IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v106y2020icp331-340.html

Gamification of production and logistics operations: Status quo and future directions

Author

Listed:
  • Warmelink, Harald
  • Koivisto, Jonna
  • Mayer, Igor
  • Vesa, Mikko
  • Hamari, Juho

Abstract

This article presents a review of the current body of academic literature concerning gamification of production and logistics to understand the status quo and provide suggestions for future research. The findings indicate that the execution and control of production and logistic processes has been addressed most often in the current body of literature, which mostly consists of design research. Objectives and goals, points, achievements, multimedial feedback, metaphorical or fictional representations, and levels and progress are currently the most often employed affordances within this field. Research has focused in the given context on examining or considering motivation, enjoyment and flow, as the main psychological outcomes of gamification, while individual performance and efficiency are the most commonly examined or suggested behavioral and organizational impacts. Future studies should employ more rigorous designs within new subdomains of production and logistics and should firmly ground research designs and discussions in management theory and critical studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Warmelink, Harald & Koivisto, Jonna & Mayer, Igor & Vesa, Mikko & Hamari, Juho, 2020. "Gamification of production and logistics operations: Status quo and future directions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 331-340.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:106:y:2020:i:c:p:331-340
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.09.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296318304594
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.09.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Louis Denis & Geneviève Dompierre & Ann Langley & Linda Rouleau, 2011. "Escalating Indecision: Between Reification and Strategic Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 225-244, February.
    2. Richard N. Landers & Elena M. Auer & Andrew B. Collmus & Michael B. Armstrong, 2018. "Gamification Science, Its History and Future: Definitions and a Research Agenda," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 315-337, June.
    3. Sarah Kaplan, 2011. "Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 665-695, May.
    4. Stephen R. Barley & Gideon Kunda, 2001. "Bringing Work Back In," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 76-95, February.
    5. Kai Huotari & Juho Hamari, 2017. "A definition for gamification: anchoring gamification in the service marketing literature," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(1), pages 21-31, February.
    6. Mikko Vesa & Eero Vaara, 2014. "Strategic ethnography 2.0 : Four methods for advancing strategy process and practice research," Post-Print hal-02313234, HAL.
    7. Linda Rouleau, 2005. "Micro‐Practices of Strategic Sensemaking and Sensegiving: How Middle Managers Interpret and Sell Change Every Day," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(7), pages 1413-1441, November.
    8. Dalvir Samra‐Fredericks, 2003. "Strategizing as Lived Experience and Strategists’ Everyday Efforts to Shape Strategic Direction," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 141-174, January.
    9. Michael Rosen, 1991. "Coming To Terms With The Field: Understanding And Doing Organizational Ethnography," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 1-24, January.
    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. Roberta Guglielmetti Mugion & Grazia Chiara Elmo & Veronica Ungaro & Laura Di Pietro & Olimpia Martucci, 2025. "A Systematic Literature Review of Selected Aspects of Life Cycle Assessment of Rare Earth Elements: Integration of Digital Technologies for Sustainable Production and Recycling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Xu, Hui & Wu, Yang & Hamari, Juho, 2022. "What determines the successfulness of a crowdsourcing campaign: A study on the relationships between indicators of trustworthiness, popularity, and success," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 484-495.
    3. Maria Elena Latino & Marta Menegoli & Fulvio Signore & Maria Chiara De Lorenzi, 2023. "The Potential of Gamification for Social Sustainability: Meaning and Purposes in Agri-Food Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Robert Ciuchita & Jonas Heller & Sarah Köcher & Sören Köcher & Thomas Leclercq & Karim Sidaoui & Susan Stead, 2023. "It is Really Not a Game: An Integrative Review of Gamification for Service Research," Post-Print hal-04133024, HAL.
    5. Hammedi, Wafa & Leclercq, Thomas & Poncin, Ingrid & Alkire (Née Nasr), Linda, 2021. "Uncovering the dark side of gamification at work: Impacts on engagement and well-being," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 256-269.
    6. Hana Dler Ahmed & Gulsum Asiksoy, 2021. "The Effects of Gamified Flipped Learning Method on Student’s Innovation Skills, Self-Efficacy towards Virtual Physics Lab Course and Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Athina G. Bright & Stavros T. Ponis, 2021. "Introducing Gamification in the AR-Enhanced Order Picking Process: A Proposed Approach," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Wallius, Eetu & Klock, Ana Carolina Tomé & Hamari, Juho, 2022. "Playing it safe: A literature review and research agenda on motivational technologies in transportation safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    9. Sharma, Wamika & Lim, Weng Marc & Kumar, Satish & Verma, Aastha & Kumra, Rajeev, 2024. "Game on! A state-of-the-art overview of doing business with gamification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    10. Behl, Abhishek & Sampat, Brinda & Gaur, Jighyasu & Pereira, Vijay & Laker, Benjamin & Shankar, Amit & Shi, Yangyan & Roohanifar, Mohammad, 2024. "Can gamification help green supply chain management firms achieve sustainable results in servitized ecosystem? An empirical investigation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).

    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. Leonardo Lemos da Silveira Santos & César Tureta & Bruno Felix, 2021. "A Qualitative Method Proposal for the Study of Strategy as Practice," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 25(2), pages 190353-1903.
    2. Ricardo Azambuja & Gazi Islam, 2019. "Working at the boundaries: Middle managerial work as a source of emancipation and alienation," Post-Print halshs-01959107, HAL.
    3. Serdukov, Svetlana, 2012. "From the chaos of transition economy to “normalized” managerial practices: The role of group interaction in creating meaning in managerial work," Journal of East European Management Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 17(4), pages 423-444.
    4. Mikko Vesa & Frank den Hond & J. Tuomas Harviainen, 2019. "On the Possibility of a Paratelic Initiation of Organizational Wrongdoing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 1-15, November.
    5. Neyland, Daniel & Whittle, Andrea, 2018. "Garfinkel on strategy: Using ethnomethodology to make sense of “rubbish strategy”," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 31-42.
    6. Linden, Erik, 2021. "Pandemics and environmental shocks: What aviation managers should learn from COVID-19 for long-term planning," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Ricardo Azambuja & Gazi Islam, 2019. "Working at the boundaries: Middle managerial work as a source of emancipation and alienation," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01959107, HAL.
    8. Gino Cattani & Daniel Sands & Joe Porac & Jason Greenberg, 2018. "Competitive Sensemaking in Value Creation and Capture," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 632-657, December.
    9. Anna M. Hansson & Eja Pedersen & Niklas P. E. Karlsson & Stefan E. B. Weisner, 2023. "Barriers and drivers for sustainable business model innovation based on a radical farmland change scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8083-8106, August.
    10. Valérie-Inés de la Ville & Eléonore Mounoud, 2015. "A Narrative Approach to Strategy as Practice," Post-Print hal-01377985, HAL.
    11. Burström, Thommie & Wilson, Timothy L. & Wincent, Joakim, 2020. "Dynamics of after-sales managers’ strategizing work: What, why and how," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 119-131.
    12. Legaki, Nikoletta-Zampeta & Karpouzis, Kostas & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios & Hamari, Juho, 2021. "Gamification to avoid cognitive biases: An experiment of gamifying a forecasting course," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    13. Kari Jalonen & Henri Schildt & Eero Vaara, 2018. "Strategic concepts as micro‐level tools in strategic sensemaking," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2794-2826, October.
    14. Splitter, Violetta, 2019. "Balancing continuity and novelty: The practical relevance of management research from the practitioners' perspective," SocArXiv v4su8, Center for Open Science.
    15. Kratochvil, Renate, 2025. "The process of framing innovation activities: How strategic leaders erode their ideas for radical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    16. repec:osf:socarx:v4su8_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Fauré, Bertrand & Rouleau, Linda, 2011. "The strategic competence of accountants and middle managers in budget making," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 167-182, April.
    18. Hassan, Lobna & Dias, Antonio & Hamari, Juho, 2019. "How motivational feedback increases user’s benefits and continued use: A study on gamification, quantified-self and social networking," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 151-162.
    19. Mathieu Detchessahar & Benoît Journé, 2018. "Managing Strategic Discussions in Organizations: A Habermasian Perspective," Post-Print hal-02070709, HAL.
    20. Steensen, Elmer Fly, 2014. "Five types of organizational strategy," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 266-281.
    21. Paula Jarzabkowski & Sarah Kaplan, 2015. "Strategy tools-in-use: A framework for understanding “technologies of rationality” in practice," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 537-558, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:jbrese:v:106:y:2020:i:c:p:331-340. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.