GAMES AND GAMIFICATIONCan These Lead to Long‐Term Energy Savings?

Courtney HendersonProject Manager

ILLUME Advising, LLC

2

Games/Gamification Overview

Behavioral Strategies

Case Studies

Challenges & Opportunities

Applications to DR

AGENDA

3

WHY GAMES?Games reach millions of people

58% of Americans play video games

Games are a powerful way to get people to interact & communicate. 

48 million Americans play games on smart phones/tables

4

KEY OBJECTIVES IN ENERGYIt’s more than the savings.

Behavior ChangeCustomer Engagement

Energy Savings

Commitment/Goal‐Setting

Follow‐through

Feedback Framing

In‐PersonInteractionsRewards/Gifts

(incl. Recognition)

Social Norms

COMMON BEHAVIOR CHANGE STRATEGIES

6

COMMON GAME COMPONENTSGetting customers to engage.

Achievements & Rewards

Leaderboards Leveling Up

7

xxx

Students made public pledges to save energy

Students tracked progress on a leaderboard

Students earned points and received prizes

CASE STUDYCommitment

8

Customers earned points for saving energy and could view status on leaderboard

Customers got feedback on energy usage

Earned points and received prizes

CASE STUDYFeedback

Players receive deck of cards andcommit to taking actions

Players earn points for taking actions.  More points given for more difficult actions.

Players could track points on a leaderboard, and received cashprizes.

CASE STUDYCommitment & Rewards

Image from: http://ctenergychallenge.com 

Operations and maintenance activities are part of a long‐term competition.

Rewards: Buildings and operators are recognized for activity through a leaderboard and annualrecognition events.

Social Interactions: The program also holds quarterly operator forums to encourage interaction.

CASE STUDYSocial Interactions & Rewards/Gifts

11

RESIDENTIAL GAMES

xxx

PROGRAM BEHAVIORAL STRATEGIES RESIDENTIAL PARTICIPANTS (N)

DURATION

ELECTRIC SAVINGS GAS SAVINGS

Cool California Challenge

Community competition; social norms; peer‐to‐peer interactions; rewards

2,700 households 5 mos. 14% (Gross) 0%

Energy Smackdown Community competition; social norms; peer‐to‐peer interactions; rewards

100 households (3 communities)

12 mos. 14% (Gross) 17% (all heating fuels)

Western Mass Saves Challenge

Community competition; goal‐setting; feedback via online portal; rewards

2,000 households (4 communities)

8 mos. 0.1‐2.3% (per community, gross)

NA

SDG&E Energy Challenge (CA)

Household competition; social norms; peer‐to‐peer interactions; rewards

5,634 households 9 mos. 6% summer; 2% winter (net unadjusted)

NA

Biggest Energy Saver (CA)

Household competition; real‐time feedback via IHD; rewards

200 households 2 mos. 11% (gross) NA

Select programs shown. See CARD report for details of all programs included in study.

12

COMMERCIAL GAMES

xxx

Select programs shown. See CARD report for details of all programs included in study.

PROGRAM BEHAVIORAL STRATEGIES DURATION

COMMERCIALPARTICIPANTS

ELECTRIC SAVINGS

iChoose (Milwaukee Fire Department, Wisconsin)

Team competition 2 mos. 29 buildings / 130 participants

6.6% (Net unadjusted)

Duke Smart Energy Now Real-time feedback via lobby kiosks; energy champions (peer-to-peer), training, pre-packaged “campaign”; behavioral experts

NR 59 buildings 6.9% (Net Unadjusted)

BC Hydro Workforce Conservation

Energy champions (peer-to-peer); real-time data/feedback; commitment; rewards

1 year 300 sites 0-3% (Net unadjusted)

SnoPUD Behavior-Based Energy Efficiency Pilot

Within-store competition; real-time feedback via in-store displays; education

1 month 10 stores 2% (Net unadjusted)

Boulder 10 for Change Challenge

Business-to-business competition; peer-to-peer interaction; commitments; goal-setting

1 year 100 businesses 8% (Gross;electric and gas)

• Customer engagement• Multiple sectors• Scalability• Layer games within current

programs• Get people to take actions in

short time periods (DR!)

13

OPPORTUNITIES & KEY POINTSHow to Integrate into DR

• Define your target audience• Define the behavior(s) you

want customers to take• Make it fun!• Don’t over-simplify

ILLUME Advising LLC, Vine E, Mazur-Stommen S. (2015). Energy efficiency behavioral programs: literature review, benchmarking analysis, and evaluation guidelines. Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources.

Mazur-Stommen S, Farley K, Nadel S. (2015) Gamified Energy Efficiency Programs. ACEEE, Report B1501.

Vine E and Jones S. (2015). A review of energy reduction competitions studies: scaling up deeper savings through comparative feedback and recognition. Prepared for California Public Utilities Commission. California Institute for Energy and Environment.

14

RESOURCES

15

Courtney HendersonProject ManagerCourtney@illumeadvising.com