Measuring the Commercial Outcomes of Serious Games in Companies – A Review

  • Johann C. K. H. Riedel
  • Yanan Feng
  • Aida Azadegan
  • Margarida Romero
  • Mireia Usart
  • Jannicke Baalsrud Hauge
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8778)


The objective of this paper is to review the work on the measurement of the commercial outcomes of serious games in companies and to provide a framework for their measurement in companies. The literature on the evaluation of training and in particular serious games is presented. A systematic literature review of studies of the impacts of business games in companies was undertaken. The paper summarises the existing studies on measuring the effectiveness of serious games in companies. A search of the grey literature was also conducted to establish what kinds of commercial outcomes have been measured and how. Finally, the paper presents some examples of measuring the commercial outcomes. It also provides some advice on how to measure commercial outcomes.


Serious games commercial outcomes evaluation framework evidence literature review 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baalsrud Hauge, J., Boyle, E., Mayer, I., Nadolski, R., Riedel, J.C.K.H., Moreno-Ger, P., Bellotti, F., Lim, T., Ritchie, J.M.: Study design and data gathering guide for serious games’ evaluation. In: Connolly, T.M., Hainey, T., Boyle, E., Baxter, G., Moreno-Ger, P. (eds.) Psychology, Pedagogy, and Assessment in Serious Games, pp. 394–419. IGI Global (2014), doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4773-2.ch018Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartel, A.P.: Measuring the Employer’s Return on Investments in Training: Evidence from the Literature. Industrial Relations 39(3), 502–524 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellotti, F., Kapralos, B., Lee, K., Moreno-Ger, P., Berta, R.: Assessment in and of Serious Games: An Overview. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction 2013, Article ID 136864, 11 pages (2013), doi:10.1155/2013/136864Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ben-Zvi, T.: Using business games in teaching DSS. Journal of Information Systems Education 18(1), 113 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cook, D.M.: The effect of frequency of feedback on attitudes and performance. Journal of Accounting Research 5, 213–224 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Connolly, T.M., Boyle, E.A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., Boyle, J.M.: A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education 59, 661–686 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Wit-Zuurendonk, L.D., Oei, S.G.: Serious gaming in women’s health care. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 118(s3), 17–21 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donovan, L.: The Use of Serious Games in the Corporate Sector. A State of the Art Report. Learnovate Centre (December 2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johnson, W.L., Wu, S.: Assessing aptitude for learning with a serious game for foreign language and culture. In: Woolf, B.P., Aïmeur, E., Nkambou, R., Lajoie, S. (eds.) ITS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5091, pp. 520–529. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kirkpatrick, D.L.: Techniques for evaluating training programs. Journal of American Society of Training Directors 13(3), 21–26 (1959)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kirkpatrick, D.L.: Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Martínez-Durá, M., Arevalillo-Herráez, M., García-Fernández, I., Gamón-Giménez, M.A., Rodríguez-Cerro, A.: Serious Games for Health and Safety Training. In: Prensky, M. (ed.) Digital Game-Based Learning. McGraw-Hill, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mayer, I., Bekebrede, G., Harteveld, C., Warmelink, H., Zhou, Q., van Ruijven, T., Lo, J., Kortmann, R., Wenzler, I.: The research and evaluation of serious games: Toward a comprehensive methodology. British Journal of Educational Technology (2013), doi:10.1111/bjet.12067Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mulrow, C.D.: Systematic reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 309(6954), 597–599 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    O’Neil, H.F., Wainess, R., Baker, E.: Classification of learning outcomes: evidence from the computer games literature. The Curriculum Journal 16(4), 455–474 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oprins, E., Korteling, H.: Transfer of gaming: effectiveness of a Cashier Trainer. (2012),
  17. 17.
    Pattabhiram, C.: Expanding and Engaging Marketo’s “Marketing Nation” (May 17, 2013), (retrieved)
  18. 18.
    Phillips, J.J.: Measuring ROI – Fact, Fad, or Fantasy, ASTD White Paper (April 2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pourabdollahian, B., Taisch, M., Kerga, E.: Serious games in manufacturing education: Evaluation of learners’ engagement. Procedia Computer Science 15, 256–265 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., Smart, P.: Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management 14(3), 207–222 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Trifschmann, J.S.: Teaching insurance with an insurance management computer game. Journal of Risk and Insurance 43(1), 43 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wolfe, J.: Effective performance behaviors in a simulated policy and decision making environment. Management Science 21(8) (1975)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wolfe, J., Luethge, D.J.: The impact of involvement on performance in business simulations: An examination of Goosen’s ‘know little’ decision making thesis. Journal of Education for Business 79(2), 69 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johann C. K. H. Riedel
    • 1
  • Yanan Feng
    • 1
  • Aida Azadegan
    • 2
  • Margarida Romero
    • 3
  • Mireia Usart
    • 4
  • Jannicke Baalsrud Hauge
    • 5
  1. 1.Nottingham University Business SchoolNottinghamUK
  2. 2.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of the West of ScotlandPaisleyUK
  3. 3.Université LavalQuébecCanada
  4. 4.ESADE Law & Business SchoolBarcelonaSpain
  5. 5.BIBABremenGermany

Personalised recommendations