The Experts below are selected from a list of 12180 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Barbara Hartl - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
power versus trust what matters more in Collaborative Consumption
Journal of Services Marketing, 2017Co-Authors: Eva Hofmann, Barbara Hartl, Elfriede PenzAbstract:Purpose Collaborative Consumption, such as car sharing, specifically implicates customer-to-customer interaction, which must be regulated by service providers (companies, peers and self-regulating communities), comprising different challenges for business organizations. While in conventional business relations, consumers are protected from undesirable customer behavior by laws, regulations (power) in the context of Collaborative Consumption are rare, so that trust becomes more relevant. It is the purpose of the study to investigate possible mechanisms to prevent undesirable customers in Collaborative Consumption. Design/methodology/approach In between subject designs, samples of 186 and 328 consumers filled in experimental online questionnaires with vignettes. Analyses were made of differences among car sharing companies, private persons and car sharing communities in terms of the power of providers, trust in providers and trust in other users of the shared goods, undesirable customer behavior and consumer–provider relations. Findings Companies, private persons and self-regulating communities differ in terms of perceived power and trust. Participants specifically perceive mainly coercive power with the car sharing company, but with the private person and the community, reason-based trust in other users is perceived as prevalent. Nevertheless, undesirable customer behavior varies only marginally over the models. Originality/value The present study is the first to investigate measures to prevent undesirable customer behavior over different Collaborative Consumption models. This enables appropriate identification of market segments and tailoring of services. The study identifies opportunities for companies in contrast to private persons and self-regulating communities and, in doing so, provides important stimulation for marketing strategy and theory development.
-
Power versus trust – what matters more in Collaborative Consumption?
Journal of Services Marketing, 2017Co-Authors: Eva Hofmann, Barbara Hartl, Elfriede PenzAbstract:Purpose - Collaborative Consumption, such as car sharing, specifically implicates customer-to-customer interaction, which must be regulated by service providers (companies, peers and self-regulating communities), comprising different challenges for business organizations. While in conventional business relations, consumers are protected from undesirable customer behavior by laws, regulations (power) in the context of Collaborative Consumption are rare, so that trust becomes more relevant. It is the purpose of the study to investigate possible mechanisms to prevent undesirable customers in Collaborative Consumption. Design/methodology/approach - In between subject designs, samples of 186 and 328 consumers filled in experimental online questionnaires with vignettes. Analyses were made of differences among car sharing companies, private persons and car sharing communities in terms of the power of providers, trust in providers and trust in other users of the shared goods, undesirable customer behavior and consumer-provider relations. Findings - Companies, private persons and self-regulating communities differ in terms of perceived power and trust. Participants specifically perceive mainly coercive power with the car sharing company, but with the private person and the community, reason-based trust in other users is perceived as prevalent. Nevertheless, undesirable customer behavior varies only marginally over the models. Originality/value - The present study is the first to investigate measures to prevent undesirable customer behavior over different Collaborative Consumption models. This enables appropriate identification of market segments and tailoring of services. The study identifies opportunities for companies in contrast to private persons and self-regulating communities and, in doing so, provides important stimulation for marketing strategy and theory development.
-
Do we need rules for “what's mine is yours”? Governance in Collaborative Consumption communities
Journal of Business Research, 2016Co-Authors: Barbara Hartl, Eva Hofmann, Erich KirchlerAbstract:With Collaborative Consumption, people are provided with access to a good rather than owning it. The current study addresses the problem of regulation in Collaborative Consumption communities, investigating whether governance increases cooperation, if and why consumers support a governance system and whether supporters and non-supporters differ in their distrust in others. To address these questions, an experiment (within-subject design) was conducted. After reading vignettes, participants indicated how likely they would cooperate and whether they support governance or not—giving reasons for their evaluation. The majority of participants support governance and governance increases cooperation. Supporters argue that humans are egoistic, whereas non-supporters are concerned about negative consequences, asking for alternative incentives. Supporters of governance also differ from non-supporters according to their trust in others. The current study allows valuable recommendation, as more and more sharing networks are created, facing the problem of whether to regulate access or not.
Eva Hofmann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
power versus trust what matters more in Collaborative Consumption
Journal of Services Marketing, 2017Co-Authors: Eva Hofmann, Barbara Hartl, Elfriede PenzAbstract:Purpose Collaborative Consumption, such as car sharing, specifically implicates customer-to-customer interaction, which must be regulated by service providers (companies, peers and self-regulating communities), comprising different challenges for business organizations. While in conventional business relations, consumers are protected from undesirable customer behavior by laws, regulations (power) in the context of Collaborative Consumption are rare, so that trust becomes more relevant. It is the purpose of the study to investigate possible mechanisms to prevent undesirable customers in Collaborative Consumption. Design/methodology/approach In between subject designs, samples of 186 and 328 consumers filled in experimental online questionnaires with vignettes. Analyses were made of differences among car sharing companies, private persons and car sharing communities in terms of the power of providers, trust in providers and trust in other users of the shared goods, undesirable customer behavior and consumer–provider relations. Findings Companies, private persons and self-regulating communities differ in terms of perceived power and trust. Participants specifically perceive mainly coercive power with the car sharing company, but with the private person and the community, reason-based trust in other users is perceived as prevalent. Nevertheless, undesirable customer behavior varies only marginally over the models. Originality/value The present study is the first to investigate measures to prevent undesirable customer behavior over different Collaborative Consumption models. This enables appropriate identification of market segments and tailoring of services. The study identifies opportunities for companies in contrast to private persons and self-regulating communities and, in doing so, provides important stimulation for marketing strategy and theory development.
-
Power versus trust – what matters more in Collaborative Consumption?
Journal of Services Marketing, 2017Co-Authors: Eva Hofmann, Barbara Hartl, Elfriede PenzAbstract:Purpose - Collaborative Consumption, such as car sharing, specifically implicates customer-to-customer interaction, which must be regulated by service providers (companies, peers and self-regulating communities), comprising different challenges for business organizations. While in conventional business relations, consumers are protected from undesirable customer behavior by laws, regulations (power) in the context of Collaborative Consumption are rare, so that trust becomes more relevant. It is the purpose of the study to investigate possible mechanisms to prevent undesirable customers in Collaborative Consumption. Design/methodology/approach - In between subject designs, samples of 186 and 328 consumers filled in experimental online questionnaires with vignettes. Analyses were made of differences among car sharing companies, private persons and car sharing communities in terms of the power of providers, trust in providers and trust in other users of the shared goods, undesirable customer behavior and consumer-provider relations. Findings - Companies, private persons and self-regulating communities differ in terms of perceived power and trust. Participants specifically perceive mainly coercive power with the car sharing company, but with the private person and the community, reason-based trust in other users is perceived as prevalent. Nevertheless, undesirable customer behavior varies only marginally over the models. Originality/value - The present study is the first to investigate measures to prevent undesirable customer behavior over different Collaborative Consumption models. This enables appropriate identification of market segments and tailoring of services. The study identifies opportunities for companies in contrast to private persons and self-regulating communities and, in doing so, provides important stimulation for marketing strategy and theory development.
-
Do we need rules for “what's mine is yours”? Governance in Collaborative Consumption communities
Journal of Business Research, 2016Co-Authors: Barbara Hartl, Eva Hofmann, Erich KirchlerAbstract:With Collaborative Consumption, people are provided with access to a good rather than owning it. The current study addresses the problem of regulation in Collaborative Consumption communities, investigating whether governance increases cooperation, if and why consumers support a governance system and whether supporters and non-supporters differ in their distrust in others. To address these questions, an experiment (within-subject design) was conducted. After reading vignettes, participants indicated how likely they would cooperate and whether they support governance or not—giving reasons for their evaluation. The majority of participants support governance and governance increases cooperation. Supporters argue that humans are egoistic, whereas non-supporters are concerned about negative consequences, asking for alternative incentives. Supporters of governance also differ from non-supporters according to their trust in others. The current study allows valuable recommendation, as more and more sharing networks are created, facing the problem of whether to regulate access or not.
Jan Mattsson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Understanding Collaborative Consumption: Test of a Theoretical Model
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2017Co-Authors: Stuart J. Barnes, Jan MattssonAbstract:Collaborative Consumption websites have enabled consumers to focus on shared access to products rather than owning them. This study aims at developing a comprehensive theoretical model to explain consumer outcomes for Collaborative Consumption. It develops and tests a structural equation model using partial least squares path modelling and survey data collected from a car-sharing website. The results suggest that consumer intentions to rent are driven primarily by perceived economic, environmental and social benefits through the mediator of perceived usefulness, and enjoyment, in turn driven by sense of belonging to the sharing community. Interestingly, social influence did not play a role. When making word-of-mouth recommendations, in addition to these factors, consumers also take website trust into account, underpinned by the structural assurances of the website. The paper rounds off further implications of the research for theory and practice.
-
Understanding current and future issues in Collaborative Consumption: A four-stage Delphi study
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016Co-Authors: Stuart J. Barnes, Jan MattssonAbstract:Sharing activities underpinned by the technologies of the Internet have become dominant in the activities of individuals, business and governments. Recently, such sharing activity has grown from information and media content to wider resources, including money, physical goods and services — coined Collaborative Consumption. Sustainability is often cited as a key driver, underpinned by economic, social and environmental benefits. If successful, the sharing of such resources is likely to have a potentially disruptive impact on incumbents in traditional supply chains. However, given the embryonic state of its development, it is perhaps not surprising that Collaborative Consumption is not well understood in research or practice. With this in mind, this study undertook a four-stage Delphi study with 25 experts in order to identify the key drivers, inhibitors and likely future developments in Collaborative Consumption over the next 10years. A key finding was that environmental concern (sustainability) was considered of minor importance. The paper rounds-off with conclusions and implications for practice and further research.
Christoph Mittendorf - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Collaborative Consumption: the role of familiarity and trust among Millennials
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2018Co-Authors: Christoph MittendorfAbstract:This paper aims to focus on online hospitality platforms in the Collaborative Consumption environment. In particular, this paper investigates the impact of trust on the obtainers’ intentions to “inquire about accommodations” and to “request a booking” on Airbnb.com.,This paper takes the perspective of a potential renter, respectively, obtainer and adopts Gefen’s (2000) research model, which incorporates familiarity and trust in the e-commerce industry. In this regard, the paper extends the work on two-sided markets of Mittendorf (2016-2017). To verify the modified research model, a survey was conducted, gathering results from over 426 participants of which 255 valid responses from the Millennials generation were obtained. This paper uses covariance-based structural equation modeling to analyze both measurement and structural relationships regarding the interaction framework.,The results show empirical evidence that both “trust in the intermediary” and “trust in providers” are decisive for the obtainers’ intentions on the online platform. In this regard, this paper advances the understanding of the Collaborative Consumption mechanisms by adapting trust literature to validate the obtainers’ intentions on contemporary Collaborative Consumption platforms.,While the unit of analysis of prior research comprises the general intention to share, this paper empirically validates a more deliberate decision of user intentions by focusing on the intention to inquire about accommodations (no registration necessary) and the intention to request a booking (registration necessary). However, this study is dependent on one setting and it is still unclear whether the results are generalizable to other Collaborative Consumption setups.,This paper is in line with the work of Mittendorf (2016-2017), thus, it uses a sophisticated statistical approach to analyze trust in the Collaborative Consumption environment, such as confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling.
Henning Günter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Collaborative Consumption, Sozialkapital und Quartier. Eine Annäherung
Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 2014Co-Authors: Olaf Schnur, Henning GünterAbstract:Sowohl das sozialraumliche Wohnumfeld als Nukleus von Stadtentwicklungsstrategien als auch internetbasierte Collaborative-Consumption-Ansatze (teilweise auch als Sharing Economy oder in Deutschland als Ko-Konsum bezeichnet) sind in Wissenschaft und Politik vieldiskutierte Themen, die sich im Spannungsfeld zwischen Globalitat und Lokalitat bewegen. In diesem Beitrag werden erstmals die Konzepte des Quartiers bzw. der Quartiersentwicklung und der Collaborative Consumption auf mogliche prozessuale Zusammenhange uberpruft. Um zu explorieren, inwieweit alternative, communitybasierte Konsummodelle zu einer Starkung der Quartiersentwicklung im Sinne eines Local Shifts beitragen konnen, stellen wir eine Typologie verschiedener Collaborative-Consumption-Arten vor, die sich konzeptionell am Sozialkapital und dessen Verwertbarkeit im Quartierskontext orientiert. Aus dieser Systematisierung folgt, dass viele der Angebote – trotz des erklarten Ziels einer „Nachbarschaftsstarkung“ – nicht notwendigerweise zu einer Akkumulation von lokalem Sozialkapital im Quartier fuhren mussen. Lediglich ein bestimmter, von uns definierter „autotelisch orientierter Collaborative-Consumption-Typ“, hat das Potenzial, Quartiersentwicklung positiv zu beeinflussen. Dieser Typ konnte insofern fur die Quartiersforschung von weiterem Interesse sein und auch fur die Stadtentwicklungspraxis im Sinne eines durch webbasierte Vernetzung gestarkten „Quartiers 2.0“ fruchtbar gemacht werden.
-
Collaborative Consumption, Sozialkapital und Quartier. Eine Annäherung
Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 2014Co-Authors: Olaf Schnur, Henning GünterAbstract:Sowohl das sozialräumliche Wohnumfeld als Nukleus von Stadtentwicklungsstrategien als auch internetbasierte Collaborative-Consumption -Ansätze (teilweise auch als Sharing Economy oder in Deutschland als Ko-Konsum bezeichnet) sind in Wissenschaft und Politik vieldiskutierte Themen, die sich im Spannungsfeld zwischen Globalität und Lokalität bewegen. In diesem Beitrag werden erstmals die Konzepte des Quartiers bzw. der Quartiersentwicklung und der Collaborative Consumption auf mögliche prozessuale Zusammenhänge überprüft. Um zu explorieren, inwieweit alternative, communitybasierte Konsummodelle zu einer Stärkung der Quartiersentwicklung im Sinne eines Local Shifts beitragen können, stellen wir eine Typologie verschiedener Collaborative-Consumption -Arten vor, die sich konzeptionell am Sozialkapital und dessen Verwertbarkeit im Quartierskontext orientiert. Aus dieser Systematisierung folgt, dass viele der Angebote – trotz des erklärten Ziels einer „Nachbarschaftsstärkung“ – nicht notwendigerweise zu einer Akkumulation von lokalem Sozialkapital im Quartier führen müssen. Lediglich ein bestimmter, von uns definierter „autotelisch orientierter Collaborative-Consumption -Typ“, hat das Potenzial, Quartiersentwicklung positiv zu beeinflussen. Dieser Typ könnte insofern für die Quartiersforschung von weiterem Interesse sein und auch für die Stadtentwicklungspraxis im Sinne eines durch webbasierte Vernetzung gestärkten „Quartiers 2.0“ fruchtbar gemacht werden. Both, neighbourhoods and Collaborative Consumption (sometimes also referred to as Sharing Economy or New Economy ), are the loci of interest in current scientific and political discussions that oscillate between the global and the local. This article aims to link the concepts’ potential procedural similarities more closely than has been done so far. Both of these concepts consider societal problems and potentials to be affecting the micro level; they form a part of the currently undergoing local shift . In order to explore this potential in more detail, we will present a typology of different platforms of Collaborative Consumption that takes into consideration both, social capital and relevant characteristics of a neighbourhood. Based on this analysis, we will argue that many of these platforms, despite their emphasis on neighbourly relationships, don’t necessarily foster an accumulation of social capital within neighbourhoods. However, there is one distinguished type, we define it as “the autotelic-oriented one”, which can potentially have a positive impact on neighbourhood development. Only this type enables the accumulation of social capital, attempts to overcome socio-economic barriers and provides reciprocity mechanisms for the exchange of favours. This type could be fruitful for neighbourhoods and should be taken into account more seriously by researchers and professionals in this field. We will argue that Collaborative Consumption can hence result in a “neighbourhood 2.0” – a community that is complementarily strengthened through web-based services.