Never level the playing field!

?LEVEL 1

?PLAYGROUND

‘If you don’t know who your most valuable players are, then the rules of the game will be determined for you and not by you.’

This part of my book is about the professional playground and how your organisation can become master it... Key insight: know where your most important stakeholders are and where they will go: competition, consumers and colleagues...

We live in a world where big brands and entire retail franchises simply topple over because they’ve been stagnant for too long. They didn’t pay attention to what the most influential players in their industry (often their competitors and suppliers) were doing, or wanted (the consumers). And on top of that, many of their strategies are based on ideas from out of date books. That old-knowledge simply can’t keep up with the reality of this new age. The business playing field is changing at a greater pace than ever before, and that change will only keep accelerating. The most important prerequisite for an organisation’s continued existence is its flexibility and ability for change. We call this ‘agile’, or resilience, and it is something that must be continuously practised and improved upon.

In the land of change-management, the term #disruption keeps being used more often, and people usually refer to this when there is turmoil. Companies like WhatsApp and Uber are interesting examples of how entire sectors can be sent into turmoil. Organisations must, therefore, be faster and more effective in reacting to the changes in supply and demand. If they don’t do that, then their businesses will be adversely affected by any changes or developments. This could be a new product, a new distribution method, consumer trends, business models, etc. Whether these changes are caused by internal or external factors of people on the playing field, it doesn’t matter. That playing field is changing all the time and that change is happening even faster.

Mapping out the business playing field

If an organisation wishes to exercise any level of influence on players within their playing field, then it's best to first map out who the most important players are, each quarter. The central question then is: ‘Who has the most influence and to what degree do they have that on the continuity of the organisation?’

From a business administration perspective, the business playing field can be divided along two axes: one axis is money (revenue and cost) and the other axis is people (internal and external); see figure 1.1. These people have an impact on the money due to certain actions that they perform. The main objective overall then of every organisation is to guarantee a level of continuity (maintain their existence) while maximising profit. Profit is then also determined by maximising revenue and minimising cost. The better this game is played, the better it is for the continuity of the organisation.

There are all kinds of mechanics as a basis when it comes to revenue and costs, and these can vary per organisation. One organisation can, for example, increase their revenue by (internally) training their employees in cross- and up-selling, but they could also do this by increasing traffic to sales outlets (externally). The most effective path to that goal will vary depending on the organisation; these can be mapped out during the formulation of objectives and mission of purpose.

The largest costs in the majority of organisations are usually the employees (especially in the service industry) or with suppliers (when it comes to production). The foremost revenue opportunities are therefore influenced by sales outlets and the consumer, which are still people. In the end, the behaviour of people determines how high the costs and revenue of an organisation will be in a business playing field. Even in the case of a multinational company with tens of thousands of employees – or maybe it does – is the ‘internationalisation’ of ‘Silicon Valley’ of no consequence to the size of the playing field. It’s the actions, behaviours and activities of people on the playing field that have an impact. If you want to influence those behaviours, then you need to know what you want to achieve with that target audience. But at the same time, you will need to accept the fact that not everyone on the playing field can be influenced, it will take some nerve to make your choice.

With the use of the quadrants depicted on the business playing field, you can relatively easily visualise the key players on it. If you were to look at the playing field of a large international production company, then the following stakeholders could be found.

Internally:

● ????Shareholders

● ????C-Suite

● ????Managers

● ????Employees

Externally:

● ????Competition

● ????Consumers

● ????Retail, franchises, wholesale, merchandise

● ????Distribution centres

● ????Suppliers

● ????Government

The impact of an organisation on the business playing field is the sum of all the actions and activities that its most important stakeholders have taken. Organisations who can effectively influence the behaviour of their stakeholders are the puppeteers and not the puppets. Be a game-changer. Alternatively: if you don’t know who your most important players are, then the game will be determined for you and not by you.

?Level 1.1 The external playing field

?‘The playing field alters because people do something positive, nothing or by actively working against it.’

The world keeps changing at an ever-greater pace. The driving forces behind this change are not abstract concepts like ‘innovation’, ‘the market’ or ‘start-ups’. It’s, in fact, the actions and activities of people in various functions and roles within organisations. Growth and progress can only be realised when people do something (positive effect), do nothing (neutral effect) or actively work against something (negative effect). Doing nothing is also destructive for organisations. Remaining static is the same as going backwards essentially. Because the world around us is changing ever quicker, organisations will need to be more agile to survive in the long-term. The ability to adapt will eventually determine an organisation’s longevity and whether they will continue existing in the long-term – something very important for every stakeholder, especially for shareholders, managers and their employees.

Three stakeholders have a strong influence on an organisation's continued existence: competitors, consumers and colleagues.

Competitors

‘Game changers are unexpectedly entering the business playing field with increasing ease and focus.’?

We will discuss three trends around competitors:

1.???They appear in unexpected places.

2.???They quickly build up distribution channels.

3.???They acquire capital relatively easily.

The undesired unexpected

The term ‘disruption’ is likely the most stated term within most large organisations who know that they need to improve their ability to adapt. Smaller, more innovative companies keep beating larger more cumbersome organisations to the punch, by developing inventive solutions that either replace or dislodge a product in the marketplace.

Through a combination of niche-propositions, low costs and high flexibility (because they’re small), these start-ups can grow incredibly fast into dangerous competitors for established companies within a particular sector.

WhatsApp permanently disrupted the business model of many large telecom businesses and changed the way the world uses SMS. And all that WhatsApp offers a way in which to chat online on your mobile phone, it’s not even that much of an innovative idea. Chatting online has existed for years on the PC (just think of MSN from Microsoft as one example), but it wasn’t available in that form on a mobile device. In 2009, WhatsApp was created by two former Yahoo employees. In 2013, the moment where it had two hundred million users, the company only had five employees. The estimated value of the company was even then around one and a half-billion dollars. By 2014 it was eventually bought by Facebook for nineteen billion dollars. WhatsApp also caused the complete stabilisation of the SMS-market (text messages).

Uber is another great example of an organisation that turned an industry completely on its head, in this case, the taxi industry. Thanks to Uber, every private citizen in the United States that has a credit card, a car and a driver’s license can start their own taxi company. Through this, the availability of transport exploded a hundredfold and individuals who lost their jobs during the economic crises can earn an income. Consumers can choose from five different taxi types, with corresponding price points. They can even plan to share a taxi, which lowers the cost considerably for longer journeys and sometimes even offers an interesting encounter.

At its core, Uber is nothing more than an application that connects supply and demand with smart location-based technology on mobile phones. The user inputs their current location and their destination, and out of the available drivers, the user can choose with whom they wish to go. As soon as a driver is chosen, the user can immediately see the exact location of the car that will transport them. The driver can even call their customer via the app, or send them a message if they are nearby. At the end of the trip, the user can give feedback on their Uber experience. This can be done through a five-star rating system. Due to this complete transparency, drivers tend to behave professionally and politely and consumers can rely on the fact that it will be a pleasant trip that fits within their price range. Uber conducts a ‘progress interview’ with drivers who regularly score below four stars. If a customer gives a rating of three stars or less, then an email will be sent to the customer, so that they can offer more comprehensive qualitative feedback to Uber.

These are two examples of innovations that threaten certain industries, but the number of other examples is too many to count. Organisations need to remain alert to the fact that their competition will likely arise outside of their playing field. This naturally increases the urgency with which they need to improve their ability to adapt, so that they can react much more quickly to these new types of competitors.

Most successful innovations do a few simple things: make it smaller, easier (access to it or use) faster or cheaper. Preferably, a combination of those.

A rapid build-up of distribution

Since so many products are distributed digitally nowadays, it’s become easier to build a system of ‘instant-distribution’. As soon as an app is greenlighted in the Apple or Google store, it has an immediate worldwide reach. The market potential for something like that is over three to (in theory) seven billion people. Previously, organisations needed to slog through decade-spanning production trajectories to build sales channels, these days they can do this with a few simple clicks. With digital products, this is fairly obvious, but even the distribution of physical products can now be managed effortlessly. One simply needs to create a suppliers-account with one of the many online sales channel websites, such as Alibaba, Amazon, Etsy or Zalando. It couldn’t be simpler.

Start-ups can even choose to establish their own (online) distribution, but for this to be successful they first need to develop a community in which they can promote their product. These days there are however a large number of methods to do this, either via social media or with the help of well-known influencers. Through the smart use of online personalities (vloggers with a lot of followers), even a newbie can become very successful very quickly. Various vloggers have even launched their makeup line or pc apparel store through this method. In the gaming world, these types of vloggers are known as pro-gamers or streamers. Via streaming sites like Twitch, they broadcast what games they play, with either live or recorded commentary. These individuals, who often have more than a hundred thousand followers, are the new superstars in the world. Watching gamers who play games has become incredibly popular and the influence of these kinds of e-celebrities is incredible. Amazon bought the streaming platform Twitch in 2015 for a billion euros, which sounds cheap to me now in 2020. Youtube also has its specialised gaming channel, on which they also stream and promote various e-sports (the professional version of playing games).

An effective way to develop a relatively quick distribution method through community building is by engaging that target audience in the production process from the start. Even this is made simpler through the use of various websites, like kickstarter.com. This website is essentially a community of people who can have their innovative ideas discovered by like-minded early adopters who can choose to financially support it from the start.

Straightforward capital

You used to go to the bank for a loan, but nowadays banks aren’t the helping hand they used to be for an organisation trying to make a start in the industry. This function is increasingly being taken over by venture capital, or for example with Kickstarter-campaigns. The only thing that start-ups need to do now explains what their plans are and what investors will get in exchange for their contribution. This doesn’t mean they will own the product or gain a part of the profit, but usually means they will get the first version of the product.

It’s not only games and apps on the Kickstarter page, but also physical products, like mini-air conditioners or innovative watch brands. The categories on the website vary from furniture to technology that helps improve the world a little. The advantage of selling in this way, and gaining investment capital, is that the first wave of adopters is immediately involved in the production process. The investors (early adopters) can give feedback directly and honestly about the product and the service offered. They can communicate with ease with the developers. And consequently, they can write a blog article about the product they have supported, and promote it through social media even before the product is officially launched. In this way, start-ups can easily garner a large crowd of brand-fans, who voluntarily contribute to building a market for the product.

After the initial round of capital acquisition via friends, fools & family, as it is so wonderfully stated in Silicon Valley, a Kickstarter-campaign is usually started and after this of course comes a trip to visit the investors on Sand Hill.

Hopefully, it has become clear from the previous explanation that there is a need for organisations to increase their ability to adapt. More and more players are entering the marketplace, and particularly from some unexpected places. And because of this, these players can quickly build distribution with relative ease and are even able to find investors and contributors who want to help promote the product.

Consumers

‘A shift is occurring from possession to “access of use”, because of a critical mass being achieved.’

We will discuss three trends around consumers:

● ????Loyalty is a thing of the past

● ????Ownership is no longer important

● ????Critical mass feedback

?Loyalty is in the past

The brand loyalty of customers is continually under a lot of pressure. In the face of so many new alternatives now, the distribution channels, brands and older business models are starting to falter. The supply has been greater than the demand for a few years now, and more and more alternatives keep popping up. But is the increase in competition the only reason why consumers aren’t as faithful existing brands as they used to be?

The world has, of course, become more transparent thanks to the internet. Prices can easily be compared, through which consumers can quickly choose the lowest price available. If a brand or outlet cannot offer the desired price, then it will need to add some other kind value to its product or service. Notable strategies for this are product leadership (premium product - positioning), operational excellence (lowest cost) or customer excellence (a close relationship with the client).

Nowadays organisations don’t have much of a choice anymore: every strategy needs to be a part of the organisation’s overall policies. Organisations need to have the best product and need to have it for the best price and maintain a relationship with their target audience. To keep customers on one side and gain new ones on the other side, organisations will need to continually come up with new ways of making the best product possible - for the lowest price, while maintaining a close dialogue with the customer. Accordingly, the relationship with the customer after the launch of the product must ensure that they become a return customer. Especially because the customer will keep buying less. It, therefore, revolves around finding the optimal combination between properties, people and necessary processes that provide a relevant and profitable product. How you can overcome - or at least have an impact on - this threat will be shown in the chapter about ‘Proces’.?

Access rather than ownership

Consumers care less and less about product ownership as such, but rather more in a product that will allow for the possibility of access to a service that will enable them to achieve what they want. And then the consumer preferably wants this to be given for free. The share-economy, in which re-usage and shared usage are central is here. The question then, of course, is to what degree it will replace the have-economy, but that it will have an impact on profits and revenue is a definite certainty. The yearly growth forecasts of 10 percent for every organisation is likely not achievable anymore in this world.

A car used to be a status symbol, nowadays it is simply a means of transport from A to B. There are so many alternatives now. Just in Amsterdam (the Netherlands) alone, people can travel by BlaBlaCar, Car2Go, Greenwheels, SnappCar, a taxi (which I don’t recommend) and Uber. And as a result of the self-driving car, we may no longer need taxi drivers either after a while.

Due to the digitalisation of the world and the resulting increase in transparency, we can now, sometimes literally, peek into the neighbours. We can even see what kind of tools they have. Ask yourself this question: ‘Do I want to own a lawn mower for 100 euros or do I want to pay 1 euro per month to have access to information about where I can hire or borrow a lawn mower?’ A rational person will question whether it is worthwhile to own a lawnmower that they only use three times a year. Thanks to apps like Peerby, Marketplace and eBay, consumers can now hire tools from their neighbours, just like other things that they may not always need.

Organisations can either prepare to expect these kinds of trends or work against them, the chance of the latter succeeding is pretty small though. The better option is to understand these kinds of consumer trends on a massive scale, to embrace them and to make the desired behaviours a possibility through the use of a commercial precedent. At the start of the century, consumers downloaded large amounts of illegal music. Naturally, various music rights institutions were against this trend. But despite that, this new behaviour took hold. Apple (and Spotify), in the end, decided to make listening to music far simpler and more cost-effective, due to these various precedents that had occurred. Through iTunes, music could be downloaded and owned by the consumer either per track or per album (which now transformed into an access model as well). In the case of Spotify, the consumer doesn’t even own the music anymore, but rather they have - ‘free’ (or paid) - access to it. And through this service, both companies can gather huge amounts of information about which artists are popular, what music is shared, and so on. There is also the possibility to give feedback by rating albums, tracks and podcasts with a simple star system from one to five.

Feedback from a critical mass

This particular development has two sides: on one side consumers are becoming ever more critical due to all the possible alternatives, and on the other side they can communicate their praise or criticism with ease through social media. Due to the broad offerings available and user experience, consumers have become more critical. The more varied the product selection and use has become, the more they know what the best option for them is. For organisations, this means that the benchmark is set ever higher and that new norms are constantly being determined. This means again that organisations always have to develop further and continually.

Consumers share both positive and negative experiences through social media. It's just that a negative user experience tends to have a larger impact on the brand experience than a positive one does. Usually with a factor of -3 versus that of a +1. And on top of that, the negative user experience will be shared more frequently, not just by the original user, but also by their followers. It is therefore in an organisations interest to avoid the negative comments than to ‘heal’ from them after someone has already posted it online. Unfortunately, many organisations still use social media as a medium to send, while the biggest opportunities exist if they would only engage in social interaction with the end-user, the customer. Organisations who are intelligent enough to use this kind of feedback are the ones with the advantage.

The airline KLM, for example, has been using social media since the eruption of the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajokull, which caused massive disruption for the airspace around Northern Europe. Specifically, Facebook and Twitter were used as methods for contacting customers. It is a textbook example of how social media can be used to promote social interaction and engage with your target audience to maintain the relationship. Now travellers can come into direct contact relatively easily with KLM employees via social media. They can change their flights, upgrade tickets and ask various questions. As paradoxical as it sounds, relationships between two people are possible through social media. And with that, the behaviour of the customer support determines in large part the user experience of the customer with that business. This in turn then influences the brand-reputation of KLM, who - despite difficult periods - has remained strong. Despite (and thanks to) various reorganisations and digitization of the organization, KLM has made a profit year after year during the crisis years (until Covid-19 hit the world).

In addition to using social media for contacting customers and also sharing user experiences or handling complaints, there are even more opportunities provided by the ‘critical masses’. Feedback given by consumers should also be used for product development. The following example from the insurance sector shows us how feedback and gamification-elements can be used so that a business position can dynamically adjust to a user's behaviour. The feedback offered in this example is therefore not from the customer directly, but rather from their observed behaviour.

Insurance companies have already been using mass data for years when it comes to product development. Other than extensive probability calculations and adjusting prices and policies, not much else was done with the gathered data. Until about 2010, essentially every insurance company employed the ‘solidarity principle’. What this means is that every insured person is treated equally with the same premium - regardless of driving ability or the number kilometres travelled. Nowadays though, more distinction is made between customers. And somewhere, that’s logical really, because why would you have a higher premium for your car insurance if you never suffered through a damage claim? The UK insurer Coop took these kinds of complaints from the customers seriously and developed a GPS-system that recorded the driving behaviour of its users. If the user maintained the speed limits and their braking behaviour was below par, then they would receive a lower premium. A user could save up to 35 percent per month on their premium. The data for this is gathered and is fed back via their smartphone to the company. In addition to this, the data gathered on customers is a veritable treasure trove for insurance companies. Through the data, it becomes clear who is on the public roads at which times, where they park, what their routine is, and so on.

The fact that consumers have become more critical and offer feedback en masse online, could be seen as a danger, but it also an opportunity. Feedback in games is primarily there to ensure that players keep playing. It makes sense then that organizations may need to use the feedback that they receive freely as an accelerator for continuous improvement. That feedback then, can be both conscious (via social media) and unconsciously (by tracking) given or received.

Colleagues

The youngest generation is already born with a mobile phone in their hand, and that device is hardly used to make phone calls nowadays. The newest generation of employees only knows a world where the internet is ubiquitous. Information and knowledge are available everywhere. The only challenge is to find the correct source and how to deal with the abundance of information. In addition to this, future colleagues will have grown up with playing games on every imaginable device. They are already learning from a young age how to perform certain actions to achieve challenging objectives. Through this, they learn creative and solution-oriented thinking, but they also become bored fairly quickly. That is why organizations must (continue to) provide objectives that motivate talented employees to continue working for them. What emerged from the interviews with various HR officers and professionals from temp-employment agencies is that the battle for talent has only gotten bigger.

For decades, the challenge for organizations has been the inflow, flow and outflow phases. Employees with a high competency score will start to look around for other opportunities if their talents are not being utilised in their current roles. Or they start their own business. In 2016, the Netherlands saw the largest increase in self-employment out of any country in Europe. Even in the United States, the topic of freelancing remains of importance within the job market. And usually, it’s former employees who all become the competition for the organisations that they left.

This is also a common complaint from SMEs in areas such as those of business services and business advice. The top players that leave large consultancy organizations, often become cheaper and more engaged competitors for medium-sized SMEs in the same industry. It used to be that an SME was a cost-effective alternative, but a self-employed competitor has now become even more cost-effective. They even offer a low price with a comparatively low amount of risk. But if all the top players go into business for themselves, will these organisations be stuck with a mediocre workforce? And how can these organisations hold on to younger high potential talent?

Inflow

Organisations need to be attractive of course, so that future employees want to work there. It used to be that employees placed a lot of value on things like a salary, career opportunities, holidays and the security of a permanent contract - mostly aspects that can be measured quantitatively. The employee of the future is looking for things that are qualitative, such as flexibility, development opportunities and the social involvement of the organization. In a word: purpose - the organisation must contribute to a better world. It is an encouraging thought that the employee of the future is more aware of making positive contributions to the world and is not pursuing purely personal gains.

Young people are increasingly doing a reality check to see whether a brand image suits who they are and want to be and whether the organization lives up to that experience internally as well. In branding, this is called keeping your brand promise. Organisations can no longer have an authentic discussion about environmental awareness if they are an active polluter. An organisation that has a statement of purpose, and who lives up to this statement with its activities, is more likely to attract future employees than an organisation that simply offers a good salary. The purpose could also be interpreted as the mission or strategic objectives of an organisation. Future employees will want work that is meaningful to them. In that sense then, you could call them world improvers. Regardless though, organisations that strive to make the world a little bit better with their activities will be attractive to a new generation of employees.

Besides the formulation and achievement of goals, it is also becoming increasingly important how cooperation occurs internally within an organisation, in other words, what the shared values are. Is an organisation primarily competitive and closed off or does it believe in cooperation and transparency? Communicating externally and aligning these values internally is akin to the cement of a house, a strong foundation. The values of an organisation connect employees as they move towards their goals and they form unwritten rules (the culture) of an organisation. The more positive the perception of an organisation’s values are externally and internally, the stronger the appeal and cohesiveness of an organisation will be.

Through Flow

If an organization knows how to attract the right employees, how does it then motivate those employees to remain in the organisation? According to behavioural scientist Daniel Pink, employees need elements like purpose, autonomy and mastery. Employees want a realistic and meaningful goal (purpose), they want to be independent or be able to choose their path (autonomy) and to "get better" in what they have chosen to pursue (mastery). At least until the moment, they get bored, because the challenges have become too easy for them, thanks to their progress. The organisation must then adjust the difficulty of the goal (level up). This can be done, for example, by extending the authority and responsibilities of an employee, by laterally repositioning the employee within the organization (through flow or transfer) or by them continuing outside of the organisation (outflow).

Surprisingly, the elements mentioned by Daniel Pink that motivate employees are all elements found within game design. The player has to independently achieve a goal (autonomy) or in a collective sense (purpose) and gets better at it while playing (mastery).

Many managers of organisations think that they can secure employees by offering them an attractive salary, but time and time again research has shown that this just isn’t true. Money doesn’t create loyalty. In that sense, all top salaries are unnecessary really, because it’s also been proven that people don’t get happier when they earn more than 60,000 euros a year. A grand of pre-tax income should, therefore, be the new norm for every driver, but that’s a different discussion.

So what does create loyalty then? Shared experiences do. They can be created by allowing employees to do amazing things together. Providing people challenges that they can complete on their own within a team creates trust and fosters bonds. To retain individuals, organizations, like game designers, must try to achieve an optimal flow. Flow comes into being by creating an optimal and dynamic balance between goals (purpose) and the required proficiencies (skills). The employee should not be allowed to become too frustrated by setting the bar too high, either due to a lack of mastery or ability to the goal set before them. An employee should also not be allowed to become bored. When all of this is combined with too much work, demandingly high goals and insufficient mastery, it can lead to burnout. Too little work and that is too simple, can also lead to a bore-out, which is equally harmful to an employee and the organisation as a burn-out is.

The development of skills (mastery), along with a lifelong learning strategy, can be done in a variety of ways. Many people over the age of 40 have grown up with the idea that knowledge is gained from books and should be brought to life by teachers. But nowadays all knowledge is available on the internet, in the form of texts, images, audio, videos and games. Knowledge is even given away for free (online). Unfortunately, though, much of this still happens too often in (digital) books, with images, or with the 'one-sided sending' of videos, TedTalks or Slideshare presentations. The most powerful medium for employee development should combine all conceivable forms of content and should enable interaction between people and with the teaching material. Sounds like a game to me!

To give you an idea-image, what follows is the history of media as a communication channel through the ages in a nutshell. In the Middle Ages, communication to the masses occurred primarily through speech via troubadours for example. Later on, theatre plays provided for the transfer of knowledge and wisdom, initially for the elite and then later also for the common folk. When the printing press was developed, books started to appear more frequently. Books and newspapers have long been thé medium of distribution for knowledge, new insights and the news. As a point of Dutch pride: Amsterdam was the largest publisher in the world in the golden age, especially with publishing the bible. After the invention of photography (1816) various new techniques emerged, these are often accelerated as a result of the war. The telegraph, for example, has also existed since 1835. Thanks to this invention one could communicate quickly and the news could be distributed locally via newspaper reports - either through someone who read aloud or not. After this then followed film, radio, television and games. Seen from an evolutionary point of view, the various media forms can be classified into the following categories:

● ????Knowledge transfer through speech and theatre plays;

● ????Sharing knowledge through books and newspaper;

● ????Photography;

● ????Radio;

● ????Film;

● ????Television;

● ????Games (a combination of text, image, sound and interaction)

?The sensory experience of these forms of content could, for example, be described as:

● ????Attending a lecture: passive listening;

● ????Reading a book: active reading;

● ????Looking at an image, photo, illustration or painting: seeing;

● ????Watching an animation, film or video: passive seeing and hearing;

● ????Playing a game: seeing, hearing with a possibility of an active experience due to interaction based on clear goals and dilemma’s, and at times supported by discussing with a team.

Based on digital content, these are the possible instances that can be differentiated:

● ????Text: the written word;

● ????Image: depictions, sculptures, photography, illustrations, paintings, comics, etc.;

● ????Audio: sound, music;

● ????Moving image: animation, film;

● ????Interactive software: fun or functional.

?

It has frequently been shown that people learn better when several senses are engaged. So if you read something and you want to remember it, it’s a good idea to read it out aloud. Then you will not only see the text, but you will also hear it and reflect on what it means. If you could then also play with the content, then the learning experience would be even more intense and enhanced. A game then is the means which appeals to the majority of the senses and combines them most effectively (seeing, hearing, talking, feeling and interaction). Games, therefore, increase the learning capability of people in a very effective manner.

The most effective - and appropriate for future employees - is, of course, a method that uses (serious) games or gamification systems. An employee can then play such a game at any time that they want. Within the game, knowledge and virtual ability can be safely experienced and applied practically to various issues. Thus, the player can try out the optimal method with which to achieve a certain goal, rather than the most obvious one taught in a rote manner. In that sense, games appeal to the creative ability of the player. If organisations want to keep their future employees, then the most obvious medium to choose is one that aligns with new norms and behavioural principles that encourage motivation: purpose, autonomy and mastery.

MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATION

from 2010 until 2015, five different games have been launched by a major cable operator to develop customer-support employees in cross- and up-selling. In each of the games, employees were given six scenarios to play, with questions about mobile telecommunication and in some cases - depending on the scenario - they had to take out a subscription for the customer themselves. After all six scenarios were completed, they were then randomly offered, based on the result of the player per customer journey. Scenarios where the player often got lost, would pop up more regularly. This is also referred to as "adaptive learning". The visual appearance of the consumer in the game and his living room would change completely randomly after each interaction. This gave the impression that the employee was constantly engaged with a different consumer, who had a similar problem to previous customer interaction. In reality, the problem wasn’t just similar, it was the same customer scenario, only in a different visual form.

At the time, the game was played by an average of five thousand employees, with approximately twenty minutes of playtime per session on average. Sales of mobile subscriptions had increased by 16 percent after the game was implemented as a training tool, with all things remaining equal for the circumstances.

If employees could develop themselves by playing games, then this development - and perhaps even the through-flow - could be made more fun.

Out Flow

A difficult to control consequence of market forces is the freedom for employees to flow out of an organisation. Due to the ebb and flow when it comes to the need for personnel as a result of trends in the market, there will periodically be more or fewer people needed, just because of seasonal trends. The challenge for an organisation is to keep employees with the right qualities in-house and say goodbye to employees who do not fit in the desired future of the organisation.

What every organisation should do at least is always offer a fair exit interview with those employees that leave. This should be done by the director of the manager of the employee in question. A departing employee can then without consequences (because he or she leaves anyway) provide fair and critical feedback on the state of affairs within the organisation. Research has shown that talented employees will often leave while the failing leadership remains in the organisation. In this situation, weak-points arise in the foundation of the organisation. If an organisation also then doesn’t receive the feedback from the departing employee, then no one will learn anything and an organisational structure is maintained whose weak links remain in place without the leadership of the organisation being aware of it.

An opportunity that is often lost at the point of outflow, is that of enabling ambitious employees to start their start-up, under the supervision of a parent organisation. It is a trend that more and more big organisations appear to be embracing. Should that departing employee start an organisation that could pose a threat, then it’d be better for the parent company to take advantage of this. Or as a well-known proverb states: "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer."

Level up - Summary 1.1 The external playing field

The business playing field is influenced by a diverse number of players. The effects of three external players were explored in this chapter: competitors, consumers and future colleagues.

Competitors will threaten the market share of organisations. More and more are appearing from unexpected corners. They can easily build distribution channels and threaten entire branches to be disrupted.

Due to an overwhelming amount of products on offer, consumers have become more critical and they also offer a lot of feedback. Smart organizations make effective use of the conscious and unconscious feedback that is given. This kind of feedback is being used to implement improvements in personnel, properties, process or the resulting product.

The employees of the future will have grown up with the internet, with a mobile phone as an extension of their skills and they will be playing a lot of games. Talented employees will be hard to find and keep. The components of purpose, autonomy and mastery motivate people within organizations, effective organizations know which mechanics unlock their motivation. These very elements are also reflected in game design. In addition to this, games also use all kinds of conceivable forms of content, which makes them highly suited for the learning agility of employees and helps them to improve their skills in an effective and fun way. This then increases the chances of advancement for employees and will likely cause them to stay for longer and become better in what they do.

Feel free to share your thoughts below, share it with people for whom it may seem relevant #gamification #competition #consumermarketing #colleagues #funatwork