2016 IEEE First International Conference on Data Science in Cyberspace
An Empirical Business Study on Service Providers’ Satisfaction in Sharing Economy
Mengyu Zhang
School of Information Technology and Management
University of International Business and Economics
Beijing, China
zhangmengyu1111@sina.com
Xuan Luo
School of Information Technology and Management
University of International Business and Economics
Beijing, China
silence9476@163.com
Abstract—The brand industry sharing economy is a hot
topic in academic sector. However, service providers who share
their cars, houses with others remain unnoticed. This paper
aims to investigate the service providers’ perceived satisfaction
and its influencing factors in sharing economy. Research
samples were online mobile ride hail drivers in a China’s
cab-hailing app company. Drawn from previous literature and
unstructured interactive interviews, five factors that are “trust
on personal information’s security”, “profitability”, “app’s
ease of use”, “app’s efficiency” and “social interaction” were
extracted. 1786 valid questionnaires were collected to measure
the five factors and overall satisfaction. Descriptive analysis
and correlation analysis were conducted. Results show that the
correlations between overall satisfaction and the other five
factors are significant. App’s efficiency and social interaction
have the moderately high correlation with overall satisfaction.
Also, drivers have extremely high trust on personal
information submitted and a moderately high level of
perceived app’s ease of use, app’s efficiency and overall
satisfaction.
Keywords—sharing economy; online mobile ride hail; service
provider; satisfaction
I. INTRODUCTION
In the context of the big data, sharing economy has
developed rapidly with the help of the big data’s precise
analysis. Sharing economy can also be called “collaborative
economy”, “collaborative consumption”, “profit-sharing
economy”. Sharing economy was first raised by Felson and
Spaeth in 1978[45]. At that time, sharing economy was
called “collaborative consumption”, but this economic model
wasn’t forming. The typical examples of sharing economy
are Airbnb and Uber. Academic studies of sharing economy
focus on several aspects. The first aspect is trust [2][3][6][9].
Airbnb and big data technology are mostly used to
investigate the predictor variables, mediator variables,
outcome variables of trust in sharing economy. The second
aspect is governments’ regulations and legislation
[18][20][29]. On one hand, the sharing economy can bring
revolution in a series of industries especially in tertiary
978-1-5090-1192-6/16 $31.00 © 2016 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/DSC.2016.115
Xusen Cheng
School of Information Technology and Management
University of International Business and Economics
Beijing, China
xusen.cheng@uibe.edu.cn
Shixuan Fu
School of Information Technology and Management
University of International Business and Economics
Beijing, China
fsx8888@163.com
industry, which can improve resource’s utilization efficiency.
Therefore governments encourage innovations [28]. On the
other hand, as a brand field, there are many loopholes and
illegal acts in sharing economy. The third aspect is the
advantage, disadvantage, drivers, and deterrents of sharing
economy. In spite of the dark side, most results in academic
debates turned to be positive for the sharing economy.
However, except for trust, other psychological aspects of
participator in sharing economy are rarely involved,
especially overall satisfaction. There are few papers studying
participators’ satisfaction in sharing economy [47], and most
of them focused on the service acceptors’ satisfaction, not
the service providers’ satisfaction. Also, research objects of
sharing economy are usually Airbnb and Uber which are
based on American society and culture. Cross-cultural and
cross-sectional research are needed.
Therefore, to fill this gap, this paper innovatively
analyzes service providers’ satisfaction in sharing economy
within China. Samples of the research are Chinese
cab-hailing drivers who share their cars with others. The
research questions are as follows.
RQ 1: What factors can have an influence on the service
provider’s overall satisfaction?
RQ 2: What is the relationship between these factors and
service providers’ overall satisfaction?
RQ 3: What is the situation of overall satisfaction and
these factors?
The results will contribute to the theoretical and practical
implications. The theory of satisfaction will enrich to a
broader field. The studies on sharing economy will be more
detailed and cover more aspects. Also the findings will
enable online mobile cab company to improve service
providers’ satisfaction.
In the following, a literature review of sharing economy
and satisfaction is presented. Then the research method
which includes case background, data collection, data
analysis and results is conducted. Data analysis includes
reliability and validity test of the questionnaires, descriptive
analysis and corrective analysis. In the end, discussion and
conclusion are stated.
513
514
 II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Sharing Economy
As "Sharing economy” is increasingly concerned, a large
volume of studies are published. Here are some major
research results and conclusions.
Firstly, for an enterprise of sharing economy, the most
basic thing is the brand identity construction and branding
considerations to extend their core brand equity and
capitalize on the sharing economy [1][8].
Secondly, trust is an issue of most concern in the sharing
economic development [33].Academic studies of trust focus
on several aspects. Different trust increasing elements are
found between host and friends in the travel by conducting
an online survey and interviews.[3] In addition, the
community’s social network acts as an informal method of
social control to help foster and sustain trust amongst its
members. What’ more, the relationship between owner
feedback and trust is that when the subject of complaint is
controllable by a host, such strategies as confession apology
and denial can improve trusting beliefs towards the host [2].
Finally, it refers to review of consumer to business impact [6]
and the relationship between trust and corporate reputation
[9].
Thirdly, innovation is essential any time which is the
code for a pattern to maintain the vitality [28], but whether
the law will affect the development of innovative yet or not.
Some studies believe that sharing economy should be bound
by the legal aspects and take into account the specificities of
innovative sharing economy practices constituting an
effective tool according to the law[18][20][29].
In addition, In the context of large-scale development of
science and technology, how to apply information systems
and digital technology to sharing economic development is a
key factor to succeed [9][21], and construction of electronic
social platforms contribute to the development of society and
economy [12].
Furthermore, with the sharing economic development in
the global [14]ˈthe researchers concluded some of the
features and drivers [16][13][14] and they put forward some
problems arising in the course of development [18].
Complementary, there are also other studies. Repurchase
is an inspiration standard to test service quality and the
impact factor whether is worth to be researched [3]. And
from the perspective of service providers, a good relationship
with the government is important [27]. Facing the future
development requires a long-term perspective [22]. Well,
localization studies in China have made some progress [7].
However, many of these articles relate to Airbnb research,
as an example of most popular sharing economy. And this
kind of article just focuses on the meaning of sharing
economy and ignores service providers’ satisfaction with
“Sharing Economy”.
B. Satisfaction in Brief
Satisfaction is a psychological statement with fulfillment
of a need or desire and the pleasure obtained by such
fulfillment. Satisfaction has been explored in broad domains
such as psychology, health care science service, business
515
514
economics, and computer science and so on. Computer user
satisfaction [37][40], customer satisfaction[38][39] and job
satisfaction[2][36] are of special concern. Because
satisfaction is an extremely baronial concept, only job
satisfaction in business economics is going to be reviewed
briefly in this paper. Cross-culture studies have been
conducted which include American [36], Canada [39], Japan
[2], China [22][24] and so on. The sites to do research are
drawing course [37], private companies [36][39], hospitals
and so on.
In the field of job satisfaction, the relationship between
satisfaction and many other factors have been investigated.
Most of these factors can be divided into four categories:
demographic characteristics, personal psychological
characteristics, organizational psychological characteristics,
time period. In demographic characteristics [2][36], Gender,
age, education, marital status, annual income, regular
employment or non-regular employment, acculturation,
length of residency are mostly considered. In personal
psychological characteristics [36], trust [25][22][24], Life
satisfaction, Self-esteem, psychological capital,
self-efficiency, personality are mostly referred to. In
organizational psychological characteristics [2][36],
perceived stress, perceived organizational support, and social
interaction are mostly involved. In demographic
characteristics, gender (female==1) has a positive effect on
overall job satisfaction both regular and non-regular. Regular
employment has negative effect on woman’s job satisfaction
while non regular woman employees have higher perceived
job satisfaction [2]. Also the relation between age and job
satisfaction is proved U-shaped [2]. In psychological
characteristics, self-esteem and self-efficiency are positively
correlated with job satisfaction [36]. In organizational
characteristics, perceived stress and perceived organizational
support are significantly correlated with job satisfaction [36].
However, the relationship between time period such as
economic shocks and satisfaction fewer which future studies
are needed.
III. RESEARCH METHOD
A. Case Background
With the rapid and steady development, online mobile
ride hail has been grown more and more popular. Many
drivers register to become service providers in cab-hailing
apps which are a typical example of “Sharing Economy”. In
China, the cab-hailing apps improvement the process of “car
sharing” and convenient people’s life. Some factors that may
affect car providers’ satisfaction are identified from the
literature review. Also in order to investigate this new field
more practically, a series of unstructured interactive
interviews [42] were conducted to find the factors which
influence drivers’ evaluation of satisfaction. In the interviews,
35 mobile ride hail drivers with 21 males and 14 females are
selected and the exploratory case study approach [43] is used.
Draw from the literature review and the unconstructed
interviews, five factors are extracted to design a scientific
questionnaire to investigate the service providers’
satisfaction in “Sharing Economy”. These five factors are
trust on the security of submitted personal information, Questionnaire’s reliability and validity are tested to
profitability, ease of use on cab-hailing apps, app’s measure factors more accurately and comprehensively.
efficiency and social interaction. In the questionnaire, the Cronbach’s alpha referring the reliability coefficient is 0.826
five-point scale (Likert scale) [44] was used with anchors which means the questionnaires has an excellent reliability.
rating as 1(strongly disagree), 2(disagree), 3(neither agree Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin of Sampling Adequacy is 0.865 and Sig.
nor disagree), 4(agree), and 5(strongly agree) to measure is 0.000 which means exploratory factor analysis is feasible.
those factors. Questions and the corresponding factors are In exploratory factor analysis, the eigenvalue is greater than
listed in TABLE I. 1 and varimax rotation is used. Considering interviewees’
patience, there are only six questions in the questionnaire to
TABLE I. FACTORS AND QUESTIONS IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE measure six different factors. Therefor one common factor is
Qu. No. Factors Questions extracted and cumulative contribution is 49.370%. Every
Trust on personal I think it is reasonable to factor’s load value is greater than 0.5
1 information’s submit personal information 2) Descriptive analysis
security to become a driver. We use SPSS to do a descriptive analysis to understand
I do not care about how much cab-hailing’s drivers’ current status and perceived attitude.
2 Profitability money I can earn by being a
service provider.
TABLE II. shows the number, mean, standard deviation,
The basic function of the app skewness, kurtosis and standard error. It can be seen from
3 App’s ease of use TABLE II. that most means were rated above 3 on a 5-point
is easy to master.
With the app’s help, Ican scale and the standard errors are around 0.03 which are
4 App’sefficiency
receive the order efficiently. sufficiently small to prove that the measurement results’
To be a service provider can precision is excellent. Most factors have a negative skewness
5 Social interaction expand my interpersonal
connections.
which means they have a negative offset. Clearly Kurtosis
As a whole, Iam satisfied with has a large difference among the six factors. The kurtosis of
6 Overallsatisfaction the process of sharing my car trust on personal information’s security is 4.057 which is
with others. extremely high. The Kurtosis of profitability is the lowest
ranking -1.258.
B. Data Collection In order to analyze more clearly, these factors are divided
The research is conducted with a mix-method approach, into four groups based on the mean. First, for the factor of
which combines qualitative and quantitative methods. trust on personal information’s security, whose the mean is
Unstructured interactive interview is used to do qualitative 4.408 which is highest. Its Skewness is -1.682 which is the
research and questionnaire is used to do quantitative research. lowest. This means the asymmetry of the probability
In the qualitative research, 35 mobile ride hail drivers were distribution is largest and the tail on the left side is longer or
interviewed with 21 males and 14 females. The results fatter than the right side. Its Kurtosis is 4.057 which is the
indicate that trust on the security of submitted personal highest. This means more of the variance is the result of
information, profitability, apps’ ease of use, app’s efficiency, infrequent extreme deviations. Second, for app’s ease of use,
and social interaction are the main elements which affect app’s efficiency and social interaction whose mean is
drivers’ perceived overall satisfaction. In the quantitative moderately high which is little higher than 4.000. The
research, 1824 questionnaires were received and 1786 standard deviation of the three factors is moderately low.
questionnaires are valid. Questionnaires are issued by Third, for overall satisfaction, is high which is a little lower
China’s largest online mobile ride hail company which can than 4.000. Fourthly, for profitability whose mean is the
be regarded as “American Uber” in China. The data retrieved lowest which is 2.938.
from the questionnaires were analyzed with “IBM SPSS Therefore service providers may not worry personal
statistics 23” for reliability test, validity test, descriptive information’s security submitted to the cab-hailing apps. In
analysis, and correlation analysis. addition, there is little difference in mean value between
profitability, app’s ease of use, app’s efficiency as well as
C. Data Analysis and Results
overall satisfaction and drivers have a relatively positive
1) Reliability and validity test of the questionnaires attitude on the four factors. Besides, drivers don’t enjoy the
expanded social interaction brought by sharing economy.

TABLE II. DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS RESULTS

N Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error
Trust on personal
1786 4.408 .0182 .7682 -1.682 .058 4.057 .116
information’s security
Profitability 1786 2.938 .0328 1.3870 .048 .058 -1.258 .116
App’s ease of use 1786 4.226 .0211 .8907 -1.310 .058 1.821 .116
App’s efficiency 1786 4.140 .0234 .9876 -1.202 .058 1.194 .116
Social interaction 1786 3.580 .0280 1.1828 -.370 .058 -.786 .116
Overall satisfaction 1786 3.906 .0246 1.0386 -.864 .058 .366 .116

516
515
3) Correlation analysis
We use SPSS to calculate the correlation between overall
satisfaction and trust on personal information’s security,
profitability, app’s ease of use, app’s efficiency and social
interaction, which is shown in TABLE III. Clearly all the
correlations are positive and related significantly at 0.01
level. In particular, the relationships between overall
satisfaction and app’s efficiency and social interaction are
moderate correlation.
TABLE III. PEARSON CORRELATION
Trust on App’s
Profita
info’s ease of
security
bility
use
Satisfaction 0.446** 0.386** 0.353**
**
. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
IV. DISCUSSION
A. Key Findings
Sharing economy is an emerging market around the
world. It’s also one attractive field that many authors interest
in. However, rare academic papers referred to the service
providers’ perceived satisfaction. Satisfaction has been a hot
topic that was investigated in many fields, e.g., psychology,
business, management. However, service provider’s
satisfaction in sharing economy is a band field which can
enrich satisfaction’s academic study. Therefore the purpose
of the paper is to 1) investigate the level of cab-hailing
drivers’ satisfaction in China, 2) explore the potential factors
which can affect service providers’ perceived satisfaction, 3)
find the correlation level between service providers’
satisfaction and the potential factors, 4) investigate the level
of potential factors in China, 5) give some practical
suggestions for Chinese online mobile ride hail industry to
improve car sharing drivers’ overall satisfaction.
Trust on personal
information’s
security(4.408)
0.446**
0.353**
Profitability Overall
0.386**
(2.938) satisfaction
0.592**
0.544**
Social Interaction
(3.580)
Fig. 1. Integrated overall results.
Based on the literature on sharing economy and
satisfaction, it’s hypothesized that many factors may
influence service providers’ satisfaction, such as trust,
profitability and so on. In order to verify the hypothesis,
some qualitative and quantitative researches were conducted
with the help of China’s largest cab-hailing company.
Unstructured interactive interviews were conducted in
qualitative research to ensure the factors. Results indicate
that trust on personal information’s security, profitability,
app’s ease of use, app’s efficiency and social interaction
have stronger influence on service provider’s satisfaction.
Questionnaires were granted in quantitative researches to
find the correlation between satisfaction and the five factors
empirically and to explore the level of these factors in
Chinese online mobile ride hail company. Results are
integrated in Fig. 1.
The Fig. 1 shows the overall analysis results. The figures
in the rectangles refer to factors’ mean value. The figures in
the arrows refer to the correlation coefficient between the
two ends of the arrows. The greater values are shown in red
font and the lowest value is shown in green font. From the
figure, we may have the following finds which can answer
App’s Social the research questions proposed in the introduction:
efficien interact
cy ion 1) To answer RQ 1: What factors can have an influence
0.592** 0.544**
on the service provider’s overall satisfaction, we have the
following findings.
a)Finding 1: Five factors that are trust on personal
information’s security, profitability, app’s ease of use, app’s
efficiency and social interaction are shown to have an
influence on the service provider’s overall satisfaction.
2)To answer RQ 2: What is the relationship between
these factors and service providers’ overall satisfaction, we
have the following findings.
a)Finding 1: The correlations between the providers’
overall satisfaction and the five factors are significant at the
0.01 level.
b)Finding 2: Social interaction and app’s efficiency are
significantly correlated with service providers’ overall
satisfaction in sharing economy.
c)Finding 3:Trust on personal information’s efficiency
and profitability are moderately correlated with service
providers’ satisfaction in sharing economy.
d)Finding 4: app’s ease of use has low correlation with
service providers’ satisfaction in sharing economy.
3)To answer RQ 3: What is the situation of satisfaction
and these factors, we have the following findings.
App’s ease of use
(4.226) a)Finding 1: In sharing economy, service providers
have moderately high level of satisfaction and trust on
personal information’s security in China.
App’s efficiency b)Finding 2: In sharing economy, car sharing drivers’
(4.140) care on profitability is moderate.
In conclusion, the more efficient the cab-hailing app is
which means drivers can receive more orders with the help
of cab-hailing app, the more satisfied drivers will perceive.
The more social connections the sharing activity brings, the
more satisfied drivers will perceive. The trust on personal
information’s security, profitability has moderate correlation
with overall satisfaction. In particular, app’s ease of use has
little influence on drivers’ overall satisfaction. In description
analysis, drivers have extremely high trust on personal
information’s submitted to the cab-hailing apps in order to
receive orders. They think the app basic functions are easy to
master. By using online cab-hailing app, it’s easier for
drivers to receive orders. However, drivers feel that social
interactions don’t expand much by sharing their cars.
517
516
 In conclusion, to improve drivers’ perceived satisfaction,
social interaction should be taken much attention to. For
example, we can build share community to gather drivers
and their passengers. We can take the occupation into
consideration when distributing orders.
B. Implications for Theory
This paper contributes to the theory in many ways. First,
this satisfaction in this field is vacant. This preliminary study
opens the study on satisfaction in sharing economy. This
paper investigates the service providers’ satisfaction in a
brand field, sharing economy. The person who have
experienced satisfaction is also fresh. Service providers’
satisfaction in sharing economy is different from any other
existing type of satisfaction such as life satisfaction [36],
consumer satisfaction [40], job satisfaction [39] and
computer user satisfaction. Therefore, the results of the
paper may give some directions or inspirations for future
research. Second, most studies [22][28] in sharing economy
use qualitative analysis while this paper combines
qualitative method and quantitative method. Third, previous
studies [47]found that cost-saving, familiarity, trust and
utility have a positive effect on service acceptors’
satisfaction. This paper validates the trust’s influence on
satisfaction. Also, service providers’ profitability and service
acceptors’ cost-saving may be an interesting comparison
which requires further study.
The findings help us to better understand the satisfaction
and sharing economy. By introducing and validation the
influence factors [2][36][37][39] of service drivers’
satisfaction, this paper suggest for the further studies on the
theoretical frame work of service providers’ satisfaction and
other psychological aspect of service provider in sharing
economy.
C. Implications for Practice
The results of the research also provide some useful
implications or suggestions for the online mobile hail
company to improvement the drivers’ overall satisfaction to
promote its business. It is concluded that drivers’ overall
satisfaction is correlated with social interaction and app’s
efficiency significantly. However, the mean value of social
network and app’s efficiency is not high enough. Therefore
the company should improve both factors. Suggestions are
as follows. First, build community to promote
communication between passengers and drivers. Second,
develop a recommended system to enable drivers to
encounter the same passengers more times. Third, utilize the
technology of big data and cloud computing to match
passengers and drivers more efficiently.
D. Limitations and Future Research
Although the validity and reliability of the questionnaire
are good, the sample size is big enough and the findings are
useful and encouraging, we must recognize that there are
some limitations in the current study. First, there may be
other factors influencing service providers’ satisfaction.
Further study is required to explore other factors. Second,
there isn’t theoretical framework to present a distinct
518
517
understanding of satisfaction. Future study is required to
raise a framework on service providers’ satisfaction
creatively. Third, this study is limited in China and in the
field of car-sharing. Therefore, cross-cultural and
cross-sectional study will be needed in the future. Fourth, the
correlation analysis is simple. More scientific studies are
needed to determine which factors is antecedent variables,
which is mediator variables, which are moderator variables
and which is outcome variables.
V. CONCLUSION
Nowadays, sharing economy has been growing fast
which is a brand form of business. It’s important for
researchers and sharing economy company owners to
understand customers’ satisfaction, especially for service
providers’ who is the essential part of the sharing process.
Drawing on the previous literature and the unstructured
interactive interview, five factors(e.g., trust on personal
information’s security , profitability, app’s ease of use, app’s
efficiency and social interaction) are extracted which may
have an influence on driver’s satisfaction. Questionnaires
were issued to examine the relationship between satisfaction
and these factors. The results indicate that social interaction
and app’s efficiency are significantly correlated with service
providers’ overall satisfaction in sharing economy, while
app’s ease of use has low correlation with service providers’
satisfaction in sharing economy. The paper also finds that, in
sharing economy, service providers have a moderately high
level of satisfaction and trust on personal information’s
security in China. Generally, this paper has proposed a new
domain to explore satisfaction and sharing economy.
Cross-culturally and cross-sectional studies are needed to
validate and enrich the field in the future.
REFERENCES
[1] N. Yannopoulou,M. Moufahim, and X. Bian, “User-Generated
Brands and Social Media: Couchsurfing and AirBnb,” Contemporary
Management Research, Vol. 9, pp. 85-90, March 2013.
[2] O. Abramova, T. Shavanova, A. Fuhrer, H. Krasnova, and P.
Buxmann, “Understanding the Sharing Economy: The Role Of
Response To Negative Reviews In the Peer-To-Peer Accommodation
Sharing Network,” ECIS 2015 Completed Research Papers,
Vol. 8, pp 70-84, April 2015.
[3] L. Lena and M. Jingen,“Understanding Repurchase Intention of
Airbnb Consumers: Perceived Authenticity, EWoM and Price Se
nsitivity,” School of Hospitality, Food & Tourism Management㸪
pp. 11, 2015.
[4] Hsaalacher, Laura,”trust in mobile travel and meet new people
applications,” School of Natural Sciences, Technology and
Environmental Studies, 2014
[5] M. Möhlmann, “Collaborative consumption: determinants of
satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option
again,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 193-207,
2015.
[6] B. Michael,“The Yelp Factor: Are Consumer Reviews Good for
Business?,” Working Knowledge, October 2011.
[7] Z. Yang and C. Marquis,”The Sharing Economy in China: Toward a
Unique Local Model,” China Policy Review, pp. 109-111, 2014.
[8] G. Zervas, D. Proserpio, and J. Byers,”The Rise of Sharing Economy:
Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry,” Boston U.
School of Management Research Paper, Vol. 16, 2013.
[9] R. Brendanand C. Shane, “The future of hotel chains: Branded
marketplaces driven by the sharing economy,” Journal of Vacation
Marketing, January 2016.
[10] D. Thierer, K. Christopher, H. Anne, and K. Chris,“How the Internet,
the Sharing Economy, and Reputational Feedback Mechanisms Solve
the “Lemons Problem”,” Available at SSRN, pp.47, May 2015.
[11] B. Russell,”You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative
consumption online,” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67, pp.
1595–1600, August 2014.
[12] Q. Giovanni, P. Davide, Q. Daniele, C. Licia, and M. Mirco, “Who
Benefits from the “Sharing” Economy of Airbnb?,” International
World Wide Web Conference, February 2016.
[13] B. Marco, “The Shared Economy: It is time to start caring about
sharing; value creating factors in the shared economy,” 1stIBA
Bachelor Thesis Conference, June 2013.
[14] W. Debbie, “Unlocking the sharing economy,” Innovation & Skills,
Janurary 2014.
[15] J. Hamari, M. Sjöklint and A. Ukkonen, “The Sharing Economy:
Why People Participate in Collaborative Consumption,” Journal of
the Association for Information Science and Technology,
Junarary2015.
[16] J. Martin and J. Chris, ”The sharing economy: A pathway to
sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism?,”
Journal of applied Business Research, pp.149-159, November 2015.
[17] R. Cheis, K. Sascha and S. Pasi, “The shareconomy as a precursor for
digital entrepreneurship business models,” International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Small Business, pp. 1476-1297, March 2015.
[18] T. Weber, “The Question of Ownership in a Sharing Economy,”
System Sciences (HICSS), 48th Hawaii International Conference on,
pp.4874-4883, 2015.
[19] J. Kassan and J. Orsi, “The LEGAL Landscape of the Sharing
Economy,” Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation, 2012.
[20] F. Chasin, M. Matzner, M. Löchte, V. Wiget, and J. Becker, “The
Law: The Boon and Bane of IT-enabled Peer-to-Peer Sharing and
Collaborative Consumption ,” Wirtschaftsinformatik, 2015.
[21] T. Teubner and C. Flath, “Economics of Multi-Hop Ride Sharing,”
Business & Information Systems Engineering, 2015.
[22] S. Juliet,“Debating the Sharing Economy,” Great Transition Initiative,
October 2014.
[23] X. Cheng, X. Wang, J. Huang, and A. Zarifis, “An Experimental
Study of Satisfaction Response: Evaluation of Online Collaborative
Learning,” The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning ,Vol. 17, No. 1, January 2016.
[24] X. Cheng, G. Yin, A. Azadegan, and G. Kolfschoten, “Trust
Evolvement in Hybrid Team Collaboration: A Longitudinal Case
Study,” Group Decision and Negotiation,Vol. 25, pp. 267-288, May
2015.
[25] X. Cheng, S. Fu, J. Sun, Y. Han, J. Shen, and A. Zarifis,
“Investigating individual trust in semi-virtual collaboration of
multicultural and unicultural teams,” Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 62, pp. 267-276, Seprember 2016.
[26] X. Cheng, and L. Macaulay, “Exploring individual trust factors in
computer mediated group collaboration: a case study approach,”
Group Decision and Negotiation,Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 533-560,
February 2014.
[27] C. Boyd and K. Jan, “Ride On Mobility Business Models for the
Sharing Economy,” Organization & Environment, 2014.
[28] R. Sofia, “Does Sharing Mean Caring? Regulating Innovation in the
Sharing Economy,” Minn. JL Sci. & Tech., 2015.
[29] M. Beonwen and K. Declan, “Radical Transactionalism: Legal
Consciousness, Diverse Economies, and the Sharing Economy,”
Journal of Law and Society, 2015.
[30] Z. Georgios, P. Davide and B. John, “The Rise of the Sharing
Economy:Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry,”
Boston U. School of Management Research Paper, Vol. 16, January
2016.
[31] S. Arun, “Peer-to-Peer Businesses and the Sharing (Collaborative)
Economy: Overview, Economic Effects and Regulatory Issues,”
Written testimony for the hearing titled, The Power of Connection:
519
518
Peer-to-Peer Businesses, January 2014.
[32] M. A. Cusumano, “How traditional firms must compete in the
sharing economy,” Communications of the ACM, Vol.58, pp. 32-34,
2015.
[33] L. Keetels, “Collaborative Consumption. The influence of trust on
sustainable peer-to-peer product-service systems,” Faculty of
Geosciences Theses, 2013.
[34] X. Ming and Z. Chu, “Analysis of Job Satisfaction: The Case of
Japanese of Private Companies,” Review of Accounting Studies,
2008.
[35] H. Hasegawa and K. Ueda, “Analysis of Job Satisfaction: The Case
of Japanese of Private Companies,” Labour-England, Vol. 1, pp.
109-134, March 2016.
[36] J. An, S. Cha, and H. Moon, “Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction of
Immigrant Korean Nurses,” Journal Of Transcultural Nursing, Vol. 2,
pp. 126-135, March 2016.
[37] M. Jou, Tennyson, D. Robert, and J. Wang, “A study on the usability
of E-books and APP in engineering courses: A case study on
mechanical drawing,” Computers & Education, pp. 181-193, January
2016.
[38] J. Heikkila, “From supply to demand chain management: efficiency
and customer satisfaction,” Journal Of Operations Management, Vol.
6, pp. 747-767, November 2002.
[39] H. Pink, A. Murray, and I. McKillop, “Hospital efficiency and patient
satisfaction,” Health Services Manage Res , Vol. 1, pp. 24-38,
February 2003.
[40] G. Monney, L. Penzenstadler, and O. Dupraz, “mHealth app for
cannabis users: satisfaction and perceived usefulness ,” Frontiers in
Psychiatry, Vol. 6, August 2015.
[41] I. Liu, M. Christy, and M. Lee, “User satisfaction with microblogging:
Information dissemination versus social networking,” Journal Of The
Association For Information Science And Technology, Vol. 1, pp.
56-70, January
[42] J. Corbin, J. Morse, “The unstructured interactive interview: Issues of
reciprocity and risks when dealing with sensitive topics,” Qualitative
Inquiry, Vol. 3, pp. 335-354, June 2003.
[43] S. Pan, and H. Scarbrough,“management in practice: An exploratory
case study,” Analysis & Strategic Management ,Vol. 3, pp. 359-374,
September 1999.
[44] G. Norman, “Likert scales, levels of measurement and the "laws" of
statistics”, Advances In Health Sciences Education, Vol. 5, pp.
625-623, December 2010.
[45] M. Felson, and J. Spaeth, “Community Structure and Colla-borative
Consumption A Routine Activity approach,” The American
Behavioral Scientist.February 1978.
[46] P. Tussyadiah, “An Exploratory Study on Drivers and Deterrents of
Collaborative Consumption in Travel,” Information and
Communication Technologies in Tourism 2015, pp 817-830,
December 2014.
[47] M. Mohlmann*, “Collaborative consumption: determinants of
satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option
again,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp 193–207,
May/June 2015