P2PserviceexchangeWork-in-ProgressFEKPhDWorkshop

HugoGuyader,PhDCandidateinMarketingDepartmentofManagement&Engineering(IEI)

DivisionofBusinessAdministration(FEK)

2015-12-17

HugoGuyader

CollaborativeConsumption

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

HugoGuyader

Someclarification

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)

Botsman2010;2013;2015

HugoGuyader

Someclarification

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)

Botsman2010;2013;2015

$335billionby2025+25%eachyear

68%of30.000USconsumersarewillingtoshareforafee

Collaborative Economy Honeycomb

HugoGuyader

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

HugoGuyader

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

HugoGuyader

TentativeResearchQuestions(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?

HugoGuyader

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?

Multiplecase-studies

userinterviews

netnographyethnography

surveyP2Pplatformdata

managementinterviews

HugoGuyader

TheoreticalFramework

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

HugoGuyader

• 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-DominantLogic

HugoGuyader

13

Service-DominantLogic

• 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).

HugoGuyader

14

ResearchPrioritiesinServiceMarketing

➡ “[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).

HugoGuyader

SharingBehavior

15

• Belk (2007) definition of sharing:“voluntarylending,poolingandallocationofresources,andauthorizeduseofpublicproperty,butnotcontractualrenting,leasing,orunauthorizeduseofpropertybytheftortrespass”

=> the sharing economy is not true sharing (Belk 2014): “presenceofprofitmotives,absenceoffeelingsofcommunity,andexpectationsofreciprocity”

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).

HugoGuyader

SharingBehavior

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).

commodityexchange

giftgiving

sharing

Other Relevant concepts: access-based consumption, mutuality or generalized reciprocal exchange, anti-consumption, pure opportunistic behavior.

HugoGuyader

Theimportanceofcommunity

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).

HugoGuyader

Theimportanceofcommunity

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.

HugoGuyader

P2Pservicesatisfaction

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)

HugoGuyader

Focus:organizedridesharing

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)

HugoGuyader

Focus:organizedridesharing

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.

HugoGuyader

Focus:organizedridesharing

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.

HugoGuyader

DRIVER PASSENGER

transporta3on

economiccontribu3on

IndividualMo,ves&MutualBenefits:

-  Socialinterac3on-  Community-belonging-  Costsavings*-  Environmentalconsciousness-  Access/sharinglifestyle-  Reciprocaltrust

*nopro'itismadebytheparticipants.

Ridesharingmodel

HugoGuyader

Sa#sfac#on Loyalty(reusage)

TransparencyPla1orm

Authen7city

SharingValues

Moralconcern

Eco-Friendliness

Reducedimpact

SMSalerts

Convenience

Easeofuse

MobileApp

P2PTrust SocialCommunityAltruism

Reciprocity

Integratedmap

EconomicBenefits

Ins7tu7onalTrust

Costsavings

Mone7za7on

ServiceQuality

Perceivedrisks

P2Pexchangesatisfaction:a(tentative)model

HugoGuyader

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:

HugoGuyader

27

HugoGuyader

Skjutsgruppen

28

• civil society movement participatory culture

• no commission • no peer-reviews • “competitors”:

GoMore, Samåkning

HugoGuyader

ridesharing · P2P car rentals · leasing

“Revolutionalizing the way people travel, and the overall infrastructure”

HugoGuyader

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.

HugoGuyader

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.

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(

Thankyou!

Anyquestions?remarks?

Hugo Guyaderhugo.guyader@liu.se