The role of gamification in fostering employee involvement in innovation

Technological development and globalization have created a highly competitive environment, one which requires organizations to stay one step ahead of their rivals. Consequently, top-performing organizations prioritize innovation as a critical component of their business processes. One way to boost innovation is to engage all members of the organization, thus making effective innovation management essential for improving efficiency and enhancing implementation. Getting the entire organization involved remains one of the most significant challenges in business innovation and entrepreneurship (Furstenthal et al., 2022). In this context, managers play a key role by optimizing the ideation process and cultivating a culture of innovation. Employees can collectively play an essential role in this process. Some remain closer to consumers and possess a strong understanding of the organization's core interests. Others offer robust industrial and specialized knowledge compared to external users (Stieglitz and Hassannia, 2016). Leveraging a company's internal innovation capabilities can therefore enhance innovation while fostering an environment that encourages innovative thinking (Viberg et al., 2020). The resulting challenge is to develop strategies that motivate and involve diverse employees, overcoming the natural inertia and alienation from the innovation process. Gamification is one of the various techniques proposed to address this challenge, and is gaining significant attention.

Gamification is defined as the use of game design elements in non-gaming environments to enhance motivation, enjoyment, and engagement while performing complex tasks or achieving specific goals (Deterding et al., 2011; Harwood and Garry, 2015; Robson et al., 2016). Examples of these elements include badges, leaderboards, and challenges, which are used to create incentives and structure progress. For instance, sales teams may receive points and progress badges for reaching specific targets, with leaderboards displaying performance to encourage friendly competition. Gamification should be distinguished from digital or traditional games, as well as from reward and loyalty programs. While the latter focuses on incentivizing behavior through point accumulation, gamification is characterized by explicit rules, defined objectives, and the inclusion of extrinsic motivational elements. Companies have employed gamification to increase employee efficiency (Robson et al., 2016), improve the work environment (Hammedi et al., 2021), and train employees to adopt best practices (Khalil et al., 2018).

Gamification appears particularly useful for fostering participation and performance, particularly for tasks that are monotonous and repetitive (Ruggiu et al., 2022). Additionally, gamification has often been applied in education (Capatina et al., 2024; Dah et al., 2024; Zeybek and Saygi, 2024), healthcare (Sestino et al., 2025; Damasevicius et al., 2023), and marketing (Bauer et al., 2020; Li and Aumeboonsuke, 2025; Malik et al., 2025; Silva et al., 2023; Vega and Camarero, 2024), demonstrating positive outcomes across various fields. These findings are promising for business contexts, although the specific characteristics of organizational processes, particularly innovation, require careful consideration, as results from other fields may not be directly transferable.

This technique has been employed in various innovation contexts, such as idea generation, crowdsourcing, and collaborative innovation, to enhance the effectiveness of innovation projects (Gimenez-Fernandez et al., 2021; Abril et al., 2024). Several authors have proposed a conceptual framework for gamification that includes three components: game mechanisms (e.g. points, badges, leaderboards, and challenges), player types (e.g. experts, enthusiasts, and achievers), and context (e.g. type of open innovation project and desired outcomes) (Milutinović et al., 2018; Rodrigues et al., 2019).

Overall, the research suggests that gamification can help address innovation challenges (Abril et al., 2024). While gamification remains a growing area of research, evidence of its effectiveness in addressing innovation challenges and supporting collaborative innovation practices remains limited (Abril et al., 2024; Alsaad and Durugbo, 2021; Patrício et al., 2022). More research is needed to further explore the internal mechanisms that enable successful gamification interventions (Eger et al., 2025), the collective and team-level effects (Schmidt et al., 2023), and their sustainable effects over time (Peciura and Zukauskaite, 2024). Overall, it remains unclear how gamification impacts innovation, particularly in relation to employee involvement.

Therefore, the research question addressed by this article is: What are the outcomes of applying gamification as a tool to foster employee involvement in innovation? In line with this, the main aim of this research is to understand how gamification can promote employees' involvement in innovation. This study also addresses the following specific objectives: (1) to analyze the outcomes, benefits, and drawbacks of implementing gamification in the workplace, and (2) to identify barriers to integrating gamification into innovation management.

The following section presents the theoretical foundations that support the qualitative study developed in this article.

Understanding gamification in organizational settings requires a theoretical foundation that explains how and why game elements influence employee behavior. This article builds on the following two main theoretical frameworks: Flow Theory and Self-Determination Theory (SDT).

Flow is a concept introduced by Csikszentmihalyi (1990) to describe a state of immersion and enjoyment often experienced in games. In this state, individuals feel completely engaged in and rewarded by the tasks, becoming so immersed that they lose track of time and space, as if they have entered a different reality. In gamification activities, employees may even experience a reduced perception of being at work (Butler and Spoelstra, 2024). One primary consequence of flow is a strong commitment to tasks and challenges, which can benefit performance. Several studies have explored gamification in the workplace through the flow theory lens, highlighting outcomes such as motivation (e.g. Liu and Gao, 2025; Silic et al., 2020), engagement (Gupta et al., 2022), performance (e.g. Jacob et al., 2022; Cardador et al., 2017), and creativity (e.g. Liu and Gao, 2025). As Liu and Gao (2025) stress, these positive outcomes result from inherent characteristics of games, particularly “clear goals, immediate feedback, and balanced skill-challenge alignment” (p. 3). Flow is therefore important for explaining how gamification supports employee involvement, since immersion promotes sustained participation in organizational activities.

A complementary perspective is provided by SDT, introduced by Deci and Ryan (2000) to explain an individual's pursuit of goals. This theory distinguishes between intrinsic and extrinsic types of motivation. Intrinsic motivation stems from the inherent satisfaction derived from the activity itself, including enjoyment and the development of competence. Extrinsic motivation is linked to external rewards and penalties, such as prizes and sanctions. The literature on gamification relates intrinsic motivators to autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Butler and Spoelstra, 2024; Van den Broeck et al., 2021; Abril et al., 2024; Huang and Zhou, 2025), while extrinsic motivators are related to external rewards and recognition. When gamification is applied to innovation, these extrinsic and intrinsic motivations drive creativity and participation (Abril et al., 2024).

Supported by these two theories, gamification is associated with hedonic, social, and utilitarian outcomes. Hedonic outcomes are the playfulness, fun, and enjoyment in gamification activities. They are linked to intrinsic motivation (Abril et al., 2024; Capatina et al., 2024; Eger et al., 2025; Jacob et al., 2022) and to the flow state and immersion (Jacob et al., 2022; Liu and Gao, 2025; Torresan and Hinterhuber, 2023), promoting engagement and continued participation (Abril et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022; Sestino et al., 2025; Capatina et al., 2024). Social outcomes concern relationship building and community. In gamification, these outcomes are associated with team building, collaboration, and status (Abril et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022; Sestino et al., 2025; Capatina et al., 2024; Jacob et al., 2022) and are consistent with the relatedness component of SDT. Finally, utilitarian outcomes are the functional and instrumental benefits, including goal achievement and performance (Abril et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022; Schmidt et al., 2023; Torresan and Hinterhuber, 2023; Jacob et al., 2022; Peciura and Zukauskaite, 2024) and extrinsic rewards (Abril et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022). As such, they are often linked to extrinsic motivation as defined by SDT.

The following sections review the literature on gamification in three areas: its application in the workplace, the mechanisms through which rewards operate, and its role in promoting innovation.

Gamification has garnered attention for its role in enhancing motivation and engagement across various fields. In the workplace, gamification satisfies several employee needs, including the need for social interaction, competition, feedback, growth, and goal attainment (Girdauskiene et al., 2022), by transforming routine tasks into meaningful activities (Abril et al., 2024; Capatina et al., 2024; Jacob et al., 2022; Liu and Gao, 2025).

Recent research on workplace gamification is summarized in Table 1. These contributions cover domains that have traditionally been associated with gamification (e.g. education and training), while also demonstrating an increasing interest in topics such as creativity, collaboration, and productivity, showing a wide range of outcomes at the individual, team, and organizational levels.

Individual-level findings emphasize the motivational and experiential aspects, while group-level work addresses collaboration and coordination. Organizational-level perspectives link gamification to productivity and cultural change. This range indicates that gamification is examined not only as an individual motivational tool but also as a mechanism that shapes collective practices and broader organizational processes, demonstrating its strategic importance for managers and companies. These recent contributions also support the idea that outcomes are associated with both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, and cover hedonic (e.g. well-being), utilitarian (e.g. productivity), and social dimensions (e.g. teamwork, collaboration, and cultural change).

Overall, the literature suggests that incorporating game elements into enterprise systems triggers employees' play instinct (Jacob et al., 2022) and can enhance the perceived hedonic value, encouraging knowledge acquisition and sharing (Capatina et al., 2024; Nair et al., 2022). In turn, this has been linked to improved organizational performance (Jacob et al., 2022; Jacobides et al., 2024). Gamification strategically rewards employees by providing goal-oriented paths, immediate feedback, and progress tracking (Alsaad and Durugbo, 2021). From a psychological perspective, gamification elicits experiences of autonomy, competition, enjoyment, self-efficacy, collaboration, and competence (Cardador et al., 2017).

Moreover, the benefits of gamification extend beyond its hedonic aspects to include utilitarian and social benefits. The utilitarian benefits encompass increased productivity, cognitive and functional enhancements, creative problem-solving, faster time to action, and improved usefulness and ease of use (Girdauskiene et al., 2022). In addition, some authors argue that personalized gamification systems, which adapt to personality traits or player types, will be more engaging than uniform systems aimed solely at achieving a predetermined goal (Klock et al., 2020).

While the literature highlights the expected positive outcomes of integrating gamification in the workplace, it also identifies important limitations and challenges. Gamification is not a guaranteed solution; it must be designed and adjusted to the business context (Dah et al., 2024; Ikhide et al., 2022; Cardador et al., 2017). Clear rules, transparent rewards, and immediate feedback are therefore necessary to ensure positive experiences (Schmidt et al., 2023; Cardador et al., 2017; Abril et al., 2024).

Another important concern is long-term effectiveness. Novelty-driven impacts may fade or even reverse if not integrated into continuous cycles (Torresan and Hinterhuber, 2023). While the long-term efficacy of gamification remains uncertain (Jacob et al., 2022), recent contributions emphasize inherent limits in sustaining engagement and motivation over time (Liu and Gao, 2025). Gamification also raises concerns regarding ethics. If perceived as coercive, it can generate stress and negatively impact employee well-being (Butler and Spoelstra, 2024; Ikhide et al., 2022; Liu and Gao, 2025). Additionally, workplace gamification can diminish privacy due to extensive data collection and monitoring, ultimately threatening autonomy and self-determination, and eroding employee trust (Butler and Spoelstra, 2024; Ruggiu et al., 2022).

Central to this discussion are the reward structures and game elements that operationalize gamification in practice. These mechanisms determine whether gamification promotes sustained involvement or fails to engage employees, making them a critical focus of current literature. The literature identifies a variety of reward mechanisms used in gamification that motivate, engage, and influence user behavior towards desired outcomes (Table 2).

Interestingly, gamification mechanisms are widely adaptable in training (Capatina et al., 2024; Torresan and Hinterhuber, 2023) and innovation (Abril et al., 2024; Jacob et al., 2022) contexts, where points, levels, feedback, badges, and leaderboards are all applied. Conversly, in productivity-oriented contexts, such as gig work or platform operations (Mao et al., 2024; Vasudevan and Chan, 2022), gamification seems to rely more heavily on tangible bonuses, prizes, and competitive rankings.

Another important aspect is the relationship between these mechanisms and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In the workplace, gamification offers significant benefits to employees, including goal-oriented paths, immediate feedback, visible progress, and reinforcement of good performance (Alsaad and Durugbo, 2021). Some mechanisms, such as badges and feedback, support intrinsic needs by fostering competence, relatedness, and mastery (Abril et al., 2024; Capatina et al., 2024; Eger et al., 2025; Ikhide et al., 2022; Liu and Gao, 2025). Others, such as tangible prizes and bonuses, clearly reinforce extrinsic motivation and behavior change (Abril et al., 2024; Mao et al., 2024; Ruggiu et al., 2022; Vasudevan and Chan, 2022). The literature emphasizes that the excessive or arbitrary use of extrinsic rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation and lead to reduced sustained engagement once rewards are removed (Dah et al., 2024). Therefore, a balance between social, hedonic, and utilitarian outcomes is recommended (Abril et al., 2024).

Nevertheless, effectiveness is not automatic; appropriate interventions and mechanisms must align with context and participants (Abril et al., 2024; Gupta et al., 2022; Torresan and Hinterhuber, 2023). Gupta et al. (2022) suggest that context-specific factors include organization-related aspects (e.g. industry and leadership), employee-related (e.g. generation, competence, stress), and job-related aspects (e.g. task congruence). Motivation, enjoyment, and flow are identified as primary psychological outcomes of gamification that shape reward mechanisms. Accordingly, employees may be driven by rewards, recognition, and status, or by adventure, making different types of mechanisms (e.g. prizes, leaderboards, or quests) more suitable for different player profiles. Additionally, while extrinsic rewards may stimulate participation, they also risk undermining intrinsic motivation (Abril et al., 2024; Dah et al., 2024; Liu and Gao, 2025). Hence, it remains unclear under what conditions gamification in the workplace increases employee motivation, effectiveness, and performance, particularly regarding innovation processes (Abril et al., 2024). Therefore, managers need to consider the types of employees (or player profiles) involved when implementing a gamification reward system.

The literature suggests that gamification can play a relevant role across all phases of innovation, including framing and ideation, screening and portfolio management, development and implementation, and commercialization (Abril et al., 2024). It supports organizations in overcoming challenges, fostering an innovation-oriented culture, and accelerating time-to-market (Abril et al., 2024; Liu and Gao, 2025; Mosleh et al., 2025; Patrício et al., 2022).

Studies have linked innovation to motivation, as intrinsically motivated individuals are more likely to overcome obstacles and adopt a proactive attitude toward their work (Howard et al., 2016; Van Tuin et al., 2020). These individuals may be driven by the satisfaction and sense of competence derived from the task itself rather than external rewards (Nair et al., 2022). According to Nair et al. (2022), employee involvement in innovation encompasses leadership support, organizational culture, employee motivation, and job resources. Hence, gamification emerges as a tool that can enhance employee motivation to innovate by making work activities more fun, engaging, and interactive (Sailer and Homner, 2020).

Aligned with conclusions on gamification in the workplace, the effectiveness of gamification in innovation depends on aligning the type of intervention with the underlying motivational drivers and the intended outcomes (Abril et al., 2024). Indeed, it is not the mere presence of points, badges, or rewards that explains success, but the creation of positive and gameful experiences such as enjoyment, absorption, and creative thinking, which mediate the link between gamification and innovation culture (Schmidt et al., 2023). Voluntary participation and cooperative dynamics are shown to be particularly relevant approaches for fostering innovation through gamification (Schmidt et al., 2023).

Abril et al. (2024), who systematized the literature on the application of gamification in innovation processes, suggest that hedonic-driven interventions are the most prevalent approach, particularly in the commercialization of innovations. According to these authors, in early stages of the innovation process, collaborative and hedonic-driven interventions stimulate creativity by fostering psychological safety, autonomy, and playful engagement. During screening and portfolio management, game mechanisms such as competitions and social points support collective decision-making through extrinsic motivation and relatedness. In development and implementation, gamified rewards and narratives can be utilized to extend innovation processes beyond the employee base and engage customers in value co-creation, drawing on emotional and extrinsic drivers. Finally, in commercialization, hedonic interventions help accelerate adoption by enhancing employees' emotional and cognitive responses, which in turn increase perceived competitive advantage.

Beyond these positive perspectives, the literature also highlights important risks in innovation. Gamification may lead to value co-destruction if perceived as a disguised form of control (Mosleh et al., 2025; Schmidt et al., 2023), consequently failing to involve employees in innovation. Moreover, managerial preference for short-term feasibility can undermine long-term creativity, limiting the contribution of gamification to sustained innovation (Mosleh et al., 2025). These challenges suggest that gamification must be carefully tailored to context, balancing hedonic, social, and utilitarian outcomes while avoiding overreliance on either intrinsic or extrinsic rewards.

The literature also provides suggestions on the application of gamification to open innovation contexts, which can be used to overcome organizational inertia, especially in the ideation and implementation phases (Abril et al., 2024), and help create participatory environments that enhance collaboration (Mosleh et al., 2025; Patrício et al., 2022). Customer involvement in design is another recurring contribution, with gamification enabling value co-creation (Abril et al., 2024) and supporting multidisciplinary team interactions (Patrício et al., 2022). Broader applications include mobilizing diverse stakeholders such as knowledge workers, middle managers, and even external investors, thereby extending the value of gamification beyond traditional employee groups (Abril et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022). Despite promising applications, empirical studies in organizational settings remain scarce, particularly those involving employee-driven and open innovation initiatives (Mosleh et al., 2025; Patrício et al., 2022).

Additionally, definitions and causal pathways remain inconsistent, with intrinsic, extrinsic, emotional, and cognitive mechanisms still under-specified (Abril et al., 2024). Unintended consequences, such as demotivation, manipulation, or conflict, are expected to be especially salient in open innovation contexts where diverse external actors are involved (Abril et al., 2024; Mosleh et al., 2025), also pointing to the need for further studies in this area.

The main aim of this research is to understand how gamification can foster employees' involvement in innovation. Additionally, this study considers the following specific objectives: (1) to analyze the outcomes, benefits, and drawbacks of implementing gamification in the workplace, and (2) to identify barriers to the integration of gamification into innovation management.

To achieve these objectives, this study adopted a qualitative approach, utilizing semi-structured interviews, due to the scarcity of literature on closed/open innovation and gamification, as well as the nature of the research questions and objectives. The interview guide consisted of open-ended questions that allowed participants to reflect on their experiences. The questions were developed from the themes identified in the literature review and aimed to explore the outcomes of applying gamification as a tool to promote innovation, with a particular focus on employee involvement. The interview guide was organized into two parts: the first part examined the innovation process in retail companies, with emphasis on employee involvement, while the second part investigated the use of gamification in the workplace to promote innovation and assess its outcomes. It was pilot tested with 1 R&D manager to ensure clarity and relevance.

Ethical principles recommended for social science research (Clark et al., 2021) were applied in this study. Prior to participation, participants received complete information regarding the study objectives and the data collection and analysis procedures. Participation was voluntary, and all participants had the option to refuse to participate or withdraw their data at any stage. Participation was also anonymous and confidential: all identifying details were omitted or replaced with pseudonyms, records were stored securely, and all audio recordings were destroyed after the analysis was completed.

Participants were selected through purposive sampling, targeting Innovation and R&D managers from large retail companies operating in Portugal, based on their expertise and leadership in innovation within the retail industry. While retail remains underexplored in the gamification and innovation literature, it is a particularly relevant sector due to its high competitiveness and innovation intensity, particularly in Portugal. Eleven managers agreed to participate in the study (Table 3). Data was collected during the second quarter of 2023. The sample was diverse in terms of age (ranging from 28 to 51) and educational backgrounds (including Bachelor's, Master's, and PhD degrees). These participants held varied positions—from Operations and Transformation Manager to Open Innovation Leader—and represented sectors such as sports and goods retail, clothing, and online retail.

The sample size was considered adequate based on both data saturation and the principle of information power. Data saturation was reached by the sixth interview, with no substantially new themes emerging thereafter (Braun and Clarke, 2021; Clark et al., 2021). Information power was also high, as the study had a narrow research aim, a specific sample of experienced innovation managers, and strong theoretical grounding (Malterud et al., 2016). Accordingly, the 11 interviews conducted were considered sufficient to generate robust insights and address the study's objectives.

Interviews had an average length of 31 min and 12 s and were recorded with prior authorization for transcription. The transcripts were analyzed using a theory-driven, yet also inductive, coding process, which allowed for the inclusion of new categories that emerged from the data. As such, initial codes were derived from the literature on gamification and innovation and were refined iteratively through comparison with the data, allowing new inductive categories to emerge. To validate the coding, two researchers independently coded all transcripts and then compared their results. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus discussions to ensure the consistency and reliability of the analysis. The list of codes is presented in Table 4. NVivo (version 1.7.7) software was used to facilitate the systematic organization, coding, and interpretation of the interview data.

All participants reported having experimented with a gamification approach for their employees at some point. For example, one respondent noted, “At one point, we had a platform to bring ideas in-house. It even had a systemically structured award issue” (Int 4), while another stated, “We implemented a gamification strategy in a very short and very surgical way” (Int 9). Several interviewees characterized their gamification initiatives as on-off efforts (Int 1, 5, 6, 11) but expressed a desire to adopt a more structured program. Respondents identified that gamification had been implemented primarily in the context of innovation (Int 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11) and, to a lesser extent, in HR-related areas such as mandatory training (Int 1, 3, 9, 10). The most frequently mentioned reasons for implementing gamification included:

1. Engaging employees in company activities.

2. Expanding the pool of ideas.

3. Recognizing merit and rewarding outstanding projects.

4. Encouraging the repetition of good practices.

5. Stimulating a continuous process of innovation.

Companies reported using various types of gamification reward systems, such as idea/project competitions, points systems, prizes, and monetary incentives (Bekius and Gomes, 2023). Respondents also claimed that the most effective approach was a retroactive incentive that rewards not only the initial idea but also the project's impact on the company. This approach acknowledges that innovation is valuable only when implemented (Int 7, 8).

The following sections examine the consequences of introducing gamification into the workplace, as expressed by participants. Additionally, we elaborate on the obstacles and barriers to implementing gamification.

In accordance with the principles of Self-Determination Theory, participants' assessments of the outcomes of gamification on human behavior were categorized into three distinct groups: hedonic, social, and utilitarian. Within these groups, subcategories derived from both empirical evidence and participant perspectives were highlighted. In addition to the ones listed in Table 4, the following subcategories were added based on their prevalence in the testimonies: Ownership (i.e. getting involved and owning the project), fostering a culture of innovation, peer-to-peer communication, career management, and career progression. It is worth noting that most of these subcategories were consistently mentioned by respondents, regardless of the type of gamification initiatives they had experienced, findings which align with those of Patrício et al. (2022).

The results underscore the need for tailored approaches that align with human dynamics within a company. The outcomes and rewards achievable through gamification are highly dependent on the company's culture. Consequently, respondents indicated that the rewards associated with the three elements were of similar importance, with a single gamified initiative triggering effects across all three dimensions. They also emphasized that the types of incentives are interlinked, suggesting that the most effective approach is one that impacts all three subcategories simultaneously. To better analyze the collected results, we examine each element of SDT separately.

Respondents identified increased internal motivation, a sense of purpose, the power of accomplishment, and ownership as the most important rewards in terms of hedonic outcomes (Table 5). For example, one respondent stated,

Previous research has tacitly characterized the functional role of entertainment as fulfilling hedonic needs. Indeed, hedonic components are closely intertwined with intrinsic motivation, and serve as indicators of arousal, contentment, and enjoyment (Tamborini et al., 2011). Based on this information, our research recognizes gamification as an effective means to motivate employees.

The prominence of ownership, sense of purpose, and the power of accomplishment reported by respondents is consistent with intrinsic motivation, particularly in terms of autonomy and competence. The importance of clear goals and immediate feedback, which promotes engagement and continued participation, aligns with indications from previous literature (Abril et al., 2024; Jacob et al., 2022; Liu and Gao, 2025).

According to our findings, team building and co-creation best illustrate the social outcomes of gamification (Table 5). Interviewees stated that increasing team spirit, promoting a better working environment, and enriching the culture of innovation are among the most beneficial results. For instance, one respondent remarked, “It created enthusiasm and interaction between departments and employees, which became very advantageous” (Int 3), while another observed that employees experienced greater status and visibility among colleagues and top management:

Additionally, respondents noted that individuals outside the field of innovation saw gamification as an opportunity to break from routine and contribute openly with their experience (Int 9).

Although these social mechanisms do not significantly alter the type of incentives valued, as hedonic ones do, their impact on reinforcing company culture is more pronounced, and influences a broader group of people (Krath et al., 2021). Thus, social mechanisms should be viewed as essential for embedding an innovation culture within the organization (Mizuyama et al., 2019; Abril et al., 2024). Furthermore, these social outcomes are consistent with the relatedness component of SDT and with gamification mechanisms that activate recognition and status (Abril et al., 2024; Capatina et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022).

Utilitarian outcomes are associated with external motivators that enhance employees' productivity, efficiency, and problem-solving skills, ultimately impacting career development and management. As one respondent noted, “Rewarding and giving visibility to projects also ends up bringing value to the person because it boosts career progression—in other words, having a continuous incentive and not just an isolated award” (Int 6).

This category also encompasses common prizes and monetary incentives linked to gamification initiatives. Several interviewees (Int 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11) indicated that external incentives, such as improved problem-solving skills, critical thinking, and increased efficiency, should not only be rewarded in gamified initiatives but also be used to evaluate employee commitment and performance. One participant remarked, “I think that having an innovative mind and creativity are aspects that have to be valued in terms of managing this person's career” (Int 8).

Moreover, respondents emphasized the measurability afforded by gamification strategies, as these approaches provide both visibility in terms of the work performed and a means to measure the impact a project has, dimensions that have traditionally been overlooked by management (Int 5, 8, 10, 11). In addition, gamification appears to mitigate risk aversion, thereby fostering a culture that encourages risk-taking in innovation and prototype development. As one respondent stated, “I think it helps to take risks, especially when it comes to innovation and prototypes; there's still too much of a culture of fear, of 'I'm not going to take a risk'.” Frequent feedback was also highlighted as a critical benefit, with respondents stressing the value of both top-down and market feedback in assessing performance. The complete list of utilitarian outcomes is presented in Table 5.

These findings align with extant literature suggesting that gamification supports productivity and performance (Girdauskiene et al., 2022; Jacob et al., 2022; Jacobides et al., 2024). However, as it is based on managers' views, it is interesting to note that the list of utilitarian outcomes is particularly diversified and detailed, comprising perspectives that contribute to more general implications for the organization (e.g. fostering productivity, creative thinking, and continuous learning), which can be considered transferable skills that benefit the company beyond innovation. This reveals the strategic nature of involving employees in innovation through gamification, which has been largely disregarded by the gamification literature so far.

Overall, these results support the view that both continuous and single gamified initiatives can trigger hedonic, social, and utilitarian outcomes, and that effectiveness depends on tailoring mechanisms such as feedback, recognition, and tangible prizes to the organizational context and player profiles (Abril et al., 2024; Capatina et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022).

The topic most frequently addressed by respondents was the expectations created in employees when a gamification strategy is applied as a reward for the best idea or project. To this point, our sample highlighted the frustration employees can experience when the gamified experience fails to meet their expectations. For example, one respondent noted, “The problem is more in the innovation filter because when you ask an expert in the field to evaluate and follow up, you can see some resistance here, which ends up creating a false promise in the natural teams and creating a burden for the organization” (Int 9). Additionally, opening up the responsibility for generating ideas can sometimes create a false promise that those ideas will be implemented, which may lead to employee disillusionment. As one interviewee explained, “There are those who think that we're going to have ideas, we're going to create ideas and we're going to change the world … But it doesn't always work like that because then there's the question of financing the idea we have, the internal talent, the internal capacity to make it work” (Int 8).

Another concern raised was the potential for over-gamification, where employees might engage solely to obtain a reward rather than out of a genuine interest in contributing valuable ideas. Some interviewees (Int 4, 9) suggested that the generalized use of gamification strategies across various domains could lead to a decrease or stagnation in project performance if additional rewards are not provided. As one respondent stated, “I welcome a certain depth to the process: as a very personal opinion of mine, I think that if this becomes commonplace, people will only participate or contribute if there's a prize at the end and they won't bother to actually bring an idea to the table” (Int 9).

Different from expectations, none of the respondents identified competition as a disadvantage of gamification (Seaborn and Fels, 2015). On the contrary, when linked to healthy competition, it was seen as beneficial for enhancing employee performance. Moreover, 7 out of 11 interviewees did not highlight any disadvantages regarding gamification when explicitly asked about this topic.

The most common barrier identified by interviewees is company culture (Int 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11), coupled with a lack of alignment among top management regarding this approach. Respondents highlighted that company culture plays a critical role in successful innovation strategies and in the decision to implement gamified approaches. For instance, one participant stated, “I see this perhaps in the culture; I think it has to be a company with a certain culture and from that certain culture there is also a certain human framework so that the process is effectively implemented and is adequate” (Int 8), while another noted, “In addition, there needs to be a certain acculturation of the company, especially managers, to innovation” (Int 4). Furthermore, the gap between implementation and the beliefs or mentality of top management was reported as significantly impacting the motivation to pursue an effective gamification strategy: “If the top management doesn't believe in and is aligned with investing in this type of concept in order to go further and have innovation present, it will be difficult for them to pass on this way of working to the rest of the organization” (Int 1).

In another context, participants highlighted a lack of expertise in workplace gamification, resulting in a lack of well-defined, comprehensive frameworks for sustaining gamification strategies that shape innovation dynamics (Seaborn and Fels, 2015). Consequently, the potential benefits of this strategy remain elusive. As one respondent remarked, “You have to think about the robust tool that makes the process viable. Sometimes it doesn't even have to be digital, it can be something analogue, but there has to be the process, the tool that provides feedback and continuity to the initiative” (Int 8). Additionally, interviewees reported that they lacked sufficient time and resources to develop the strategy internally or to pursue outsourcing solutions. The complete list of barriers identified by participants is presented in Table 6.

It is also important to note that, as in many areas of business and employee management, culture represents a significant obstacle to implementing gamification (Sieber et al., 2022). Culture influences team morale, productivity, conflict resolution, decision-making, and hiring, essentially every facet that drives a company forward (Sieber et al., 2022). Consequently, the acceptance of this “new approach” is highly contingent upon the underlying company culture. Our findings align with the existing literature, indicating that leadership style significantly influences both the acceptance and success of a gamified strategy. When top management supports gamification and recognizes its potential value, the necessary resources and buy-in are more likely to be secured.

Based on the interviews, six recurring enablers emerged as essential for gamification to promote employee involvement in innovation (Table 7). These included clear and relevant objectives, immediate feedback, measurable performance, positive reinforcement, social comparison and communication, and team building.

According to the participants, rather than operating in isolation, these enablers only produced positive outcomes when embedded in a structured, robust, and ongoing process, which is essential for realizing the potential benefits of gamifying the workplace. Without such a process, the advantages of gamification are difficult to fulfill. These key enablers are therefore essential to embrace gamification as a strategic tool for enhancing innovation culture. In this sense, participants described gamification as contributing not only to individual engagement but also to collective alignment, visibility of contributions, and integration of efforts across teams, reinforcing its role as a strategic support for innovation processes.

Most companies are already opening their innovation processes to external inputs from customers, universities, and other areas beyond the company's R&D team (Chesbrough, 2006; Hofstetter et al., 2017). In parallel, our interviewees described using gamification to mobilize the internal employee base for innovation, positioning it as an inward-facing complement to external sourcing.

Organizations seek to enhance employee performance, involvement, and ownership in order to align leadership styles with employees' best interests and foster productivity (Byron et al., 2023; Hanges et al., 2016). In line with these objectives, an increasing number of companies are adopting work gamification, and the potential benefits of this strategy have been noted in the literature (Cardador et al., 2017; Krath et al., 2021). Our findings corroborate this, as all companies interviewed had already implemented gamification in various contexts, particularly through best-idea/project competitions and reward systems.

Many of the positive outcomes identified in the literature were also reported in our interviews, such as autonomy, ownership, a sense of purpose, team building, and awards, which foster employee participation and engagement. By reinforcing entrepreneurial attributes and stimulating repetitive behavior, gamification encourages deeper employee involvement in projects and continuous performance improvement. Moreover, by providing real-time and tangible performance feedback, gamification contributes to career management and progression in two ways: directly, by offering new metrics for peer comparison, and indirectly, by fueling the ambition to continually achieve more and enhance involvement across various projects. It is interesting to note that the findings were consistent across participants and retail subsectors, which may reflect both the focus on large companies and the highly competitive and dynamic nature of the retail industry. Taken together, this reframes gamification as a strategic management tool.

Among the interesting findings is the fact that respondents did not perceive competition as harmful; on the contrary, when framed as “healthy,” it supported employee performance and engagement. This finding contrasts with earlier concerns in the literature (Seaborn and Fels, 2015) and suggests that competitive elements can be effective when embedded in recognition and status pathways and supported by a collaborative culture (Abril et al., 2024; Capatina et al., 2024; Patrício et al., 2022; Sieber et al., 2022). Additionally, the findings also highlighted the strategic potential of gamification that involves the employee base in innovation processes. Managers also valued outcomes that extended beyond the focal innovation tasks, such as problem-solving, critical thinking, and creative thinking, which are arguably transversal skills and therefore benefit the overall performance.

However, the study highlights that the strategic value of gamification is conditional. The barriers identified by managers, such as cultural resistance, lack of expertise, limited resources, and misalignment with top management, show that gamification cannot be effective in isolation. Its success depends on managerial design and integration into broader innovation governance. In this sense, gamification provides managers with a toolkit for shaping innovation culture and processes. Still, it requires deliberate calibration of rewards, metrics, and communication strategies to avoid disillusionment or short-termism. The role of managers is therefore central, as they transform gamification from an engagement technique into a strategic mechanism that structures how innovation is coordinated and sustained.

This study aimed to understand how gamification can foster employees' involvement in innovation. It addressed this by analyzing the associated outcomes, benefits, and drawbacks. In line with existing research, outcomes were clustered into three categories: hedonic, social, and utilitarian. The study demonstrates that integrating the employee base in innovation through gamification yields a wide range of outcomes that benefit both employees and the company in the long term. The results highlight the distinctive role of gamification as a coordination instrument. Beyond stimulating motivation, it structures innovation work: objectives align contributions, feedback surfaces progress, performance visibility enhances accountability, and social dynamics reinforce collaboration. Together, these findings suggest gamification functions less as an engagement add-on and more as a system embedded in innovation routines. Overall, this study demonstrates that gamification strategically enhances innovation by reinforcing key coordination mechanisms—clarity, feedback, measurability, and communication—that underpin collaborative innovation practices.

By linking theoretical foundations to practical applications in innovation management, this study advances the literature on gamification in organizational settings and deepens understanding of its role in business innovation. The findings confirm the relevance of Self-Determination Theory and Flow Theory while also extending their application to innovation practices. Specifically, gamification was shown to generate hedonic, social, and utilitarian outcomes that not only support autonomy, competence, and relatedness but also reinforce coordination mechanisms, goal clarity, feedback, measurability, and communication that structure innovation processes. This suggests that SDT's focus on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is necessary but insufficient; gamification also operates as a system-level instrument that embeds motivational drivers into organizational routines and collaboration.

While contributing to the still scarce literature on gamification applied to a more open innovation approach that encompasses the employee base, this study provides evidence that adds to the current knowledge, further demonstrating that gamification's effects extend beyond individual motivation, have a clear strategic role to develop transferable skills, and contribute to the overall productivity and efficiency of the organization and its employees. This study also demonstrates that the positive outcomes of gamification are evident in both companies with one-off and more structured approaches to gamification.

This study evidences the potential of gamification as a strategic tool to foster employee involvement in innovation. Gamification has been shown to stimulate internal motivation, foster ownership of projects, enhance collaboration through team building and knowledge dissemination, and contribute to career progression and measurable outcomes. Importantly, these outcomes can emerge even in one-off initiatives, demonstrating that gamification is a viable approach to mobilizing employees beyond the innovation team. However, managers in our study stressed that the potential of gamification is higher when initiatives move beyond isolated efforts and are designed as structured and continuous processes.

In order to foster the success of gamification initiatives and, inherently, employee involvement, several key enablers should be considered. Clear objectives and associated metrics that evaluate contributions transparently are important for guiding employees' efforts and enabling them to track their contributions and performance. Immediate feedback should be provided through real and objective criteria, allowing employees to adjust their contributions and recognize progress in a timely manner. Managers should also adopt a balanced combination of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards (e.g. recognition and rewards) that better adapt to the profiles of the participants and promote not only their motivation to participate but also their effort and the quality of their contributions. Additionally, while social comparison can be used to promote competition among teams and participants, fostering communication and the sharing of ideas (e.g. peer-to-peer interactions, cross-departmental meetings, presentation events) can maximize the collaborative potential of innovation. Finally, these initiatives can also build team spirit and collaboration, while fostering a culture of innovation.

For managers initiating gamification, attention must be given to the barriers identified in this study, including cultural resistance, lack of expertise, limited resources, and insufficient alignment of top management. Anticipating and addressing these barriers is essential for success and may involve starting with small-scale pilots, demonstrating early wins, and securing leadership commitment before scaling up. For managers already adopting gamification to foster innovation, this research highlights the importance of continuously refining these practices. In line with our findings, managers should adopt an iterative approach that incorporates regular monitoring and performance-based adjustments. This proactive strategy not only enhances the effectiveness of the gamification process but also ensures that it remains a dynamic tool for fostering employee involvement and driving innovation over the long term.

While the findings primarily pertain to the retail sector, they may also be applicable to other industries characterized by a demand for continuous innovation, large and diverse workforces, and the need for cross-functional collaboration (e.g. hospitality, healthcare, manufacturing, logistics, and technology services). Moreover, industries facing high turnover and motivation challenges may particularly benefit from the potential contribution of gamification in encouraging employee involvement and strengthening innovation practices beyond retail.

This research is not without limitations. In addition to the limited number of participants, the sample was restricted to managers leading innovation teams, and thus excluded direct employee perspectives. The exclusive focus on the retail sector further constrains the generalizability of the findings across industries.

Future research should consider expanding the scope of analysis to include both managers and employees in order to capture a broader range of experiences and motivations. Comparative studies of other sectors, such as the manufacturing and IT industries, could reveal how gamification practices vary according to industry dynamics and innovation environments. Cross-national research may also offer valuable insights into how cultural factors influence the effectiveness and reception of gamification mechanisms in innovation processes.

Another promising avenue for future research lies in the use of longitudinal studies, which could examine how the motivational outcomes of gamification evolve over time and whether initial engagement leads to sustained innovation behaviors. Such extensions would help assess the durability and generalizability of the mechanisms identified in this study. Additionally, case study analyses of gamification implementation practices could provide practical insights into the impacts of objectives, feedback loops, and long-term follow-up strategies on the effectiveness of gamification.