Gaming and Simulation for Railway Innovation

Abstract

Background. Gaming simulation allows decision-makers to experiment with sociotechnical systems, similar to computer simulation. However, the value of these tools in comparison with each other remains uncertain, especially when focusing on their real-life application in systemic innovation processes. Aim. This article builds a framework based on the literature related to innovation of complex systems in a multi-actor environment and intends to use this framework to differentiate between the value of computer simulation and gaming simulation in innovation processes. Method. Using a case study of the introduction of gaming simulation to ProRail, the Dutch railway infrastructure manager, this article explores the advantages and disadvantages of using the two tools in situations where radical innovations need to be invented, explored, tested, and implemented in an incumbent system. Results.Computer simulations, as closed exercises, allow for more radical innovations to be studied. The openness of gaming sessions as well as the need for gamers to interact with a recognizable system inhibit the use of gaming simulation in envisioning radical innovations. However, they are more suitable for the joint commissioning of research and the stepwise testing of small-scale improvements. Gaming simulation is therefore a more appropriate tool for planning a concerted transition in a multi-actor setting. Conclusion.Computer simulation better allows for the building of experimental niches, and gaming simulation better helps in the concerted planning of the implementation of innovations. The article ends with concrete directions for further research as well as ideas about combining the two tools.