Lessons Learned from Creating a Mobile Version of an Educational Board Game to Increase Situational Awareness

  • Roland KlemkeEmail author
  • Shalini Kurapati
  • Heide Lukosch
  • Marcus Specht
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9307)


This paper reports on an iterative design process for a serious game, which aims to raise situational awareness among different stakeholders in a logistics value chain by introducing multi-user role-playing games. It does so in several phases: After introducing the field of logistics as a problem domain for an educational challenge, it firstly describes the design of an educational board game for the field of disruption handling in logistics processes. Secondly, it describes how the board game can be realized in an open-source mobile serious games platform and identifies lessons learned based on advantages and issues found. Thirdly, it derives requirements for a re-design of the mobile game and finally draws conclusions.


Mobile learning Game-based learning Multi-user games Logistics Multi-role game-design 



The SALOMO project is funded by the Dutch Institute of Advanced Logistics (DINALOG).


  1. 1.
    De Bruijn, J.A., Heuvelhof, E.F.: Management in Networks: On Multi-actor Decision Making. Routledge, London (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kurapati, S., Kolfschoten, G., Verbraeck, A., Drachsler, H., Specht, M., Brazier, F.: A theoretical framework for shared situational awareness in sociotechnical systems. In: Proceedings of 2nd Workshop on Awareness and Reflection in TEL, pp. 47–53 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Salmon, P.M., Stanton, N.A., Walker, G.H., Jenkins, D.P., Mcmaster, R., Young, M.S.: What really is going on? Review of situation awareness models for individuals and teams. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 9(4), 297–323 (2008). doi: 10.1080/14639220701561775
  4. 4.
    Crichton, M.T., Flin, R., Rattray, W.A.: Training decision makers–tactical decision games. J. Contingencies Crisis Manage. 8(4), 208–217 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dowell, J., Hoc, J.M.: Coordination in emergency operations and the tabletop training exercise. Le Travail Humain, pp. 85–102 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klemke, R., Ternier, S., Kalz, M., Schmitz, B., Specht, M.: Multi-stakeholder decision training games with ARLearn. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on eLearning (eLearning 2013), pp. 26–27. Belgrade, Serbia, Sept 2013Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kurapati, S., Kolfschoten, G.L., Verbraeck, A., Corsi, T.M., Brazier, F.M.T.: Exploring shared situational awareness using serious games for supply chain disruptions. In: Proceedings of the 10th International ISCRAM Conference, Baden-Baden, Germany (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sitzmann, T.: A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychol. 64(2), 489–528 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alessi, S.: Designing educational support in system-dynamics-based interactive learning environments. Simul. Gaming 31(2), 178–196 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kopainsky, B., Alessi, S.M., Pedercini, M., Davidsen, P.I.: Exploratory strategies for simulation-based learning about national development. In: 27th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Albuquerque, NM (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vis, I.F., De Koster, R.: Transshipment of containers at a container terminal: an overview. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 147(1), 1–16 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bandeira, D.L., Becker, J.L., Borenstein, D.: A DSS for integrated distribution of empty and full containers. Decis. Support Syst. 47(4), 383–397 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Svensson, G.: A conceptual framework for the analysis of vulnerability in supply chains. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logistics Manage. 30(9), 731–750 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Loh, H.S., Thai, V.V.: The role of ports in supply chain disruption management. In: Proceedings of the International Forum on Shipping, Ports and Airports, pp. 325–337, Hong Kong (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yliskyla-Peuralahti, J., Spies, M., Tapaninen, U.: Transport vulnerabilities and critical industries: experiences from a finnish stevedore strike. Int. J. Risk Assess. Manage. 15(2/3), 222–240 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Endsley, M.R.: Towards a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum. Factors 37(1), 32–64 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fiore, S.M., Salas, E., Cuevas, H.M., Bowers, C.A.: Distributed coordination space: toward a theory of distributed team process and performance. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 4(3–4), 340–364 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ciolfi, L., Bannon, L.J.: Space, place and the design of technologically-enhanced physical environments. In: Turner, P., Davenport, E. (eds.) Spaces, Spatiality and Technology, pp. 217–232. Springer, Netherlands (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nofi, A.: Defining and Measuring Shared Situational Awareness. DARPA, Center for Naval Analyses Alexandria, VA (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Perla, P.P., Markowitz, M., Nofi, A.A., Weuve, C., Loughran, J.: Gaming and Shared Situation Awareness. Center for Naval Analyses Alexandria, VA (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Duke, R.D.: A paradigm for game design. Simul. Games 11(3), 364–377 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Duke, R.D., Geurts, J.: Policy Games for Strategic Management, Rozenberg (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meijer, S.: The organisation of transactions: studying supply networks using gaming simulation. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Klabbers, J.H.: The Magic Circle: Principles of Gaming & Simulation. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen, L., Miller-Hooks, E.: Resilience: an indicator of recovery capability in intermodal freight transport. Transp. Sci. 46(1), 109–123 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Port of Rotterdam Authority: Change Your Perspective. Port of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ternier, S., Klemke, R., Kalz, M., Van Ulzen, P., Specht, M.: ARLearn: augmented reality meets augmented virtuality. J. Univ. Comput. Sci. Spec. Issue Technol. Learn. Across Phys. Virtual Spaces 18(15), 2143–2164 (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kelle, S., Klemke, R., Specht, M.: Design patterns for learning games. Int. J. Technol. Enhanced Learn. 3(6), 555–569 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ternier, S., De Vries, F., Börner, D., Specht, M.: Mobile augmented reality with audio. In: InSuEdu 2012 Workshop, 10th International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods, Thessaloniki, Greece (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gonsalves, A., Ternier, S., De Vries, F., Specht, M.: Serious games at the UNHCR with ARLearn, a toolkit for mobile and virtual reality applications. In: Specht, M., Sharples, M., Multisilta, J. (eds.) Proceedings of 11th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning (mLearn 2012), pp. 244–247. Helsinki, Finland, 16–18 Oct 2012Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schmitz, B., Ternier, S., Kalz, M., Klemke, R., Specht, M.: Designing a mobile learning game to investigate the impact of role-playing on helping behaviour. In: 8th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, Paphos, Cyprus (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gagnon, D.J.: ARIS: an Open Source Platform for developing Mobile Learning Experiences. University of Wisconsin at Madison, Madison (2010)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Holden, C.L., Sykes, J.M.: Leveraging mobile games for place-based language learning. Int. J. Game-Based Learn. (IJGBL) 1(2), 1–18 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Santos, P., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Hernández-Leo, D., Blat, J.: QuesTInSitu: from tests to routes for assessment in situ activities. Comput. Educ. 57(4), 2517–2534 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Robles, G., Gonzales-Barahona, J.M., Fernandez-Gonzales, J.: Implementing gymkhanas with android smartphones: a multimedia m-learning game. In: Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2011 IEEE, pp. 960–968. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Klemke, R., Kurapati, S., Lukosch, H., Specht, M.: Transferring an educational board game to a multi-user mobile learning game to increase shared situational awareness. Advanced Interaction Systems in Technology Enhanced Learning and Training (accepted). In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International 2015), Los Angeles, CA, USA (2015)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schmitz, B., Schuffelen, P., Kreijns, K., Klemke, R., Specht, M.: Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes: the impact of a location-based, collaborative role-playing game on behaviour. Comput. Educ. 85, 160–169 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Klemke, R., Ternier, S., Kalz, M., Schmitz, B., Specht, M.: Immersive multi-user decision training games with AR-learn. In: Rensing, C., de Freitas, S., Ley, T., Muñoz-Merino, P. (eds.) Open Learning and Teaching in Educational Communities. Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8719, pp. 207–220. Springer International Publishing, Graz, Austria (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland Klemke
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shalini Kurapati
    • 2
  • Heide Lukosch
    • 2
  • Marcus Specht
    • 1
  1. 1.Welten Institute – Research Center for Learning, Teaching and TechnologyOpen University of the NetherlandsHeerlenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of Technology, Policy and ManagementDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations