IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v11y2021i3p92-d628019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Can Gamified Applications Drive Engagement and Brand Attitude? The Case of Nike Run Club Application

Author

Listed:
  • Ivo Rodrigues

    (ISAG—European Business School, 4100-442 Porto, Portugal)

  • João M. Lopes

    (NECE—Research Unit in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, 6200-209 Covilhã, Portugal
    Miguel Torga Institute of Higher Education, 3000-132 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Ana Borges

    (ISAG—European Business School, 4100-442 Porto, Portugal
    Research Center in Business Sciences and Tourism (CICET-FCVC), 4100-442 Porto, Portugal
    Research Centre in Organizations, Markets and Industrial Management (COMEGI), 1349-001 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • José Oliveira

    (Instituto Superior Politécnico Gaya, Av. dos Descobrimentos 333, 4400-103 Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal)

  • Márcio Oliveira

    (NECE—Research Unit in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, 6200-209 Covilhã, Portugal
    Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Apartado 4133, 2411-901 Leiria, Portugal)

Abstract

This research aims to analyze the feasibility of gamified applications as a tool to promote engagement and brand attitude. To accomplish this, this research was developed using a quantitative methodology. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and the model hypotheses were tested by a structural equation modeling (SEM). A questionnaire was applied to Portuguese consumers who use the “Nike Run Club” application, from which 203 valid responses were received. The results confirm the influence of social circles and their impact on the intention to interact with the brand. For theoretical contributions, this research contributes to the existing literature and academic knowledge in the areas of marketing and gamification, providing a suggestion for the TAM model to be used in this type of research. It also contributes to a better understanding of the relationship between gamification and marketing, demonstrating that the use of gamified applications as engagement tools can have a positive impact on the brand attitude. On the practical side, it contributes as a consultation tool for brands, application designers, and marketers when defining engagement strategies, allowing a better understanding of the factors that may or may not influence the public’s relationship with the brands and what dynamics they should use in the development of new Gamified marketing solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivo Rodrigues & João M. Lopes & Ana Borges & José Oliveira & Márcio Oliveira, 2021. "How Can Gamified Applications Drive Engagement and Brand Attitude? The Case of Nike Run Club Application," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:11:y:2021:i:3:p:92-:d:628019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/11/3/92/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/11/3/92/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michelle Greenwood, 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 315-327, September.
    2. Athapol Ruangkanjanases & Shu-Ling Hsu & Yenchun Jim Wu & Shih-Chih Chen & Jo-Yu Chang, 2020. "What Drives Continuance Intention towards Social Media? Social Influence and Identity Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-15, August.
    3. Bhuvanesh Kumar Sharma & Vinod Kumar Pal, 2020. "Application of TAM model in teaching and learning - a behavioural study on social media," International Journal of Management Practice, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 13(4), pages 478-497.
    4. Helena Nobre & André Ferreira, 2017. "Gamification as a platform for brand co-creation experiences," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(4), pages 349-361, August.
    5. Yi He & Qimei Chen & Sakawrat Kitkuakul, 2018. "Regulatory focus and technology acceptance: Perceived ease of use and usefulness as efficacy," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1459006-145, January.
    6. Shampy Kamboj & Shruti Rana & Vinayak A. Drave, 2020. "Factors Driving Consumer Engagement and Intentions with Gamification of Mobile Apps," Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), IGI Global, vol. 18(2), pages 17-35, April.
    7. Ralph Tench & Brian Jones, 2015. "Social media: the Wild West of CSR communications," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 11(2), pages 290-305, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. João M. Lopes & José Oliveira, 2022. "The New Times of Social Media Marketing in the B2B Framework," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-12, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. María Iborra & Marta Riera, 2023. "Corporate social irresponsibility: What we know and what we need to know," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 1421-1439, May.
    2. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Maria Järlström & Essi Saru & Sinikka Vanhala, 2018. "Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 703-724, October.
    4. Leonardo Becchetti & Emanuele Bobbio & Federico Prizia & Lorenzo Semplici, 2022. "Going Deeper into the S of ESG: A Relational Approach to the Definition of Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    5. Swiatkiewicz Olgierd, 2017. "Linking Csr To Strategy: A Practical View," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 299-316, October.
    6. Gordon Liu & Catherine Liston-Heyes & Wai-Wai Ko, 2010. "Employee Participation in Cause-Related Marketing Strategies: A Study of Management Perceptions from British Consumer Service Industries," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 195-210, March.
    7. Lei Zhou & Feng Wei & Yu Kong, 2022. "Do Employee Stock Ownership Plans Affect Corporate Social Responsibility? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Rafael Alcadipani & Cíntia Rodrigues Oliveira Medeiros, 2020. "When Corporations Cause Harm: A Critical View of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Corporate Crimes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(2), pages 285-297, November.
    9. Francesco Gangi & Eugenio D'Angelo & Lucia Michela Daniele & Nicola Varrone, 2021. "Assessing the impact of socially responsible human resources management on company environmental performance and cost of debt," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1511-1527, September.
    10. Chris Mason & John Simmons, 2014. "Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility in Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Systems Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 119(1), pages 77-86, January.
    11. Watson, Rosina & Wilson, Hugh N. & Macdonald, Emma K., 2020. "Business-nonprofit engagement in sustainability-oriented innovation: What works for whom and why?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 87-98.
    12. Alice Klettner & Thomas Clarke & Martijn Boersma, 2014. "The Governance of Corporate Sustainability: Empirical Insights into the Development, Leadership and Implementation of Responsible Business Strategy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 145-165, June.
    13. Saenz, Cesar, 2023. "The social management canvas for the mining industry: A Peruvian case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    14. Jinmin Kim & Jaeyoung Kim, 2021. "An Integrated Analysis of Value-Based Adoption Model and Information Systems Success Model for PropTech Service Platform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-17, November.
    15. Saenz, Cesar, 2021. "Community partnership and ownership as key factors of community strategies. A Peruvian case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    16. José Plaza-Úbeda & Jerónimo Burgos-Jiménez & Eva Carmona-Moreno, 2010. "Measuring Stakeholder Integration: Knowledge, Interaction and Adaptational Behavior Dimensions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 419-442, May.
    17. Christopher Isike & Alice Ajeh, 2017. "Stakeholder Engagement as a Core Management Function: Analysing the Business Value of Stakeholder Engagement for Nigerian Business Organizations," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 9(1), pages 46-55.
    18. Letizia Lo Presti & Mario Testa & Vittoria Marino & Pierpaolo Singer, 2019. "Engagement in Healthcare Systems: Adopting Digital Tools for a Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, January.
    19. Secundo, Giustina & Del Vecchio, Pasquale & Simeone, Luca & Schiuma, Giovanni, 2020. "Creativity and stakeholders' engagement in open innovation: Design for knowledge translation in technology-intensive enterprises," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 272-282.
    20. Salih Börteçine Avci & Adnan Karataş, 2022. "Public Service Motivation’s Mediating Role in the Effect Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Justice Have on Organizational Commitment in Higher Education Institutions," Journal of Economy Culture and Society, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 66(66), pages 29-54, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:11:y:2021:i:3:p:92-:d:628019. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.