Gamifying your Designs Through Self-Determination

By: Shakiyla Huggins August 14, 2025

In corporate environments, training programs are often designed to hit compliance targets or engagement metrics. But what if true learning isn’t about completion rates or flashy gamification—but about satisfying deeper psychological needs?

According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 2000), individuals are most motivated when three basic psychological needs are met: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. My research on gamified learning environments supports this: when these needs are fulfilled, learners move from passive compliance to active, natural engagement.

In this post, I’ll break down how corporate training can be transformed by designing around these needs—and why it matters more than ever.

The Problem: Training That Misses the Mark

Traditional corporate training is often experienced as a task to finish, not an opportunity to grow. It’s common for employees to breeze through modules with minimal retention, viewing learning as something to “get through” rather than something meaningful.

This surface-level engagement happens because the design isn’t anchored in what actually motivates people to learn. “Most efforts to improve learning have focused on extrinsic motivators,” Deci et al. (1991) note, “but sustained learning comes from internal motivation.” And internal motivation comes from psychological need satisfaction—not checklists.

The Solution: Design for Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness

Let’s break down what each need means—and how to embed it into corporate learning experiences.

Autonomy: Giving Learners Control Over Their Journey

“Autonomy refers to being the perceived origin or source of one’s own behavior.”
— Ryan & Deci (2000)

Autonomy is not about letting employees do whatever they want—it’s about giving them meaningful choices and control over their learning experience.

How to Build It In:

• Offer learning pathways. Let employees choose between topics or formats that fit their interests and role needs.
• Use branching scenarios. Interactive simulations where employees make decisions and experience consequences reinforce ownership.
• Try adaptive learning. Personalize content based on performance and preferences using AI or smart LMS tools.

Example:
Instead of a standard cybersecurity course, use a decision-based scenario where the learner chooses how to handle a suspicious email. Each decision changes the outcome—and reinforces the learning through agency.

Competence: Supporting Growth and Mastery

“People are inclined to seek out optimal challenges and to extend their capacities.”
— Deci & Ryan (1985)

Employees want to feel effective. When training is either too difficult or too basic, motivation suffers. The sweet spot lies in scaffolding difficulty and giving feedback that helps employees grow.

How to Build It In:

• Use progressive difficulty. Start with basics, then introduce more complexity as skills improve.
• Deliver meaningful feedback. Move beyond “Correct” or “Try Again.” Explain the reasoning behind responses.
• Introduce stretch challenges. Allow high-performers to go beyond the minimum with optional advanced tasks.

Example:
In a sales training, begin with scripted role-plays, then transition to complex objection-handling scenarios that require on-the-spot decisions—followed by expert feedback.

Relatedness: Making Learning Social and Supportive

“The need for relatedness involves developing secure and satisfying connections with others.”
— Ryan & Deci (2000)

Learning doesn’t happen in isolation. People are more likely to engage in training when they feel connected—to peers, mentors, or the larger purpose of their role.

How to Build It In:

• Incorporate peer interaction. Team challenges, feedback exchanges, or learning circles build connection.
• Use social proof. Highlight what others are learning and how it’s impacting their roles.
• Acknowledge contributions. Recognize learner progress, peer support, or shared insights.

Example:
During onboarding, include a cohort-based challenge where new hires solve a mock customer issue together, fostering collaboration and early peer bonds.

The Result: Flow-State Learning and Motivation That Lasts

When all three needs are met, learners are more likely to enter a state of flow—a term coined by Csikszentmihalyi (1990) that describes deep immersion, focus, and intrinsic motivation. This is the ideal state for learning—and the opposite of click-through compliance.

As Deci & Ryan (2000) emphasize, “environments that support psychological needs facilitate more effective learning, creativity, and well-being.” This doesn’t just benefit learners—it leads to higher retention, better performance, and stronger organizational growth.

Conclusion

Corporate learning doesn’t have to be a chore. When we design with autonomy, competence, and relatedness in mind, training becomes something employees want to do—not just have to do.

✅ We move from extrinsic motivation to intrinsic curiosity.
✅ From one-size-fits-all to learner-centered journeys.
✅ From compliance to genuine capability.

If you’re a learning leader, ask yourself this: Are your programs designed to satisfy your learners’ psychological needs—or just to check a box?

If it’s the latter, it may be time to rethink your approach, and build learning that people actually want to engage with.

---

📚 References (APA)

• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer.
• Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 325–346.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.