Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

Exchange of P2P services in the Collaborative Economy (PhD research-in-progress)

693 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Presentation of my work-in-progress on P2P service exchange in the collaborative economy (particularly ridesharing and carsharing); at the PhD-workshop of my division (December 2015).

Publicado en: Educación
  • Inicia sesión para ver los comentarios

Exchange of P2P services in the Collaborative Economy (PhD research-in-progress)

  1. 1. P2P service exchange Work-in-Progress FEK PhD Workshop Hugo Guyader, PhD Candidate in Marketing Department of Management & Engineering (IEI) Division of Business Administration (FEK) 2015-12-17
  2. 2. Hugo Guyader Collaborative Consumption 2 Consumers co-create value by sharing existing products that are only temporarily needed, rather than owning them. Consumers access to more resources, 
 more convenience and at lower costs. What’s Mine is Yours
  3. 3. Hugo Guyader Some clarification 3 - Collaborative Economy: An economy built on decentralized networks and marketplaces that unlocks the value of underused assets by matching needs and haves, in ways that bypass traditional middlemen and disrupt centralised institutions. - production (Design, production, and distribution of goods through collaborative networks) - finance (P2P banking and crowd-driven investment models that decentralize finance) - education (Open education and person-to-person learning models that democratize education) - consumption (Maximum assets utilization through models of redistribution and shared access) Botsman 2010; 2013; 2015
  4. 4. Hugo Guyader Some clarification 4 - Collaborative Consumption: An economic model based on sharing/ swapping/renting/consuming products & services, that enable access-based consumption over ownership, thanks to technology and the internet. - Redistribution markets (Unwanted or underused goods are redistributed) - Collaborative Lifestyles (Non-tangible assets such as space, skills and money are exchanged) - Product Service Systems (Pay-to-access the benefit of a product instead of owning it) - Sharing economy: An economic model based on sharing underutilized products & services for monetary or non-monetary benefits among private individuals. - Peer economy: Person-to-person marketplaces that facilitate the sharing and direct trade of assets built on peer trust (the pure P2P slice of the sharing economy) Botsman 2010; 2013; 2015
  5. 5. $335 billion by 2025 +25% each year 68% of 30.000 US consumers are willing to share for a fee Collaborative Economy Honeycomb
  6. 6. Hugo Guyader 7 • Sharing behavior is nothing new, 
 but it is being revolutionized and facilitated by ICT • Primary drivers of the collaborative economy:
 - economic incentive
 - an urge to reduce the socio-environmental impact of consumption and a belief in “the commons”
 - normative desires to satisfy altruistic needs and of community-belonging
 - shift from ownership to access
  7. 7. Hugo Guyader Problematisation 8 • Trust, reputation and peer-reviews ‣ trust is the first barrier to sharing ‣ control mechanisms for perceived risks ‣ role of communities? ‣ institutional trust & “we-washing” • Social proof and critical mass of users ‣ choice and convenience depend on the size of the opposite network ‣ reputation system requires input ‣ WOM ‣ platform re-usage • Dichotomous network users: consumers and/or providers ‣ users can be on both sides of the exchange ‣ different expectations of service quality ‣ dyadic relationship
  8. 8. Hugo Guyader Tentative Research Questions (RQs) 9 . RQ1 What are the determinants of satisfaction in P2P service exchange? . RQ2 What are the determinants of re-usage (loyalty) of P2P service platform? . RQ3 What is the role of a community for sharing platforms? . RQ4 What is the impact of trust and reciprocity in P2P service exchange? . RQ5 How can sharing platforms reach a critical mass of users? . RQ6 What differs between user-providers and user-consumers of P2P services?
  9. 9. Hugo Guyader Approach 10 . RQ1 What are the determinants of satisfaction in P2P service exchange? . RQ2 What are the determinants of re-usage (loyalty) of P2P service platform? . RQ3 What is the role of a community for sharing platforms? . RQ4 What is the impact of trust and reciprocity in P2P service exchange? . RQ5 How can sharing platforms reach a critical mass of users? . RQ6 What differs between user- providers and user-consumers of P2P services? Multiple case-studies user interviews netnography ethnography survey P2P platform data management interviews
  10. 10. Hugo Guyader Theoretical Framework 11 • the collaborative economy is “new” - popular science books, essays, online articles, etc. • few academic studies, mostly published in JCP, consumer behavior and some marketing journals • mainly descriptive (case studies, interviews) ‣ Marketing: Service-Dominant Logic, Service Satisfaction ‣ Consumer Behavior: Sharing and Access modes of consumption, Consumer Communities
  11. 11. Hugo Guyader • The more network users, 
 the more valuable it becomes, 
 the better services can be provided. • Service organizations develop online platforms that enable their users to exchange P2P services. Service-Dominant Logic
  12. 12. Hugo Guyader 13 Service-Dominant Logic • With its network-centric perspective, the SDL framework on the collaborative economy potentially allows a deeper understanding of how online platforms create mutual value for their users. • The actor-to-actor (A2A) perspective on co-creation within networks focus on exchanges between all actors of the service ecosystem. • The service platform “[...] helps to liquefy resources and enhance resource density through efficient and effective service exchange” (Lusch and Nambisan, 2015, p.161). • Service marketing concepts and particularly the SDL have already demonstrated to be promising in understanding the exchange of P2P services in the collaborative economy (QUIS14: 4-5papers).
  13. 13. Hugo Guyader 14 Research Priorities in Service Marketing ➡ “[s]ervices are increasingly ‘prosumed’ (produced and consumed) in settings that combine actors from multiple sectors, creating a ‘demand for research that moves from bilateral supplier–customer service–value cocreation to a multi-actor perspective and an ecosystem service–value cocreation’” (Ostrom et al., 2015, p.136). ➡ Existing theoretical models do not fit the empirical phenomenon: there are no employees performing services in P2P platforms, only users who act as producers and/or consumers. Thus, “[r]esearch should also address service innovation that involves new or changed roles of service firms, customers, and employees, such as when conventional employee roles are delegated to customers” (Ostrom et al. 2015, p.131).
  14. 14. Hugo Guyader Sharing Behavior 15 • Belk (2007) definition of sharing:
 “voluntary lending, pooling and allocation of resources, and authorized use of public property, but not contractual renting, leasing, or unauthorized use of property by theft or trespass” => the sharing economy is not true sharing (Belk 2014): “presence of profit motives, absence of feelings of community, and expectations of reciprocity” Sharing is driven by altruistic motives, a sense of commonality, in- direct economic benefits, fame or reputation, utilitarianism, feeling of belonging to a community (Belk 2007, 2010, 2014).
  15. 15. Hugo Guyader Sharing Behavior 16 • True sharing involve caring and love, it is inalienable, interpersonal and dependent, as well as communal as it creates trust and social bonds without contracts or legal requirements (Belk, 2010). • Sharing out (vs. Sharing in) “involves giving to others outside the boundaries separating self and other, and is closer to gift giving and commodity exchange” (Belk 2010 p.725). • “If we conceive of a continuum commodity exchange lies at one end and sharing at the other, with gift giving somewhere in the middle” (Belk, 2007, p.127). commodity exchange gift giving sharing Other Relevant concepts: access-based consumption, mutuality or generalized reciprocal exchange, anti-consumption, pure opportunistic behavior.
  16. 16. Hugo Guyader The importance of community 17 What’s Yours Is Mine • “wewashing”, “share-washing” or “collaborative washing”: online businesses claim to foster community sharing, whereas they are mostly benefiting from enabling renting services rather than social exchange. • Sharing platforms use peer-review and reputation-based trust systems to alleviate the problem of “free-riders” who do not contribute (Hamari et al., 2015). • Call for research on “the role of customer communities and how best to develop and maintain such communities that have positive outcomes for both customers and firms” emphasizing the social aspect of value creation (Ostrom et al. 2015, p. 139).
  17. 17. Hugo Guyader The importance of community 18 —> Authenticity of a sharing platform? • The ‘true sharing’ movement raises awareness of this loss of communities and criticizes the profits of “Big Sharing unicorns” (Uber, Airbnb). • For instance, Blablacar has been criticized for killing the original ridesharing philosophy (i.e. saving travel costs, reducing environmental impact of driving, and meeting people) when it changed its business model in 2012 and “forced” an online registration system. With this change of business model, direct contact between users (exchange of emails, phone numbers) became impossible and forbidden, and the price rose to take into consideration the driver’s car depreciation. The social aspect diminished (i.e. riders listen to music, sleep, claim reserved seats; direct communication is impossible before a reservation) and the economic aspect reversed (i.e. more than 10% commission, less flexibility with booking and pricing). • Thus, I see two perspectives on the collaborative economy: 
 -> one driven by convenience (i.e. ICT) and economic benefits; and 
 -> one more authentic sharing philosophy, close to gift giving, not driven by 
 monetary profits and strongly relying on the social aspect of communities.
  18. 18. Hugo Guyader P2P service satisfaction 19 ✴ information quality (i.e. availability and usefulness) ✴ technical quality (i.e. website’s design and usability) ✴ service quality (i.e. reliability, assurance, responsiveness, empathy) ✴ interaction quality (i.e. communication) A recent CB study shows that satisfaction and the likelihood of choosing a sharing option again is determined by serving users’ self-benefits: 
 — high utility, trust, cost savings, and familiarity.
 Cost savings are particularly important, as well as service quality and community belonging. (Möhlmann 2015)
  19. 19. Hugo Guyader Focus: organized ridesharing 20 Liftsharing (UK) or Carpooling (US) two-sided platforms e.g. Blablacar hitchhiking, slugging TNCs: Uber, Lyft, Sidecar ✦ Individual travellers share a vehicle for a trip and split travel costs with others that have similar itineraries and time schedules. (Furuhata et al. 2013)
  20. 20. Hugo Guyader Focus: organized ridesharing 21 • Two-sided matching platforms “facilitate ridesharing services by matching individual car drivers and passengers” (Furuhata et al. 2013, p. 30). • Ridesharing can include small detours, but it does not concern for-profit taxis and chauffeured vehicles in which drivers make a special trip to carry a passenger and enable them to make profits (e.g. the passenger pays more than the trip gas costs). 
 Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber, Lyft or Sidecar provide such “ridesourcing service” (Rayle et al. 2014). • Blablacar: largest platform in Europe with 20 million members in 18 markets, arranging 2 million rides per month (Dillet, 2015) and estimates to enable drivers yearly total savings of $320 million (Cowan, 2015). 
 The average shared ride distance in Europe is 342 km.
 Blablacar claims to raise car occupancy from 1.7 to 2.8 passengers.
  21. 21. Hugo Guyader Focus: organized ridesharing 22 ✴ Main motivations and drivers for the sharing economy: 
 more convenience and efficiency (technology), economic benefits (affordability, cost-savings, monetisation of under-utilised assets; better value/quality), environmentally friendliness, strong community, access lifestyle, curiosity and fun (Matfoska 2015; Owyang et al. 2014; PWC 2015). In Denmark, a recent ridesharing study reports the user perceptions of the service as positive thanks to cost savings, greater comfort, flexibility and speed, and socialization with vehicle occupants; 
 …but also negative because of a lack of ride availability and inconvenience in finding them, viewing ridesharing as unsafe or unsecure, and expectations of social awkwardness and exclusion (Nielsen et al., 2015). ➡ Economic and social attributes seem to be the strongest choice determinants for adopting a ridesharing service.
  22. 22. Hugo Guyader DRIVER PASSENGER transporta3on economic contribu3on Individual Mo,ves & Mutual Benefits: -  Social interac3on -  Community-belonging -  Cost savings* -  Environmental consciousness -  Access/sharing lifestyle -  Reciprocal trust *no pro'it is made by the participants. Ridesharing model
  23. 23. Hugo Guyader Sa#sfac#on Loyalty (reusage) Transparency Pla1orm Authen7city Sharing Values Moral concern Eco- Friendliness Reduced impact SMS alerts Convenience Ease of use Mobile App P2P Trust Social Community Altruism Reciprocity Integrated map Economic Benefits Ins7tu7onal Trust Cost savings Mone7za7on Service Quality Perceived risks P2P exchange satisfaction: a (tentative) model
  24. 24. Hugo Guyader
  25. 25. Interacting with other users: 1. Flexibility: small time frame, high expectations. 2. Monetary exchange defines who is service provider and consumer. 3. Communication: high expectations. 1. Flexibility: higher than during the planning phase. 2. Meeting points: country-specific. 3. Sociability: “co- pilot fear”, headphones sleepiness, and taxi feelings.
 4. Reputation: reviews matter! 5. Trust and Safety: fully-completed profile, car model 6. Comfort: breaks. 7. Music: background. 8. No-Show. Traveling with other users:
  26. 26. Hugo Guyader 27
  27. 27. Hugo Guyader Skjutsgruppen 28 • civil society movement participatory culture • no commission • no peer-reviews • “competitors”: 
 GoMore, Samåkning
  28. 28. Hugo Guyader
  29. 29. ridesharing ·P2P car rentals ·leasing “Revolutionalizing the way people travel, and the overall infrastructure”
  30. 30. Hugo Guyader 31 Imported ridesharing from Germany to Denmark, seeing an opportunity in the Danes’ concern for the environment and their discontent with public transportation (prices, delays, cancellations). Organic growth (no marketing) as a non-profit platform for 6 years. Enhanced the ridesharing platform with a new technology enabling online payment. Begun to charge the drivers a 9% commission on their ride. February – launch of P2P car rentals: Users could now borrow privately owned vehicles from other users, or rent out their own car. An insurance-deal covers the rental period. 
 September – launch of leasing: when the car idles, it can be rented out to GoMore members. By renting out their leased car 8 days/month, the Leasers can make up the leasing cost, so the car can be used for free the rest of the month. More than 300.000 users in Scandinavia.
  31. 31. Hugo Guyader 32 Begun in Dec. 2013 as a P2P car rental platform in HongKong. In April 2015: they partnered-up with BYD to offer their users to lease an EV (e6) for free if they rent it out to other members. Might add P2P maintenance in private garages and cleaning services to the platform.
  32. 32. Platform Business Model Frequency:*Low* Dura0on:*Medium* Spontaneity:*High* Hauling:*High* Frequency:*Low* Dura0on:*Low* Spontaneity*:*Low* Hauling:*Low* Frequency:*High* Dura0on:*High* Spontaneity*:*High* Hauling:*High*** MOBILITY(NEED(3(MOBILITY(NEED(2(MOBILITY(NEED(1( * Financial* compensa0on* SERVICE*1* Ridesharing( SERVICE*2* P2P(Rentals( SERVICE*3* Leasing( SERVICE*4* Servi>za>on( CAPITALIZATION(( NEED(4( Par>al(access(( Temporary(access(( Total(access( Financial(( compensa>on( Access(
  33. 33. Thank you! Any questions? remarks? Hugo Guyader
 hugo.guyader@liu.se

×