• No results found

loyalty program?

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "loyalty program?"

Copied!
12
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

JANUARY 29, 2019

Gamified

branded apps:

the next level

loyalty program?

Master Thesis Defense | By Aniek Groenwold

(2)

INTRO

CONSUMERS STAY ATTACHED TO THEIR DEVICES MORE THAN EVER

Today’s proliferation in mobile technology and devices are

expected to continue to rise and future mobile marketing will create endless possibilities (Fritz, Sohn & Seegebarth, 2017).

Hence, creating a deeper understanding of mobile shopper

marketing is highly important.

(3)

Relevance

ACADEMIC MANAGERIAL

Limited empirical evidence for effects of gamification on loyalty, customer

engagement and motivation (hamari, koivisto & sarsa, 2014).

Do findings regarding traditional loyalty programs also apply within a branded app context? (li, 2018)

Since gamification elements are

increasingly used in mobile marketing to drive customer engagement (robson et al., 2015), the results of this research will also be highly relevant for

managers.

Need to assess how the mix of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards affects the

marketing effectiveness of mobile gamification! (hofacker et al., 2016; li,

2018; blom & leimeister, 2013).

(4)

Intrinsic rewards

H1A) LEARNING

BENEFITS H1B) SOCIAL

EXCHANGE H1C) SOCIAL

RECOGNITION

(5)

Conceptual model

(6)

RESEARCH METHOD

D A T A

G A T H E R I N G

Online survey

(qualtrics)

S C A L E S

Literature research, matching

constructs with validated scales

M O D E L S P E C I F I E D

PLS-SEM analysis

by the use of SmartPLS 3.2.7.

M E A S U R E - M E N T

M O D E L

A S S E S S M E N T

Reliability and

validity testing --> Post-hoc

analysis!

S T R U C T U R A L M O D E L

A S S E S S M E N T

Multicollinearity check and path coefficients by

means of bootstrapping

(7)

Measurement model assessment

‘On the basis of composite reliability alone, researchers may conclude that the convergent validity of the construct is adequate, even though more than 50% of the variance is due to error’

(Malhotra & Dash, 2011).

(8)

Post-hoc analysis

When item Eff1 is excluded, increased loadings for Eff2 and Eff3 were found and the initial AVE value of 0.437 changed into 0.727, which

meets the threshold of .5. Hence, the validity of the measurement

construct Effort increases.

(9)

Conclusion

An increase in learning benefits

created through gamification

elements positively affect user

engagement intentions

L E A R N I N G

B E N E F I T S S O C I A L E X C H A N G E

Social exchange created through

gamification

elements positively affect user

engagement intentions

A P P U S E R S A V V I N E S S

An increase in app user savviness

reduces the

perceived effort of engaging with a

gamified loyalty program within a

branded app*

O T H E R

H Y P O T H E S E S

H1c, H2, H3a, H4a and H4b were

rejected.

*But no significant effect was found for perceived effort on user engagement intentions

(10)

Possible explanations...

Consumers might become frustrated by ‘status benefits’, as they may induce feelings of inferiority (Dowling & Uncles, 1997)

Consumer benefits which are NOT tied to financial incentives are the most important indicators for the success of a loyalty program (Lee & Cunningham, 2001)

Effort is a motivational consequence rather than its’ predictor (Markland & Hardy, 1997)

Rather than simply one’s gender, social and psychological

mechanisms predict how individuals react towards social aspects

of digital environments (Nysveen, Pedersen & Thorbjørnsen, 2005).

(11)

LIMITATIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH

Larger sample size --> Barclay et al. (1995) fail to take into account the effect size, reliability, number of indicators and other factors that are known to

affect power (Henseler, Ringle & Sinkovics, 2009).

No differentiation in types of gamification elements or degrees of gamification.

Future research: to which degree is succes determined by the app savviness of a brand’s consumer base?

Also encouraged to study whether effort is a predictor or a motivational consequence within the context of loyalty programs within branded apps.

And: whether customers become loyal to the rewards or to the branded app.

Potentially negative effects: over-consuming, privacy concerns, etc.?

More specific indicators, e.g. 4 types of social benefits.

(12)

D I S C U S S I O N . . .

THANK YOU

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

How does the junction of intrinsic rewards, specifically those facilitated by the use of gamification elements, extrinsic rewards and perceived effort affect the user engagement

The first test is conducted with the variable in which the discount is already subtracted from the spending amount. Table 4.7 contains the output of this test. In order to see whether

Product involvement also showed a partially mediating effect in the relationship between the differences in the types of customers and LP enrollment, explaining a margin

This research focused on the tensions customized versus standardized system, small scope versus large scope, bottom-up versus top-down and big bang versus

The purpose of this study was to get insight into the reactions of consumers toward a retailer loyalty program withdrawal, by taking into account the level of progress the consumer

O’Brien  and  Jones  (1995)  see  aspirational  value  as  an  impact  on  consumer’s  behavior. 

Thirdly, to examine heterogeneity in customers responses toward different loyalty programs by means of including two sets of moderating variables (1)

As well as the first section, respondents need to report the degree of agreement or disagreement (in a 5-point scale) towards several statements concerning the