Firms increasingly use games to interact with their customers. Yet, surprisingly little is known about whether, when, and how such "gamified" interactions engage consumers with a firm's brand, thereby facilitating self-brand connections. Building on flow theory, we show that gamified interactions that are highly interactive and optimally challenging facilitate self-brand connections, because such games lead to emotional and cognitive brand engagement. A field study and three experiments across various product domains and game designs support our theory. We also identify conditions under which consumers do not become engaged with a brand, namely when firms restrict their decisional control either to voluntarily participate in the game (i.e., compulsory play) or to spend as much time as desired playing the game (i.e., time pressure). Our findings advance existing knowledge about the use of games in marketing and provide important implications for how marketers can harness their potential to build selfbrand connections.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. We focus on investor-state dispute settlement provisions contained in various, though far from all, bilateral investment treaties as a possible determinant of BIT-related effects on bilateral FDI flows. Our estimation results prove to be sensitive to the specification of these provisions as well as the inclusion of transition countries in the sample. Stricter dispute settlement provisions do not necessarily result in higher FDI inflows so that the effectiveness of BITs as a credible commitment device remains elusive. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may

Summary This paper uses a value chain lens to examine the prospects for competition and cooperation between Europe and China in the global wind power sector. Drawing on insights from fieldwork conducted in 2010 combined with secondary industry data, we find that Chinese and European industries are developing distinct models of industrial‐technological organisation. The usual headlines emphasising Sino‐European competition or conflict fail to capture the complexity of current reality. While competition among lead firms is increasing, there are also considerable prospects for increased collaboration between firms across the value chains. China, Europe and the world can benefit from such collaboration to drive down the costs of the technology, improve quality, enhance innovation capabilities and make wind power a more credible energy option for the world. Policy initiatives in and between China and Europe have a big role to play in securing mutually beneficial relationships for the future.

China's economic rise has transformed the global economy in a number of manufacturing industries. This paper investigates whether China's transformative influence extends to the new green economy. Drawing on the debate about how China is driving major economic changes in the world -the "Asian drivers" debate -it identifies five corridors of influence and investigates their relevance for the wind energy industries. Starting with the demand side, it suggests that the size and rapid growth of the Chinese market have a major influence on competitive parameters in the global wind power industry. While Western firms have found ways of participating in the growth of the Chinese market, the government's procurement regimes benefit Chinese firms. The latter have invested heavily and learned fast, accumulating production capabilities that have led to changes in the global pecking order of lead firms. While the combined impact of Chinese market and production power is already visible, other influences are beginning to be felt -arising from China's coordination, innovation and financing power.

No abstract