IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nup/jrmdke/v5y2017i4663-680.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some Factors Hindering Acceptance of Three Gamification Solutions in Motivation Systems, in Small and Medium Enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • Jacek WOŹNIAK

    (University of Finance and Management)

Abstract

Gamification, understood as a use of chosen game mechanisms for motivating actors in non-game contexts, is increasingly popular and has become one of the “hot topics” of managerial practice and science. Despite its widespread use in HRM, several barriers preventing its progress in certain types of organizations have been identified. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs), where employees are not accustomed to formal procedures are a specific example, as gamification is based on formal procedures. The goal of the text is to analyze employees’ opinions concerning the incorporation of chosen gaming mechanisms into their motivation systems, to check if not being accustomed to formal procedures is a barrier. Beside “typical” SMEs where the entrepreneur is present, direct relations within a team are also characteristic of company departments which achieve their goals almost without contact with the rest of the organization – as in the case of a discount stores chain. The study bases on two samples to check if being accustomed to formal procedures in the small team facilitates acceptance of gamification. Two questionnaires (one on a sample of 100 employees of a discount store chain, and the second on 73 “typical” SME employees) asked respondents to declare their preferences for different types of rewards in motivation systems, including readiness to be involved in two gamification-type solutions: based on (i) lotteries, or (ii) BLAP gaming with non-material and material prizes. The effects of chosen factors: psychological (risk aversion) and situational (dissatisfaction with current incentive system) on the perception of two different ways of incorporating gamification into motivational systems, were analyzed. The results show that dissatisfaction with the current incentive system and not being risk-averse favor accepting the incorporation of gamification solutions into motivational systems. The responses of discount store employees and SME employees were similar to each other.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacek WOŹNIAK, 2017. "Some Factors Hindering Acceptance of Three Gamification Solutions in Motivation Systems, in Small and Medium Enterprises," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 5(4), pages 663-680, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:nup:jrmdke:v:5:y:2017:i:4:663-680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.managementdynamics.ro/index.php/journal/article/download/219/197
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.managementdynamics.ro/index.php/journal/article/view/219/197
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. García-Granero, Ana & Llopis, Óscar & Fernández-Mesa, Anabel & Alegre, Joaquín, 2015. "Unraveling the link between managerial risk-taking and innovation: The mediating role of a risk-taking climate," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1094-1104.
    2. Constantin BRÄ‚TIANU, 2013. "The Triple Helix of the Organizational Knowledge," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 1(2), pages 207-220, August.
    3. Jennings, Jennifer E. & Jennings, P. Devereaux & Greenwood, Royston, 2009. "Novelty and new firm performance: The case of employment systems in knowledge-intensive service organizations," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 338-359, July.
    4. Jakub Swacha, 2015. "Gamification In Knowledge Management: Motivating For Knowledge Sharing," Polish Journal of Management Studies, Czestochowa Technical University, Department of Management, vol. 12(2), pages 150-160, December.
    5. Yan Ling & Zeki Simsek & Michael Lubatkin & John F. Veiga, 2008. "The impact of transformational CEOs on the performance of small- to medium-sized firms : Does organizational context matter?," Post-Print hal-02312589, HAL.
    6. Rauch, Andreas & Hatak, Isabella, 2016. "A meta-analysis of different HR-enhancing practices and performance of small and medium sized firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 485-504.
    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 & Sofia Gomes & Ivo Rodrigues, 2024. "Playing the gamification and co-creation game: a bibliometric literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 353-376, February.

    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. Evelien P. M. Croonen & Marko Grünhagen & Melody L. Wollan, 2016. "Best fit, best practice, or stuck in the middle? The impact of unit ownership on unit HR performance in franchise systems," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 697-711, September.
    2. Hadad Shahrazad, 2017. "Strategies for developing knowledge economy in Romania," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 12(3), pages 416-430, September.
    3. Yu-Chieh Lo, Jade, 2015. "Selling science: Resource mobilization strategies in the emerging field of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1513-1526.
    4. Silke Eisenbeiss & Daan Knippenberg & Clemens Fahrbach, 2015. "Doing Well by Doing Good? Analyzing the Relationship Between CEO Ethical Leadership and Firm Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 635-651, May.
    5. Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2014. "Antecendents and effects of decision comprehensiveness: The role of decision quality and perceived uncertainty," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 625-635.
    6. Behl, Abhishek & Jayawardena, Nirma & Ishizaka, Alessio & Gupta, Manish & Shankar, Amit, 2022. "Gamification and gigification: A multidimensional theoretical approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1378-1393.
    7. Apostol Ingrid Georgeta & Zaharia Giulia-Elena & Miu Claudia-Maria & Constantin Georgiana Elena, 2024. "Beyond Trends: Promoting Sustainability through Influencer-Driven Product Endorsements," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 652-659.
    8. Yan Ling & Michelle Hammond & Li-Qun Wei, 2022. "Ethical leadership and ambidexterity in young firms: examining the CEO-TMT Interface," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 25-48, March.
    9. Jung, Eunjun & Lee, Changjun & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "Effective strategies to attract crowdfunding investment based on the novelty of business ideas," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    10. Stephan, Ute & Strauss, Karoline & Gorgievski, Marjan J. & Wach, Dominika, 2024. "How entrepreneurs influence their employees’ job satisfaction: The double-edged sword of proactive personality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    11. Mikael Hilmersson & Stylianos Papaioannou, 2015. "SME international opportunity scouting—empirical insights on its determinants and outcomes," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 186-211, September.
    12. Long Lam & Xu Huang & Dora Lau, 2012. "Leadership research in Asia: Taking the road less traveled?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 195-204, June.
    13. Iovino, Felicetta & Migliaccio, Guido, 2019. "Energy companies and sizes: An opportunity? Some empirical evidences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 431-439.
    14. Kang, Jae Hyeung & Matusik, James G. & Kim, Tae-Yeol & Phillips, J. Mark, 2016. "Interactive effects of multiple organizational climates on employee innovative behavior in entrepreneurial firms: A cross-level investigation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 628-642.
    15. Jeffrey E. Stambaugh & John Martinez & G. T. Lumpkin & Niyati Kataria, 0. "How well do EO measures and entrepreneurial behavior match?," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-21.
    16. Damoc Adrian – Ioan, 2018. "Multidisciplinarity in economics education and how it can shape economic thinking in the future," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 263-275, May.
    17. Kraft, Priscilla S. & Günther, Christina & Kammerlander, Nadine H. & Lampe, Jan, 2022. "Overconfidence and entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of different types of overconfidence in the entrepreneurial process," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).
    18. Cheng, Colin C.J. & Shiu, Eric C., 2022. "A two-level, longitudinal investigation into the effects of employee social entrepreneurship orientation and top management team decisions on product innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Sophia R. Thomas & S. R. Aurora, 2024. "The dynamic effects of transformational leadership on employee retention and employability over time: an agent-based model," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 350-380, December.
    20. Simon Ashby & Trevor Buck & Stephanie Nöth-Zahn & Thomas Peisl, 2018. "Emerging IT Risks: Insights from German Banking," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 180-207, April.

    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:nup:jrmdke:v:5:y:2017:i:4:663-680. 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: Cristian-Mihai VIDU (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmsnsro.html .

    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.