2.

  The practice of play

How incredible would it be for a professor to say “Pull out your laptops, load
up Investhor: Lord of Wall Street, and begin your midterm?” (Greene, 2009)

“Play it again, Sam!” OK, devoted cinephiles know that Humphrey Bogart
really did not say this in Casablanca, but it is the ubiquitously quoted line
and we’re going with it – especially because the idea of playing something
over and over again fits with the idea of a practice and subsequently teach-
ing entrepreneurship as a method. The practice of play is about developing
a free and imaginative mind, allowing one to see a wealth of possibilities,
a world of opportunities, and a pathway to more innovative ways of being
entrepreneurial. In fact, play has been pointed to as a necessary twenty-­
first-­century skill (Pink, 2005).

THE CONCEPT OF PLAY

Jesse Schell, in his book The Art of Game Design (2010), dedicates a
portion of a chapter to “A rant about definitions,” calling out what he sees
to be an overly large commitment of energy to definitional precision, while
at the same time recognizing that having your own definition in mind is
quite helpful in framing the discussion or, ultimately, the action. Useful
for our purposes, Schell calls out the “murky” terms in the field of game
design, emphasizing “experience,” “play,” and “game” as defined differ-
ently by different people. Our interest for advancing entrepreneurship
education is in exploring the differences between “play” and “game,” with
ultimately some consideration of “fun.”
The Dutch historian, Johan Huizinga, is one of the earliest people to
devote careful thought to the concept of play, going so far as to suggest
that instead of Homo sapiens we should actually be known as Homo
ludens, or “Man the Player” (Huizinga, 1944). Huizinga defines “play” as:

[A] free activity standing quite consciously outside “ordinary” life as being “not
serious,” but at the same time absorbing the player intensely and utterly. It is an
activity connected with no material interest, and no profit can be gained by it. It
proceeds within its own proper boundaries of time and space according to fixed
rules and in an orderly manner. (Huizinga, 1944, p. 13/Kindle).

25

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
26 Teaching entrepreneurship

The space of play becomes a particularly beguiling notion, with

Huizinga’s notion of “magic circle” often repeated among other theo-
rists. Overall, his approach to play is broad and inclusive, ranging from
the romping of dogs (including rules about nipping ears) to contests and
performances. In an earlier work, one of us considered this definition as
establishing the archetype of play, positioning it as the “opposite of pro-
ductive work” (Greene, 2011). However, at the same time this definition
notably still includes a sense of structure, exemplified by the reference to
“fixed rules” and “orderly manner.” In fact, the inclusion of rules almost
makes the definition feel more like “game” than “play.” Going beyond
the question of rules or place, Huizinga places play as outside of ordinary
events, with enjoyment as an important outcome. He describes play as
superfluous and, importantly, voluntary, saying that “Play to order is no
longer play,” asserting that the only urgent need that play should fulfill
is that of enjoyment (Huizinga, 1944, p. 175/Kindle).
Jean Piaget, child development psychologist, provided another notable
contribution to the understanding of play. He actually started on the
concept of games, and moved into the consideration of play as part of his
study of developmental processes. Therefore, his study is largely on play
in childhood. Even so, it is interesting to note the criteria he proposes
as to what makes up “play.” Play is disinterested and spontaneous (in
opposition to work requirements); it is for pleasure; it is relatively unor-
ganized, it is proposed as free from conflicts (positioned as more about
internal conflicts than external ones), and it may contain an element
of “overmotivation” (Piaget, 1962). Piaget proposes categories of play:
exercise play, symbolic play, games with rules, and games of construction,
with this last category representing the transition between symbolic play
and non-­playful activities or “serious” adaptations (Piaget and Inhelder,
1969).
Writing about the same time as Piaget, Kraus (1971) looked back and
summarized work done by psychologists, sociologists, and educators,
largely to consider the relationship of play to a variety of types of human
development, including physical, social, emotional, and cognitive aspects
(Rieber, 1996; Brougère, 1999). Kraus (1971) uses the early theories of
play that follow as a foundation for advancing his study of play in the
context of leisure and recreation:

●● surplus energy theory: play is motivated by the need to burn up excess

energy (Schiller, 1875; Spencer in Lehman and Witty, 1927, p. 13);
●● recreation theory: play as a way of conserving or restoring energy
(Lazarus);

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
 The practice of play ­27

●● instinct-­practice theory: play as a way of practicing life skills (Groos,

1901);
●● catharsis theory: play as a “safety valve” for releasing pent-­up emo-
tions (Groos, 1901; Carr in Lehman and Witty, 1927, p. 19);
●● recapitulation theory: play as a linkage of evolutionary stages, reliv-
ing the history of the human race (Hall, 1920);
●● relaxation theory: play as a form of physical and emotional release
that is necessary for social order (Patrick, 1916).

Kraus suggests that none of these theories could stand on their own, and
proposes his own definition of play:

[Play is] regarded as an activity carried on within leisure for purposes of pleas-
ure and self-­expression. It tends to be active and to be carried on in a spirit of
competition, exploration, or make-­believe. Customarily, play is regarded as
a child’s activity, although an adult may also engage in play and under some
circumstances may find play in his [sic] work. (Kraus, 1971, p. 266)

Bateson (2006), with a slightly different twist, explores play as part of

the evolution of communication. Bateson states: “It appears that play is a
phenomenon in which the actions of ‘play’ are related to, or denote, other
actions of ‘not-­play.’ We therefore meet in play with an instance of signals
standing for other events” (p. 317). Bateson pushes this approach some-
what, suggesting that many actions of play are indeed representative of
ordinary events (not-­play), but taking place in a different arena and with
different expected outcomes. Consider the following:

The challenge in thinking about play, however, is that we (the adults) tend to
associate this kind of play with childhood, a time of freedom and imagination
where minutes turned into hours, backyards transformed into magical faraway
kingdoms, living rooms were reconfigured into tent cities, swimming pools
became uncharted waters littered with sunken treasure, and stuffed animals sat
at attention waiting for the assignment from the young seven-­year-­old teacher
(Neck, 2010, p. 41).

In any of these scenarios we can see a connection to ordinary events – just

some more loosely connected than others. Pushing to the looser con-
nections raises potentially interesting questions about the relationship
between play, creativity and innovation. In some ways, types of play and
those connections to ordinary life might even be considered on a con-
tinuum, leading us to think about various types of play.

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
28 Teaching entrepreneurship

GAMES AS CONTEXT FOR PLAY

Much of the conversation in the educational literature actually focuses

more on “game” than “play.” As with “play,” there are a variety of defini-
tions of “games.” One of the more explicit definitions is that “A game is a
rule-­based formal system with a variable and quantifiable outcome, where
different outcomes are assigned different values, the player exerts effort in
order to influence the outcome, the player feels attached to the outcome,
and the consequences of the activity are optional and negotiable” (Jules,
in Koster, 2005, p. 12). Other definitions particularly support the empha-
sis on “rule-­based play” (Suits, 1978; Salen and Zimmerman, 2003; de
Freitas, 2006).
It is understandable why the line between game and play is so porous.
When we look at general game characteristics, the chief ones that emerge
are:

●● Games consist of highly abstract models of real things.

●● They are generally quantified.
●● They focus on presenting things to be absorbed into our uncon-
scious (rather than the conscious and logical). (Koster, 2005, pp. 76,
116)

While moving between consideration of play and game may get confus-
ing, Schell (2010) provides an extremely useful way of building from
definitions of multiple concepts (play, fun, toy, and games). When
summarized, “play” and “games,” particularly regarding application to
education and practice, lie at the intersections of rules, engagement, and
fun.
While a game by definition is rules based, play also has rules. Huizinga
explicitly connects play with games through rules: “All play has its
rules . . . Indeed, as soon as the rules are transgressed the whole play-­world
collapses. The game is over” (Huizinga, 1944, p. 238).
Related to the question of rules is the question of the voluntary nature
of play. One suggested difference between play and games is that play
is voluntary and superfluous, filling no basic need except enjoyment
(Huizinga, 1944, p. 175). This voluntary nature does raise the question
of how play becomes an educational practice and indeed makes us very
aware of the different types of teaching approaches needed to advance this
practice. Rules give a framework where engagement can happen. When
engaged within a framework there is an understanding of “the game,” and
more fun can be experienced.
Engagement is a key quality that makes play enjoyable (Csikszentmihalyi,

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
 The practice of play ­29

BOX 2.1  DEFINING TOWARDS FUN

For play:

● Play is the aimless expenditure of exuberant energy.

(Friedrich Schiller)
● Play refers to those activities which are accompanied by a
state of comparative pleasure, exhilaration, and power, and
the feeling of self-­initiative. (J. Barnard Gilmore)
● Play is free movement within a more rigid structure. (Katie
Salen and Eric Zimmerman)
● Play is whatever is done spontaneously and for its own
sake. (George Santayana)

For fun:

● Fun is pleasure with surprises.

For toy:

● Toy is an object that you play with.

● A good toy is an object that is fun to play with.

For games:

● Games are an exercise of voluntary control systems, in

which there is a contest between powers, confined by rules
in order to produce a disequilibrial outcome. (Elliot Avedon
and Brian Sutton-­Smith)
● [A game is] an interactive structure of endogenous meaning
that requires players to struggle toward a goal. (Greg
Costikyan)
● A game is a closed, formal system, that engages players
in structured conflict, and results in an unequal outcome.
(Tracy Fullerton, Chris Swain, and Steven Hoffman)

This all adds up to the following:

● Fun is pleasure with surprises.

● Play is manipulation that satisfies curiosity.

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
30 Teaching entrepreneurship

● A toy is an object you play with.

● A good toy is an object that is fun to play with.
● A game is a problem-­solving activity, approached with a
playful attitude.

(Schell, 2010, pp. 24–38)

1990). When someone is playing, that person is able to concentrate only

on a limited “stimulus field” where he or she is transcended to a new envi-
ronment where existence is limited to the moment and problems outside
of the stimulus field are outside of consideration. Csikszentmihalyi called
this state of being “flow” and described it as often experienced through
play. He states:

Flow denotes the holistic sensation present when we act with total involvement.
It is the kind of feeling after which one nostalgically says: “that was fun,” or
“that was enjoyable.” It is the state in which action follows upon action accord-
ing to an internal logic which seems to need no conscious intervention on our
part. We experience it as a unified flowing from one moment to the next, in
which we feel in control of our actions, and in which there is little distinction
between self and environment: between stimulus and response; or between past,
present and future. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 41)

We see Csikszentmihalyi’s flow as equating to Huizinga’s intense and utter

absorption. It is a complete engagement. It is a highly desirable state for
optimal learning.
Most definitions of play include a sense of enjoyment or at least imply
that it is a pleasurable experience. Definitions of games generally do not
explicitly include this, although some game theorists do suggest that it is
an enviable attribute. In fact, during a recent game design class one of us
took, the instructors specifically said that games do not have to be fun,
but they do have to be engaging (Burak, 2013). But, like our other two
major concepts “play” and “game,” “fun” means different things to dif-
ferent people, with types of fun ranging across and between things such as
sense-­pleasure, make-­believe, drama, obstacle, social framework, discov-
ery, self-­discovery and expression, and surrender (M. LeBlanc, in Koster,
2005). Expanding our view, and that of our students, for what constitutes
“fun” motivates the practice of play. Of course, fun is also included for
its pedagogical contribution. “Fun and humor stimulate creativity as the
brain moves from a cognitive, rule-­bound state to a more fluid, relaxed
state where the whole body is engaged in problem solving” (Prouty, 2000

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
 The practice of play ­31

in Hromek and Roffey, 2009, p. 630). Overall, laughter, humor, and light-
heartedness are credited with both health and professional benefits (Pink,
2005).

THE ROLE OF GAMES IN THE PRACTICE OF PLAY

Early games were designed to teach children survival skills while enter-
taining them (Shubik, 2009). The introduction of using games for training
and education (didactic application) is largely tracked to war games (de
Freitas, 2006), particularly around the time of World War II (Cohen and
Rhenman, 1961; Shubik, 2009; Verzat et al., 2009). Since then, intention-
ally playing games has become an extensive part of the world of business,
as well as for various kinds of education, nonprofit, and government
organizations targeting social change. Two of the major areas where this
can be seen are in the use of video games for purposeful education, called
serious games, and, to a much more limited extent while staying quite
interesting, the use of alternative reality games.
The first use of the term Serious Games is attributed to Carl C. Abt’s
book of the same name in 1970 (Annetta, 2008). In general, serious games
are an outcome of “the convergence of education and gaming technolo-
gies, positioned as part of an evolution of learning” (Annetta, 2008, p. ix),
with defining criteria that include a focus on governance by rules and spe-
cific outcomes that include the “pleasure of play” (Lastowka, 2009, p. 380;
Greene, 2011). Early game pioneers tried to capture these characteristics.
“Game play is about problem solving, applying ingenuity, anticipating the
programmers’ challenges, and their humour, in a tough cycle of observe,
question, hypothesize, test” (Heppell, 2006, p. 4).
What is actually included in the genre of “serious games” is still some-
what ambiguous (Greene, 2011), with an emerging inventory of related
terms being developed, moving the field towards a goal of a more shared
and consistent terminology. Sawyer and Smith’s (2008) examples to
date include: educational games, simulations, virtual reality, alternative-­
purpose games, edutainment, digital game-­based learning, immersive
learning simulations, social impact games, persuasive games, games for
change, games for good, synthetic learning environments, and game-­based
“X.” One suggestion for an overarching term is that of immersive learn-
ing simulations, a categorization which includes those interactive learning
tools that are representative of a real life situation and combine aspects of
simulations, learning, and competition (Schooley et al., 2008). Another
approach that we find more helpful, as we think about not only types but
what makes up a serious game, is “the use of games or gaming dynamics

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
32 Teaching entrepreneurship

not simply to entertain the player, but rather to inspire a particular action,
effect some type of attitudinal change, or instill a particular lesson in the
service of an organizational goal” (Keitt and Jackson, 2008, p. 3).
These attributes, or what makes up these games, are actually among our
primary concerns. Merrilea Mayo, former director of Future Learning
Initiatives at the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, identified several
game features that contribute to enhanced learning environments. By
analyzing video game research from various authors she concluded that
video games foster self-­efficacy, collaboration, user-­directed exploration,
and continuous feedback. The gaming features are also seen to contribute
to enhanced creativity. Improving self-­efficacy leads to a greater belief in
one’s ability; collaboration requires group-­based problem solving; user-­
directed exploration incites tolerance for ambiguity and curiosity; and
continuous feedback provides real time learning to apply as one progresses
through the game. It makes for a virtuous circle of practicing play as the
game, or series of games, is played over and over.
Part of the growth in this area is due not only to the intersection of
gaming technology and education, but also to the sheer size of the video
game industry and the ever growing population of gamers. This has to do
with not only the consideration of who might like to play, but also who
is now making the decision about how work is done and how people are
trained to do that work. In many respects, higher education, and entrepre-
neurship education specifically, is very late to the gaming party! Box 2.2
highlights some of the relevant gaming statistics today.
While mainstream video gaming numbers are intriguing from a societal
perspective and help us understand the general video game industry, it is
the serious game market that is of particular interest to us as educators.
The market for simulation-­focused learning was nearly $2.4 billion in
2012 and projected to grow to $6.6 billion in 2017. Revenues for pack-
aged mobile education games reached $307.5 million in 2012, expected to
reach $459.9 million by 2017.1 The U.S. Army has created its own video
group unit with the intent of investing up to $50 million for game training
systems.2 The intersection of education and social change with gaming is
awe inspiring. For example, the game called Half the Sky Movement raises
awareness and funds for global girl empowerment. Within six months the
game reached 1 million registered players on Facebook! The game play
has triggered more than 230 350 free book donations, raised over $145 100
for fistula surgeries, and contributed $410 450 in direct and sponsored
donations.3
There are other changes in the industry producing these games. Serious
games are being used as effective employee training and productivity
tools. Intel provides an online arcade as a game training center for its

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
 The practice of play ­33

BOX 2.2  VIDEO GAMING QUICK FACTS

● Fifty-­eight percent of Americans play video games.

● Consumers spent $20.77 billion on video games, hardware,
and accessories.
● Purchases of digital content, including games, add-­on
content, mobile apps, subscriptions, and social networking
games, accounted for 40 percent of game sales.
● The average game player is 30 years old and has been
playing games for 13 years.
● The average age of the most frequent game purchaser is
35 years old.
● Forty-­five percent of all game players are women. In fact,
women over the age of 18 represent a significantly greater
portion of the game-­playing population (31 percent) than
boys age 17 or younger (19 percent).
● 800 million people worldwide are regular players.
Source:  Entertainment Software Association, 2012.

latest processors. Playing games related to security, visuals, connectiv-

ity, efficiency, partnerships, and performance allows participants to
earn game points and training credits (arcade.intel.com). The Hilton
Garden Inn was the first hotel brand to offer training on customer service
through a “graphically-­intense, 3-­D, first-­person video game” played
on the Sony PlayStation gaming system. Representatives from the hotel
chain report being enthused not only about the training per se, but also
about the potential for this approach to enhance their recruiting efforts
for next-­generation team members to whom the gaming environment
is particularly inviting (virtualheroes.com/projects/Hilton-­ultimate-­team-­
play). U. S. Army chaplains use gaming technologies to replicate the types
of “trauma-­oriented environments” in which chaplains may be called
to serve (http://www.ecsorl.com/solutions/spiritual-­triage-­army-­chaplain-­
school). Finally, IBM makes a business model case for the use of training
games in a quantifiable way, reporting outcome possibilities including a 20
percent margin improvement, complete with a 12–18 percent increase in
capacity, a 12 percent reduction in employees, and a 10–30 percent capital
reduction (IBM White Paper).

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
34 Teaching entrepreneurship

GAMES FOR LEARNING AND EDUCATION

The use of video games for teaching has become the subject of much
research in a number of different fields, largely in different types of cog-
nitive sciences. Part of the discussion is led by the changing nature and
understanding of not only how generations learn, but also how they want
to work (Tapscott, 1998, 2009; Beck and Wade, 2004; Pink, 2005; Gee,
2007; Palfrey and Gasser, 2008; Edery and Mollick, 2009; Reeves and
Read, 2009; Greene, 2011). For example, James Gee, a leading theorist in
the field of learning in and through video games, is a linguist, with early
work focused on language, learning, and literacy (Gee, 2007). For Gee,
people learning to play video games are engaging in a semiotic exercise,
in essence learning a new literacy complete with all the accompanying
visual symbols. Gee cites Jean Lave, the social situation cognition theo-
rist, quoting her in “learning is not best judged by a change in minds” (the
traditional school measure), but by “changing participation in changing
practices.” For both these theorists, the movement is toward a form of
learning that essentially moves from the use of “particular tools and
techniques for learning” to ways “in which participants and practices
change” (Gee, 2007, p. 203). “[T]he term ‘learning mechanism’ diminishes
in importance, in fact, it may fall out altogether, as ‘mechanisms’ disap-
pear into practice” (Gee, 2007, p. 203). One of the advantages Gee sees
in playing these games is the contribution of practice; people can play
before they are competent and continue to play (practicing) to develop
their skills.
All of these advances suggest that our increased understanding of how
people learn is supporting the emerging and proposed changes in how we
teach, and certainly there is growing interest and acceptance in ­educational
or serious games. As John Geiger describes it, “The play, the interaction,
the rules, the value system in the games” combine with the other needed
parts of the trajectory, “the pedagogy, the instruction, and making sure
the learning outcome is met” (Geiger, in Greene, 2011, p. 268). The
approach is not without its opponents, or at least those who question some
of the attributes of the approach. Concerns abound, largely at the level of
younger children, about the overall influence of computer games, espe-
cially given a perception of violence and aggression (Foster and Mishra,
2009). The additional issue is the increasing concern about an approach
to education that more heavily relies on “edutainment” (de Castell and
Jenson, 2003), a concern that raises questions about learning objectives,
processes, and outcomes. Early research in this area looked at what play
meant in terms of definition, structures, functions, and outcomes as well
as the role of actual pleasure and enjoyment (de Castell and Jenson), but

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
 The practice of play ­35

much of this research was focused on younger children (Winnicott, 1971;

Brougère, 1999; Corbeil, 1999). However, play as a practice is important
as a motivation for learning because it moves that motivation to the
intrinsic category – the students play (learn) because they want to do so. It
becomes voluntary and engaging.
There are many types and kinds of computer games available for use in
teaching. One approach is to purchase, license, or even develop a game spe-
cifically for the discipline. Publishing houses are starting to offer computer
games as a related educational asset to certain textbooks. Another version
is to repurpose off-­the-­shelf games, buying existing games and modifying
as necessary to help students learn the agreed-­upon lessons. A third option
is to have the students play an existing game, while designing the debrief
(takeaways) around the desired learning objectives (Greene, 2011).

Within that scope lies limitless practical potential to use video games for the
betterment of the individual, yet much depends on the creativity and motiva-
tion of the end user, to make that crucial MacGuyveresque shift of perspective.
Not everything can be listed on the box, and a tool can only do so much on its
own. (Waugh, 2008 in Greene, 2011, p. 261)

Greene provides a set of examples:

Examples of this include using The Sims Open for Business to teach the creation
of entrepreneurial culture (Greene and Brush, 2009) and SimCity for civil engi-
neering and government (Van Eck, 2006). Others include Civilization, CSI, and
RollerCoaster Tycoon for teaching history, forensics, and physics respectively.
Once considered “slightly eccentric” or the domain of “specialist companies,”
Serious Games are now becoming much more mainstream, a trend attributed
back to that “increasingly sophisticated and affordable technology” (Damon,
2009). (Greene, 2011, p. 270)

At this point it is also important to think about the role of simulations.

“Simulations are growing in importance because they address the radi-
cally different needs of next-­generation employees” (Schooley et al., 2008).
However, we need to think clearly about the nature of a simulation; it is
generally what you make of it. A simplest form of a simulation is a repre-
sentation or model of some part of reality (Lederman, 1984). Simulations
may be a version of a computer game, or may be a simple set of physical
and cognitive activities (such as an in-­box exercise). Some simulations
are made into games, largely through the addition of roles, interaction
between the roles, rules about those interactions, and some criteria for
determining who wins (Ruben and Lederman, 1982).
Another way to think about simulations is as providing the context for
role-­play. Role-­plays can be an effective way to practice play, taking on

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
36 Teaching entrepreneurship

other identities and moving into a fantasy of how you would lead, plan,
react, and so on. A simulation, perhaps at its best, provides content and
context to provide a more meaningful experience (Enspire Learning,
2007).
While a great deal of emphasis in this chapter has been on video and
computer games and simulations, largely owing to the many questions
that exist in the field, other types of games should absolutely be noted and
considered as well. For example, the alternative reality game (ARG) has a
niche following. This type of game is a socio-­fantasy type of game, while
having the potential for constructivism as well. These games are generally
targeted toward teaching complex content while potentially ­motivating
changes in behavior. In their overarching study of ARGs, Enspire
Learning (2007) define this genre of gaming as “ interactive experiences
that make use of modern technologies and modes of communication to
frame game events” and provide characteristics that include the following:

●● Puzzle-­solving or scavenger hunt as gameplay.

●● Narrative explored through a variety of widely used technologies (email,
webpages, source code, phone communication and voice mail, television,
published novels, physical mail, trading cards, live meetings).
●● In-­game characters are directly controlled by the game architects, as
opposed to programmed adversaries in a video game.
●● Players have the power to alter the direction of the game.
●● Blurred line between reality and gamespace: maintaining the fantasy that
the experience is not really a game.
● The whole world is gamespace (no artificial boundaries).
● No stated or apparent artificially imposed rules of the game: any
available means (within normal legal, societal, and moral bounda-
ries) of progressing the game is fair.
● Real time – no artificially constructed time divisions.
● Game elements function outside of the game context: if a phone
number or URL is used in the game, it works in the real world.

ARGs are emerging in both the business and the educational world.
In 2008 ARGs were named one of the top 20 breakthrough ideas by the
Harvard Business Review and celebrated in a blog by Jane McGonigal,
one of the main advocates of ARG use. Examples of current uses of
ARGs include Conspiracy for Good, which engage players to volunteer for
nonprofit organizations, and Skeleton Chase and Cryptozoo (by Indiana
University and the American Heart Association respectively) teach about
getting people more physically active (http://www.argn.com/).
In sum, all types of games are considered in the practice of play, eve-

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
 The practice of play ­37

rything from physical games (creating and flying paper airplanes as part
of an innovation exercise) to board games (reframing Settlers of Catan to
learn about regional resources and populations) to video games (using The
SIMS to teach culture creation). As educators we are only limited by our
own imagination.

GAMES AND PLAY IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP

EDUCATION: CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Entrepreneurship educators have for some time been recognized as inno-

vative teachers, partly because of the younger age of the discipline, and
partly because of the sense of novelty, innovation and creativity that per-
vades entrepreneurship content and ultimately influences the approach to
delivery as well. There are many uses and examples of playing and games
found within entrepreneurship education, yet there is a great deal of room
for considering not only more, but how.
The opportunity to play games to learn about entrepreneurship begins
with the younger generation and spans a range of types of play. The
National Federation for Independent Businesses (NFIB) provided Johnny
Money the Game through their Young Entrepreneur Foundation up until
December 2010. Another example of an approach to youth entrepreneur-
ship is seen in SunDrum, part of the Center for Integral Economics in
Canada. SunDrum uses a multi-­prong approach to work with young
people to learn to solve social problems through social purpose businesses,
using pedagogical approaches of “art, stories and culture to inspire, and
games and play to teach.”4
In college, instructors are testing all types of play and games to advance
student understanding and competences around entrepreneurial mind-
sets and skillsets, and a number of examples are included in the exercises
included in Part II of this book. As we continue to think and learn about
the role of play and games, there are a set of questions that emerge for
incorporating play into an entrepreneurship curriculum:

1. What are the learning objectives for the exercise, course, etc.? As with
any pedagogy, the desired outcomes need to be carefully thought out
and planned, leaving room for both student and instructor to grow
and maybe even be surprised.
2. What is the appropriate type of game? While computer games, mobile
apps, ARGS, and so on offer a wide range of opportunities, more
traditional games remain a positive option.
3. What are the rules? Are there rules? What happens if someone breaks

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool
38 Teaching entrepreneurship

the rules? Sometimes in entrepreneurship education it is a good thing

to have the discussion of the role of rules. Whose rules are they and do
they really have to be followed? Are they rules or industry standards?
Is going a different direction a positive move, or disastrous?
4. What is the desired level of engagement? Is it possible to have the stu-
dents so immersed that they do accept (even if tacitly) responsibility
for their own learning?
5. What is the role of fun? Is it an important attribute to promote
­creativity?
6. What is the role of place in play? A final consideration is the poten-
tial contribution of providing “playful spaces” (de Souza e Silva
and Hjorth, 2009, pp. 604–05) to further push the boundaries of the
“magic circle” of play.

Raph Koster (2005) on his theory of fun said that fun is just another
word for learning. He also said that “fun is a neurochemical reward
to encourage us to keep trying” (p. 19). We are not sure where formal
education stopped becoming fun, but it has. Classrooms facilitating the
learning of entrepreneurship and encouraging students to think and act
entrepreneurially require a playful, engaging, challenging, and enjoying
experience. We want you, as an educator, to honestly answer some of
these questions:

●● Are students walking out of your class frequently to “go to the

restroom”?
●● Are students more interested in their laptops or smartphones than
what’s going on in the real world of your classroom?
●● Are students asking questions you have already answered?
●● Are they arriving to class unprepared?
●● Do they avoid eye contact with you?
●● Does your classroom go silent when you ask for volunteers?
●● Do you hear laughter less than three times in every class session (at
the right time)?
●● Do you not look forward to going to class?

If you answered yes to any of the questions above, the diagnosis is simple.
You lack play in your entrepreneurship class. The remedy? Start building
a practice of play for both yourself and your students. It is not just an
interesting or alternative approach – it is really necessary.

Heidi M. Neck, Patricia G. Greene and Candida G. Brush - 9781782540557

Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/29/2017 05:03:24AM
via University of Liverpool