The share economy: Motivations and strategies for corporations

!!

!!!!!!!

This!work!is!licensed!under!a!Creative!Commons!!Attribution!4.0!International!License.!

!

!!

!You$are$free$to:$

• Share!—!copy!and!redistribute!the!material!in!any!medium!or!format!• Adapt!—!remix,!transform,!and!build!upon!the!material!for!any!purpose,!even!

commercially.!!

Under$the$following$terms:$• Attribution$—!You!must!give!appropriate!credit,!provide!a!link!to!the!license,!

and!indicate!if!changes!were!made.!You!may!do!so!in!any!reasonable!manner,!but!not!in!any!way!that!suggests!the!licensor!endorses!you!or!your!use.!!

• No!additional!restrictions!—!You!may!not!apply!legal!terms!or!technological!measures!that!legally!restrict!others!from!doing!anything!the!license!permits!

!

!

!

!

!Suggested$citation:!!Brodersen,!Sara!Green!(2015)!The$share$economy:$Motivations$and$strategies$for$corporations.$Master!thesis,!IT!University!of!Copenhagen/Copenhagen!Business!School.!

!

!

!

!

!

This!is!a!nonPconfidential!version!of!the!original!thesis.!!Some!sections,!tables,!figures!and!all!appendices!!

have!been!omitted!due!to!confidentiality.!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Feedback,!questions!and!comments!are!welcome.!!Please!contact!the!author!at!sara.g.brodersen@gmail.com!

!

Abstract(

(Societal)forces)and)technological)advancements)have)led)to)a)new)21st)Century)socio9economic)system)built)on)the)sharing)of)physical)assets)and)services:)the)share)economy.)Consumers)now)want)access)over)ownership,)which)is)catered)for)by)online)platforms)that)enable)consumers)to)participate)and)create)value)together.)The)movement)has)predominantly)been)associated)only)with)startups)and)it)is)believed)they)represent)a)threat)to)established)industries)and)incumbents.)However,)the)concept)has)recently)started)to)be)adopted)by)large)companies)through)partnerships)or)experimental)new)business)models.)Even)though)the)impact)of)this)movement)is)becoming)increasingly)widespread,)it)is)still)not)well)theorised.)))This)paper)aims)to)make)two)contributions)to)the)literature.)One)is)to)provide)an)answer)to)why)corporations)are)motivated)by)the)share)economy.)The)second)is)to)examine)how)incumbents)can)become)successful)in)the)share)economy)as)they)launch)their)venture.)Therefore)the)thesis)is)structured)in)two)main)parts.)))Part)one)examines)the)origin)of)the)share)economy)and)factors)that)enable)its)growth.)A)literature)review)presents)relevant)literature)of)typologies)for)share)model)companies)including)those)of)Benkler,)Gansky,)Andersson)and)colleagues,)Owyang,)Matzler)and)colleagues)and)more.)In)addition,)it)provides)an)overview)of)the)developments)in)six)industries)which)have)played)a)key)role)in)the)growth)of)the)share)economy;)including)transportation,)money,)space,)goods,)food)and)services.)Furthermore,)a)practical)perspective)is)presented)by)themes)from)nine)startup)interviews.)As)a)result,)a)taxonomy)is)presented)which)provides)a)basis)for)assessing)companies’)likelihood)for)success)in)the)share)economy.)))Part)two)presents)a)cross9case)study)of)eight)corporations)which)have)explored)sharing9based)models.)The)study)identifies)nine)motivations)for)incumbents)to)participate)in)the)share)economy.)The)nine)motivations)are)elaborated)in)context.)Furthermore,)the)thesis)presents)three)strategies)for)increasing)the)likelihood)of)success)for)corporations)in)the)share)economy,)based)on)the)taxonomy)developed)in)part)one.)The)implications)of)the)findings)for)understanding)the)nature)of)sharing)models)in)a)corporate)setting)are)discussed.)))

)))

The)share)economy:)Motivations)and)strategies)for)corporations))

Sara)Green)Brodersen)(2015)) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Page)2)of)104)

)))))))))))))))))

“Consume)less;)share)better.”))―)Hervé)Kempf)

)) )



))

Table(of(contents(

1.#Introduction#.......................................................................................................................................#5)1.1.)Problem)field)..................................................................................................................................................)6)1.2.)Research)question)........................................................................................................................................)6)1.3.)Thesis)structure)............................................................................................................................................)7)

2.#Methodology#.......................................................................................................................................#9)2.1.)Research)philosophy)...................................................................................................................................)9)2.2.)Research)design)..........................................................................................................................................)10)2.3.)Literature)and)theoretical)foundation)..............................................................................................)14)2.4.)Data)Collection)............................................................................................................................................)15)2.5.)Validity)and)Reliability).............................................................................................................................)23)2.6.)Delimitation)..................................................................................................................................................)25)2.7.)Definitions).....................................................................................................................................................)26)

3.#Dynamics#of#the#share#economy#...............................................................................................#27)3.1.)Literature)review:)Understanding)the)share)economy)..............................................................)28)3.2.)Developments)and)disruptions)in)industries).................................................................................)47)3.3.)Examining)startup)companies)..............................................................................................................)56)3.4.)A)taxonomy)for)companies)in)the)share)economy).......................................................................)57)

4.#Exploration#of#Corporate#Presence#in#the#Share#Economy#..............................................#59)4.1.)Case)A:)IKEA).................................................................................................................................................)60)4.2.)Case)B:)Santander).......................................................................................................................................)62)4.3.)Case)C:)Marriott)...........................................................................................................................................)64)4.4.)Case)D:)Citi)Group)......................................................................................................................................)66)4.5.)Case)E:)B&Q)...................................................................................................................................................)68)4.6.)Case)F:)Toyota)..............................................................................................................................................)69)4.7.)Case)G:)Kelly)Services)...............................................................................................................................)72)4.8.)Case)H:)Coca)Cola)........................................................................................................................................)74)4.9.)Cross)case)analysis)....................................................................................................................................)76)

5.#Conclusion#and#discussion#..........................................................................................................#87)5.1.)Findings)and)contribution)......................................................................................................................)87)5.2.)Conclusion).....................................................................................................................................................)90)5.3.)Further)research)and)perspective)......................................................................................................)92)

6.#References#........................................................................................................................................#94)7.#Appendices#.....................................................................................................................................#104)



List(of(figures(

Figure)1.1)9)Thesis)structure).........................................................................................................................)7)Figure)2.1)–)Multiple)case)study)method)...............................................................................................)13)Figure)2.2)9)Affinity)diagram)for)startup)interviews)in)part)1)......................................................)22)Figure)2.3)9)Affinity)diagram)for)multiple)case)study)in)part)2)....................................................)22)Figure)3.1)9)Structure)of)part)1)...................................................................................................................)27)Figure)3.2)9)Main)drivers)of)the)share)economy).................................................................................)35)Figure)3.3)9)The)Mesh)Sweet)Spot).............................................................................................................)38)Figure)3.4)9)The)sharing)economy)life9cycle).........................................................................................)41)Figure)3.5)9)Life)cycle)of)mesh)businesses).............................................................................................)42)Figure)3.6)9)Collaborative)economy)value)chain).................................................................................)43)Figure)3.7)9)The)collaborative)economy)honeycomb).......................................................................)48)Figure)3.9)9)Taxonomy)assessing)likelihood)of)success)in)the)share)economy).....................)58)Figure)4.1)9)Corporate)motivations)for)participating)in)the)share)economy).........................)78)(

List(of(tables(

Table)2.1)–)Exploratory)case)study)framework)..................................................................................)12)Table)2.2)9)Overview)of)data)collection)techniques)..........................................................................)16)Table)2.3)9)Overview)of)interviewees)......................................................................................................)17)Table)2.4)9)Overview)of)incumbents)for)multiple)case)study)........................................................)18)Table)2.5)9)Data)sources)for)multiple)case)study)................................................................................)21)Table)3.1)9)Overview)of)definitions)of)the)share)economy).............................................................)30)Table)3.2)9)Drivers)of)the)share)economy)..............................................................................................)31)Table)3.3)9)Typologies)presented)in)literature)on)the)share)economy).....................................)36)Table)3.4)9)Archetypes)of)peer9to9peer)platforms).............................................................................)39)Table)3.5)9)Comparing)archetypes)............................................................................................................)40)Table)3.6)9)Maturity)levels)of)company9as9a9service)model)..........................................................)45)Table)3.7)9)Comparing)theories)of)corporate)re9engineering).......................................................)47)Table)3.8)9)Summary)of)industry)overview)...........................................................................................)55)Table)3.10)9)Taxonomy)types)......................................................................................................................)58)Table)4.1)9)Summary)of)the)IKEA)case)....................................................................................................)61)Table)4.2)9)Summary)of)the)Santander)case).........................................................................................)63)Table)4.3)9)Summary)of)the)Marriott)case).............................................................................................)65)Table)4.4)9)Summary)of)the)Citi)Group)case)..........................................................................................)67)Table)4.5)9)Summary)of)the)B&Q)case).....................................................................................................)69)Table)4.6)9)Summary)of)the)Toyota)case)................................................................................................)71)Table)4.7)9)Summary)of)the)Kelly)Services)case)..................................................................................)73)Table)4.7)9)Summary)of)the)Coca)Cola)case)...........................................................................................)75)Table)4.9)9)Motivations)for)entering)the)share)economy)for)case)companies).......................)77)Table)4.10)9)Summary)of)types)across)case)companies)...................................................................)82)



(

1.(Introduction(

In)2011,)Time)Magazine)announced)that)the)share)economy)is)one)of)ten)ideas)that)will)change)the)world.)A)new)generation)is)leading)the)way)toward)a)different)form)of)consumption.)An)economy)where)consumers)rent,)lend)and)share)goods)instead)of)buying)them)(Walsh)2011).)))The)change)is)spurred)by)a)post9crisis)antidote)to)materialism)and)over)consumption,)a)highly)developed)environmental)consciousness)(Andersson)et)al.)2013))and)a)yearning)to)trust)and)be)trusted)in)an)era)where)families)are)scattered)(Walsh)2011).)Recently)we)have)witnessed)the)emergence)of)a)new)breed)of)peer9to9peer)(P2P))platforms)that)are)designed)for)sharing)goods)and)services)which)generate)benefits)without)resulting)in)ownership)of)material)goods)(Andersson)et)al.)2013).)The)phenomenon)of)sharing)has)been)around)as)long)as)mankind,)but)the)key,)differentiating)factor)is)that)technological)advances)enable)networked)platforms)that)support)the)share)economy)enough)to)operate)at)scale.)))Broad)segments)of)the)population)can)collaboratively)make)use)of)underutilised)goods)and)services.)Individuals)can)provide)short9term)rentals)of)vehicles)through)BlaBla)Car)or)spare)rooms)via)AirBnB.)They)can)even)share)their)pets)via)Borrow)My)Doggy)(Zervas)et)al.)2015).)The)revenue)flowing)through)the)share)economy)was)estimated)to)surpass)3.5)billion)USD)in)2013,)exceeding)a)growth)rate)of)25)percent.)This)is)a)testament)to)it)not)just)being)a)boost)in)a)bad)economy,)but)indeed)a)disruptive)economic)force)(Morgan)2014).)According)to)respondents)in)the)largest)survey)on)peer9to9peer)sharing)usage)is)said)to)double)in)the)next)year)as)consumers)adopt)sharing)even)more)(Owyang)2014a).)))The)growing)share)economy)challenges)and)disrupts)established)industries)and)companies)that)base)their)business)model)on)traditional)value)chain)thinking)(Owyang)2014a,)Mandag)Morgen)2013).)Incumbents)in)markets)being)disrupted)by)the)share)economy)are)increasingly)recognising)that)they)have)to)engage)in)the)new)economy)or)risk)being)marginalised)(Leung)and)Lesko)2015).)A)shift)is)now)evident)as)corporations)are)exploring)opportunities)in)this)new)economy.)It)has)long)been)dominated)by)startups)with)their)novel)approach)of)combining)technology)and)capitalising)on)societal)changes,)but)the)share)economy)is)becoming)increasingly)popular)and)the)concept)is)



being)adopted)by)large)companies)entering)into)partnerships)or)developing)initiatives)for)the)business)(Botsman)2014).)Major)corporations)at)the)front)of)innovation,)such)as)GM,)BMW)and)Amazon)are)exploring)ways)of)participating)in)this)emerging)ecosystem)and)how)to)benefit)from)it)(Avital)et)al.)2014).))

1.1.(Problem(field(

As)new)developments)take)place)in)the)share)economy,)there)is)still)much)we)do)not)know.)The)discussion)about)the)future)for)the)share)economy)has)just)begun)and)the)area)is)not)well)theorised,)thus)leaving)opportunity)for)contributing)to)the)discourse)(Avital)et)al.)2014,)Bardhi)and)Eckhardt)2012).)With)this)thesis)I)aim)to)contribute)to)the)discussion)on)the)share)economy)and)explore)why)and)how)corporations)can)become)an)active)player)in)it.)))In)order)for)large)businesses)to)reach)their)full)potential)in)the)share)economy)we)must)understand)how)the)share)economy)affects)businesses,)its)potential)value)for)corporations)and)how)they)can)capitalise)on)the)opportunities)at)hand.)))

1.2.(Research(question(

The)problem)statement)for)this)thesis)takes)departure)in)the)following)question,)which)is)twofold.)

)Why$are$corporations$motivated$by$the$share$economy$and$)

what$strategies$can$they$apply$to$achieve$success$in$this$new$economy?)

(

)

))))))



1.3.(Thesis(structure(

This)thesis)is)structured)as)visually)shown)in)figure)1.1)below.)Chapter)1)is)an)introductory)chapter)to)provide)the)reader)with)the)context)for)the)problem)and)the)research)question.)))Chapter)2)will)present)the)methodology)and)research)strategy)of)the)text.)In)addition,)it)will)discuss)considerations)of)literature,)data)collection)and)validity)and)reliability)of)the)documentation)used)for)the)analysis.)))

)Figure#1.1#J#Thesis#structure#

)))



Chapter)3)represents)part)1)of)this)thesis)and)seeks)to)support)the)analysis)in)answering)the)research)question,)explaining)what)the)share)economy)is)and)how)it)affects)companies.)In)addition,)it)presents)literature)of)this)phenomenon)and)how)it)can)contribute)to)developing)strategies)for)incumbents.)The)chapter)is)divided)in)three)sections;)a)literature)review,)an)industry)overview)and)an)examination)of)companies)based)on)interviews)with)nine)startups.)The)literature)review)starts)by)discussing)definitions)of)the)share)economy)to)provide)a)common)understanding)of)the)phenomenon.)Second,)it)will)present)drivers)of)the)share)economy)to)explain)its)growth)in)recent)years.)Third,)various)scholars)have)presented)typologies)and)strategies)for)re9engineering)business)models)in)the)share)economy)literature)which)will)be)elaborated)upon.)The)industry)overview)provides)a)background)in)the)movements)of)the)six)predominant)industries)within)the)share)economy.)The)third)section,)draws)on)nine)interviews)with)startups)in)this)sphere)to)comment)on)the)practical)side)of)the)phenomenon.)The)findings)lead)to)six)themes)which)will)be)discussed)in)turn.)Chapter)3)draws)on)the)various)literature)and)empirics)to)create)a)taxonomy)of)three)types,)which)will)support)an)assessment)of)the)likelihood)of)success)for)companies.)The)taxonomy)will)be)applied)in)the)second)part)of)the)thesis.)))Chapter)4)represents)part)two)and)will)explore)eight)corporations)which)have)all)entered)into)the)share)economy)in)one)way)or)another.)The)taxonomy)from)part)one)will)be)applied)to)each)case)as)well)as)other)relevant)theories.)In)addition,)I)seek)to)find)motivations)for)the)incumbents’)move)to)the)share)economy.)The)chapter)concludes)with)a)cross)case)analysis)which)seeks)to)answer)the)research)question.)The)findings)present)a)number)of)motivations)for)corporations)to)enter)into)the)share)economy)in)section)4.9.1.,)which)answers)“why$are$corporations$motivated$by$the$share$economy?”.$Section)4.9.2.)applies)these)motivations)and)the)types)from)the)taxonomy)as)it)seeks)to)answer)“what$strategies$can$they$apply$to$achieve$success$in$this$new$economy?”)as)three)separate)strategies)are)presented.))Finally,)the)thesis)concludes)with)chapter)5)which)will)provide)a)discussion)of)my)findings)and)contributions,)a)conclusion)and)a)section)on)further)research)for)the)thesis.))))

(



2.(Methodology

In)this)chapter)I)present)an)overview)of)the)methodological)decisions)made)during)the)research)process)and)shall)clarify)the)purpose)of)these)choices.)I)discuss)the)epistemology)and)research)design)of)the)thesis,)which)includes)sections)on)interpretivism,)hermeneutics)and)the)multiple)case)study)approach.)In)addition,)I)present)the)literature)and)theoretical)foundation)on)which)my)analysis)is)built)upon.)I)will)explain)my)approach)to)data)collection)and)its)validity)and)reliability)which)will)be)divided)in)two)sections)to)underline)the)different)methods)used)in)part)one)and)part)two)of)the)thesis.)Finally,)I)clarify)the)delimitations)I)have)made)to)the)scope)of)my)research.)This)section)concludes)with)a)list)of)definitions)relevant)to)the)following)chapters.)))

2.1.(Research(philosophy((

In)business)and)information)systems)(IS))research,)three)philosophical)schools)frame)the)development)of)knowledge)which)are)positivism,$interpretivism)and)realism)(Saunders)et)al.)2003).)These)philosophical)assumptions)relate)to)the)underlying)epistemology)which)guides)the)research)and)therefore)it)is)important)to)know)what)these)assumptions)are)(Myers)1997).)))Positivists)assume)that)reality)is)objective)and)seek)to)identify)general)laws)from)complex)information.)These)studies)attempt)to)test)theories)to)increase)the)predictive)understanding)of)phenomena)and)are)often)applied)to)statistical)studies)(Saunders)et)al.)2003,)Myers)1997).)Interpretivism)views)individuals)as)unique)and)contextual)and)believes)reality)is)a)social)construction)(Saunders)et)al.)2003).)In)this)way,)interpretive)researchers)assume)reality)can)be)reached)through)social)constructions)such)as)language,)consciousness)and)shared)meaning.)Hermeneutics)is)the)philosophical)grounding)for)interpretivism)(Myers)1997).)In)IS,)interpretive)research)is)“aimed)at)producing)an)understanding)of)the)context)of)the)information)system,)and)the)process)whereby)the)information)system)influences)and)is)influenced)by)the)context”)(Walsham)1993).)In)opposition,)realists)assume)that)reality)is)independant)from)the)human)mind)and)is)therefore)subjective,)however,)external)factors)do)influence)individuals,)whether)they)are)aware)or)not)(Saunders)et)al.)2003).)This)thesis)is)based)on)the)philosophical)framework)of)interpretivism)as)it)enables)the)researcher)to)explore)several)companies’)experiments)with)the)share)economy)as)well)as)investigating)the)context)and)drivers)of)



the)phenomenon.)However,)in)my)effort)to)conclude)a)number)of)strategies,)I)seek)to)identify)general)laws)based)on)my)analysis,)why)it)could)be)argued)there)are)elements)of)positivism)also.))))))))))Hermeneutics,)as)a)mode)of)analysis,)suggests)a)way)of)understanding)textual)data)(Myers)1997).)According)to)Gadamer)(1976))the)idea)of)the)hermeneutic)circle)refers)to)the)dialectic)between)the)understanding)of)the)text)as)a)whole)and)the)interpretations)of)its)parts,)in)which)descriptions)are)guided)by)anticipated)explanations.)For)me)as)a)researcher)this)means)my)knowledge)will)grow)as)I)explore)the)field)of)the)share)economy)and)for)every)part)of)knowledge)I)gain,)my)understanding)of)the)entirety)and)my)research)question)will)change)along)with)it.)My)understanding)of)this)field)is)guided)by)the)literature)review)where)several)theories)and)views)will)be)presented.)In)addition,)my)knowledge)expands)as)I)interpret)the)companies)through)interviews)and)textual)analysis.)Gadamer)(1976))also)believes)that)we)interpret)the)world)based)on)our)own)prejudice)which)originates)in)our)cultural)heritage.)This)means)I)am)affected)by)my)own)view)of)the)world,)however,)during)the)interpretation)of)the)interviews)and)case)studies)I)have)sought)to)keep)an)open)mind.)I)am)aware)that)the)interviewees)have)described)their)personal)perception)of)reality)to)me,)which)means)the)outcome)might)have)been)different)if)I)had)interviewed)someone)else.)For)this)reason)I)have)tried)to)be)critical)towards)their)way)of)presenting)their)company.)Similarly,)a)different)researcher)could)have)concluded)something)else)by)interviewing)the)same)people.)This)is)true)as)I)cannot)separate)myself)from)my)perception)of)reality)and)thus)I)am)a)part)of)the)knowledge)created.)I)recognise)that)it)is)impossible)to)be)completely)objective)and)therefore)it)is)also)impossible)to)reach)a)final)truth.))

2.2.(Research(design(

The)research)presented)in)this)thesis)uses)methods)associated)with)grounded)theory,)which)is)a)research)method)that)seeks)to)develop)theory)that)is)grounded)in)data)systematically)gathered)and)analysed)(Corbin)and)Strauss)2015).)The)approach)is)specifically)relevant)here,)as)the)motivation)for)this)thesis)is)to)expand)the)contribution)of)literature)in)the)field)of)the)share)economy,)however,)only)little)theory)is)currently)available.)Grounded)theory)is)different)from)other)qualitative)research)methods)as)the)concepts)out)of)which)the)theory)is)constructed)are)derived)from)data)collected)during)the)research)process)and)not)chosen)prior)to)beginning)the)research)(Corbin)and)Strauss)



2015).)This)is)evident)in)part)one)of)this)thesis)where)current)literature)supports)the)development)of)a)taxonomy,)as)well)as)in)part)two)which)develops)three)strategies)based)on)the)cross)case)analysis.)In)addition,)in)grounded)theory)research)analysis)and)data)collection)is)interrelated.)After)initial)data)has)been)collected,)the)researcher)analyses)the)data)and)the)concepts)derived)from)the)analysis)form)the)basis)for)the)subsequent)data)analysis)(Corbin)and)Strauss)2015).)Thus)the)taxonomy)in)part)one)dictates)the)data)gathered)of)the)cases)in)part)two,)for)example)information)about)their)internal)ability)and)the)external)market.)))It)is)argued)that)grounded)theory)is)closely)linked)to)inductive)methodology)(Corbin)and)Strauss)2015),)which)seeks)to)create)a)theoretical)framework)by)observing)data)without)a)predefined)theory)of)causality.)The)research)process)is)flexible)and)seeks)to)explain)why)a)given)situation)is)occurring.)In)opposition,)deduction)tests)an)already)existing)theory)on)empirical)data)and)adapts)and)revises)the)theory)accordingly.)The)aim)of)the)deductive)method)is)to)generalise)the)results)(Saunders)et)al.)2007).)Both)part)one)and)part)two)in)this)thesis)are)predominantly)inductive.)Part)one)derives)elements)of)a)new)taxonomy)based)on)existing)theories.)Part)two)has)deductive)traits)as)the)taxonomy)from)part)one)is)applied)to)the)cases,)however,)the)outcome)is)three)strategies)which)is)based)on)the)findings)in)these)cases)and)are)not)predefined)by)theory)and)thus)mainly)inductive.))))))Part)one)in)this)thesis)takes)the)form)of)an)explorative)research)approach,)as)I)seek)to)discover)more)about)the)share)economy)as)a)phenomenon.)The)explorative)research)approach)can)help)in)discovering)interesting)questions)for)further)investigation)and)act)as)a)pilot)study)for)a)larger)research)thesis)and)thereby)find)hypotheses)and)assumptions)which)can)later)be)tested)(Andersen)2005,)p.)21).)Similarly,)Yin)(2009,)p.)92))describes)the)pilot)study)as)a)way)to)develop)relevant)lines)of)questioning)and)clarifying)concepts.)Table)2.1,)explains)this)exploratory)approach)which)has)been)used)in)this)thesis.))))))) Phase#1) Phase#2) Phase#3) Phase#4)Purpose) Exploration)of)share) Formulating)problem) Case)analysis)of)eight) Revealing)patterns)of)



economy)companies)and)pilot)study)

statement)and)selecting)platforms)to)be)analysed))

corporations) sharing)models)in)corporations)

Steps) 9 Interview)companies)9 Investigate)phenomenon)

9 Determine)problem)statement))9 Gather)empirical)data)

9 Analyse)eight)cases)in)parallel)

9 Perform)structured)comparison)of)the)cases)9 Elicit)patterns)and)contributions))

Data#sources) Interviews)) Platforms)and)documents)

Platforms)and)documents)

Data)collected)and)gathered)in)report)

Output) Understanding)of)the)implications)for)share)economy)startup)companies)and)the)phenomenon)as)a)whole)

Problem)statement)and)selection)of)eight)cases)

Analysis)of)eight)individual)cases))

Findings)and)theoretical)framework)of)nine)motivations)and)three)strategies)

When) September)9)November)2014)

December)2014)9)January)2015)

January)2015) February)2015))Table#2.1#–#Exploratory#case#study#framework#

)In)phase)one,)nine)interviews)with)startup)companies)acted)as)a)pilot)study)in)furthering)my)understanding)of)the)share)economy.)The)interviews)showed)a)number)of)difficulties)for)growth)and)thus)were)relevant)in)determining)a)direction)for)investigating)corporations)in)the)share)economy.)The)findings)also)serve)as)an)element)in)part)one)of)the)thesis)as)the)examination)of)the)companies)were)valuable)in)determining)the)elements)in)the)taxonomy)from)a)practical)perspective.)Phase)two)sought)to)formulate)a)problem)field)and)create)a)basis)for)the)cross)case)study,)which)took)place)in)phase)three.)The)final)phase)four)was)dedicated)to)finding)patterns)and)developing)the)answer)to)the)research)question.)Part)two)of)the)thesis)is)of)a)normative)nature)as)it)suggests)solutions)to)a)problem)with)the)three)strategies)mentioned.)The)normative)approach)creates)solutions)based)on)the)established)knowledge)which)has)been)created)through)analysis)(Andersen)2005).)))

2.2.1.(Multiple(case(study(approach(

In)a)multiple9case)study)the)goal)is)to)build)a)general)explanation)that)fits)each)individual)case,)even)if)the)cases)vary)in)details)(Yin)2009,)p.)142).)The)advantages)of)a)multi9case)analysis)include)that)the)evidence)is)regarded)as)more)robust,)however,)a)multi9case)analysis)also)requires)extensive)time)for)analysis)(Yin)2009,)p.)53).)For)this)reason,)and)the)limited)scope)of)this)report,)I)have)chosen)a)holistic)multiple9case)design.)This)approach)analyses)each)case)by)way)of)replication)in)connection)to)the)context.)In)opposition,)the)embedded)approach)carries)out)a)collection)of)quantitative)data)and)analysis)of)several)units)for)each)case)(Yin)2009,)p.)60).)Had)I)chosen)to)also)look)at)management)or)customers)as)a)unit)it)would)be)an)embedded)approach.))



)Figure)2.1)shows)the)case9study)method)from)Yin)(2009,)p.)57),)which)indicates)that)the)initial)step)in)designing)the)study)must)consist)of)theory)development.)As)described)previously)the)first)part)of)this)thesis)develops)a)taxonomy,)which)is)applied)to)the)cases)in)part)two.)According)to)the)figure,)the)study)must)then)select)cases)and)design)data)collection)(Yin)2009,)p.)56).)These)points)will)be)elaborated)in)section)2.4.)The)second)step)is)conducting)the)case)study)where)each)case)is)a)whole)study)in)which)convergent)evidence)is)sought)regarding)the)facts)and)conclusions)(Yin)2009,)p.)56).)Each)case)in)part)two)will)conclude)motivations)which)have)been)relevant)for)the)specific)company)in)entering)the)share)economy.)In)addition,)I)apply)Owyang’s)(2013a))value)chain)as)a)typology)and)characterise)each)case)with)the)taxonomy)developed)in)part)one.))

) )Figure#2.1#–#Multiple#case#study#method#(Yin#2009,#p.#57)#

#

The)dash9lined)feedback)loop)indicates)a)situation)where)important)discovery)occurs)which)might)cause)the)researcher)to)rethink)the)original)theoretical)propositions)(Yin)2009,)p.)56).)In)this)case,)I)had)originally)planned)to)apply)Andersson)and)colleagues’)(2013))typology)of)peer9to9peer)shared)model)companies,)however,)when)conducting)case)study)C)it)was)clear)it)was)not)a)peer9to9peer)model)in)the)traditional)sense.)For)that)reason)I)chose)to)use)Owyang’s)(2013a))value)chain)instead.)The)third)step)



concludes)with)a)cross)case)report)(Yin)2009,)p.)56).)In)this)thesis,)I)develop)three)strategies)based)on)the)taxonomy,)which)is)valuable)when)coupled)with)the)companies’)motivations.)I)also)comment)on)why)certain)cases)were)predicted)to)have)a)specific)outcome.)))

2.3.(Literature(and(theoretical(foundation(

Although)the)share)economy)has)gained)interest)in)academics,)it)has)only)just)recently)gained)a)surge)and)even)so)the)phenomenon)is)still)not)well)theorised)(Bardhi)and)Eckhardt)2012,)Andersson)et)al.)2013).)The)main)topic)within)the)published)literature)seems)to)be)related)to)car)sharing)and)the)transportation)sector,)which)was)the)earliest)industry)affected)by)share)models,)see)for)example)Shaheen)(2014),)Andersson)and)colleagues)(2013))and)Teodorovic)and)Dell’Orco)(2008).)In)a)broader)perspective)the)literature)has)been)supplied)by)mainly)non9academic)writers)such)as)Owyang)(2013,)2014),)Botsman)and)Rogers)(2011))and)Gansky)(2012))until)this)December)where)Matzler,)Veider)and)Kathan)(2014))published)their)preliminary)work)on)corporate)strategies)for)the)share)economy.)The)non9academic)writings)have)often)been)seen)cited)by)academic)writers)and)thus)I)use)them)here)as)well.)However,)it)is)worth)noting)that)these)writers)can)be)motivated)by)commercial)interests)and)that)their)findings)have)not)been)as)thoroughly)documented)as)would)be)expected)from)academic)work.)To)my)knowledge)there)are)no)contrasting)opinions)and)most)works)supplement)each)other,)some)with)overlapping)ideas.)))))In)order)to)answer)the)research)question)and)gain)an)understanding)for)the)share)economy)part)one)presents)a)literature)review)referencing)the)most)cited)authors,)which)was)discovered)through)Google)scholar)and)various)academic)databases)such)as)the)Association)for)Computing)Machinery,)IIE)Electronic)Library,)SAGE)Journals)and)Science)Direct.)In)addition,)books)were)taken)out)of)the)IT)University)library)and)articles)were)found)in)mainstream)media)such)as)the)Economist,)Forbes)and)Fast)Company.)The)industry)overview)especially)required)industry)statistics)and)thus)these)were)found)and)applied)when)possible.)The)literature)used)in)part)one)serves)as)a)great)basis)for)understanding)the)dynamics)of)companies)in)the)share)economy.)However,)it)also)poses)some)limitations)in)terms)of)focusing)on)narrow)aspects)or)only)including)some)shared)models)in)the)analysis.)Hence)the)taxonomy)developed)in)the)last)section)of)chapter)



three,)which)draws)on)the)literature)assessing)important)elements)of)the)phenomenon)and)thus)including)them)in)the)analysis)in)chapter)four.)))))

2.4.(Data(Collection((

The)data)collection)technique)is)closely)linked)to)both)the)research)philosophy)and)research)design,)so)the)types)of)data)have)often)been)decided)before)the)actual)data)collection)has)begun)(Andersen)2005,)p.)149).)In)this)thesis)the)data)collection)has)been)an)iterative)process)as)the)interviews,)case)studies)and)literature)review)were)developed)on)an)ongoing)basis)although)with)a)strong)emphasis)on)interviews)in)the)beginning)and)more)work)with)case)studies)in)the)end.)As)part)one)and)part)two)apply)different)types)of)data)collection)methods)I)have)chosen)to)divide)this)section)in)two)parts,)each)accounting)for)the)two)major)parts)of)this)thesis)and)their)empirics.))))

2.4.1.(Data(collection(part(1(

In)part)one)of)this)thesis,)both)qualitative)and)quantitative)data)was)used.)Data)can)also)be)divided)in)to)primary)and)secondary)data,)which)refers)to)data)collected)by)the)researcher)and)data)collected)by)others)respectively)(Andersen)2005,)p.)151).)Table)2.2)provides)an)overview)of)the)data)techniques)used)in)this)report)which)is)inspired)by)that)of)Andersen)(2005,)p.)151).)As)shown,)the)nine)interviews)with)startup)companies)can)be)categorised)as)qualitative)primary)data.)In)addition,)the)interview)are)stimuli)data,)as)the)interviewees)have)been)affected)by)stimuli)in)the)form)of)questions.)The)interviews)were)conducted)as)semi9structured,)which)refers)to)the)fact)that)there)is)an)interview)guide.)However,)the)researcher)can)deviate)from)this)and)the)interview)happens)more)as)a)conversation)(Andersen)2005,)p.)153).)The)interview)guide)can)be)seen)in)appendix)A)and)as)it)shows)in)the)transcribed)interviews)in)appendices)B9J,)I)have)asked)follow)up)questions.)Some)interviewees)had)asked)to)receive)the)questions)beforehand)and)had)made)stipulations)in)regards)to)what)they)were)willing)to)disclose,)even)with)a)promise)of)confidentiality.)))Secondary)data)was)used)in)the)literature)review)and)the)industry)overview,)where)data)from)academic)articles,)mainstream)media,)blogs)and)websites)were)used.)Some)quantitative)data)was)represented)in)these)sources)and)applied)to)the)industry)overview)in)terms)of)statistics)of)growth.)Yin)(2009,)p.)116))defines)collecting)information)from)



multiple)sources)aimed)at)corroborating)the)same)phenomenon)as)data)triangulation.)Triangulation)allows)the)researcher)to)address)a)broader)range)of)historical)and)behavioural)issues.)Thus)any)conclusion)is)likely)to)be)more)convincing)and)accurate)as)it)is)based)on)several)different)sources)of)information)(Yin)2009,)p.)116).)As)exemplified)in)the)table,)this)thesis)applies)several)types)of)information)and)thus)follows)the)data)triangulation)method.)))

) Primary#data) )Secondary#data)

Stimuli)data) Non9stimuli)data)

Qualitative#data) Semi9structured)interviews)with)9)organisations))

9) Academic)articles)Mainstream)media))Blogs)Websites))

Quantitative#data) 9) 9) Statistics)Table#2.2#J#Overview#of#data#collection#techniques#(As#seen#in#Andersen#2005,#p.#151)#

)The)selection)of)companies)for)the)initial)pilot)study)was)chosen)based)on)a)number)of)criteria:)● Private)company)in)the)share)economy))● Representing)different)industries,)maturity)and)sizes)● Availability)for)interview))

)Some)sharing)movements)do)take)place)in)the)public)sector,)however,)their)basis)for)setting)goals,)motivations)for)the)share)economy)and)competition)differs)a)great)deal)from)private)companies,)which)is)why)it)was)important)to)find)only)privately)owned)companies)or)organisations.)In)addition,)I)wanted)to)find)a)variety)of)industries,)maturity)and)sizes,)in)order)for)the)conclusion)to)apply)widely.)The)contact)to)the)interviewees)were)made)through)my)personal)and)professional)network.)Additional)companies)were)suggested)and)many)of)these)were)related)to)the)car9sharing)industry)such)as)MinBilDinBil,)Haxi,)Drivr)and)Ants.)I)decided)to)leave)these)companies)out)of)the)study)as)I)was)afraid)it)would)bear)too)much)emphasis)on)this)sector)as)GoMore)was)one)of)the)participating)companies)and)also)to)limit)the)burden)of)analysing)too)many)interviews.)It)was)also)important)that)the)companies)were)available)for)an)interview)whether)in)person,)via)email)or)skype.)The)personal)interviews)seemed)to)give)the)most)in)depth)answers)as)it)was)easier)to)ask)follow)up)questions)and)clarify)any)



misunderstandings.)Table)2.3)shows)the)companies)interviewed)with)a)brief)overview)of)key)information)for)each)company.))))

Company) Interviewee#name) Interviewee#title) Type) Location) Appendix)AirBnB) Anne)Sofie)Kirkegaard) Community)

Manager)In)person) Denmark)(Global)) B)

Bringrs1) Mads)Emil)Dalsgaard) Co9founder) In)person) Denmark) C)By9del) Anas)Kababo)and)

Christian)Hansen)Co9founders) In)person) Denmark) D)

Dinnersurfer) Kasper)Krægpøth) Co9founder) Skype) Denmark) E)Fanbed) Sarah)Green) Co9founder) Skype) United)Kingdom) F)GoMore) Søren)Friis) Community)

Manager)In)person) Denmark) G)

Lær)Noget)Nyt)

Lars)Frahm)) CEO) Email) Denmark) H)

Momly) Mircea)Vadan) CEO) Skype) Romania) I)Reshopper) Nicolai)Danmark)

Johannesen)Co9founder) Skype) Denmark) J)

Table#2.3#J#Overview#of#interviewees#

)

2.4.2.(Data(collection(part(2(

Part)two)of)this)thesis)presents)a)multiple)case)study)of)eight)organisations.)When)conducting)a)multiple9case)study,)each)case)must)be)carefully)selected)so)it)predicts)either)similar)results)or)contrasting)results)for)anticipable)reasons)(Yin)2009,)p.)54).)To)answer)the)problem)statement)in)this)study)it)was)important)that)the)cases)were)incumbents)and)had)in)one)form)or)another)ventured)in)to)the)share)economy.)Table)2.4)shows)the)case)companies)analysed.)However,)as)the)share)economy)covers)a)broad)scale)of)activities,)I)have)sought)to)find)different)forms)of)activity)that)have)led)the)case)companies)into)the)share)economy,)whether)it)be)partnerships)or)a)new)service)or)product)innovation.))

Case) Type) Company) Region) Industry)A) Incumbent) IKEA) Europe) Goods)

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))1)Bringrs)has)since)the)interview,)which)was)conducted)in)October)2014,)changed)name)to)Trunkbird.)To)avoid)confusion)this)report)will)refer)to)the)company)as)Bringrs.))



B) Incumbent) Santander) Europe) Money)C) Incumbent) Marriott) United)States) Space)D) Incumbent) Citi)Group) United)States) Money)E) Incumbent) B&Q) Europe) Goods)F) Incumbent) Toyota) Asia) Transport)G) Incumbent) Kelly)Services) United)States) Services)H) Incumbent) Coca)Cola) United)States) Food)Table#2.4#J#Overview#of#incumbents#for#multiple#case#study#

)In)addition,)the)companies)represent)a)number)of)different)industries)to)both)cover)the)broad)spectre)of)the)share)economy,)but)also)to)reflect)on)how)an)industry)can)affect)why)a)company)decides)to)step)into)the)share)economy.)The)cases)are)spread)geographically)across)the)United)States,)Europe)and)Asia,)so)it)is)not)possible)to)conclude)that)this)only)applies)to)one)region)or)market,)however)there)might)be)differences.)))According)to)Eisenhardt)(1989))multiple)cases)provide)greater)opportunity)for)overall)generalisation)in)comparison)to)single)case)studies.)It)is)argued)that)there)is)no)optimal)number)of)cases,)but)a)good)rule)of)thumb)is)to)stay)between)four)and)ten)cases.)With)less)than)four)cases)it)becomes)difficult)to)generate)well9founded)conclusions)and)more)than)ten)makes)it)difficult)to)process)all)the)data)which)increases)complexity)(Eisenhardt)1989).)Therefore,)I)settled)on)analysing)eight)cases.)))Another)consideration)that)has)affected)which)cases)to)analyse)has)been)the)availability)of)documentation)and)data)necessary)to)conduct)a)thorough)analysis.)As)it)was)not)possible)to)create)primary)empiric)data)due)to)timing)and)location)constraints,)the)cases)are)based)on)secondary)sources.)According)to)Andersen)(2005,)p.)158))secondary)sources)can)save)a)lot)of)time)and)energy)if)some)or)all)of)the)research)can)be)based)on)these.)Table)2.5)presents)the)sources)used)for)each)case.)It)presents)a)mix)of)the)companies’)own)websites,)blogs)and)press)releases)as)well)as)six)academic)papers,)12)industry)blogs)and)14)media)articles

The$share$economy:$Motivations$and$strategies$for$corporations$$

Sara$Green$Brodersen$(2015)$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Page$19$of$104$

Case$ Company$ Sources$

A$ IKEA$ ● Afzal,$S.$(2013)$IKEA%Partner%With%Customers%to%Sell%Used%Furniture%in%Virtual%Flea%Market.$URL$http://mashable.com/2013/11/03/ikeaQfurnitureQcampaign/$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$

● IKEA$(2013)$IKEA%yearly%summary%report%fy13%URL$http://www.ikea.com/ms/en_CN/pdf/yearly_summary/ikeaQgroupQyearlyQsummaryQfy13.pdf$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$

● IKEA$(2015)$Annonsera%på%Köp%&%sälj$URL$http://www.ikea.com/ms/sv_SE/ikea_family/kop_och_salj/index.html$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$● Matzler,$K.,$Veider,$V.$&$Kathan,$W.$(2014)$Adapting$to$the$Sharing$Economy.$MIT%Sloan%Management%Review,$Winter(15)$● Mok,$K.$(2013)$IKEA$campaign$lets$customers$buy$used$IKEA$furniture$URL$http://www.treehugger.com/ecoQfriendlyQfurniture/ikeaQsecondQhandQ

campaignQbuyQsecondQhandQfurnitureQonline.html$[first$accessed$18$January$2015]$$● Smfb$(2014)$The%Second%Hand%Campaign$URL$http://www.smfb.com/ikeaQsecondQhand/$[first$accessed$18$January$2015]$$

B$ Santander$ ● Hawksworth,$J.$&$Vaughan,$R.$(2014)$The%sharing%economy%N%sizing%the%revenue%opportunity.$URL$http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/megatrends/collisions/sharingeconomy/theQsharingQeconomyQsizingQtheQrevenueQopportunity.jhtml$[first$accessed$3$January$2015]$

● Hirt,$M.$and$Willmott,$P.$(2014)$Strategic$principles$for$competing$in$the$digital$age.$McKinsey%Quarterly,$May$2014$$$● Jones,$N.$(2014)$Funding%Circle%&%Santander%announce%partnership%to%support%thousands%of%UK%businesses$URL$

https://www.fundingcircle.com/blog/2014/06/fundingQcircleQsantanderQannounceQpartnershipQsupportQthousandsQukQbusinesses/$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$

● Moules,$J.$(2014)$Santander%in%peerNtoNpeer%pact%as%alternative%finance%makes%gains.$URL$http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b8890a26Qf62aQ11e3Qa038Q00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PX5c2Ksv$$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$

● Santander$(2013)$Santander%UK%Plc%Annual%Report%URL$http://www.aboutsantander.co.uk/documents/sanukQ2013QannualQreport.pdf$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$

● Savage,$R.$(2014)$Finally%banks%embrace%P2P%as%Santander%gets%into%bed%with%Funding%Circle$URL$http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/go/news/article/1299405/finallyQbanksQembraceQp2pQlendingQsantanderQgetsQbedQfundingQcircle/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$

● Stokes,$K.,$Clarence,$E.,$Anderson,$L.$&$Rinne,$A.$(2014)$Making%sense%of%the%UK%collaborative%economy.$London:$Nesta$

C$ Marriott$ ● Carrington,$D.$(2013)$Hotels%vie%to%become%offices%of%the%future$URL$http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/09/travel/businessQtravellerQhotelQworkspace/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$

● Kaye,$L.$(2013)$LiquidSpace%and%Marriott%Team%Up%for%Instant%Shared%Workspace$URL$http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/02/conferenceQroomQrentalQliquidspaceQmarriott/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$

● Marriott$(2015)$About%Marriott%International$URL$http://www.marriott.com/marriott/aboutmarriott.mi$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$● Said,$C.$(2014)$How%hotel%chains%innovate%with%onNdemand%work%spaces$URL$http://skift.com/2014/07/06/howQhotelQchainsQinnovateQwithQonQdemandQ

workQspaces/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$● Trejos,$N.$(2013)$More%hotels%rent%popNup%office,%work%spcaes$URL$http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/hotels/2013/11/24/hotelsQrentQofficeQworkQ

space/3691921/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$● White,$M.C.$(2013)$Office%space,%by%the%hour$URL$http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/business/hotelsQcarveQoutQworkQspacesQrentedQ

hourly.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$

D$ Citi$Group$ ● Citi$(2015)$Citi%at%a%Glance$URL$$http://www.citigroup.com/citi/about/citi_at_a_glance.html$$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$● Bernstein,$A.$(2012)$Breaking:%Citibank%is%sponsor%of%NYC%bike%share,%“Citibike”$URL$http://www.wnyc.org/story/284420QbreakingQcitibankQisQsponsorQ

ofQnycQbikeQshareQcitibike/$$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$



● Ferro,$S.$(2014)$When%branding%is%too%good:%a%cautionary%tale%from%New%York’s%Citi%Bike$URL$http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028632/terminalQvelocity/whenQbrandingQisQtooQgoodQaQcautionaryQtaleQfromQnewQyorksQcitiQbike$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$

● O’Connor,$W.$(2013)$Citi%investment%in%New%York%City%bikeshare%pays%off$URL$http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/16/citiQinvestmentQinQnewQyorkQcityQbikeshareQpaysQoff.html$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$

● Radovanovic,$J.$(2013)$Citi%bike%initiative%invited%you%to%take%a%bike%for%a%spin%in%NYC$URL$$http://www.brandingmagazine.com/2013/05/10/citiQbikeQnyc/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$

● Summers,$N.$(2013)$Citi%bike:%Citibank’s%New%York%marketing%coup$URL$http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013Q10Q31/citiQbikeQcitibanksQnewQyorkQmarketingQcoup$[first$accessed$24$January$2015]$

E$ B&Q$ ● B&Q$(2015)%Company%information$URL$$http://www.diy.com/corporate/about$[first$accessed$24$January$2015]$● Knight,$A.$(2013)$Start%and%B&Q%team%up%on%Streetclubs$URL$http://www.bitc.org.uk/newsQevents/news/startQandQbqQteamQstreetclubs$[first$accessed$

22$January$2015]$$

● Parsfield,$M.$$(2012)$Sustainable,%stronger%communities%through%enhancing%practical%skills:%Reflections%from%an%expert%seminar.$UK:$RSA$Action$and$Research$Centre$

● Sexton,$M.$(2014)%Green%gameNchangers.%Insights%for%mainstreaming%business%innovation.$UK:$World$Wildlife$Foundation/Verdantix$● Streetclub.co.uk$(2014)$What%is%Streetclub?$URL$$https://www.streetclub.co.uk/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$● Stokes,$K.,$Clarence,$E.,$Anderson,$L.$&$Rinne,$A.$(2014)$Making%sense%of%the%UK%collaborative%economy.$London:$Nesta$

F$ Toyota$ ● Gain,$B.$(2014)$Toyota%tests%carNsharing%in%French%city$URL$http://europe.autonews.com/article/20141016/ANE/141019918/toyotaQtestsQcarQsharingQinQfrenchQcity$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$

● Hawksworth,$J.$&$Vaughan,$R.$(2014)$The%sharing%economy%N%sizing%the%revenue%opportunity.$URL$http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/megatrends/collisions/sharingeconomy/theQsharingQeconomyQsizingQtheQrevenueQopportunity.jhtml$[first$accessed$3$

January$2015]$

● King,$D.$(2014)$Toyota’s%HaMo%urban%mobility%carsharing%program%comes%to%France$URL$http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/22/toyotasQhamoQurbanQmobilityQcarsharingQprogramQcomesQtoQfrance/$[first$accessed$27$January$2015]$

● Martin,$J.$(2014)$Toyota%iNRoad%EVs%trialled%for%lastNmile%carNsharing$URL$http://www.gizmag.com/toyotaQiQroadQcomsQevQtrialQlastQmileQcarQsharingQjapanQfrance/31120/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$

● Toyota$(2013)$Toyota%in%the%world%2013$URL$http://www.toyotaQglobal.com/company/profile/in_the_world/pdf/2013/databook_en_2013.pdf$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$

● Toyota$(2014)$Company%overview$URL$$http://www.toyotaQglobal.com/company/profile/overview/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$$● Winton,$N.$(2014)$New%report%says%except%for%Tesla,%electricNonly%vehicles%are%failures%so%far$URL$

http://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2014/05/28/exceptQforQteslaQelectricQonlyQvehiclesQareQfailuresQforQnowQreport/$[first$accessed$28$January$

2015]$

G$ Kelly$

Services$● Hawksworth,$J.$&$Vaughan,$R.$(2014)$The%sharing%economy%N%sizing%the%revenue%opportunity.$URL$

http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/megatrends/collisions/sharingeconomy/theQsharingQeconomyQsizingQtheQrevenueQopportunity.jhtml$[first$accessed$3$

January$2015]$

● Karple,$A.$(2013)$Kelly,%oDesk%and%the%“hybridization”%of%staffing%in%2013$URL$http://www.staffingindustry.com/site/ResearchQPublications/Blogs/AndrewQKarpieQsQBlog/KellyQoDeskQandQtheQHybridizationQofQStaffingQinQ2013$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$

● Kelly$Services$(2013)$Kelly%Services%and%oDesk%announce%alliance,%a%first%between%a%workforce%solutions%company%and%an%online%work%platform$URL$http://ir.kellyservices.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=813549$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$

● Kelly$Services$(2015)$About%us$URL$http://www.kellyservices.com/Global/AboutUS/$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$● Putt,$D.$(2014)$Kelly,%oDesk%and%one%big%question$URL$http://www.mboenterprise.com/blog/kellyQodeskQandQoneQbigQquestion$[first$accessed$28$



January$2015]$

H$ Coca$Cola$ ● Bowman,$R.J.$(2015)$Happy%New%Year.%Are%you%ready%for%the%Sharing%Economy?$URL$http://www.supplychainbrain.com/content/blogs/thinkQ

tank/blog/article/happyQnewQyearQareQyouQreadyQforQtheQsharingQeconomy/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$

● Coca$Cola$(2014)$CocaNCola%at%a%glance$URL$http://www.cocaQcolacompany.com/ourQcompany/infographicQcocaQcolaQatQaQglance$[first$accessed$26$

January$2015]$

● Hawksworth,$J.$&$Vaughan,$R.$(2014)$The%sharing%economy%N%sizing%the%revenue%opportunity.$URL$

http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/megatrends/collisions/sharingeconomy/theQsharingQeconomyQsizingQtheQrevenueQopportunity.jhtml$[first$accessed$3$

January$2015]$

● Jobbox$(2014)$Lean%recruitment%N%Hire%faster%and%better$URL$http://blog.jobbox.io/leanQrecruitmentQhireQfasterQandQbetter/$[first$accessed$27$January$

2015]$

● Karkaria,$U.$(2013)$CocaNCola%creating%app%to%help%workers%find%jobs$URL$http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/printQedition/2013/08/23/cocaQcolaQ

creatingQappQtoQhelpQworkers.html?page=all$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$

● Moye,$J.$(2014)%Creating%a%winNwin:%Inside%Coke’s%new%startup%model$URL$http://www.cocaQcolacompany.com/stories/creatingQaQwinQwinQinsideQcokesQ

newQstartupQmodel$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$

● Scheiber,$N.$(2014)$Corporate%America%is%using%the%sharing%economy%to%turn%us%into%temps$URL$http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120378/wonoloQ

tempQworkerQappQshowsQscaryQfutureQsharingQeconomy$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$

● Wonolo$(2015)$Making%onNdemand%staffing%simple$URL$$http://wonolo.com/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$

Table12.5151Data1sources1for1multiple1case1study1

$

The$share$economy:$Motivations$and$strategies$for$corporations$

$


2.4.3.%Affinity%diagram%technique%

When$analysing$and$interpreting$unstructured$qualitative$data$the$researcher$should$be$as$

open$as$possible$and$build$the$material$step$by$step$(Andersen$2005,$p.$157).$The$

interpretation$often$happens$simultaneously$with$the$collection$and$so$the$material$will$

change$shape$and$content$throughout$the$process.$This$process$is$known$as$synthesising$

where$emphasis$is$placed$on$finding$relationships$and$patterns$between$elements.$I,$as$the$

researcher$attempt$to$give$abstract$and$tangible$form$to$ideas,$thoughts$and$reflections$

through$various$methods$(Kolko$2010).$I$have$used$the$affinity$diagram$technique$to$

consolidate$themes$from$both$the$interviews$in$part$one$as$well$as$the$cases$in$part$two.$It$is$

an$effective$method$to$support$the$analysis$of$a$large$amount$of$information$and$to$highlight$

issues.$The$categories$are$essential$as$they$point$to$the$most$important$themes$(Judge$and$

McCrickard$2008).$Figure$2.2$shows$the$affinity$diagram$for$the$topics$presented$in$relation$to$

the$interviews$in$part$one.$Figure$2.3$shows$the$affinity$diagram$sorted$into$nine$themes$

which$points$to$the$motivations$for$the$eight$case$studies$in$part$two.$$

$

Figure'2.2'*'Affinity'diagram'for'startup'interviews'in'part'1''

'

Figure'2.3'*'Affinity'diagram'for'multiple'case'study'in'part'2'



2.5.%Validity%and%Reliability%In$this$section$I$discuss$the$validity$and$reliability$for$the$data$I$have$gathered$and$used$in$my$

thesis.$According$to$Bryman$(1988)$validity$is$connected$with$the$accuracy$and$truthfulness$of$

the$findings,$while$reliability$is$concerned$with$the$consistency$of$the$tool$for$measuring.$

Again,$I$divide$part$one$and$part$two$in$two$sections,$as$there$are$major$distinctions$between$

the$data.$$

2.5.1.%Validity%and%reliability%part%1%

In$part$one$of$this$thesis$I$conducted$nine$interviews$for$the$pilot$study.$When$conducting$

semiUstructured$interviews,$there$are$a$number$of$data$quality$issues$which$can$occur.$

EasterbyUSmith$and$colleagues$(2012)$work$with$three$issues$in$relation,$which$are:$

● Reliability$

● Forms$of$bias$$

● Validity$and$generalisability$$

The$nature$of$semiUstructured$interviews$makes$it$difficult$to$compare$one$interview$to$

another$and$so$it$is$difficult$to$use$quantitative$data$based$on$these$interviews$(EasterbyU

Smith$et$al.$2012).$The$interviews$in$this$report$are$mainly$used$to$describe$a$complex$

phenomenon$for$every$company.$This$could$question$reliability,$however,$the$data$is$not$used$

as$statistical$data,$but$merely$points$to$a$general$tendency$why$I$believe$the$reliability$is$high.$

Another$issue$related$to$reliability$is$that$this$research$method$reflects$reality$at$the$time$

when$they$were$collected$in$a$situation$which$might$be$subject$to$change,$which$characterises$

the$complex$and$dynamic$nature$of$the$topic$(EasterbyUSmith$et$al.$2012).$The$interviews$

were$conducted$in$September$and$October$2014,$which$was$the$basis$for$analysis$in$the$

following$months.$If$the$interviewees$had$been$asked$the$same$questions$later$in$the$process$

their$answers$might$have$been$different$due$to$a$changed$situation.$For$this$reason$my$

findings$reflect$a$moment$in$time.$

$

EasterbyUSmith$and$colleagues$(2012)$also$mentions$two$forms-of-bias.$First,$interviewer$bias$

can$affect$the$response$of$the$interviewee$by$the$tone$of$voice,$comments$and$nonUverbal$

behaviour.$Bias$can$also$occur$in$the$way$responses$are$interpreted.$It$is$believed$that$the$

interviewee$bias$issue$is$difficult$to$discover$when$it$happens,$however,$proper$preparation$

and$listening$skills$can$minimise$the$risk$during$the$interview.$For$each$interview$I$gave$a$

thorough$introduction$to$my$research$and$how$their$answers$were$going$to$be$used.$I$also$



ensured$the$interviewees$that$they$could$not$give$wrong$answers.$For$the$physical$interviews,$

the$time$and$location$were$picked$by$the$interviewees$to$make$them$as$comfortable$as$

possible.$The$more$interviews$conducted$and$that$points$to$the$same$issue$will$minimise$the$

risk$of$bias$in$interpreting$data$(Saunders$et$al.$2009),$which$is$why$I$have$chosen$to$have$

nine$companies$represented.$Interviewee$bias$can$be$caused$by$perceptions$about$the$

interviewer$or$the$nature$of$the$interview$situation$which$can$be$both$time$consuming$and$

intrusive$(Saunders$et$al.$2009).$The$interviewees$were$positive$about$participating$in$the$

interview$once$they$were$informed$that$the$interview$is$confidential.$$

$

The$validity$of$semiUstructured$interviews$are$usually$high$as$the$interviewer$is$able$to$clarify$

any$unclear$responses$(Saunders$et$al.$2009).$However,$qualitative$research$is$not$able$to$

make$statistical$generalisations$about$entire$countries$or$industries$as$a$case$study$is$based$on$

a$small$and$unrepresentative$number.$Two$arguments$have$been$raised$in$order$to$clarify$the$

approach$often$adopted$to$the$generalisability$of$qualitative$research.$According$to$Bryman$

(1988),$the$first$argues$that$a$single$wellUcompleted$and$rigorous$case$study$can$be$more$

useful$in$other$contexts,$than$a$restricted$sample$in$surveys.$The$second$argues$that$if$you$are$

able$to$relate$your$research$to$existing$theory,$the$findings$will$have$a$broader$theoretical$

significance$(Bryman$1988).$The$report$seeks$to$do$just$this$and$therefore$I$believe$the$case$

studies$will$help$test$and$build$theory$based$upon$the$findings.$The$validity$and$reliability$of$

secondary$sources$used$in$part$one$are$similar$to$the$features$of$those$in$part$two$and$thus$I$

will$not$repeat$them$here,$but$refer$to$the$next$section.$$$$$

$

2.5.2.%Validity%and%reliability%part%2%

In$the$second$part$of$this$thesis$I$analyse$my$eight$cases$based$on$secondary$sources,$as$

described$previously.$Reliability$and$validity$ascribed$to$secondary$data$are$functions$of$the$

method$by$which$the$data$was$collected$and$its$source.$The$authority$and$reputation$of$the$

source$can$give$an$assessment$of$the$reliability$and$validity$(Saunders$et$al.$2009).$As$

described$previously,$the$case$studies$draw$on$a$number$of$different$types$of$sources.$

Saunders$and$colleagues$(2009)$argue$that$large,$well$known$organisations$are$likely$to$be$

reliable$and$trustworthy,$as$their$existence$relies$on$the$credibility$of$their$data$and$it$is$

expected$that$their$procedures$for$collecting$and$compiling$data$are$accurate.$Thus$I$believe$

the$academic$papers$as$well$as$the$media$articles$from$sources$such$as$Forbes,$Businessweek$



and$Financial$Times$have$a$high$degree$of$validity$and$reliability.$The$blogs$from$Treehugger,$

TriplePundit$and$The$Daily$Beast$are$less$likely$to$be$as$reliable$and$valid.$It$is$clear$that$these$

texts$are$influenced$by$the$writers’$own$opinion$of$the$situation.$However,$as$these$writers$are$

not$used$for$referencing$exact$data,$but$merely$to$reflect$the$potential$motivation$for$the$case$

companies,$I$believe$their$reliability$and$validity$are$high$enough.$Companies’$records$are$

often$more$difficult$to$asses$as$they$often$hold$inaccuracies$and$inconsistencies$(Saunders$et$

al.$2009).$The$companies’$own$websites$and$press$releases$in$the$case$studies$have$been$used$

to$introduce$the$company$and$the$activity$in$the$share$economy.$Thus,$the$company$has$not$

influenced$my$assessment$or$their$motivation$or$potential$strategy.$$$$$$$

$

2.6.%Delimitation%

Through$the$following$delimitation,$I$will$elaborate$on$the$choices$I$have$made$throughout$the$

study,$detailing$why$I$have$chosen$to$exclude$parts$of$seemingly$relevant$parameters.$To$keep$

the$thesis$concise$and$relevant$in$accordance$with$the$topic$I$have$excluded$aspects$which$

could$have$proven$useful.$This$enables$me$to$focus$on$the$theories$and$methods$relevant$to$

the$problem$being$investigated.$$

$

I$do$not$set$out$to$investigate$how$the$share$economy$can$create$value$for$corporations,$but$

strictly$what$motivates$these$companies$to$enter$into$this$new$economy.$As$these$activities$

are$so$recent$it$is$impossible,$within$the$scope$of$this$thesis,$to$establish$or$even$seek$to$

analyse$the$actual$value$gained$for$the$companies.$However,$the$incumbents’$motivations,$

which$are$discussed$in$part$two,$are$an$indication$of$the$value$which$these$companies$expect$

to$gain.$In$other$words,$why$does$entering$into$the$share$economy$make$sense$for$these$eight$

corporations.$I$do$not$aim$to$define$value$or$success,$as$this$could$become$cumbersome.$The$

words$value$and$success$are$used$to$reflect$the$strive$towards$improving$the$current$situation,$

whatever$that$might$be$in$terms$of$competitive$advantage,$revenue$or$something$else,$for$

these$companies.$$$

$

In$the$industry$review$in$section$3.2.$I$focus$on$six$of$the$twelve$industries$provided$in$

Owyang’s$(2014b)$framework.$This$is$done$to$limit$the$extent$of$the$text$and$keep$it$relevant$

to$the$cases$in$part$two.$The$startup$companies$in$part$one$reflect$the$opinion$of$European$



and$mainly$Danish$companies,$why$a$different$set$of$themes$would$have$occurred$if$I$had$

interviewed$American$or$Asian$startups.$The$incumbents$in$part$two$cover$both$Asia,$Europe$

and$America$and$so$the$findings$are$able$to$be$applied$widely.$With$that$said$there$might$be$

cultural$and$market$differences,$which$influences$incumbents,$however$that$is$beyond$the$

scope$of$my$research$here.$Through$the$process$of$searching$for$relevant$literature$I$have$

come$across$authors$linking$the$share$economy$to$the$circular$economy.$I$have$chosen$not$to$

include$or$define$the$circular$economy$in$my$thesis,$as$this$seems$strongly$related$to$

optimising$production$cycles$in$terms$of$sustainability$and$thus$does$not$relate$to$peerU

models$as$such.$$$$$

2.7.%Definitions%

The$below$definitions$are$used$to$describe$unfamiliar$terms$so$writer$and$reader$have$the$

same$point$of$departure$and$understanding.$

$

Incumbents$ $

For$this$thesis$I$assume$incumbents$to$be$companies$where$the$core$business$is$not$related$to$

the$share$economy$from$the$outset.$These$companies$are$typically$older$and$larger$than$most$

small$and$medium$sized$enterprises$which$are$covered$in$research$and$media$in$connection$to$

the$share$economy.$See$for$example$the$Mesh$directory$(Mesh$2015).$The$cases$chosen$for$the$

analysis$are$indeed$larger$and$older$than$most$share$economy$startups.$$

$

Share$economy$companies$

The$share$economy$will$be$defined$in$depth$in$section$3.1.1$Share$economy$companies$refers$

to$companies$which$have$been$started$with$sharing$as$a$core$element$of$their$business.$In$

opposition$to$incumbents$described$above,$these$companies$are$often$smaller$and$younger,$

also$referred$to$as$startups.$See$for$example$the$Mesh$directory$(Mesh$2015).$$$

$

Traditional$industries$

Like$‘incumbents’$described$above,$traditional$industries$refer$to$industries$and$sectors$with$

incumbent$companies$that$have$not$yet$or$have$just$recently$been$entered$by$new$share$

economy$companies.$$


$


PART$1$

3.%Dynamics%of%the%share%economy%To$provide$a$thorough$background$of$the$share$economy$this$chapter$will$dive$into$the$

literature$on$the$topic$as$well$as$present$empirical$examples$of$companies$in$the$share$

economy.$I$work$from$a$broad$spectrum$and$narrow$in$on$specific$industries$and$concrete$

startup$examples$as$illustrated$in$figure$3.1.$First,$I$start$with$a$literature$review$which$entails$

defining$the$share$economy$from$its$early$days$to$the$present$time$as$well$as$drivers$of$

growth,$typologies$and$types$of$reUengineering.$Second,$I$present$an$overview$of$

developments$in$a$select$few$industries,$which$are$relevant$to$the$final$analysis.$Third,$I$give$

insight$to$the$businesses$of$nine$startup$companies$based$on$interviews.$The$chapter$

concludes$with$a$taxonomy$of$companies$in$the$share$economy,$which$will$be$applied$in$the$

cross$case$analysis$in$chapter$4.$$

$

Figure'3.1'*'Structure'of'part'1'



3.1.%Literature%review:%Understanding%the%share%economy%

The$available$literature$presents$sporadic$research$in$different$directions,$hence$why$this$

review$is$divided$into$four$sections.$First,$I$draw$on$early$and$current$literature$to$present$the$

various$definitions$of$the$share$economy.$Second,$I$aim$to$provide$an$overview$of$the$drivers$

that$create$growth$in$the$share$economy.$Third,$I$draw$on$recent$literature$to$present$

available$typologies$of$companies$present$in$the$share$economy.$Fourth,$the$section$concludes$

with$an$explanation$of$theory$related$to$corporate$reUengineering.$$

$

3.1.1.%Defining%the%share%economy%

The$Share$Economy$is$a$term$that$is$understood$broadly$and$often$used$synonymously$with$

terms$such$as$‘collaborative$consumption’,$‘collaborative$economy’,$‘peer$economy’$among$

others$(Botsman$2013).$The$first$term$describing$the$phenomenon$was$‘collaborative$

consumption’$coined$by$Spaeth$and$Felson$(1978),$which$was$brought$to$life$again$by$

Botsman$and$Rogers$(2011)$more$than$thirty$years$later.$This$term$is$being$criticised$as$it$is$

also$about$production,$trading,$creation,$distribution$and$not$just$consumption$(Nesta$2014).$$

The$peer$(or$P2P)$economy$has$been$used$to$describe$companies$with$peerUtoUpeer$business$

models$where$the$platform$facilitates$people’s$lending,$renting$and$sharing$of$things$without$

interference$from$larger$corporations$(P2P$Foundation$2014).$This$term,$however,$can$also$

refer$to$other$traditional$aggregators$and$so$it$is$not$fitting$to$describe$this$phenomenon$

either$(Nesta$2014).$$

$

The$mesh$has$been$used$to$describe$the$interconnectedness$of$people$and$how$technology$

gives$access$to$goods$and$services$(Gansky$2012,$p.$15)$in$the$same$way$as$social$media$has$

often$been$described$(Nesta$2014).$Rifkin$(2000)$wrote$about$the$access$economy$

highlighting$the$user’s$preference$of$access$over$ownership$and$thus$eliminating$other$

business$models,$which$focus$on$redistribution$of$goods$(Nesta$2014).$Bardhi$and$Eckhardt$

(2012)$also$uses$the$term$access$and$argues$that$consumers$are$able$to$access$objects$or$

networks$that$they$could$not$afford$to$own$or$that$they$choose$not$to$own$due$to$concerns$

such$as$space$constraints$or$the$environment.$They$define$accessUbased$consumption$as$

“transactions$that$may$be$market$mediated$in$which$no$transfer$of$ownership$takes$place.”$$

$



Benkler$(2004)$wrote$an$essay$on$the$developments$happening$in$the$early$days$of$the$share$

economy$and$used$carpooling,$which$at$the$time$accounted$for$one$in$six$commuting$trips$in$

the$United$States,$as$an$example.$He$characterised$these$new$resourceUmanagement$models$as$

“...$relying$on$social$relations$and$an$ethic$of$sharing,$rather$than$on$a$price$system,$to$mobilise$

and$allocate$resources…”$(Benkler$2004).$Despite$the$fairly$widespread$impact$at$the$time,$his$

argument$was$that$the$new$practices$were$not$well$specified$in$contemporary$economics.$A$

few$years$later$Belk$(2007)$also$focused$on$the$share$economy$as$a$social$system.$He$defines$

the$share$economy$as:$

$

“Sharing-is-an-alternative-to-the-private-ownership-that-is-emphasised-$

in-both-marketplace-exchange-and-gift-giving.-$

In-sharing,-two-or-more-people-may-enjoy-the-benefits-(or-costs)-$

that-flow-from-possessing-a-thing.”$

$

The$share$economy$has$become$a$popular$term$to$describe$a$range$of$various$business$

models,$activities$and$organisations$(Nesta$2014).$John$(2013)$emphasises$how$the$share$

economy$has$grown$from$web$2.0$and$consumer$participation$in$social$networks$(SNS).$

However,$he$argues$that$it$is$not$just$a$type$of$communication,$but$also$an$economic$activity$

which$can$be$of$both$production$or$consumption.$Similarly,$Botsman$(2013)$argues$for$

including$an$economic$element$and$a$wide$definition$of$what$can$be$shared.$She$has$given$the$

following$definition$of$the$share$economy:$

$

“An-economic-model-based-on-sharing-underutilized-assets-$

from-spaces-to-skills-to-stuff-for-monetary-or-nonDmonetary-benefits.$

It-is-largely-focused-on-P2P-marketplaces.”-$

$

Table$3.1$provides$an$overview$of$the$definitions$presented$here$from$earlier$works$to$the$

present$time,$where$it$seems$definitions$are$wider$and$encompass$several$players,$economic$

activities$and$elements$to$be$shared.$$

$

$$

$



$

Author$ Title$ Year$ Definition'of'the'share'economy$

Spaeth$and$Felson$

Community$Structure$and$Collaborative$Consumption:$A$Routine$Activity$Approach$

1978$ First$to$describe$the$phenomenon$and$use$the$term$“collaborative$consumption”$

Rifkin$ The$Age$of$Access:$The$New$Culture$of$HyperCapitalism$Where$All$of$Life$Is$A$PaidUFor$Experience$

2000$ “Access$economy”$highlighting$users’$preference$to$access$over$ownership$

Benkler$ "Sharing$Nicely":$On$shareable$goods$and$the$emergence$of$sharing$as$a$modality$of$economic$production$

2004$ “...$relying$on$social$relations$and$an$ethic$of$sharing,$rather$than$on$a$price$system,$to$mobilise$and$allocate$resources…”$

Belk$ Why$not$share$rather$than$own?$ 2007$ “Sharing$is$an$alternative$to$the$private$ownership$that$is$emphasised$in$both$marketplace$exchange$and$gift$giving.$In$sharing,$two$or$more$people$may$enjoy$the$benefits$(or$costs)$that$flow$from$possessing$a$thing”$

Gansky$ The$Mesh:$Why$the$Future$of$Business$is$Sharing$

2012$ “The$interconnectedness$of$people$and$how$technology$gives$access$to$goods$and$services”$

Bardhi$and$Eckhardt$

AccessUBased$Consumption:$The$case$of$Car$Sharing$

2012$ “AccessUbased$consumption$is$transactions$that$may$be$market$mediated$in$which$no$transfer$of$ownership$takes$place”$

Botsman$ The$sharing$economy$lacks$a$shared$definition$

2013a$

“An$economic$model$based$on$sharing$underutilized$assets$from$spaces$to$skills$to$stuff$for$monetary$or$nonUmonetary$benefits.$It$is$largely$focused$on$P2P$marketplaces.”$

John$ Sharing,$collaborative$consumption$and$web$2.0$

2013$ “Sharing$is$an$activity$of$Web$2.0$and$is$the$word$that$describes$the$mode$of$our$participation$in$SNSs$and$digital$communication.$It$can$also$perform$production$and$consumption”.$

Table'3.1'*'Overview'of'definitions'of'the'share'economy'

$

%

%

%

%

%

$$


$


%

3.1.2.%Drivers%and%enablers%of%growth%

To$understand$the$share$economy$and$the$companies$acting$in$it,$we$must$understand$how$it$

has$grown$and$what$factors$enable$its$existence.$Literature$on$the$topic$suggests$a$number$of$

drivers$as$presented$in$table$3.2.$The$drivers$are$similar$and$overlapping,$but$I$derive$five$

main$drivers$from$the$literature$which$are;$excess$capacity,$technology,$environmental$

awareness,$reUengineering$of$consumption$and$resurgence$of$community.$The$five$drivers$will$

be$examined$in$the$following.$$

$

$

Author$ Drivers'of'the'share'economy'$

Andersson$et$al.$(2013)$$ U InternetUbased$platforms$U PostUcrisis$antidote$to$materialism$U CostUsaving$U Environmental$concerns$

Avital$et$al.$(2014)$ U Spare$capacity$exchange$U ReUengineering$of$consumption.$Access$over$ownership$U Technology,$internetUbased$platforms,$informations$systems,$social$networks$

Botsman$and$Rogers$(2011)$ U Idling$capacity$U Critical$mass$U Environmental$concerns$U Cost$consciousness$U Trust$between$strangers$U Belief$in$the$commons$U Resurgence$of$community$U P2P$technologies$$

Cusumano$(2015)$ U Underutilized$assets$U Social$media$

Gansky$(2013)$ U Information$networks$U Distrust$of$old$companies$U People$reconsider$what’s$valuable$U Climate$change$U Growing$population$and$urbanisation$

John$(2013)$ U Technology$as$driver$U Technology$as$enabler$$

Malhotra$and$Van$Alstyne$

(2014)$$U Spare$resources$U TwoUsided$platforms$

Table'3.2'*'Drivers'of'the'share'economy'

$

$



3.1.2.1.%Excess%capacity%

One$of$the$most$important$ingredients$in$the$share$economy$is$consumers$sharing$or$

exchanging$excess$resources$such$as$services$and$goods$(Avital$et$al.$2014).$In$the$UK$and$the$

US,$80$percent$of$items$that$people$own$are$used$less$than$once$a$month.$This$can$include$

anything$from$bikes,$tools,$clothes,$office$equipment$and$much$more.$This$idling$capacity$is$at$

the$core$of$many$share$economy$companies,$as$they$have$discovered$how$to$redistribute$the$

capacity$elsewhere$(Botsman$and$Rogers$2011,$p.$83).$TwoUsided$web$platforms$bring$people$

with$underutilized$assets$together$with$people$who$would$like$to$rent$those$assets$short$term$

and$thus$unlock$value$inherent$in$spare$resources.$It$can$range$from$spare$time$for$everyday$

tasks$(TaskRabbit),$cars$(Uber,$Lyft),$extra$rooms$(AirBnB),$used$tools$(Streetbank)$and$other$

household$items$(Cusumano$2015,$Malhotra$and$Van$Alstyne$2014).$$$

$

Sharing$is$not$just$spurred$by$technology,$but$is$also$enabled$by$a$growing$population$and$

higher$degree$of$urbanisation.$Roughly$half$of$the$world’s$population$live$in$urban$areas$now$

and$these$dense$cities$are$the$perfect$soil$for$building$share$economy$businesses.$When$there$

are$more$people$around$it$is$easier$to$create$a$more$costUeffective$and$profitable$business$

(Gansky$2013,$p.$81).$In$this$way$the$twoUsided$platforms$can$reach$critical$mass$and$work$

efficiently$(Botsman$and$Rogers$2011,$p.$75).$ $

$

3.1.2.2.%Technology%

According$to$John$(2013)$and$Avital$and$colleagues$(2014)$the$share$economy$is$

characterised$by$a$very$close$affinity$to$contemporary$communication$technologies$as$

consumers$are$leveraging$social$media$networks$to$create$communities$to$trade,$swap,$rent$or$

barter$goods,$skills,$services$and$expertise.$The$internetUbased$platforms$allow$consumers$to$

disintermediate$traditional$commercial$channels$and$instead$trade$with$one$another$

effectively$at$reasonable$low$transaction$costs$(Avital$et$al.$2014).$In$this$regard,$share$

economy$companies$do$not$function$as$middlemen$between$production$and$buyer$anymore,$

but$as$facilitators$of$interactions$(Botsman$and$Rogers$2011,$p.$83).$The$companies$can$grow$

exponentially$through$the$power$of$platform$dynamics$and$network$effects$(Cusumano$2015),$

thus$enabling$a$match$of$supply$and$demand$in$real$time$on$a$global$scale,$why$the$

macroeconomic$gains$are$colossal$(Malhotra$and$Van$Alstyne$2014).$$

$


$


According$to$Andersson$and$colleagues$(2013)$the$ongoing$expansion$and$proliferation$of$

these$companies$would$be$impossible$without$dedicated$IT$infrastructure.$The$spread$of$

mobile$and$social$computing$is$a$foundation$on$which$digital$platforms$sprout$in$everU

increasing$numbers$and$variants$supporting$peerUtoUpeer$exchange.$This$infrastructure$

creates$possibilities$for$a$level$of$service$and$adUhoc$coordination$that$is$brand$new.$The$data$

that$can$be$extracted$from$networks$has$enabled$share$economy$businesses$to$customise$

offerings$and$sustain$a$relationship$with$their$customers$from$the$information$they$collect$

(Gansky$2012,$p.$82U84).$$

All$of$these$companies$are$dependent$on$network$effects$and$attracting$a$critical$mass$of$

peers$to$create$enough$perceived$value$(Andersson$et$al.$2013).$Critical$mass$is$a$term$used$to$

describe$the$“existence$of$enough$momentum$in$a$system$to$make$it$become$selfUsustaining”$

(Botsman$and$Rogers$2011,$p.$82).$Reaching$the$“tipping$point”$of$popular$critical$mass$is$vital$

for$companies$in$the$share$economy$for$a$number$of$reasons.$One$reason$is$satisfying$the$

users’$desire$for$choice$and$availability.$If$share$economy$companies$want$to$compete$with$

traditional$shopping$they$must$be$able$to$provide$the$same$choice.$The$choice$grows$as$the$

number$of$users$grow$which$means$more$people$will$be$satisfied.$The$second$reason$is$that$a$

critical$mass$of$users$provide$a$social-proof-that$the$concept$is$working$and$will$thus$attract$

more$users$(Botsman$and$Rogers$2011,$p.$82).$

$

3.1.2.3.%Environmental%awareness%

Andersson$and$colleagues$argue$(2013)$that$one$of$the$drivers$of$the$share$economy$is$a$

highly$developed$environmental$consciousness$with$consumers.$Botsman$and$Rogers$(2011,$

p.$84)$supplements$this$thought$as$the$nonUmaterialistic$lifestyle$of$the$share$economy$is$

characterised$by$an$increasing$environmentally$aware$consumer.$For$those$consumers$value$

unused$equals$waste,$why$they$share$their$belongings$with$others.$This$creates$a$positive$

impact$on$the$environment$(Gansky$2012,$pp.$76).$$

$

$

3.1.2.4.%Re<engineering%of%consumption%

Avital$and$colleagues$(2014)$suggest$that$the$continued$consumerisation$of$digital$

technologies$suggests$that$we$are$seeing$a$fundamental$reUengineering$of$consumption.$


$


Consumers$are$more$likely$to$want$access$over$ownership$and$this$is$facilitated$by$the$

widespread$adoption$of$peerUtoUpeer$shared$access$models.$The$growth$of$shared$models$

could$be$motivated$by$an$antidote$to$materialism$and$overUconsumption$as$a$response$to$the$

financial$crisis$(Andersson$et$al.$2013).$The$recession$has$also$forced$people$to$focus$on$what$

is$important$to$them$and$revisit$the$ideal$childhood$dream$of$owning$a$home.$Will$physical$

assets$provide$happiness$in$their$old$age?$People$have$questioned$lifestyles$that$required$

expensive$materialistic$possessions$and$instead$seek$to$live$a$sustainable$life$with$strong$

community$participation.$Both$Andersson$and$colleagues$(2013)$and$Botsman$and$Rogers$

(2011,$p.$89)$argue$that$these$new$models$create$opportunities$for$cost$savings$and$thus$are$

popular$with$consumers$today.$These$shifts$in$values$have$created$a$boon$for$share$economy$

companies$(Gansky$2013,$p.$69).$$

$

3.1.2.5.%Resurgence%of%community%

According$to$Gansky$(2013,$p.$64)$and$Botsman$and$Rogers$(2011,$p.$88)$the$financial$crisis$

has$also$spurred$a$sense$of$community$in$society.$During$the$financial$crisis$a$number$of$large$

corporations$from$banks$to$insurance$companies$were$exposed$for$having$handled$customers’$

money$in$unethical$ways.$Their$actions$created$a$chasm$between$consumers$and$big$brands.$

This$distrust$of$oldUmodel$companies$has$fueled$consumers’$willingness$to$consider$

alternative$businesses,$brands$and$lifestyles.$Consumers$in$the$US$are$reported$to$be$more$

willing$to$try$a$community$bank$or$carUsharing$service,$which$feeds$the$growing$number$of$

share$economy$companies$(Gansky$2013,$p.$64U65).$

$

Most$forms$of$interaction$in$share$economy$platforms$require$us$to$trust$a$stranger.$Even$so,$

the$platforms$work$because$they$are$being$selfUgoverned$by$the$communities$and$any$

disputes$are$resolved$by$a$decentralised,$transparent$and$peerUpoliced$system.$Technology$

makes$it$possible$to$take$the$anonymity$out$of$the$transaction$by$showcasing$reviews,$people$

they$know,$location,$interest$and$much$more.$Even$if$someone$does$something$wrong$in$the$

community$we$are$back$to$the$time$of$the$village$where$everyone$would$know$who$and$what$

that$person$did.$In$this$way$trust$is$more$often$strengthened$than$broken$(Botsman$and$

Rogers$2011,$p.$91U93).$The$internet$has$brought$the$value$of$the$commons$back$as$we$as$

consumers$recognise$that$by$providing$value$to$a$community$we$enable$our$own$social$value$



to$expand$in$return.$Furthermore,$the$more$users$participating$in$a$community,$the$higher$the$

value$for$everyone$participating$in$it$(Botsman$and$Rogers$2011,$p.$88).$This$belief$makes$us$

more$inclined$to$use$various$platforms$online.'$

$

Figure$3.2$presents$the$five$main$drivers$of$the$share$economy.$

$

$Figure'3.2'*'Main'drivers'of'the'share'economy'

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$



$

3.1.3.%Typologies%of%share%economy%companies%

In$this$section$I$will$cover$the$various$typologies$presented$in$the$literature$within$the$share$

economy.$The$typologies$are$different$in$their$approach$and$thus$the$section$presents$theory$

on$type$of$goods,$archetypes,$lifeUcycles$and$types$of$corporate$reUengineering.$Table$3.3$sums$

up$the$typologies$in$relation$to$each$author$before$each$typology$will$be$explained$in$the$

following.$$

$

Author$ Title$ Year$ Typologies$

Benkler$ "Sharing$Nicely":$On$

shareable$goods$and$the$

emergence$of$sharing$as$a$

modality$of$economic$

production$

2004$ Shareable'goods$U Lumpy$goods$

U FineUgrained$goods$

U MidUgrained$goods$

U LargeUgrained$goods$

Gansky$ The$Mesh:$Why$the$Future$

of$Business$is$Sharing$2012$ The'mesh'sweet'spot'$

U High$cost,$low$use$goods$

U Durable$

U Flexible$

U Reparable$

U Sustainable$$

$Life'cycle'curve$

Andersson$

et$al.$PeerUtoUPeer$Service$

Sharing$Platforms:$Driving$

Share$and$Share$Alike$on$a$MassUScale$

2013$ Four'archetypes'of'peer*to*peer'exchange$U File$sharing$

U Trading$U Goods$sharing$

U Service$sharing$$

Botsman$

and$Rogers$What's$Mine$Is$Yours:$How$

Collaborative$Consumption$

Is$Changing$the$Way$We$

Live.$

2011$ 3'types'of'businesses$U Redistribution$markets$

U Product$service$systems$

U Collaborative$lifestyles$

Hawkswort

h$and$

Vaughan$

The$sharing$economy$U$

sizing$the$revenue$

opportunity.$

2014$ Sharing'economy'life*cycle$

Table'3.3'*'Typologies'presented'in'literature'on'the'share'economy'

$

$

$$

$



3.1.3.1.%Shareable%goods%

In$early$works$on$the$share$economy,$Benkler$(2004)$presented$his$cases$of$carpooling$and$

distributed$computing$and$the$sharing$practices$around$them.$The$cases$were$dedicated$to,$

among$other$things,$defining$a$particular$class$of$physical$goods$as$‘shareable$goods’$that$

systematically$have$excess$capacity$and$how$this$capacity$could$be$harnessed$through$sharing$

relations.$Benkler$(2004)$identifies$shareable$goods$based$on$the$technical$characteristics$of$

the$functionalityUproducing$goods$and$the$shape$of$demand$for$the$functionality.$The$

shareable$goods$are$named$lumpy-goods,$also$known$as$indivisible$by$economists.$Lumpy$

goods$provision$functionality$in$packages$rather$than$in$a$smooth$flow.$The$example$of$the$PC$

illustrates$that$it$is$lumpy$as$you$cannot$buy$less$than$some$threshold$computation$capacity,$

and$once$purchased$you$have$a$certain$amount,$whether$you$need$it$or$not.$Lumpy$goods$can$

in$turn$be$divided$by$granularity$into$fineD,-midU$and-largeDgrained.$LargeDgrained-goods$are$

characterised$by$being$so$expensive$it$can$only$be$used$by$aggregating$demand$for$it$such$as$

industrial$equipment.$FineDgrained-goods$allow$consumers$to$buy$the$exact$capacity$required$

to$cover$their$need$such$as$a$cup$of$coffee.$MidDgrained-goods$are$small$enough$for$an$

individual$to$justify$buying$it$for$personal$use,$provided$the$person$is$willing$and$able$to$pay$

for$it.$If$enough$individuals$buy$midUgrained$goods$society$will$have$a$large$amount$of$excess$

capacity.$This$excess$capacity$can$be$used$to$provision$the$requirements$of$others$(Benkler$

2004).$$

$

With$the$increase$in$sharing$over$the$last$few$years,$it$is$discussed$what$we$are$willing$and$

able$to$share.$Gansky$(2012,$p.$23)$tries$to$answer$this$and$supports$Benkler’s$earlier$

thoughts$with$her$theory$of$‘own$to$mesh’.$She$argues$that$not$everything$will$or$can$be$

shared,$but$sharing$makes$sense$where$it$gives$a$big$payoff$for$a$family,$community$or$

business$(2012,$p.$22).$Figure$3.3$shows$a$grid$of$frequency-of-use$and$cost-of-goods.$The$

optimal$goods$to$share$are$placed$in$the$mesh-sweet-spot,$which$are$characterised$by$low$use$

and$high$cost.$Goods$which$are$used$a$lot$do$not$have$excess$capacity$and$thus$cannot$cater$

for$others’$needs.$In$addition,$transaction$costs$of$sharing$low$cost$goods$are$too$high$and$thus$

outweighs$the$value$from$sharing.$Therefore,$high$cost,$low$use$creates$value$for$both$parties$

when$sharing$(Gansky$2012,$p.$23).$$



$Figure'3.3'*'The'Mesh'Sweet'Spot'(Gansky'2012,'p.'23)'

$

$

Gansky$(2012,$p.$53)$also$argues$for$four$features$of$sweet$spot$goods.$First,$as$many$people$

use$these$goods$they$must$be$durable,$meaning$they$are$safe,$well$built$and$long$lasting.$

Second,$products$must$be$flexible$as$they$will$need$to$accommodate$different$users$with$

various$needs.$Third,$standardisation$and$transparent$design$allows$products$to$be$fixed$and$

reused$rather$than$trashed$and$thus$products$must$be$reparable.$Fourth,$products$must$be$

sustainable$with$a$design$that$reduces$natural$resource$destruction$and$waste,$which$is$ever$

more$expensive,$improves$efficiency$and$reduces$overall$costs$(Gansky$2012,$p.$53).$$$$$$$

%

$$


$


3.1.3.2.%Archetypes%

Andersson$and$colleagues$(2013)$have$attempted$to$compare$and$explore$the$new$peerUtoU

peer$exchange$platforms$that$are$specifically$designed$to$facilitate$sharing.$Their$findings$lead$

to$four$archetypes$of$peerUtoUpeer$exchange$which$can$be$categorised$according$to$what$is$

actually$being$shared,$the$focal$object$of$sharing$and$thus$the$archetypes$are$file-sharing,-

trading,-goods-sharing$and$service-sharing.$According$to$Andersson$and$colleagues$(2013)$the$

object$can$be$purely$digital,$physical$or$a$service$interaction.$In$addition,$it$is$relevant$to$

categorise$according$to$the$coordination$patterns$that$are$involved$in$the$mediated$exchange$

between$consumers.$Are$the$peers$required$to$arrange$timing$or$meet$physically?$In$this$way$

physical$coordination$can$be$decoupled,$where$no$coordination$is$necessary$or$coupled,$where$

peers$coordinate$in$time$and$space.$Table$3.4$details$their$findings,$which$also$entails$

examples$of$four$businesses$for$each$archetype.$The$findings$highlight$aspects$of$these$

platforms$such$as$only$goods-sharing$does$not$include$a$transfer$of$ownership.$Consumers$can$

rent$a$place$to$stay$at$AirBnB$for$a$set$time$for$a$fee,$but$they$will$not$own$the$place$unlike$

trading-of$goods.$Service$sharing,$which$have$become$more$prevalent$in$recent$years,$seems$to$

be$the$most$complex$form$as$the$mutually$beneficial$encounter$is$produced$and$consumed$

simultaneously.$Andersson$and$colleagues$(2013)$suggest$that$the$classification$is$not$

exhaustive$and$the$boundaries$are$somewhat$fuzzy.$$

$

$ Peer*to*peer'$File'sharing$

Peer*to*peer'Trading$

Peer*to*peer'Goods'sharing$

Peer*to*peer'Service'sharing$

Object'of'exchange$ Digital$material$ Tangible$material$ Tangible$material$ Intangible$encounter$

Timing'requirement$

No$ Not$necessarily$ Not$necessarily$ Yes$

Meeting'requirement$

No$ No$ Not$necessarily$ Yes$

Example$ Napster$ eBay$ AirBnB$ Avego$

Table'3.4'*'Archetypes'of'peer*to*peer'platforms'(Andersson'et'al.'2013)'

$$$

In$2010,$Botsman$and$Rogers$published$their$study$on$share$economy$systems.$After$

organising$thousands$of$examples$into$categories$their$findings$led$to$three$systems,$which$

are$product-service-systems,-redistribution-markets$and$collaborative-lifestyles$(Botsman$and$

Rogers$2010).$Product-service-systems$characterises$companies$which$offer$goods$as$services$



rather$than$selling$them$as$products.$It$can$also$be$privately$owned$goods$which$can$be$

shared$or$rented$through$peerUtoUpeer$systems.$Redistribution-markets$move$preowned$goods$

from$somewhere$they$are$not$needed$to$somewhere$they$are.$The$goods$might$be$free,$

swapped$or$sold$for$cash.$Collaborative-lifestyles$let$people$with$similar$needs$or$interests$

come$together$and$share$and$exchange$lessUtangible$assets$such$as$time,$space,$skills$and$

money.$These$interactions$often$happen$at$community$or$neighbourhood$level$such$as$sharing$

working$spaces,$gardens$or$parking$spots$(Botsman$and$Rogers$2010).$The$three$systems$

presented$by$Botsman$and$Rogers$(2010)$have$similarities$to$the$four$archetypes$presented$

by$Andersson$and$colleagues$(2013).$Botsman$and$Rogers$(2010)$do$not$include$file$sharing$

as$part$of$the$share$economy,$however,$the$idea$for$the$remaining$systems$and$archetypes$

seem$to$be$similar.$Table$3.5$show$each$archetype’s$similar$system$type$where$applicable.$$$$$$

$

Andersson'et'al.'(2013)$

PeerUtoUpeer$$File$sharing$

PeerUtoUpeer$Trading$ PeerUtoUpeer$$Goods$sharing$

PeerUtoUpeer$Service$

sharing$

Botsman'and'Rogers'(2010)$

N/A$ Redistribution$

markets$Product$service$

systems$Collaborative$

lifestyles$

Table'3.5'*'Comparing'archetypes'

%

3.1.3.3.%Life<cycles%

By$studying$the$development$path$of$companies$in$the$share$economy$it$is$evident$that$many$

follow$an$SUcurve$pattern$(Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$2014)$or$life$cycle$curve,$which$have$

similar$features$(Gansky$2012,$p.$128).$The$logic$behind$both$the$SUcurve$pattern$and$the$life$

cycle$is$that$they$exhibit$a$tendency$for$a$breakthrough$company$to$accelerate$growth$before$a$

market$saturates$due$to$initial$low$and$volatile$volumes.$Simultaneously,$older$sectors$mature$

and$eventually$decline$as$they$are$replaced$by$new$innovation$(Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$

2014,$Gansky$2012,$p.$130).$Hawksworth$and$Vaughan’s$(2014)$lifecycle$is$presented$in$figure$

3.4$and$shows$five$stages$ranging$from$niche,-breakthrough,-normalised,-mature$to$decline$or$

rebirth.$Gansky’s$depiction$in$figure$3.5$shows$just$four$stages$from$infancy,-adolescence,-

adulthood$and$over$full-maturity.$

$



$Figure'3.4'*'The'sharing'economy'life*cycle'(Hawksworth'and'Vaughan'2014)'

$

$

In$figure$3.4,$it$is$shown$how$traditional$rental$industries,$such$as$car$and$DVD$rental,$are$

being$replaced$by$peerUtoUpeer$lending$and$accommodation$as$presented$by$Hawksworth$and$

Vaughan$(2014).$The$analysis$underlying$the$sharing$sUcurve$reveals$that$in$2013$the$five$

sharing$sectors$(peerUtoUpeer$lending,$online$staffing,$peerUtoUpeer$accommodation,$car$

sharing$and$music$and$video$streaming),$generated$15$billion$USD,$which$is$equivalent$to$just$

five$percent$of$the$total$revenue$of$the$ten$sectors.$However,$by$2025$the$five$sharing$sectors$

are$estimated$to$generate$over$half$the$revenue$in$total$with$a$revenue$opportunity$of$335$

billion$USD,$as$the$new$sectors$will$grow$much$faster$than$traditional$industries$(Hawksworth$

and$Vaughan$2014).$The$sectors$will$be$presented$in$depth$in$section$3.2.$The$difference$

between$the$two$depictions$of$the$process$is$that$Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$(2014)$allow$for$

two$potential$outcomes$at$the$end$of$the$curve.$The$company$can$either$decline$as$a$

consequence$of$low$volumes$or$experience$rebirth$fostered$by$new$innovation.$Gansky$(2012,$

p.$129)$on$the$other$hand$shows$the$full$maturity$stage$as$a$downward$slope.$$

$



$

Figure'3.5'*'Life'cycle'of'mesh'businesses'(Gansky'2012,'p.'129)'

$

Gansky’s$argument$for$this$downward$tendency$lies$in$a$company’s$growth$activities.$

Traditional$business$logic$dictates$that$taking$a$proprietary$approach,$such$as$using$patents,$

controlling$the$entire$value$chain$and$enforcing$secrecy,$will$distinguish$a$business$from$its$

competitors$and$protect$it$from$them.$The$advantages$of$managing$costs$and$risks$are$

especially$evident$when$a$company$reaches$a$certain$size$(Gansky$2012,$p.$128).$However,$the$

cons$of$this$approach$are$that$customers$lose$trust$in$the$company$and$are$not$willing$to$try$

new$products.$Furthermore,$being$less$open$makes$it$more$difficult$to$develop$new$products$

which$cater$to$customers’$needs.$Thus$the$erosion$of$the$brand$limits$its$extensibility$(Gansky$

2012,$p.$130).$Gansky$argues$that$many$share$economy$companies$are$in$the$early$stages,$

where$openness$has$clear$advantages.$It$is$unsure$how$the$future$will$look$once$these$

companies$reach$mature$stages$and$whether$they$will$take$a$more$proprietary$approach$or$

will$be$able$to$renew$themselves$(Gansky$2012,$p.$133).$$

$

%

$



3.1.4.%Types%of%corporate%reHengineering%

Owyang$(2013a)$and$Matzler,$Veider$and$Kathan$(2014)$have$provided$very$recent$literature$

on$the$topic$of$transforming$an$organisation’s$business$model$to$be$competitive$in$the$share$

economy.$Both$Owyang$(2013a)$and$Matzler$et$al.$(2014)$agree$that$the$share$economy$

represents$a$serious$threat$to$established$industries$caused$by$fewer$purchases$and$

consequent$distress$in$conventional$markets.$For$this$reason$companies$risk$becoming$

disintermediated$by$customers$who$connect$with$each$other.$Therefore$organisations$must$

understand$and$manage$the$emergence$of$the$new$economy$in$order$to$adapt$to$current$and$

future$business$models$to$provide$new$sources$of$revenue$(Matzler$et$al.$2014;$Owyang$

2013a).$In$this$section,$I$present$their$take$on$strategies$for$corporations,$which$are$largely$

focused$on$reUengineering$the$company’s$internal$processes$without$consideration$for$

external$influences.$$

$

Owyang’s$(2013a)$and$Matzler,$Veider$and$Kathan’s$(2014)$two$approaches$are$similar$and$

some$overlap$is$evident,$however,$Owyang’s$(2013a)$‘collaborative$economy$value$chain’$is$an$

overarching$framework$describing$ways$for$organisations$to$rethink$their$business$model.$

The$framework,$see$figure$3.6,$consists$of$three$models$representing$increases$in$maturity.$

Each$level$requires$greater$investment$that$result$in$greater$benefit$at$each$level.$Forward$

looking$organisations$employ$one$model$and$the$most$advanced$companies$employ$all$three$

(Owyang$2013a).$A$short$description$of$the$three$models$will$follow$here.$

$

$ $Figure'3.6'*'Collaborative'economy'value'chain'(Owyang'2013a)'



Model$1:$Evolve$Business$Model$to$a$CompanyUasUaUService$

Organisations$have$several$options$in$response$to$the$sharing$revolution.$Going$beyond$selling$

will$create$deeper$relationships$with$customers,$reduce$inventory$costs$and$generate$more$

revenue$(Owyang$2013b).$Consumers$want$access$to$goods,$not$ownership$of$them.$Thus$by$

offering$onUdemand$access,$subscriptions$or$memberships$the$organisation$will$be$able$to$sell$

a$product$over$and$over$again.$Matzler$and$colleagues$(2014)$point$to$the$same$development$

as$purchase$is$being$omitted$and$companies$must$create$new$revenue$streams.$Thus$their$first$

way$of$response$is$“Sell$the$use,$not$the$product”.$$

$

Owyang$(2013b)$presents$a$four$phase$maturity$level$model$for$the$CompanyUasUaUService.$

The$levels$range$from$level$one,$which$represents$the$least$mature$model$to$level$four$with$

the$most$advanced$model.$See$table$3.6.$Level$one$is$for$those$companies$not$offering$physical$

goods,$but$still$want$to$be$part$of$the$movement.$By$sponsoring$initiatives$in$this$movement$

the$organisation$can$offer$money,$their$brand,$distribution$and$marketing.$Level$two$is$for$

companies$selling$a$high$cost,$low$usage$product$that$could$be$offered$through$an$access-based-

model.$This$model$is$optimal$for$car$sharing$businesses.$The$third$level$provides$organisations$

which$supply$quicklyUconsumed$goods$or$want$to$build$a$long$term$relation$with$their$

customers$to$offer$an$ongoing-subscription-model.$This$is$typically$seen$in$the$beauty$and$

hygiene$industry.$The$fourth$level$is$for$the$organisation$that$wants$to$provide$their$

customers$with$access-to-a-variety-of-goods-and-experiences$that$extend$beyond$their$own$

product$(Owyang$2013b).$By$applying$the$CompanyUasUaUService$model$there$are$several$

benefits$such$as$$

U Satisfying$new$customer$behaviours$

U Building$a$long$term$relationship$with$customers$

U Activating$unused$inventory$into$revenue$

U Connecting$to$new$emerging$markets$

U Adding$value$with$new$services$

U Making$more$money$by$selling$a$product$again$and$again$$

U Reducing$waste$as$products$are$used$more$efficiently$(Owyang$2013b)$

$

$

$



Maturity'Level$ Description$ Great'for'Companies'that:$

1.$Sponsor$the$Movement$ Corporations$can$offer$something$these$startups$don’t$have.$$Money,$recognised$brand,$distribution,$and$marketing$

Who$don’t$offer$physical$goods,$but$want$to$be$part$of$this$growing$collaborative$movement.$

2.$Make$available$onUdemand$goods$

Rather$than$sell$a$product,$corporations$can$make$them$available$on$demand$in$a$rental$type$of$manner.$

If$you$have$a$highUcost,$or$highUconsideration$product,$or$low$usage$product,$considering$offering$it$on$demand,$through$a$shared$access$model.$

3.$Provide$a$long$term$subscription$

Companies$offer$an$ongoing$subscription$to$recurring$goods$and$services,$all$paid$in$advance$or$on$demand$

Have$products$that$are$quickly$consumed$or$companies$that$desire$a$long$term$relationship$over$seasonal$sales$

4.$Offer$a$lifestyle$membership$

The$highest$form$of$maturity$is$providing$a$membership$that$gives$access$to$many$different$products$and$experience$–beyond$your$own$product.$

Who$want$to$extend$beyond$their$core$product$offering,$and$offer$an$ecosystem$of$suites$and$products.$$Companies$in$tenuous$markets.$

Table'3.6'*'Maturity'levels'of'company*as*a*service'model'(Owyang'2013b)'

$

Model$2:$Connect$P2P$Buyers$and$Sellers$by$Motivating$a$Marketplace$

Organisations$have$an$opportunity$to$add$new$value$to$transactions$between$customers$by$

creating$a$community$that$enables$customers$and$partners$to$reUsell$or$coUpurchase$products,$

swapping$goods$related$to$the$brands$or$even$lending$or$gifting$without$monetary$exchange.$

For$many$brands$these$communities$have$existed$as$long$as$the$brand,$so$the$organisation$

must$enter$into$this$carefully$(Owyang$2013a).$Also,$Matzler$and$colleagues$(2014)$argue$for$

“supporting-your-customers-in-their-attempts-to-resell”$in$their$second$way$of$responding$to$the$

share$economy.$This$might$seem$cannibalising$to$a$company’s$new$product$sales,$however,$it$

can$actually$benefit$in$several$ways:$

U The$company’s$environmental$image$becomes$more$positive$$

U It$gives$customers$liquidity$and$room$to$purchase$new$products$

U It$provides$a$boost$in$product$visibility,$potentially$to$a$new$segment$$$$$

$

Model$3:$Let$them$Build$on$You$by$Providing$a$Platform$$

Owyang$(2013c)$argues$that$consumers$in$the$share$economy$are$already$replicating$

company$functions$by$funding,$ideating,$designing,$developing,$producing,$distributing,$

marketing,$selling$and$supporting$products$on$their$own.$Thus$companies$are$starting$to$

realise$they$only$have$two$options$to$regain$power.$The$first$option$is$to$fight-the$revolution$

by$ignoring$it,$or$introducing$or$influencing$regulation.$The$second$option$is$to$collaborate$

with$the$new$economy,$invite$consumers$in$and$unlock$new$business$value$for$all.$By$

providing$a$platform,$an$organisation$reaches$the$most$advanced$use$case$when$consumers$



participate$in$coUemployment,$coUdesign,$coUideation$and$so$on.$Collaboration$can$take$two$

forms;$either$by$partnering$with$a$startup$which$offers$these$services$already$or$by$hosting$

the$platform$on$the$organisation’s$website$(Owyang$2013c).$$$$$$

$

In$addition$to$Matzler$and$colleagues’$(2014)$first$and$second$way$for$organisations$to$

respond$to$the$share$economy,$“Sell$the$use,$not$the$product”$and$“Support$your$customers$in$

their$attempts$to$resell”$which$corresponds$to$Owyang’s$(2013a)$CompanyDasDaDService$and$

Providing-a-Platform,$they$present$four$more$ways.$The$six$ways$are$based$on$the$assumption$

that$consumer$motivation$is$selfUoriented$and$that$the$low$costs,$which$the$leading$companies$

in$the$share$economy$can$provide,$is$a$major$factor.$This$is$good$news$as$incumbent$

companies$will$have$a$chance$to$market$traditional$products$in$the$realm$of$the$new$economy$

simply$by$persuading$consumers$of$the$overall$value$proposition$(Matzler$et$al.$2014).$The$

remaining$four$ways$are$presented$in$the$following.$$

$

Way$3:$Take$advantage$of$unused$resources$and$capacities$

The$third$way$of$profiting$from$the$sharing$economy$is$to$share$existing$assets$and$capacities.$

This$applies$especially$for$companies$with$assets$that$cannot$be$acquired$by$anyone$due$to$

the$large$amount$of$capital$associated$with$purchasing$and$owning$them.$For$instance$this$

works$well$in$machinery,$forestry$and$agriculture,$but$can$be$applied$to$any$fixed$assets$such$

as$offices$as$well$(Matzler$et$al.$2014).$$

$

Way$4:$Provide$repair$and$maintenance$services$

The$fourth$way$suggests$that$companies$can$use$their$expertise$within$repair$and$

maintenance$to$take$part$in$the$share$economy.$This$is$good$for$business,$since$an$increase$in$

people$using$accessUbased$goods$results$in$an$increase$in$the$demand$for$repair$and$

maintenance$services.$In$addition,$this$assures$customers$that$the$product$is$still$functioning$

fine$and$that$they$can$access$expert$knowledge$should$they$need$it$(Matzler$et$al.$2014).$$

$

Way$5:$Align$with$collaborative$consumption$to$target$new$customers$

The$fifth$way$of$aligning$to$the$share$economy$is$by$collaborating$on$platforms$to$introduce$

the$organisation’s$products$to$a$new$segment.$The$organisation$can$also$benefit$from$

positively$associating$its$brand$with$a$company$in$the$share$economy$(Matzler$et$al.$2014).$


$


$

Way$6:$Find$new$business$models$based$on$the$sharing$economy$

The$last$way$promotes$the$option$of$inventing$completely$new$and$novel$business$models.$

The$basis$is$that$customers$pay$to$access$assets$they$would$not$otherwise$have$access$to$and$

this$allows$organisations$to$rethink$revenue$streams$(Matzler$et$al.$2014).$$

$

Table$3.7$compares$the$two$theories$as$overlap$is$evident.$

Owyang'(2013a)$ Matzler'et'al.'(2014)$

Model$1:$$Evolve$Business$Model$to$a$CompanyUasUaUService$

Way$1:$$Sell$the$use,$not$the$product$

Model$2:$$Connect$P2P$Buyers$and$Sellers$by$Motivating$a$

Marketplace$

Way$2:$$Support$your$customers$in$their$attempts$to$resell$

Model$3:$$Let$them$Build$on$You$by$Providing$a$Platform$$

N/A$

N/A$ Way$3:$$Take$advantage$of$unused$resources$and$capacities$

N/A$ Way$4:$Provide$repair$and$maintenance$services$

N/A$ Way$5:$$Align$with$collaborative$consumption$to$target$new$

customers$

N/A$ Way$6:$$Find$new$business$models$based$on$the$sharing$economy$

Table'3.7'*'Comparing'theories'of'corporate're*engineering'

$

%

3.2.%Developments%and%disruptions%in%industries%

Owyang$(2014b)$has$recently$published$an$expanded$version$of$his$original$collaborative-

economy-honeycomb.$His$framework$in$figure$3.7,$is$a$visual$representation$of$the$industries,$

subclasses$and$startup$companies$present$within$the$share$economy$at$present$day.$The$

original$honeycomb$comprised$six$industries$which$were$goods,$food,$services,$

transportation,$space$and$money.$The$added$hexes$represent$six$new$industries$which$are$

health$and$wellness,$logistics,$corporate,$utilities,$municipal$and$learning.$The$original$hexes$

have$more$companies$represented$than$the$newly$added,$which$is$a$testament$to$a$market$



saturation$in$certain$industries.$The$framework$is$expected$to$expand$into$industries$such$as$

data,$analytics,$insurance,$financial$services$and$benefits$(Owyang$2014b).$In$this$section,$I$

will$use$Owyang’s$framework$to$assess$the$current$state$and$future$opportunities$of$relevant$

industries.$The$section$will$comprise$transportation,$money,$space,$goods$and$food$since$these$

industries$are$more$mature$and$thus$there$is$more$documentation$available$for$analysis.$

$

$Figure'3.7'*'The'collaborative'economy'honeycomb'(Owyang'2014b)'

$



3.2.1.%Transportation%

Concerns$about$climate$change,$energy$security$and$unstable$fuel$prices$have$caused$decision$

makers$and$policy$experts$to$look$for$more$sustainable$transportation$strategies.$These$

strategies$include$clean$fuels,$vehicle$technologies,$transportation$demand$management$and$

integrated$land$use$strategies$(Shaheen$et$al.$2012).$Several$forms$of$sharedUuse$mobility$

strategies$could$help$many$of$these$concerns$such$as$bikeU,$carU$or$rideUsharing$(Shaheen$

2014).$CarUsharing$involves$using$information$technology$to$facilitate$transactions$between$

vehicle$owners$and$those$who$would$like$to$use$those$vehicles$for$a$short$time$either$by$

renting$the$car$or$providing$lifts$to$users.$Similar$technology$has$fostered$bicycle$sharing$

programmes.$Users$can$access$bicycles$from$an$automated$unmanned$depot$and$pay$by$credit$

card.$The$bicycles$are$equipped$with$tracking$devices$and$can$be$returned$to$one$of$the$depots$

which$are$usually$scattered$across$cities$(Barry$and$Caron$2015).$$

$

In$the$last$few$years,$these$types$of$transportation$forms$have$been$considered$a$promising$

mode$of$transport$for$the$future$as$it$reduces$car$ownership,$increases$capacity$of$existing$

cars,$leads$to$more$frequent$use$of$public$transport$(Loose$et$al.$2006)$and$reduces$pollution$

(Cohen$and$Kietzmann$2014).$In$addition,$the$shared$mobility$models$create$a$possibility$for$

users$to$develop$their$social$life$and$build$new$friendships$(Teodorovic$and$Dell’Orco$2008).$

Today,$BlaBlaCar,$which$is$Europe’s$leading$carUsharing$service$now$transports$more$

passengers$than$the$Eurostar$(Radjou$and$Prabhu$2015).$At$the$same$time$taxi$ridership$has$

declined$anywhere$from$ten$to$30$percent$in$cities$where$carUsharing$businesses$operate$

(Netzer$2014).$The$carUsharing$business$is$said$to$grow$even$more$in$2015$(Netzer$2014),$and$

close$to$50$percent$of$Europeans$believe$that$cars$will$be$consumed$as$a$shared$good,$instead$

of$privately$owned$in$the$future$(Radjou$and$Prabhu$2015).$For$bikeUsharing$the$number$is$

also$rising.$An$estimated$300$programmes$are$now$in$operation$across$the$globe$from$Paris$to$

Tokyo$(Schieferdecker$2013).$$

$

The$explosive$growth$of$shared$transport$opportunities$is$caused$by$a$number$of$reasons.$

First,$Millennials$are$attracted$by$the$city$lifestyle$and$want$access$to$transportation,$rather$

than$owning$their$car.$Second,$work$and$shopping$patterns$have$changed,$which$means$

transportation$must$change$in$order$to$cater$for$this$(Shaheen$2014).$Hansen$and$colleagues$

(2010)$have$examined$the$challenges$for$shared$models$in$transportation.$They$argue$that$


$


high$transaction$costs$of$matching$drivers$and$riders$and$coordinating$road$networks$to$

communication$channels$could$prove$difficult$for$some$businesses.$A$number$of$players$in$the$

carUsharing$industry$seem$to$have$figured$out$the$solution,$however.$Uber$is$causing$panic$

among$taxi$companies$around$the$world$with$its$novel$approach$to$taxi$services$and$

ridesharing.$Despite$its$controversy$it$has$just$been$valued$at$more$than$40$billion$USD$

(Radjou$and$Prabhu$2015).$Other$transportation$companies$in$the$share$economy$include$

Lyft,$Sidecar,$Zimride,$Rideshare$among$many$others$(Andersson$et$al.$2013).$According$to$

Berger$(2014)$transportation$is$the$industry$in$the$share$economy$which$have$proved$the$

most$successful$for$businesses.$$$

$

3.2.2.%Money%

In$this$section$I$focus$on$peerUtoUpeer$lending$and$crowdfunding$to$give$insight$into$the$

financial$industry$and$its$sharing$activities.$Technology$has$brought$changes$to$the$traditional$

financial$industry$as$the$share$economy$has$entered$this$market.$PeerUtoUpeer$lending$is$an$

innovative$way$of$lending$money$to$unrelated$individuals$without$going$through$a$traditional$

financial$intermediary$such$as$banks$or$other$financial$institutions$(Wang$et$al.$2014,$Mach$et$

al.$2014).$According$to$Lin$(2009)$peerUtoUpeer$lending$has$the$potential$to$disrupt$traditional$

institutional$lending$models.$$

$

The$growth$in$alternative$lending$forms$grew$during$the$recent$financial$crisis$as$distrust$and$

dissatisfaction$with$commercial$banks$increased$(Mach$et$al.$2014).$Compared$with$the$

traditional$lending$process$peerUtoUpeer$platforms$tend$to$have$lower$transactions$costs$

(Klafft$2008)$and$they$make$money$from$small$fees,$paid$by$users$(Morse$2015).$According$to$

Wang$and$colleagues$(2014)$consumers$tend$to$trust$online$lending$platforms$as$they$are$

perceived$to$be$useful$and$easy$to$use.$Crowdfunding$is$a$concept$where$the$crowd,$a$group$of$

individuals,$gather$finances$which$would$typically$have$to$be$borrowed$through$a$bank$(Mach$

et$al.$2014).$The$industry$have$been$growing$since$2006,$but$paused$in$2008$when$the$United$

States$Securities$and$Exchange$Commission$decided$to$regulate$the$loans.$After$this$transition$

the$industry$has$since$grown$(Mach$et$al.$2014).$In$2013,$the$five$biggest$peerUtoUpeer$

platforms$in$the$United$States$originated$3.5$billion$USD,$an$increase$from$1.2$billion$USD$in$



2012.$According$to$a$Fitch$report$peerUtoUpeer$lending$is$expected$to$grow$to$114$billion$USD$

(Morse$2015).$$

$

The$two$biggest$peerUtoUpeer$lending$sites$are$Prosper$and$Lending$Club$(Mach$et$al.$2014),$

but$other$businesses$also$include$Zopa,$Funding$Circle$and$Crowdcube$(Bruton$et$al.$2015).$

According$to$the$Economist$(2012),$European$banks$are$getting$smaller$and$the$gap$in$the$

market$could$be$filled$by$peerUtoUpeer$alternatives$and$even$make$traditional$banks$obsolete.$

However,$critics$point$to$the$fact$that$the$industry$is$still$tiny$by$banking$standards$and$

untested$with$risk$of$wrecking$its$reputation$if$it$saw$a$scandal.$Traditional$banks$have$farU

reaching$distribution$networks$whose$service$offerings$are$not$yet$matched$by$the$new$

entrants.$Nonetheless,$bigger$banks$are$increasingly$investing$in$innovation$and$testing$new$

business$models$to$avoid$disruption$(The$Economist$2012).$$

$

3.2.3.%Space%

The$industry$of$space$covers$both$personal$and$work$space.$AirBnB,$one$of$the$biggest$and$

first$players$in$the$share$economy$is$also$a$dominant$force$in$the$personal$space$industry.$The$

peerUtoUpeer$platform$facilitates$contact$between$hosts,$with$excess$space$and$guests,$who$

needs$accommodation$short$term.$AirBnB$takes$a$cut$of$the$payment$which$is$processed$

through$the$platform,$but$most$regulation$works$through$reviews$between$users$(Zervas$et$al.$

2014).$Its$growth$is$fueled$by$millennials$and$travel$enthusiasts$with$a$need$for$destination$

authenticity$or$a$cheap$room,$a$seamless$online$booking$experience$and$a$passionate$

community$of$users$(Widarsyah$2014).$With$about$one$million$listings$AirBnB$have$surpassed$

the$biggest$hotel$chains$in$terms$of$size$(Clarke$2015).$$

$

According$to$a$study$by$Zervas$and$colleagues$(2014)$the$company$has$had$a$negative$impact$

on$the$hotel$industry,$as$revenues$have$dropped$with$the$growth$of$AirBnB.$Seemingly$this$

growth$will$continue$as$it$is$estimated$that$the$number$of$bookings$will$surpass$the$largest$

hotel$chains$within$the$next$few$years$(Clarke$2015).$Other$businesses$in$the$accommodation$

space$includes$VRBO,$HomeAway,$FlipKey,$Roomorama,$CyberRentals.com$and$others$

(Widarsyah$2014).$AirBnB$and$similar$businesses$have$been$in$legal$battles$in$various$cities$

around$the$world$as$legislation$is$unclear.$For$many$hosts$it$is$in$fact$illegal$to$rent$out$their$



apartments$for$shorter$periods$of$time$according$to$local$housing$regulations.$In$addition,$

hosts$who$receive$an$income$from$renting$are$tax$liable$(Coldwell$2014).$$

$

As$for$work$spaces,$great$changes$are$happening$as$well.$With$an$increase$in$mobile$workers$

and$freelancers$there$is$a$rise$in$coworking$spaces$(Van$Meel$and$Brinkø$2014).$From$2011$to$

2013$the$number$increased$by$250$percent$with$over$2000$spaces$across$the$world.$Some$are$

carved$out$of$existing$facilities$run$by$companies,$whereas$others$are$operated$independently$

(John$and$Gratton$2013).$The$idea$is$popular$not$only$because$it$fulfills$a$need$for$a$desk,$but$

also$as$it$gives$a$sense$of$community$allowing$for$collaboration$and$synergy$(Van$Meel$and$

Brinkø$2014).$Lately,$the$industry$has$expanded$into$other$spaces$such$as$parking$spaces$

which$can$be$rented$through$ParkAtMyHouse$(Buczynski$2013).$$$

$

3.2.4.%Goods%

The$industry$of$sharing$goods$are$seeing$more$and$more$businesses$and$public$initiatives$

start$up$with$the$aim$of$facilitating$the$sharing$of$goods$between$consumers$(Kaye$2012).$

Goods$such$as$books,$clothes,$electronics$and$tools$are$shared$in$peerUtoUpeer$networks$

(Buczynski$2013).$According$to$Albinsson$and$Perera$(2012)$some$of$these$movements$were$

originally$started$as$a$form$of$resistance$to$the$capitalist$economic$model.$However,$the$

movement$have$spread$to$other$user$groups,$which$utilise$the$model$to$raise$awareness$about$

sustainability$and$overconsumption.$Consumers$seek$sustainable$solutions$to$the$energy$

crisis,$environmental$degradation$and$global$financial$meltdown.$The$increase$in$the$share$

economy$initiatives$indicates$a$change$in$consumer$preferences,$albeit$for$a$small$segment$of$

the$entire$population$(Albinsson$and$Perera$2012).$Sheth$and$colleagues$(2011)$refer$to$a$

“new$normal”,$and$argues$that$consumers$are$increasingly$turning$to$frugality$and$that$it$is$

unlikely$they$will$turn$back$to$overconsumption.$$

$

According$to$a$study$from$The$People$Who$Share$(2013)$the$most$common$form$of$sharing$is$

selling$or$buying$second$hand$goods,$hereunder$online.$In$the$UK,$51$percent$have$bought$or$

sold$second$hand$goods$and$in$the$last$two$years$52$percent$of$Americans$have$rented,$

borrowed$or$leased$the$kind$of$items$people$usually$own.$Females$tend$to$be$more$engaged$in$

sharing$activities$as$57$percent$of$females$have$bought$or$sold$second$hand$goods$compared$



to$44$percent$of$males$(The$People$Who$Share$2013).$One$of$the$companies$which$enables$

sharing$is$NeighborGoods,$an$online$community$where$people$can$borrow$and$lend$goods$

locally.$The$site$allows$organisers$to$create$local$groups$and$members$are$verified$and$can$

choose$who$they$share$their$things$with.$In$this$way,$the$local$community$has$easy$access$to$

the$things$they$need,$without$accumulating$goods$(Kaye$2012).$Other$companies$include$

Yerdle,$Swappin,$LeftoverSwap,$UUexchange$and$FreeCycle$(Buczynski$2013).$$

$

3.2.5.%Food%

The$food$sector$has$also$embraced$the$share$economy$as$the$peerUtoUpeer$model$is$utilised$in$

providing$good$quality$food$at$low$prices$enabled$by$technology$(Pham$2013).$Examples$such$

as$EatWith,$which$lets$strangers$get$together$for$a$home$cooked$meal$in$a$private$home,$or$

Munchery,$which$delivers$freshly$cooked$meals$made$by$private$chefs$to$your$door,$are$

popping$up$(Pham$2013,$Smith$2014).$Besides$the$obvious$advantage$of$having$a$home$

cooked$meal$at$a$low$price,$the$social$element$of$meeting$new$people$and$creating$a$

community$around$food$is$also$one$of$the$benefits$for$peers$using$these$online$platforms$

(Smith$2014).$Also$restaurants$can$join$in$by$using$Le$Loca,$which$enables$them$to$sell$last$

minute$unused$seats$or$portions$of$food$through$the$app$(Kamenetz$2013).$$

$

Another$range$of$the$sharing$food$industry$is$stronger$related$to$the$philanthropic$mission$of$

providing$food$for$those$in$need$and$not$wasting$food$and$technology$also$enables$these$

organisations$and$their$communities.$Examples$of$charities$include$Planzheroes,$Trusseltrust,$

Foodcycle,$FareShare,$Casserole$Club$and$Meal$Sharing.$The$organisations$work$in$different$

ways$from$facilitating$contact$between$volunteers$and$soup$kitchens,$enabling$private$people$

to$cook$for$those$in$need,$allowing$private$people$to$start$food$recycling$clubs$in$their$

community$and$lobbying$for$food$companies$to$share$their$excess$food$(The$People$Who$

Share$2013).$These$platforms$face$some$obvious$health$and$legal$issues,$as$they$grow$

(Kamenetz$2013),$and$several$platforms$have$tried$and$failed$in$the$past$(Meijers$2014).$$

$

3.2.6.%Services%

The$share$economy$has$also$reached$the$service$industry,$where$innovative$new$companies$

are$creating$unprecedented$liquidity$in$the$labour$force$and$foster$new$consumption$models$



on$a$massive$scale$(Leung$and$Lesko$2015).$The$rise$of$these$online$labour$markets$allow$

workers$to$work$for$any$employer,$regardless$of$their$location$(Lehdonvirta$et$al.$2014),$and$

the$work$spans$a$wide$range$of$skills$and$pay$levels$(Kittur$et$al.$2013).$Leung$and$Lesko$

(2015)$divide$the$type$of$tasks$into$professional-services,$such$as$design,$coding,$consulting,$

finance$and$marketing$and$local-services-including$transportation,$local$delivery$and$

household$services.$For$companies,$utilising$crowdUsourced$labour$instead$of$hiring$

employees$can$be$more$efficient$and$cost$effective$(Leung$and$Lesko$2015)$and$it$also$

mitigates$challenges$such$as$a$shortage$of$expertise$in$specific$areas$or$geographical$location$

(Kittur$et$al.$2013).$For$individual$workers$it$creates$new$opportunities$for$income$and$social$

mobility$in$regions$of$the$world$where$the$economy$is$stagnant$(Kittur$et$al.$2013).$$

$

According$to$a$report$by$the$Freelancers$Union,$34$percent$of$the$labor$force$in$the$United$

States,$that$is$53$million$people,$work$in$some$form$of$contingent$arrangement$(Weber$and$

Silverman$2015).$Furthermore,$more$businesses$are$relying$on$these$workers$as$United$States$

businesses$spent$604$million$USD$hiring$freelancers$through$ElanceUoDesk,$one$of$the$largest$

freelance$marketplaces,$in$2014,$which$is$an$increase$of$30$percent$from$2013$(Pofeldt$2015).$

Other$similar$companies$include$TaskRabbit$and$Mechanical$Turk$by$Amazon$(Leung$and$

Lesko$2015,$Lehdonvirta$et$al.$2014).$$

$

Despite$the$growing$number$of$share$workers$and$companies$in$the$service$industry,$it$has$

received$criticism$lately.$Workers$say$that$the$onUdemand$work$platforms$give$them$little$

control$over$the$terms$of$their$labor$and$the$contracts$force$them$to$suffer$personal$and$

financial$risks$without$the$returns$or$advantages$they$had$hoped$for$(Weber$and$Silverman$

2015).$Many$fear$a$global$abuse$of$labour$in$which$the$pay$is$extremely$low$from$the$big$

players$in$this$arena,$such$as$Amazon$(Kittur$et$al.$2013).$The$discussion$comes$down$to$

whether$the$onUdemand$workers$should$be$considered$as$employees$and$thus$expect$the$

same$benefits$and$security$(Weber$and$Silverman$2015),$which$is$yet$to$be$decided$as$courts$

are$undecided$in$the$matter$(Pofeldt$2015).$$

$



3.2.7.%Summary%

From$looking$into$the$six$industries,$it$is$evident$that$they$all$prove$a$growth$pattern$and$that$

on$global$scale$more$and$more$examples$of$companies$and$initiatives$are$popping$up$within$

each$industry.$Table$3.8$summarises$my$findings$for$each$category.$$

$

Industry$ Projections'and'statistics$ Companies'and'initiatives$

Transportation$ U Growth$projected$for$both$car$and$bike$sharing$U BlaBla$Car$transports$more$people$than$the$Eurostar$$U 50%$of$Europeans$think$ownership$will$be$replaced$

by$sharing$

Uber,$Blabla$Car,$Lyft,$SideCar,$Zimride$and$Rideshare$$Various$bike$sharing$programmes$

Money$ U Growth$in$alternative$lending$forms$since$2006$U US:$the$5$biggest$platforms$originated$3.5$billion$

USD$in$2013$

Zopa,$Funding$Circle,$Prosper,$Lending$Club$and$Crowdcube$

Space$ U A$250%$growth$in$coUworking$spaces$globally$U AirBnB$bigger$than$largest$hotel$chains$U AirBnB$have$negative$impact$on$hotel$industry$

AirBnB,$VRBO,$HomeAway,$FlipKey,$Roomorama,$CyberRentals$and$ParkAtMyHouse$

Goods$ U Increase$in$initiatives$U UK:$51%$bought$or$sold$second$hand$goods$U US:$52%$have$rented,$borrowed$or$leased$usually$

owned$goods$

NeighborGoods,$Yerdle,$Swappin,$LeftoverSwap,$UUexchange$and$FreeCycle$

Food$ U Increasing$number$of$companies$and$initiatives$$ EatWith,$Munchery,$Le$Loca,$Planzheroes,$Trusseltrust,$Foodcycle,$FareShare,$Casserole$Club$and$Meal$Sharing$

Services$ U US:$53$million$contingent$workers$U US:$Businesses$spent$604$million$USD$hiring$

through$ElanceUoDesk,$increase$in$30%$from$2013$

ElanceUoDesk,$TaskRabbit$and$Mechanical$Turk$

Table'3.8'*'Summary'of'industry'overview'

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$



3.3.%Examining%startup%companies%

This-section-has-been-omitted-from-this-version-of-the-document-due-to-confidentiality.-

$$$$

%

%

%

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%$



3.4.%A%taxonomy%for%companies%in%the%share%economy%%

Part$one$of$this$thesis$has$provided$a$thorough$presentation$of$the$share$economy$through$a$

literature$review,$industry$overview$and$an$examination$of$current$startups$in$the$share$

economy.$The$literature$review$investigated$a$definition$of$the$share$economy$and$what$

drivers$have$spurred$its$growth$in$recent$years.$The$typologies$presented$gave$an$

understanding$of$the$current$business$types$in$the$share$economy.$The$suggestions$for$reU

engineering$corporate$business$models$focused$on$internal$aspects$of$how$a$business$can$

enter$the$share$economy.$As$the$industry$overview$showed,$there$is$growth$in$the$six$

industries$presented$and$many$of$them$have$more$and$more$players$showing$signs$of$an$

impending$market$saturation.$Through$the$startup$interviews$we$saw$that$external$factors$

have$a$major$impact$on$the$business$such$as$legislation$and$users.$However,$internal$factors$

such$as$choice$of$revenue$model,$the$ability$to$overcome$barriers$of$use$and$attract$a$critical$

mass$of$users$and$building$the$platform$is$crucial$to$master$for$newly$started$companies$in$the$

share$economy.$$

$

Even$if$most$companies$mentioned$thus$far$have$been$small$and$medium$sized,$I$believe$all$

these$factors$also$influence$corporations,$which$are$now$embarking$or$have$just$started$their$

venture$in$the$share$economy.$To$create$strategies$for$the$various$types$of$corporations,$

which$will$be$analysed$in$part$two,$it$is$vital$that$I$can$characterise$these$companies$on$a$

number$of$factors.$The$typologies$presented$thus$far$focus$on$the$type$of$goods$shared,$

maturity$and$business$models.$These$factors$mainly$relate$to$internal$processes$and$decisions$

made$by$the$company.$Thus$the$typologies$do$not$take$into$account$the$external$factors$

influencing$a$company’s$success.$As$presented$in$both$the$industry$review$and$the$startup$

interviews$external$factors$pose$major$influence$on$the$business.$For$this$reason$I$suggest$a$

taxonomy$which$captures$the$knowledge$presented$in$part$one$and$which$can$be$applied$to$

the$eight$cases$in$part$two.$$

$

For$simplicity$the$taxonomy$measures$strong$or$weak$external-market$and$internal-ability-for$

the$company.$In$this$way$the$taxonomy$reflects$external$factors,$such$as$industry$growth$and$

market$saturation$as$presented$in$the$life$cycle$and$also$internal$factors$such$as$how$the$

company$is$equipped$to$attract$users$or$its$ability$to$comply$with$legislation.$As$we$have$seen,$

these$elements$are$the$most$important$factors$according$to$current$literature.$With$these$two$



elements$it$gives$a$possible$outcome$of$three$types.$Type-1$suggests$the$company$is$likely$to$

succeed$as$both$external$and$internal$factors$are$positive$and$strong.$Type-2$presents$a$

company$that$might$be$strong$in$either$internal$or$external$factors.$Type-3-is$a$company$which$

is$both$weak$internally$in$utilising$the$opportunities$of$the$share$economy$as$well$as$has$bad$

projections$for$its$industry$or$market.$The$correlation$is$shown$in$table$3.10$and$figure$3.9.$$

$

$ External'market$ Internal'ability$

Type'1$ +$ +$

Type'2$ +/U$ +/U$

Type'3$ U$ U$Table'3.10'*'Taxonomy'types'assessing'strength'of'internal''ability'and'external'market'

$

$Figure'3.9'*'Taxonomy'assessing'likelihood'of'success'in'the'share'economy'

$

With$this$taxonomy$I$am$able$to$assess$the$companies$in$part$two$and$their$likelihood$of$

success$based$on$what$the$literature$and$startups$suggest$are$important$factors.$Based$on$this$

I$give$suggestions$for$strategies$which$correlate$to$companies’$type$and$motivations.$$ $


$


PART$2$

4.%Exploration%of%Corporate%Presence%in%the%Share%Economy%

This$chapter$will$explore$and$analyse$the$reasons$and$motivations$that$corporations$may$have$

for$venturing$into$the$share$economy.$Each$case$will$be$analysed$in$turn,$drawing$on$the$

taxonomy$developed$in$part$one$and$thus$be$characterised$as$Type$1,$Type$2$or$Type$3.$I$

predict$not$many$companies$will$be$characterised$as$Type$3,$as$the$cases$have$already$

launched$and$so,$assumingly,$are$strong$in$at$least$one$element.$As$presented$in$section$2.3.1.$

the$cases$represent$a$wide$selection$of$industries,$geographical$areas$and$businesses.$The$

cases$are$presented$based$on$secondary$sources$from$research$article$databases$and$online$

resources.$The$chapter$will$conclude$with$an$examination$of$the$patterns$of$motivations$as$

well$as$a$discussion$of$the$various$types$in$order$to$finally$suggest$three$different$strategies$

for$corporations.$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$



4.1.%Case%A:%IKEA%IKEA$provides$consumers$with$wellUdesigned$home$furnishing$products$at$low$prices.$The$

company$currently$employs$135,000$people$spread$across$27$countries$reaching$total$sales$of$

28.7$billion$EUR.$IKEA$has$taken$a$strong$focus$on$sustainable$growth$over$the$last$few$years$$

(IKEA$2015).$$

$

In$2010,$IKEA$launched$an$online$platform$as$an$extension$of$their$website,$enabling$

customers$to$resell$their$used$IKEA$goods.$The$platform$only$existed$in$Sweden$and$could$

only$be$accessed$by$members$of$IKEA$Family,$their$membership$program$(Matzler,$Veider$and$

Kathan$2014).$In$2013,$the$idea$expanded$to$Norway$as$IKEA$ran$an$eight$week$campaign$

helping$their$customers$to$resell$furniture$from$the$company’s$own$product$lines.$The$

premise$was$that$IKEA$Norway’s$Facebook$page$was$transformed$to$an$online$flea$market$

every$Sunday$between$11$am$to$5$pm.$Users$could$upload$photos$of$their$second$hand$furniture$and$at$closing$time$IKEA$staff$would$delete$all$pictures.$In$addition$to$the$Facebook$

activity,$an$extensive$multiple$media$campaign$launched$with$customers’$real$furniture$for$

sale$(Afzal$2013).$These$activities$can$be$defined$as$IKEA$having$developed$a$reUsell$

marketplace$according$to$Owyang’s$(2013a)$value$chain$described$previously.$$

$

Some$argued$that$these$moves$would$decrease$IKEA$sales,$as$the$reselling$of$second$hand$

furniture$would$cannibalise$new$products.$However,$according$to$the$agency$who$ran$the$

campaign,$it$resulted$in$a$40$percent$increase$in$new$product$sales$online$and$5.5$percent$in$

store$(Smfb$2014).$These$numbers$have$not$been$accounted$for$and$the$growth$in$sales$could$

be$related$to$other$factors,$such$as$being$measured$in$the$Summer$which$is$a$particularly$busy$

time$for$moves.$Critics$also$noted$that$the$initiative$in$Norway$should$be$permanent$and$

global,$like$the$buy$and$sell$platform$in$Sweden$(Mok$2013).$$$

$

It$is$interesting$not$only$whether$the$platform$and$campaign$can$be$deemed$as$a$success,$but$also$why$IKEA$ventured$in$to$peerUtoUpeer$activities$in$the$first$place.$First,$IKEA$saw$an$

opportunity$to$brand$their$environmentally$friendly$ethos$and$thus$attract$customers$on$this$

premise.$The$campaign$in$Norway$was$a$branding$exercise,$but$both$this$and$the$Swedish$

platform$was$aligned$to$their$green$strategy$(Matzler,$Veider$and$Kathan$2014).$Second,$by$

helping$customers$to$sell$their$old$furniture$it$meant$they$suddenly$had$space$and$money$for$



new.$Third,$by$launching$the$platform$on$the$IKEA$website$it$exposed$customers$to$new$

products$as$well$as$the$second$hand$selection$of$goods;$it$was$an$opportunity$to$engage$with$

the$brand$in$a$positive$setting.$

$

As$we$have$seen$previously,$the$market$for$secondhand$goods$are$growing$and$thus$the$

external$market$for$IKEA$is$strong.$As$this$platform$is$close$to$the$core$business$of$IKEA$and$it$

does$not$require$major$restructuring$or$special$skills$I$assess$their$internal$ability$also$to$be$

strong,$which$categorises$the$company$as$a$Type$1$and$thus$highly$likely$to$succeed.$Table$4.1$

provides$an$overview$of$the$findings$for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ IKEA$

Summary$ Launch$of$resell$marketplace$online$in$Sweden$and$Norway$

Industry$ Goods$

Business'model$ Marketplace$(reUsell)$$

Motivations$ U Promote$green$ethos$aligned$with$strategy$U Attract$new$customer$segment$who$values$sustainability$U Expose$customers$to$new$products$through$second$hand$platform$U Help$customers$get$space$and$money$for$new$products$

External'market$ Strong$

Internal'ability'$ Strong$

Type$ Type$1$Table'4.1'*'Summary'of'the'IKEA'case'

$

%

%

%

$

$

$



4.2.%Case%B:%Santander%

Santander$UK$is$a$major$financial$services$provider$offering$a$wide$range$of$personal$financial$

products$and$services$as$well$as$being$a$growing$player$in$the$corporate$and$commercial$

banking$market.$Santander$UK$is$part$of$the$Banco$Santander$Group$and$employs$just$under$

20,000$employees$who$service$14$million$customers$in$the$United$Kingdom.$One$of$

Santander’s$strategic$goals$is$to$become$the$‘bank$of$choice$for$UK$companies’$(Santander$

2013).$$

$

In$June$2014,$Santander$entered$into$a$partnership$with$the$online$peerUtoUpeer$lending$start$

up,$Funding$Circle,$who$specialise$in$corporate$loans.$The$deal$is$the$first$of$its$kind$for$small$

business$lending$(Moules$2014).$Through$the$partnership,$Santander$will$refer$small$

businesses$looking$for$a$loan$to$Funding$Circle$and$in$return,$Funding$Circle$will$promote$

Santander’s$services$such$as$day$to$day$banking$and$cash$management$on$their$website$

(Stokes$et$al.$2014).$According$to$a$press$release$from$Funding$Circle,$the$partnership$

addresses$the$challenges$of$access$to$finance$for$small$businesses$and$a$common$goal$of$

helping$more$small$businesses$and$investors$(Jones$2014).$The$partnership$can$be$defined$as$

a$coUfunding$platform$as$described$in$connection$to$Owyang’s$(2013a)$theory$previously.$$

$

While$Funding$Circle$gets$more$traction,$the$reasons$for$Santander$to$enter$the$partnership$

might$be$less$obvious.$As$peerUtoUpeer$lending$is$part$of$the$United$Kingdom’s$fast$growing$

alternative$finance$market,$the$online$platforms$become$a$threat$to$incumbent$banks.$In$

addition,$the$United$Kingdom’s$government$has$plans$to$force$banks$to$refer$rejected$

businesses$to$alternative$finance$providers,$so$it$seems$wise$for$Santander$to$establish$a$

relationship$with$Funding$Circle$(Moules$2014,$Savage$2014).$Santander$actually$discovered$

that$there$was$a$segment$of$their$customers$who$wanted$access$to$peerUtoUpeer$lending$and$

thus$initiated$negotiations$with$Funding$Circle,$acknowledging$that$building$a$similar$service$

would$be$too$costly$(Hirt$and$Willmott$2014).$$

$

The$partnership$also$allows$Santander$to$fend$off$riskier$loans,$while$maintaining$a$reputation$

of$helping$small$businesses,$which$might$one$day$become$large$businesses$(Savage$2014).$

These$reasons$are$a$testament$to$the$fact$that$Santander$was$less$able$to$have$built$a$peerUtoU

peer$lending$platform$itself,$and$therefore$I$characterise$their$internal$ability$as$weak.$


$


Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$(2014)$defines$peerUtoUpeer$lending$and$crowdfunding$as$a$niche$

market$in$the$share$economy.$This$points$to$a$growth$potential$and$so$I$define$the$external$

market$as$strong$leaving$Santander$as$a$Type$2.$Table$4.2$provides$an$overview$of$the$findings$

for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ Santander$

Summary$ Partnership$with$Funding$Circle$

Industry$ Money$

Business'model$ Platform$(CoUfunding)$$

Motivations$ U Response$to$threat$of$alternative$finance$providers$U Cater$for$customer$demands$U Partnership$saves$resources,$as$opposed$to$building$internally$U Avoids$risky$loans$to$small$businesses$U Keep$positive$brand$with$small$businesses$U Growth$in$P2P$lending$market$$


Internal'ability'$ Weak$

Type$ Type$2$

Table'4.2'*'Summary'of'the'Santander'case'

'

%

%

%

%$

$

%$

%$

%$

$

$

$

$



4.3.%Case%C:%Marriott%Marriott$is$a$leading$hospitality$company$with$3,900$properties$scattered$around$the$globe.$

The$company$was$founded$in$1927$and$now$employs$325,000$associates$worldwide.$Marriott$

has$18$brands$that$all$cater$to$different$segments$from$luxury$hotel$suites$to$extendedUstay$

executive$apartments.$The$company$is$headquartered$in$Maryland,$United$States$and$reported$

earnings$close$to$13$billion$USD$in$2013$(Marriott$2015).$$

$

In$2013,$the$Marriott$chain$launched$Workspace$on$Demand,$a$programme$for$guests$and$

nonUguests$to$book$small$work$and$meeting$spaces$mainly$in$the$San$Francisco$and$

Washington$areas$(Carrington$2013,$White$2013).$Some$spaces,$like$lobby$areas,$are$free$to$

use,$whereas$more$private$spaces$with$more$amenities$are$charged$at$50$USD$per$hour$(Said$

2014).$The$online$booking$system$is$supplied$by$LiquidSpace,$a$company$which$offers$its$

members$workplaces$onUtheUgo$through$their$site.$The$partnership$therefore$means$more$

available$spaces$to$LiquidSpace’s$members$(Kaye$2013).$The$paid$for$spots$at$Workspace$on$

Demand$can$be$characterised$as$a$CompanyUasUaUService$model$according$to$Owyang’s$

(2013a)$value$chain,$whereas$the$free$workspaces$are$based$on$a$freemium$model.$

LiquidSpace$also$partners$with$a$number$of$other$hotels$such$as$Hilton,$Rich$Carlton$and$

Holiday$Inn,$but$also$hosts$real$estate$agents$and$even$private$companies$for$employees$to$

book$desk$space$in$their$corporate$offices$(Said$2014,$Carrington$2013).$$

$

The$ease$of$booking$as$well$as$flexibility$of$location$caters$for$a$younger$workforce$according$

to$Jenny$Hsieh,$Vice$President$for$insight,$strategy$and$innovation$at$Marriott,$who$says:$

“These$nextUgeneration$professionals,$they$grew$up$working$in$Starbucks,$Panera,$libraries,$

working$outside.$So$sometimes,$they$are$most$creative,$most$effective$in$nonUtraditional$

environments”$(Trejos$2013).$Marriott$has$tapped$into$a$huge$market$as$predictions$suggest$

that$one$third$of$the$global$workforce$will$be$mobile$workers$by$2015,$according$to$a$research$

report$by$IDC$and$these$people$will$need$places$to$meet$and$work$even$onUtheUgo$(Said$2013)$

and$as$we$have$seen$previously$the$market$is$growing,$which$is$why$I$characterise$the$

external$market$as$strong.$$$$$$$$

$

There$are$several$reasons$why$Workspace$on$Demand$is$a$good$idea$for$Marriott.$Firstly,$

there$is$an$untapped$opportunity$for$revenue$in$the$empty$space$in$hotels,$especially$at$night,$



so$by$renting$this$out,$even$small$transactions$can$help$increase$revenue.$Secondly,$customers$

have$told$the$hotel$group$that$they$would$sneak$into$the$lobby$or$use$the$hotel$wifi$from$their$

cars$before$the$programme$was$available$(Carrington$2013).$By$systematising$this$use$it$

creates$opportunity$for$revenue.$Third,$the$renting$of$space$is$at$the$core$of$Marriott’s$

business;$renting$workspace$is$not$that$different$from$renting$bedrooms.$Therefore$daily$

operations$do$not$change$much$and$with$a$plug$and$play$system$like$LiquidSpace$to$handle$

bookings$the$effort$is$minimal$compared$to$the$gains.$Fourth,$much$of$the$available$space$is$

located$in$close$proximity$to$a$bar$or$cafe$with$waiters$offering$food$and$beverages$(Said$

2014),$so$there$is$a$good$chance$that$sales$of$food$and$drinks$will$increase$as$the$space$is$

occupied$with$more$people.$Fifth,$as$already$mentioned,$younger$workers$are$attracted$by$the$

concept$which$opens$up$for$a$new$segment$for$Marriott.$Numbers$show$that$56$percent$of$the$

people$who$use$the$programme$are$Generation$X$and$Generation$Y$Millennials$and$that$18$

percent$never$use$Marriott$otherwise$(Said$2014).$This$is$a$chance$for$the$hotel$chain$to$build$

relations$and$upsell$to$the$young$workforce,$who$in$return$can$try$Marriott$quickly$and$

cheaply,$without$commitment.$The$initiative$would$probably$not$have$run$without$the$

technology$and$user$base$from$LiquidSpace,$which$is$why$I$characterise$Marriott’s$internal$

ability$as$weak.$Table$4.3$provides$an$overview$of$the$findings$for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ Marriott$

Summary$ Launches$Workspace$on$Demand$with$Liquidspace$

Industry$ Space$

Business'model$ CompanyUasUaUService$(rent)$

Motivations$ U Growth$in$mobile$workers$U Opportunity$for$revenue$from$unused$space$U Combating$exploitation$of$space$with$serviceUoffering$generates$revenue$U Offering$is$close$to$core$business$which$means$only$small$changes$to$workflow$U Opportunity$to$sell$more$food$and$drinks$U Target$young$worker$segment$



Type$ Type$2$Table'4.3'*'Summary'of'the'Marriott'case'


$


4.4.%Case%D:%Citi%Group%

Citi$Group$is$a$global$bank$and$financial$services$institution$servicing$private$customers,$

organisations$and$governments$in$160$countries.$In$the$fourth$quarter$of$2014,$Citi$Group$

reported$a$net$income$of$350$million$USD.$The$company’s$mission$is$“enabling$progress”$

which$is$guided$by$Citi’s$four$principles;$common$purpose,$responsible$finance,$ingenuity$and$

leadership$(Citi$2014).$$

$

In$May$2013$Citi$Group$sponsored$Citibikes,$a$bike$sharing$system$for$the$citizens$of$New$

York.$The$programme$was$launched$by$the$City$of$New$York$and$Alta$Bike$Share$which$has$

taken$care$of$daily$operations$(Summers$2013).$MasterCard$joined$as$a$minor$sponsor$with$

6.5$million$USD,$against$Citi$Groups’s$41$million$USD,$which$allowed$them$to$be$the$title$

sponsor$(Ferro$2014).$The$system$launched$with$300$docking$stations$and$close$to$5,500$

bikes$in$Brooklyn$and$Manhattan$expanding$to$10,000$bikes$and$600$stations$over$spring$

2013.$The$Citibikes$initiative$is$a$clear$example$of$a$CompanyUasUaUService$model.$As$this$is$a$

sponsorship$it$is$characterised$as$level$1,$as$the$integration$of$the$business$is$fairly$low$

(Owyang$2013a,$2013b).$The$programme$also$features$a$city$bike$app,$which$enables$New$

Yorkers$to$easily$find$their$route$and$locate$local$shops$and$other$points$of$interest$(Bernstein$

2012,$Radovanovic$2013).$The$programme$offers$several$subscriptions$ranging$from$9.95$USD$

for$24$hours$to$a$95$USD$annual$membership.$The$latter$has$been$more$popular$with$riders$as$

92,000$New$Yorkers$have$purchased$this$subscription,$which$is$also$the$option$with$the$

smallest$margin$for$Citibikes$(Ferro$2014,$Summers$2013).$$

$

It$is$interesting$to$explore$why$Citi$Group$has$entered$into$this$bike$sharing$programme,$

which$is$so$far$from$its$core$business.$The$financial$crisis$has$left$many$banks$untrustworthy$

in$the$eyes$of$consumers$and$so$there$is$a$steep$hill$to$climb$to$regain$reputation.$However,$

without$trust,$traditional$marketing$does$not$work$and$banks$must$be$creative$to$get$the$

attention$and$win$back$customers$(O’Connor$2013).$When$25,000$locals$and$tourists$saddle$a$

Citibike$every$day,$the$recognisable$blue$bikes$with$the$Citi$logo$plastered$on$them$it$is$a$

rolling$testament$for$the$bank’s$brand.$Coupled$with$the$online$universe$with$messages$of$

caring$for$the$community$Citi’s$efforts$not$only$gain$them$goodwill,$but$it$also$breaks$through$

the$clutter$of$other$banks’$desperate$attempts$to$regain$popularity$(O’Connor$2013,$Ferro$

2014).$In$addition,$Citi$has$branded$the$bikes$so$ingeniously$that$trying$to$separate$the$bikes$


$


from$their$sponsor$can$be$confusing,$“its$the$visual$and$the$verbal”$says$Kevin$Lane$Keller,$a$

Dartmouth$marketing$professor,$which$is$why$other$sponsors$are$not$interested$in$sponsoring$

the$programme$giving$Citi$sole$branding$possibilities$(Ferro$2014).$$

$

According$to$Citi’s$marketing$executive$Citibikes$have$generated$4.4.$million$USD$in$earned$

media,$mainly$from$social$media$(Ferro$2014).$In$addition,$celebrities$have$been$spotted$

wheeling$through$New$York$giving$rise$to$the$popularity$of$the$bikes.$Critics$predicted$an$

increase$in$road$accidents,$however,$this$has$not$happened$which$has$helped$Citibikes$

maintain$a$reputation$for$being$a$safe$experience$(Summers$2013).$As$a$result$Citibank’s$

perceived$trustworthiness$has$increased$with$14$percent$according$to$the$brand$asset$

valuator$(O’Connor$2013).$Citi$decided$to$enter$a$new$industry$with$their$launch$in$the$share$

economy,$which$is$why$I$categorise$them$in$the$transportation$sector$and$not$money.$As$we$

have$seen$the$transportation$sector$and$sharing$systems$are$growing,$so$I$categorise$the$

external$market$as$strong.$Since$the$bike$sharing$programme$is$so$far$from$their$core$

business,$their$internal$ability$to$carry$this$out$is$weak,$which$is$why$they$have$joined$forces$

with$experienced$organisations.$This$makes$Citi$a$Type$2$company.$Table$4.4$provides$an$

overview$of$the$findings$for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ Citi$Group$

Summary$ Sponsor$of$Citibikes,$bike$sharing$programme$

Industry$ Transportation$

Business'model$ CompanyUasUaUService$(rent$or$subscribe)$Maturity$level$1$$

Motivations$ U Regain$trustworthy$brand$U Bikers$act$as$testament$to$brand$U Sole$sponsorship$due$to$strong$branding$



Type$ Type$2$

Table'4.4'*'Summary'of'the'Citi'Group'case'

$



4.5.%Case%E:%B&Q%

B&Q$is$the$largest$home$improvement$and$garden$centre$retailer$in$Europe$and$strives$to$

offer$everything$customers$need$for$DIY$projects.$B&Q$is$part$of$the$Kingfisher$Group$with$

headquarters$in$Hampshire,$United$Kingdom.$The$retailer$has$350$stores$throughout$the$UK$

which$employs$30,000$people.$For$the$financial$year$2013$the$company’s$retail$sales$were$3.7$

billion$GBP.$B&Q$is$a$part$of$‘Big$Energy$Vision’,$a$joint$initiative$with$other$major$retailers$to$

“use$less,$waste$less,$and$pay$less”$and$thus$have$a$positive$impact$on$the$environment$(B&Q$

2015).$$

$

In$2012$B&Q$launched$Streetclub,$an$online$community$platform$which$enables$hyperUlocal$

communities$plan,$share$and$talk$with$their$neighbours$(Streetclub$2014).$In$addition,$people$

on$the$street$can$share$tools$and$DIY$skills$(Stokes$et$al.$2014).$As$the$community$provides$

both$swapping,$lending$and$communications$between$people$it$can$be$defined$as$both$a$

marketplace$and$a$platform$according$to$Owyang’s$(2013a)$value$chain,$described$previously.$

Streetclub.co.uk$now$hosts$1780$private$communities$throughout$the$UK$(Streetclub$2014).$

John$Compton,$who$manages$the$programme$says:$“We$see$this$as$vital$to$be$leading$in$this$

area$–$a$businessUgood$as$well$as$a$socialUgood.$And$that’s$the$kind$of$innovation$and$new$

business$approach$that$contributes$to$a$greener$economy$and$brings$future–proofing$for$

B&Q”$(Stokes$et$al.$2014).$The$societal$drivers$for$launching$Streetclub$are$a$strong$wish$for$a$

growing$global$population$to$have$a$good$quality$of$life$despite$scarce$natural$resources,$

which$demands$new$thinking$from$business$leaders.$In$addition,$communities$do$not$function$

like$they$used$to$and$we$often$forget$to$be$good$neighbours,$so$online$technology$might$be$

able$to$reinforce$good$neighbourship$again$(Knight$2013).$$

$

As$a$company$that$cares$about$the$environment$and$positive$relationships$among$neighbors,$

B&Q$have$a$clear$incentive$to$have$a$positive$brand$affinity$with$consumers.$In$this$way$it$

makes$sense$that$the$programme$is$a$logical$extension$of$their$brand$purpose$(Sexton$2014,$

Parsfield$2012).$It$is$also$argued$that$a$community’s$happiness$has$a$direct$correlation$to$

spending$money$on$home$improvement.$That$is,$“if$you$have$pride$in$your$street,$you$are$

more$likely$to$do$things$to$your$house,$like$paint$the$front$gate”$(Parsfield$2012).$However,$

the$programme$is$also$an$exploration$into$models$of$sharing$using$social$networking$sites$and$

how$B&Q$can$monetise$on$these$and$online$tool$banks$(Sexton$2014).$Furthermore,$the$



concept$of$dematerialisation$is$a$way$to$protect$the$company$from$rising$natural$resource$

costs.$As$consumers$retain$ownership$and$share$or$rent$instead,$it$reduces$the$resources$

needed$to$provide$the$same$value$for$customers$(Sexton$2014).$$

$

B&Q$are$working$to$implement$a$leasing$model,$but$face$two$main$challenges$in$order$to$make$

this$a$reality.$The$first$issue$is$culture,$which$B&Q$tackles$with$small$steps$in$building$a$

community$around$sharing$and$thus$getting$people$used$to$sharing$instead$of$owning.$The$

second$issue$is$systems$for$IT$and$finance$processes.$The$company$has$made$experiments$

with$mixed$results,$so$this$is$still$an$issue$that$needs$to$be$tackled$before$a$full$implementation$

(Sexton$2014).$For$this$reason$I$argue$that$their$internal$ability$is$weak,$however,$the$market$

for$good$sharing$is$growing$and$thus$B&Q$can$be$categorised$as$a$Type$2.$Table$4.5$provides$

an$overview$of$the$findings$for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ B&Q$

Summary$ Launch$of$Streetclub,$neighbourhood$community$online$$

Industry$ Goods$

Business'model$ Marketplace$(swap,$lend)$+$Platform$(coUideate)$

Motivations$ U Dematerialisation$protects$the$company$from$rising$costs$U Exploration$of$feasibility$of$sharing$models$U Demonstrating$brand$purpose$of$$positive$relations$and$taking$care$of$the$environment$U Opportunity$of$increased$revenue$from$happy$communities$



Type$ Type$2$

Table'4.5'*'Summary'of'the'B&Q'case'

%

4.6.%Case%F:%Toyota%

In$its$own$words$Toyota$“strives$to$develop$automobiles$that$meet$the$needs$of$consumers$

while$at$the$same$time$achieving$a$balance$between$consideration$for$the$environment,$safety,$

drivability,$comfort$and$reliability”$(Toyota$2013).$Toyota$was$founded$in$1937$in$Tokyo,$

Japan$where$the$company’s$head$office$still$sits.$The$company$employs$just$under$339,000$

employees$worldwide$(Toyota$2014).$$

$


$


In$October$2014,$Toyota$launched$a$threeUyear$trial$car$sharing$program$in$Grenoble,$France,$

named$Ha:mo,$short$for$Harmonious$Mobility$(Martin$2014).$Toyota$has$distributed$70$

electric$cars$around$the$city$which$can$be$booked$and$paid$for$by$travellers$by$smartphone$for$

shorter$journeys$for$as$little$as$five$Euros$per$hour$(Gain$2014).$This$is$an$example$of$a$

CompanyUasUaUService$model$which$allows$customers$to$rent$cars,$but$with$ample$

opportunity$for$subscription$too$(Owyang$2013a).$The$maturity$level$is$characterised$as$2$as$

this$is$a$highUcost,$lowUuse$product$made$available$through$sharing$(Owyang$2013b).$The$

scheme$provides$the$three$wheeled$iURoad$and$the$four$wheeled$Auto$Body$COMS,$which$will$

work$as$an$extension$of$public$transportation,$the$so$called$‘lastUmile$car’$(Martin$2014,$Gain$

2014).$$

$

The$OneUMile$Mobility$Management$System$supporting$the$scheme$is$a$centralised$IT$system$

which$enables$travellers$to$check$availability$and$location$as$well$as$allow$the$fleet$

management$to$optimise$distribution$of$cars$throughout$the$charging$station$network.$In$

addition,$it$integrates$with$a$bus$operations$management$system$for$the$city,$so$travellers$will$

be$able$to$easily$plan$their$trips$according$to$departures$and$availability$(Martin$2014).$

Toyota$has$partnered$with$GrenobleUAlpes$Metropole,$the$city’s$transportation$authority,$in$

helping$promote$the$car$sharing$program.$EDF$group$will$provide$the$infrastructure$of$

charging$stations$and$Cite$Lib,$which$runs$car$sharing$programs$all$over$France,$will$be$in$

charge$of$daily$operations$and$customer$services$for$Toyota’s$scheme$(King$2014).$$$$$

$

One$of$the$reasons$for$Toyota$establishing$the$programme$is$the$research$into$car$sharing$and$

the$feasibility$of$the$business$coUtransport$solutions.$This$will$provide$insights$into$public$and$

individual$transportation$in$urban$environments,$which$will$be$valuable$in$further$developing$

the$programme$(Martin$2014).$Electric$car$sales$have$not$reached$forecasted$sales,$as$

projected$just$a$few$years$ago,$according$to$a$Morgan$Stanley$report$(Winton$2014),$so$this$

novel$way$of$pushing$electric$vehicles$to$the$market$might$enable$Toyota$to$earn$back$its$

investment,$since$revenue$from$renting$out$the$cars$will$likely$be$higher$than$attempting$to$

sell$them.$With$the$spread$of$electric$cars,$consumers’$barriers$for$purchase$are$likely$to$

decrease$as$familiarity$increases$during$a$nonUcommittal$rental$period.$Customers$using$the$

share$programme$might$even$become$a$new$segment$for$Toyota$as$it$will$target$urban$

consumers$who$will$appreciate$the$scheme$for$its$novelty$and$green$ethos.$$


$


$

A$final$note$is$that$the$partnerships$established$with$EDF$Group$and$Cite$Lib$will$enable$

Toyota$to$focus$on$innovating$the$core$of$the$business,$while$learning$from$experienced$

players$in$energy$and$carUsharing$and$thus$integrating$innovations$which$have$been$already$

tried$and$tested.$According$to$Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$(2014)$car$sharing$has$a$strong$

potential$for$growth$as$it$is$defined$as$a$breakthrough$market.$It$could$be$argued$that$the$

external$market$is$weak$when$looking$towards$electric$vehicles,$however,$the$car$sharing$

business$is$growing$and$therefore$I$believe$the$market$is$strong.$Toyota$has$chosen$to$partner$

up$with$other$organisations$to$run$the$daily$operations$of$the$programmes$as$their$internal$

ability$allows$them$to$only$focus$on$their$core$competencies,$which$is$why$I$characterise$them$

with$a$weak$internal$ability$and$thus$a$Type$2.$Table$4.6$provides$an$overview$of$the$findings$

for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ Toyota$

Summary$ Launches$HaMo,$car$sharing$service$in$Grenoble$

Industry$ Transportation$

Business'model$ CompanyUasUaUService$(rent)$Maturity$level$2$

Motivations$ U Test$of$feasibility$of$car$sharing$programmes$U Potential$increased$revenue$from$renting,$rather$than$selling$U Target$new$segment$of$young,$urban$workers$who$appreciates$novelty$and$sustainability$

U Promotion$of$electric$vehicles$lowers$barriers$to$use$and$purchase$U Partnership$enables$to$focus$on$innovation$U Growth$in$car$sharing$market$$



Type$ Type$2$

Table'4.6'*'Summary'of'the'Toyota'case'

$

$

$

$

$



4.7.%Case%G:%Kelly%Services%

Kelly$services$is$a$global$outsourcing$and$consulting$service$within$staffing$and$recruitment$

solutions.$The$company$was$founded$in$1946$and$is$headquartered$in$Michigan$in$the$United$

States.$In$2013$it$provided$employment$to$540,000$employees$and$the$company’s$revenue$

was$5.4$billion$USD$(Kelly$Services$2015).$$

$

In$December$2013$Kelly$Services$entered$into$a$partnership$with$oDesk2,$the$world’s$largest$

online$workplace$with$close$to$five$million$registered$freelancers$from$180$countries.$The$

alliance$was$the$first$of$its$kind$between$a$workforce$solutions$company$and$an$online$work$

platform$(Kelly$Services$2013).$In$practice,$this$meant$that$oDesk$became$part$of$Kelly’s$

Outsourcing$and$Consulting$Group$(OCG)$and$thus$an$integrated$part$of$the$company’s$talent$

supply$chain.$Thereby$Kelly’s$clients$will$have$access$to$a$new$service$offering,$where$

freelancers$across$the$globe$can$work$on$online$projects.$The$talent$pool$will$still$be$managed$

by$Kelly$Services$(Karple$2013).$This$is$another$example$of$a$CompanyUasUaUService$model$

where$businesses$can$rent$or$subscribe$to$the$global$talent$pool$depending$on$their$needs.$As$

the$model$matures$it$goes$from$level$2,$renting$onUdemand$to$level$3,$subscription$based$

transactions$(Owyang$2013a,$2013b).$$

$

For$oDesk$the$alliance$means$that$their$registered$freelancers$will$have$access$to$more$job$

opportunities,$however,$what$are$the$benefits$for$Kelly$Services?$With$an$increasing$demand$

from$companies$to$access$TalentUasUaUService$(TaaS)$from$a$global$pool$of$talent,$online$

workplaces$pose$a$threat$to$traditional$staffing$companies$and$by$partnering$with$one$of$them$

Kelly$is$ahead$of$its$competitors$(Karple$2013,$Putt$2014).$Many$new$forms$of$online$staffing$

businesses$are$emerging$(Karple$2013),$so$Kelly$Services$could$have$built$their$own$online$

offering.$In$that$case$the$company$would$have$to$attract$a$pool$of$the$same$quantity$and$

quality$as$oDesk$and$other$services,$which$might$have$been$difficult.$In$addition,$the$launch$of$

an$online$system$that$could$cater$for$the$demands$on$par$with$oDesk$would$have$been$

immensely$time$consuming$and$costly.$Therefore$it$makes$more$sense$to$create$an$alliance$

with$a$partner$that$have$a$functioning$system$and$pool$of$talent.$One$issue$that$Kelly$might$

face$is$how$it$will$cope$with$its$commitment$to$its$corporate$clients’$compliance$and$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$2$Shortly$after$the$partnership$with$Kelly$Services,$oDesk$merged$with$Elance,$another$online$workers$platform.$Today$the$company$is$

referred$to$as$oDeskUElance,$however,$the$literature$refers$to$oDesk$and$so$to$avoid$confusion$I$refer$to$the$company$as$oDesk.$$



regulations.$As$traditional$workers$keep$being$emphasised$in$the$United$States$and$other$

countries,$Kelly$must$be$aware$of$this$risk$(Putt$2014).$For$both$these$reasons$it$is$also$

evident$that$Kelly$Service’s$internal$ability$is$weak.$According$to$Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$

(2014)$online$staffing$is$defined$as$a$niche$and$is$on$the$rise$in$the$share$economy$sUcurve$as$

described$previously.$This$tendency$might$have$motivated$Kelly$Services$to$enter$into$this$

business$and$thus$the$external$market$is$strong,$categorising$them$as$a$Type$2.$Table$4.7$

provides$an$overview$of$the$findings$for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ Kelly$Services$

Summary$ Partnership$with$oDesk,$online$staffing$platform$$

Industry$ Services$

Business'model$ CompanyUasUaUService$(rent$or$subscribe)$Maturity$levels$2$or$3$

Motivations$ U Meeting$demands$from$customers$who$wants$larger$pool$of$global$talent$U Tackling$threat$of$new$online$competitors$U Alliance$requires$less$resources$than$building$internally$U Growth$in$online$staffing$market$



Type$ Type$2$Table'4.7'*'Summary'of'the'Kelly'Services'case'

$

%

%

%

$$$$$

%

%

$


$


$

4.8.%Case%H:%Coca%Cola%%

Coca$Cola$is$the$world’s$largest$beverage$company$with$500$brands$sold$across$200$countries.$

The$company$was$founded$in$1892$and$today$their$headquarters$are$based$in$Atlanta,$United$

States.$Coca$Cola$employs$over$700,000$employees$and$in$2013$their$net$revenue$amounted$to$

46.9$billion$USD.$Coca$Cola’s$2020$vision$is$to$“double$their$system$revenue$focusing$on$profit,$

people,$portfolio,$partners$and$planet”$(Coca$Cola$2014).$$

$

In$December$2013,$Coca$Cola$launched$Wonolo,$short$for$‘Work,$Now,$Locally’,$as$part$of$their$

internal$innovation$initiative$called$Founders.$The$mobile$app$connects$consumers$with$daily$

or$hourly$jobs$in$merchandising,$fulfillment,$event$staffing$and$more$(Moye$2014).$The$idea$is$

that$any$company$can$create$a$job$posting$online$and$users$can$then$claim$the$job$and$report$

to$work$just$a$few$minutes$or$hours$later$(Scheiber$2014).$After$completing$the$job$the$user$

will$get$a$rating$from$the$company$and$get$paid$for$the$day’s$work$through$Wonolo$(Wonolo$

2015).$This$means$Wonolo$is$a$CompanyUasUaUService$model,$which$allows$businesses$to$rent$

on$demand$labour$when$needed$(Owyang$2013a).$According$to$Owyang$this$is$defined$as$

maturity$level$2$(2013b),$however,$even$though$staffing$can$be$defined$as$highUcost;$lowUuse,$

it$is$new$that$labour$services$are$characterised$as$a$product.$According$to$Coca$Cola,$the$app$

simultaneously$tackles$a$business$challenge$of$reducing$outUofUstock$product$inventory$as$well$

as$youth$unemployment$(Moye$2014).$$

$

It$is$easy$to$understand$why$increasing$employment$is$important$for$a$consumer$brand$like$

Coca$Cola.$By$finding$people$jobs$they$will$be$able$to$afford$buying$their$products$(Karkaria$

2013).$Furthermore,$by$encouraging$thousands$of$people$to$use$the$mobile$platform$and$take$

jobs,$there$is$suddenly$a$question$of$whether$consumers$are$shoppers$or$store$associates$

(Bowman$2015).$Either$way,$if$consumers$have$a$positive$experience$such$as$getting$a$job$

from$Coca$Cola$and$thereby$improve$their$quality$of$life$it$will$build$their$brand$preference$

and$loyalty$(Karkaria$2013).$In$addition,$the$mobile$platform$which$is$used$by$millions$of$

people$every$day$is$a$very$valuable$platform$for$engaging$with$consumers.$The$mobile$app$is$

an$especially$effective$communication$medium$in$the$developing$world$where$the$number$of$

mobile$internet$users$are$2$billion$against$1.6$billion$desktop$internet$users$(Karkaria$2013).$$

$


$


Wonolo$also$helps$Coca$Cola$to$leverage$their$infrastructure$by$satisfying$stores$faster$with$

precise$deliveries,$offering$a$more$flexible$distribution$through$its$channels$and$expanding$its$

geographical$reach$(Karkaria$2013).$Wonolo$is$also$a$way$to$promote$‘lean$recruitment’$

within$the$company,$which$saves$time$and$resources$as$there$are$no$long$interview$and$hiring$

processes;$the$candidates$can$be$screened$according$to$a$few$simple$requirements.$In$

addition,$Coca$Cola$is$not$responsible$for$pension,$insurance$and$health$benefits,$which$makes$

workers$cheaper$than$regular$long$terms$workers$(Jobbox$2014).$Hawksworth$and$Vaughan$

(2014)$argues$that$online$staffing$is$still$a$niche$in$the$share$economy,$however,$it$has$

potential$for$growth$and$this$is$why$the$external$market$is$characterised$as$strong.$As$

described,$the$app$has$been$developed$internally$and$it$seems$Coca$Cola$has$enough$

competence$to$carry$it$out,$which$is$why$I$believe$their$internal$ability$is$also$strong,$making$

them$a$Type$1$company.$Table$4.8$provides$an$overview$of$the$findings$for$this$case.$$

$

Company$ Coca$Cola$

Summary$ Launch$of$Wonolo,$online$staffing$app$

Industry$ Services$

Business'model$ CompanyUasUaUService$(rent)$

Maturity$level$2$

Motivations$ U Improves$flexibility$of$infrastructure$and$distribution$U Reduces$outUofUstock$inventory$U Positive$brand$by$helping$youth$unemployment$U Saves$time$and$resources$by$lean$recruitment$U Effective$communication$in$developing$countries$U Platform$creates$preference$and$loyalty$to$the$company$U Opportunity$for$higher$revenue$by$increasing$employment$U Online$staffing$is$a$market$in$growth$$


Internal'ability'$ Strong$

Type$ Type$1$

Table'4.7'*'Summary'of'the'Coca'Cola'case'

$

%

%

$

$



4.9.%Cross%case%analysis%

This$section$will$provide$an$overview$of$the$common$patterns$that$was$found$across$the$eight$

cases.$The$motivations$for$each$case$are$a$testament$to$the$companies’$expected$value$from$

entering$into$a$share$economy$initiative.$As$these$programmes$are$so$new,$and$due$to$the$

limited$scope$of$this$study,$I$am$not$able$to$assess$if$it$has$actually$created$value$for$the$

companies$in$question.$The$motivations$are$also$a$strong$indicator$of$the$companies’$strategic$

goals$and$by$coupling$these$with$suggested$strategies$I$believe$it$is$possible$to$suggest$a$likely$

successful$direction$for$companies$entering$into$the$share$economy.$The$suggested$strategies$

are$based$on$the$taxonomy$and$the$findings$it$has$presented$by$applying$it$to$the$eight$cases.$

First,$I$present$the$findings$for$motivations$and$second,$I$suggest$a$number$of$strategies$based$

on$the$taxonomy$from$part$one.$Finally,$I$provide$a$few$concluding$remarks.$$

$

4.9.1.%Motivations%for%corporations%

The$data$on$motivations$has$been$analysed$by$the$affinity$method$described$in$section$2.4.3.$

The$findings$points$to$several$patterns$for$motivations$across$the$cases.$In$total,$I$have$

identified$nine$motivations$all$of$which$are$present$in$two$or$more$of$the$cases,$as$presented$

in$table$4.9.$The$nine$motivations$are:$

1. Save$costs$and$resources$

2. Opportunity$for$increased$revenue$

3. Response$to$competition$

4. Meeting$customer$demands$

5. Target$new$segment$

6. Forming$alliances$

7. Market$growth$

8. Exploration$of$feasibility$

9. Improve$brand,$trust$and$loyalty$

$

$

$

$

$



$

Company$ Summary$ Motivation$

IKEA$ Launch$of$resell$marketplace$online$in$Sweden$and$Norway$

U Promote$green$ethos$aligned$with$strategy$U Attract$new$customer$segment$who$values$sustainability$U Expose$customers$to$new$products$through$second$hand$platform$U Help$customers$get$space$and$money$for$new$products$

Santander$ Partnership$with$Funding$Circle$

U Response$to$threat$of$alternative$finance$providers$U Cater$for$customer$demands$U Partnership$saves$resources,$opposed$to$building$internally$U Avoid$risky$loans$to$small$businesses$U Keep$positive$brand$w.$small$businesses$U Growth$in$P2P$lending$market$$

Marriott$ Launches$Workspace$on$Demand$with$LiquidSpace$

U Growth$in$mobile$workers$U Opportunity$for$revenue$from$unused$space$U Combating$exploitation$of$space$with$service$offering$generates$revenue$U Offering$is$close$to$core$business$which$means$only$small$changes$to$workflow$U Opportunity$to$sell$more$food$and$drinks$U Target$young$worker$segment$

Citi$Group$ Sponsor$of$Citibikes,$bike$sharing$programme$

U Regain$trustworthy$brand$U Bikers$act$as$testament$to$brand$U Sole$sponsorship$due$to$strong$branding$

B&Q$ Launch$of$Streetclub,$neighbourhood$community$online$$

U Dematerialisation$protects$the$company$from$rising$costs$U Exploration$of$feasibility$of$sharing$models$U Demonstrating$brand$purpose$of$positive$relations$and$taking$care$of$the$environment$

U Opportunity$of$increased$revenue$from$happy$communities$

Toyota$ Launches$HaMo,$car$sharing$service$in$Grenoble$

U Test$of$feasibility$of$car$sharing$programmes$U Potential$increased$revenue$from$renting,$rather$than$selling$U Target$new$segment$of$young,$urban$workers$who$appreciates$novelty$and$sustainability$

U Promotion$of$electric$vehicles$lowers$barriers$to$use$and$purchase$U Partnership$enables$to$focus$on$innovation$U Growth$in$car$sharing$market$$

Kelly$Services$

Partnership$with$oDesk,$online$staffing$platform$$

U Meeting$demands$from$customers$who$want$larger$pool$of$global$talent$U Tackling$threat$of$new$online$competitors$U Alliance$requires$less$resources$than$building$internally$U Growth$in$online$staffing$market$

Coca$Cola$ Launch$of$Wonolo,$$online$staffing$app$

U Improves$flexibility$of$infrastructure$and$distribution$U Reduces$outUofUstock$inventory$U Positive$brand$by$helping$youth$unemployment$U Saves$time$and$resources$by$lean$recruitment$U Effective$communication$in$developing$countries$U Platform$creates$preference$and$loyalty$to$the$company$U Opportunity$for$higher$revenue$by$increasing$employment$U Online$staffing$is$a$market$in$growth$$

Table'4.9'*'Motivations'for'entering'the'share'economy'for'case'companies'

$

$



The$motivations$are$presented$in$figure$4.1,$in$no$particular$order.$Each$motivation$will$be$

explained$in$the$following.$

$Figure'4.1'*'Corporate'motivations'for'participating'in'the'share'economy'

'

4.9.1.1.%Save%costs%and%resources%

For$several$of$the$case$companies,$the$sharing$model$enables$the$company$to$save$on$costs$

and$resources.$B&Q$have$been$fighting$rising$costs$of$production,$but$by$letting$products$stay$

longer$in$the$cycle$of$use$by$enabling$citizens$to$share,$it$reduces$the$demand$for$new$

products$and$thereby$costs.$Dematerialisation$does$not$necessary$mean$that$revenue$will$

decrease$as$there$is$a$rising$demand$for$renting$items$such$as$tools$and$DIY$equipment.$Coca$

cola’s$app$Wonolo$enables$the$company$to$improve$their$distribution$channels$with$a$more$

flexible$workforce$who$can$report$for$duty$in$a$short$amount$of$time.$For$one,$this$means$that$

outUofUstock$inventory$will$be$reduced$and$customers$are$always$able$to$purchase$their$



products.$Second,$the$company$applies$lean$recruitment$through$the$app,$which$means$they$

save$time$and$resources$avoiding$long$and$complicated$hiring$processes.$However,$this$does$

mean$that$workers$are$not$protected$with$healthcare$and$other$worker$rights.$$$$$$$

4.9.1.2.%Opportunity%for%increased%revenue%

The$logic$behind$Coca$cola’s$app$is$that$when$more$people$have$employment,$more$people$can$

afford$to$buy$their$products.$In$this$way$the$app$represents$an$opportunity$to$increase$

revenue.$The$core$of$the$share$economy$is$to$rent,$lend,$swap$or$borrow$rather$than$buy.$

Toyota$exemplifies$this$with$their$HaMo$car$sharing$initiative$where$customers$pay$per$use$

rather$than$buying$a$car.$This$model$can$increase$revenue$if$it$gets$enough$traction$as$renting$

a$car$many$times$can$amount$to$much$more$than$selling$a$car$once.$It$is$important$to$notice$

that$this$mainly$applies$to$goods$which$are$high$cost$and$used$rarely.$Marriott$hotels$

discovered$that$renting$out$unused$workspace$would$not$only$gain$them$extra$revenue,$but$it$

would$also$lower$the$costs$of$having$dormant$conference$rooms.$In$addition,$the$hotel$

combated$exploitation$of$the$space$from$people$who$would$sneak$in$the$lobby$before$renting$

was$an$option.$Furthermore,$the$hotel$chain$projects$there$will$be$a$good$chance$to$sell$more$

food$and$beverages$due$to$the$placement$of$the$workspaces.$For$IKEA$the$knock$on$effect$of$

their$peerUtoUpeer$buy$and$sell$platform$is$that$customers$will$have$more$space$and$funds$to$

purchase$new$products.$For$B&Q$having$happy$communities$in$their$Streetclub$will$encourage$

citizens$to$engage$more$and$take$pride$in$their$street,$thus$investing$in$its$appearance,$which$

again$will$create$opportunity$for$revenue.$$$$$$$

4.9.1.3.%Response%to%competition%

Some$companies$face$fierce$competition$from$new$entrants$in$the$market,$such$as$Kelly$

services$which$have$seen$a$rise$in$online$workers$on$demand$in$recent$years.$In$order$to$

tackle$this$threat,$they$must$adapt$their$business$to$accommodate$what$the$market$wants.$In$

this$case$Kelly$Services$partnered$with$oDesk$and$thus$were$able$to$supply$its$clients$with$a$

flexible,$global$pool$of$talent.$Santander$not$only$faces$online$share$economy$competitors$in$

the$market,$but$also$government$pressure$which$dictates$that$all$banks$must$refer$customers$

to$alternative$finance$providers$in$the$instance$where$banks$reject$a$loan.$For$Santander$this$

evolved$into$a$partnership$with$peerUtoUpeer$lending$platform$Funding$Circle.$$


$


4.9.1.4.%Meeting%customer%demands%

Santander$not$only$adapted$to$competition,$but$they$also$discovered$that$some$customers$

were$interested$in$peerUtoUpeer$lending$options,$so$Santander$opted$to$incorporate$a$sharing$

model$into$their$business.$Kelly$services$also$felt$a$demand$from$customers$who$expected$the$

company$to$supply$global$talent,$why$they$opted$for$a$partnership$with$oDesk.$These$

movements$in$consumers$are$key$in$the$share$economy$as$we$see$a$tendency$towards$

customers$who$prefer$access$over$ownership$or$they$have$strong$feelings$about$the$

environment$and$thus$become$political$consumers,$which$companies$must$cater$to.$$$

4.9.1.5.%Target%new%segment%

Launching$a$new$business$concept$can$also$open$up$for$a$whole$new$segment$of$users$or$

customers.$With$oDesk,$Kelly$Services$suddenly$has$access$to$a$global$workforce$that$were$

potentially$also$a$little$younger$as$the$collaboration$took$place$strictly$online.$Coca$Cola’s$

Wonolo$app$meant$they$can$communicate$to$people$globally$and$especially$efficient$in$

developing$countries$where$mobile$use$is$higher$than$desktop$use.$For$IKEA$their$secondU

hand$furniture$platform$attracted$customers$who$care$about$sustainability$and$at$the$same$

time$IKEA$could$expose$new$products$to$them$through$their$platform.$This$strategy$also$made$

sense$to$Toyota.$With$the$launch$of$HaMo$it$exposed$the$Toyota$brand$to$a$new$segment$of$

young$urban$workers$who$were$interested$in$the$sharing$scheme.$In$addition,$it$also$

promoted$the$use$of$electric$vehicles$in$a$city$setting$and$thus$hopes$to$lower$barriers$to$

purchasing$an$electric$vehicle$in$this$segment.$$

4.9.1.6.%Forming%alliances%

For$corporations$who$want$to$enter$the$share$economy$it$can$be$a$good$idea$to$start$by$

partnering$with$a$smaller$company$already$in$the$share$economy,$as$there$are$several$

benefits.$For$Santander,$the$partnership$meant$that$they$could$avoid$risky$loans$to$small$

businesses$as$they$would$pass$these$on$to$Funding$Circle$while$still$maintaining$a$good$

reputation.$Both$Santander$and$Kelly$Services$have$saved$resources$by$forming$alliances,$not$

having$to$build$platforms$from$scratch$as$these$were$already$supplied$by$Funding$Circle$and$

oDesk$respectively.$Marriott$benefits$in$the$same$way$as$renting$out$workspace$is$close$to$

their$core$business$of$renting$hotel$rooms,$so$the$transition$required$minimal$change$in$

business$processes.$For$Toyota,$partnering$with$local$authorities$and$the$EDF$group$meant$

that$they$could$focus$on$innovation$rather$than$running$the$car$sharing$programme.$Smaller$



companies$can$also$provide$knowledge$and$experience$of$running$a$share$model,$however,$it$

is$worth$noting$that$by$partnering$with$a$smaller$company$it$means$that$the$corporation$loses$

control$of$the$potentially$important$processes$and$transactions$unless$the$agreement$between$

the$two$are$very$clear.$$$$$

4.9.1.7.%Market%growth%

When$companies$adapt$their$business$to$the$share$economy$it$is$because$it$is$a$growing$

market$and$the$industries$represented$here$are$all$growing.$This$means$there$are$great$

opportunities$for$corporations$to$benefit$from$these$markets.$$

4.9.1.8.%Exploration%of%feasibility%

The$share$economy$might$not$work$for$all$companies$and$it$can$be$difficult$assessing$which$

models$to$use$and$how$to$restructure$the$company.$This$is$one$reason$that$Toyota$started$the$

HaMo$car$sharing$initiative.$By$launching$this$as$a$test$programme$in$Grenoble,$Toyota$could$

test$the$feasibility$of$the$sharing$model$and$tweak$it$for$a$wider$launch$later$on.$The$same$

applies$to$B&Q’s$Streetclub$initiative.$Not$only$are$the$company$testing$how$communities$

work,$but$it$is$also$building$a$critical$mass$of$users$to$potentially$launch$a$sharing$programme$

in$the$next$few$years.$Companies$also$gain$valuable$insight$into$customer$behaviour$along$the$

entire$purchase$and$use$cycle.$This$is$why$some$companies$find$it$attractive$to$start$with$an$

explorative$approach$to$the$share$economy.$$

4.9.1.9.%Improve%brand,%trust%and%loyalty%

The$activities$of$the$share$economy$offer$ample$opportunity$to$adjust$a$company’s$branding$to$

the$consumers$of$today,$who$are$leaning$towards$nonUconsumption$and$greener$values.$This$

is$the$main$reason$why$Citibank$decided$to$sponsor$Citibikes$bike$sharing$programme$in$New$

York$city.$After$the$financial$crisis,$financial$institutions$have$plummeted$in$customer$trust$

surveys$and$therefore$banks$have$been$competing$to$win$back$consumers$through$various$

initiatives.$Citibank$was$good$at$branding$the$Citibikes$which$was$a$rolling$testament$to$the$

bank’s$efforts$to$be$known$as$environmentally$friendly$and$caring$for$the$community.$The$

same$goes$for$IKEA,$Coca$Cola$and$B&Q,$which$all$try$to$promote$awareness$of$natural$

resources$and$caring$for$the$community$with$their$initiatives.$$$



4.9.2.%Strategies%of%share%economy%companies%

By$combining$the$taxonomy$with$eight$case$corporations$and$the$most$common$motivations,$I$

believe$it$is$possible$to$point$to$a$number$of$strategies$which$can$enhance$a$company’s$chance$

of$success$when$starting$a$new$initiative$in$the$share$economy.$The$analysis$of$the$eight$cases$

revealed$that$just$two$of$the$cases$could$be$characterised$as$Type$1,$with$both$a$strong$

internal$ability$and$external$market.$The$remaining$six$cases$are$Type$2,$which$either$have$a$

strong$internal$ability$or$strong$external$market.$As$projected$none$of$the$cases$are$a$Type$3$

with$weak$external$market$and$weak$internal$ability.$This$makes$sense$as$these$cases$have$

already$been$launched$and$if$any$company$could$see$there$was$no$market$and$no$ability$to$

carry$an$idea$through$it$would$not$launch$and$so$I$would$not$be$able$to$find$information$about$

it$for$a$case$analysis.$Similarly,$we$can$see$that$the$Type$2$cases$all$have$a$strong$external$

market,$but$a$weak$internal$ability.$The$companies$in$question$have$sought$to$build$

partnerships$to$accommodate$this$weakness$and$thus$it$could$be$argued$some$of$these$are$

leaning$towards$a$Type$1.$Table$4.10$provides$a$summary$of$the$findings.$$$$$$$$

$

Company$ Summary$ Type$ External'market$ Internal'ability$

IKEA$ Launch$of$resell$marketplace$online$in$Sweden$and$Norway$

1$ +$ +$

Santander$ Partnership$with$Funding$Circle$ 2$ +$ U$

Marriott$ Launches$Workspace$on$Demand$with$LiquidSpace$

2$ +$ U$

Citi$Group$ Sponsor$of$Citibikes,$bike$sharing$programme$

2$ +$ U$

B&Q$ Launch$of$Streetclub,$neighbourhood$community$online$$

2$ +$ U$

Toyota$ Launches$HaMo,$car$sharing$service$in$Grenoble$

2$ +$ U$

Kelly$Services$

Partnership$with$oDesk,$online$staffing$platform$$

2$ +$ U$

Coa$Cola$ Launch$of$Wonolo,$online$staffing$app$ 1$ +$ +$Table'4.10'*'Summary'of'types'across'case'companies'

$

The$suggested$strategies$are$sectioned$according$to$the$taxonomy$which$was$developed$in$

part$one,$which$entails$Type$1,$Type$2$and$Type$3.$$



4.9.2.1.%Type%1%strategy%

Type$1$companies$are$characterised$by$having$a$strong$projection$for$the$external$market$and$

a$strong$internal$ability$to$carry$out$the$pending$share$economy$initiative.$This$means$that$

Type$1$companies$are$the$most$likely$companies$to$succeed.$This,$however,$does$not$mean$

that$there$is$no$risk$involved$with$launching$the$initiative$for$Type$1$companies.$As$we$have$

seen$there$a$plenty$of$pitfalls$for$companies$in$the$share$economy$such$as$picking$the$right$

revenue$model,$building$a$functioning$platform$and$attracting$a$critical$mass$of$users.$For$

Coca$Cola,$which$is$one$of$the$Type$1$cases,$there$are$big$risks$in$terms$of$legislation$when$

dealing$with$workers$around$the$world.$As$presented$in$the$case,$the$company$is$not$liable$for$

insurance$and$benefits$for$the$workers,$which$could$cause$major$issues$in$some$countries.$

This$might$meet$their$goal$of$increased$revenue$or$creating$job$and$thereby$improving$their$

brand,$however,$by$not$complying$to$legislation$it$might$damage$their$brand$even$more$so$and$

have$the$opposite$effect.$With$IKEA,$which$is$the$second$Type$1$case,$the$analysis$showed$that$

their$Norwegian$campaign$was$short$term$and$critics$highlighted$that$their$secondUhand$

platform$was$only$available$in$Sweden.$This$might$fulfill$IKEA’s$goal$of$an$improved$green$

brand,$however,$it$can$also$come$across$as$a$gimmick$or$marketing$stunt$and$not$a$true$belief$

in$less$consumption$and$saving$the$environment.$An$additional$point$to$remember$is$that$

when$a$market$is$in$growth$many$others$flock$there$and$thus$create$immense$competition.$

Summarising$my$points$above,$the$strategy$to$follow$for$Type$1$companies$is:$

$

Focus-on-the-next-risk-and-ensure-engaged,-long-term-share-economy-activity.$

$


Type$2$companies$are$characterised$by$being$strong$in$either$external$market$or$internal$

ability,$and$being$weak$in$the$remaining$factor.$This$means$these$types$of$companies$are$likely$

to$succeed$if$they$can$improve$their$weak$factor,$be$it$internal$ability$or$moving$the$initiative$

to$a$stronger$external$market.$$

$

In$the$analysis$there$were$six,$Type$2$companies,$which$were$all$identified$with$a$strong$

external$market$and$weak$internal$ability.$The$weak$abilities$are$caused$by$a$variety$of$issues.$

For$B&Q$it$is$simply$a$matter$of$not$having$found$the$right$IT$and$finance$systems$to$support$



their$initiative$as$of$yet.$However,$for$the$rest$of$the$Type$2$cases$they$simply$did$not$have$the$

knowledge$and$experience$with$running$an$initiative$like$this$and$thus$partnered$with$

someone$who$did.$Santander$partnered$with$Funding$Circle$to$support$their$small$businesses$

with$peerUtoUpeer$lending,$Marriott$let$LiquidSpace$supply$the$technology$to$their$office$space$

rental$site$and$Citi$Group$and$Toyota$let$other$organisations$run$their$bikeU$and$carUsharing$

efforts.$For$Kelly$Services$it$was$a$matter$of$supplying$their$customers$with$the$right$talent$

and$thus$had$to$partner$with$oDesk$to$get$access$to$the$freelancers$they$needed.$Partnerships$

are$therefore$a$great$way$to$fulfill$many$different$goals,$as$we$have$seen$represented$in$the$

companies’$motivations$previously,$and$it$can$even$be$a$goal$in$itself$as$partnerships$can$bring$

knowledge$and$experience$while$the$company$can$focus$on$its$core$business.$However,$it$is$

important$to$note$that$partnerships$can$be$tricky$and$terms$and$conditions$must$be$carefully$

agreed.$Despite$the$difficulties,$partnerships$offer$a$great$response$to$competitive$threats,$

meeting$demands,$target$new$segments,$improving$the$brand$and$saving$on$costs.$$

$

In$the$analysis,$there$were$no$Type$2$companies$with$a$strong$internal$ability$and$weak$

market,$however,$in$theory$this$is$possible.$For$these$companies$the$priority$is$to$find$a$

market$that$has$better$opportunities$for$growth$or$which$is$not$saturated.$As$we$have$seen,$

several$companies$move$across$industries$to$join$the$share$economy.$Citi$Group$which$is$a$

financial$services$company$suddenly$entered$into$a$bike$sharing$programme$and$Coca$Cola$

launched$a$new$app$for$freelance$workers$that$could$satisfy$their$own,$but$also$other$

businesses’$needs.$Growing$the$market$or$targeting$a$new$segment$is$a$great$way$to$create$

value.$The$strategy$to$follow$for$Type$2$companies$are$as$follows:$

$

Seek-partnerships-to-strengthen-your-ability-or-move-your-business-to-a-better-market.--$

$


Type$3$companies$are$characterised$by$having$a$weak$external$market$and$weak$internal$

ability,$which$make$these$companies$the$least$likely$to$succeed.$There$were$no$Type$3$

companies$in$the$analysis,$however,$it$is$possible$that$some$companies$would$face$these$

challenges$as$they$start$planning$a$share$economy$venture.$When$this$is$the$case$it$is$

important$to$look$at$their$motivation$for$entering$the$share$economy.$Have$the$company$been$



threatened$by$competition?$Are$customers$demanding$a$share$model?$Is$it$merely$an$

exploration$of$feasibility$of$a$new$share$model?$Does$the$company$want$to$target$a$new$

segment?$By$establishing$this,$the$company$can$decide$if$there$are$other$options$that$can$

create$the$value$they$need$as$a$company.$It$might$not$be$a$viable$model$for$all$companies$to$

become$a$share$economy$company.$However,$if$this$is$the$only$way,$I$suggest$the$company$can$

follow$the$Type$2$strategy$and$seek$partners$and$find$a$better$market.$Summarising$this$I$

suggest$a$strategy$for$Type$3$as$follows:$

$

Establish-motivation-and-seek-alternative-opportunity-for-creating-value.--

Explore-option-of-partnerships-and-new-market.-$$

$

4.9.3.%Concluding%remarks%

The$taxonomy$presents$a$simplified$view$of$a$very$complex$phenomenon$and$due$to$the$scope$

of$this$thesis$it$only$prioritises$two$elements,$external-market$and$internal-ability$to$

encompass$this$complexity.$Naturally,$an$assessment$of$the$external$market$requires$thorough$

analysis$of$competition,$growth$forecasts,$customer$demands$as$well$as$an$assessment$of$the$

internal$ability$must$include$financials,$experience$and$knowledge$in$the$organisation,$IT$

capabilities$and$much$more.$However,$it$does$point$to$the$fact$that$companies$must$assess$

both$internal$and$external$factors,$whereas$other$theories$focus$solely$on$the$type$of$good$or$

business$model$which$can$be$controlled$internally.$$

$

The$nine$incumbents’$motivations$for$entering$the$share$economy$have$been$derived$by$

finding$general$patterns$from$these$eight$specific$companies.$The$affinity$analysis$reveals$that$

the$most$common$motivations$are$an-opportunity-for-increased-revenue$and$improved-

branding,-trust-and-loyalty.$However,$this$result$could$be$very$different$with$another$selection$

of$companies$and$so$I$am$not$able$to$say$there$is$one$main$motivation$which$applies$to$all$

companies.$The$findings$do,$however,$reveal$a$wide$set$of$motivations,$of$which$some$will$also$

be$relevant$to$companies$outside$the$selection$of$companies$presented$in$this$thesis.$$

$

The$strategies$are$based$on$a$simple$taxonomy$and$I$acknowledge,$that$the$complexities$of$the$

share$economy$and$the$companies$cannot$be$captured$with$the$few$elements$presented.$


$


Therefore,$the$strategies$are$simplistic$interpretations$of$how$the$challenges$of$launching$in$

the$share$economy$can$be$solved.$In$addition,$I$realise$that$a$share$initiative$might$not$be$

relevant$for$all$companies.$If$a$company$is$in$a$weak$market$or$its$internal$capability$is$not$

geared$for$this$major$change$it$might$make$more$sense$to$find$other$ways$of$reaching$its$

objectives.$Thus$I$can$conclude$that$not$all$companies$should$pursue$the$share$economy.$$

When$looking$at$the$strategies$isolated$it$might$seem$that$these$can$also$apply$to$smaller$

companies$or$startups.$However,$the$strategies$have$been$developed$from$incumbent$case$

studies$and$thus$it$cannot$be$concluded$that$they$also$apply$to$SMEs.$Finally,$no$guarantee$for$

success$is$given$as$the$strategies$have$not$been$tested.$Although$I$do$believe$by$understanding$

a$company’s$situation$and$taking$steps$to$improve$it,$will$further$any$company’s$likelihood$for$

success$in$the$share$economy.$$

$

$ $



5.%Conclusion%and%discussion%

This$thesis$has$been$guided$by$the$research$question$and$has$been$comprised$of$two$main$

parts.$The$first$part$provided$a$comprehensive$background$of$the$share$economy$and,$on$this$

basis,$developed$a$taxonomy$to$assess$the$likelihood$for$the$success$of$companies$in$the$share$

economy.$The$second$part$analysed$eight$incumbents$which$have$entered$the$share$economy.$

The$analysis$applied$the$taxonomy$as$well$as$examined$the$corporations’$motivations,$which$

provided$insight$to$the$objectives$and$expected$value$to$be$gained.$The$three$levels$in$the$

taxonomy$resulted$in$three$complementing$strategies$for$companies$to$become$successful$in$

the$share$economy.$By$coupling$a$company’s$motivations$with$the$strategy$it$becomes$more$

specific$in$terms$of$the$company’s$objectives$and$expected$value.$This$chapter$will$provide$

answers$to$the$research$question$as$well$as$discuss$my$main$findings$and$their$contribution$to$

the$share$economy$literature.$Finally,$I$discuss$the$basis$for$further$research.$

$

5.1.%Findings%and%contribution%

To$my$best$knowledge,$this$research$is$first$to$contribute$to$the$share$economy$literature$by$

demonstrating-why$corporations$are$motivated$to$join$and$what$strategies,$which$encompass$

both$internal$and$external$factors,$they$can$apply$to$achieve$success.$$

$

The$exploratory$research$has$been$guided$by$a$hermeneutic$philosophy$and$designed$with$

Yin’s$(2009)$multiple$case$study$approach$and$incorporated$Corbin$and$Strauss’$(2015)$

thoughts$on$grounded$theory.$Both$primary$and$secondary$data,$which$has$been$

predominantly$qualitative,$have$been$used$in$the$analysis.$Throughout$I$have$sought$to$ensure$

a$high$degree$of$validity$and$reliability.$In$this$section$I$present$and$discuss$my$findings$which$

have$supported$my$research$in$reaching$my$conclusion.$$

$

Understanding$the$share$economy$

The$aim$of$part$one$was$to$gain$an$understanding$of$the$dynamics$of$the$share$economy.$The$

literature$review$in$section$3.1.$provided$an$overview$of$the$various$definitions$related$to$the$

share$economy,$which$have$been$proposed$since$the$first$mentioning$by$Spaeth$and$Felson$

(1978).$By$discussing$the$share$economy’s$drivers$I$derived$the$five$most$common$factors$

mentioned$in$the$literature$which$were$excess-capacity,-technology,-environmental-awareness,-



reDengineering-of-consumption$and$resurgence-of-community.$By$discussing$these$five$drivers$

we$understand$what$enables$the$share$economy$and$its$growth.$The$five$drivers$are$similar$to$

those$presented$by$Botsman$and$Rogers$(2011)$and$Gansky$(2013).$$

$

The$literature$review$also$discussed$the$various$typologies$presented$by$a$number$of$scholars.$

This$reflected$the$types$of$goods$which$are$most$shareable,$archetypes$of$shared$models$and$

lifeUcycles.$Finally,$the$corporate$reUengineering$strategies$by$Owyang$(2013a)$and$Matzler$

and$colleagues$(2014)$were$compared.$In$section$3.2.$I$presented$current$developments$and$

examples$of$disruptive$companies$in$six$industries,$including$transportation,-money,-space,-

goods,-food$and$services.$More$industries$are$affected$by$the$share$economy,$however,$these$

six$represent$the$most$mature$and$relate$to$the$eight$cases$in$part$two.$In$section$3.3.$I$sought$

to$present$the$practical$side$of$the$share$economy$by$comparing$themes$from$interviews$with$

nine$startup$companies.$The$findings$here$pointed$to$six$issues,$challenges$and$priorities$

including$revenue-models,-legislation,-critical-mass,-barriers-of-use,-building-the-platform$and$

knowing-users.$$

$

In$order$to$develop$strategies$that$are$relevant$I$must$characterise$the$corporations$in$part$

two.$However,$the$typologies$presented$in$the$literature$review$are$not$sufficient$as$they$focus$

on$the$internal$aspects$of$the$company,$such$as$the$type$of$goods$shared$or$archetypes$which$

focus$on$the$business$model.$The$lifeUcycle$theory,$on$the$other$hand,$only$focus$on$market$

factors$and$do$not$take$into$account$the$internal$aspects$of$the$company.$For$this$reason$I$

suggest$a$taxonomy$which$encompasses$both$internal$and$external$factors,$by$assessing$the$

strength$of$a$company’s$internal$ability$and$external$market$conditions.$The$taxonomy$thus$

provides$three$types,$which$ranges$from$most$likely$to$succeed$at$Type$1$and$least$likely$to$

succeed$in$Type$3.$To$my$knowledge,$the$taxonomy$is$thereby$the$first$to$suggest$taking$both$

internal$and$external$factors$into$account.$However,$the$taxonomy$is$a$simplistic$approach$to$a$

very$complex$area.$$$

$

Motivations$and$strategies$

Part$two$was$an$exploration$of$nine$incumbents$who$have$all$entered$the$share$economy$in$

some$form$or$another,$including$IKEA,$Santander,$Marriott,$Citi$Group,$B&Q,$Toyota,$Kelly$

Services$and$Coca$Cola.$I$characterised$each$company$according$to$industry$and$business$



model,$according$to$Owyang’s$(2013a)$value$chain$model.$In$addition,$I$applied$the$taxonomy$

developed$in$part$one$and$categorised$each$company$as$Type$1,$Type$2$or$Type$3.$The$cases$

focused$on$discovering$each$company’s$motivation$for$entering$the$share$economy.$The$

motivations$resulted$in$nine$main$motivations$which$are$save-costs-and-resources,-opportunity-

for-increased-revenue,-response-to-competition,-meetings-customer-demands,-target-new-

segment,-forming-alliances,-market-growth,-exploration-of-feasibility$and$improve-brand,-trust-

and-loyalty.-I$am$not$able$to$say$that$there$is$one$main$motivator$which$applies$to$all$

companies.$However,$I$believe$that$the$nine$motivations$can$be$reflected$in$other$companies$

outside$this$study.$Owyang$(2013b)$has$argued$how$the$share$economy$can$create$value$for$

corporations$as$presented$in$section$3.1.4.$His$seven$benefits$are$similar$with$the$nine$

findings$of$this$study.$However,$to$my$knowledge,$his$findings$have$not$been$supported$by$

empirics$and$thus$these$findings$are$a$wellUfounded$contribution$to$the$discussion.$$

$

The$analysis$of$the$eight$corporations$also$revealed$that$Coca$Cola$and$IKEA$could$be$

categorised$as$Type$1$companies$and$therefore$highly$likely$to$succeed$due$to$a$strong$

internal$ability$and$strong$external$market.$The$remaining$companies$are$characterised$as$

Type$2,$all$with$strong$markets,$but$weak$internal$ability.$None$of$the$companies$were$Type$3,$

which$makes$sense$as$the$companies$analysed$all$had$launched$and$thus,$we$must$assume,$$

had$initiated$the$project$based$on$at$least$one$positive$factor.$By$discussing$how$the$

companies$have$overcome$their$weaknesses$I$suggest$three$strategies$for$Type$1,$Type$2$and$

Type$3$respectively:$

U Focus$on$the$next$risk$and$ensure$engaged,$long$term$share$economy$activity.$

U Seek$partnerships$to$strengthen$your$ability$or$move$your$business$to$a$better$market.$$$

U Establish$motivation$and$seek$alternative$opportunity$for$creating$value.$Explore$

option$of$partnerships$and$new$market.$$

$

These$strategies$contribute$to$the$literature$of$how$corporations$can$enter$the$share$economy$

with$an$alternative$approach$to$how$to$assess$companies’$likelihood$of$success.$In$addition,$I$

can$conclude$that$not$all$companies$should$pursue$the$share$economy.$I$acknowledge$that$the$

strategies$are$a$simplified$suggestion$to$increase$the$chances$for$success.$No$guarantee$for$

success$is$given,$however,$by$assessing$internal$and$external$factors$companies$will$better$

understand$how$to$approach$their$venture$into$the$share$economy.$$$$


$


5.2.%Conclusion%

The$following$research$question$was$introduced$in$chapter$one:$

$

Why-are-corporations-motivated-by-the-share-economy-and-$

what-strategies-can-they-apply-to-achieve-success-in-this-new-economy?$

$

This$question$has$been$examined$through$relevant$literature$and$empirics$of$current$startups$

in$the$share$economy$through$interviews.$As$the$literature$available$was$insufficient$for$

categorising$the$companies$on$an$equal$basis,$a$taxonomy$was$developed.$The$taxonomy$was$

built$on$the$basis$of$the$literature$and$empirics$and$thus$included$two$elements$which$assess$

the$strength$and$weakness$of$the$internal-capability$and$external-market-for$each$company.$

The$combinations$give$three$potential$types,$Type$1$representing$the$most$likely$to$succeed$

and$Type$3$the$least$likely.$The$taxonomy$was$applied$to$the$eight$cases.$$

$

Why$are$corporations$motivated$by$the$share$economy...?$

The$study$of$eight$corporations$revealed$a$pattern$across$their$motivations$for$entering$into$

the$share$economy.$The$pattern$revealed$nine$main$motivations:$$

● Save$costs$and$resources$

● Opportunity$for$increased$revenue$

● Response$to$competition$

● Meeting$customer$demands$

● Target$new$segment$

● Forming$alliances$

● Market$growth$

● Exploration$of$feasibility$

● Improve$brand,$trust$and$loyalty$

The$motivations$are$mentioned$in$no$particular$order$and$as$many$or$as$few$can$apply$to$any$

one$company$included$in$the$study.$The$list$helps$in$understanding$why$it$makes$sense$for$

these$incumbents$to$enter$the$share$economy$and$what$value$they$might$expect$from$their$

new$venture.$$

$

$



…$and$what$strategies$can$they$apply$to$achieve$success$in$this$new$economy?$

The$strategies$were$developed$by$applying$the$taxonomy$to$each$company$and$by$gaining$an$

understanding$of$their$strengths$and$weaknesses.$This$provided$the$basis$for$developing$

three$strategies:$

$

Type$1$strategy$

D-for-companies-most-likely-to-succeed$

● Focus$on$the$next$risk$and$ensure$engaged,$long$term$share$economy$activity.$$

$

Type$2$strategy$

D-for-companies-likely-to-succeed,-provided-improvement-occurs$

● Seek$partnerships$to$strengthen$your$ability$or$move$your$business$to$a$better$market.$

$

Type$3$strategy$

D-for-companies-least-likely-to-succeed$

● Establish$motivation$and$seek$alternative$opportunity$for$creating$value.$Explore$

option$of$partnerships$and$new$market.$$

$

The$strategies$represent$simple$potential$solutions$to$challenges$for$the$companies$which$

have$been$examined.$Thus,$there$is$no$guarantee$for$success,$but$rather$a$chance$to$increase$

the$likelihood$of$success.$In$addition,$I$can$conclude$that$not$all$companies$should$pursue$the$

share$economy.$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$


$


5.3.%Further%research%and%perspective%

As$this$thesis$concludes,$it$paves$the$way$for$further$exploration$of$the$share$economy$as$a$

focus$for$research.$A$natural$extension$of$the$conclusion$here$is$to$assess$the$actual$value$

created$by$the$share$economy$for$incumbents$when$they$make$the$move$to$this$new$way$of$

doing$business.$I$believe$more$data$on$this$will$emerge$in$the$coming$years,$but$even$now$this$

could$be$an$interesting$topic$if$the$scope$of$such$a$research$project$allows.$Adding$to$this,$it$is$

relevant$to$look$at$various$industries$and$markets$to$see$if$some$are$more$suitable$for$larger$

corporations$to$establish$shared$models$of$business.$$$

$

5.3.1.%The%dark%side%of%the%share%economy%

This$thesis$and$the$literature$presented$in$it$has$predominantly$been$in$favour$of$the$

widespread$impact$of$the$share$economy,$however,$an$increasing$number$of$critics$have$

emerged$both$in$academics$and$mainstream$media.$As$the$new$economy$experience$growing$

pains,$its$limitations$and$challenges$become$painfully$clear.$$

$

Barry$and$Caron$(2015),$Malhotra$and$Van$Alstyne$(2014)$and$Dervojeda$and$colleagues$

(2013)$discuss$the$legal$gap$between$current$legislation$of$ownership$and$responsibility,$tax$

regulation$and$these$new$innovative$sharing$companies,$which$leave$users$uninsured,$the$

government$in$risk$of$losing$out$on$tax$income$and$some$markets$to$gain$unfair$advantages.$

Tonkinwise$(2015)$argues$that$users$of$these$companies$accept$social$costs$in$connection$

with$economic$transactions$to$be$part$of$this$economy$such$as$socialising$with$strangers.$For$

workers$hired$by$these$companies$the$risks$involve$everything$from$income$instability,$

unforeseen$criminal$liabilities$and$fewer$protections$(Rampell$2015).$Owyang$(2013c)$points$

to$the$challenges$specifically$for$incumbents$entering$the$share$economy.$Not$only$will$the$

road$require$a$business$transformation,$but$there$will$also$be$challenges$connected$to$

legislation$and$governance$such$as$liability,$IP$ownership,$revenue$sharing,$information$

security$and$quality$assurance.$If$companies$go$for$a$joint$venture$solution$it$cannot$assume$

that$new$entrants$will$want$to$join$the$partnership.$The$cultural$fit$or$overall$mission$might$

differ$too$greatly.$AirBnB’s$debacle$with$the$New$York$City$Council,$where$they$accused$the$

company$of$making$houses$less$affordable$by$restricting$supply,$is$another$issue$(New$York$

Times$2014).$$$$$$



$One$company,$especially,$has$gained$negative$traction$and$proves$the$point$for$critics.$For$many,$Uber$exemplifies$all$that$is$evil$in$the$share$economy.$The$novel$taxi$and$car$sharing$service$has$been$the$eye$of$the$media$storm$on$several$occasions$in$the$last$year.$Its$achievements$for$this$include,$but$are$not$limited$to;$operation$being$banned$in$several$countries$as$the$company$failed$to$comply$with$local$legislation,$a$major$PR$faux$pas$in$which$the$CEO$revealed$his$thoughts$of$blackmailing$journalists$criticising$the$company,$several$sexual$assaults$involving$Uber$drivers,$a$driver$strike$due$to$dumping$wages,$refusing$to$cooperate$with$driver$unions$and$drivers$being$accused$of$giving$discriminating$ratings$to$homosexual$passengers$(Irwin$2014).$Yet$the$number$of$users$are$at$an$all$time$high$and$the$company$continues$to$receive$major$funding$rounds$(Mac$2014).$$$$This$critique$points$to$a$new$area$of$relevant$research$in$areas$reaching$beyond$IS,$such$as$law,$social$sciences$and$business$to$understand$how$the$share$economy$can$have$a$positive$impact$on$society,$businesses$and$individuals.$$

%$ $



6.%References%$Afzal,$S.$(2013)$IKEA-Partner-With-Customers-to-Sell-Used-Furniture-in-Virtual-Flea-Market.$URL$http://mashable.com/2013/11/03/ikeaUfurnitureUcampaign/$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$$$$ $$$Albinsson,$P.A.$&$Perera,$Y.$(2012)$Alternative$marketplaces$in$the$21st$century:$Building$community$through$sharing$events.$Journal-of-Consumer-Behaviour,-11:$303–315.$$$Andersen,$I.$(2005)$Den-Skinbarlige-Virkelighed:-Om-Vidensproduktion-Inden-for-Samfundsvidenskaberne.$Frederiksberg:$Samfundslitteratur.$$$Andersson,$M.,$Hjalmarsson,$A.,$&$Avital,$M.$(2013)$PeerUtoUPeer$Service$Sharing$Platforms:$Driving$Share$and$Share$Alike$on$a$MassUScale.$In$Baskerville,$R.$&$Chau,$M.$(Eds.)-Proceedings-of-the-34th-International-Conference-on-Information-Systems.-ICIS-2013.$$$Avital,$M.,$Andersson,$M.,$Nickerson,$J.,$Sundararajan,$A.,$Van$Alstyne,$M.$&$Verhoeven,$D.$(2014)$The$Collaborative$Economy:$A$Disruptive$Innovation$or$Much$Ado$about$Nothing?$Proceedings-of-the-35th-International-Conference-on-Information-Systems.-ICIS-2014.$$$Bardhi,$F.$&$Eckhardt,$G.M.$(2012)$AccessUBased$Consumption:$The$case$of$Car$Sharing.$Journal-of-Consumer-Research,-39:$881U898$$$Barry,$J.M.$&$Caron,$P.L.$(2015)$Tax$regulation,$transportation$innovation$and$the$sharing$economy.$The-University-of-Chicago-Law-Review-Dialogue,-81(1)$$$Belk,$R.$(2007)$Why$not$share,$rather$than$own?$The-ANNALS-of-the-American-Academy-of-Political-and-Social-Science-2007,$611(126)$

Benkler,$Y.$(2004)$"Sharing$Nicely":$On$shareable$goods$and$the$emergence$of$sharing$as$a$modality$of$economic$production.$The-Yale-Law-Journal,-114(2)$

Berger,$D.$(2014)$The-sharing-economy:-A-growing-trend,-especially-in-transportation$URL$http://blog.uship.com/startups/theUsharingUeconomyUaUgrowingUtrendUespeciallyUinUtransportation/$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$Bernstein,$A.$(2012)$Breaking:-Citibank-is-sponsor-of-NYC-bike-share,-“Citibike”$URL$http://www.wnyc.org/story/284420UbreakingUcitibankUisUsponsorUofUnycUbikeUshareUcitibike/$$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$$$$$$$ $$$Botsman,$R.$&$Rogers,$R.$(2010)$Beyond$Zipcar:$Collaborative$Consumption.$Harvard-Business-Review,-10$$$Botsman,$R.$&$Rogers,$R.$(2011)$What's-Mine-Is-Yours:-How-Collaborative-Consumption-Is-Changing-the-Way-We-Live.$London:$Collins.$$$



Botsman,$R.$(2013)$The-Sharing-Economy-Lacks-A-Shared-Definition.-URL$$http://www.fastcoexist.com/3022028/theUsharingUeconomyUlacksUaUsharedUdefinition#10$[first$accessed$4$November$2014]$$$Botsman,$R.$(2014)$Sharing’s-not-just-for-startDups$URL$https://hbr.org/2014/09/sharingsUnotUjustUforUstartUups$[first$accessed$29$January$2015]$$$Bowman,$R.J.$(2015)$Happy-New-Year.-Are-you-ready-for-the-Sharing-Economy?$URL$http://www.supplychainbrain.com/content/blogs/thinkUtank/blog/article/happyUnewUyearUareUyouUreadyUforUtheUsharingUeconomy/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$ $$$Bruton,$G.,$Khavul,$S.,$Siegel,$D.$&$Wright,$M.$(2015)$New$financial$alternatives$in$seeding$entrepreneurship:$Microfinance,$crowdfunding,$and$peerUtoUpeer$innovations.$Entrepreneurship-theory-and-practice,-39(1):$9U26.$$$Bryman,$A.$(1988)$Quantity-and-Quality-in-Social-Research.$London:$Unwin$Hyman.$$$Buczynski,$B.$(2013)$9-collaborative-consumption-services-you’ve-got-to-try$URL$http://earthtechling.com/2013/09/9UcollaborativeUconsumptionUservicesUyouveUgotUtoUtry/$[first$accessed$12$February$2015]$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$B&Q$(2015)-Company-information$URL$$http://www.diy.com/corporate/about$[first$accessed$24$January$2015]$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$Carrington,$D.$(2013)$Hotels-vie-to-become-offices-of-the-future$URL$http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/09/travel/businessUtravellerUhotelUworkspace/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Citi$(2015)$Citi-at-a-Glance$URL$$http://www.citigroup.com/citi/about/citi_at_a_glance.html$$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$$$Clarke,$P.$(2015)$Barclays-report-projects-Airbnb-bookings-to-surpass-hotel-companies-URL$http://www.travelpulse.com/news/businessUtravel/barclaysUreportUprojectsUairbnbUbookingsUtoUsurpassUhotelUcompanies.html$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$Coca$Cola$(2014)$CocaDCola-at-a-glance$URL$http://www.cocaUcolacompany.com/ourUcompany/infographicUcocaUcolaUatUaUglance$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$$$Cohen,$B.$&$Kietzmann,$J.$(2014)$Ride$On!$Mobility$Business$Models$for$the$Sharing$Economy.$Organization-&-Environment,$27:$279U296$$$Coldwell,$W.$(2014)$Airbnb’s$legal$troubles:$what$are$the$issues?$URL$http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2014/jul/08/airbnbUlegalUtroublesUwhatUareUtheUissues$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$Corbin,$J.$&$Strauss,$A.$(2015)$Basics-of-Qualitative-Research.-Techniques-and-Procedures-for-Developing-Grounded-Theory.$USA:$SAGE$Publications$$$



Cusumano,$M.A.$(2015)$How$Traditional$Firms$Must$Compete$in$the$Sharing$Economy.$Communications-of-the-ACM,$58(1):$32U34.$$$Dervojeda,$K.,$Verzijl,$D.,$Nagtegaal,$F.,$Lengton,$M.,$Rouwmaat,$E.,$Monfardini,$E.$&$Frideres,$L.$(2013)$The$Sharing$Economy$Accessibility$Based$Business$Models$for$PeerUtoUPeer$Markets.$Business-Innovation-Observatory.$$$EasterUby$Smith,$M.,$Thorpe,$R.$&$Jackson,$P.R.$(2012)$Management-Research.$London:$Sage.$$$Eisenhardt,$K.M.$(1989)$Building$Theories$From$Case$Study$Research.$The-Academy-of-Management-Review,-14(4):$532U550$$$Ferro,$S.$(2014)$When-branding-is-too-good:-a-cautionary-tale-from-New-York’s-Citi-Bike$URL$http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028632/terminalUvelocity/whenUbrandingUisUtooUgoodUaUcautionaryUtaleUfromUnewUyorksUcitiUbike$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$$Gadamer,$H.G.$(1976)$Philosophical-Hermeneutics$California:$University$of$California$Press$$$Gain,$B.$(2014)$Toyota-tests-carDsharing-in-French-city$URL$http://europe.autonews.com/article/20141016/ANE/141019918/toyotaUtestsUcarUsharingUinUfrenchUcity$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$$$Gansky,$L.$(2012)$The-Mesh:-Why-the-Future-of-Business-is-Sharing.$London:$Penguin.$$$Hansen,$E.G.,$Gomm,$M.L.,$Bullinger,$A.C.,$Möslein,$K.M.$(2010)$A$CommunityUBased$Toolkit$for$Designing$RideUSharing$Services:$The$Case$of$a$Virtual$Network$of$Ride$Access$Points$in$Germany.$International-Journal-of-Innovation-and-Sustainable-Development,-5(1).$$$Hawksworth,$J.$&$Vaughan,$R.$(2014)$The-sharing-economy-D-sizing-the-revenue-opportunity.$URL$http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/megatrends/collisions/sharingeconomy/theUsharingUeconomyUsizingUtheUrevenueUopportunity.jhtml$[first$accessed$3$January$2015]$$$Hirt,$M.$and$Willmott,$P.$(2014)$Strategic$principles$for$competing$in$the$digital$age.$McKinsey-Quarterly,$May$2014$$$$$IKEA$(2013)$IKEA-yearly-summary-report-fy13-URL$http://www.ikea.com/ms/en_CN/pdf/yearly_summary/ikeaUgroupUyearlyUsummaryUfy13.pdf$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$$$IKEA$(2015)$Annonsera-på-Köp-&-sälj-URL$http://www.ikea.com/ms/sv_SE/ikea_family/kop_och_salj/index.html$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$$$Irwin,$N.$(2014)$Uber-scandal-highlights-Silicon-Valley’s-GrownDup-problem$URL$http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/upshot/ubersUlatestUscandalUandUsiliconUvalleysUgrownUupUproblem.html?abt=0002&abg=0$[first$accessed$18$February$2015]$$$



Jobbox$(2014)$Lean-recruitment-D-Hire-faster-and-better$URL$http://blog.jobbox.io/leanUrecruitmentUhireUfasterUandUbetter/$[first$accessed$27$January$2015]$$$John,$N.A.$(2013)$Sharing,$collaborative$consumption$and$web$2.0.$Media@LSE-Electronic-Working-Papers,-26$$$John,$T.$&$Gratton,$L.$(2013)$The$third$wave$of$virtual$work.$Harvard-Business-Review,-JanuaryDFebruary$$$Jones,$N.$(2014)$Funding-Circle-&-Santander-announce-partnership-to-support-thousands-of-UK-businesses$URL$https://www.fundingcircle.com/blog/2014/06/fundingUcircleUsantanderUannounceUpartnershipUsupportUthousandsUukUbusinesses/$[first$accessed$19$January$2015]$$$Judge,$T.K.$&$McCrickard,$D.S.$(2008)$Collaborating$on$Affinity$Diagrams$Using$Large$Displays.$CHI-2008.$$$Kamenetz,$A.$(2013)$Food:-The-next-frontier-for-the-sharing-economy?$URL$http://www.fastcompany.com/3005324/foodUnextUfrontierUsharingUeconomy$[first$accessed$14$February$2015]$$$Karkaria,$U.$(2013)$CocaDCola-creating-app-to-help-workers-find-jobs$URL$http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/printUedition/2013/08/23/cocaUcolaUcreatingUappUtoUhelpUworkers.html?page=all$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$$Karple,$A.$(2013)$Kelly,-oDesk-and-the-“hybridization”-of-staffing-in-2013$URL$http://www.staffingindustry.com/site/ResearchUPublications/Blogs/AndrewUKarpieUsUBlog/KellyUoDeskUandUtheUHybridizationUofUStaffingUinU2013$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$$$Kaye,$L.$(2012)$Why-sharing-makes-sense-in-an-overDconsuming-world$URL$http://www.theguardian.com/sustainableUbusiness/collaborativeUconsumptionUsharing$[first$accessed$12$February$2015]$$$Kaye,$L.$(2013)$LiquidSpace-and-Marriott-Team-Up-for-Instant-Shared-Workspace$URL$http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/02/conferenceUroomUrentalUliquidspaceUmarriott/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Kelly$Services$(2013)$Kelly-Services-and-oDesk-announce-alliance,-a-first-between-a-workforce-solutions-company-and-an-online-work-platform$URL$http://ir.kellyservices.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=813549$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$$$Kelly$Services$(2015)$About-us$URL$http://www.kellyservices.com/Global/AboutUS/$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$$$King,$D.$(2014)$Toyota’s-HaMo-urban-mobility-carsharing-program-comes-to-France$URL$http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/22/toyotasUhamoUurbanUmobilityUcarsharingUprogramUcomesUtoUfrance/$[first$accessed$27$January$2015]$$$



Kittur,$A.,$Nickerson,$J.V.,$Bernstein,$M.S.,$Gerber,$E.M.,$Shaw,$A.D.,$Zimmerman,$J.,$Lease,$M.,$&$Horton,$J.J.$(2013)$The$Future$of$Crowd$Work,$ACM-Conference-on-Computer-Supported-Collaborative-Work-(CSCW-'13).-$$$$Knight,$A.$(2013)$Start-and-B&Q-team-up-on-Streetclubs$URL$http://www.bitc.org.uk/newsUevents/news/startUandUbqUteamUstreetclubs$[first$accessed$22$January$2015]$$$Klafft,$M.$(2008)$Online$peerUtoUpeer$lending:$a$lenders'$perspective.$Proceedings-of-the-International-Conference-on-EDLearning,-EDBusiness,-Enterprise-Information-Systems,-and-EDGovernment,-EEE:$371U375.$$$Kolko,$J.$(2010)$Abductive$Thinking$and$Sensemaking:$The$Drivers$of$Design$Synthesis.$MIT's-Design-Issues,$26(1).$$$Lehdonvirta,$V.,$Barnard,$H.,$Graham,$M.,$&$Hjorth,$I.$(2014)-Online$labour$markets$–$leveling$the$playing$field$for$international$service$markets?$PP2014:-Crowdsourcing-for-Politics-and-Policy,-25D26-September-2014,-Oxford,-UK$$$Leung,$G.$&$Lesko,$Z.$(2015)$The-collaborative-economy.-Empowering-freelancers,-gigDworkers-and-sharers$URL$http://agcpartners.com/content/uploads/2015/01/AGCUCollaborativeUEconomyUJAN2015.pdf$$[first$accessed$13$February$2015]$$$Lin,$M.$(2009)$PeerUtoUpeer$lending:$An$empirical$study.$Proceedings-of-the-Fifteenth-Americas-Conference-on-Information-Systems,-San-Francisco,-paper-17.-$$$$Loose,$W.,$Mohr,$M.$and$Nobis,$C.$(2006)$Assessment$of$the$future$development$of$car$sharing$in$Germany$and$related$opportunities.$Transport-Reviews,-26(3):$365–382.$$$Mac,$R.$(2014)$Uber-files-for-$1.8-billion-round-and-could-be-worth-$40-billion$URL$http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2014/12/04/uberUfilesUforU1U8UbillionUroundUandUcouldUbeUworthU40Ubillion/$[first$accessed$18$February$2015]$$$Mach,$T.L.,$Carter,$C.M.$&$Slattery,$C.R.$(2014)$PeerUtoUpeer$lending$to$small$businesses.$Finance-and-Economics-Discussion-Series-Divisions-of-Research-&-Statistics-and-Monetary-Affairs-Federal-Reserve-Board,-Washington,-D.C.$$$Malhotra,$A.$&$Van$Alstyne,$M.$(2014)$The$Dark$Side$of$the$Sharing$Economy…$and$How$to$Lighten$It.$Communications-of-the-ACM,$57(11):$24U27$$$Mandag$Morgen$(2013)$Hvorfor-købe-og-eje,-når-man-kan-låne-og-leje.-URL$https://www.mm.dk/koebeUejeUnaarUlaaneUleje$[first$accessed$18$November$2014]$$$Marriott$(2015)$About-Marriott-International$URL$http://www.marriott.com/marriott/aboutmarriott.mi$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Martin,$J.$(2014)$Toyota-iDRoad-EVs-trialled-for-lastDmile-carDsharing$URL$http://www.gizmag.com/toyotaUiUroadUcomsUevUtrialUlastUmileUcarUsharingUjapanUfrance/31120/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$



$$Matzler,$K.,$Veider,$V.$&$Kathan,$W.$(2014)$Adapting$to$the$Sharing$Economy.$MIT-Sloan-Management-Review,$Winter(15)$$$Meijers,$N.$(2014)$Feastly-brings-the-sharing-economy-to-food$URL$http://www.foodtechconnect.com/2014/02/14/feastlyUbringsUtheUsharingUeconomyUtoUfood/$[first$accessed$14$February$2015]$$$Mesh$(2015)$Mesh$directory$URL$http://meshing.it/companies$$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$$$Mok,$K.$(2013)$IKEA$campaign$lets$customers$buy$used$IKEA$furniture$URL$http://www.treehugger.com/ecoUfriendlyUfurniture/ikeaUsecondUhandUcampaignUbuyUsecondUhandUfurnitureUonline.html$[first$accessed$18$January$2015]$$$Morgan,$J.$(2014)$Why-the-collaborative-economy-is-changing-everything.$URL$http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2014/10/16/whyUtheUcollaborativeUeconomyUisUchangingUeverything/$[first$accessed$18$November$2014]$$$Morse,$A.$(2015)$PeerUtoUpeer$crowdfunding:$Information$and$the$potential$for$disruption$in$consumer$lending.$Working-paper,-University-of-California,-Berkeley-D-Haas-School-of-Business.$$$Moules,$J.$(2014)$Santander-in-peerDtoDpeer-pact-as-alternative-finance-makes-gains.$URL$http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b8890a26Uf62aU11e3Ua038U00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PX5c2Ksv$$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Moye,$J.$(2014)-Creating-a-winDwin:-Inside-Coke’s-new-startup-model$URL$http://www.cocaUcolacompany.com/stories/creatingUaUwinUwinUinsideUcokesUnewUstartupUmodel$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$$Myers,$M.D.$(1997)$Qualitative-Research-in-Information-Systems.$Auckland:$Sage$Publications$$$Nesta$(2014)$Making-Sense-of-the-UK-Collaborative-Economy.-London$$$Netzer,$J.$(2014)$2014:-The-year-of-ridesharing$URL$https://quoted.thezebra.com/659/ridesharingUinfographic/$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$New$York$Times$(2014)$The$dark$side$of$the$sharing$economy$URL$http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/01/opinion/theUdarkUsideUofUtheUsharingUeconomy.html?_r=0$[first$accessed$18$February$2015]$$$O’Connor,$W.$(2013)$Citi-investment-in-New-York-City-bikeshare-pays-off$URL$http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/16/citiUinvestmentUinUnewUyorkUcityUbikeshareUpaysUoff.html$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$$$Owyang,$J.$(2013a)$A-Market-Definition-Report:-The-Collaborative-Economy.$Altimeter$Group.$$$



Owyang,$J.$(2013b)$In-the-Collaborative-Economy,-Your-Company-Becomes-a-Service.$URL$http://www.webUstrategist.com/blog/2013/06/24/inUtheUcollaborativeUeconomyUyourUcompanyUbecomesUaUservice/$$[first$accessed$11$January$2015]$$$Owyang,$J.$(2013c)$Provide-a-Platform-for-the-Crowd-to-Become-Your-Company.$URL$http://www.webUstrategist.com/blog/2013/06/21/provideUaUplatformUforUtheUcrowdUtoUbecomeUyourUcompany/$$[first$accessed$11$January$2015]$$$Owyang,$J.$(2014a)$Report:-Sharing-is-the-new-buying,-Winning-in-the-collaborative-economy.-URL$http://www.webUstrategist.com/blog/2014/03/03/reportUsharingUisUtheUnewUbuyingUwinningUinUtheUcollaborativeUeconomy/$[first$accessed$18$November$2014]$$$Owyang,$J.$(2014b)$Collaborative-Economy-Honeycomb-2-D-Watch-it-Grow.$URL$http://www.webUstrategist.com/blog/2014/12/07/collaborativeUeconomyUhoneycombU2UwatchUitUgrow/$[first$accessed$11$January$2015]$$$P2P$Foundation$(2014)-Category:-Collaborative-Economy.$URL$$http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Collaborative_Economy$$[first$accessed$14$November$2014]$$$Parsfield,$M.$$(2012)$Sustainable,-stronger-communities-through-enhancing-practical-skills:-Reflections-from-an-expert-seminar.$UK:$RSA$Action$and$Research$Centre$$$Pham,$J.$(2013)$SFDstartup-Munchery-uses-sharing-economy-to-make-fresh,-homeDdelivered-meals-affordable$URL$http://www.forbes.com/sites/juliepham/2013/12/18/sfUstartupUmuncheryUusesUsharingUeconomyUtoUmakeUfreshUhomeUdeliveredUmealsUaffordable/$$[first$accessed$14$February$2015]$$$Pofeldt,$E.$(2015)$Will-you-be-a-winner-when-UberDstyle-platforms-replace-bosses?$URL$http://www.forbes.com/sites/elainepofeldt/2015/01/29/meetUyourUnewUbossUaUplatformUlikeUubersUcanUyouUhandleUit/2/$[first$accessed$13$February$2015]$$$Putt,$D.$(2014)$Kelly,-oDesk-and-one-big-question$URL$http://www.mboenterprise.com/blog/kellyUodeskUandUoneUbigUquestion$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$$$Radjou,$N.$&$Prabhu,$J.$(2015)$The$rise$of$the$frugal$economy.$URL$http://www.projectUsyndicate.org/commentary/peerUtoUpeerUeconomyUbyUnaviUradjouU1UandUjaideepUprabhuU2015U02$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$Radovanovic,$J.$(2013)$Citi-bike-initiative-invited-you-to-take-a-bike-for-a-spin-in-NYC$URL$$http://www.brandingmagazine.com/2013/05/10/citiUbikeUnyc/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$$Rifkin,$J.$(2000)$The-Age-of-Access:-The-New-Culture-of-HyperCapitalism-Where-All-of-Life-Is-A-PaidDFor-Experience.$New$York$City:$Tarcher.$$$



Rampell,$C.$(2015)$The$dark$side$of$sharing$economy$jobs$URL$http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherineUrampellUtheUdarkUsideUofUsharingUeconomyUjobs/2015/01/26/4e05daecUa59fU11e4Ua7c2U03d37af98440_story.html$$[first$accessed$18$February$2015]$$$Said,$C.$(2014)$How-hotel-chains-innovate-with-onDdemand-work-spaces$URL$http://skift.com/2014/07/06/howUhotelUchainsUinnovateUwithUonUdemandUworkUspaces/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Santander$(2013)$Santander-UK-Plc-Annual-Report-URL$http://www.aboutsantander.co.uk/documents/sanukU2013UannualUreport.pdf$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Saunders,$M.,$Lewis,$P.,$&$Thornhill,$A.$(2003)$Research-Methods-for-Business-Students.$Harlow:$Financial$Times$Prentice$Hall$$$Saunders,$M.,$Lewis,$P.,$&$Thornhill,$A.$(2007)$Research-Methods-for-Business-Students.$Harlow:$Financial$Times$Prentice$Hall$$$Saunders,$M.,$Lewis,$P.,$&$Thornhill,$A.$(2009)$Research-Methods-for-Business-Students.$Harlow:$Financial$Times$Prentice$Hall$$$$$Savage,$R.$(2014)$Finally-banks-embrace-P2P-as-Santander-gets-into-bed-with-Funding-Circle$URL$http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/go/news/article/1299405/finallyUbanksUembraceUp2pUlendingUsantanderUgetsUbedUfundingUcircle/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$Scheiber,$N.$(2014)$Corporate-America-is-using-the-sharing-economy-to-turn-us-into-temps$URL$http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120378/wonoloUtempUworkerUappUshowsUscaryUfutureUsharingUeconomy$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$$$Schieferdecker,$A.$(2013)$Pedal$talk.$The$fall$and$rise$of$bikes$and$bike$sharing$in$the$twin$cities.$Cities-in-the-21st-Century,-3(1)$$$Sexton,$M.$(2014)-Green-gameDchangers.-Insights-for-mainstreaming-business-innovation.$UK:$World$Wildlife$Foundation/Verdantix$$$Shaheen,$S.A.,$Guzman,$S.$&$Zhang,$H.$(2012)$Bikesharing$across$the$globe,$in$J.$Pucher$&$R.$Buehler$(eds.)$City-Cycling.$USA:$MIT$Press,$pp.$183U210$$$Shaheen,$S.A.$(2014)$Transportation-and-the-Sharing-Economy.-Berkeley-Transportation-Letter.$URL$http://its.berkeley.edu/btl/2014/winter/sharedmobility$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$Sheth,$J.N.,$Sethia,$N.K.$&$Srinivas,$S.$(2011)$Mindful$consumption:$a$customerUcentric$approach$to$sustainability.$Journal-of-the-Academy-of-Marketing-Science,-39:$21U39$$$



Smfb$(2014)$The-Second-Hand-Campaign$URL$http://www.smfb.com/ikeaUsecondUhand/$[first$accessed$18$January$2015]$$$Smith,$N.C.$(2014)$Sharing-meals-in-the-sharing-economy$URL$http://www.cbsnews.com/news/eatwithUsharingUmealsUinUtheUsharingUeconomy/$[first$accessed$14$February$2015]$$$Stokes,$K.,$Clarence,$E.,$Anderson,$L.$&$Rinne,$A.$(2014)$Making-sense-of-the-UK-collaborative-economy.$London:$Nesta$$$Streetclub.co.uk$(2014)$What-is-Streetclub?$URL$$https://www.streetclub.co.uk/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$$$Spaeth,$J.L.$&$Felson,$M.$(1978)$Community$Structure$and$Collaborative$Consumption:$A$Routine$Activity$Approach.$American-Behavioral-Scientist,-21:$614U624$$$Summers,$N.$(2013)$Citi-bike:-Citibank’s-New-York-marketing-coup$URL$http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013U10U31/citiUbikeUcitibanksUnewUyorkUmarketingUcoup$[first$accessed$24$January$2015]$$$Teodorovic,$D.$and$Dell’Orco,$M.$(2008)$Mitigating$traffic$congestion:$solving$the$rideUmatching$problem$by$bee$colony$optimization.$Transportation-Planning-and-Technology,-31(2):135–152.$$$The$Economist$(2012)$NonDbank-finance.-Filling-the-bankDshaped-hole$URL$http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21568365UeuropesUbanksUareUshrinkingUwhatUwillUtakeUtheirUplaceUfillingUbankUshapedUhole$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$The$people$who$share$(2013)$The-state-of-the-sharing-economy$URL$http://www.thepeoplewhoshare.com/tpws/assets/File/TheStateoftheSharingEconomy_May2013_FoodSharingintheUK.pdf$[first$accessed$12$February$2015]$$$Tonkinwise,$C.$(2015)$Do$not$think$that$people$only$do$what$is$more$convenient$URL$http://thefuturescentre.org/articles/3068/doUnotUthinkUpeopleUonlyUdoUwhatUmoreUconvenient$[first$accessed$18$February$2015]$$$Toyota$(2013)$Toyota-in-the-world-2013$URL$http://www.toyotaUglobal.com/company/profile/in_the_world/pdf/2013/databook_en_2013.pdf$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$$$Toyota$(2014)$Company-overview$URL$$http://www.toyotaUglobal.com/company/profile/overview/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$$$Trejos,$N.$(2013)$More-hotels-rent-popDup-office,-work-spcaes$URL$http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/hotels/2013/11/24/hotelsUrentUofficeUworkUspace/3691921/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$



Van$Meel,$J.$&$Brinkø,$R.$(2014)$Working$apart$together.$FM-World-D-the-BIFM’s-Facilities-Management-magazine.$February$2014.$$$Walsh,$B.$(2011)$10$ideas$that$will$change$the$world.$Today’s$smart$choice:$Don’t$own.$Share.$URL$http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2059521_2059717,00.html$$[first$accessed$19$February$2015]$$$Walsham,$G.$(1993)$Interpreting-Information-Systems-in-Organizations.$Chichester:$Wiley.$$$Wang,$M.,$Wang,$T.,$Kang,$M.,$&$Sun,$S.$(2014)$Understanding$perceived$platform$trust$and$institutional$risk$in$peerUtoUpeer$lending$platforms$from$cognitionUbased$and$affectUbased$perspectives.$PACIS-2014-Proceedings,-208.$$$Weber,$L.$&$Silverman,$R.E.$(2015)$OnUdemand$workers:$‘We$are$not$robots’$URL$http://www.wsj.com/article_email/onUdemandUworkersUweUareUnotUrobotsU1422406524UlMyQjAxMTE1NDM2MTYzNjEwWj$[first$accessed$13$February$2015]$$$White,$M.C.$(2013)$Office-space,-by-the-hour$URL$http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/business/hotelsUcarveUoutUworkUspacesUrentedUhourly.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$$$$Widarsyah,$R.$(2014)$The-impact-of-the-sharing-economy-on-hotels.-An-analysis-of-Aibnb-and-alternative-accommodations-URL$http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Article/14346/TheUimpactUofUtheUsharingUeconomyUonUhotels$[first$accessed$11$February$2015]$$$$$Winton,$N.$(2014)$New-report-says-except-for-Tesla,-electricDonly-vehicles-are-failures-so-far$URL$http://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2014/05/28/exceptUforUteslaUelectricUonlyUvehiclesUareUfailuresUforUnowUreport/$[first$accessed$28$January$2015]$$$Wonolo$(2015)$Making-onDdemand-staffing-simple$URL$$http://wonolo.com/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$$$Yin,$R.$K.$(2009)$Case-Study-Research:-Design-and-Methods.$Thousand$Oaks:$Sage$Publications$$$Zervas,$G.,$Proserpio,$D.$&$Byers,$J.$(2014)$The$rise$of$the$sharing$economy:$Estimating$the$impact$of$Airbnb$on$the$hotel$industry.$Boston-U.-School-of-Management-Research-Paper-No.-2013D16.$$$$$$$$$


$


7.%Appendices%

$

Appendix$A$$ Interview$guide$

Appendix$B$ Interview$with$AirBnB$

Appendix$C$ Interview$with$Bringrs$

Appendix$D$ Interview$with$ByUdel$

Appendix$E$ Interview$with$Dinnersurfer$

Appendix$F$ Interview$with$Fanbed$

Appendix$G$ Interview$with$GoMore$

Appendix$H$ Interview$with$Lær$Noget$Nyt$

Appendix$I$ Interview$with$Momly$

Appendix$J$ Interview$with$Reshopper$

$

The share economy: Motivations and strategies for corporations

Technology

Transcript of The share economy: Motivations and strategies for corporations