A while back I posted the Fun in fun out article stating that having fun while creating products leads to more fun products. Although I believe this principle works, one of the ideas that emerged from this principle did not. I’m talking about Playtime, an initiative within Playlogic Game Factory to spawn new ideas, to motivate people and led them be creative.
The basic idea was to provide time, during working hours, for people to spend on their own projects. Participants of Playtime had four hours a week to create what they always wanted to created, or so was the plan. I ‘borrowed’ the idea from Google and Royal Philips Electronics, who were successful with this policy.
Unfortunately it didn’t go to plan, although some projects still have a lot of potential. So what did go wrong? Following is a small analyses.
No limits
Personally, I like limits and when I have total freedom to create what I want, I start limiting myself or I go nuts. For some people, the limitless nature of Playtime may have been too overwhelming.
“What should I create?”
”How will I proceed?”
“How long should I keep going?”
These may have been questions that participants faced and without any of these questions answered it is entirely imaginable that this may put people off.
No focus
Another side effect of having no limits is the fact that there’s no predetermined focus, no single goal to work towards. Without a goal there is no way to measure progress, which is a cornerstone to having fun. Without direction and without limits, participants of Playtime were easily lost.
No separation
At Playlogic, everybody is located in the same studio floor. Playtime projects happened in the same space. Participants of Playtime and non-participants were mixed. This had a bad affect on both.
No competition
Competition is one way of providing motivation. Your (team’s) plan, solution or product needs to be better then the others. You want to portray your ingenuity and your skills. One of the reasons why PlayDays did work is because of this competition element.
No guidance
Although each Playtime project had its own coach, there wasn’t enough (consistent) guidance. Not all coaches had the skills or the time to lead that particular project. Together without any process, schedules and reviews this didn’t help the already pretty chaotic nature of Playtime.
No time
Pressure on regular projects became naturally higher when the advanced in development but rose even further by shortage of personnel. This made everyone more aware of the little amount of time they had, making it tough to choose for Playtime.
No value
All in all, the reasons mentioned above made Playtime of less value to its participant, which is totally understandable and actually shows that Playlogic personnel is highly motivated and involved in their everyday projects, which can only be applauded.
Of course for Playtime this wasn’t so good. What strikes me is that the freedom doesn’t really motivate or stimulate any creativity to an extend that I hoped.
But still valuable
Although the Playtime project didn’t turn out what I hope it would be, it did provide us with valuable information on how to proceed with Fun in Fun out projects in the future.
Lessons learned:
- Set up some boundaries
- Provide focus and guidance
- Create a clear division between regular work time and Playtime
- Provide enough time and have enough personnel to reduce pressure
- Add an element of competition
Het is goed dat je zo kritisch kijkt naar dit experiment om de creativiteit te vergroten.
Ik denk dat je gelijk hebt dat het meer tijd en voorbereiding vraagt om zoiets op poten te zetten. De menselijke psyche is geneigd zich aan patronen vast te maken en zich daarin veilig te voelen. Mensen uit vaste werk- en creativiteitspatronen te halen is een lastige klus. Het betekent mensen uit hun vertrouwde omgeving halen, te vergelijken met een plotselinge verhuizing. Verwarring, onzekerheid zijn dan de eerste reacties, bepaald niet de beste uitgangpunten om nieuwe ideeën te ontwikkelen.
Toch denk ik dat het idee in de grond goed is.
Iemand leren zwemmen doe je in een zwembad en niet in een oceaan. Wanneer mensen zeggen: ‘wat is de doelstelling van dit gebeuren?’, dan moet je als het ware drie stappen verder zijn en weten: deze vraag had ik verwacht, men is onzeker en zoekt houvast. Antwoord: de doelstelling is je eigen doelstelling te vinden.
Veel tijd zal dus geïnvesteerd moeten worden in het losmaken van bestaande patronen. Ik hoop wel dat je ermee doorgaat, want de kern is goed en absoluut van grote waarde voor de ontwikkeling van nieuwe ideeën. Bevinden alle vernieuwende ideeën zich immers niet in het land ‘achter de horizon’, ofwel: moeten we niet altijd dingen zien die er nog niet te zien zijn?
Veel succes!
Theije
English translation of Dutch comment:
It is good that you have a critical look at this experiment to boost creativity.
I think you are right that it takes more preparartion time to get something like this from the ground. The human psyche tends to stick to patterns and to feel safe with them. Getting people out of their regular work and creativity patterns is a difficult job. It means getting people out of their safe environment and is comparable to re-locating. Confusion and uncertainty are the first reactions, not really the best starting points to develop ideas.
But still I think the idea has a solid basis.
You learn someone swimming in a pool and not in the ocean. When people say: ‘what was the goal of this?’, you have to be three steps ahead and know: I expected that question, people are uncertain and are looking to hold on to soemthing. Answer: the goal is to find your own goal.
Much time should be invested in trying to cut the chains of existing paterns. I hope you continue with this, because the core is good and of absolute value for the development of new ideas. Don’t all new ideas come from the land ‘beyond the horizon’, or shouldn’t we all see things that aren’t to be seen?
Good luck!
Theije
Hi Theije. Thanks for the comment, I hope you don’t mind me translating it to english so non-Dutch reading people can read it too. It is true that people could create their own goals, and that’s certainly a question I could ask them. But it takes a lot of time and knowledge to be able to create your own goals. For each profession it takes experience to be able to set goals at a creative level.
When searching for new ideas within our company we either do not have the time for waiting on people to set their own goals or to guide them in this process. What we can and will do next is return to the first idea of PlayDays - have two days to create an idea/prototype - and create more focus and boundaries to stimulate the creative process. Things like a definite goal, peer presure in the form of friendly rivalry, and clear boundaries are added and the actual goal of these PlayDays will extend beyond its traditional scope.
I have good hopes that the new PlayDays will give us the results were after and otherwise we’ll just have to keep on searching for other ways to unlock the creative potential of my colleagues.
Hi Tj’ièn. It’s certainly a hell of a job to get people off their daily state of mind and routine. Question is: is the concept of Playtime or PlayDay an educational one (to stimulate the creativity beyond existing bounderies) or is it an experiment based on free time to see what people like to make without de pressure of the usual targets? When it’s an educatonal setup there must be a teacher. When is een ezxperimental setup there must be an observer.
Anyway, your readiness to broad the focus of yourself and your colleagues is admirabble, busy as your job already is withouth these initiatives.
Have a good time anyway!
Theije