Potential Impact of Gamification on Professionalism and Professional Identity
Gamification, the use of game design elements in non-game contexts, has founded itself as an important information systems (IS) phenomenon that can motivate and engage individuals to perform certain tasks or behaviors. Gamified IS combine characteristics of utilitarian IS (i.e., productivity-oriented systems that provide instrumental value to users) and hedonic IS (i.e. pleasure-oriented systems that provide self-fulfilled values to users). Therefore, gamified IS are expected to not only create enjoyable experiences, but also support instrumental goals such as increased productivity, learning or physical activity.
While gamification has demonstrated promising effects in many domains, its application in professional contexts such as workplaces, healthcare, or expert settings may create tensions. Gamification principally draws its inspiration from games, which are by design purely hedonic and offer no instrumental value. This combined with the sometimes playful nature of gamification designs can conflict with professional norms, values and expectations. As Lowry et al. put it: “[Professionals] do not deal with games and must stick with austere, tried-and-true, business-like topics free from any trace of play” (Lowry et al., 2020, p. 609). As a result, gamified IS may be perceived as unprofessional or trivializing, which can negatively influence system acceptance, perceived usefulness, and ultimately willingness to use gamified IS in professional settings. Yet, the impacts of gamification on the perceived professionality of a system or professional identity remains unclear.
Aim
The aim of the thesis is to investigate the potential impact of gamification on professional identity and perceptions of professionalism in work-related contexts. In particular, the thesis should examine whether and how gamification elements may create tensions with professional norms, values, and expectations. If interested, the tension may also explore conditions under which gamification can be designed in ways that support rather than undermine professional identity.
Method
Method-wise, the thesis should follow a quantitative approach using either a survey or experimental approach. The thesis should investigate perceptions of gamified IS among professionals in a specific domain (e.g., healthcare, education). A survey-based approach may focus on perceptions of a gamified IS, while an experimental approach may manipulate specific gamification elements (e.g., in terms of their playfulness) or compare a gamified and a non-gamified system version. The choice of professional domain can be based on personal interest of the student (within reason).
Contact
If you are interested in the thesis topic, please send your transcript of records and a 2-3 sentence motivation why you are interested in the topic to Simon Krohmann (simon.krohmann@tum.de)
References
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, September). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining" gamification". In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments (pp. 9-15).
Hamari, J., & Koivisto, J. (2015). “Why do people use gamification services?” International Journal of Information Management, 35(4), 419–431.
Paul Benjamin Lowry, Stacie Petter & Jan Marco Leimeister (2020) Desperately seeking the artefacts and the foundations of native theory in gamification research: why information systems researchers can play a legitimate role in this discourse and how they can better contribute, European Journal of Information Systems, 29:6, 609-620, DOI: 10.1080/0960085X.2020.1841574