Turn a vague research question into one a study could actually prove wrong

Here is a research question I want to investigate. Help me tighten it into something falsifiable — a version where a specific finding could actually prove it wrong, not just something interesting to explore indefinitely.

ORIGINAL QUESTION
Does gamification improve employee training outcomes?

WHY I CARE ABOUT THIS
We're deciding whether to spend budget adding badges and leaderboards to our compliance training platform.

WHO OR WHAT THIS APPLIES TO
Adult employees completing mandatory annual compliance training, not students or gamers in general.

WHAT I ALREADY SUSPECT
I suspect it might boost completion rates but not actual retention of the material.

Diagnose what makes the original question unfalsifiable or too broad as stated — usually it's an undefined population ("do people" — which people?), an undefined outcome measure ("does it help" — help by what measure, over what timeframe?), or a comparison with no baseline ("is X better" — better than what?). Name the specific gap in Does gamification improve employee training outcomes? before rewriting it. Then produce a tightened version that specifies the population from Adult employees completing mandatory annual compliance training, not students or gamers in general., names a concrete, measurable outcome, and states an explicit comparison or baseline. The tightened question should be falsifiable in the sense that you could describe, right now, a specific result that would count as a "no."

WHAT NOT TO DO
Do not just rephrase the original question in fancier language while leaving the same ambiguity intact. Do not narrow the question so far that it stops addressing We're deciding whether to spend budget adding badges and leaderboards to our compliance training platform. at all — the tightened version has to still answer the real thing you care about.

OUTPUT FORMAT
1. The specific ambiguity or unfalsifiable element in the original question.
2. The tightened, falsifiable research question.
3. One sentence describing what a "no" result would look like.
4. If the tightening narrowed the scope meaningfully from We're deciding whether to spend budget adding badges and leaderboards to our compliance training platform., one line flagging that trade-off explicitly.