Edtech (education technology) has been in its gamification phase for a long time. We're actually quite light on gamification on our platform, and I sometimes wonder if I'm making the right choices here.

It's a deliberate decision, based on how the team learns and rooted in our values. We're about the humans (and their learning) first, tech second. We're all about data - we collected it on the platform, we asked people. And we're always learning - we do add things when requested and when they make sense.

The Overuse Of Gamification (Made Worse By AI)

I do think we have Duolingo to blame for this. Every learning company claims to be Duolingo for X. I hate it. Now I don't have any issues with Duolingo - but people's 100 day streaks do not make them learn the language.

Back on point. Gamification is adding any gaming type interactions into learning (see our Gamification in Workplace Learning resource). Every website and app seems to be adding it. The streaks like in Duolingo are great for habit building. But not so much for the learning.

A trend we're seeing is AI generated avatars - cartoons or realistic people. Everyone who's mentioned this to us as a buyer has hated them. (Interestingly, anecdotally, they seem popular with people I know who have ADHD - but I have no hard data on that.)

My general thoughts on gamification is it needs to be used well - or it's basically just a mechanism for people to click buttons. Which if you aren't a company using ads for revenue, isn't actually the point.

The other side is overusing gamification as checkpoints and check-ins. What people have told us - they detest reading long text, clicking buttons and watching videos. Not big fans of multi choice tests either. In an attempt to make things engaging, they've been made annoying. Constant clicking to reveal content. Dragging things into certain places. Check ins after everything. Training takes longer than it should. And clicks create the illusion of interaction.

And with AI assisting in coding and content creation it's becoming easier to mass roll out crappy, not well thought through gamification.

What We Think Workplace Learning Needs

Quick. For the majority of workplace learning - the goal is speed. Both speed to done and speed to understanding. Everyone is busy, needs to get back to work and has competing obligations.
Relevant. Things are actually engaging when they are relevant to them and their role (and this is engagement measured beyond a button click). Where we feel this the most is areas like mandatory training - which often talk about fines, legal terms, when they should focus on how this impacts someone's role and actions.
Active. Not clicking buttons but actually thinking about things and how these relate to you, your job, company and industry. Reading a guide on data isn't the same as reading examples on the data you use. And aren't one and done - skills need to be regularly updated and put into practice.
Has a clear why - and ideally a personal one. People are busy. Yearly mandatory training is a slog for everyone - it's framed as something they have to do. Learning new skills, continued professional development need a bigger goal - a promotion, making their job easier, unlocking new tasks.

We of course aren't claiming to have solved all of these. But we definitely bet a chat with Dotly which takes 5-10 minutes - is engaging, relevant to your role and action driven - beats clicking buttons and watching videos. Dotly works through a chat interface, like ChatGPT or Claude. That's how people are already learning and doing tasks at work. So it feels natural.

What We're Thinking About

And when I reflect on the things rolling around on our roadmap (ready to be boosted if a customer needs them):

Missions - we already have tasks. But working with Dotly and your manager to make smaller development plans.
Meeting people where they work - Slack and Teams integration.
Projects - more than a chat. Action driven, practical, relevant. A safe place to apply skills, and evidence you're ready.
Social learning - we keep coming back to this. We're not sure exactly how it works yet but it keeps coming up, even within the tbh team.

Maybe we are using gamification - just in a quieter, less flashy way. Focused on the learning, not the interaction.

Progress bars have been there from the start. Confetti and certificates to share on LinkedIn were two of the earliest things learners asked for - and we added them. We listened to what people actually wanted, we just didn't lead with gamification as the strategy.

It's also worth noting - managers never request gamification. They want results and impact. A thought for another day.

Why We Don't Go Hard on Gamification at Taught by Humans

Want to put this into practice?