The
digital consumer platforms are laying the foundations for a leveling ground for
trade and transactions where both haves and have nots benefit from services in
all walks of life as never before. In this decade, significant changes are
happening in the way services are envisioned and delivered in every part of the
world. The consumer platform businesses and the sharing ecosystems have
initiated this trend. The fluctuating financial conditions and uncertain
employment affecting the mindset of the middle-income group consumers of the
developed countries are catalysts to this trend. There is a significant
difference in their affordability for owning one-time use goods. Corporations
and businesses have not been able to keep their promises of steady employment
due to complexities that arise with changing global trade and national taxation
policies. As a result, they have become larger consumers and suppliers of short
and long term services.
Sharing assets is not new for people or businesses; the
underlying motivation could be as varied as purely economic or purely
humanitarian. What has made this prevalent, is the convenience of
availability of services, and people being able to locate the services through
the mobile web platforms that are just a touch away – the app on their tablet
or smartphone. Considering the history of web platforms, eBay probably comes
first for connecting consumers and producers. So, what is new about sharing or
peer production? The web as the hub (digital platforms) coupled with smartphone
apps (call them cloud services) has become a trend and is no longer limited or
contained for the wide variety of daily needs of consumers of all walks of
life. The young are attracted to convenience; the regulators recognize the outdated
laws and regulations, those in the middle are observing services expand from the
trading spare time (Time Banks such as Greater Boston Time Trade Circle (TTC))
to accommodations away from home such as Airbnb.
Consumer platform businesses are mostly web platforms,
serving communities in different walks of life. Outwardly, all the services are
catering to the needs of the consumers and appear to be similar. There are
subtle differences though. Consider the often heard Airbnb and Uber platforms. Home
owners and travelers (Airbnb) have come together
starting a new trend of finding avenues to stay away from home. Drivers or
vehicle owners, and riders (Uber) have come together
starting a new trend of finding quick rides at any time in the busy streets of cities
everywhere, finding convenient and affordable transportation. The service ecosystems
of the sharing economy distinguish
themselves from the rest of the services with their unique characteristics.
These services are from individuals or businesses who utilize their not
frequently used assets or services for a fee or provide for free.
Therefore,
an Uber driver, driving his car for a living, is not a participant in the
sharing economy if viewed as someone co-partnering with riders on the Uber platform.
His car is not just parked for days, becoming an asset which can be rented otherwise
to make some money. An Uber driver uses his car to drive and make a living in
this context. But a vehicle owner who may be using his vehicle as part of Turo (formerly RelayRides) is clearly participating
in the sharing economy. The car would be just parked in an airport or on the
road side, if not part of the Turo system. One can argue if a shared Uber (one
car with several independent riders) is a participant in the sharing economy or
not. In this context, every seat in the Uber driver’s car is an asset and is
under-utilized if there are not enough riders. Services around sharing
ecosystems can be analyzed further to differentiate. What about Uber drivers who earn their basic
living in some other jobs? While the definitions of the economies of sharing
and collaboration are still being debated and understood, the sharing
ecosystems are making their way into the mainstream of all sections of
societies. New business models are evolving as the communities of the sharing economy are sharing under-utilized assets
and are challenging the established and traditional businesses and regulations
that govern them.
The motivation behind these services is
economic, social, technological, as well as environmental. Compared to
hiring a regular maid service, calling a one- time helper is more economical
and easier. The “help user” and “help taker” can be co-partners in the system
(for example, TaskRabbit).
They can still enjoy the luxury of hiring services with just some trust on the
people that are contributing to these services. Compared to leaving the car in
a parking garage at an airport, Turo (formerly RelayRides)
helps to rent those cars to be of service minimizing the economic burden on the
traveler – the one traveling in/out.
Some
of the services add new capabilities to existing businesses. The old and new
are teaming up to deliver niche services for the convenience of the
customer. For example, Walgreens’ flu medicines are delivered home by
TaskRabbit during the flu season, a home service that is reliable for the needy
who is sick at home. TaskRabbit is a participant in the sharing economy where
people with skills or time, help out each other in errands that are hard to get
on a temporary basis. Anyone with some spare change can enjoy services that
they can’t afford on a permanent basis. Walgreens is an established business.
Taking advantage of a sharing economy participant – TaskRabbit (the worker
him/herself is the asset making himself available), Walgreens added the service
of delivery of the flu medicine.
The consumer platform businesses are not limited to physical goods business services.
They include social services, banking and retail services, time banks, asset
sharing and rentals. Services are becoming more granular with expanding
boundaries for those who are interacting in the platform ecosystem. The reach
of an asset is permeating via different channels - using the web as the
platform for service delivery directly to the consumer who makes a personal
decision to participate in the ecosystem. The solution is a real-time pull,
personalized solution using a mobile app. The interactions on these apps are real-time, personalized, and have
a built-in feedback system.
Dubois, E., Schor, J., & Carfagna, L. (2014)
elaborate on the time banking concept in their article highlighting the members’
opinions on the motivation behind their social services. They clarify that the
gaps they are filling and the services they render are not possible by the
current global or capitalistic ways of running businesses and marketplaces.
There is a local need for collaborative sharing, and they are doing that
voluntarily. Time is the currency with equal value to all skills where the
assets are social relationships in time banking.
The mobile app services tap into the power of
mobility, user-centeredness, personalization, context awareness, sensing,
embedding technologies such as search engines, GPS, RFID, NFC chips, device
interaction, and many possible unique mobile web platform capabilities in
addition to integrating with the traditional media. Mobile Apps don’t require software license; they
connect people and business processes to wherever you are. It does not matter
where the worker is; the technology comes in handy to manage the workflow
connecting with colleagues, customers, and suppliers.
In the case of business services, the business processes are
undergoing closer scrutiny to attain efficient access to service delivery, promote
assets (tangible and intangible), and filling the gaps from both outsiders
and insiders of the industry. Adjustments and re-thinking for conducting
business are required to value the trends. Businesses will benefit paying
attention to the “weak signals” of the acts of collaboration taking different
shapes and sizes by the societies of the world. GOVINDARAJAN, V. (2016) calls
the idea of paying attention to the weak signals as “Planned Opportunism.” He
explains “The idea starts with recognizing that the future is unpredictable,
shaped by nonlinear changes and chance events—the “opportunism” part. How you
as a leader respond to is the “planned” part. Planned opportunism requires
sensitivity to weak signals.” A much
broader view of the potential of the web for services needs to be taken to come
up with models and standards to enable their larger role in the world societies
and businesses.
For designing business services,
delving deeper into the context of existing customers as well as listening to
stories of new, potential customers of various cultures, and backgrounds from
global settings is the first step. Empathy is about paying attention to the
story with intense listening to the other. Demonstrating empathy comes by practicing to
understand deeper beliefs about problems and solutions. Gathering information by interviewing the client
places the problem solver/ analyst in the pre-planned questioning mode.
Whereas, listening to the story told in open dialogue without judgment brings
the underlying intentions and needs to the surface. The analyst can make sense
of the problem by synthesizing the information collected and defining the
problem. Next step would be to generate several ideas for potential solutions.
Prototyping allows to quickly explore which ideas are worth pursuing to
generate further conversations and to test possibilities with feedback.
For example, services in any housing community can include
pet care services, tools for home repairs, listings to reach out for
maintenance activities at a minimum. While an in-house service and maintenance
unit in the housing complex can be expensive, sharing the assets (home
improvement tools), services among the members of the community can’t be
difficult. The services thrive when consumers don’t count everything as
numbers. Deeper insights help build services to meet the needs of service
seekers. Inquiring into the pet service seeker’s needs can unfold a different
story altogether. It is possible the family may be in need of a one-time
vacation gear as well. The rentals for vacation can then be offered at low
prices to lure the service seeker into sharing a related item for the next
seeker.
The scope of sharing and services around sharing is enormous.
It is not just for those who are economically deprived. Anyone benefits from
sharing. The millennial consumers of designer
fashions prefer to rent clothing, more so than their previous generations. Chic
by choice, Rent the Runway business models cater to the needs of the consumers
who seek expensive, designer brand clothing for onetime events, with a willingness to rent rather than own to
keep up with the fast pace of fashion trends.
Student communities and college administration can come
together to provide more avenues for making the student life in dorms even more
friendly with attention to detail. While reputed schools like Harvard are known
for their generous approach catering to the needs of students, it is not all
that difficult for every school to step up. For example, any student juggling
with time management, desires shared Uber and TaskRabbit services either free or
with a minimal fee. Student fairs to share the rarely used assets of senior students
with juniors is another area to explore.
Linking services with the student registration process instead of just
leaving it to the student to handle it all would bring a welcome change to the
not so friendly campuses.
Owning assets does not make sense for many who would prefer
to participate in the sharing ecosystems and benefit by them. The savvy web
generation is beginning to enjoy the benefits of sharing. The web is enabling
their freedom of choice with a fraction of the expenditure without missing the
privileges of sought after assets and services.
References
Amit Sheth, Kunal Verma, and
Karthik Gomadam. 2006. Semantics to energize the full services spectrum. Commun. ACM 49,
7 (July 2006), 55-61. DOI=10.1145/1139922.1139949 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1139922.1139949
Andrikopoulos, V., Binz, T., Leymann, F., & Strauch,
S. (2013). How to adapt applications for the Cloud environment. Computing, 95(6),
493-535. doi:10.1007/s00607-012-0248-2
Banking in the Backwaters. (2010). Business Today, 19(11),
48-50.
Botsman, R. (2014). Sharing's Not Just for Start-Ups. Harvard
Business Review, 92(9), 23-25.
Cook, S. (2008). THE CONTRIBUTION REVOLUTION. (cover
story). Harvard Business Review, 86(10), 60-69.
Cusumano, M. A. (2015). How Traditional Firms Must Compete
in the Sharing Economy. Communications Of The ACM, 58(1),
32-34. doi:10.1145/2688487
Delaney, Laurel J.( ©
2013). Exporting: the definitive guide to selling abroad profitably
Dubois, E., Schor, J., & Carfagna, L. (2014). CONNECTED
CONSUMPTION: A SHARING ECONOMY TAKES HOLD. Rotman Management,
50-55.
Geron, T. (2013). The Share Economy. (cover story). Forbes, 191(2),
58.
Gobble, M. M. (2015). Regulating Innovation in the New
Economy. Research Technology Management, 58(2), 62-64.
doi:10.5437/08956308X5802005
GOVINDARAJAN, V. (2016). Planned Opportunism. Harvard Business Review, 94(5), 54-61
HENWOOD, D. (2015). WHAT THE
"SHARING ECONOMY" TAKES. (Cover story). Nation, 300(7), 12-15.
Lehrer, E., & Moylan, A. (2014). Embracing the
Peer-Production Economy. National Affairs, 2151-63.
Malhotra, A., & Van Alstyne, M. (2014). The Dark
Side of the Sharing Economy and How to Lighten It. Communications Of
The ACM, 57(11), 24-27.
MANEY, K. (2014). YOU JUST GOT UBER-ED!. Newsweek
Global, 163(19), 52-53.
Nafaâ Jabeur, Sherali
Zeadally, and Biju Sayed. 2013. Mobile social networking applications. Commun. ACM 56,
3 (March 2013), 71-79. DOI=10.1145/2428556.2428573 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2428556.2428573
Roland T. Rust and Carol Miu.
2006. What academic research tells us about service. Commun. ACM 49,
7 (July 2006), 49-54. DOI=10.1145/1139922.1139948 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1139922.1139948
Villano, M. (2014). The sharing economy 2.0. (cover
story). Entrepreneur, 42(12), 56-58.
Zingale, N. C. (2013). The phenomenology of sharing: social
media networking, asserting, and telling. Journal Of Public Affairs
(14723891), 13(3), 288-297. doi:10.1002/pa.1468
