I had the honor of participating in a Co Health Tweet Chat the other day where we also announced a small collaboration with them to get some feedback on our product, Daily Challenge.
The tweet chat as a ton of fun. It was pretty hectic trying to watch all the tweets coming in, respond to them as fast as you can while constantly trying to edit your responses into 140 character tweets! It was fast and furious!
Here is a collection of my primary answers to the questions that were put out by CoHealth. I wanted to get them all here as a record. The topic was about Health Games.
Question 1: What's the promise of health games? (link)
To create a context in which participants gain access to an emergent experience around health. (link). They become immersed. They achieve, socialize, cooperate, compete, and gain mastery over their health challenges. (link) This mastery, often in the form of knowledge and mindfulness, beats back the powerlessness that many people face. (link) Through game experiences we are empowered to succeed. (link)
Question 2: What can we achieve with health games that's different from other change efforts? (link)
A game is a context. In that context we can set constraints. These constraints can be powerful. (link) They create a sense of control for the participant. There is comfort in this control. (link)
Question 3: What evidence do we have about their effectiveness? (link)
Games are a framework to bring people together to create the scaffolding for the social affects to take over. (link) The science on the affects of social is well documented. People recovering from disease together, recover faster. (link) Games are great frameworks to generate social interaction in an accessible way. That is where the truew power lies. (link)
Question 4: What makes a "good" health game, considering design, implementation, measurement? (link)
Any good game I have ever played is optimized for emergent outcome. (link) If I know there's a goal, that there is an expected end state, it isn't as fun as a game that emerges as you go. (link) In health games it is most important the participants be allowed to find their own win state. (link) The goal someone has when they start pursuing health (lose weight) might be different by the end (change jobs). (link)
Question 5: Where do games go wrong in these same areas? (link)
I think health games go wrong when they have a goal. (link) If the game is to lose 10 pounds, it becomes much more important to lose 10 pounds than to play the game. (link) If we leave the game we stop interacting with the content and other participants that really matter. (link)
Question 6: Are there any considerations specific to building games for the employer space? (link)
The main consideration is that all this is new to employers. :) (link) I think "games" and "players" when selling into workplace wellness is not helpful. "Participants" and "products" [is better]. (link)
So that's my story. :)
I find there is an over fixation (in my mind) on what a game is and not enough attempt to understand how gamification is there to create better product experiences. The product experience is the sum of the game rules and mechanics, plus the dynamics that arise out of interaction inside the product. If you want people to interact and not make them feel weird about it, try adding game mechanics! If you want people to feel comfortable and empowered within a set of constraints, use game mechanics! People tend to accept those constraints and flourish within them.
There continues to be a lot of pontification on what gamification is... and how to use it etc. That is all great. I am just trying to create a good experience in our products, using game mechanics to generate social dynamics that have shown to increase engagement, which extends the delivery window of the intervention, leading to more "doses" which leads to real health outcomes. For me that is really what this is all about.
