Teknoloji Tabanlı Talebe-Dayalı Taşımacılık İş Modellerine Geçiş: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Araştırma

Year 2020, Volume: 22 Issue: 4, 1035 - 1045, 31.12.2020

Berk Küçükaltan

https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.755931

Abstract

Dünya, günümüzde, farklı düzeylerde yapısal değişikliklere tanıklık etmekte ve bazı dış faktörler (COVID-19 gibi) bu değişiklikleri özellikle hızlandırmaktadır. Yeni dünya düzeninde, insanlar günlük yaşamlarında karşılaştıkları bazı zorluklara karşı etkili çözümler ararlarken, örgütler de bu ihtiyaçları karşılamak için yenilikçi teknolojiler kullanarak daha rekabetçi olma arayışına girmektedirler. Sonuç olarak, dijitalleşmenin hayatımıza girmesiyle birlikte, ulaşımda, geleneksel iş modellerinden teknoloji tabanlı talebe-dayalı iş modellerine bir dönüşüm olmaktadır. Özellikle, İstanbul gibi büyükşehirlerin karmaşık yapısı ve yüksek yoğunluğu göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, talebe bağlı taşımacılık platformlarını kullanmak yolcular için faydalı olabilmektedir. Ancak, bu platformlara gösterilen ilginin artmasına rağmen, literatürde bu iş modellerini ve bunların etkilerini farklı açılardan inceleyen sınırlı sayıda çalışma bulunmaktadır. Buna bağlı olarak, bu araştırma, teknoloji tabanlı talebe-dayalı iki örnek taşımacılık iş modeli olan Uber ve BiTaksi'nin pratiklerini araştırmayı ve öne çıkan çeşitli niteliklere göre stratejiler önermeyi amaçlamaktadır. Sonuç olarak, belirlenen niteliklere ilişkin tartışmalar ve önerilen stratejiler, taşımacılıktaki dijital iş modelleri hakkında yeni oluşmaya başlayan bilgileri ilerletme, özellikle uluslararası ve ulusal bir platformun karşılaştırılmasında, ve iş çevresinde yer alan gerek uygulayıcılara gerekse de politika belirleyicilere stratejik rehberlik etme konusunda önemli potansiyel taşımaktadır.

Keywords

BiTaksi, dijital iş modelleri, talebe-dayalı taşımacılık iş modelleri, teknoloji tabanlı hizmet platformları, Uber

Shifting towards Technology-based On-demand Transportation Business Models: A Comparative Research

Abstract

Today, the world has been witnessing to structural changes at different levels and some external factors (e.g. COVID-19) have particularly accelerated these changes. In the new world order, people seek effective solutions to some challenges they confront in their daily lives while organisations are in quest for becoming more competitive by using innovative technologies to address these needs. As a result, with the introduction of digitalisation, there has been a transformation from traditional business models towards technology-based on-demand business models to be used in transportation. Especially, considering the complex structure and high density of metropolitan cities, such as Istanbul, using on-demand transportation platforms can be worthwhile for passengers. However, despite the increasing attention paid to these platforms, there is a limited number of studies exploring these business models and their impacts from different aspects. Therefore, this research aims to investigate the practices of two exemplary technology-based on-demand transportation business models, Uber and BiTaksi, and to propose strategies based on several prominent attributes. Consequently, the discussions and proposed strategies regarding the established attributes hold a significant potential to advance the nascent knowledge about digital transportation business models, especially in the comparison of an international and a national platform, and to offer strategic guidance to practitioners and policy-makers in business environment.

Keywords

BiTaksi, digital business models, on-demand transportation business models, technology-based service platforms, Uber

References

• Bălan, C. (2016). Ride-sharing and car-sharing in Romania: What choices do potential users have?. International Conference of the Institute for Business Administration in Bucharest, 2016, 103-112.
• Beh, L. S., Ghobadian, A., He, Q., Gallear, D., & O'Regan, N. (2016). “Second-life retailing: A reverse supply chain perspective.” Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 21(2), 259-272.
• Benjaafar, S., & Hu, M. (2020). Operations management in the age of the sharing economy: what is old and what is new?. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 22(1), 93-101.
• BiTaksi (2020a). Available at: http://www.bitaksi.com/, accessed: 26.02.2020.
• BiTaksi (2020b). Available at: http://www.bitaksi.com/kullanim-kosullari/, accessed: 26.02.2020.
• BiTaksi (2020c). Available at: http://www.bitaksi.com/gorme-ve-isitme-engellilere-de-kolay-taksi/, accessed: 16.06.2020.
• Cao, D. (2016). Regulation through deregulation: sharing economy companies gaining legitimacy by circumventing traditional frameworks. Hastings LJ, 68, 1085-1110.
• Cohen, B., & Kietzmann, J. (2014). Ride on! Mobility business models for the sharing economy. Organization & Environment, 27(3), 279-296.
• Cornelissen, J., & Cholakova, M. (2019). Profits Uber everything? The gig economy and the morality of category work. Strategic Organization, 1-10, DOI: 10.1177/1476127019894506.
• Ensari, M. Ş., & Karabay, M. E. (2014). What helps to make SMEs successful in global markets?. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 192-201.
• Ercoskun, O. Y., & Ocalir, E. (2018). An urban tension about ridehailing: Uber experience in Istanbul. Beiträge zu einer ökologisch und sozial verträglichen Verkehrsplanung (1/2018), 131-146
• Ferah (2017). Available at: https://webrazzi.com/2017/01/27/sehiri-ici-ulasim-teknolojilerinin-aldiklari-ucretler-bitaksi-careem-olev-uber-yolo/ , accessed: 27.02.2020.
• Fleming, P. (2017). The human capital hoax: Work, debt and insecurity in the era of Uberization. Organization Studies, 38(5), 691-709.
• Gebeyehu, M., & Takano, S. E. (2007). Diagnostic evaluation of public transportation mode choice in Addis Ababa. Journal of Public Transportation, 10(4), 27-50.
• Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., & Wong, Y. Z. (2018). Potential uptake and willingness-to-pay for Mobility as a Service (MaaS): A stated choice study. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 117, 302-318.
• Kahya, Y (2018). Hizmet sektöründe yeni iş uygulamaları. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 16(3), 219-238.
• Kale, M., Bhadale, S., & Lohar, S. V (2017). Advanced transport management system. International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication, 5(6), 511-513.
• Kayikci, Y. (2018). Mobility-on-demand service in mass transit: HyperCommute options. Sigma J. Eng. Nat. Sci., 9, 447-460.
• Kucukaltan, B., Irani, Z., & Aktas, E. (2016). A decision support model for identification and prioritization of key performance indicators in the logistics industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 346-358.
• Lee, S. H., Lee, B. Y., & Kim, H. W. (2019). Decisional factors leading to the reuse of an on-demand ride service. Information & Management, 56(4), 493-506.
• Li, S., Tavafoghi, H., Poolla, K., & Varaiya, P. (2019). Regulating TNCs: Should Uber and Lyft set their own rules?. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 129, 193-225.
• Maltas, D. (2010). Introducing ICT. 5 to 7 Educator, 2010(71), 18-22.
• Martikainen, A., Niemi, P., & Pekkanen, P. (2014). Developing a service offering for a logistical service provider—Case of local food supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 157, 318-326
• Mitchell, A., & Strader, T. J. (2018). Introduction to the special issue on ‘‘Sharing economy and on-demand service business models”. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 16, 243-245.
• Mohamed, M. J., Rye, T., & Fonzone, A. (2019). Operational and policy implications of ridesourcing services: A case of Uber in London, UK. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 7(4), 823-836.
• Noulas, A., Salnikov, V., Hristova, D., Mascolo, C., & Lambiotte, R. (2018, October). Developing and deploying a taxi price comparison mobile app in the wild: Insights and challenges. In 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA) (pp. 424-433). IEEE.
• Ofei-Manu, P., Didham, R. J., Byun, W. J., Phillips, R., Gamaralalage, P. J. D., & Rees, S. (2018). How collaborative governance can facilitate quality learning for sustainability in cities: A comparative case study of Bristol, Kitakyushu and Tongyeong. International Review of Education, 64(3), 373-392.
• Pepić, L. (2018). The sharing economy: Uber and its effect on taxi companies. Acta Economica, 16(28), 123-136.
• Shaheen, S., & Cohen, A. (2018). Is it time for a public transit renaissance?: navigating travel behavior, technology, and business model shifts in a brave new world. Journal of Public Transportation, 21(1), 67-81.
• Smith, J. W. (2016). The Uber-all economy of the future. The Independent Review, 20(3), 383-390.
• Täuscher, K., & Laudien, S. M. (2018). Understanding platform business models: A mixed methods study of marketplaces. European Management Journal, 36(3), 319-329.
• Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long range planning, 43(2-3), 172-194.
• Uber (2020a). Available at: https://www.uber.com/ride/uberpool/
• Uber (2020b). Available at: https://www.uber.com
• Walji, J. M., & Walji, W. (2016). Uber, a Disruptive Business Model of a Taxi Service. International Journal of Systematic Innovation, 4(2), 23-29.
• Walter, K. D. (2019). AI-based sensor platforms for the IoT in smart cities. In Big Data Analytics for Cyber-Physical Systems (pp. 145-166). Elsevier.
• Watanabe, C., Naveed, K., Neittaanmäki, P., & Fox, B. (2017). Consolidated challenge to social demand for resilient platforms-Lessons from Uber's global expansion. Technology in society, 48, 33-53.
• Whitehill, J. M., Wilner, M., Rataj, S., & Moreno, M. A. (2019). College students’ use of transportation networking companies: An opportunity to decrease substance-impaired driving. Journal of American college health, 67(7), 611-614.
• World Population Review (2020). Available at: https://worldpopulationreview.com/continents/cities-in-europe/, accessed: 10.06.2020.
• Xu, F., McCluskey, C. C., & Cressman, R. (2013). Spatial spread of an epidemic through public transportation systems with a hub. Mathematical biosciences, 246(1), 164-175.