Abstract
Platform innovations like Uber and Airbnb allow peers to transact outside established market institutions. From an institutional perspective, platform companies follow a reverse innovation process compared to innovation within traditional regulatory systems: they first launch their online platform and ask for government permission only later. We analyze the emergence of Uber as an institutional entrepreneur in The Netherlands and the strategies it employed in a failed attempt to get its UberPop service legalized through changes in Dutch taxi law. We conclude that Uber’s failure to change the Dutch taxi law stemmed from the difficulty to leverage pragmatic legitimacy among users into favorable regulatory changes in a highly institutionalized regime, because Uber’s institutional work strategies were not aligned.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
