IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i10p3416-d171957.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Core Resource and Competence Characteristics of Sharing Economy Business on Shared Value, Distinctive Competitive Advantage, and Behavior Intention

Author

Listed:
  • Youn Kue Na

    (Department of Art & Culture Research Institute, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 156-756, Korea)

  • Sungmin Kang

    (College of Business and Economics, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 156-756, Korea)

Abstract

Sharing economy businesses need to increase the value of service effectiveness through the efficiency of their core resources and capabilities, and the effectiveness and efficiency-based services can achieve high results through business competitive advantage. Therefore, this study identifies the need for core resource and competence characteristics, both concepts are approachable from the competitive advantage and resource-based perspectives of the sharing economy business, and it also presents a comprehensive structural model of the shared value creation, distinctive competitive advantage, and behavior intention of the sharing economy business through these concepts. For this purpose, data were collected by survey questionnaires, and a preliminary survey (50 persons) as a pretest and the main survey (550 persons) were conducted and 534 experienced consumers were finally used for data analysis. For the data analysis method, frequency, reliability/validity, model-fit, and path analyses were conducted. The results of the study are the following. First, visibility, inimitability, and asymmetry of the core resources of sharing economy business have a significant effect on shared value. Additionally, while inimitability and asymmetry have a significant effect on distinctive competitive advantage. Second, the integration and internalization of core abilities of sharing economy services have a significant effect on shared value. However, externalization and internalization have a significant effect on distinctive competitive advantage. Finally, the shared values of sharing economy business have a significant effect on distinctive competitive advantage, shared value has a significant effect on behavior intention, and distinctive competitive advantage has a significant effect on behavior intention. Through the importance of managing strategic factors for these shared values and distinctive competitive advantages, this study is aimed at the development of core resources and dynamic ability leading to achievement that is expected to be a systematic academic basis for environmental impact information of sharing economy business.

Suggested Citation

  • Youn Kue Na & Sungmin Kang, 2018. "Effects of Core Resource and Competence Characteristics of Sharing Economy Business on Shared Value, Distinctive Competitive Advantage, and Behavior Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3416-:d:171957
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3416/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3416/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Morris, Michael & Schindehutte, Minet & Allen, Jeffrey, 2005. "The entrepreneur's business model: toward a unified perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 726-735, June.
    2. Fleura Bardhi & Giana M. Eckhardt, 2012. "Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(4), pages 881-898.
    3. Lai, Kee-hung, 2004. "Service capability and performance of logistics service providers," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 385-399, September.
    4. Akbar, Payam & Mai, Robert & Hoffmann, Stefan, 2016. "When do materialistic consumers join commercial sharing systems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4215-4224.
    5. Scott L. Newbert, 2008. "Value, rareness, competitive advantage, and performance: a conceptual‐level empirical investigation of the resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(7), pages 745-768, July.
    6. Margaret A. Peteraf & Jay B. Barney, 2003. "Unraveling the resource-based tangle," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 309-323.
    7. Christoph Zott & Raphael Amit, 2008. "The fit between product market strategy and business model: implications for firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 1-26, January.
    8. Valentín Molina-Moreno & Juan Carlos Leyva-Díaz & Jorge Sánchez-Molina, 2016. "Pellet as a Technological Nutrient within the Circular Economy Model: Comparative Analysis of Combustion Efficiency and CO and NO x Emissions for Pellets from Olive and Almond Trees," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, September.
    9. David Griggs & Mark Stafford-Smith & Owen Gaffney & Johan Rockström & Marcus C. Öhman & Priya Shyamsundar & Will Steffen & Gisbert Glaser & Norichika Kanie & Ian Noble, 2013. "Sustainable development goals for people and planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7441), pages 305-307, March.
    10. Henry Chesbrough & Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2002. "The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 529-555, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ibrahim M. Awad & Neda A. Alnatsha, 2024. "CSV Strategy and Clustering for Improvement of the Stone and Marble Sector’s Competitiveness: Empirical Evidence from Hebron," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 13552-13573, September.
    2. Ibinceanu Onica Mihaela Cristina & Cristache Nicoleta & Dobrea Răzvan Cătălin & Florescu Margareta, 2021. "Regional Development in Romania: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Factors for Measuring a Prosperous and Sustainable Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Afshin Omidi & Cinzia Dal Zotto & Esmaeil Norouzi & José María Valero-Pastor, 2020. "Media Innovation Strategies for Sustaining Competitive Advantage: Evidence from Music Download Stores in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Andrei Boar & Ramon Bastida & Frederic Marimon, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review. Relationships between the Sharing Economy, Sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-14, August.
    5. M. Koubková, 2023. "Continuity of sharing and shadow economy," Economics Working Papers 2023-05, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Faculty of Economics.
    6. Ying Teng & Zhenzhong Ma & Lei Jing, 2021. "Explore the World Responsibly: The Antecedents of Ethical Tourism Behaviors in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    7. José Alberto Martínez-González & Eduardo Parra-López & Almudena Barrientos-Báez, 2021. "Young Consumers’ Intention to Participate in the Sharing Economy: An Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Sheila Walsh & Cuiwen Li & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Exploring technology business incubators and their business incubation models: case studies from China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 90-116, February.
    2. Cinzia Battistella & Gianluca Murgia & Fabio Nonino, 2021. "Free-driven web-based business models," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 445-486, June.
    3. Wüstenhagen, Rolf & Menichetti, Emanuela, 2012. "Strategic choices for renewable energy investment: Conceptual framework and opportunities for further research," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-10.
    4. Wenyao Zhang & Tugrul Daim & Qingpu Zhang, 2019. "Exploring the Multi-Phase Driven Process for Disruptive Business Model Innovation of E-Business Microcredit: a Multiple Case Study from China," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(2), pages 590-617, June.
    5. Zbysław Dobrowolski & Łukasz Sułkowski, 2021. "Business Model Canvas and Energy Enterprises," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-10, November.
    6. Esben Rahbek Gjerdrum Pedersen & Wencke Gwozdz & Kerli Kant Hvass, 2018. "Exploring the Relationship Between Business Model Innovation, Corporate Sustainability, and Organisational Values within the Fashion Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 267-284, May.
    7. OGREAN Claudia, 2015. "Business Models To Meet The Challenges Of The Global Economy. A Literature Review," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 67(6), pages 127-146, December.
    8. Sascha Kraus & Alexander Brem & Miriam Schuessler & Felix Schuessler & Thomas Niemand, 2019. "Innovative Born Globals: Investigating the Influence of Their Business Models on International Performance," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem & Joe Tidd & Tugrul Daim (ed.), Managing Innovation Internationalization of Innovation, chapter 11, pages 275-328, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Xuerong Li & Han Qiao & Shouyang Wang, 2017. "Exploring evolution and emerging trends in business model study: a co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 869-887, May.
    10. Randhawa, Krithika & Wilden, Ralf & Gudergan, Siegfried, 2021. "How to innovate toward an ambidextrous business model? The role of dynamic capabilities and market orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 618-634.
    11. Barneto, Pascal & Ouvrard, Stéphane, 2015. "Is the firm's business model related to segment reporting?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 122-137.
    12. Mechelli, Alessandro & Cimini, Riccardo & Mazzocchetti, Francesca, 2017. "The usefulness of the business model disclosure for investors’ judgements in financial entities. A European study," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12.
    13. Fehrer, Julia A. & Wieland, Heiko, 2021. "A systemic logic for circular business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 609-620.
    14. Annette Popp Tower & Charles H. Noble, 2017. "Exploring and extending a collective open business model," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(3), pages 170-182, December.
    15. Sungmin Kang & Youn Kue Na, 2020. "Effects of Strategy Characteristics for Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Sharing Economy Businesses on Creating Shared Value and Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Giacomo Fabietti & Francesca Trovarelli, 2016. "The role of Eco-control in the implementation of Sustainable Business Models," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(3), pages 141-172.
    17. Anna-Greta Nyström & Miia Mustonen, 2017. "The dynamic approach to business models," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(3), pages 123-137, December.
    18. Belussi, Fiorenza & Orsi, Luigi & Savarese, Maria, 2019. "Mapping Business Model Research: A Document Bibliometric Analysis," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3).
    19. Landoni, Paolo & Dell’era, Claudio & Frattini, Federico & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Verganti, Roberto & Manelli, Luca, 2020. "Business model innovation in cultural and creative industries: Insights from three leading mobile gaming firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    20. Loock, Moritz, 2012. "Going beyond best technology and lowest price: on renewable energy investors’ preference for service-driven business models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 21-27.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3416-:d:171957. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.