A View from the Consumers' Glasses on the Taxi – Uber Debate: A Study on the Factors Determining the Intention to Use and Recommend Uber Platform

Year 2020, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 425 - 444, 31.05.2020

Hakan Kiracı , Ruşen Akdemir

https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.689951

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Along with AirBnb, Uber platform that one of the flagships of sharing economy which its effect is growing day by day in recent years, is in many scientific researches with the aim of analysis of sharing economy and media tools with regard to actions / business models. Uber that operates in a limited area of activity in Turkey, is sometimes exposed to reactions of taxi drivers or chambers of taxi due to led to unfair competition. Leaving aside the discussion of “who is right? Taxi drivers or Uber, we examined the opinions of users / potential users of Uber platform. In brief, this study determines the individuals’ behavior (using) intention about Uber and effects of trust, existing sharing behaviors, social effect and expected benefits on Uber using intention. From this point, data is collected with Internet-based survey and it is defined the consumer–oriented view of Uber platform. Findings and results of the study that investigate sharing economy from window of a digital platform is expected to set light to reviews of sharing economy in Turkey. In summary, as a result of the regression analysis, it was determined that the perceived trust, substitution benefit and social impact variables had an effect on the intention to use Uber.

Keywords

Sharing economy, Turkey, Uber, sharing intention

Taksiciler – Uber Tartışmasına Tüketici Gözlüğünden Bir Bakış: Uber Platformunu Kullanma ve Tavsiye Etme Niyetini Belirleyen Etkenler Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Abstract

Son yıllarda etkisi günden güne çoğalarak hissedilen paylaşım ekonomisinin amiral gemilerinden biri olarak nitelendirilen Uber platformu, AirBnb ile birlikte paylaşım ekonomisinin çözümlenmesi amacıyla pek çok bilimsel araştırmaya konu olmakta ve aynı zamanda iş modeli / faaliyetlerine ilişkin medya araçlarında haber olarak yer almaktadır. Ülkemizde kısıtlı bir alanda faaliyetlerini sürdüren Uber, haksız rekabete yol açtığı düşüncesiyle özellikle taksici esnafın zaman zaman tepkilerine maruz kalabilmektedir. Taksici mi Uber mi kim haklı? tartışmalarından sıyrılarak, ülkemizde de yasal niteliği tartışmalı olan bu paylaşım sisteminin kullanıcıları / potansiyel kullanıcıların yaklaşımlarını ortaya koymak bu araştırmanın amacını oluşturmaktadır. Bu noktadan hareketle internet ortamında yapılan anket çalışmasıyla; sosyal etki, güven, varolan paylaşım davranışları ve beklenen yarar türlerinin Uber sistemini kullanma ve kullanımını tavsiye etme niyeti üzerindeki olası etkileri incelenmektedir. Ülkemizde son yıllarda tartışma konusu olan Uber girişiminin tüketici yönlü değerlendirmesinin yapıldığı bu araştırma sonucunda elde edilecek bulgu ve sonuçların, spesifik bir paylaşım sistemi penceresinden Türkiye’de paylaşım ekonomisinin değerlendirmesine ışık tutması beklenmektedir. Özetle; bu araştırmada yapılan regresyon analizi sonucunda algılanan güven, ikame yararı ve sosyal etki değişkenlerinin Uber kullanma niyeti üzerinde etkisi olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

Paylaşım ekonomisi, Türkiye, Uber, paylaşım niyeti, güven

References

• ALBINSSON, P.A. &Perera, B.Y. (2012). “Alternative Marketplaces in the 21st Century: Building Community Through Sharing Events”, Journal of Consumer Behavior, 11 (4): 303-315.
• BARDHI, F. &Eckhardt, G.M. (2012). “Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing”, Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (4): 881-898.
• BARNES, S.J., & MATTSSON, J. (2017). “Understanding Collaborative Consumption: Test of a Theoretical Model”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 118(1):281-292.
• BELK, R. (2007). “Why Not Share Rather Than Own?”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 611 (1): 126-140.
• BELK, R. (2010). “Sharing”, Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5): 715-734.
• BELK, R. (2014). “You Are What You Can Access: Sharing and Collaborative Consumption Online”, Journal of Business Research, 67(8): 1595-1600.
• BELK, R. (2014b). “Sharing Versus Pseudo-Sharing in Web 2.0”, Anthropologist, 18(1): 7-23.
• BHATTACHERJEE, A. & PREMKUMAR, G. (2004). Understanding Changes in Belief and Attitude Toward Information Technology Usage: A Theoretical Model and Longitudinal Test, MIS Quarterly, 28 (2): 229–254.
• BOROWIAK, C. (2019). Poverty In Transit: Uber, Taxi Coops, And The Struggle Over Philadelphia's Transportation Economy. Antipode. 51 (4): 1079-1100.
• BÖCKER, L., & MEELEN, T. (2016). “Sharing for People, Planet or Profit? Analysing Motivations For Intended Sharing Economy Participation”, Innovation Studies Utrecht – (ISU) Workin Paper Series – No.16.02.
• BUCHER, E., FIESELER, C. & LUTZ, C. (2016). “What's Mine is Yours (For a Nominal Fee) – Exploring the Spectrum of Utilitarian to Altruistic Motives for Internet-Mediated Sharing”, Computers in Human Behavior, 62(1):316-326.
• CANNON, S. & SUMMERS, L.H. (2014). “How Uber and the Sharing Economy Can Win Over Regulators”, Harvard Business Review, October 13th.
• CRAMER, J. & KRUEGER, A.B. (2016). "Disruptive Change in the Taxi Business: The Case of Uber." American Economic Review, 106 (5): 177-82.
• ÇABUK, S., SÜDAŞ, H.D. & ZEREN, D. (2015). “SahipOlmakYerinePaylaşmak: TüketicilerinPaylaşmaDavranışlarınınUnsurlarınıBelirlemeyeYönelikBirÇalışma”, ÇankırıKaratekinÜniversitesiSosyalBilimlerEnstitüsüDergisi, 6 (1): 151-168.
• DREYER, B., FREUND, F.L., HAMANN, R. & FACCER, K. (2017). “Upsides and Downsides of the Sharing Economy: Collaborative Consumption Business Models’ Stakeholder Value Impacts and Their Relationship to Context”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 125 (1): 87-104.
• ERTZ, M., DURIF, F. & ARCAND, M. (2016). “Collaborative Consumption: Conceptual Snapshot at a Buzzword”, Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 19 (2): 1-23.
• ERTZ, M., DURIF, F. & ARCAND, M. (2016). “Collaborative Consumption or the Rise of the Two-Sided Consumer”, The International Journal Of Business & Management, 4 (6): 195-209.
• ERTZ, M., DURIF, F. & ARCAND, M. (2017).“Dual Roles of Consumers: Towards an Insight into Collaborative Consumption Motives”, International Journal of Market Research, 59 (6).
• HELLWIG, K., MORHART, F., GIRARDIN, F. & HAUSER, M. (2015). “Exploring Different Types of Sharing: A Proposed Segmentation of the Market for Sharing Businesses”, Psychology & Marketing, 32 (9): 891-906.
• HSU, C.L. & LIN, J.C.C. (2008). Acceptance of Blog Usage: The Roles of Technology Acceptance, Social Influence and Knowledge Sharing Motivation, Information & Management, 45 (1):65–74.
• HWANG, J., & GRIFFITHS, M. A. (2017). “Share More, Drive Less: Millennials Value Perception and Behavioral Intent in Using Collaborative Consumption Services”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 34(2): 132-146.
• KIŞI, N. (2018). “Paylaşım Ekonomisinin Ulaşım Sektörüne Yansımaları: Uber Örneği”, Uluslararası Yönetim ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5 (10): 57-68.
• LAMBERTON, C.P. & ROSE, R.L. (2012). “When is Ours Better Than Mine? A Framework for Understanding and Altering Participation in Commercial Sharing Systems”, Journal Marketing, 76(7): 109-125.
• LI, M. (2020). Uber Future Value Prediction Using Discounted Cash Flow Model. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 10 (1): 30-44.
• MAXHAM, J.G. & NETEMEYER, R.G. (2002). Modeling Customer Perceptions of Complaint Handling Over Time: The Effects of Perceived Justice on Satisfaction and Intent”, Journal of Retailing, 78 (4): 239–252.
• MIRALLES, I., DENTONI, D. & PASCUCCI, S. (2017). “Understanding the Organization of Sharing Economy in Agri-Food Systems: Evidence from Alternative Food Networks in Valencia”, Agriculture and Human Values, 34 (4): 833–854.
• MONT, O. (2004). “Institutionalisation of Sustainable Consumption Patterns Based on Shared Use”, Ecological Economics, 50(1-2): 135-153.
• MÖHLMANN, M. (2015). “Collaborative Consumption: Determinants of Satisfaction and the Likelihood of Using a Sharing Economy Option Again”, Journal of Consumer Behavior, 14(3):193-207.
• OZANNE, L.K. & BALLANTINE, P.W. (2010). “Sharing as a Form of Anti-Consumption? An Examination of Toy Library Users”, Journal of Consumer Behavior, 9 (6): 485-498.
• PARK, H. & ARMSTRONG, M.J. (2017). “Collaborative Apparel Consumption in the Digital Sharing Economy: An Agenda for Academic Inquiry”, Journal of Consumer Studies, 41 (5): 1-10.
• PEDERSEN, E.R.G. & NETTER, S. (2015). “Collaborative Consumption: Business Model Opportunities and Barriers for Fashion Libraries”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 19 (3): 258-273.
• PISCICELLI, L., COOPER, T. & FISHER, T. (2015). “The Role of Values in Collaborative Consumption: Insights From a Product-Service System for Lending and Borrowing in the UK”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 97(1):21-29.
• PIZZOL, H.D., ALMEIDA, S.O. & SOARES, C. (2017). Collaborative Consumption: A Proposed Scale for Measuring the Construct Applied to A Carsharing Setting, Sustainability, 9(703):1-16.
• RASALAM, J., & ELSON, R. J. (2019). Cybersecurity And Management’s Ethical Responsibilities: The Case Of Equifax And Uber. Global Journal Of Business Pedagogy, 3 (3): 8-15.
• RAUCH, D.E. & SCHLEICHER, D. (2015). “Like Uber, but for Local Government Law: The Future of Local Regulation of the Sharing Economy”, Ohio State Law Journal, 76 (4): 901-963.
• ROGERS, B. (2017). “The Social Costs of Uber”, University of Chicago Law Review Online, 82 (1): 85-102.
• ROOS, D. & HAHN, R. (2017). “Does Shared Consumption Affect Consumers’ Values, Attitudes, and Norms? A Panel Study”, Journal of Business Research, 77(1): 113-123.
• SCHIFFMAN, LG. &KANUK, L.L. (1991).Consumer, 4th edition, Prentice-Hall International.
• TUSSYADIAH, I. (2015). “An Exploratory on Drivers and Deterrents of Collaborative Consumption in Travel”, pp.817-839, in Tussyadiah, I &Inversini, A. (Eds.), Information & Communication Technologies in Tourism 2015, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
• TZUR, A. (2019). Uber Über Regulation? Regulatory Change Following The Emergence Of New Technologies in The Taxi Market. Regulation & Governance, 13 (3): 340-361.
• WALLSTEN, S. (2015). “The Competitive Effects of the Sharing Economy: How is Uber Changing Taxis?”, Technology Policy Institute, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_comments/2015/06/01912-96334.pdf
• VENKATESH, V. & DAVIS, F.D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of The Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies, Management Science, 46 (2):186–204.