The Bartle model adapted to the B2B: 4 player typologies
The Bartle model (Richard Bartle, 1996) was originally developed for multiplayer video games and identifies 4 main motivations of the player: killer, accompli, explorer, sociable. Adapted to the business context (where learners are not volunteer players but collaborators in training), we observe a slightly different typology, in 4 profiles.
Profile 1 - the competitor (25-30% of the B2B hearing). Main motivation: win, be the best, see his score. Engage immediately on ranking mechanics, duel, personal challenge. Quickly pick up on purely cooperative formats without a designated winner.
Profile 2 - Explorer (20-25% of audience). Main motivation: understand the system, discover hidden rules, optimize. Engage on mechanics with strategic depth. Pick up on formats too simple or too directed.
Profile 3 - the collaborative (30-35% of the hearing). Main motivation: interact with others, build as a team, share. Engage on mechanics of mutual aid, cooperation, communication. Pick up on pure individualistic or competitive formats.
Profile 4 - the contemplative (15-20% of the audience). Main motivation: enjoy the experience without pressure, observe, learn passively. Engage if the format meets its rhythm. Pick up on formats with high competitive pressure or too dynamic.
Identify the dominant audience in 5 minutes
Before designing a game, identify the dominant typology of the target audience. The quick 5-minute method: ask 3 questions to 5 representative employees. Question 1: "When you play as a team, do you prefer to win together or be the best individual?" Question 2: "Do you prefer a game with simple rules and quick turns, or a game with deep strategy?" Question 3: "Do you enjoy animation, or do you prefer a calm setting to learn?"
The answers quickly draw the dominant: a commercial team: often dominant competitors (40-50 %), an R&D or engineering team: often dominant explorers (30-40%), a HR or comm team: often dominant collaborative (40-50 %), a legal or accounting team: often dominant contemplative (25-35 %).
But the golden rule: no team is monotypologyEven a commercial team dominated by competitors contains 20-30% collaboratives, 15-20% explorers, 10-1% contemplatives. A game that only engages competitors loses 50-60% of the audience.
Design a game that speaks to 3 typologies out of 4 (multi-levy method)
The objective of an effective B2B game is not to talk to the 4 typologies (often impossible without excessively complexing the mechanics), but to 3 out of 4 by activating multiple simultaneous engagement levers. Four main levers to combine.
Competitive lever : a system of points or visible score, a ranking (individual or team), a clear victory goal. For example: who finishes the first, who collects the most cards, who solves the final riddle.
Explorer levier : a mechanics with strategic depth, choices with variable consequences, hidden rules to discover as they go. For example: a system of map combinations, an internal saving of resources, cascade effects.
Collaborative lever : team phases, joint actions, bonuses for cooperation, a secondary shared objective. For example: save everyone, reach a collective target, share clues.
Contemplative lever : a neat aesthetic, a rich narrative universe, an accessible rhythm (not too dynamic), moments of breathing. For example: moments of map reading, narrative in several chapters, immersive visual atmosphere.
Of the 33 documented B2B projects, those that activate 3 levers reach a commitment rate (NPS > 7) of 85% vs 55% for single-levier games.
Classic errors by dominant typology
Competition dominant audience and pure cooperative game : stall 50% towards the 2nd half of the game. Solution: add an individual score parallel to the team score (top contributor, best card played).
Dominant audience explorers and game too simple : boredom, disengagement, "unclear" behavior (plays something else). Solution : add an optional strategic layer (card combos, strategic bonus).
Collaborative dominant audience and pure competitive game Some players are going back to "let it win". Solution: add a self-help mechanism where competitors can do without bonuses.
Contemplative dominant audience and too rhythmic play The solution: slow the pace by longer turns, add moments of break/reading, and treat aesthetics.
The practical rule: test on 3 to 6 players representative of the dominant before production. If the test reveals a major stall, add a targeted lever on the neglected typology.
Concrete examples of multi-type levers per client case
Cases Watt for Enedis : dominant audience explorers (energy technologists). Strong explorer lever (energy action combination system), collaborative lever (power saving collective objective), competitive lever (top contributor). Measured commitment: 89% NPS > 7.
Cases The Right Reflex for SNCF Voyageurs : dominant audience competitors (field agents). Competitive lever (first to finish), collaborative lever (mutual assistance between agents in the course of the game), contemplative lever (savvy illustrations of security situations).
Cases Emulation for France Travail The following are the main types of collaborative audience: (advisors) Collaborative lever (team objective), Explorer lever (methodcard combinations), Competitive lever (team score).
Sources: ANACT (continuing training) · Ministry of Labor (professional training).
Have a custom game project?
Design, manufacturing, delivery turnkey. Detailed quote within 48 hours, free and no commitment.
Request a quote in 48hAre you carrying out a project on this subject and you want to secure its design, remuneration and production? We talk about it. Estimated quote within 48 hours, by a human, after defining your needs.
Request a quoteQuestions frequent
How do you know what typology dominates your team?
The quick method: ask 3 short questions to 5 representative collaborators (individual preference vs collective, simplicity vs strategic depth, dynamic vs calm). The answers draw the dominant in 5 minutes. For a strategic project, provide a mini-questionnaire to 10-15 collaborators before framing the brief.
Can we design a B2B game that speaks to all 4 typologies at once?
Theoretically yes, in difficult practice: combining 4 engagement levers complicates the mechanics and increases the learning of rules. The realistic target is 3 levers out of 4, with a focus on the dominant typologies of the audience. A game that activates 3 levers engages 80-85% of the audience - it is operational excellence.
Is the Bartle model still relevant in 2026?
Yes, despite its origin in 1996 on video games. The model has been empirically validated in learning contexts by the game B2B on several recent studies. It remains the reference grid for game design design in professional training. Variations exist (Yee model, Quantic Foundry model) but converge towards the same 4 large profiles.
Do seniors and juniors have different types of work?
No strong age-specific trend on the projects accompanied. The typology is more related to the trade (commercial → competitor, collaborative HR →) and personality than to age. On intergenerational teams, typological diversity is rather enriched than altered.
Should this test be repeated for each new B2B game project?
Yes, ideally for each new target audience. The same company can have very different dominant typologies depending on the department (commerce vs R&D vs HR). An effective game on the commercial team can fall flat on the legal team if the mechanics have not been adjusted. 5 minutes of typological qualification avoid 5 weeks of bad design.