Abstract
The introduction of ride-sharing alternative to taxis brought a refreshing alternative to consumers because it promises a comfortable and reliable service of ride sharing. However, Uber i.e. the first ride-sharing service offered in Malaysia in particular, has caused uneasiness among the conventional taxi concessionaires. This paper took a case study approach to understand the reasons behind this issue within the context of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia using document analysis and semi structured interviews. The findings suggest that high quality ride experience that ride- sharing services such as Uber offer have caused much disruption to traditional taxi drivers’ livelihood. Hence, government assistance to improve traditional taxi service is essential to help their continued survival. A few managerial implications are proposed at the end of this paper.
Highlights
Peer-to-peer consumption has been on the rise for several years
Data had been collected from multiple sources/actors including a representative of the local regulating agencies, ten local taxi drivers, ten members of the public, an authoritative figure in cars, buses and trucks magazines and a newspaper editor who has been focusing on the issue of Uber in Kuala Lumpur
Local taxis are regulated by regulatory agencies such as Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), the local Land and Public Transport authority and Puskapom, Police and Department of Environment for Emission of Gas by taxis
Summary
Peer-to-peer consumption has been on the rise for several years now. Many companies are leveraging on the phenomenon of decreased barriers to interaction brought about by internet and social networks to help their users rent each other’s houses, cars, parking space, cooking skills and much more. While sharing of assets is not new among communities all around the world, internet has certainly amplified this activity by making it faster and easier for asset owners and potential renters to communicate with one another This peer-topeer lending allows physical assets (such as cars, condo etc.) to be shared as services when the owners are not using them. Detractors of sharing economy opine that it can pose societal risk in the need to change how service firms operate, how customers need to be engaged and how to deal with their expectations (Helkkula et al, 2018) They maintain that even though a properly regulated sharing economy can be good, this business model presents very little net gain in long term social welfare (Petropoulos, 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
