Quick heads up for everyone here in the community. Over the last weeks, we have been quietly building something that many of our customers have been asking for in different forms. A simple way to look at a learning setup, an HR process, or an internal initiative and answer one uncomfortable question: Is the system actually motivating the kind of behavior it expects? Most instructional designs say they want curiosity, transfer, problem-solving, ownership, and most HR systems still reward completion, speed, attendance, or clean spreadsheets. That gap is not a motivation problem. It is a design mismatch. We just released a short Motivational Fit Diagnostic that helps make this visible. It is not a learner-type quiz or an engagement score. It is a behavioral design diagnostic that looks at the structure around people and the type of motivation it quietly produces. Why am I sharing this here? First, this assessment is very new. Which means it is not finished. And that is intentional. If you are working in instructional design, L&D, or HR, you are exactly the people who can stress test it with real contexts. Learning programs, onboarding journeys, mandatory trainings, leadership tracks, or change initiatives. In about five minutes, you get a first map of: What kind of motivation does your setup currently trigger? Whether that motivation fits the behavior you actually need? Where engagement leaks are structural, not personal? Think of it as a diagnostic before redesign. Before adding nudges. Before adding rewards. Before adding more content. If you try it and something feels off, that feedback matters. If it clicks immediately, that matters too. This is one of those tools that will only get sharper by being used on real cases, not hypothetical ones. If you are curious how behavioral design applies to your learning or HR context, jump in. Early users are part of shaping where this goes next. As always, the goal is not to motivate people harder. It is to design systems that make the right behavior easier to sustain.

- Where are you from? - What’s your business? - What’s your next goal? - What do you want to learn? Let’s start a great discussion! Thank you. 🙏

Data is not the magic. The framing is. Gamified L&D environments can take boring data and turns it into an emotionally charged storyline, character arc, a bragging right, or a personal memory. So the value is not the number. It is the interpretation. Which is exactly the opposite of what organisations most oftne do with their KPIs/dashboards. Most dashboards present information as statistics. What if we present information as a protagonist’s journey? Huge difference.

I just had a (friendly) discussion with a colleague from gamification. It struck me that it is becoming increasingly common for a behavior-oriented approach to be labeled as gamification simply because it addresses a human need (which every behavior-oriented approach does). First, this is complete nonsense from a scientific point of view. Just because something plays on a person's loss aversion, for example, does not mean it is gamification. And secondly, because gamification wants to be everything (if you go by what many providers in this field say), outsiders don't really see it as a discipline with a ‘profile’. This in turn leads to ‘zero’ USP and makes it very difficult to argue and demonstrate its real benefits.

Is there something special you are working on today?