WP3 : Serious Games in Applications

1. WP3 : SeriousGames in Applications Michela Mortara, Bianca Falcidieno, Chiara Catalano CNR-IMATI Genova

2. Overview • Objectivesof the WP • Organizationof the WP • Activities and TimePlanfor the First year • Status of the WP and Deliverable D3.1 • Work in Progress and Planfor the Secondyear • Discussion

3. Objective and strategy • Providing the basis for gradually increasing the connection among users and stakeholders through integrative mechanisms • Analyzing the current practices, gaps and desiderata concerning the adoption of SGs in various application fields • Identification of • barriers and facilitators • Methodological and technological open issues • best practices in the adoption and development of SGs • market perspectives in new, promising application fields or breakthrough in established ones • Support and stimulate • knowledge exchanges • Further research, project proposals

4. Structureof the WP • Established six Special Interest Groups, plus an harmonization and integration task. • Business and management (T3.1, CEDEP) • Engineering and manufacturing (T3.2, PoliMi) • Health and fitness (T3.3, HWU) • Security, safety & crisis management (T3.4, NURC) • Humanities & Heritage (T3.5, CNR) • Personal & social learning & ethics (T3.6, Inesc-Id) • 17 partners • 70 MM • SIGs Harmoniization & integration (T3.7 ,CEDEP)

5. Detail of the Activities • Roadmap for the first year We are here!

6. Detailof the Activities • SIG Set-up • Identification of stakeholders and titles • Taxonomy and scheme for classification of SGs • Assessment and cataloguing of SGs • Ad-hoc meetings, questionnaires and critical assessment of the field • Assessment for cross-fertilization • Individuation of potential new SIGs • Deliverable preparation

7. Deliverable D3.1 • WP3 isexpectedtodeliverone single report due at PM12 (end ofseptember) • D3.1 willconsistof: • Introduction and descriptionof the WP: objectives, organization and detailsof the common activitiesaspresented in the previousslides • The FieldReports, oneforeach SIG, by the SIG leaders • The harmonization and cross-fertilizationassessment, includingrecommendationsfornewSIGs or new focus for the presentones, by the T3.7 leader • The planfor the nextyearofactivities.

8. Field Report Structure • Organization of the SIG • SIG leader, active members, interested • Definition of the field • Descriptionof the domain and SIG taxonomy classifying the educational objectives and/or the competencies and skills that games in the area teach/train. • SIG motivation • why the application field is so relevant and promising for SG development and spread; which is the added value provided by SGs in the field

9. Field Report Structure • Stakeholders in the field • Customers, Developers, Researchinstitutes • and also • Conferences • Journals • Projects • Other (e.g. blogs, communities) asindicatorsfor the spread of SGs in the domain.

10. Field Report Structure • Brief state of the art of the methodology and of the technology relevant to the field • Describe the potential solutions to any specific design requirement given by the application: e.g. need for realism, fast interaction, particular interaction devices…

11. Field Report Structure • SGs Case Studies • This section collects the interesting SGs in the field discovered so far. • The collection should be as exhaustive and balanced -with respect to the taxonomy terms- as possible. • It is also the starting point for a catalogue of SGs that will be continuously updated and will be hosted on the Virtual Research Environment when ready. • Each game entry is tagged with taxonomy terms and described by the metadata already defined on the wiki.

12. Field Report Structure • Stakeholder survey (analysis of questionnaires) • Identification • Current Situation and Practices, focussing on: • Technical aspects on the game side: Design, Operationalisation & Testing, Business Model • Technical aspects on the learning side: Usability, Effectiveness, Evaluation • Facilitators for Adoption of SGs in the field • Barriers for Adoption of SGs in the field • Best/worst practices • Needs and Desiderata of Stakeholders, focussing on • needs which have been already addressed • issues still overlooked

13. Field Report Structure • Insights gained (Synthesisofquestionnaires) • Identify present trends and promising future developments in the field focussing on: • Needs which can be solved by integration/defragmentation actions • Open issues still not addressed by research: important for the roadmap, for seed project ideas, joint papers and future project proposals • Guidelines for the adoption of SGs • Guidelines for the design/development of a good SG

14. Field Report Structure • SIG Specific Actions • Defragmentation Actions • Integration Actions • Dissemination Actions • Bibliography (relevant papers and any other material) • Next: the Field Reports

15. SIGs

16. SIG3.1 Business and Management Angelo Marco Luccini CEDEP

17. Scope of SIG3.1: the taxonomy • Use of the taxonomy elaborated by EC project OpenScout (ECP 2008 EDU 428016) • In order to address the fragmentation provided by the different categorisations of Business and Management, • Provision of a fully comprehensive list of concepts reflecting the areas of interest broken down into sets of relevant competences. • It has been revised by INSEAD Business School and CEDEP executive education centre. • Slightly adapted by integrating the concepts that have been already introduced in Business education such as Collaboration and Crisis Management • NB: In business environments often SG is a term hardly accepted, because of the gaming aspect (often associated to “fun” as a purpose itself). The common term used is Simulation.

18. Overview of SGs in the domain • Advergames & Brand-games vs. Educational games • Advergames & Brand-games Neuromarketing • Many business and management games are addressing the mainstreams of world economy and serve the HE programmes held in Business Schools, corporate universities and academic institutions (e.g. marketing sims, finance sims) • Emerging social aspect  learning communities • However, there is room for • new emerging subjects (e.g. Ethics, CSR, Blue Ocean Strategy, Humanitarianism) and for the ones that have just started to be addressed (e.g. Crisis Mgmt at strategic & tactical level rather than operational one) • And for fully online deployment

19. Insights gained (ideally from the analysis of questionnaires) • Gaps and Desiderata of the stakeholders as emerge from the last section of the questionnaires • Questionnaires data are still missing • “Actionability” is a must! Put the learning into practice • More and more room for fully online deployment (i.e. briefing, game session and debriefing are run online only) • Online facilitation + remote & diverse • Bandwidth and tech issues (e.g. scalability) • Social aspect  before, during and, most of all, afterwards • However, still F2F is the most common deployment setting and Blended solutions seem to be more acceptable (e.g. web + F2F/web + F2F)

20. Present trends and promising future developments • Guidelines for the adoption of SGs (from the identification of Barriers and Facilitators for the adoption of SGs in the field) • Still hard to make the SG name digestible, despite at least the concept of Smallworld has started to become familiar to corporate organisations and education • Important for addressing organisations learning communities / CoP (social aspect) • To make users understand that SGs do not necessarily bring to sense of accomplishment and instant gratification for achieving mission goals. Often failure is the most likely outcome. • Insights and lessons learnt from frustration

21. Present trends and promising future developments • Open issues still not addressed by research: important for the roadmap, for seed project ideas, joint papers and future project proposals • Post Games Learning Community (PGLC):Seed Project that applies not only to Business & Management domain but to all application fields, • Ethics, • CSR (sustainable development, human capital, civil society, cultural heritage, carbon footprint), • Humanitarianism, • eDemocracy & eGov & we-Gov (participative govmnt.) • BOS (creating new markets),

22. Present trends and promising future developments • Guidelines for the design/development of a good SG (from the identification of Best/worst practices) • Moving from procedural games where goals are fixed and steps to achieve them are univocally set (the actual traditional Simulations) towards games where there is room for divergent thinking, alternative paths and solutions exploration and even fuzzy and / or ever changing goals where typically optimal solutions may even not exist but just a set of good ones. • Boosting creativity + engagement of knowledge workers • Game follow up: sustaining the learning community (social aspect) with social / WEB2.0 tools and games

23. Specific activities done in the first year and/or planned in the second year • specific actions or achievements in the first year (e.g. joint papers, presentations) • Presentations of GaLA aims and perspectives in the network of CEDEP / INSEAD • FIAT already expressed interest in being part of the Advisory Board

24. Specific activities done in the first year and/or planned in the second year • Specific needs for the second year (e.g. enlarge or narrow down the field scope to particularly promising sub-fields) • Exploring emerging subjects in business matters that may be interrelated with other domains (e.g. Ethics, Sustainability, CSR, humanitarian aid) or that promise to be next to come (e.g. eDemocracy, eGov and participative government – we-gov) or that maybe have not been fully addressed yet (e.g. innovation in NPD, creativity) • Social aspect (PGLC but not only)

25. Just in case… • If there is still time you can finish with a short demo or a quick review of a SGs you find particularly interesting, commenting why. • Game to be identified among the ones collected so far

26. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen SIG3.2Engineering and Manufacturing Borzoo Pourabdollahian Politecnicodi Milano Borzoo.pourabdollahian@mail.polimi.it

27. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Contents Activities Stakeholders Taxonomy Increasing the general awarenees of serious game

28. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Activities ❶ Studying literature review ❷ Defining taxonomy and stakeholders ❸ Carrying out field research ❹ Increasing the general awareness of serious games

29. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Stakeholders Customers Suppliers Users Decision makers Designers Buyers Vendors Learners

30. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Engineering and Manufacturing environment can be considered as 3 main concepts. For designing Serious games the relation between them have to be considered carefully. Taxonomy

31. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Approaches Various modern and well-known concepts are defined in this area which can be trained to people by serious games and simulations • Product design • Sustainable Manufacturing • Supply Chain Management • New Product Development • Lean Manufacturing • Just in time manufacturing • Service operation Management • Mass customization • Agile manufacturing

32. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen According to organization structure, people in different departments need specific and particular skills • Operation Unit • Purchasing Unit • Logistic Unit • ICT Unit • R&D Unit Functions

33. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Applications Manufacturing systems are divided into different sections and industries that understanding how people can improve their competency in each application by serious game is a must. • Metal & Mining • High Tech • Telecommunication • Forest Products • Pharmaceutical & Medical Products • Energy • Electronics & Semiconductor • Food & Beverage • Automative • Aerospace

34. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Approach Function key learning indicators in each cell have to be identified exactly

35. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Increasing the general awarenees of serious game ❶ Increasing the awareness of SGs between students at engineering schools ❷Holding workshops for stakeholder ❸ Attracting audiences by presenting real evidences

36. 3rdGaLA meeting 19-21 September 2011 BIBA - Bremen Thank you for your attention

37. SIG3.3 Health and Fitness SIG Leader: Alasdair Thin (HWU) SIG Deputy Leader: Giusy Fiucci (ORT)

38. Scope of the SIG: the taxonomy

39. Overviewof SGs in the domain • VERY DIVERSE field • Wide Range of Different Applications • Large Number of SGs in Field • Very Limited Evidence Base • Only 1 specialised journal • Only few specialised conferences

40. Stakeholders

41. Insights gained • Many current funders of SGs are in fact game publishers - and yet most do not realise it. • Individuals on design/technical side are far too caught up in the technology and grossly under-estimate the importance of the human behavioural aspects in influencing outcomes • Individuals on health/fitness side are often ignorant about games, sceptical and even hostile.

42. Facilitators Barriers Rising Cost of Healthcare Widespread adoption smart-phones Broad scepticism of video games High demands for the demonstration of efficacy

43. Addressed Overlooked Sufficient evidence to support POTENTIAL of SGs in field Unequivocal evidence of effectiveness Sustainable business models

44. Specificactivitiesdone in the first year and/or planned in the secondyear • 1° Year • Lab Visit (HWU – Univ Graz) • Lab Visit (HWU – Univ Southern California) • Started Work on Behavioural Model • 2° Year • Establish Business Models • Determine Value Chains • Prioritise Focus Areas • Continue Work on Behavioural Model

45. SIG3.4 Michel LeonardNURC

46. Scope of the SIG: the taxonomy

47. Overviewof SGs in the domain SG

48. Insightsgained (ideallyfrom the analysisofquestionnaires) • Fields were questions are not welcomed. • Interoperability • Data exchange (HLA ?) • Faster, Better and cheaper • Multi-cultural aspects.

49. present trends and promising future developments • Success Stories – Direct correlation with the game • In average, still very simple Vs the production time • Data fusion/Game intelligence is an issues • Problems related to psychological • More and more technologies and tools are becoming available (Game Industry)

50. TTX HPTT2 (La Spezia, Dec 05-09) Serious Game on Harbor Security (20+ participants in battlefield SG) • 11 simulators with consoles • 6 Autonomous Agents (AI) • 75 Simulated traffic ships • 24 scenarios (3 days) • Real-time data (traffic, radar, data fusion) • Multi-cultural (police, navy, politics, researchers)