthermore, there is a diversity of generations within a company. So, how do we personalize Gamification?

To achieve this, and be sure that the proposed solution is the best, we have to make the effort to understand the users. Not only identify them and know what role they play in the organization, but we have to know them more deeply. We need to know how they react, to what and when. We need to know what affects them and what does not motivate them at all. This way, we can design training and dynamics that allow them to motivate themselves and achieve the best results.

Types of players and games

Some people look at player types as proposed by Bartle. This view can be partially useful. Octalysis’ perspective provides other useful elements for the implementation of gamification in companies and is more focused on the goal of the game.

And what about the user profile? We are not even talking about gamification in companies like what Closelly does but about video games. Companies that create video games face exactly the same challenges as us. They want their users to be as motivated and engaged as possible, and to achieve this, they need to understand them.

A company that is a great source of game creators is Quantic Foundry. On their blog, there is a vast amount of information about what they have learned about games and their players. We love the analysis of player motivations and personality traits that we find here.

However, when designing a gamification implementation for a client, even when you can customize activities, how can we consider the differences of the participants when we choose the same narrative for everyone?

Looking for a common denominator? Strategy, not competition

Here are interesting points to highlight from Quantic Foundry’s blog.

• Strategy is the most stable motivator as players mature. Contrary to what many people might think, competition is a motivator that is not always effective for all ages. Competition is more effective as a motivator at an early age rather than by gender. On the other hand, strategy and complex thinking keep players motivated at all ages.

• Gender matters, but not as much as age. As we might expect, female players are more likely to be motivated by elements of personal expression and the customization of elements, fantasy elements, and elements that revolve around stories. Male players tend to be more motivated by competition, challenges, adrenaline, and strategy. All of this aligns with the stereotypes we have seen. The interesting thing is that as players age, these elements become less important.

These are just 2 examples among many. The point is the importance of understanding users (players and employees).