Advertisement

HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 147–159 | Cite as

Einsatz von Spielmechaniken und Bots zur Moderation von Kreativitätsprozessen in Unternehmen

  • Milad Mirbabaie
  • Stefan StieglitzEmail author
  • Jessica Priesmeyer
  • Marius Kindel
Schwerpunkt
  • 56 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

In diesem Beitrag wird die konzeptuelle Plattform Innovari präsentiert, mit deren Hilfe kollaborative, digitale Innovationsprozesse im Unternehmen unterstützt werden können. In einer sich schnell verändernden globalisierten Welt, die von technologischem Wandel geprägt ist, müssen Unternehmen die Fähigkeit zur Innovation ausbauen. Verteilte Arbeit und Spezialisierung von Wissen führen dazu, dass digitale Innovationslösungen in den Vordergrund rücken. Hindernisse hierbei sind jedoch verankert in ineffizienter Kollaboration, festgesetzten Hierarchien und psychologischen Bürden, die die gemeinsame Arbeit erschweren.

Das Tool Innovari unterstützt die Kollaboration mit einer moderierenden künstlichen Intelligenz in Form eines Chat Bots und einem durch Spielmechaniken motivierenden Prozess bei der Findung von Innovationen. Verschiedenste Mechanismen helfen dabei, die Vorzüge vielfältiger Gruppen zu nutzen, um unkonventionelle Denkweisen zu stimulieren und so bessere Ergebnisse kollaborativer Prozesse zu ermöglichen.

Schlüsselwörter

Kollaboration Innovation Chat Bot Kreativität Design Science 

The Use of Gamification Elements and Bots for Moderating Creativity Processes in Enterprises

Abstract

This article presents the conceptual platform Innovari, which can be used to support collaborative, digital innovation processes in enterprises. The rapidly changing globalized world is characterized by technological change. Enterprises must expand their ability to innovate in order to stay relevant. Distributed work and specialization of knowledge lead to digital innovation solutions coming to the fore. Obstacles are anchored in inefficient collaboration, fixed hierarchies and psychological burdens that complicate collaborative work.

The Innovari platform supports collaboration with moderating artificial intelligence in the form of chatbots and gamification elements. Various mechanisms help to use the advantages of diverse groups to stimulate unconventional ways of thinking. Innovari enables better results in collaborative processes and thus finding innovations.

Keywords

Collaboration Innovation Chatbot Creativity Design Science 

Literatur

  1. Becker J, Bergener K, Voigt M (2010) Supporting creative group processes – design principles for appropriate groupware. Eur Conf Inf Syst (ECIS 2010). Bd. 34Google Scholar
  2. Chen F, Zhang L, Latimer J (2014) How much has my co-worker contributed? the impact of anonymity and feedback on social loafing in asynchronous virtual collaboration. Int J Inf Manage 34:652–659.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clawson VK, Bostrom RP, Anson R (1993) The role of the facilitator in computer-supported meetings. Small Group Res 24:547–565.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496493244007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Connolly T, Jessup LM, Valacich JS (1990) Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Manage Sci 36:689–703.  https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.6.689 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dennis AR, Valacich JS (1993) Computer brainstorms: more heads are better than one. J Appl Psychol 78:531–537.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.531 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dickson GW, Lee-Partridge JE, Limayem M, Desanctis GL (1996) Facilitating computer-supported meetings: a cumulative analysis in a multiple-criteria task environment. Group Decis Negot 5:51–72.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02404176 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fischer G (2000) Symmetry of ignorance, social creativity, and meta-design. Knowl Based Syst 13:527–537.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-7051(00)00065-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hilliges O, Terrenghi L, Boring S et al (2007) Designing for collaborative creative problem solving. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Creativity & Cognition, S 137–146Google Scholar
  9. van Knippenberg D, De Dreu CKW, Homan AC (2004) Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. J Appl Psychol 89:1008–1022.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koster R (2005) Theory of fun for game design. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  11. Kramer TJ, Fleming GP, Mannis SM (2001) Improving face-to-face brainstorming through modeling and facilitation. Small Group Res 32:533–557.  https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200502 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lebeuf C, Storey M‑A, Zagalsky A (2017) How software developers mitigate collaboration friction with chatbots. In: 20th ACM conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW ’17)Google Scholar
  13. Leimeister JM (2014) Collaboration engineering. Springer Gabler, Berlin HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Paulus PB, Brown VR (2007) Toward more creative and innovative group idea generation: a cognitive-social-motivational perspective of brainstorming. Soc Pers Psychol Compass 1:248–265.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00006.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Paulus PB, Dzindolet MT (1993) Social influence processes in group brainstorming. J Pers Soc Psychol 64:575–586.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.575 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scheiner CW, Witt M, Voigt K‑I, Robra-Bissantz S (2012) Einsatz von Spielmechaniken in Ideenwettbewerben: Einsatzmotive, Wirkungen und Herausforderungen. In: Mattfeld DC (Hrsg) Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik. Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Braunschweig, S 781–792Google Scholar
  17. Siemon D, Lattemann C, Robra-Bissantz S (2017) Forming virtual teams – visualization with digital whiteboards to increase shared understanding, satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. In: International Conference on Information Systems, S 1–17Google Scholar
  18. Starbuck WH, Webster J (1991) When is play productive? Account Manag Inf Technol 1:71–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-8022(91)90013-5 Google Scholar
  19. Strohmann T, Fischer S, Siemon D et al (2018) Virtual moderation assistance: creating design guidelines for virtual assistants supporting creative workshops. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Pacific Asian Conference on Information Systems (PACIS)Google Scholar
  20. Subramaniam M, Youndt MA (2005) The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Acad Manage J 48:450–463.  https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.17407911 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Töpfer A, Maertins A, Duchmann C (2015) Risiko-Identifikation durch Elektronisches Brainstorming für Szenario-Analysen. Control Z Erfolgsorientier Unternehmenssteuer 27:587–592Google Scholar
  22. Wang H‑C, Rosé CP, Chang C‑Y (2011) Agent-based dynamic support for learning from collaborative brainstorming in scientific inquiry. Int J Comput Collab Learn 6:371–395.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9124-x Google Scholar
  23. Zadrozny W, Budzikowska M, Chai J et al (2000) Natural language dialogue for personalized interaction. Commun ACM 43:116–120.  https://doi.org/10.1145/345124.345164 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universität Duisburg-EssenDuisburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations