Would you share
a car?
MASTER THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15
PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Engineering Management AUTHOR: Asmae Bemmouna & Hedaya Alyousif
JÖNKÖPING, May 2020
A qualitative study on the factors affecting consumer
participation in car-sharing systems.
Master Thesis in Business Administration
Title: Would you share a car? A qualitative study on the factors affecting consumer
participation in car-sharing systems.
Authors: Asmae Bemmouna and Hedaya Alyousif
Tutor: Jerker Moodysson
Date: 2020-05-18
Key terms: Car-sharing, consumer behaviour, sharing economy, consumption trends, motivations, barriers.
Abstract
The sharing economy is an evolving economic model that is based on collaboration and sharing access to goods with other people. A leading example of this is car-sharing services, which allow people who are strangers to each other to access a car in return of a fee. Although these services are widely spreading across the globe, there is still a short understanding of the customer motives and barriers to engage in these services.
The purpose of this thesis was to explore the factors that affect customer participation in car-sharing services including motives and barriers. The study was designed to test and modify an adapted conceptual framework through conducting an abductive qualitative study in the form of semi-structured in-depth interviews with a total of 18 interviewees.
The empirical findings of the study suggest that there is a total of 14 relevant factors affecting consumer participation in sharing services: 3 factors were related to consumption trends, 7 factors were identified as motives and 4 as barriers. Among all of these factors, economic motivations were recognized to be the most critical factor for customers. The results of this study are highly relevant to companies that operate car-sharing services when considering customer needs and demands.
Acknowledgement
Throughout this research project, we received help and support from different
people, which made an impact on the quality of this study. Here, we would like
to acknowledge those people who offered us advice and direction.
First, we would like to thank our supervisor, Jerker Modysson, for his continuous
support and guidance which helped us through the process of writing this thesis.
Second, we would like to thank our fellow seminar participants, André Martins
Salmazzo, Charikleia Tompea, Jonas Binzenhoefer and Luke Müller for their
valuable comments and constructive feedback.
Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to the participants of our empirical
study, who showed interest in our research and contributed to the findings of this
study with their deep insights and discussion. We appreciate that you took the
time to talk to us.
Thank you
Table of contents
1. Introduction ... 1
1.1 Background ... 1
1.2 Problem discussion ... 3
1.3 Purpose & Research Questions... 4
2. Theoretical Framework ... 6
2.1 The sharing economy ... 6
2.1.1 Collaborative Consumption: ... 7
2.1.2 Product-Service Systems: ... 7
2.1.3 Commercial Sharing Systems (CSS) ... 8
2.2 Information Technology impact ... 9
2.3 Trends affecting sharing attitudes ... 11
2.3.1 Materialism ... 11
2.3.2 Anti-consumption ... 12
2.3.3 Perceived sustainability ... 13
2.4 Consumer Behavior ... 15
2.4.1 Factors affecting consumer behavior ... 15
2.4.2 Motives ... 16 2.4.2.1 Economic motivations ... 16 2.4.2.2 Environmental motivations ... 17 2.4.2.3 Social motivations ... 18 2.4.3 Barriers ... 19 2.4.3.1 Ownership ... 19 2.4.3.2 Social Stigma ... 19 2.4.3.3 Unfamiliarity ... 20
2.4.3.4 Lack of trust and risks ... 20
2.4.4 Summary ... 20 2.5 Research framework ... 22 3 Research Methodology ... 24 3.1 Research Philosophy ... 24 3.2 Research Approach ... 25 3.3 Research Design... 26 3.4 Data Collection ... 27 3.5 Sampling Selection ... 28 3.6 Data Analysis ... 29 3.7 Quality Assessment ... 30 3.8 Ethical Consideration ... 31 4 Findings ... 33 4.1 Consumption Trends ... 34 4.1.1 Materialism ... 34 4.1.2 Anti-consumption ... 35 4.1.3 Perceived Sustainability ... 36 4.2 Motives ... 37 4.2.1 Economic motivations ... 37 4.2.2 Environmental motivations ... 38
4.2.4 Service Quality ... 40
4.3 Barriers ... 43
4.3.1 Ownership ... 43
4.3.2 Social Stigma ... 45
4.3.3 Lack of trust and risks ... 46
4.3.4 Unfamiliarity ... 47 5 Discussion ... 49 6. Conclusion ... 53 6.1 Contribution to literature... 54 6.2 Managerial Implications ... 55 6.3 Limitations ... 55 6.4 Further research ... 56 7. Reference list ... 57 8. Appendix... 60
8.1 Appendix 1: Interview Guide ... 60
Table of figures
Figure 1: Conceptual framework ... 22 Figure 2: Most repeated words by participants (NVIVO) ... 33
1. Introduction
_____________________________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the topic to the reader by providing general background information and help the reader to understand the importance of the chosen subject. This will be followed by the problem discussion and the purpose of the thesis. _____________________________________________________________________________________
1.1 Background
The linear economic model or in other words the take make dispose model has created a lot of environmental problems such as accumulation of waste or the overexploitation of raw materials causing scarcity in many essential natural resources. The linear economic model is threatening the future of our planet and natural resources are endangered because of mass production and mass consumption (Esposito, Tse, & Soufani, 2018). These issues of consumption habits have raised a growing concern about their impact on the environment and society and have led to the implementation of new consumption approaches that involve consumers who are primarily conscious of environmental problems (Hamari & Ukkonen, 2013).
Multiple models that minimize the ecological and social costs are emerging today; among them is the sharing economy; also named collaborative consumption and access over ownership, in which different parties share the value of an underutilized asset in order to minimize waste and encourage the growth of shared interests within society (Laurenti, Singh, Cotrim, Toni, & Sinha, 2019; Esposito et al., 2018, Sung, Kim, & Lee, 2018). This applies to goods and services such as vehicles, houses, books, toys, bicycles, etc. (Sung et al., 2018).
The notion of sharing has already existed far back in time in forms of bartering, lending, trading, renting, gifting and swapping (Laurenti et al., 2019). Collaborative consumption is an extension of the traditional sharing. However, it involves strangers sharing goods and services together rather than kin and communities (Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015).
The new concept of sharing is more popular today than what was known as sharing in the past as a result of the development of information technology, which made it easier and
simple to coordinate with other peers through online platforms or peer-to-peer applications (Kim & Jin, 2019; Laurenti et al., 2019), where individuals or companies list their requests for goods as well as services and they get matched by offers from individuals or companies (Boysen, Briskorn, & Schwerdfeger, 2019). Besides, the ability of social media to promote online music and film sharing has speeded up the development of sharing systems. However, tangible product sharing (e.g. cars and bicycles) is also increasing at a fast rate (Lamberton & Rose, 2012).
The sharing economy has mostly gained publicity in transportation, hospitality and consumer goods sectors (furniture, sporting equipment, electronics, etc.). Major present-day players in sharing market are Uber, Zipcar and Airbnb (Kim & Jin, 2019). However, the concept is expected to expand in the upcoming decade to include more products and service categories (Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). In 2011, collaborative consumption was identified to be one of the 10 ideas that will change the world by Time magazine. These new models of consumption are causing a transformation in consumer ideology in a way that they are accepting to share goods that have been considered as personal assets in the past, a major example of this is cars.
Car sharing has originated in Switzerland and Germany more than 20 years ago and has grown up significantly in the United States. In the past decade, car sharing became a worldwide phenomenon with more and more consumers participating. Companies engaging in car sharing businesses offer consumers access to a fleet of cars along with other members over an online platform. An additional monthly or annual membership fee might be required in addition to the car reservation charge (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012). Zipcar is the world’s largest car sharing company; founded by Robin Chase; a visionary entrepreneur with a strong sustainability drive. Zipcar is a business-to-peer company, aiming at reducing urban car ownership. It operates by placing its vehicles in convenient urban locations for those who do not own vehicles to reserve them. Overtime, the company has gained popularity; especially among young people who have a lower car ownership percentage than the previous generation. In 2013, the company was acquired by AVIS. Today, large transportation corporations and
car manufacturers are adopting the concept including BMW (Bavarian Motor
There are several motives to participate in the sharing economy. On top of them is the economic advantage it offers through redistributing the value across the supply chain from producers to consumers (Botsman & Rogers, 2010). Along with that, it allows consumers to gain access to products that they cannot afford to own, or they choose not to own due to space constraints for example or environmental aspects (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012). Additionally, by participating in the sharing economy, people gain profit by renting out their spare rooms or cars or doing tasks for money (Botsman & Rogers, 2010). Another reason for the increasing growth of the sharing economy is its positive impact on the environment in terms of slow production of new goods and thus constraining depletion of raw materials and reducing carbon and eco-footprint (Botsman & Rogers, 2010). Sharing is increasingly perceived as a sustainable and competitive substitute to ownership by both businesses and consumers (Lamberton & Rose, 2012). At last, sharing goods together can increase social connection through building social networks between the participants (Botsman & Rogers, 2010).
1.2 Problem discussion
The sharing economy, collaborative consumption, or access over ownership are all emerging business models that are disrupting existing commercial strategies in their way of rethinking the use of underutilized assets especially in the accommodation and mobility business sectors (Laurenti et al., 2019). In order for these models to be successful and achieve their purpose, they need to be accepted by consumers, yet now there seems to be an unfamiliarity and a lack of information with these concepts, which inhibits their emergence and implementation (Muranko, Andrews, Newton, Chaer, & Proudman, 2018). Moreover, many businesses are not aware of the competitive advantages of these novel business models or are uncertain about how consumers would react to changes in their business strategies. For example, some consumers might be reluctant to sharing goods because of the strong emotional connection attached to some products or due to the need of having control over products (Barnes & Mattsson, 2017). Thus, switching to sharing economy calls for a change in the way people produce and consume goods.
Moreover, consumer motivation to change their consumption habits is different from a person to another. Some people are environmentally motivated and are aware of the impact of their choices, others might be motivated by convenience and practicality with
little effort and there are those who are economically motivated and look for ways to save money. Such motivations can shift consumer attitudes from needing to own goods to sharing them collaboratively where access to products becomes more important than ownership. Co-living, co-working spaces and car sharing are becoming more popular as people are changing their lifestyle choices. Besides, the rise of technology and social networks has connected the world more than ever, allowing sharing and collaborative consumption to emerge in a global network through mobile applications and web platforms. However, there are some barriers to the expansion of sharing, namely safety and lack of trust that can be overcome by rating systems which builds confidence between providers and users. Businesses must recognize these changes in consumers’ purchase behaviors and adapt their business strategy accordingly. Companies should take advantage of underutilized goods and try to put them into circulation to get more value out of them. In this way, it is important to get an understanding of consumer needs, motivations and barriers to design the best business strategy for access-based goods.
1.3 Purpose & Research Questions
Till date, an extensive amount of research has been conducted to understand consumer behavior and habits in the linear economy, which helped to accelerate the growth of many companies and increase their income. While the need today is to transform to alternative business models in order to save resources and minimize waste, a limited amount of knowledge is available about consumer attitude towards those new models.
These new manners of consumption are leading to a transformation in the way companies do business and more importantly, in the way people consume goods and services. Therefore, understanding consumer needs and practices should come at the early stages of designing a service or a product because the success of any commercial business is dependent on the acceptance of the end customer at the first place. Consequently, it is crucial at this point for companies embracing sharing models (refers here to all models that allow access to a product or a service for a limited period of time including collaborative consumption, product-service-system (PSS) and access-based systems) to study their consumers’ motives and attitudes towards this disruptive economy. In addition, it is of the same importance to explore the barriers that stand against them.
including demographic variables (such as income, age and educational level), preferences and values. Additionally, other factors such as materialism, anti-consumption habits and perceived sustainability may have a big impact on people’s attitudes towards sharing.
Our aim is to help understand consumer attitude when it comes to adopting collaborative consumption models in the case of car sharing. According to Barnes & Mattsson (2017), consumers are motivated by both enjoyment and perceived usefulness (economic, environmental and social benefits) when it comes to engaging in car sharing. This knowledge about consumer behavior can help increase the implementation of collaborative consumption through guiding the service providers to better design their products and services to fit the needs of their target consumers. It can also be of a beneficial value to local governments and policy makers, who are concerned about the consequences of overconsumption. Furthermore, this research contributes to the previous literature by adding a new factor affecting consumer’s choice to participate in car-sharing: service quality.
It follows that the purpose of this thesis is to investigate consumer behavior inclusive of factors, motives and barriers to participate in collaborative consumption models in the case of car sharing, using the research questions below:
Research question
RQ: What are the factors that affect consumers’ participation in car-sharing systems?
In order to answer the question of whether consumers are willing to engage in sharing systems or not, we will try to answer two sub questions:
1. What are the underlying motives and barriers relating to consumer’s choice
of participating in collaborative consumption?
2. How is consumer attitude towards collaborative consumption affected by factors
such as anti-consumption, perceived sustainability and materialism?
2. Theoretical Framework
_______________________________________________________________________________ In this literature review, we will begin by describing different concepts within the sharing economy including collaborative consumption, product-service-systems and commercial sharing systems. Followed by the impact of information technology on the implementation of the sharing models. We then move to presenting the different trends affecting consumer’s attitudes towards sharing such as anti-consumption, materialism and perceived sustainability. Finally, we will investigate consumers’ motives and barriers to participate in sharing systems.
______________________________________________________________________
2.1 The sharing economy
The concept of idle capacity sharing is fundamental to the idea of sharing economy, as it differentiates the act of sharing goods from individual on-demand services (Frenken & Schor, 2017). The three distinctive features of the sharing economy are consumer to consumer interaction, time limited access and tangible goods (Frenken & Schor, 2017). Aside from having economic implications, it is argued that the sharing economy has favorable environmental and social impacts (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). A better usage of products and services could preserve natural resources, moreover, sharing can unite people and enhance social harmony (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). The traditional linear business models caused financial disparity, excessive consumption and over-exploitation of resources, which have led to present and future environmental issues. This has raised a debate about whether consumers really need to purchase and own a lot of things or whether a new system where people share assets would lead to improved resource use,
social advantages and decreased environmental issues(Barnes & Mattsson,
2017). Sharing is considered environmentally sustainable since it minimizes demand for new products or construction of new buildings. However, environmental advantages often occur in car sharing and because of rebound effects, the potential impacts of sharing economy systems can be low (Frenken & Schor, 2017).
Renting and leasing are specific cases of sharing which are associated with the assumption of returning the item (Belk, 2014). However, the secondhand economy where people sell products to each other is not considered as sharing economy because it allows permanent access to goods (Frenken & Schor, 2017). Profitable sharing ventures are expected to
consumption would result in lower sales or encourage the transition from personal ownership to collective consumption or temporary use (Belk, 2014). By looking at technological and environmental trends as opportunities instead of threats, prospective businesses could benefit from these new emerging models by taking the lead of implementing them (Belk, 2014).
2.1.1 Collaborative Consumption:
Collaborative consumption (CC) is mainly referred to as access over ownership, in other words, sharing the consumption of goods and services through practices like renting, exchanging and trading. Examples include AirBnb, Uber, RentTheRunway (renting designer dresses and accessories), Drivenow (a car-sharing service), MonJouJou (renting toys for children) and many other businesses. Hamari & Ukkonen (2013) suggest that collaborative consumption is a peer-to-peer practice of receiving, providing or exchanging access to goods and services accommodated by online community services.
However, Kim & Jin (2019) explain that collaborative consumption activities can be split into two categories. The first includes optimization of using underutilized goods or services such as a spare car or a bedroom for a limited period of time, which encompasses the notion of access to ownership. The second category consists of recirculation of goods, which may include transfer of ownership. An early platform that applied this concept is eBay. According to Laurenti et al. (2019), collaborative consumption has reinvented the traditional market behaviors in creative and innovative ways. They state that collaborative consumption “implies maximizing the utilization of assets through efficient models of redistribution and shared access”. Key characteristics of collaborative consumption are network of peers, trust and idle resources (Laurenti et al., 2019).
2.1.2 Product-Service Systems:
The product-service economy refers to renting products from a company instead of a consumer. The service that the company provides is allowing the customer to use the product while retaining ownership of it (Frenken & Schor, 2017). The Product-Service systems (PSS) enable companies to differentiate themselves from their competitors and satisfy consumers’ needs through a wide range of options (Schallehn, Seuring, Strähle, & Freise, 2019). The PSS model is still not widely spread in the market due to low consumer interest and the investment risks for companies to adopt it (Schallehn et al., 2019). The
customer’s response to a company's product or service involves interactions with the company and what it offers before, during and after the consumption (Schallehn et al., 2019). To sustain PSS offerings, it is important to understand the customer experience and the extent to which this experience relates to the product part and the service part of a PSS (Schallehn et al., 2019).
One of the recent concepts is Sustainable Product-Service Systems (SPSS), moving towards products and services that have little effect on the environment and are more efficient in terms of materials and energy use (Hobson, Lynch, Lilley, & Smalley, 2018). The principle of SPSS is shifting from owning a product to renting, leasing and getting access to product’s functions (Hobson et al., 2018). SPSS forms fall into three fundamental categories: Product-oriented (through sale of products and services combined), Use-oriented (renting or leasing products along with services) and Result-oriented (offering a service as opposed to simply selling products) (Hobson et al., 2018).
2.1.3 Commercial Sharing Systems (CSS)
There is an increasing interest in commercial sharing systems (CSS) as an alternative to owning the product (Akbar, Mai, & Hoffmann, 2016). Subsequently, marketing researchers started investigating the motivating factors of sharing in order to develop enticing sharing offers (Akbar et al., 2016). CSS gives customers access to products’ advantages without owning them, and therefore provides businesses with profits and long-term value.
Sharing systems represent new threats and opportunities to conventional firms focused on ownership (Lamberton & Rose, 2012). Aware of these challenges, several companies are adopting sharing systems such as Mercedes Benz who joined the car-sharing market (Lamberton & Rose, 2012). It is suggested that commercial sharing systems could be favored since they provide access to products at cheaper costs. Three forms of costs are expected to influence consumers’ views regarding the usefulness of a sharing system. Firstly, the cost of a shared product (i.e. the price of sharing) may involve a one-time subscription fee or regular user charge. Secondly, non-financial costs related to learning how to use new products and dealing with them are called “technical costs”. For instance, in car-sharing systems, users might have to drive unfamiliar cars frequently because they have access to a variety of automobile types. Thirdly, “search
costs” are generated through the resources or effort required to evaluate which product to buy or which sharing system to participate in (Lamberton & Rose, 2012).
Additionally, it is necessary to determine multiple benefits in order to realize the total value of a sharing program. Firstly, “transaction utility” corresponds to the relative value of the sharing system, comparable to the transaction utility of ownership. Secondly, “sources of utility related to flexibility” relate to the absence of restrictions on the usage of a service or a product in a commercial sharing system. For instance, in the case of car sharing, vehicles should be accessible in various locations, with different types of cars available and may be used for a range of purposes. Thirdly, “storage utility” relates to the benefits of product storage gained from sharing goods. For example, in car sharing, the consumer is not responsible for storing the vehicle which allows him to use his storage area for other purposes. Fourthly, “anti-industry utility” applies to psychological benefits resulting from refusing to participate in the conventional ownership markets, especially in industries producing products that remain unused the majority of time. Fifth, “social utility” corresponds to the benefits obtained in the form of acceptance by certain groups (such as environmental advocates) (Lamberton & Rose, 2012).
Marketers can start by understanding the particular costs and utility drivers that might influence the consumers’ willingness to engage in commercial sharing systems. By reducing costs and increasing the sharing gains, consumers would eventually be more willing to participate in sharing instead of purchasing (Lamberton & Rose, 2012). It is expected that consumers who are acquainted with commercial sharing systems are more inclined to get involved, because previous experience with sharing reduces the confusion over the ability to utilize the benefits and functionalities of the shared system (Lamberton & Rose, 2012).
2.2 Information Technology impact
The sharing economy is an evolving economic-technological trend powered by advances in information and communications technology (ICT), increased awareness of customers, emergence of online network communities and social trade / sharing (Hamari & Ukkonen, 2013). The development of ICT has paved the way for the modern sharing economy and has reduced the transaction costs of sharing services (Laurenti et al., 2019).
There is a clear business interest about the effects of the sharing economy on industrial sectors and whether it constitutes a disruptive change (Barnes & Mattsson, 2017). The rapid growth of collaborative consumption on online networks has contributed to the expansion of the sharing economy where people are primarily interested in getting access to goods and services rather than owning them (Barnes & Mattsson, 2017). Information technology is a key element in driving and implementing collaborative consumption, specifically online social networks that have created a novel digital platform to support sharing of goods and services. Sharing and collaborative consumption activities have two main characteristics: access-based models of products and services instead of ownership and their dependency on internet, namely Web 2.0 (Belk, 2014). As reported by Laurenti et al. (2019), the sharing economy has developed over two stages. The first before web 2.0, where it was mainly without monetary exchange and the network was limited to relatives, friends and acquaintances. The second period was after web 2.0, where the concept has expanded to be a widespread trend driven mainly by economic, social and environmental motives.
Sharing systems take a range of forms but all utilize information technology to provide people, businesses and governments with information that allows distribution and sharing of idle products and services (Heinrichs, 2013). Access-based systems provide consumers with access to a service, space or physical facility for a limited period of time in exchange for a payment, whilst ownership stays with the service supplier (Lu, Lai, & Liu, 2019). Access-based systems are supported by Smart Product-Service Systems (SPSSs), which combine e-services and smart products within an integrated solution (Lu et al., 2019). Smart products utilize information and communication technology (ICT) in order to gather, manage and generate information, whereas e-services are online platforms or applications that allow contact between customers and service suppliers (Lu et al., 2019). Lu et al. (2019) stress the fact that once consumers recognize the practicality of SPSSs, they will probably appreciate and use SPSSs. One of the factors of the rapid growth of the sharing economy (like sharing cars or bikes) is the rise of smart technologies (such as sensors) for SPSSs (Lu et al., 2019). SPSSs are useful for consumers especially when products have particular features supported by the access-based services. Through improved interactivity in mobile applications, it becomes easier for consumers to use SPSSs (Lu et al., 2019).
2.3 Trends affecting sharing attitudes
In the following section, we highlight the most important consumption trends that may affect consumers’ sharing behavior. Based on the reviewed literature, the most significant factors identified were materialism, anti-consumption and perceived sustainability.
2.3.1 Materialism
Materialist consumers believe that ownership of products is fundamental in many aspects of their lives and objects are part of their identity. Materialism is composed of three elements: the significance of possessing goods; the part that possession plays in achieving happiness; and how those goods are used to measure success (Davidson, Habibi, & Laroche, 2018). Since materialistic consumers tend to buy and often own products, there is a logic to assume that the main obstacle to adopt sharing systems is consumer materialism (the strong desire to own things) (Akbar et al., 2016). Ownership is highly important for materialistic people, which is why it is less likely that they would decrease their consumption mode. Furthermore, since materialism is linked to feelings of power over goods and deep attachment to things, many might claim that it is inherently opposed to sharing (Davidson et al., 2018). Sharing systems may be able to solve this problem since sharing is a viable way of reducing purchases without decreasing consumption (Akbar et al., 2016). Akbar et al. (2016) investigate the way to reach consumers who abstain from sharing in order to grow the sharing programs’ commercial potential. They found that materialism is the primary barrier of sharing, however, the negative effect of materialism decreases as the demand for exclusive consumer products rises, and only when consumers do not own a product in a category with a strong product-need-fit (the degree to which one product meets the need of a particular product category) does the demand for exclusive consumer products exercise its moderating effect. Businesses should recognize the fact that with CSS, consumers could use unique products that they would normally not be able to buy or use. This approach seems especially appealing for attracting materialistic consumers who are unwilling to engage in CSS (Akbar et al., 2016).
Although, it would seem like materialism and sharing are in opposition to each other, materialistic attitudes may give rise to preference for shared experiences over individual consumption. Recent studies reveal how sharing and possessiveness (materialism) are aligned in situations where collective possession enhances the shared
product’s benefits and experience (Davidson et al., 2018). For example, while materialist attitudes strengthen feelings of possessiveness, consumers do not care to share them with like-minded people, which enhances the collaborative consumption experience. It is assumed that people could gain social acceptance by engaging in sharing systems and may receive respect from their friends and family members. Collaborative consumption has traditionally been viewed as inferior to ownership, however, modern social and cultural changes have altered consumption standards from tangible assets and ownership to more experiential and cultural assets. Collaborative consumption and sharing platforms, in their current condition, are novel to the materialist consumer and are linked to an urbanized and developed lifestyle. Consequently, the materialist consumer is likely to find sharing systems as a new alternative to product ownership under which they seek lifestyle improvements (Davidson et al., 2018).
2.3.2 Anti-consumption
Engaging in CSS may be seen as a form of anti-consumption, which is an attempt to minimize or avoid consumption for social, environmental or symbolic purposes (Akbar et al., 2016). Recently, there have been trends of minimalism and small luxury spreading among consumers (Lee, 2019). The minimalist movement can be considered as an anti-consumption form where people willingly change their anti-consumption behaviors because of individual and social motives. Small luxury refers to a consumer attitude which includes seeking fulfillment in an economically restricted lifestyle from small consumption (Lee, 2019). The sharing economy has been the focus of increased interest, providing valuable business models for people participating in anti-consumption habits (Lee, 2019). The reasons for consumers engaging in anti-consumption lifestyles vary. For some consumers, sharing is financially motivated, while for others, this behavior is based on personal convictions concerning environmental and social interests (Lee, 2019). Since alternatives for buying and product usage are needed, understanding consumers who deliberately reduce their consumption rates and finding business strategies that can engage those consumers is key (Lee, 2019). Anti-consumption lifestyle forms relevant to the sharing economy are motivations and behaviors such as frugality, voluntary simplicity, small luxury, environmental protection and tightwadism (Lee, 2019). Most forms of anti-consumption attitudes are directly connected to the perception towards CSS. Frugality, small luxury and environmental
protection have a positive influence on the behavior towards CSS, however tightwadism and voluntary simplicity (related to people who adopt a simplified life) have no noticeable effect on CSS attitudes (Lee, 2019). Voluntary simplifiers try to make their own products or steer away from buying completely rather than purchasing or participating in CSS (Lee, 2019). Anti-consumption attitudes appear to influence the willingness to engage in commercial sharing systems unlike a consumer trend which solely decreases consumption (Lee, 2019).
The “distance from the consumption system” is an important encouraging factor for a variety of reasons relevant to how sharing economy platforms operate and the motives for implementing these platforms (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Firstly, participating in sharing economy platforms is equivalent to choosing an alternative and unconventional market systems and thus allowing consumers to distance themselves from the consumer society. Secondly, through peer-to-peer platforms, users are able to have social interaction with peer users who share the same enthusiasm to break away from the conventional consumption structures. Thirdly, peer-to-peer users detach themselves from conventional marketing incentives to purchase or buy new products, which are viewed as a decline and decrease of resources that occur in the consumer society. Fourthly, taking part in sharing economy platforms enables exclusive ownership of products to be replaced by lower-cost alternatives from within the sharing platform (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Thus, motivations to detach oneself from the consumption system may offer a significant explanation to attitudes towards participating in sharing systems.
2.3.3 Perceived sustainability
The sharing economy or collaborative consumption involves the exploitation of market intelligence to promote a more inclusive and sustainable community (Heinrichs, 2013). The sharing economy is of great interest as a way of encouraging responsible and sustainable consumption behaviors (Martin, 2016). It is argued that sharing systems could disrupt excessive unsustainable consumption activities that leverage the capitalist economy (Martin, 2016). This is due to the fact that the sharing economy allows a transition from a system in which people own goods to a system in which they share access to goods. This shift is led by peer-to-peer internet channels that bring users together and allow them to make a better use of idle assets. For instance, peer-to-peer car sharing systems enable vehicle rentals, thereby allowing an efficient usage of underutilized cars
(Martin, 2016). Additionally, it is also argued that peer-to-peer systems encourage a more sustainable and equitable utilization of assets by decreasing both the costs related to the access to goods and services and consumer need for assets. For example, in peer-to-peer car sharing, rental costs are cheaper than ownership costs, and instead of many individuals owning a vehicle people share one car together (Martin, 2016).
Sustainability is a major issue for companies in general, and much more in certain industries that are in desperate need of change (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). The rise of consumers involved in sharing, in accessibility and in sustainable alternatives are main success drivers for sharing economic models; provided that people consider the sharing economy as a sustainable economic system (Pouri & Hilty, 2018). Many consumers became highly interested with consumption-related environmental concerns (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Customers involved in sustainable or pro-social actions might think that sharing is an opportunity to preserve the natural environment and decrease waste (Lamberton & Rose, 2012).
Studies related to consumers’ perceptions about sustainability issues have been undertaken in social sciences, psychology, marketing, consumer behavior and also in the field of sharing economy (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Empirical data shows that environmental awareness, including attitudes and beliefs regarding sustainability problems, may be amongst the driving factors of consumers’ participation in the sharing economy. A study found that ecological awareness, collectivism and sustainability tendency of Chinese consumers influenced their attitudes regarding sustainable purchasing (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Another study done on Danish milk consumers showed that purchasers of organic milk have distinct choice heuristics as opposed to conventional milk buyers. A “green” characteristic tends to increase customer engagement in choice-making. Another research done on Indian consumers found that concerns about sustainability led to a more positive approach towards purchasing green goods. In a study based on Ikea customers in Sweden, environmental concerns showed to be the third most important incentive to purchase second-hand goods. Likewise, a research showed that the presumed sustainability of collaborative consumption in a Finish sharing platform (Sharetribe) had a positive and important effect on behaviors towards CC (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Overall, most studies suggest that consumers’ attitudes
towards environmental sustainability may potentially play a key role in shaping consumer behaviors.
2.4 Consumer Behavior
Considering that consumer’s reluctance to adopt alternative business models is building barriers against transitioning towards sharing economy (Singh & Giacosa, 2019), it is of great importance to understand consumer’s perspectives and interests in order to help developing more user-friendly solutions (Singh & Giacosa, 2019). Although it is mostly companies that are responsible for implementing sharing business models, the process involves all actors, namely consumers. It is therefore important to study consumer behavior towards embracing a collaborative consumption model.
2.4.1 Factors affecting consumer behavior
The factors affecting consumer behavior towards participating in the sharing economy varies over a wide range from aspects related to the product to aspects related to the consumers themselves. These factors can also vary through different stages of the purchasing process. In a study by Poppelaars, Bakker, & Engelen (2018), consumers considered different factors along the adoption phase, when consumers start thinking about the product before purchasing it based on their expectations of the service and the acceptance phase, which consumers go through after purchasing the product and they start thinking about the benefits of the service they got. According to Besch (2005) and Tischner’s (2002), sharing models can be better implemented for products that have certain characteristics than others. In their literature they conclude that in order for a product to be successful in the sharing economy, it has to have one or more of the following characteristics: expensive products, technically advanced products that require regular maintenance and repair, easily transported products, infrequently used products and products that are not heavily influenced by fashion or trends.
This is in consonance with Edbring, Lehner, & Mont (2015), who report that consumers’ attitude towards collaborative consumption differs depending on how long the product will be used. Consumers show positive attitude towards short-term use such as leasing outdoor furniture for an event or party. Likewise, consumers find that sharing consumption practical for seldom or rarely used products such as do-it-yourself tools. It
is also considered as a perfect solution for products that lose their value after first use (Edbring et al., 2015).
Additionally, a main factor affecting consumer behavior towards those sharing systems is the product group (Edbring et al., 2015; Baumeister, 2014). Consumers considered aspects such as the material of which the product is made, the frequency of use, perceived degree of intimacy in their use and the social and emotional value of the product. In consequence, consumers have a very negative attitude towards leasing or sharing textiles and upholstery furniture, but they are positive about home appliances (Edbring et al., 2015).
2.4.2 Motives
Consumers participate in sharing systems for a range of different motives. Recent research on sharing has examined consumer incentives to make use of access-based systems in general and car-sharing in particular (Wilhelms, Henkel, & Falk, 2017). In the following section, we highlight the most relevant and important motivations that promote consumer engagement in sharing activities, namely car-sharing.
2.4.2.1 Economic motivations
Economic reasons are a key driving force for adopting sharing economy models. In these sharing systems, the user substitutes individual ownership of products with lower-costs collaborative consumption service offerings (Hamari & Ukkonen, 2013). Hence, consumers see that it is cheaper to share a product with others than to buy it (Edbring et al., 2015; Kim & Jin, 2019; Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). Besides, consumers are favorable to commit to long-term regular payments rather than paying a big amount at once for expensive products (Catulli, 2012). This is in line with the notion that costly products are more highly to succeed in the sharing economy supported by Besch (2005), Tischner’s (2002), Mont (2002) and Rexfelt and Hiort af Ornäs (2009). Furthermore, with lower prices, consumers can as well get access to an abundant selection of products with various characteristics to choose from (Kim & Jin, 2019). For other people, convenience is the reason behind their choice for car sharing because they skip greater responsibility and expenses including taxes, insurance, maintenance and fuel (Kim & Jin, 2019).
Research suggests that economic factors play the main role for consumers as they plan to
participate in collaborative consumption (Benoit, Baker, Bolton, Gruber,
& Kandampully, 2017). Economic gains (saving time and money) appear to have a strong impact on behavioral intentions (Hamari & Ukkonen, 2013). One research showed that reduced expenditures were the primary reason for consumer participation in collaborative consumption (Billows & Mcneill, 2018). In the matter of car sharing, it is expected to contribute to a considerable amount of financial saving because a car is an expensive good to own (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). In Bardhi and Eckhardt (2012) interview-based study about motivation on participation in car sharing; using a case study of Zipcar, they found that economic motivations such as saving money are the main reason underlying Zipcar participation. However, according to Möhlmann (2015) survey regarding car and accommodation sharing, cost saving increases participants satisfaction about the service but does not influence their decision to participate in the service again. Another study found that cost savings raised the likelihood of customer satisfaction in B2C car sharing but did not have a relevant relationship with the decision to use the sharing service again (Billows & Mcneill, 2018). Alternatively, a study showed that the expected economic gain did not have a major impact on the attitude towards CC but positively affected the decision to participate (Billows & Mcneill, 2018).
2.4.2.2 Environmental motivations
Collaborative consumption is usually assumed to be particularly sustainable in ecological terms and has been considered as a consumption mode that involves consumers who are primarily conscious of environmental issues (Hamari & Ukkonen, 2013). Consumers find it better for the environment when sharing products (Kim & Jin, 2019; Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). According to Hamari & Ukkonen (2013), sustainability is a significant factor in shaping good attitudes regarding collaborative consumption, however economic advantages are a greater driving factor for participating in this model. This idea is supported by Hobson, Lynch, Lilley, & Smalley (2018), who found that there was little evidence that giving consumers more details about the environmental and ethical conundrums related to the product would have any kind of effect on their buying, using and disposing behavior. Although aware of the environmental issues, people found it hard to connect these problems with their consumption style (Hobson et al., 2018).
People would engage in sharing programs in order to decrease their exploitation of limited natural resources (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). Some research points out that sustainability is one of the key drivers of consumer participation in collaborative consumption (Billows & Mcneill, 2018; Gazzola, Vătămănescu, Andrei, & Marrapodi, 2018). One study done in the US found that environmental awareness had a positive impact on the decision to participate in “fractional ownership” (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). Yet other studies showed that environmentalism is not specifically linked to someone’s behavioral motivation to participate in CC (Billows & Mcneill, 2018). For example, a research showed that environmental concerns had little effect on people’s motivations to use Zipcar
car-sharing (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). However, when consumers recognize the
psychological benefits of sustainable consumption, this can contribute to a bigger shift in behaviors towards sustainability in general (Billows & Mcneill, 2018). Overall, there is no definite evidence related to the relationship between engaging in the sharing economy and environmental motivations (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). Car-sharing appears to be the most evident sharing form with environmental benefits because of the negative impacts that cars have on the natural environment. Thus, it is anticipated that environmental motivations are significant for car-sharing (Böcker & Meelen, 2017).
2.4.2.3 Social motivations
Another reason for consumers to participate in the sharing economy is related to social benefits. Many consumers see a way of accessing a community through engaging in sharing consumption platforms and actively exchange comments and feedback about the product and service. It is claimed that social aspects such as the ability to meet new people and make friends with them is a key driver in stimulating sharing economy participation (Botsman & Rogers, 2010). For example, in the case of accommodation and car sharing, peers might need to meet in order to exchange keys and thus have a discussion about their experience of the service (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). These practices work on replicating social relations and providing consumers with an enhanced sense of belonging to a community (Gazzola, et al., 2018). According to Schor & Fitzmaurice (2015), many users join sharing platforms looking for social connections and building a social network. In fact, many sites advertise this as a feature of their business and it is common between users to join for this reason (Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). However, social motivations may be more noticeable for sharing forms that
in a car, which in consequence increases the chance of having a conversation together (Gazzola et al., 2018).
Furthermore, social motivations for joining a sharing platform are expected to be more popular amongst older people as compared to younger. Besides, people from non-western origins are expected to show higher social motivations for participating in collaborative consumption models as they come from cultures that are often more collectivist. Lastly, it is assumed that households composed of singles show higher social drivers for participating in the sharing economy (Gazzola et al., 2018).
2.4.3 Barriers
There are different barriers that stand against consumer participation in sharing economy, which are related to the consumer personality itself, society or other different aspects. In the following section, we highlight the most relevant barriers that prevent consumer engagement in sharing activities, namely car-sharing.
2.4.3.1 Ownership
Key barriers for consumers to engage more in the sharing business models is their strong desire for owning their products as part of consumer culture (Mont, 2004; Edbring et al., 2015). According to Singh & Giacosa (2019) psychological ownership restrains the user’s acceptance of sharing their assets with others. In their study, they state that old habits and behaviors instilled into people for a long-time act as barriers toward switching to sharing economy. Likewise, a study by Mashhadi, Vedantam, & Behdad (2019) showed that factors such as the need for ownership played a bigger role than environmental motives for some consumers in sharing models.
2.4.3.2 Social Stigma
The social stigma associated with participating in the sharing economy and using goods with other people is still considered as a barrier by many consumers in different cultures as the society will commonly view them as a lower class (Catulli, 2012; Singh & Giacosa, 2019). Singh & Giacosa (2019) also believe that the capitalist system has persuaded people that consumption defines where they fit into society and thus inhibits the transition to alternative models. This is supported by Catulli (2012) in which some consumers associated leasing products with social stigma as it is usually seen as a solution for consumers with limited financial abilities.
2.4.3.3 Unfamiliarity
Consumers unfamiliarity with the concept of collaborative consumption including terms and conditions stood as a barrier on their way of adopting the service. Consumers frequently discussed uncertainty regarding costs and responsibility (Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009). This includes some consumers having anxiety because they do not know what happens if the product is broken for example (Edbring et al., 2015). In other cases, consumers cannot understand the offered service because the offer description is bad, important information is missing or it is too complicated to understand (Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009).
2.4.3.4 Lack of trust and risks
The lack of trust in others put many consumers back from participating in collaborative consumption services (Edbring et al., 2015). Issues of trust with the service provider were also raised. In the case of unfamiliarity with the service type or provider, consumers usually seek references from friends and media. Likewise, the reputation and image of the service provider were of high importance to consumers (Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009). In addition, consumers expressed concern regarding health and safety including the product hygiene and cleanliness. (Catulli, 2012; Edbringet al., 2015). At last, the fear of product unavailability; for example, not being able to access a car when needed or having to wait for an hour or so is inconvenient for consumers and therefore stands as a barrier as well (Edbring et al., 2015; Catulli, 2012).
2.4.4 Summary
In summary, intentions to engage in the sharing economy vary between socio-demographic categories, between consumers and suppliers, and in particular, between the various types of shared items (cars, rides, accommodation, tools and meals) (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). For instance, the sharing of pricey goods like accommodation is strongly financially driven, while for car and drive-sharing, environmental motives are more significant and for meal sharing, social motives are the key drivers, where social interaction is significant for the participant (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). Therefore, the variety of reasons driving the participation in sharing economy is highly reliant on the industry division (Böcker & Meelen, 2017).
Nevertheless, different gender and age groups can have a different attitude towards collaborative consumption. As shown in the text by Böcker & Meelen (2017), Rousseau, (2020), younger and lower-income individuals have a greater economic incentive to provide and use shared goods, while women are more motivated by the environment. Still, motives may become different over time. People who adopt sharing for functional reasons may later learn to value environmental and social facets or the other way around (Böcker & Meelen, 2017). Despite, the perceived advantages (enjoyment and economic benefit) have the greatest effect on consumer’s willingness to take part in the sharing economy (Lee, Chan, Balaji, & Chong, 2018). Therefore, businesses should deliver strong economic incentive messages and pleasant experiences to promote consumer engagement in sharing economy. Furthermore, trust in the platform greatly decreases the perception of risks by consumers and strengthens the notion of benefits to engage in the sharing economy. Thus, organizations should improve the aspects of the sharing economy platform, namely quality of information and the system in order to maintain trust in the platform (Lee et al, 2018).
After all, consumers need to be more educated about the effects of their consumption habits on the environment as it is of low priority to them (Catulli, 2012). According to Rexfelt & Ornäs (2009) “The environment was almost never brought up by the
participants” in their study of consumer acceptance of product-service
system. Additionally, website developers should seek to build cohesive groups of users who are inclined towards sharing practices in order to establish efficient collaborative consumption. When targeting new customers, businesses should also highlight the economic advantages of renting and the environmental benefits of sharing instead of owning (Barnes & Mattsson, 2017). Overall, the best access-based model, should satisfy consumer needs, align with the habits and values of the targeted consumer group, is easy to understand and offers flexibility in use (Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009).
2.5 Research framework
Figure 1: Conceptual framework
The theoretical structure of this research is illustrated in figure 1. As described in the literature review, consumer behavior towards sharing systems is affected by various factors. Consumption trends such as materialism, anti-consumption, and perceived sustainability may have an impact on consumers’ attitudes towards sharing systems. Although materialism may seem opposed to sharing, materialist consumers may participate in sharing when non-ownership is associated with seeking lifestyle improvements (Davidson et al., 2018). Anti-consumption attitudes can increase people’s engagement in sharing platforms (Lee, 2019) because it allows them to distance themselves from the consumer society (Styvén & Mariani, 2020). Perceived sustainability of sharing systems can promote consumers’ involvement in sharing (Pouri & Hilty, 2018) because they think that sharing is an alternative to preserve the natural environment and decrease waste (Lamberton & Rose, 2012).
Additionally, consumer behavior towards sharing is influenced by different motives and barriers. After reviewing the literature, we found three key motives that enhance consumer participation in the sharing economy. These three motives are economic,
environmental and social benefits. For the most part, consumers are motivated by the economic value of sharing goods rather than buying them. They are inclined to replace exclusive ownership of goods such as private cars with temporary access to ownership at cheaper prices than what is offered by the regular market (Kim & Jin, 2019; Edbring et al., 2015; Catulli, 2012; Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). These cheaper prices can also afford consumers access to a wide range of selection of goods and let them skip greater responsibility and expenses (Kim & Jin, 2019). The second key motive for consumers to engage in sharing economy is that they find a way in it to achieve sustainability; especially those who are driven by greener consumption; they find it to be more environmentally friendly (Hamari & Ukkonen, 2013; Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2015). The third key motive for participating in sharing is social gain for consumers by allowing them to be part of a community or a group. Thus, they feel a sense of belonging through interacting with their fellow users and exchanging comments and feedback with the chance of becoming friends (Kim & Jin, 2019).
In terms of barriers, we identified four main barriers that can limit consumer participation in the sharing economy: desire for ownership, unfamiliarity with the concept, lack of trust & risks and finally social stigma. When it comes to ownership, it is seen as a fundamental barrier for the implementation of the sharing economy as many consumers show a strong desire to owning their products as a deeply ingrained old habit of traditional consumption (Mont, 2004; Edbring et al., 2015). Another barrier that stands in the face of consumers is their unfamiliarity with the concept of sharing in regard to terms & conditions, responsibility and consequences when the product is damaged for example (Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009; Edbring et al., 2015). Besides, consumers also showed concern for issues of trust for other users and even the service provider, which can be reduced with the presence of good reviews and feedback (Edbring et al., 2015; Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009). This was combined with risk concerns such as product unavailability, which in the case of car sharing might require the customer to wait for up to one hour or so in order to find an available car (Edbring et al.,; Catulli, 2012). The last main barrier is the social stigma that many consumers consider when they think about sharing products with others; fearing that society will view them as a lower class (Catulli, 2012; Singh & Giacosa, 2019).
3
Research Methodology
_____________________________________________________________________________________ Methodology refers to the systems that guide how information should be gathered. In this chapter, we describe the research philosophy, research approach, research design, data collection, data sampling and data analysis. The chapter is concluded by quality assessment and ethical considerations.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
3.1 Research Philosophy
Research philosophy is based on Ontology and Epistemology. Ontology is about what we know about the nature of the world and epistemology is about how we get to know the nature of reality (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe, Jackson & Jasperson, 2018). Understanding this helps us appreciate and compare different fields of research. When it comes to ontology, we mainly distinguish four ontological positions: realism (the world exists independently of scientists), internal realism (reality exists but it cannot be accessed directly), relativism (there are many truths and reality depends on view points) and nominalism (reality is human creation through language and discourse). On the other hand, epistemology encompasses two main views: positivism and social constructionism. Positivism is the view that reality exists externally and can only be discovered and measured using objective tools. Positivists tend to rely mainly on experiments and quantitative methods. Social constructionism is the view that reality exists through people who give it meaning through their thoughts. Constructionists tend to mainly use qualitative methods in their studies. Most researchers do not write about their assumptions about ontology and epistemology deliberately, but their research design and methodologies leave clues about their philosophy of research (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).
Our epistemological position in this paper is social constructionism. Constructionists tend to believe that there are many realities that need to be gathered to get a better understanding of a particular phenomenon (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). The purpose of this research is to understand consumer attitude towards participating in car-sharing systems. In order to do that, it is essential to study subjective experiences to build knowledge about how participants’ perspectives are developed through social interaction
people’s intention to engage in car-sharing depends on different factors. Some people may be economically motivated, others could be environmentally driven and there are those that seek social interaction through sharing. In this context, we assume that there are multiple realities and perceptions than cannot be generalized.
In this research, we consider a relativist ontology. From a relativist ontology, it is acknowledged that there is no single truth that can be uncovered, but there are multiple realities and viewpoints on the subject (Easterby-Smith et al., 2015). In order to get an insight about individual motives and barriers towards car-sharing, it is essential to take a relativist position to understand the different individual intentions. This allows the theory to develop and new truths to emerge during the research process. Furthermore, when undertaking a constructionist research, authors consider a relativist ontology and a subjectivist position, which enables a cyclical study process where knowledge is developed by engaging with participants (Easterby-Smith et al., 2015). However, we do not take an extreme relativist position in this research and still rely on observations to make conclusions. To analyze the most relevant aspects affecting consumers towards car-sharing we based our judgement on the number of times a specific factor was repeated by the respondents. Thus, it could be argued that we stand between an internal realist and a relativist ontology.
3.2 Research Approach
Deciding on a research approach is very critical for the development of the research design. It helps researchers to think about the research strategies and methodological choices that will work for them and those that will not. The extent to which the research theory is clear at the beginning of the research is an important factor in defining the research approach. According to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2016), there are mainly two contrasting approaches: deduction and induction. Deduction includes the development of a theory that is then tested through a series of propositions. In other words, deduction occurs when the conclusion is based on a set of premises. When the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. In this approach, the data collected is used to evaluate propositions or hypotheses related to an existing theory. Hence, it is a way for theory falsification or verification. Deduction approach generalizes from the general (theory) to the specific (premises). It is the main research approach in the natural sciences, where natural laws present the basis of explanation (Saunders et al.,
2016). In contrast, induction occurs when there is a gap between the conclusion and the known premises. The known premises are used to generate untested conclusions. In this approach, the data collected are used to explore a phenomenon, identify themes and patterns and create a conceptual framework (Saunders et al., 2016). Hence, it is a way for theory generation and building. Induction approach generalizes from the specific (premises) to the general (theory). It is usually concerned with the study of a small sample of subjects than a large number as with the deductive approach. As reported by Saunders et al., (2016), induction reasoning is the most common approach in social sciences. Researchers following the inductive approach are more likely to work with qualitative data collected using a variety of methods. A third approach to research is called abduction. Abductive approach combines deduction and induction together in terms of moving back and forth from theory to data and vice versa. In abduction, known premises are used to generate testable conclusions. Here, the collected data is used to explore a phenomenon, identify themes and patterns, locate these in a conceptual framework and test this through subsequent data collection. Abduction is a way for theory generation or modification; incorporating existing theory where appropriate, to build a new theory or modify an existing one. Abductive reasoning generalizes from the interactions between the specific (premises) and the general (theory). This approach matches mostly business and management research (Saunders et al., 2016).
In this thesis, we started by collecting data to explore a phenomenon (consumer attitude towards the sharing economy and factors affecting their decision). Based on the collected information, we built our theory in the form of a conceptual framework. This conceptual framework was then used as a guide to structure our primary data collection and help
us design the interview questions, which implies that we are using
an abductive approach according to Saunders et al., (2016). In this study, we are evaluating and modifying an existing theory rather than building a new one.
3.3 Research Design
The research design is the general plan of how researchers will go about answering their research question(s). A high-quality research is fundamentally dependent on a good research design (Easterby-Smith et al., 2015).
