master thesis change management and serious games
Post on 04-Jun-2018
225 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
1/68
Simulation Games &Postmodernist Change Management
Supporting Postmodernist Change Interventions
Abram Janse
Janse@simagine.nlOpen University 2011
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
2/68
2
Table of contents
Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 4
Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2 Characteristics of postmodern change ................................................................................... 9
2.1 Societal paradigms and organizational change management ..........................................................9 2.1.1 Modern society ............................................................................................................................9 2.1.2 Globalization................................................................................................................................ 9 2.1.3 Postmodernist society ...............................................................................................................10 2.1.4 Society and change management .............................................................................................10
2.2 Postmodernism translated in organizational change management ...............................................12 2.2.1 Characteristics of both paradigms translated in change theories............................................12 2.2.2. Postmodernist theories of chaos and complexity ...................................................................13 2.2.3 Changing relationships employee - organization .................................................................... 15 2.2.4 Postmodernism and change management, intermediary conclusions ....................................16
2.3 Focusing on postmodernism from Homans theory ........................................................................18 2.3.1 Homans (2005) postmodernist theory of change management.............................................18 2.3.2 Connecting various theories with Homans change dimensions............................................19
2.4. Conclusion: five characteristics of PC ........................................................................................... 22
Chapter 3 Characteristics of simulation games .....................................................................................23 3.1 Introducing simulation games ..........................................................................................................23 3.2 Research and concept of simulation games .....................................................................................23
3.2.1 Conceptual background of simulation games ..........................................................................24 3.2.2 Research focus ........................................................................................................................... 25
3.3 Experiential learning and simulation games ................................................................................... 26 3.4 Simulation game characteristics and phases ................................................................................... 27
3.4.1 Characteristics of simulation games.........................................................................................27 3.4.2 Phases of simulation games ......................................................................................................29 3.5.1 Elements necessary for effective simulation games................................................................30 3.5.2 Functionalities of simulation game .......................................................................................... 32
3.6 conclusions: 6 characteristics of simulation games ........................................................................35
Chapter 4 Comparing PC & SG ..............................................................................................................37 4.1 Complexity, dialectics and interconnection .....................................................................................37
4.1.1 Complexity in postmodernism and simulation games ............................................................37 4.1.2 Multiple realities & dialectics...................................................................................................38 4.1.3 Interconnections and empowerment ........................................................................................39
4.2 Experiential learning ......................................................................................................................... 40 4.2.1 Connecting postmodernist change with SG.............................................................................40 4.2.2 Frameworks of experiential learning .......................................................................................41
4.3 Effect of simulation game in postmodernist change processes454.3.1 Implementing process ...............................................................................................................42 4.3.2 Phases of change and simulation game usage .........................................................................44
4.4 Conclusions of fit postmodernist change and simulation games ...................................................... 45
Chapter 5 connecting theory with case studies ......................................................................................48 5.1 Heart of postmodernism....................................................................................................................48
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
3/68
3
5.1.1 LNV and Control-IT ................................................................................................................. 48 5.1.2 MN Services and klant-erger-je-niet ........................................................................................48 5.1.3 conclusions................................................................................................................................. 49
5.2 How does the SG support (post)modern change? ........................................................................... 50 5.2.1 LNV and Control-IT ................................................................................................................. 50 5.2.2 MN Services and klant-erger-je-niet ........................................................................................50 5.2.3 Conclusions................................................................................................................................ 51
5.3 Effect of SG in the implementation process .....................................................................................52 5.3.1 LNV and Control-IT ................................................................................................................. 52 5.3.2 MN Services and klant-erger-je-niet ........................................................................................54 5.3.3 Conclusions................................................................................................................................ 56
6. Final conclusions..................................................................................................................................... 58
7. Future research directions ....................................................................................................................62
Literature ..................................................................................................................................................... 64
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
4/68
4
Summary
Globalization marks the start of a new paradigm, Postmodernism. Organizations are
affected by the paradigm shift, although more slowly than their environment. The
cultural reality is only slowly being transferred to change management theory, which
is why there are so many practical answers instead of more scientific answers to
organizational change. Organizational reality is more effectively changed using
postmodern theory to understand and a postmodern instrument to intervene.
Homan uses postmodernist concepts such as complexity and chaos theory to give
meaning to organizational reality. Simulation games are able to translate these
concepts into a fitting intervention method. What is more, simulation games areuseful bridging (often still) modern organizational design with postmodern change
management.
Five characteristics of postmodernist change (PC) are distilled from the contextual
analysis of postmodernism. These are: PC is a bottom-up participatory process, with a
framework to guide interaction, to channel and support feedback flows within the
organization at all levels. The focus is on behavior, of individuals or small groups,
because change is understood as an incremental process, spreading like an oil stain.
Simulation games (SG) have many aspects, as they are compressing reality, of
which there are six to mention in particular. These are: Simulations mimic complex
systems, whereas games focus on behaviour and interaction. SG are easy to use next
to other intervention methods, and they create a flexible and controllable experience.
Benefits can be numerous, but effect size of SG depends on presence of specific
standards such as sequence of the game and the facilitator; and influence of contextualfactors such as organizational buy-in, and participants motivation before the game.
To what degree could simulation games support postmodernist organizational
change? SG support understanding complex realities, help empower participants and
teach them skills, knowledge and behavior including insight, cooperation, interaction.
SG are thus highly able to support PC. Yet, SG standards and contextual factors have
to be met to intervene effectively. It seems beneficial to conduct practical researchinto the effects of simulation games in change trajectories.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
5/68
5
Chapter 1: Introduction
Business success in a globalized world heavily depends on the ability to come to
terms with fast flows of communication, finances and technology. Adaptability, the
(in)ability to adapt to change is an important shaper of organizational reality.
Unfortunately, it seems, when change is carried out in organizations, it often fails to
live up to expectations.
In this thesis a distinction is made between modern and postmodern approaches to
change. Modern approaches to organizational change prove unsatisfactory in range
(too narrowly focused on one specific change and therefore short term lived) and
success rate (consistent failure rates of 70%). Times have changed, as globalizing postmodern society needs different answers. Organizations also need a new approach
to cover economic and societal demands. Simulation games are useful bridging
modern organizational design and postmodern change management.
Many authors propose a dichotomy of change management characteristics belonging
to modernism and postmodernism. Modernism is equated with planned, top-down,
programmatic, economic value-driven change, whereas postmodernism with
emergent, bottom-up, participatory, capability-driven change (e.g. Russ, 2010; Ten
Have and Visser, 2004; Strh, 2005; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Homan, 2005). The
societal context is very useful in understanding this dichotomy as modernism and
postmodernism bear heavily on change management theories. That the societal
changes have their effect on organizational reality and the consequent intervention
strategies and styles should not come as a surprise. However, organizations change
more slowly than environments (Leavitt, 1996).
This study gathers characteristics of postmodernist organizational change from
literature and employs a focus on Homans theory of organizations and change
management to exemplify postmodernist change (PC) management theory. A main
framework used is Homans (2005) figure of four dimensions of organizational
change. One continuum translates the degree of planning; a second distinguishes the
amount of participation in change interventions. At extremes, PC is spontaneous and
participated in, while modernist change is a management plan.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
6/68
6
Characteristics of postmodernist society trickle down into organizations, which are in
turn no longer governed by modern laws of change management. The application of
simulation games in postmodernist organizational change processes promises to be
very useful. Whereas the simulation part ensures a modelling of organizational reality,
the gaming part empowers employees to participate, opening usage of previously
disengaged soft-skills for organizational strengthening.
This research describes characteristics of PC and SG from literature and describes the
degree to which they match. It then presents two case studies to exemplify the theory.
Within the field of simulation games the focus is on real life, serious games with a
process component Control-IT (Simagine) and Klant-erger-je-niet (Customer
Games). Necessary for the argument of this research is the consequent juxtaposing of
PC management and SG characteristics.
In the end, there will be an answer to the question: to what degree are simulation
games - real life, with serious purposes and a process component- useful for
intervening in the postmodernist organizational landscape (Homan, 2005). The
degree of usefulness is an interdependency of characteristic fit between postmodernist
change management and simulation games with minor focus on the phases of
organizational change in which simulation games are employed. This research only
briefly touches upon the phases of organizational change, using the DOVE-cycle as
used in the study of Van de Westelaken (2002).
The argument that simulation games are useful in PC processes begs for further
research answering the question: can the argued usefulness of simulation games be
measured in practice? This will be discussed in the end of the thesis.
To sum up, this research explores the literature that aims to contribute to the
understanding of the consistent failure rates of 70% of (modern) organizational
change reality, proposing the benefits of PC management. Furthermore, this study
argues that simulation games are a very useful tool in the change managers toolbox
to help creating the desired (post)modern organizational change. These benefits areshown, juxtaposing characteristics of simulation games with postmodernist change
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
7/68
7
management - bridging the postmodernist approach to change (game element) with
the modern character of the target service oriented organizations (simulation element).
However, both subjects are too vast in depth and breadth to cover in their entirety.
Therefore, borders of research are determined: Homans (2005) theory of change
management will serve as focused example of PC management. In similar fashion, for
simulation games is zoomed in on simulation games played in reality, with serious
purposes and a process component.
The main research question is: To what degree could simulation games support
postmodernist organizational change?
Four minor questions adding up to a final answer to the research question:
1. What are the characteristics of postmodern organizational change?
2. What are the characteristics of simulation games and what makes them able to
support change management in general?
3. What are the opportunities and points of attention of using simulation games for
postmodern change processes?
4. How are simulation games experienced by participants? Adding understanding to
the broader question: how do simulation games (real life, serious, process component)
support postmodernist organizational change (service oriented, mostly modern
characteristics) in practice?
A clear approach to answering the research question is used, first explaining PC
management, then simulation games, consequently opportunities and points of
attention in theory and practice.
The second chapter attempts to create understanding of postmodernist change
management, best achieved by sketching a societal background. In this chapter, the
articles of Singh (2001) and Strh (2005) as well as the book of Homan (2005) are
used as main source.
The third chapter is composed of knowledge on the subject of simulation
games from many articles, often of fellow students such as Bekebrede (2010), Van deWestelaken (2002), Van Gils (2008), and of course also of well-established
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
8/68
8
researchers such as Klabbers (2009), De Caluw (e.g. 2007), Wenzler (1999), and
Geurts (e.g. 2000).
The fourth chapter combines both bodies of knowledge, adding work on experiential
learning and change methods from authors Russ (2010) and Wenzler (2008).
The fifth chapter connects theory with practice through two case studies. After
this fifth chapter, the conclusions can be drawn answering to the research questions.
As this research mostly accounts for the theoretical background, further research into
the realistic and achieved effects of simulation games in postmodern change
management in practice is necessary.
Picture 1: Sigmar Polke, Object Kartoffelhaus (Potato House Object), 1967.
The house in modern terms stands for the organization as a planned project, with clear
boundaries and forms. In postmodernist terms we focus on the potatoes (teams/employees)
where the environment touches the organization, potentially creating networks. The house is a
simplified form of reality, a simulation; and naming multiple realities is both a postmodernist
approach to reality and a game we can play to understand the sometimes difficult concepts
mentioned in this research.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
9/68
9
Chapter 2 Characteristics of postmodern change
2.1 Societal paradigms and organizational change management
How can we frame the concept of postmodernist society as a phenomenon and how
does it influence organizational change management in general terms?
2.1.1 Modern society
The 20 th century started with two big wars. The consecutive build-up period was
characterized by a strong belief in a rational and better world. Organizations such as
NATO would help spread peace and justice around the world and organizations
would prosper finding the most rational production methods. One fine definition ofmodernity: the progressive economic and administrative rationalization and
differentiation of the social world (Sarup 1993). This material rationalization
developed in the context of capitalist society and industrialization. Tomlinson (1991)
and Castoriadis (1987) mention that capitalist modernity is technologically and
economically powerful, but culturally weak. Giddens (1987) adds that there is a lack
of moral legitimacy (Giddens, 1987).
2.1.2 Globalization
To some, the modern period ended together with imperialism in 1960, and with it the
belief in a purposeful project faded (Tomlinson, 1991 p. 175). As capitalist modernity
advanced, globalization emerged spurring change around the world communication,
information and financial flows. Globalization as a change force is less directed
compared to imperialism and was clearly distinct from 1972 (Harvey, 1989 p. vii).
Globalizing forces mix and mingle people and flows at a higher speed than before.
The interconnections of finance, information and communication confront
government and organizations with multiple realities. While the increasing ease and
speed of flows spurs global competition, local people are pushed in a defensive
position to protect themselves from the negative impact of globalization. Workers,
minorities, cultural and ethnic groups organize to defend themselves from further
exploitation in the changing labor process first locally, later, via media globally.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
10/68
10
The global issues get politicized from the local and personal points of view. In the
event of downsizing, local and personal issues as well as issues related to self-
actualisation get exacerbated and, consequently, much has been written about how
managers can plan and implement various aspects of downsizing. Thus, globalization
presses on local realities, forcing leaders of society (e.g. politicians and managers) to
come up with answers and solutions (Giddens, 1991).
2.1.3 Postmodernist society
The period following imperialism is rendered ambiguous. The late modernity or
postmodernity contains uncertainty, paradox and cultural indirection (Tomlinson,
1991 p. 175). Like globalization, postmodernity can be understood as emerging from
modern capitalist society. Postmodernity is a movement in advanced capitalist
culture, indicating diversity of individual and social identity.
Instead of a coercive totality, postmodernism has a pluralistic and open democracy
and awareness of ambivalence and contingency (free interpretation from Lyotard,
1984). Postmodern authors such as Derida, Faucault and Lyotard reject the Marxist
idea that material reality determines social forces, proposing rather that society is
determined by information through the media a consciousness industry (Cova,1996 p. 15; Mickey, 1997 p. 271&272).
In a way, the cultural void left by capitalist modernity is filled by many voices during
postmodernity e.g. of supposed leaders, random individuals, but also the voice of
globalizing brands and organizations. Reality is being reconstructed through a clash
of viewpoints; discourse through the media is the new way to progress. Whereas
globalization is the name of the forces driving the change, postmodernity is the nameof the resulting societal reality.
2.1.4 Society and change management
The modern society showed faith in material reality and organized development,
which translates into change management as logical process and adjustment of
systems. It comes as no surprise that single best solutions and meta-approaches are
adopted in this paradigm, because the world is viewed as comprehensible and
malleable by logic. Postmodernism is the negation of the rationalist approach and the
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
11/68
11
one-stop solutions. The shift away from a mechanistic into a more dialectic world-
view can be marked by the globalization of the capitalist society. For individuals to
change, they need to see or debate the meaning of new behaviour; and meaning is
dynamic here, not purely rationalist and mathematical.
Yet, organizations are changing more slowly than environments (Leavitt, 1996). And
in turn, management theories of change develop even slower. The paradigm shift of
modernity to postmodernity has not been completed in organizations and the
management of change. Organizations are formed to somehow control aspects of their
environment, which might explain their being stuck on comprehendible rationalist
approaches instead of emotional, individualist meaning giving. Theorists have
criticized the body of management knowledge that is repeatedly taught and used in
industry and training as deeply flawed, and not producing the returns promised
(Jackson & Carter, 1992, p. 2). The figure of about 70% of change management
failures should perhaps not come as a surprise taking into account the contextual
factors. Because the scientific methods are still attuned to the modern paradigm, the
necessity of more fitting (dynamic) models is recognized by practitioners.
Nowadays, even popular literature on organizational experience is accepted as valid
depictions of reality (Kreiner, 1992 p. 38).
Picture 2: Neo (postmodernist) stopped believing material reality posing questions of identity, and
meaning. He discovers his uniqueness, and understands that material reality is only the frontier ofmultiple realities, a complex network, a simulation game (hence, the matrix).
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
12/68
12
2.2 Postmodernism translated in organizational change management
2.2.1 Characteristics of both paradigms translated in change theories
Both societal paradigms mentioned in the overview of Table 1 bear heavily on change
methods. The what (substance) of change management has roughly shifted from
system to behaviour oriented; the how (method) of change management on many
levels has also underwent development. It is important to note though, most
organizations tend to follow a combination of planned and emergent approaches to
change management, depending on circumstances and objectives of the organization
(Strh, 2005 p. 71; Burnes, 1996 p. 338; Beer & Nohria, 2000).
Table 1: Characteristics of modern and postmodernist change management theory
Modernism PostmodernismChange theory One reality; teleological, life-cycle, episodic change
Multiple realities; evolutionary,dialectic, continuous change
Goal Theory E, economic value-driven, shareholder
Theory O, organizational capability-driven, stakeholder
Focus Hard-systems, rational, objective Soft-systems, people issues, subjective Direction Top-down, directive leadership Bottom-up, participative leadershipTarget Structure and systems Culture
Approach Planned and programmatic Emergent and non-programmatic Agents Consultants + top management Small process-oriented consulting
General systems theory:Unfreeze move refreeze (Lewin, 1947)
Socio-technical approach: Interaction human-technology (Trist e t al, 1960)
Organizational development (based on Lewinswork): Behavioral science and system improvement(McGregor, 1950s)
Learning organization: Organizational structure &culture focused on multiple loop learning (Senge, 1994)
Lean production: Cutting the waste in organizations Toyota, Kaizen models (Womack et al, 1990)
Total quality management: Like lean, but with focus on quality and customer requirements (Kaoru, 1985)
Business process reengineering, best practice, high performance work organization :Focus on core business & building workforce commitment
Complexity theory Self-organization and connectionism.Compare: Game (Homan, 2005)
Chaos theoryThe study of complex, dynamic systemsthat reveal patterns of order out of
seemingly chaotic behaviours...so complexand dynamic, in fact, as to appear chaotic(Overman, 1996, p. 487). Compare: Play(Homan, 2005)
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
13/68
13
To modernity belong the systemic, financially measurable approaches to change
management. From 1960, a shift towards including human behaviour and quality for
the customer can be noted. However, including behaviour here still means to plan,
organize and change it rationally according to the top down conceived change models.
Change management is almost a mathematical skill preserved for the big minds in
top management and consulting firms.
According to Chia (1995), the modernist understanding of a process refers to a
discrete, linear and sequential static process. Contrasting this view, postmodernists
understand a process as intricate patterns, networks of interactions and relationships.
Moreover, whereas modern management includes employee behaviour in the change
equation as a factor to mould in the right shape, postmodernism celebrates humanistic
values of creativity and quality of life as focus point of change. Postmodernism
criticizes capitalist practises and management based on rational objectivity, offering a
holistic approach to management (Jackson & Carter, 1992; Kreiner, 1992).
For example, postmodernists pursue courses of action that are advantageous in
the long term to the organiser including environmental issues criticizing the chasing
of profit at the detriment of the ozone layer etc. Change, in postmodernist terms, is
not willed or designed as in modernism, but is a natural result of learning,
understanding and knowing. Organizations should be brave enough to discard an idea
if it is outdated, despite its past usefulness (Sherman & Schultz, 1998, p.27). Chia
(1995 p. 579) argues that because organizations are in constant flux and are thus not
representable in a cross-sectional point in time or state, instead of looking at
organizational structures, attributes and outcomes (material form), they should be
approached in terms of interactions, relationships and complex changes (soft system).
2.2.2. Postmodernist theories of chaos and complexity
Postmodernism proclaims that meaning is created via interaction (dialectic theory)
and systems are diverse. According to Cilliers (1998) postmodernism has an implicit
sensitivity to complexity, acknowledging self-organization and connectionism which
all are important factors influencing chaos and complexity theories. Complexity and
chaos theory appreciate reality as being constantly reconstructed while the diversity
and interaction of systems is necessary for the quality of the flow (figure 2). Another
common denominator is the use of scenarios, where different (dis)courses are
selected, changes introduced and then criticised again.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
14/68
14
Within postmodernism, complexity and chaos theory, building relationships is the
key. The development and maintenance of relationships is more important than the
outcomes, players or objects themselves because relationships spur development of
meaning. Supporting and diversifying the existing flow and flexibility of living
systems thus contributes to greater access to and renewal of information, power, new
technology and developments. Isolating a system and stopping the flow will cause
disintegration, free flow, however, allows for creativity and growth (Youngblood,
1997 p. 71).
The term complexity refers to the fact that in a system there are more possibilities
than can be actualized (Luhmann, 1985, p.25) while the interactions of components
of a system and the environment are too intricate to understand just by studying the
components (Cilliers, 1998 p. viii). Moreover, the interrelationships shift, change and
transform, denying definition of absolute patterns and borders. Summing up,
complexity refers to the ever-changing patterns of interactions of a system, which
make the systems difficult to study as an entity. Examples of complex systems are
societies, the brain, organizations and language (Laszlo & Laugel, 2000).
To add to the complexity, a system both influences and is influenced by its
environment and changes do not occur because of one single intervention. For
example, if a single intervention has caused a change in a systems current state, the
system will only keep this state as long as the environment is stable. And finally, the
process of self-organization makes behaviour prediction in complex systems almost
seem impossible. One could feel as though the interrelations and self organisation is
completely random, chaotic. However, chaos and complexity differ on the patterns of
interactions whereas chaos assumes that no pattern can be distinguished, complexity
assumes patterns and models if viewed from a distance or over time. According to
Sherman and Schultz (1998) chaos and complexity might be a confusion in
terminology as chaos and order are two ends of the same continuum, complexity
being the path in between the two extremes.
Chaos can be described as change periods in an organization when people get
confused or overwhelmed and cannot make sense of anything (compare play , Homan
2005). These change periods in organizations force people to move from a state ofcomfort (compare game , Homan 2005) to something new. This state of confusion
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
15/68
15
helps reorganise systems so that they are better adapted to the new environment.
Change basically becomes a self-ability to transform only made possible when
systems are willing to move into confusion, chaos, and change (Flower, 1993 p.51).
As mentioned before, the commonly assumed body of management
knowledge does not produce the returns promised, because the scientific methods are
still attuned with modernity. Models need to fit reality better in order for management
of change to be more effective. If chaos and complexity theories represent
postmodern reality correctly, the modern approach with one stop change and future
prediction cannot hold, strategies will have to be modified constantly. The
postmodern/complex approach however offers solutions focussing on behavioural
skills and interactive patterns. In order for a system to survive it has to be allowed to
utilise its self-organising abilities effectively (Cilliers, 1998).
Self-organization and power are closely connected. Giving power to the actors
within the system (employees) instead of letting a small group (management) control
the flows may generate conflicts through discourse, but resolutions may also be found
through the interactions of the elements of complex systems.
2.2.3 Changing relationships employee - organization
The shift in society is causing organizations to change, with globalization as a forceexpressing the intensified speed and variation of flows. As environments and
organizations are changing, demands on behaviour are too. Whereas the modern
approach includes behaviour as part of a mathematic equation of the change plan
(behaviour manipulation), postmodernism celebrates behaviour putting interaction
and creative skills in the centre of organizational development.
Noer (1993) gives an interesting overview of how relationships between employeeand organizations have shifted (table 2). The shift entails faster flows within
organizations, which presses on jobs and livelihoods of individual employees. Forces
of globalization are often linked with downsizing. The postmodernist answer to keep
being profitable as organization requires building employee skills such as improved
communication and networking skills (Homans theory); and also awareness of and
responsibility for the processual flow. Building behavioural skills helps organizations
notice and respond to changes at local (team) level more adequately.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
16/68
16
It is remarkable to see the shift in relationship between employee and
employer mentioned by Noer (1993). While the way of managing shifts from process
to behaviour (in line with postmodernism), employees themselves are increasingly
treated like things rather than beings (in line with globalization). The hardened
approach to employees is necessary if seen from a modern standpoint, changes are
addressed mechanically. A postmodernist approach would keep focus on the
employee as asset; yet, individuals hold responsibility to cater for their own
development. Further reflection and research promises to be useful but lies outside of
the scope of this research.
As organizations want to survive, self-organizing utilities need to be addressed
and build. First, the organization needs to understand the changed laws of social
reality and build participative frameworks. Second, employees have to become aware
of the need to develop and understand their surroundings in order to be able to
adequately respond to changes in the environment. Third, a postmodernist perception
of processes needs to be translated into action, first and foremost enriching
interpersonal relationships.
Modernity Postmodernity Employee Asset to be developed Cost to be reduced Language of hire andcut
An almost nurturing way oftalking: develop, help, grow
Violent language: take out, shoot, terminate
Orientation Focus on long term careers Hiring for the job to bedone
Size Synergistic build and develop Reductionist small size andcut
Manager Machine like, old ings: planning, coordinating,evaluating
Organic, new ings:helping, empowering,coaching
Table 2: organization employee relationship shift
2.2.4 Postmodernism and change management, intermediary conclusions
Both modernist and postmodernist paradigms heavily bear on change methods. The
what of change management has roughly shifted from system to behaviour oriented;
the how of change management on many levels has also underwent development
(table 1). As globalization spurs flows, the tempo of change has also up-scaled. Most
changes in organizations reflect simple responses to demographic, economic, social,
and political forces (March, 1981). Failed responses to change are often blamed on
employees who resisted doing what was expected of them. However, from a
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
17/68
17
contextualist point of view first organizations failed to respond to change initiatives
(postmodern: bottom up) or changed in ways that were inappropriate (Gross,
Giaquinta, and Berstein, 1971; Nelson and Yates, 1978). More specifically,
organizations change in response to their environments, but rarely change in ways that
fulfils the intentions of a particular group of actors (Attewell and Gerstein 1979).
Continuous change cannot be meaningfully managed with a modern (mechanist,
singular) approach, it has to be managed more organic and sustainable.
Although most organizations follow combinations of planned and emergent
approaches, often a pre-conceived (cognitive) idea of the end state is proposed
organizations are seen as entities instead of flows and interrelations. Essentially, all
models are wrong, some models are useful (Box, 1987, p. 424). Models refer to
static states of being, in postmodern times changes are continuous which makes
models only useful for specific moments and contexts in time.
A few suggestions to deal with change in the postmodernist era are: create a
free flow of information; emphasize relationship management; empower people to
engage in appropriate activities, for a quick change response; cultivate diversity in all
roles, forming accurate perception of system and environment; encourage a
participatory approach, promoting internal interaction, commitment and direction.
Participation calls for creativity, allows diversity of interrelationships and helps enrich
the flows. The goal of change in postmodernism would be that changes in the
organisation are constantly monitored (by the system) in parallel with changes in the
environment. No management board could do this alone (many authors mentioned,
adapted from Strh, 2005).
PostmodernismModernism
Join up
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
18/68
18
2.3 Focusing on postmodernism from Homans theory
2.3.1 Homans (2005) postmodernist theory of change management
Homan (2005) describes implementation of change around the concept of the so-
called organizational landscape . Homan juxtaposes organizations on paper with
organizations as constellation of (micro diverse) communities (p. 95) while including
complexity theory. His central point of argumentation is that implementing action
cannot automatically bring about desired behavioural changes as the landscape works
in more complex ways. The practical application of complexity theory to change
management is found in describing the mechanisms of interrelation of communities
within organizations.
Homan proposes organizations to be viewed as social fabrics where a. organizations
are formed out of elements existing more or less apart from each other b. behaviour of
these elements is based on locally available information and realities, and c. these
elements interact in a multitude of forms. Interactive patterns between communities
can recreate reality constructions and merge them into one larger shared community.
The diversity within and between communities is necessary for creative and
innovative flows (the recreation of realities). Managing the collective patterns is notnecessary as it is a self-organizing process without order from management.
According to Homan this should not lead to uncontrollable waste of time and means.
In order for collective constructions of reality to appear, a certain degree of stability
needs to be present. However, too much stability (similarity of realities) makes the
organization inapt for absorbing environmental change. Homan speaks of an optimal
situation in which the communities change around a stable identity formed bycollective narratives. The relations and interaction patterns within and between
communities (K-factor) combined with the interaction rules (R-factor referring to
power) dictate the sort of regime within an organization.
Are communities too much alike, then change stagnates and the community is in the
Game stadium (clear identity and clear guards of the regime). Are there distinct
differences between communities and are the rules flexibly changed to the
environment, then the community is in the Play stadium. Management of change for
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
19/68
19
rigid organizations could then be proposed as bringing them from a state of game into
play in order to help them becoming able to adapt to the environmental changes (and
then it is up to the organization to either create a game again or stay in constant state
of play).
2.3.2 Connecting various theories with Homans change dimensions
Before explaining how simulation games are useful for supporting PC processes,
Homans four dimensions of organizational change (figure 1) are connected to various
models of change. Homan has one continuum translate the degree of planning; a
second distinguishing the amount of participation in change interventions. Most
importantly, the combinations of the dimensions each correspond to a particular
degree of participation as proposed by De Wilde and Geverink (2001, p. 41 in Van de
Westelaken, 2002, p. 30).
Ten Have and Visser (2004) basically describe the treadmill of failure as an outcome
of management driven change, whereas success is reached by broader understanding
of the change situation, a dynamic and contributory perspective of change with the
knowledge that incremental steps add up to larger long term results. This puts an
expectation of failure on the planned-monovocal and spontaneous-monovocalapproaches to change.
Russ (2010) describes experiential learning methods as either programmatic or
participatory, the first corresponding to planned monovocal change, the latter to the
other three combination of dimensions. He also seems to suggest that programmatic
change is outdated in a world where organizations have to be ready to change on a
continuous basis. He is realistic enough to mention drawbacks of both systemsthough. More about these experiential methods is explained in chapter 3. Also,
compare the overview of modern and postmodern change management theory in table
1 with the dimensions of Homan (2005). With the theory of Homan (and the
participation stages of De Wilde and Geverink), the modern and postmodern
approaches can be placed on a continuum explaining how modern and postmodern
approaches are used simultaneously.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
20/68
20
Figure 1: Homans (2005) figure of organizational change dimensions
1. Planned Monovocal: modern planned change trajectories where
management and consultants has the dominant say. The top of the
organization sells the necessity and benefits of change, and the bottom has to
buy in. Decisions are not subject of discussion. The change trajectory is
divided in clear-cut programmatic parts, with clear responsibilities. The
content or what of change are central. Thinking and doing are separated,
should there be unexpected variations during the implementation phase, the
management will be surprised or irritated (why dont they do it correctly).
2. Planned Polyvocal: modern planned change trajectories are mingled with a
form of validating participation. A small group conjures up an idea, asks for
presents the idea in a small part of the organization and then evaluates the
idea. The perspective of the change situation becomes broader and deeper so
that chances and threats are better identified. Some sort of dialectics are taking
place starting with a movement of diverging open talks, followed by aconvergent closure, a decision of management.
3. Spontaneous Polyvocal: In the spontaneous changes, the motor of change
are the employees in the organization, not the board or management. What is
most important for this type of emergent organizational change is the diversity
of the interactive network as change emanates from a varying perception of
organizational reality. This type of local change starts for example with animprovement in the work process or communication towards customers.
Monovocal
Planned
Polyvocal
Spontaneous
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
21/68
21
Larger changes are co-created: an employee picks up a tendency in the market,
which becomes a topic of talk, management organizes some form of meeting
and everyone is asked to develop and share their view on the matter.
Behavioural diversity and learning at this level is very important for flexibility
of the system and consequently for making of real changes within the system.
4. Spontaneous Monovocal: local communities within the organization infect
each other with some idea for change. This idea is put up for discussion and
can become an official change initiative. In modern understanding the idea for
change starts at the top of the organization, postmodern understanding does
not discriminate where this idea originated. In any case, there is enough space
for feedback and consultation from employees, and management fosters
development of the spontaneous change plans.
Figure 2: The constellation of communities placed in the change dimensions (adapted from Homan,2005). Many communities with their own view of organizational reality together form the
organizational landscape. The colored ovals depict these varying realities, would they have been all the
same color, the organization would be static, hard to change. The lines between communities represent
the communication between them (and the outside world), would there be less, or more structured
patterns, organizational strength and consequent ability to change would be lower. Homan seems to be
proponent of polyvocal and spontaneous changes, corresponding to the postmodern paradigm.
Monovocal
Polyvocal
Spontaneous
Change motor
Planned
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
22/68
22
2.4. Conclusion: five characteristics of PC
Five distinguishing characteristics of postmodernist change should be mentioned. In
these characteristics the following postmodernist concepts play a role: complexity,
interconnections, multiple realities, dialectics between them, and empowerment. Postmodernist change is a bottom-up process, which is an effective answer to
a constantly changing environment. Multiple actors from their respective positions
can more effectively notice change indicators (vibrations environment-organization)
than the management alone. However, as resources are scarce, not every single
picture of change/reality can elicit an organizational response.
This is why boundaries have to be placed in the form of an organizational
framework of interaction (Simons, 1995), an active policy and structure in support of
innovation. Next to a fertile soil, innovation requires innovators also known as
intrapreneurs (Pinchot, 1985). Third, organizational strength in postmodernist
understanding is largely determined by the amount and variety of communication
between organizationenvironment and the collective will to serve the needs of actors
within this environment. This counts for financial stakeholders, but ultimately also for
more social stakeholders e.g. government, Greenpeace.
Furthermore, it is important to stress that (small groups of) individuals carry
out the bottom up process, supported by an organizational framework. PC demands
organizational attention on the behaviour of these individuals.
Finally, postmodernist change processes are incremental (dialectic and
evolution theory), spreading like oil stains -small to larger scale. However, setting up
the organization to the postmodernist model can be difficult: the management should
take the lead spreading their power through the company -starting with a planned,
top-down framework, actively and increasingly leaving space for spontaneous, bottom
up initiatives.
Characteristic Postmodernist change
1. Bottom-up
2. Framework for interaction
3. Constant organizationenvironment feedback loops at all levels
4. Focus on behaviour of individuals and small groups
5. Incremental steps, oil stain
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
23/68
23
Chapter 3 Characteristics of simulation games
3.1 Introducing simulation games
On 10 August 2010 project Backoffice Servicecentre started, the aim of this
project is to re-form the organization so that three services are unified. Points of
attention are the redirection of processes, implementation of new software and
shaping the flows of communication and attitudes of employees. The project leader
would like to test the future situation to learn about possible obstacles and how to
solve them, supporting managers to getting the bigger picture and employees to get
acquainted with their new style of working. Therefore, the organization is playing a
simulation game, Control-IT.
This game supports testing future situations in a metaphoric way, helps
understanding the bigger picture and employees acquire insights for new behaviour.
Some themes touched upon by this game are, business process management, ICT
service management organization, service level management. During the game,
participants simulate working in an industrial harbour, playing a role according to
their play card & place in the room. They have to be themselves, not acting out a role.
During the game, players can discover through interaction which behaviour pays off
most. After each round, they can evaluate and discuss freely with each other, then
implement their proposed changes to the process in the next round. After minimally
three rounds, the game is evaluated with the game facilitator to create parallels
between the metaphoric game reality and the organizational reality better retention.
3.2 Research and concept of simulation games
When we grow up, simulating (adult) behaviour and playing take up a large
proportion of our time, and with benefiting results. Why not using our ability to learn
through interaction in a business setting? Much has to do with the belief in the method(does it really pay off?). Although seemingly apparent in real life, these principles are
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
24/68
24
not always easy to proof scientifically. In scientific language, games represent playing
while simulation is the mimicking of the environment to be able to learn in a
purposeful way. These concepts are explained in more detail in this chapter in order to
create understanding of what simulation games are and what they can do in a business
setting. Below you can read about the conceptual background of simulation and
gaming and the chosen research focus.
3.2.1 Conceptual background of simulation games
Gaming and simulation have been linked since the introduction of the term gaming
around the 1950s. However, the terms game or play were not easily accepted for
scientific usage (Klabbers, 2009a). While simulation emerged as a tool for serious
contexts simulating reality for educational purposes it was easily accepted as
scientific. Gaming on the other hand emerged from entertainment and gradually got
used for educational purposes, which blurred its scientific usefulness.
The discussion whether games are scientifically useful can be traced back to
the function of games: entertainment or serious. The seriousness of gaming relates to
the outcome or purpose of the game and not to the intention of playing. Serious
games have a thought-out educational purpose and are not intended primarily for
amusement (Abt, 1970, p. 9). When play is a planned learning tool it is serious;when intentions of use are serious the game can be considered scientifically useful.
Klabbers (2009a) further mentions elements of both functions of games. Present in
both entertainment and serious games: a. competition by players/decision makers
pursuing different objectives b. chance through events affecting the ongoing process.
Other purposes specifically for serious functionality are: c. enhancing interaction
between people and engage them in a way that is more productive than otherscientific methods, and d. putting people in unfamiliar situations forcing them to learn
because of the related uncertainty and ambiguity.
Finally, gaming derived its academic status from its connection to simulation
(Klabbers, 2009, p. 453). In this later stage, social behaviour and interactions became
a large proportion of the simulations when they represented social, complex systems.
Gaming expressed the active social part within the simulation system. Both concepts
were used to help clarify complex social situations, focussing on policy and decision-
making.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
25/68
25
Duke (1980) describes simulation as an attempt to abstract and reproduce core
features of a complex system aiming to understand, experiment and predict behaviour
of the system. Others followed this general line of thinking, posing that simulation is
the method of experimentation (Caluw et al., 1996, p. 21) or the process of
conducting experiments on a model, instead of attempting to experiment with the real
system (Klabbers, 2009, page 451).
Gaming refers to the part of simulation, which is not computerized, dealing
with both cognitive and non-cognitive learning. A game is an activity amongst two
or more independent decision-makers seeking to achieve their objectives in some
limiting context (Abt, 1970 p.6). The gaming part refers to activities and decisions of
players, such as playing roles, achieving goals and results (positive & negative),
carrying out activities and experiencing limitations. The activities and decisions are
made in relation with other players and elements (Caluw et al., 1996, p. 20). It is
generally agreed upon that the goals of gaming and simulation are pedagogic
(learning and training), communication, and research.
3.2.2 Research focus
There are many sorts of simulation games (SG). In this research the choice is to
divide SG by their nature. On the one side are interactive SG, where participants caninteract within the borders of instructions, role descriptions and game rules. The
interaction between people, informal behaviour and non-verbal communication is
inherently connected to interactive SG. On the other side are computer based SG,
where one or more participants are playing against each other, or the computer. In
computer games it is not necessary that participants are in the same physical space or
take part of the game simultaneously (Gils, 2008, p. 7).
Low-tech role-playing games are used and are effective for the simulation ofsocial systems (Bekebrede, 2010, p. 79). Serious gaming simulates a socio-technical
system in which there is a strong interaction between the decisions of an actor
network and the simulated environment (Mayer, Bekebrede and Van Bilsen, 2009).
This research focuses on simulation games with an objective outside the game
(serious), simulating the social reality (interactive), without the usage of digital
technology (real life), and with process elements. As the concept implies, simulation
games in this research are understood as having both process (game rules and set up)
and social (free to act) components.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
26/68
26
3.3 Experiential learning and simulation games
A simulation game is a powerful experiential learning tool supported by the well-
known phrase "I see and I forget, I hear and I remember, I do and I understand." -
Confucius . Games and simulations have been closely connected to experientiallearning, which is also known as problem based learning (Klabbers, 2006).
Learning merely by listening does not enable full development of important
higher order learning tasks (Lee, 2010). Important higher order tasks touched upon by
simulation games, through experiential learning, are for example, decision-making,
creativity, integration of cross functional materials, problem solving, risk-taking and
interpersonal skills (Thorne et al., 1999; Cadotte, 1995). Simulation games built for
social systems and policies help improving communication, support consensus,
commitment to action and stimulate creativity and understanding of complexity
(Duke & Geurts, 2004).
According to Kolb (1984), the main function of the learning process is knowledge
creation. He introduced the experiential learning cycle (figure 3), which outlines the
objective of learners to achieve the final stage of Active Experimentation. Research
from Kolb (1984) on simulation games vs. other learning methods, showed that
learning outcomes of listening methods are geared towards Reflexive Observation
and Abstract Conceptualisation stages, while simulation game methods also
reproduce emotional, perceptual, and symbolically complex environments, geared
mainly towards Specific Experience and Reflexive Observation and the final stage
Active Experimentation. Among the benefits of simulation games is the ability to see
consequences of decisions and test alternative proposals. Simulation games have the
potential to improve learning experience and knowledge acquisition (Lee, 2010).
Simplifying the reality in a simulation game can create a learning environment
in which participants can practice with (old and new) rules and habits. Simulation by
playing is first and foremost a way of communication. Participants explore each
others ideas, meanings and opinions not only by debating, but especially through
exploration of simulated reality in rapid tempo. A simulation game is a simultaneous
dialogue (multilogue) between players, aimed to get a broader understanding of the
subject and tasks at hand (Duke, 1974).
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
27/68
27
Figure 3: Kolb's 1984 learning styles adapted (Chapman, 2005).
3.4 Simulation game characteristics and phases
The concept simulation game has been discussed and connected to experiential
learning. What have SG in common? Characteristics and phases are here described in
order to lay the basis for discussing effectiveness.
3.4.1 Characteristics of simulation games
According to De Caluw et al. (1996, p. 26) simulation games share five basic
characteristics. Below these are briefly discussed.
1. A simulated but simplified reality. The goal of the game design is to
recreate reality and present this in simplified form to players of the game (figure 4).
Certain elements and relations of reality are emphasized to create a controlled
experience (Lynton and Pareek, 2000, p. 174).
2. Roles, rules and goals form the elements of the simulation game.
Participants of a SG interact with each other using their real selves, bound by pre-
mentioned rules of simulation. The rules help guide the gaming experience, e.g.
describing a role, which is a specific set of tasks in relation to the subject of the SG.Although there are rules, the behaviour is authentic, not prescribed like in a role-play.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
28/68
28
In their role participants can bring their own knowledge and experience from daily
reality into the simulation game in order to reach certain goals (Peters & Van de
Westelaken, 2008, p. 21).
3. Activities, interaction, decisions and results form the relations between the
elements. SG are all about behaviour, social relationships and interaction (Van der
Meer&Mastik, 1993). Decisions, activities and interactions have mutual effect, on the
environment and the evolution of the simulation game (Elgood, 1993, p. 11).
4. Timeframe. Activities in the SG may last longer or shorter than they would
in reality. This zooming in or out, shows short and long term effects of actions
(Geurts & Van Wierst, 1991, p. vii; Peters & Van de Westelaken, 2003, p. 3). The SG
timeframe may represent past, current or (possible) future time (Duke, 1974, p. 50).
5. Safe environment. There are several aspects to the safe environment. First, unlucky
choices or decisions have no direct consequences in reality, which is referred to as the
magic circle (Klabbers 2006). Second, participants experience the game as more or
less safe to experiment. Ambiguous feelings before the game serve as motivation to
embark on the SG; however, while playing the simulation has to be safe to experiment
in order not to form a barrier to learning (Caluw et al., 1996, p. 181). A third
understanding of the safe environment is that SG can replace expensive or dangerous
experiments of reality (Abt, 1970, Kirriemuir, 2002).
Figure 4 Peters and Van de Westelaken (2011). Translating organizational reality to simulation game.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
29/68
29
3.4.2 Phases of simulation games
SG can be bought in standard format (off-the-shelf-games), adjustable format (frame-
games) or free-format (tailor-made-games). However, in all cases, the development
and use of the SG typically contains four phases: game design, game preparation, playing the game, and game debriefing in the future there should perhaps be
included a test and reporting phase covering the game experience.
Game design aims to construct a SG by translating elements and relations of reality
into game elements (figure 4). Three concepts explain the translation process of
reality into SG: Reduction, through which relevant elements and relations are being
enlarged in the SG. Abstraction: elements of reality are depicted less detailed in SG
compared to reality. Symbolising, which malls elements from reality into another
form in the SG e.g. running a tourist agency symbolizes running financial
administrations in bank and insurance (Peters & Van de Westelaken, 2008, p. 6).
During preparation, the facilitator checks the materials, prepares the introduction,
invites participants and divides them into groups. During the SG interaction between
participants is central. By their interactions and decisions participants mirror a
situation in reality (Peters & Van de Westelaken, 2011). Playing the game gives
participants insight into the (problematic) situation and they become aware of how
they can contribute to improvement thereof.
Playing a simulation game creates insight into the nature of (simplified) complex
problems and participants can train new behaviour. The Kolb cycle of learning (figure
3) has to be repeated four to five times to create a lasting effect on participants (De
Caluw, 2002). The debriefing stage is necessary for the retention and the actual
consciousness process of the participants, so that they can translate the simulated
reality into the everyday reality (Duke, 1987, p. 16; figure 4). Thiagi (2000) places
even more importance on this phase mentioning to always conduct a debriefing. The
game is just an excuse for having a discussion among the participants.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
30/68
30
3.5 Effect of simulation games
Tying the concept SG to experiential learning gave hints about the effectiveness. The
characteristics and phases further shaped a picture of what effective simulation games
look like. Yet, surely not every SG that shares the five characteristics and contains
four phases is an equally effective tool. We take some time to discuss elements
necessary for effectiveness and short- and longer-term effects of simulation games.
3.5.1 Elements necessary for effective simulation games
First, outcomes of SG depend on the functionality of simulation games (see 2.3.2). In
general, at least three aspects positively contribute to the effect of SG for serious
purposes (Bekebrede, 2010): A high motivation (internal and external factors), a safe
environment and cognitive engagement (better retention). A prominent issue
encompassing these aspects is the degree to which the game reflects reality (figure 4).
Various views exist on how to keep a balance between game and organizational
reality. E.g. there are different approaches to facilitating SG. Where one praticitioner
explicitly wishes to keep participants in the game reality during the game only
reflecting on organizational reality in the debriefing stage; another facilitator focuses
more on making participants feel comfortable, debriefing shortly between every
(Kolb) learning cycle (Saganet seminar 22 September 2011).
Nevertheless, it is shared that the validity of a SG as training instrument depends on
the realistic representation of organizational reality (Peters and Van de Westelaken,
2011). Peters, Vissers en Heijne (1998) give more detailed criteria to the realistic
environment. A SG is valid when a. the game environment is deemed realistic to
participants, when b. there is congruence between elements and relations in the game
and reality, when c. there is congruence between processes in both systems and thesimulation game is valid to the degree a good estimation or prediction can be made of
what happens in reality. When the SG has to be used for training of future situations,
acquiring skills for acting in a very complex situation or when possibilities are to be
tested, the reality of the SG is important. The level of reality directly influences the
effectiveness and validity of any content, conclusions and generalisations.
Game reality has to mimic organizational reality. For effect and validity, participants
need to belief in the game reality (see also chapter 4). When they experience the rules
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
31/68
31
players, and behaviour in the game, it needs to correspond to organizational reality of
agent, interaction and system behaviour. Duke (1980) devised a pyramid where the
base stands for a perfect representation of reality and the top for perfect metaphor /
abstraction. This cone shares striking similarities with Dales cone of experience
(1969, p.107; figure 5) where Dale proposes teaching methods from most abstract
(verbal) to most realistic (direct experience). According to Duke (1980) and Caluw
(1996) simulation games have to represent a relatively large proportion of daily
reality of participants. A. Game reality needs to represent something real because
participants have to be invited to show competitive behaviour and become motivated,
b. the game environment needs to be abstract enough in order to be safe for
experimentation with new behaviour, and c. the game environment needs to resemble
reality enough because new behaviour has to be retained in combination with
problems encountered in reality.
On the one hand, participants need to have freedom to make decisions within the
game that represent something for them in the real world (outcomes /consequences of
decision making). On the other hand, the freedom to express and experiment safely
has to be without consequences in real life. Simulated reality has to create challenges
for people in order for them to learn new behaviours (complex), but not so
challenging that they get over-confused and stop altogether (chaos). Variation in the
functionality of the SG demands variation in the mimicking of reality. E.g. the SG has
to be more realistic when next to consciousness raising, learning becomes a goal
(Caluw, 1996, p. 161).
Figure 5, Dales cone 1969, p.107
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
32/68
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
33/68
33
Simulation games train knowledge, skills and behaviors with an eye on the short-term
(modernist, specific goals) and the long-term (postmodernist, empowerment,
interaction etc.). To illustrate this an example is giving of organizational intervention
of short- and long-term. A short-term focus is for example implementing a shared
service centre or intervening in a process requiring staff to respond in a specific
different way. Long-term focus can be for instance setting up an interaction
framework or support skill training to be used in various circumstances -educating a
workforce to be more responsive to the environment of the organization. Strategy
simulation belongs to both goals; creation of strategy is a short-term goal, whereas the
enactment of strategy necessitates behavioral assimilation. Parallel to modernist
change, the intention of short-term change is to attain a predetermined precise goal
after which change stops, whereas the intention of long-term change is similar to PC:
attaining general skills through which process understanding increases and interaction
patterns are enriched to support continuous change. For both, short- and long-term,
simulation games are effective tools.
Pertaining to the short-term focus of change is the concept of valley of despair
(graph 1). Simulation games short cut the valley of despair because they practice a
new approach before its actualized. Training beforehand builds understanding of the
big picture, helps creating a leap of consciousness with visions of the future, enables
shared intelligence and builds confidence in being successful. Most importantly,
training (failing and learning) before the real change is cheaper (Wenzler, 1999).
The long-term focus of change has a focus on behavioral learning, aiming at
general improvement of organizational functioning. Van de Westelaken (2002)
distinguishes detailed impacts of simulation games in this category. Training
knowledge about systems or problems in the systems; consciousness raising about the
organizational situation; learning from each others opinions; (communication) skill
training; experimenting with ideas as a way to come to get insight into possible reality
(visions of the future); improving cooperation and interaction (of teams); improving
decision taking; and clarify or integrate visions.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
34/68
34
Graph 1 : Valley of Despair. Prestentation R. Deenen, Accenture 2010. Based on Wenzler (1999).
3.5.3 Detrimental elements of SG As unfavourable conditions for the use of gaming are mentioned little motivation and
acceptance of the change, feeling of loss of status due to the change, no active or a not
accepted leadership, hidden agendas or conflicts, uncertainty about the future,
disenchantment in practice or overestimating ones own abilities (De Caluw, 2007).
An underlying problem to many of these conditions is cynicism of participants about
organizational change and the use of interventions in general. Cynicism about
organizational change often combines pessimism about the likelihood of successfulchange with the blame of those responsible for change as incompetent, lazy, or both
(Reichers et al., 1997, p. 48). As change is highly behavioural, a SG is on the one
hand a blessing, on the other hand a curse. The effect of the SG depends for a large
part on the attitudes and behaviour of participants towards the game and change in
general actions of facilitator and organization in turn affect participant behaviour.
Major factors that contribute to cynicism include a history of change programs that
are inconsistently successful, lack of adequate information about change and simply
predisposition to cynicism. Cynicism affects commitment, satisfaction and motivation
of employees, making it an important factor of failure of change processes (Reichers
et al., 1997). This failure leads again to more cynicism on behalf of the employees
and renewed attempts of management to implement changes with the help of new
models and methods. Ten Have and Visser (2004) accurately describe this vicious
circle of failure. The failure rates of change implementation consistently soar around
70%, showing that organizations do not learn enough from previous failure.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
35/68
35
The so-called treadmill of failure starts with incomprehension of the situation and
necessary change, creating disorientation, acceptance of outside consultants and
magic methods. These methods are only partly understood and implemented, creating
disillusion. Consequent reports analyse the failure, and point fingers to blame. A way
out of this vicious circle would be to remark the progression points. In order to curb
failure into success, organizations should shift from obsession with the change goal
itself to becoming aware of the change situation; adopt a dynamic instead of static
perspective of change; implement change from contributory perspective instead of
making change a precise assignment; create total, long term and incremental instead
of partial, short term and planned results. These success criteria are very similar to the
characteristics of a postmodernist approach mentioned in chapter 1.2, table 1.
3.6 conclusions: 6 characteristics of simulation games
Six distinguishing characteristics of simulation games should be mentioned. First,
simulations mimic organizational reality by reduction, abstraction and symbolizing.
Thereby simulations create insight into the nature of complex problems and make it
possible for participants to see consequences of decisions and test alternative
proposals within a safe environment the simulation.
Second, the game part of SG allows participants to act more or less free within the
simulated organizational reality. The gaming focuses on behaviour and interaction,
training to let go of old and learn new behaviour. Interaction patterns are shown, and
new communication is facilitated; such as the simultaneous multilogue. This is done
via experiential learning, which is more productive than other methods.
Third, SG are easy to used next to other intervention methods which make them a
good instrument to place into a change program/process. Fourth, it is relatively easy
to adjust circumstances: a SG is flexible, a controlled experience. It caters for short-
and long-term goals, a broad variety of functionalities and mimics all sorts of realities
for a realistic effect. Fifth, there are strict/specific standards to adhere to in order for
a SG to give a valid and effective outcome. E.g. phases and characteristics such as
level of reality-depending on the functionality; Kolb cycles need to be repeated; a safe
environment and debriefing need to be present to have a lasting effect.
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
36/68
36
Last, the contextual factors or environmental influences. Next to having a good
simulation game (point 5), these include the facilitator who functions in multiple roles
supporting the participants in creating the magic circle of game reality. Another factor
is the participant, who has a specific background of experience, motivation etc.,
which may interfere with the effect of the SG. Importantly, the organization is a factor
and it has to ensure that a coherent change process supports the effect of the SG.
Characteristic Simulation game
1. Simulations mimic complex (organizational) systems
2. Games focus on (old and new) behaviour and interaction
3. SG is easy to use next to other intervention methods.
4. SG is flexible, a controlled experience.
5. Specific standards to create a valid, effective and lasting result.
6. Contextual factors influencing the effect of the SG
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
37/68
37
Chapter 4 Comparing PC & SG
In the first chapter, the concept of postmodernism and its influence on organizations
and the management of change have been clarified with 5 characteristics as a result.
In chapter two, the conceptual background, link with experiential learning, factors
necessary for effect and the short/long-term effects of simulation games are discussed.
6 characteristics as a result. In order to answer the research question, the two need to
be combined, sketching a postmodernist context of simulation game usage. Therefore,
in this chapter SG are connected with PC and the phases of change.
In advance of the theoretical fit and limitations of simulation games in
postmodernist change management, some practical experience is shared supporting
the idea that change management and simulation games are a good match. In the
experience of Wenzler, with 25 years of experience in both business and academics
simulation games have proven to be a valuable contribution in helping organizations
improve their performance by helping them change and adapt more effectively and
efficiently (Wenzler, 2009). According to him, ten commandments guide using
simulation games in change management. Simulation games can support effective
change interventions depending on: understanding the client need (whether
postmodernist or not), the envisioned results, stakeholders being involved in the
iterative development of the simulation game as intervention (interaction during
employment), ensuring organizational support so that found improvements can be
implemented in reality, the validity of simulation games in support of the learning
goals, and the focus on learning being translated into action (Wenzler, 2009). Let us
regain focus on specifically PC keeping this practical experience and considerations
in mind.
4.1 Complexity, dialectics and interconnection
The substance of PC can be traced from concepts closest to the heart of
postmodernism. These concepts are intricately intertwined with simulation games.
This finding is a compelling argument for using simulation games in PC trajectories.
4.1.1 Complexity in postmodernism and simulation games
New techniques such as computer- or interactive simulation and gaming were found
useful to scientifically cope with complexities and uncertainties. Games are open, in
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
38/68
38
the sense that the players have freedom to act within the space provided. Simulation is
more confined in its freedom with regard to modelling social systems. Complex and
dynamic systems can be expressed and made tangible thereby allowing experiments
on these social realities without actual interference. Games and simulations are useful
a. in order to understand the functioning of these systems and b. to transmit
knowledge (Klabbers, 2010a). Simulation games could thus be used as a tool to
understand and train people to act within complex systems (complexity theory and
dialogue).
Simulation games and related design methodologies offer effective approaches to the
framing and better understanding of social systems, to the generation of ideas, and the
shaping of action repertoires for change (awareness, understanding, action). Games
can thus be designed for dual purposes: a) to generate a practical tool (artifact) for
supporting the design-in-the-large, or b) to devise a method or model in the analytical
science tradition for developing and testing theories. In both cases SG are being used
to model existing (complex) social systems (Klabbers, 2009b).
Simulation games help creating a holistic understanding of complex (problems
in) reality. This is also expressed by the functionalities of understanding the big
picture and visions of the future (Wenzler, 1999). By playing the game, participants
become part of the system and experience its complexity (Bekebrede, 2010 p. 74).
Experiencing complexity helps in consciousness-raising; what is more, learning to
deal with this complexity is also reached.
4.1.2 Multiple realities & dialectics
The simulation approach presumes a commonly shared reality and one formal
language. It has been suggested that participants eventually construct common imagesof reality and achieve common objectives shared among coordinators and
subordinates (Duke, 1974). However, Greenblat (1981b) questioned the common
reality underlying game design and use. She argues that participants bring their own
goals and interests moulding multiple realities into the gaming situation; experiences
of relevant aspects differ between people, time and context.
The (postmodernist) idea of multiple realities all applicable to one simulation game
necessitates that each social actor should have at least some points of similarity
-
8/13/2019 Master Thesis Change management and Serious Games
39/68
39
regarding the reality to be simulated and the game to play. The sense making has to be
steered somehow in order for simulation games to be useful as a tool understanding
complex realities. These common points of reality can be achieved by a process called
problem framing , in which participants interactively name the elements and attributes
to which they will pay attention, eventually framing the contexts of the simulation
game (Schn, 1983).
At least as important as a common framework to begin with, is the evaluation
of the game in which the multiple realities are expressed, heard by all and blended
into stories of what happened and what can be learned from it. This is then the
dialectic process arriving at shared intelligence and creating a more or less common
vision of the future. Against this background, the behavioural component (gaming)
shows more potential compared to the static design (simulation) in dealing with social
and political issues in the private and public domains.
4.1.3 Interconnections and empowerment
In the process of a common start and evaluation, there is a guided exchange of voices
which helps learning, understanding and strengthening the organizational network
(compare social fabric, Homan, 2005). The simulation game is a simplified stage for
understanding interconnections between individuals, departments, customers andsuppliers.
The interconnections and flows that are enacted during the game not only
provide a test case for participants and organization (visions of the future), it also
enhances the interconnections in daily reality participants meet each other in a
different environment, connect with different people in a different way than in daily
reality. Evaluation (discourse) during and after the simulation game potentially
strengthens the learning effect. According to Klabbers (2009b), the switch of position between spectator (observing the systems behaviour) and inside player (making the
system happen) implies a switch from problem solving to problem framing
enhancing understanding and learning. Problems are here defined a
top related