IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8285-d600699.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Logics at Play in a Mobility-as-a-Service Ecosystem

Author

Listed:
  • Hugo Guyader

    (Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, 58183 Linköping, Sweden)

  • Brenda Nansubuga

    (Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, 58183 Linköping, Sweden)

  • Karin Skill

    (Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, 58183 Linköping, Sweden)

Abstract

The last decade has brought the transport sector to the forefront of discussions on sustainability and digital innovations: practitioners, researchers, and regulators alike have witnessed the emergence of a wide diversity of shared mobility services. Based on a longitudinal case study of a regional Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) ecosystem in Sweden, constituted of a document analysis and 24 semi-structured interviews with 18 representatives from regional authorities, mobility service providers, and other stakeholders from the public and private sectors, this study examines the co-existing and competing institutional logics at play, identified as State logic, Market logic, Sustainability logic, Experimental logic, and Service logic. The analysis reveals that these institutional logics pertain to tensions in the collaboration within the ecosystem’s stakeholders in terms of: (1) finding a common vision and scope for MaaS, (2) establishing a sustainable business model, (3) triggering a behavioral change regarding car travel, (4) being able to find one’s role within the project and to consequently collaborate with other stakeholders, and (5) managing uncertainty through testing and experimenting innovative solutions, which ultimately yielded key learnings about MaaS and the shared mobility ecosystem and its stakeholders. These case study findings, based on an institutional logics framework, provide a novel perspective on emerging ecosystems, from which implications for MaaS developers and further research on shared mobility are drawn.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugo Guyader & Brenda Nansubuga & Karin Skill, 2021. "Institutional Logics at Play in a Mobility-as-a-Service Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-25, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8285-:d:600699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8285/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8285/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mair, Johanna & Reischauer, Georg, 2017. "Capturing the dynamics of the sharing economy: Institutional research on the plural forms and practices of sharing economy organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 11-20.
    2. Minelle E. Silva & Marina D. Figueiredo, 2017. "Sustainability as Practice: Reflections on the Creation of an Institutional Logic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-13, October.
    3. Michael Lounsbury & Eva Boxenbaum, 2013. "Institutional Logics in Action," Post-Print hal-01487932, HAL.
    4. Thomas Schulz & Markus Böhm & Heiko Gewald & Zehra Celik & Helmut Krcmar, 2020. "The Negative Effects of Institutional Logic Multiplicity on Service Platforms in Intermodal Mobility Ecosystems," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 62(5), pages 417-433, October.
    5. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    6. McColl-Kennedy, Janet R. & Cheung, Lilliemay & Coote, Leonard V., 2020. "Tensions and trade-offs in multi-actor service ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 655-666.
    7. Vadim Grinevich & Franz Huber & Mine Karataş-Özkan & Çağla Yavuz, 2019. "Green entrepreneurship in the sharing economy: utilising multiplicity of institutional logics," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 859-876, April.
    8. Lina Berglund-Snodgrass & Dalia Mukhtar-Landgren, 2020. "Conceptualizing Testbed Planning: Urban Planning in the Intersection between Experimental and Public Sector Logics," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 96-106.
    9. Laurell, Christofer & Sandström, Christian, 2017. "The sharing economy in social media: Analyzing tensions between market and non-market logics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 58-65.
    10. Michael Lounsbury & Eva Boxenbaum, 2013. "Institutional Logics in Action," Post-Print hal-00826521, HAL.
    11. Vickers, Ian & Lyon, Fergus & Sepulveda, Leandro & McMullin, Caitlin, 2017. "Public service innovation and multiple institutional logics: The case of hybrid social enterprise providers of health and wellbeing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1755-1768.
    12. Stephen L. Vargo & Robert F. Lusch, 2016. "Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 5-23, January.
    13. Peraphan Jittrapirom & Valeria Caiati & Anna-Maria Feneri & Shima Ebrahimigharehbaghi & María J. Alonso González & Jishnu Narayan, 2017. "Mobility as a Service: A Critical Review of Definitions, Assessments of Schemes, and Key Challenges," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 13-25.
    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. Iria Lopez-Carreiro & Andres Monzon & Elena Lopez, 2023. "MaaS Implications in the Smart City: A Multi-Stakeholder Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-27, July.
    2. Enoch, Marcus & Potter, Stephen, 2023. "MaaS (Mobility as a Service) market futures explored," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 31-40.
    3. Hugo Guyader & Margareta Friman & Lars E. Olsson, 2021. "Shared Mobility: Evolving Practices for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, November.

    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. Olivier Boiral & Marie‐Christine Brotherton & David Talbot & Laurence Guillaumie, 2022. "Legitimizing unsustainable practices: The institutional logics of pro‐pesticide organizations," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2284-2298, July.
    2. Thomas Schulz & Markus Böhm & Heiko Gewald & Helmut Krcmar, 2021. "Smart mobility – an analysis of potential customers’ preference structures," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(1), pages 105-124, March.
    3. Lehmann, Julian & Weber, Florian & Waldkirch, Matthias & Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz & König, Andreas, 2022. "Institutional work battles in the sharing economy: Unveiling actors and discursive strategies in media discourse," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    4. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Everding, Sebastian, 2020. "Do hybrids impede sustainability? How semantic reorientations and governance reforms can produce and preserve sustainability in sharing business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 174-185.
    5. Geissinger, Andrea & Laurell, Christofer & Sandström, Christian, 2020. "Digital Disruption beyond Uber and Airbnb—Tracking the long tail of the sharing economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    6. Elbasha, Tamim & Avetisyan, Emma, 2018. "A framework to study strategizing activities at the field level: The example of CSR rating agencies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 38-46.
    7. Anne Vancaelemont, 2015. "The power of objects ? Materiality and institutional work in the French recorded music industry (1994-2014)," Post-Print hal-01267723, HAL.
    8. Thomas Schulz & Markus Böhm & Heiko Gewald & Zehra Celik & Helmut Krcmar, 2020. "The Negative Effects of Institutional Logic Multiplicity on Service Platforms in Intermodal Mobility Ecosystems," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 62(5), pages 417-433, October.
    9. Michaël Distelmans & Ilse Scheerlinck, 2021. "Institutional Strategies in the Ridesharing Economy: A Content Analysis Based on Uber’s Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, July.
    10. Mélodie Cartel & Eva Boxenbaum & Franck Aggeri, 2014. "Policy making as bricolage: the role of platforms in institutional innovation," Post-Print hal-01089462, HAL.
    11. Daniel Trabucchi & Laurent Muzellec & Sébastien Ronteau, 2019. "Sharing economy: seeing through the fog," Post-Print hal-03718526, HAL.
    12. Schneckenberg, Dirk & Roth, Steffen & Velamuri, Vivek K., 2023. "Deparadoxification and value focus in sharing ventures: Concealing paradoxes in strategic decision-making," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    13. Melanie Bryant & Vaughan Higgins, 2019. "Managing the grand challenge of biological threats to food production: The importance of institutional logics for managing Australian biosecurity," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 534-550, November.
    14. Schulz, Thomas & Zimmermann, Sina & Böhm, Markus & Gewald, Heiko & Krcmar, Helmut, 2021. "Value co-creation and co-destruction in service ecosystems: The case of the Reach Now app," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    15. Lucía Muñoz-Pascual & Jesús Galende, 2020. "Ambidextrous Knowledge and Learning Capability: The Magic Potion for Employee Creativity and Sustainable Innovation Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-27, May.
    16. Gerard George & Ryan K. Merrill & Simon J. D. Schillebeeckx, 2021. "Digital Sustainability and Entrepreneurship: How Digital Innovations Are Helping Tackle Climate Change and Sustainable Development," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(5), pages 999-1027, September.
    17. Caroline Scotto, 2014. "Visualization of spatial organization: from art of memory to action?," Post-Print hal-01113272, HAL.
    18. Eva Kiefhaber & Kathryn Pavlovich & Katharina Spraul, 2020. "Sustainability-Related Identities and the Institutional Environment: The Case of New Zealand Owner–Managers of Small- and Medium-Sized Hospitality Businesses," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 37-51, April.
    19. Min-Dong Paul Lee & Michael Lounsbury, 2015. "Filtering Institutional Logics: Community Logic Variation and Differential Responses to the Institutional Complexity of Toxic Waste," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 847-866, June.
    20. Moses, Aditya & Sharma, Amalesh, 2020. "What drives human resource acquisition and retention in social enterprises? An empirical investigation in the healthcare industry in an emerging market," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 76-88.

    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:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8285-:d:600699. 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.