Enhancing Experience Without Losing Focus

Although many companies enjoy the success of their gamified entities, gamification is not universally successful in reaching business objectives (Liu et al., 2017, Spire, 2012). For example, Adobe offered a gamified learning tool for its Photoshop software in an attempt to increase conversion rates following a free trial month, but the effort never increased revenues (Shein, 2012). Research also reveals ambiguous results (Koivisto & Hamari, 2019): some studies find positive effects of gamified entities or game-based marketing applications on consumers’ adoption of product innovations (Müller-Stewens, Schlager, Häubl, & Herrmann, 2017), consumers’ self-brand connections (Berger, Schlager, Sprott, & Herrmann, 2018), or customer engagement (Eisingerich, Marchand, Fritze, & Dong, 2019), whereas others find negative effects on product choices (Högberg, Shams, & Wästlund, 2019) or consumers’ experience of co-creation activities after they lose a gamified competition (Leclercq, Hammedi, & Poncin, 2018)

Against this background, we propose that gamification initiates two opposing processes—a negative process through decreased attention to product information and a positive process through increased enjoyment—and that these two opposing processes exert joint or separate influences on different outcome variables. More specifically, for attitudinal outcomes, such as attitudes and purchase intention, the two processes operate in parallel and produce a null effect of gamification. For cognitive outcomes, such as product information recognition, only the negative process emerges, resulting in a negative effect of gamification. Furthermore, we identify two managerially relevant boundary conditions for the undesired negative effect of gamification on recognition that are related to the gamification design. Linking the game elements with meaningful information about the product reverses the negative effect of gamification on product information recognition. In addition, the negative effect disappears in gamification designs that make consumers aware of the distraction potential of game elements. Our research thus addresses calls for more gamification research to help clarify how gamification works and under what conditions it has a positive, negative, or no effect (e.g., Harwood and Garry, 2015, Hofacker et al., 2016).

There are two sides to every topic, and the implementation of gamification is no different. Gamification is a popular topic that this article analyzes, showing both the benefits that it can provide, while also giving the limitations and negative aspects of implementing it. While gamification can be implemented in most areas, it does not mean it is going to make it effective in engaging with useful information.

The gamification process should not distract from the true purpose of the design, but rather, it should enhance the user experience. One aspect that has to be paid special attention to when implementing this into an online banking app is the importance of intentional design. There have to be meaningful connections and learning being done; users have to be aware of the seriousness that comes with dealing with their finances. This process is not intended to take away from the financial progress of the user, but to enhance and support their goals in a more engaging way.

References:

Bekk, M., Eppmann, R., Klein, K., & Völckner, F. (2022). All that glitters is not gold: An investigation into the undesired effects of gamification and how to mitigate them through gamification design. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(4), 1059-1081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2022.03.002

Ai was not used in the creation of this article