Gamfi for sales · Module
Motivation programme effectiveness in numbers – participants against the rest of the network, cost next to result
In the Gamfi platform you check whether a contest or programme lifted sales – by comparing participants with the rest of the network and with the same people's result before it started. Once an edition closes, you know whether that programme's budget should come back next quarter, and in which part of the network.
The scope of the comparison – metrics, periods and the groups to compare – we agree together during rollout, on your own data.
They improve their results with us
How it works
The question of a programme's effectiveness stops being a matter of opinion.
- 1
You set the baseline
Before the programme starts, you record the same people's result in a comparable period, and who is covered by the programme. A recorded starting point is stronger evidence than one reconstructed after the fact, because nobody picks it to fit the result.
- 2
You launch the programme
Participants compete, and the system records their participation and their sales results from your systems at the same time – as one record, not two separate reports.
- 3
You compare the groups
Participants' result sits next to the rest of the network's result in the same period, and next to the same period before launch. You can also see what happened after the programme was settled.
- 4
You design the next edition on data
You know which mechanics went along with a higher result and at what cost, so you design the next edition on the previous one's data.
More, because it is one system
This kind of measurement is only possible when the programme and the sales data live in one system. Otherwise someone has to piece two exports together by hand and take the result on faith.
Programme participation and sales result are the same data
Usually the sales result comes from the sales system and programme participation from the motivation tool, so the comparison gets built in a spreadsheet, usually once, at the end of the season. In Gamfi, the result from your API and participation in the contest are recorded together from day one – a foundation that already works, because head-to-head duels on sales results already stand on it.
We say what a number does not prove
In this category, bare percentages without a described method get published most often – a rise of several dozen percent with no information on what it was compared with, or what else changed at the same time. Our statement shows exactly what was compared, and names the limits of the conclusion: seasonality, a new offer, an ad campaign. A sales director can walk into the boardroom with this without risking that the first question knocks the whole presentation over.
The effect broken down by mechanic, not just the overall result
Knowing that the programme "worked" does not help you design the next one. The statement shows a threshold, a streak and a leaderboard separately, so you build the next edition on what went along with the higher result, and drop what only took up the team's attention.
See how Gamfi is used in sales networksCustomers →
Describe your need
Describe the situation in your own words – we will write back with how the Gamfi platform answers that challenge. You decide about a meeting after you have read the answer.
What you get in Gamfi
A measurement that holds up to questions from the board and finance.
A baseline, not a guess
- The same people's result before the programme startsrecorded before the programme launches
- Participants alongside the rest of the network in the same perioda comparison on your own data, without an industry benchmark
- An explicit list of who was covered by the programmethe basis for every comparison
- An observation window longer than the programme itselfyou can see whether the result drops back to its starting level after settlement
One number, from data to conclusion
- A person's sales result and programme participation in one placeno export between two tools
- Points, contest result and sales result on the same source recordnot on two reports pieced together by hand
- Every line traceable backan event log instead of an argument over whose spreadsheet is right
- The same dataset for sales and financeone version of the numbers at the meeting
Which mechanics went along with the result
- Participants' result broken down by the mechanics they took part ininput for designing the next edition, not proof that one mechanic caused it
- Comparing successive editions on the same metricsthe findings carry over into the design of the next one
- Result per region, branch and rolewhere the programme worked, and where it did not move the needle
Cost next to result
- Programme spend set against the change in resultpoints, rewards and charges in one statement
- Cost per participant and per unitwhere the budget worked hardest
- Spend control in the programme budgets moduleyou run the budget, top-ups and liabilities there
Honesty about the method
- An explicit statement of what exactly was comparedperiod, group, metric – not just the headline percentage
- A flag when the comparison is weakera network-wide programme has no comparison group, and we say so plainly
Ready to take further
- A statement ready to show the boardwith a description of what was compared
- Exporting the comparison data to a spreadsheetCSV and XLSX for further analysis on your side
- The decision on the next edition on the same screenthe findings sit right next to the button that launches the programme
- A statement for a single unit or the whole networka regional director gets their own slice of the picture
Common questions
Open the one that applies to you.
How do you know it is the programme, and not the season?
We do not know that on our own, and we do not pretend we do. We show participants' result next to the rest of the network's result and next to the same period before launch, and we leave the judgment on what else changed at the same time – pricing, a campaign, a seasonal peak – to you, because only you know your market. We do not know of a tool that would settle this for a customer automatically, and we do not do it ourselves.
Who calculates this – you, or our controlling team?
You open the statement in the platform: the numbers and the group comparison are built from data already in it. During rollout we agree once what the baseline is and which metrics we compare, because that depends on your sales plan. The interpretation and the decision on the next edition are yours to make.
Is a comparison group even feasible in our network?
If the programme covers the whole network at once, there is nobody to compare participants against, and you are left with a before-and-after comparison – weaker, but still useful. If the programme rolls out in stages or covers part of the network, a comparison with people outside the programme works from day one. It is worth thinking about this at the programme-design stage, because it changes how strong the conclusion is.
Is this the same as return on investment?
Not entirely. A full return needs margin and total-cost data that sit in your accounting system. We show the change in sales result and the programme's cost side by side – you calculate the return formula on your own financial data.
Will you guarantee that the programme will deliver a result?
No. We show whether it delivered a result – during and after – we do not predict it up front. An upfront promise in this category usually ends up as a number nobody can defend afterwards.
How is this different from the engagement reports other vendors have?
Engagement – logins, completed tasks, a leaderboard position – tells you whether people used the programme. This page is about whether the programme changed the sales result. Those are two different questions, and most tools in this category only answer the first.
What if the effect disappears once the programme is settled?
That is a real risk with every contest, which is why the observation window reaches further than the programme itself. If the result drops back to its starting level, you see it in the data and can change the next edition's mechanics – usually moving from a one-off burst to a rhythm spread out over time.
Do you have effect numbers from your own rollouts?
We will show them once there is a measured customer behind them, a described method and written consent. Until then we show the method of measurement, not a percentage without one – a number that cannot survive the board's first question is a cost for you, not an argument. In new rollouts we set up measurement from day one, and we will propose the same to you at the start of your programme.
What does the price depend on?
Several factors affect the price: the number of programme participants, the range of modules and the number of programmes you want to compare against each other. We are happy to go through the details at a meeting and in the contact that follows.