A Preliminary Investigation of the Relationship Between Gamification and Organizational Socialization Outcomes: Does Gamification Live Up to Its Expectations?

The Concept of Gamification and Its Effects in the Organizational Context

Gamification, a term first coined in the social media industry in 2008, describes the process of incorporating game design elements into non-gaming contexts (Deterding et al., 2011). The inspiration behind gamification comes from video games, which are known to entertain and engage users intensively for a long time. Based on this assumption, it was thought those game elements could be incorporated within non-gaming products and services to provide enjoyment and potentially increase consumer retention.

In their early attempts to conceptualize gamification, Huotari and Hamari (2012) described it as a process in which standard services are enriched with elements that can lead to a playful experience. They also argued that it is not accurate to explain gamification in terms of the use of game-specific elements alone, as not every game element creates a playful experience, and there is no fixed set of game elements. Instead, the essence of the concept of gamification should be goal-oriented, that is, creating playful experiences. Werbach (2014) takes a similar approach and argues that it is impossible to determine whether a system is gamified without considering the intentions of its creators or how the consumer perceives it. He proposes to define gamification as a process in which activities are transformed to be similar to a game.

Werbach and Hunter (2012) provided one of the first classifications of gamification elements, broken down into three tiers: dynamics, mechanics, and components. Dynamics refer to the basis of the activity being played, such as progress, narrative, obstacles, relationships, and emotions, that motivates users to take action. Mechanics are middle-level elements that encourage further involvement in gamified activities, such as challenges, collaboration, competition, resource gathering, feedback, and rewards. Finally, components are gameplay elements that directly represent the dynamics and mechanics of the game, such as badges, achievements, points, levels, leaderboards, avatars, tasks, and teams. It is essential to consider all three aspects and start from the upper tier when constructing gamification systems.

In the workplace, management often uses gamification to influence worker behavior broadly (Landers & Marin, 2021). Studies have shown that gamification can have positive effects on employee attitudes and behavior, such as increasing engagement (Girdauskienė et al., 2022), retention, and commitment to the organization (Hussain et al., 2018). In addition, gamified activities can also increase employee motivation (Cardador et al., 2016) and performance (Basit et al., 2021), as well as promote learning and the development of workplace social relationships (Stanculescu et al., 2016).

However, gamification in the workplace may not always lead to positive outcomes. It has been shown that it may negatively impact employee engagement and well-being, particularly if employees are not willing to participate in gamified activities (Hammedi et al., 2021). Additionally, gamification may include competitive elements that can lead to rivalry among employees, making new employees less likely to engage in idea generation within teams (Rink et al., 2013). In addition, some concerns about using game-like mechanics at work may violate ethical principles, such as exploiting employees through artificial motivation or using gamification as a surveillance tool, which creates privacy issues (Nyström, 2021). Finally, it is worth mentioning that gamification sometimes may face the consequences of the novelty effect (Koivisto & Hamari, 2014). Individuals tend to engage in gamified activities because they are new. This tendency fades away because people lose motivation over time if no changes are made in a gamified system.

Research on specific gamification elements has also yielded mixed results. For example, Costa et al. (2013) found that leaderboards were effective in promoting punctuality in regularly-scheduled meetings. On the other hand, other studies have suggested that making performance visible to others through leaderboards may have a detrimental effect on performance (Mollick & Rothbard, 2014).

Regardless of gamification’s positive or negative effects, its elements can be an inevitable part of the work environment in which new employees must work, adjust, and socialize.

Organizational Socialization

Organizational socialization, defined as the process through which a person adapts to a new work role in an organization (Wanberg, 2012), encompasses several aspects of an employee's integration into the workplace. It includes acquiring the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behavior patterns required to fit into the new job, as well as forming initial impressions of the new environment and evaluating job compatibility with individual expectations and long-term goals. Furthermore, new employees assess how well the organization meets their needs and if it is a good fit for them.

There is still no consensus on the duration of the organizational socialization process. However, some argue that it can continue throughout a person's career (Katz, 1980). Therefore, it is reasonable to distinguish two types of organizational socialization outcomes: proximal and distal. The proximal outcomes of organizational socialization indicate whether a newcomer’s socialization process is advancing. This outcomes group is also called adjustment indicators and is considered to occur at the beginning of the socialization process. Bauer et al. (2007) distinguished three leading indicators of adjustment: role clarity, task mastery, and social acceptance. Role clarity describes a degree of understanding of a new work role (Ellis et al., 2015), task mastery shows a newcomer’s capability to perform assigned tasks with confidence, and social acceptance indicates the extent to which the newcomers perceive themselves integrated into the team (Kammeyer-Mueller & Wanberg, 2003). Distal organizational socialization outcomes indicate a newcomer’s behavioral (job performance, turnover) and attitudinal (organizational commitment, job satisfaction, turnover intentions) changes in the long run. Some authors summarize the outcomes of socialization by perceived organizational insider status (Stamper & Masterson, 2002), thus noting the individual’s self-awareness of when employees perceive themselves as an insider within a particular organization.

The socialization of new employees can differ in each workplace because organizations can apply varying formal and informal actions to influence newcomers’ adjustment. These efforts can include one-time employee orientation and complex socialization procedures integrated into human resource management processes, such as formalized training or mentoring programs. Therefore, work-related factors are significant when it comes to adjusting new employees. For example, newcomers may find socializing more difficult in a large workgroup due to their members feeling less attached to each other or less frequently participating in collective activities (Forsyth, 2019). Also, remote work can change new employees’ identification compared to co-located counterparts (Bailey et al., 2017), resulting in difficulties for the organization in managing the workforce.

Gamification, Organizational Socialization, and the Current Study

Gamification elements can assure precision and clarity of work assignments, instant feedback on completed job tasks, and support that is received from an engaged social community (Koivisto & Hamari, 2019). These characteristics can play a critical role in how well employees adjust to their new organization. However, gamification effects on organizational socialization were not studied in detail and were primarily related to new hires’ onboarding experiences. Studies have shown that new employees enjoy gamified onboarding applications (Heimburger et al., 2020) and report increased engagement and motivation from using such applications with game-like features (Bell et al., 2020). Gamification is also associated with better information retrieval after new employees’ orientation programs (Brull et al., 2017). Finally, onboarding with gamification can help organizations improve new hires’ engagement, performance, and retention while better aligning it with learning and development initiatives (Laurano, 2013). Building upon these findings, it has been underscored that gamefulness plays a substantial role, particularly in the context of gamified onboarding processes (Jedel & Palmquist, 2021). The assertion here is that merely incorporating game elements into an onboarding system is not sufficient to elevate user experiences or boost engagement among new employees. Rather, thoughtful integration of gamefulness into the system's design is imperative to truly enhance and enrich the onboarding process.

In the discourse on gamification and employee socialization, it is also essential to consider the implications of recent changes in the work environment. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, remote work has been widely adopted and is now recognized as a standard practice across a multitude of industries (Didion et al., 2022). This change in work patterns has fundamentally redefined the dynamics of employment and magnified the importance of well-structured employee socialization and onboarding procedures. As highlighted in recent studies, newcomers often grapple with accessing relevant information in digital contexts, displaying proactivity, and receiving timely feedback—elements crucial for understanding their fit within the organization and its broader context (Petrilli et al., 2022). The rise in remote work underscores the increased relevance of these issues, necessitating innovative and effective solutions. As a part of these efforts, gamification has garnered attention for its potential to facilitate engagement and learning in the remote workplace. Theoretical propositions have suggested that by integrating gamified applications with virtual reality, companies might immerse newcomers in simulated work scenarios, thereby potentially facilitating the development of critical job skills (Russo et al., 2023). Additionally, the introduction of gamified challenges could expedite learning and foster collaboration among new hires. However, these propositions underline the need for a deeper understanding of how gamification intersects with the employee socialization process and its outcomes.

Notably, this highlights a gap in the existing literature where there has been a lack of direct investigation into the effects of gamification on proximal socialization outcomes, such as task mastery and social integration. Girdauskienė et al. (2022) found that gamification had a low impact on the clarity of job roles compared to other employee engagement antecedents. However, the actual effect size was not investigated. Also, the literature overview showed that gamification is related to such distal organizational socialization outcomes as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, or turnover intentions. However, mentioned studies primarily rely on employees’ opinions and expert interviews, or they are experimental studies that do not consider the whole work context.

Furthermore, in these studies, questions are often formulated directly through the general concept of gamification. However, not all employees have the same perception of what counts as gamification and what does not. Koivisto and Hamari (2019) criticize previous gamification research, stating that most of it treated gaming elements as a whole, and further research should be related to the assessment of the effectiveness of individual elements. Organizations also apply different gamification elements in their activities, so they will likely have different impacts on employee socialization.

Lastly, analysis of gamification showed arguments that gamification elements determine gamification's content. Therefore, the actual manifestation of gamification and its consequences should depend directly on the nature, quantity, and interaction of included gamification elements, which is usually overlooked in scientific research.

This study aims to provide a more nuanced understanding of the effects of gamification on organizational socialization by examining the specific elements that organizations incorporate and how they relate to socialization outcomes. This goal will be achieved by fulfilling the following objectives: 1) analyzing how the interaction with gamification elements is related to socialization variables, 2) identifying how socialization outcomes differ based on the presence or absence of certain gamification elements, and 3) examining the predictive properties of gamification-related factors on socialization outcomes when controlling for other sociodemographic and work-related variables.

Sample and Procedure

This study was organized by convenience sampling. The invitation to fill out the questionnaire was made public on various social media channels. The study was targeted only at employed people. The research followed all ethical requirements applicable to this type of research. Participants were given an informed consent form containing the study’s objectives, the possibility of voluntary withdrawal, the assurance of anonymity, and the purposes of the data use. It is important to note that there is no universally accepted definition of when socialization variables should manifest. In this preliminary investigation, the sample is not restricted to a specific duration of employment. Participants will subsequently be divided into two groups, based on their tenure within the organization, and analyzed to determine if any significant differences in socialization outcomes exist between these groups. Once established, these differences will be considered in subsequent data analysis.

A total of 161 responses were collected. Twelve responses (7.45%) were excluded from the study due to missing data. Further analysis was carried out on the responses of 129 women (86.58%) and 20 men (13.42%). Participants, on average, were 35.97 (SD = 11.27) years old. Almost two-thirds of the respondents had a university degree (N = 98; 65.77%), while the remaining had either a college degree (N = 21; 14.09%) or a high school education (N = 30; 20.13%).

Considering job-related variables, 45 subjects (30.20%) have not yet spent more than 1 year in their current job position, and 46 respondents (30.90%) indicated that they are currently working in a managerial position. Also, just over half of employees do not practice remote working to any extent (N = 91, 61.07%). The distribution of respondents by workgroup size was as follows: small-sized groups of 2 to 5 people (N = 62, 41.61%), medium-sized groups of 6 to 10 people (N = 33, 22.15%), large-sized groups of more than ten people (N = 44, 29.53%), individual work (N = 10, 6.71%).

Measures

Participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire composed of demographic variables, job-related variables (group size, job tenure, job role, and remote work), and variables measuring interactions with gamification elements and assessing the outcomes of organizational socialization—proximal (role clarity, social integration, task mastery) and distal (job satisfaction, organizational commitment (that is identification and internalization), turnover intentions, and perceived organizational insider status). The questionnaire was administered in Lithuanian.

A back-translation was applied if a particular measurement was unavailable in Lithuanian. Permission to use the instruments was granted by their authors.

Data Analysis

The data were processed using SPSS 24.0 software. For the overall data reporting, descriptive statistics criteria were used (means, standard deviations, percentages of response rates). In addition, the reliability of the instruments was checked by measuring their internal consistency (Cronbach α).

To align our statistical methods with the research objectives, we utilized the Pearson correlation coefficient for the first objective, which measured the relationship between variables. For the second objective, assessing the differences in socialization outcomes based on the presence or absence of certain gamification elements, we employed either the Student t-test or univariate analysis of variance, depending on the specific case. Finally, addressing the third objective of examining the predictive properties of gamification-related factors on socialization outcomes, we used a linear regression analysis with a backward procedure. The normality of data was assessed by skewness and kurtosis indicators. The values obtained fell from −0.7 to 0.7, suggesting that the data distribution is normal.

Future Research and Limitations

Given the disproportion between genders in this study, it would be beneficial to include a more significant number of males in future research to measure gamification’s effects in the workplace accurately. In addition, future research studies could explore a broader range of gamification elements. A limited number of the most popular gamification elements in the workplace were presented in this study. However, other potential elements could also be explored in-depth. Including a broader range of gamification elements would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of gamification on employees’ socialization process. Moreover, future research could explore the effects of gamification on employees in different types of workplaces. This study did not focus on any particular sector, but gamification may have different effects across industries. Also, it would be beneficial to adopt a more focused scope, targeting employees within a single organization that actively utilizes gamification for purposes such as socialization and onboarding. This proposed approach would yield a more finely detailed understanding of gamification effects within the uniform context of one organization. Such focused investigations could provide insights into the intersection of gamification strategies with the distinctive organizational culture and operational flow of the company, and how they shape the socialization process in a tangible, everyday work setting. Finally, future research could examine the long-term effects of gamification on employee socialization. This study used a cross-sectional design, but there are indications that gamification could have different effects over time.

Practical Implications

Given the relatively low efficiency and potential risks of gamification, managers and HR professionals should carefully consider the appropriateness of gamification applications, that is, what goals and outcomes are to be achieved with it, what consequences it may cause, and other relevant factors before embarking on gamification-related activities. In addition, this concerns the organization’s expectations management, especially if gamification sometimes fails to deliver the intended results—for example, if it does not positively affect employees’ job satisfaction. It is, therefore, imperative to carry out a consistent monitoring process to observe whether gamification has the desired effect, how it is being received by employees, when the effect may be waning and whether gamification is leading to negative consequences.

Providing feedback helps new employees to clarify their job roles. The results of this study suggest that gamification elements could relatively strengthen this process. In addition, applying gamification elements could be beneficial for managers who are physically unable (due to the number of employees or lack of time) to pay enough attention to employees (Cardador et al., 2016). However, the question arises as to whether the feedback provided by gamification can completely replace the feedback provided by the manager. Gamification feedback is descriptive—for example, an employee might receive information about poor performance (low position on the leaderboard) but does not know the reasons for this evaluation (what was done poorly) or the course for further actions (how to improve one’s performance). Therefore, gamification feedback should always be followed by the manager’s or mentor’s feedback to ensure the best outcomes for the new employees.