Assessing the Impact of Workplace Games
Thank you for sharing the details of the games and the percentage improvement in various categories. What Mr. Raghunathan has written is something that had also crossed my mind. Nevertheless, I would like to take it forward. You have provided the following statistics:
1) 95% of employees said it reduces stress and keeps them happy.
2) 65% of employees said it had a positive impact on work quality and productivity.
3) 12% of employees said it had a negative impact on work quality and productivity.
4) 33% of employees said it had no impact on work quality and productivity.
5) 82% of employees said it increases trust and team communication.
6) 92% of employees said it motivates individuals and teams.
Motivation, happiness, trust, team communication, etc., are relative terms. All these aspects need to translate into concrete measures. Therefore, as training professionals, we must measure (due to these games) whether the process turnaround time decreased, whether the consumption of resources decreased, etc.
You mentioned that you conducted 50 games with 70 persons in your company. Assuming 50 persons participated in each game, and each game lasted approximately 15-20 minutes, the total time spent by the organization was:
50 x 50 x 15 = 37,500 minutes
37,500 minutes = 625 hours
625 hours = 69 mandays = 2.5 months' (average) salary of the average employee
Assuming the average salary is Rs 60,000 per month, the revenue spent on the games is Rs 150,000.
Instead of conducting more games, it is time to assess the ROI of the games or whether your organization has recouped the amount spent. In my calculations, I have used conservative estimates. While the games might have lasted for 15-20 minutes, employees might have spent an additional 5-10 minutes chatting and idling around. I have not factored in that time. Therefore, the actual cost of conducting games may be higher.
Playing childlike games in the workplace is not wrong; however, we must not lose sight of our business acumen. Otherwise, we might end up missing the forest for the trees.
Thank you,
Dinesh Divekar