The Share Economy: Understanding Corporate Motivations and Strategies

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
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)socio9
economic)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)sharing9
based)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)re9
engineering)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$http://mashable.com/2013/11/03/ikeaQfurnitureQ
campaign/$[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$$$
● Jones,$N.$(2014)$Funding%Circle%&%Santander%announce%partnership%to%support%thousands%of%UK%businesses$URL$
https://www.fundingcircle.com/blog/2014/06/fundingQcircleQsantanderQannounceQpartnershipQsupportQthousandsQukQbusinesses/$[first$accessed$19$
January$2015]$
● Moules,$J.$(2014)$Santander%in%peerNtoNpeer%pact%as%alternative%finance%makes%gains.$URL$http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b8890a26Qf62aQ11e3Qa038Q
00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PX5c2Ksv$$[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]$$
● Kaye,$L.$(2013)$LiquidSpace%and%Marriott%Team%Up%for%Instant%Shared%Workspace$URL$http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/02/conferenceQroomQrentalQ
liquidspaceQmarriott/$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$
● Marriott$(2015)$About%Marriott%International$URL$http://www.marriott.com/marriott/aboutmarriott.mi$[first$accessed$20$January$2015]$$
● 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$http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028632/terminalQ
velocity/whenQbrandingQisQtooQgoodQaQcautionaryQtaleQfromQnewQyorksQcitiQbike$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$
● O’Connor,$W.$(2013)$Citi%investment%in%New%York%City%bikeshare%pays%off$URL$http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/16/citiQinvestmentQinQ
newQyorkQcityQbikeshareQpaysQoff.html$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$
● Radovanovic,$J.$(2013)$Citi%bike%initiative%invited%you%to%take%a%bike%for%a%spin%in%NYC$URL$$http://www.brandingmagazine.com/2013/05/10/citiQbikeQ
nyc/$[first$accessed$25$January$2015]$
● Summers,$N.$(2013)$Citi%bike:%Citibank’s%New%York%marketing%coup$URL$http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013Q10Q31/citiQbikeQcitibanksQnewQ
yorkQmarketingQcoup$[first$accessed$24$January$2015]$
E$ B&Q$ ● B&Q$(2015)%Company%information$URL$$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$$https://www.streetclub.co.uk/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$
● Stokes,$K.,$Clarence,$E.,$Anderson,$L.$&$Rinne,$A.$(2014)$Making%sense%of%the%UK%collaborative%economy.$London:$Nesta$
F$ Toyota$ ● Gain,$B.$(2014)$Toyota%tests%carNsharing%in%French%city$URL$http://europe.autonews.com/article/20141016/ANE/141019918/toyotaQtestsQcarQsharingQ
inQfrenchQcity$[first$accessed$26$January$2015]$
● Hawksworth,$J.$&$Vaughan,$R.$(2014)$The%sharing%economy%N%sizing%the%revenue%opportunity.$URL$
January$2015]$
● King,$D.$(2014)$Toyota’s%HaMo%urban%mobility%carsharing%program%comes%to%France$URL$http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/22/toyotasQhamoQurbanQ
mobilityQcarsharingQprogramQcomesQtoQfrance/$[first$accessed$27$January$2015]$
● Martin,$J.$(2014)$Toyota%iNRoad%EVs%trialled%for%lastNmile%carNsharing$URL$http://www.gizmag.com/toyotaQiQroadQcomsQevQtrialQlastQmileQcarQsharingQ
japanQfrance/31120/$[first$accessed$23$January$2015]$
● Toyota$(2013)$Toyota%in%the%world%2013$URL$http://www.toyotaQglobal.com/company/profile/in_the_world/pdf/2013/databook_en_2013.pdf$[first$
accessed$26$January$2015]$
● Toyota$(2014)$Company%overview$URL$$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$
January$2015]$
● Karple,$A.$(2013)$Kelly,%oDesk%and%the%“hybridization”%of%staffing%in%2013$URL$http://www.staffingindustry.com/site/ResearchQ
Publications/Blogs/AndrewQKarpieQsQBlog/KellyQoDeskQandQtheQHybridizationQofQStaffingQinQ2013$[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$2015]$
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
$

$
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$definition$
2013
a$
“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$2013b)$
$
$
$

The Share Economy: Understanding Corporate Motivations and Strategies

The Share Economy: Understanding Corporate Motivations and Strategies

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à The Share Economy: Understanding Corporate Motivations and Strategies

Similaire à The Share Economy: Understanding Corporate Motivations and Strategies (14)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

The Share Economy: Understanding Corporate Motivations and Strategies