Gamifying the Circular Sharing and Civic Economy
Sailing on the choppy waves of the financial crisis, various thinkers and designers are proposing a change of system which can give rise to new business models. We are witnessing the emergence of the circular economy, the sharing economy and the civic economy. What are the real-life consequences of these new business models, which are still far from common? For example, the sharing economy as well as the circular economy are based on trust. What is the effect on business norms and ethics of this central role of trust?
Contents
Pervasive games
We have researched, tested and/or commented upon new business models by designing and implementing gamified interventions during the Redesigning Business Symposium on November 20th, 2014. These interventions were focused on allowing the public to experience that evening what these new business models mean, here and now.
We analysed various business models and distilled from this analysis a number of ‘game rules’ which we will introduce during the symposium. We will allow visitors to experience the consequences of the ‘game rules’ of current and future business models by participating in a pervasive game (a combination of reality and game). This way we wished to provide insight into the various business models, making it possible to compare them, and thus inviting an interesting discussion.
This method of using games neatly corresponds to the basic rules of gamification in education by incorporating the slogan '"Play, Don't tell"'. With careful design, players will experience and be confronted by the consequences of their own actions. While this short experience will not be able to explain the more delicate questions surrounding these complex topics, it will aid the participant in the overall experience of listening to the keynote speakers and presentations, linking their game experience to the more difficult topics.
Overall experience
Visitors of the Symposium get handed different stickers at the entrance. The sticker defines in which fictitious company the visitor belongs. Players participate individually, but score points for their companies, working together with strangers for a common goal. You've got to build products (Lego figures) using four different economical strategies at the four different stands with a time limit of one minute. Succeeding means scoring for the whole company. Different games have different mechanics resembling
References to the subprojects
This project is divided between four different subprojects, of which three resemble the new economies and one resembles the old economy:
A Proposal for gamifying the old economy
From economic principles to game rules
Assumptions
We live in a world of limited resources, but not of limited needs. This principle is called scarcity, and is one of the basic principles of the classic –or "old" economy. Scarcity describes the relation between supply and demand in an economy with limited resources.
Translation of assumptions to design principles
The old economy uses the cradle to grave principle, and therefore uses their resources without re-using them. According to that principle, where resources are used only one time, you have to use your resources thoughtfully in order to make the most out of it.
Game proposal
In the Gamification Masterclass of the Redesigning Business Week, we tried to translate this principle of scarcity into a pervasive game. Each team has a limited pool of resources, with which they have to build different products to gain points. You can choose to build an easy product, but by doing so you have to use a lot of resources. The other option is to build the difficult product, for which you need less resources, but in which you are less likely to succeed because of the given time limit of 60 seconds. The resources are limited for each team, so choose wisely, because if you fail to make your product within the time limit your resources will be spent as well.
Storytelling
You could translate this principle to the idea of designing for the dump. The easy products are simple to produce but have a lot of waste material once finished, while the difficult products –for instance, products made from durable recourses– have a lower amount of waste. Also, the idea of eliminating the used recourses from the game as waste, gives this game a definite end, which relates to the linear proces of the "old" economy.
A Proposal for gamifying the circular economy
From economic principles to game rules
Assumptions
The circular economy is a economy-design based on reduce, re-use, recycle. Energy must come from renewable sources. One of the problems with the circular economy is to retrieve the necessary high quality resources from the waste. Development should therefore focus on pre-sorting instead of post-sorting strategies.
Translation of assumptions to design principles
The design should reflect the necessity within the circular economy to rethink design such that high valued resources can be easily accessed for retrieval. Furthermore, the use of lesser materials will generally result in a lower price. This can be done by literally letting the players search through a pile of resources for the right resource, but still enabling the player to succeed their goal with lesser resources (albeit at a lower price).
Game proposal
The circular economy game is a game where players can make a product out of waste. Players have to filter the waste in order to make a perfect one colored product. If they can't find the right colored resources, they can opt to use another color, but this results in less profit.
Storytelling
The bowl represents the waste pile, where players will have to search between the litter (i.e. other colored blocks). Furthermore, the need for high-end recycled products is reflected by searching for just one type of resource within several resources of lesser quality (i.e. other colored blocks).
http://33.media.tumblr.com/c770e47946481728f1e006cfb4aea5cd/tumblr_nfata0LumK1u0pdywo2_500.jpg
A Proposal for gamifying the civic economy
From economic principles to game rules
Assumptions
The civic economy is a economy-design based on co-operating and local production, local entrepreneurs and local resources.
Translation of assumptions to design principles
Game proposal
The civic economy game is a game where you can make a product with local ingredients, but you only have yellow or black ingredients. You have to negotiate with the other local company to trade your leftovers. Together you'll be able to finalize your products. In practice that means that you start working on a product at one stand, which only has resource A –grain, for example. But you also need resource B to make your product –coal, for example. You have to go to the other stand with resource A (a product you have too much of) and trade it there for resource B (which are leftovers for the other stand, too). You can start making your product at both stands as starting point, but eventually you'll need the leftover resource of the other stand to finish your product.
Storytelling
A Proposal for gamifying the sharing economy
From economic principles to game rules
Assumptions
These essential principles, in my opinion, are 'trust' and 'shared benefit'. Creating together gives a result that is in fact larger than the sum of its components. However, both contributing businesses will have to trust that the other considers this shared benefit just as important. Otherwise, the system will simply fail.
Translation of assumptions to design principles
The above assumption already gives a game concept in terms of victory and failure. In this game proposal, playing together is essential for having even a chance of winning. Not being able to play together – or trust each other, for that matter – means failure for both participants. Playing together, however, should also have an additional incentive besides winning to underline the urgency of the sharing economy.
Translating these conditions to the concept of the entire pervasive game at the symposium – visualising each of the economies named earlier with four small building games using LEGO-bricks – I've come up with the following proposal.
Game proposal
As the player approaches the table with this game, he or she is instructed to find another player as this game can only be played in pairs. While most of the other mini games have one source of resources, this one has two different resources: one for each player. Both players have a bowl with one type of resources. Yet, in order to make the shape shown on a picture by the game master within 60 seconds, they will have to share their resources AND deliberate how they are going to build the shape together in a successful way. Winning means that each competing team gets one point, meaning that playing with a player from a different team gets a better joint result than playing with a member from the same team. I'm hoping this will present the players with the concept of sharing to get a better joint benefit.
Storytelling
Imagine that both players are in fact businessmen and the teams are different companies, making a product out of different resources. However, the companies do not own all the resources. In this case, consequently, the product can only be made by working together and 'sharing' your resources. Joint benefit is the key here. Of course, both businessmen working together 'can' be from the same company, but that will not gain the team more benefit than usual. Working together with another company, however, means benefits for both cooperating companies: 1+1=3!