Sharing Economy: Sensegiving of Strategic Decisions …
111
The expected contribution is to deepen the knowledge about the consequences
derived from a fully adoption of sharing economy, particularly in the context of
uncertainty, based on the words of Martin (2016) that the uncertainty lies in considering the sharing economy as a mode of neoliberalism or as an authentic path to
sustainability. This includes the statement that reasons alleged for criticizing this
model are based on the lack of market regulation (Martin 2016).
2 Strategic Decision-Making Process as Sensegiving
2.1 Technological Context
The institutional environment in which new technology-based businesses are established can be examined in a global context. Internationalization goes beyond
geographic borders and simultaneously reaches different countries, despite varying
degrees and modes of manifestation (Parente et al. 2018). The integration of different
agents occurs rather than the subordination of some in relation to others. Furthermore,
social and economic aspects are present in the process in a more intense way.
Studies show that the motivations for adhering to sharing economy services differ
from each other (Davidson et al. 2018; Grybait˙ e and Stankeviˇ cien˙ e 2016) and are even
selfishly determined, moving away from the ideal of altruism (Belk 2010; Grybait˙ e
and Stankeviˇ cien˙ e 2016). In the United States, according to Davidson et al. (2018),
this materialistic emphasis leads, given some conditions, to a more intense adhesion
to the sharing economy. In India, however, the phenomenon occurs similarly, due to
a different reason: while in the USA sharing is seen as a possibility of improving
self-image and self-well-being through a hedonic experience, in India the sense is
pragmatic through perceived utility. In Lithuania, a research conducted by Grybait˙ e
and Stankeviˇ cien˙ e (2016) reveals that other factors emerge, such as the perception
that this is a way (i) to earn additional easy money; (ii) to support individuals or
small businesses; (iii) to meet new people; and (iv) to get a different experience than
other people had.
In the sharing economy context, urban mobility is highlighted through the development of new business models (Cohen and Kietzmann 2014). Several elements
operate as guidelines for the formation of these new businesses, such as the orientation of network, transaction, and community (de Rivera et al. 2017), as well as
the focus on value proposition, supply chain, customer interface and financial model
(Cohen and Kietzmann 2014). In this sense, technology and social organization act
on the capacity of the environment to meet these needs, seeking to equate sustainability to a sustainable path (Johnson et al. 2018). The principle of sustainability is
understood from the social, environmental and economic dimensions (Johnson et al.
2018). These are domains whose origin refers to the concern with the development
that is maintained over time and the satisfaction of present and future needs (WCED
1987).
111
The expected contribution is to deepen the knowledge about the consequences
derived from a fully adoption of sharing economy, particularly in the context of
uncertainty, based on the words of Martin (2016) that the uncertainty lies in considering the sharing economy as a mode of neoliberalism or as an authentic path to
sustainability. This includes the statement that reasons alleged for criticizing this
model are based on the lack of market regulation (Martin 2016).
2 Strategic Decision-Making Process as Sensegiving
2.1 Technological Context
The institutional environment in which new technology-based businesses are established can be examined in a global context. Internationalization goes beyond
geographic borders and simultaneously reaches different countries, despite varying
degrees and modes of manifestation (Parente et al. 2018). The integration of different
agents occurs rather than the subordination of some in relation to others. Furthermore,
social and economic aspects are present in the process in a more intense way.
Studies show that the motivations for adhering to sharing economy services differ
from each other (Davidson et al. 2018; Grybait˙ e and Stankeviˇ cien˙ e 2016) and are even
selfishly determined, moving away from the ideal of altruism (Belk 2010; Grybait˙ e
and Stankeviˇ cien˙ e 2016). In the United States, according to Davidson et al. (2018),
this materialistic emphasis leads, given some conditions, to a more intense adhesion
to the sharing economy. In India, however, the phenomenon occurs similarly, due to
a different reason: while in the USA sharing is seen as a possibility of improving
self-image and self-well-being through a hedonic experience, in India the sense is
pragmatic through perceived utility. In Lithuania, a research conducted by Grybait˙ e
and Stankeviˇ cien˙ e (2016) reveals that other factors emerge, such as the perception
that this is a way (i) to earn additional easy money; (ii) to support individuals or
small businesses; (iii) to meet new people; and (iv) to get a different experience than
other people had.
In the sharing economy context, urban mobility is highlighted through the development of new business models (Cohen and Kietzmann 2014). Several elements
operate as guidelines for the formation of these new businesses, such as the orientation of network, transaction, and community (de Rivera et al. 2017), as well as
the focus on value proposition, supply chain, customer interface and financial model
(Cohen and Kietzmann 2014). In this sense, technology and social organization act
on the capacity of the environment to meet these needs, seeking to equate sustainability to a sustainable path (Johnson et al. 2018). The principle of sustainability is
understood from the social, environmental and economic dimensions (Johnson et al.
2018). These are domains whose origin refers to the concern with the development
that is maintained over time and the satisfaction of present and future needs (WCED
1987).