Though gamified loyalty programs (GLPs), or loyalty programs that deploy gamified elements, are increasingly adopted, academic acumen of customer engagement with GLPs lags behind, thus exposing an important research gap. Based on this gap, we review the gamification-, loyalty program-, and customer engagement literature, from which we derive important insight. First, extending the customer engagement literature, we develop the concept of GLP engagement (GLPE), defined as members’ GLP-related behavior, expressed through direct- (i.e., purchase) and/or indirect (e.g., GLP-related learning/advocating) contributions, which we argue are critical to GLP effectiveness. Extending prior research, we also classify members’ indirect GLP contributions as autonomous (vs. interdependent)-, selfless (vs. self-seeking)-, control (vs. laissez-faire)-based-, collaborative (vs. competitive)-, individual (vs. generic)-, and calculated (vs. non-calculated) contributions. Second, we develop a self-determination theory-informed framework that proposes members’ intrinsic/extrinsic motivation as major drivers of GLPE, which in turn impacts customer brand engagement value (CBEV). Third, formalizing the framework’s associations, we develop a set of Propositions that serve as a springboard for further GLPE research. We conclude by discussing major implications that arise from this research.

尽管越来越多地采用游戏化的忠诚度计划（GLP）或部署游戏化元素的忠诚度计划，但客户与GLP互动的学术敏锐性却落在后面，从而暴露了重要的研究差距。基于这一差距，我们回顾了游戏化，忠诚度计划和客户参与方面的文献，从中我们得出了重要的见识。首先，扩展客户参与度文献，我们发展GLP参与度（GLPE）的概念，定义为会员通过直接（即购买）和/或间接（例如，与GLP相关的学习/倡导）表达的GLP相关行为）贡献，我们认为这对GLP有效性至关重要。扩展先前的研究，我们还对成员的间接进行分类GLP贡献包括基于自主（相对于相互依赖），无私（相对于自我寻求），基于控制（相对于自由放任），协作（相对于竞争），个人（相对于通用）以及计算的（相对于未计算的）贡献。其次，我们建立了一个自我决定理论为基础的框架，该框架提出了成员的内在/外在动机是GLPE的主要驱动力，这反过来又影响了客户品牌参与价值（CBEV）。第三，正式化框架的关联，我们制定了一组命题，作为进一步GLPE研究的跳板。最后，我们讨论了这项研究产生的主要含义。