4 rules of thumb to design communities of any sort

Published June 19, 2010 by Jo Jordan

Getting collective life right

There are so many models around for designing games, communities, and work. Yet we rarely use them. I could ponder why. But here is another that has a useful acronym, CASH. I’ve lost its source, so if you know its provenance, please let me know. All I remember is that is was used to design youth clubs.

CASH

Connection (Integration)

Who comes here and what do they like each other, do together, and want to do together?

Autonomy (Choice, role, responsibility)

What freedoms do we each have to choose how we will participated in our community?

Skills (Capacity in the place)

What are the many ways we each contribute to this place?

Healthy Norms

What is ‘good, true, better and possible’ about our life together and what do want to do more of?

Comparing CASH with ARC

Pundits will have immediately noticed that CASH is similar to the Autonomy-Relationships-Competency triad of Ryan and Deci and differs from game-designer, Jane McGonigal who uses ARC + belonging to something bigger than ourselves.

Perhaps we can add wider meaning by saying CASH UP?

Reality is broken. Games are great. What do you dislike about games?

Published September 17, 2009 by Jo Jordan

Game designers are better at psychology than psychologists

Jane McGonigal, games designer extraordinaire, has long pointed out that games are better designed than most jobs. I agree with her, but oddly I still prefer work.

Nonetheless, agreeing that games designers make better use of work psychology than psychologists do, I’ve been deliberately playing games from beginning to end.

Orientation that gives control back to the audience

Getting into games, the autonomy dimension of Ryan & Deci’s ARC model is clear. We need to be be able to see what to do at glance. We shouldn’t need elaborate instructions or encouragement.

Something for the audience to get their teeth into

I am stepping through the levels quite doggedly. That should be the competence dimension of Ryan & Dec’s model. In truth, games are quite fun while I am figuring out the rules – or when I think I can push myself to a new level. But they also get boring quickly. Dogged is the feeling I have!

A way for us to play together

I think I don’t use the social aspects of games sufficiently. Social or relationships, is the third component of Ryan & Deci’s ARC model.

I am probably not very sociable because my motives for playing games aren’t social. But, equally, I probably get bored quickly because I am not being sociable.

Bringing our own rules to the game

What has interested me more has been the way my preconceptions affect my game play

In a game in which I played the role of explorer in Africa, it took me a long while to realize that I could deliberately kill people and even longer to do it.

In Mafia Wars running on Facebook, I am yet to start a fight. I am yet to invest in armor. I only do jobs against an anonymous enemy. When someone attacks me, I just clean up and take out some more insurance.

In Farmeville, I would like to share my tractor.

Does social mean more than sending gifts and energy bonuses? Are our ‘identities’ and ‘values’ also important to us?

Sometimes it is useful to have our values challenged. Sometimes it is useful to see that we impose rules that other people don’t care about.

Then we have a choice. Do we want to play by those rules? Maybe we do.

Springing happily into games design

Published March 30, 2009 by Jo Jordan

Spring and new projects

Today is the first working day of British Summer Time 2009. The daffodils are out along the paths and the highways of England. It is light by 6am and it is time to spring clean my apartment.

I am also going to revamp my blog.

This is the third revamp or fourth incarnation. I will still write about work and opportunity and I will still write about positive psychology – that is, the psychology of what goes well rather than the psychology of what goes badly.

Happiness engineering

What I will focus on for the foreseeable future is “happiness engineering” or “fungineering” or “happiness hacks”. These are all terms used by preeminent games designer, Jane McDonigal who has pointed out that games designers use basic work psychology to make engaging games far more effectively than managers, HRM and psychologists use the very same body of knowledge to make engaging work.

Learning games design from the beginning

I have no experience in game design. Zip. I don’t even play games – much. So this is the blog of a rank amateur exploring what games designers have to teach us about making work and play engaging in the 21st century, in our built up urban areas, with the threat of climate change and financial ruin hanging over our heads!

A community of amateur games designers

I suspect there are a heap of people out there who want to do this too. Please drop me the name of your blog if you also blog. Or join in the comments and suggest puzzles and conundrum for us to solve. And we will do our best.

Here’s to a winning 2009!
Jo

3 Comments

Tag: games design