A Qualitative Analysis of Customer Use Behaviour in Mobility Sector Product Service Systems

65  Download (0)

Full text



List of abbreviations ... I Acknowledgements ... II Abstract ... III

1. Introduction ... 1

2. Theory ... 4

2.1 Circular economy ... 4

2.2 Product Service Systems... 4

2.3 Product care, careful and careless behaviour ... 5

2.3.1 Product care ... 5

2.3.2 Careful and Careless behaviour ... 5

2.4 Customer journey ... 6

2.5 Theory of planned behaviour (TPB)... 6

2.5.1 Attitude ... 7

2.5.2 Subjective norms ... 7

2.5.3 Perceived Behavioural Control ... 7

2.6 Theory of interpersonal behaviour (TIB) ... 8

2.7 Norm activation model (NAM) ... 9

2.8 Integrated model ... 11

2.8.1 Critique on the TPB ... 11

2.8.2 Addition of emotions ... 11

3. Method ... 13

3.1 Semi structured interviews ... 13

3.2 Operationalisation of the theory ... 15

3.3 Analysing data ... 16

3.4 Trustworthiness, reliability, and validity of methods ... 17

3.5 Ethical issues ... 18

4. Results ... 18

4.1 Perceived Behavioural Control ... 18

4.2 Facilitating conditions ... 20

4.3 Attitude... 23

4.4 Subjective norm ... 25

4.5 Emotions of pride and guilt ... 26

4.5.1 Emotions of pride ... 26

4.5.2 Emotions of guilt ... 27

4.6 Habits ... 28


4.7 Concluding on results ... 30

5. Model performance ... 31

5.1 Updated model ... 33

5.2 Case description ... 33

5.2.1 Case 1: Description of careful behaviour ... 34

5.2.2 Case 2: Description of careless behaviour ... 35

6. Discussion ... 37

6.1 Theoretical contributions ... 37

6.2 Limitations ... 38

6.3 Practical implications ... 39

6.4 Suggestions for further research ... 40

7. Conclusion ... 40

Sources ... 43

Appendices ... 51

Appendix I - Informed consent ... 51

Appendix II - Quotes supporting the results ... 52

Appendix III - Interview guide ... 56

Appendix IV - Company descriptions ... 59



List of abbreviations

CE Circular Economy

NAM Norm Activation Model PBC Perceived Behavioural Control PSS Product Service System

TIB Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour TPB Theory of Planned Behaviour




I would like to express my genuine gratitude to my first supervisor Vivian Tunn.

Her expertise, constructive and personal guidance throughout this thesis was very pleasant to work with.

To all the interviewees for their time and inspiring answers, making this research even more interesting.

Finally, I want to thank my girlfriend for her support, and special thanks to my parents for their time and valuable discussions.

To all those who made this possible.




Due to increased competition and environmental pressure, many companies today are striving to offer value-adding Product Service Systems (PSS) in addition to their current business. Through the implementation of PSS, circularity of businesses can be improved. However, customer misbehaviour is a frequently returning concept within these relatively new business models. Therefore this research stresses the following research question: why do consumers treat products they use through Product Service Systems with or without care? To answer this question this research takes a qualitative approach and combines three mayor theories in behavioural studies namely, the Theory of Planned Behaviour, the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour, and the Norm Activation Model. Furthermore this research analyses 15 semi-structured interviews with customers that use mobility focussed PSSs. The results provide insights into the connections between the determinants and the most important determinants of careful and careless behaviour. Next, these findings provide practical insights for PSS companies for focus points when wanting to improve their customers use behaviour. The main findings suggest that the subjective norm has a big influence on both careful and careless use behaviour, as family and nurture are big influences of careful use behaviour. Customer connection is an important aspect for users in terms of their level of carefully or carelessly using the product. Moreover, subjective norm often returns in careless use behaviour, as friends have the power to change careful habitual behaviour to careless use behaviour. These careful habitual actions often relate to personal precautions of being able to use the product in a later stage of usage. Prominent facilitating conditions for careful behaviour are; knowledge about the product, age of the user, condition of the product, and the subjective norm. Biggest influences of facilitating conditions leading to careless behaviour are; (lack of) knowledge about the product, lack of interest by the company, condition of the product, and alcohol consumption. Suggestions for further research include gaining theoretical insights with the integral model in mobility focussed PSS, additionally capturing insights with this model in other type of PSSs. Moreover, it might be interesting to observe use behaviour in PSSs, as one of the major limitations of this behavioural study is the fact that the behaviour is questioned to the customer directly.

Key words: Product Service Systems, customer use behaviour, careful behaviour, careless behaviour, Theory of Planned Behaviour, Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour, Norm Activation Model.



1. Introduction

Circular Economy (CE) is receiving increased awareness worldwide due to its relatively new approach to continuous growth and increasing resource optimalisation (Ghisellini, Cialani & Ulgiati, 2016). CE aims to transform linear and semi-linear systems into circular ones (Reigado et al., 2017). Doing so by slowing, closing, and narrowing down resource flows (Bocken et al., 2016). One of the business models used to achieve this lays emphasis on supplying product functionality rather than product ownership (Linder & Willander, 2015). For example, business models that focus on collaborative consumption (e.g. car- or bike-sharing) (Annarelli, Battistella & Nonino, 2016). Additionally, many manufacturers today are striving to offer value-adding Product Service Systems (PSS) in addition to their current business (De Jesus Pacheco, 2019), due to increasing competition and environmental pressure.

Through the implementation of Product Service Systems (PSS) the circularity of businesses can be improved (Lieder and Rashid, 2016; Urbinati et al., 2017; Pieroni et al., 2019). PSSs have the ability to direct and control the use of resources (Goedkoop, van Halen, Riele and Rommens, 1999) and to design and implement service-oriented and value-added offers, essentially dematerializing the fulfilment of needs (Kjaer et al., 2019). PSSs have a range of definitions (Haber, 2017), the first one originating from 1999, where Goedkoop et al. (1999) define PSSs as: “a marketable set of products and services capable of jointly fulfilling a user’s needs” (p. 18). A more recent definition is constructed by Ostaeyen (2014), he describes a PSS as: “an integrated offering of products and services with a revenue mechanism that is based on selling availability, usage or performance” (p. 68).

However, reduced ownership is only able to contribute to CE when simultaneous change in both production and consumption is realised, since simply offering lease/rental products does not automatically reduce the environmental impact of the product (Junnila, Ottelin, & Leinikka, 2018;

Sousa & Miguel, 2015). Research has been focused in the optimisation of product design and production to contribute to CE. Here, methods like Design for Sustainability, Biomimicry, Cradle to Cradle, Modularity, Dematerialisation, and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) are designed to help product designers to get their product fit in the market. However, research on the use behaviour and therefore consumption of consumers in PSS is lacking (Sousa & Miguel, 2015; Mylan, 2015). According to Sorrentino, Woelbert & Sala (2015), and Sala & Castellani (2019), who researched the use behaviour in LCA, mention that use behaviour can greatly contribute to the prolonging of life cycle stages for some products.

To continue on customer use behaviour, Bardhi and Eckhardt (2012) mention that customer misbehaviour in access-based services is important to reseach. In one of his studies on PSSs and their contribution to CE, Tukker (2015) writes that “leased products tend to be used less carefully than products that are owned” (p. 88). In his research on a copying company in Taiwan, Kuo (2011) says that


2 when a customer owns a product, he or she treats it with greater care. Product care is defined by Ackerman, Mugge & Schoormans (2018) as “all activities initiated by the consumer that lead to the extension of a product´s lifetime” (p. 380). There is evidence that contagious effects of customer misbehaviour in access-based services exist (Schaefers et al., 2016), and there are multiple cases to be found in newspapers and blogs about misuse, vandalism and theft in shared mobility services (Mcneice, 2018; Randall, 2019; Ibex Publisher, 2021). However, these cases are most familiar to us because they are alluring and interesting. As Lewis and Rowe (1994) describe the following: “good news is almost never reported, so news is almost always bad”. So do customers really handle their rented product without care or are there cases to be found of careful use behaviour?

To find an answer to that question, this study assumes that product care can be careful and careless. This study uses the definition of Schaefers et al. (2016, p. 5) in the context of access-based services to describe careless use behaviour: “inappropriate handling, damage, or overuse of the accessed good”. There is no unambiguous definition of careful behaviour in the context of PSSs, therefore the definition of the Cambridge dictionary is used: “giving a lot of attention to what you are doing so that you do not have an accident, make a mistake, or damage something”.

No in-depth research into understanding the use behaviour, and why consumers treat products the way they do in the mobility sectors of PSSs is performed. Therefore, to be able to understand the customer and their behaviour, the following research question and complementary sub question are formulated: Why do consumers treat products they use through Product Service Systems with or without care?

- What are the main differences in behavioural determinants of careful and careless use behaviour in Product Service Systems?

Moreover, this research aims to be practically and socially relevant. This research is practically relevant because after this study, governmental organisations and companies that provide PSSs know where to focus on when wanting to improve customer behaviour or their current business model.

Moreover, this research can be particularly interesting since these companies might be able to extend the lifetime of a product, therefore becoming more sustaintable, and probably increase their profit.

The social relevance lies in a better understanding of human behaviour in PSSs. Since research is performed into the understanding of misbehaviour in access-based services (Schaefers et al., 2016), but the insights on determinants for careful behaviour are lacking. By looking at the motivators for careful behaviour instead of only focussing on the negative impact of behaviour, this research tries a different approach towards understanding the customer behaviour in PSSs.


3 To answer the research questions, several theories that help describe and analyse behaviour are used: the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991), the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB) (Triandis, 1977), and the Norm Activation Model (NAM) (Schwartz, 1977).

To be able to come to relevant results, a sample group of 15 users of PSSs is composed via stratified purposive sampling. These individuals are interviewed according to a semi-structured interview scheme. This research will solely focus on mobility PSSs. The sample group therefore consists of consumers who make use of mobility PSSs such as Swapfiets, OV-Bike, and shared scooters, to be able to get a precise, yet comprehensive view on use behaviour in PSSs.

The outline of this report is as follows. In Chapter 2 the aforementioned theories are described.

Chapter 3 entails the method of this study, describing how the theory will be operationalised to get answers to the research questions. Chapter 4 describes the results of this study, its model performances, and case descriptions, which are used to give better insight in the data. Lastly discussion and conclusions of this research are explained.



2. Theory

This chapter describes the main concepts used in this research, namely; CE, PSS, Customer Journey, moreover definitions of product care and careful behaviour are given. Lastly, the used theories that are combined to write this paper are described. This study will make use of three theories, the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB), and the Norm Activation Model (NAM). To be able to map the eventual behaviour of consumers in PSSs, a combination of these models will be used as a guidance for interview questions, to gain insight, and to eventually describe consumers’ use behaviour in PSSs. To quote Ajzen (1991): “Explaining human behaviour in all its complexity is a difficult task” (p. 179), therefore he made a theory to describe behaviour, the TPB.

Trandis’ (1977) Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour has some overlap with the TIB but it includes factors like habits and facilitating conditions. The Norm Activation Model (Schwartz, 1977) will be used in order to get more insight in the functions of anticipated pride and guilt on the behaviour.

2.1 Circular economy

The concept of CE is interesting to both researchers and practitioners because it is seen as an operationalisation for enterprises to execute the much-discussed concept of sustainable development (Ghisellini et al., 2016; Murray et al., 2017). CE is a concept used to convert linear and semi-linear systems into circular ones (Reigado et al., 2017), by trying to slow, close, or narrow down resource flows (Bocken et al., 2016). There are multiple scientific and business-related concepts that build on the concept of CE, for example: “cradle-to-cradle design, […] biomimicry, eco-efficiancy, resilience science, natural capitalism and cleaner production” (Korhonen et al. 2018 P. 549). One of the business models to achieve CE emphasises product functionality rather than product ownership (Linder &

Willander, 2015). An example of a concept that focuses on this collaborative consumption is car or bike sharing (Annarelli et al., 2016). This concept is seen as the ´sharing economy´ as this is part of an umbrella construct (Acquier, Daudigeos & Pinkse, 2017). This kind of access or functional economy raised in the form of businesses offering services instead of products, a process which is referred to as servitisation, functional business models, and PSSs (Mont, 2002).

2.2 Product Service Systems

It has been attempted to translate CE principles into business models that simultaneously achieve economic and environmental benefits (e.g., Bocken et al., 2016; Lewandowski, 2016; Tunn et al., 2019).

Moreover, it has been used to analyse possibilities in sustainable and circular business models (e.g., Perey et al., 2018; Schaltegger, Lüdeke-Freund & Hansen, 2012; Zucchella & Previtali, 2019). Within these business models, PSSs appeared as a prominent concept with the potential to address sustainability and circularity challenges (Tunn et al., 2021).


5 According to Tukker (2004), there are three kinds of PSSs; product oriented, result-oriented, and use-oriented. Product-oriented service business models are mainly geared toward sales of products, with some extra services added. Result-oriented service is an agreement between provider and client about a result, having no pre-determined product. With use-oriented services the original product lies at the core, but the business model is not geared towards selling products, and the provider still has ownership over the product (Tukker, 2004). More specifically, Tukker (2004) describes the following PSS types within use-oriented PSSs; product lease, product renting or sharing, and product pooling. He describes that the key problem with these kind of PSS lies in the difficulty of agreeing to a set of performance criteria with the user, and the lack of prediction of (Epstein, 1983), or the influence on, the behaviour of the user. Therefore this study can contribute to a better understanding and predicting of customer behaviour.

2.3 Product care, careful and careless behaviour

2.3.1 Product care

Product care is defined by Ackerman et al. (2018) as: “all activities initiated by the consumer that lead to the extension of a product´s lifetime” (p. 380). This concept therefore includes careful handling of products and consciously taking protective measures such as buying covers for smartphones and looking out for glass on the road when cycling. Belk (1998) mentioned that the concept of product care is partly the result of an extended self-construct. Customers care for things they feel connected to and consider as extensions of themselves (Belk, 1998). However, customers are emotionally connected to a small number of things that are important to them (Mugge, Schifferstein & Schoormans, 2010;

Schifferstein and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, 2008).

As discussed in the introduction, product design strategies have been composed for product lifetime extension that focus on the technical aspects such as; modular product design, Biomimicry, dematerialisation. On the other hand, customer involvement and effort is necessary to repair and extend the life cycle of a product (Sonego, Echeveste & Debarba 2022). Consequently, more thought needs to be given to the customers’ position in this system (Ghisellini et al., 2016; Sonego et al. 2022;

Wastling, Charnley & Moreno, 2018).

2.3.2 Careful and Careless behaviour

In this research, use behaviour is defined as the product handling behaviour. Which means the way a consumer handles and treats the product, how careful they are with using, storing, and for example maintenance of the product. More specifically, whether the customer handles their product with or without care is determined by the factors of respectively careful and careless behaviour. To describe careless behaviour, the definition of Schaefers et al. (2016) in the context of access-based services is used: “inappropriate handling, damage, or overuse of the accessed good” (p. 5). Since there is no clear


6 definition to be found on careful behaviour in the context of PSSs, the definition of careful in the Cambridge dictionary is used: giving a lot of attention to what you are doing so that you do not have an accident, make a mistake, or damage something.

2.4 Customer journey

The concept of customer journey is mainly used to help compose the interview guide and topic list.

Customer journeys has been widely accepted in practical service management and service design (Rawson, Duncan, and Jones, 2013; Zomerdijk and Voss, 2010, 2011). The definitions often highlight the customers´ point of view towards the system. For instance, the definition of a customer journey is described by Kankainen et al. (2012) as: “the process of experiencing service through different touchpoints from the customer´s point of view” (p. 221). Thus, the concept of the customer journey helps us gain insight into their experiences and complex customer behaviour (Tueanrat et al., 2021). A customer journey can help visualise the users’ actions to achieve their goal and perspective on the process or service (Halvorsrud, Kvale & Følstad, 2016; Nenonen, 2008). How this concept is applied in this paper is explained in more detail in Chapter 3.1.

2.5 Theory of planned behaviour (TPB)

The Theory of Planned behaviour (TPB) is designed by Icek Ajzen in an attempt to predict and explain human behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). Ajzen (1991) considers that there are three constructs: Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC). These factors determine behavioural intention, and that intention is a direct antecedent of behaviour. Attitude is considered as an individual’s evaluation whether conducting a behaviour is favourable or not. The Subjective Norm is the perceived surrounding social pressure to (not to) perform that behaviour, while PBC reflects the difficulty or ease of performing the behaviour (Fishbein and Ajzen, 2009; Ajzen, 1991). The flow of these determinants is displayed in the figure below.

Figure 1: Theory of Planned behaviour by Ajzen (1997)


7 2.5.1 Attitude

Each construct can be further elaborated into several indicators (Fishbein and Ajzen, 2009; Ajzen, 1991), with Attitude being described as “the degree to which a person has a favorable or unfavorable evaluation or appraisal of the behaviour in question’’ (Ajzen, 1991, P.188). More specifically, when a person determines whether to act according to a specific behaviour, benefits and costs of the eventual outcome behaviour are assessed (Cheng, Lam, & Hsu, 2006). If these outcomes are positive, an individual's attitude is more likely to be positive, and he or she is more inclined to engage in that specific behaviour (Ajzen, 1991; Cheng et al., 2006; Lee, 2005). Within Attitude, Outcome Beliefs are used to determine the individuals’ beliefs about the consequences of the behaviour. Additionally, Outcome Evaluations are the evaluations of the level of desirability of those consequences.

2.5.2 Subjective norms

The second determinant, Subjective Norms, is defined by Ajzen (1991) as: “the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behavior” (p. 188). In other words, the subjective norm is a social factor which contains beliefs about the normative expectations of significant ‘referents’ (e.g.

family, friends, and colleagues), and what their opinion is (Hee, 2000). It also includes Motivation to Comply, which is the level of motivation to meet these aforementioned normative expectations of the referents. The subjective norm is therefore referred to as a function of a individuals’ normative beliefs, what salient referents think he/she should (or should not) do, and their own motivation to comply (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).

2.5.3 Perceived Behavioural Control

The third determinant of TPB is the Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC), and is defined as: “the perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior” (Ajzen, 1991, p. 122). Assessing ones view of how well he or she can control aspects that may facilitate or constrain the actions required to deal with given scenario. PBC is determined to be a function of Control Beliefs and Power of Control. Control Beliefs refer to the existence of factors that may help or hinder to perform of the behaviour, for example the presence/absence of resources or opportunities. Power of Control, on the other hand, includes the perceived ability to influence these factors (Fishbein and Ajzen, 2009; Ajzen, 1991).

Despite TPBs focus on behaviour, PBC enables TPB to analyse an individuals´ pro-environmental behaviour, such as electric car use, energy savings, and recycling (Fornara et al., 2016; Wang et al.

2016; Botetzagias, Dima & Malesios, 2015). Several studies agree upon the fact that when an individual has little control over performing a specific behaviour, due to a lack of required resources (e.g., costs or time), his or her behavioural intention will be lower, even if he or she has a positive attitude or subjective norm about the intended act (e.g., Baker, Al-Gahtani, & Hubona, 2007; Cheng et al., 2006;

Conner & Abraham, 2001).


8 The TPB has been used to predict human behaviour in a diverse field of research, for example;

dietary choice (McDermott et al., 2015), alcohol and substance use (Duncan, Forbes-McKay &

Henderson, 2012), fruit and vegetable consumption (Menozzi et al., 2015). But more interestingly, it has been used to understand pro-environmental behaviour. For example, understanding individual’s energy saving behaviour in workplaces (Gao, Wang & Li, 2017), the context of recycling (Botetzagias et al., 2015), and young consumers' intention towards buying green products in a developing nation (Yadav, 2016). Therefore, this theory will be used as a foundation to this study, with the following theories having their additions to it.

2.6 Theory of interpersonal behaviour (TIB)

In addition to the TPB, the concepts of habits and facilitating conditions from the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB), composed by Triandis (1977), will be used in this study. Although the TIB is more comprehensive in describing consumer behaviour (Martiskainen, 2007), and provides a wider range of determinants (Issock et al., 2020), it has been used and cited far less than the TPB or the NAM (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Conner & Sparks, 2005; Montano & Kasprzyk 2015). Furthermore, it has been overlooked in relation to sustainable behaviour (Jackson, 2005). The reason according to Jackson (2005) and Godin (2008) and lies in the lack of parsimony of the model, the greater complexity of TIB, and no clear guidelines of the practical definitions of the variables in TIB.

In parallel to Ajzen (1977), Triandis (1977) states that behaviour is partially a function of intention. However, he emphasises less conscious, more impulsive and automatic determinants, namely habit and emotion (Kupfer et al., 2019). Habits are learned behaviours that are carried out on a regular basis (Gardner, 2012). Moreover, situational constrains and conditions, are also influencing behaviour. Triandis (1997) assumes that both intention and habit are moderated influencing factors.

He also describes facilitating conditions, these conditions refer to opportunities or situational constrains to perform a specific behaviour. If intentions and habits are pointed towards a certain (sustainable) behaviour, but the facilitating conditions to perform this behaviour are missing, it has a great influence on the outcome behaviour (Triandis, 1997). The TIB will therefore be an addition to the TPB by adding habits and facilitating conditions as a construct to able to describe behaviour. An overview of the full flow of the TIB is displayed in the figure below.



Figure 2: Triandis' (1977) Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour

2.7 Norm activation model (NAM)

The last addition to the TBH, is the Norm Activation Model (NAM). Which is originally designed by Schwartz (1997) to map altruistic behaviour. In this model, personal norms are at the core to determine behaviour. It primarily concerns sacrificing a person’s own interest for the well-being of others.

Schwartz (1977) states that these norms are actively experienced as: “feelings of moral obligation not as intentions” (p. 227). Personal norms represents the self-expectations for a specific action in a distinct situation that are created by the individual, on which other people evaluate whether the action was right or wrong. Therefore, people tend to engage in a certain behaviour if it correlates with their personal norms.

Personal norms are determined by two factors: the awareness of performing (or not performing) a particular behaviour has consequences (Awareness of Consequences (AC)), and the feeling of responsibility that occurs while performing the specific behaviour (Awareness of Responsibility (AR)) (Schwartz, 1977). According to the NAM, norm activations refer to a process in which individuals develop self-expectations regarding a certain behaviour, called ‘personal norms’.

They consist in feelings of moral obligation or duty to act pro-social, and have a direct influence on behaviour (Harland, Staats & Willeke, 2007). However, Harland et al. (2007) explains that the activation of personal norms is not sufficient for a certain behaviour to occur. Because they can be neutralized by denying the consequences of actions, or by denying the responsibility to take action. The flow of these determinants of behaviour is displayed in Figure 3.



Figure 3: Norm Activation Model by Schwartz (1997)

The NAM has been widely applied to predict pro-environmental behaviour such as; recycling (Bratt, 1999; Hopper & Nielsen, 1991), choice of travel mode (Hunecke, et al., 2001), and plastic consumption (Benyamin, Djuwita, Ariyanto, 2018). Nonetheless, there is still some confusion about how to interpret the NAM, which makes it hard to draw definite conclusions on the merits of this model (Steg & De Groot, 2010; Kaiser & Schuthle, 2003). However, to understand pro-environmental behaviour in the NAM, emotions of pride and guilt seem particularly relevant (Onwezen, Antonides &

Bartels, 2013). These emotions are the consequences of the personal evaluations of one’s self after following (or failing to follow) personal- or social standards (Lewis, 1993; Tracy & Robins, 2004).

In relation to the TPB, Kaiser and Scheuthle (2003) claim that personal feelings or morals could increase the TPBs exploratory power. Since the TPB already includes the Subjective Norm, which is focussed on the beliefs about the normative expectations of significant ‘referents’, and is very much alike the personal norms from the NAM, only the concepts of pride and guilt will be used to increase the explanatory power in the integrated model. Moreover, because confusions arose about the interpretations of the NAM (Steg & De Groot, 2010; Kaiser & Schuthle, 2003), and the TBP lacks in the ability to explain emotions of consumer appeals (Sommestad, Karlzén, & Hallberg 2015; Moon, Mohel,

& Farooq, 2021), it would be more convincing to only use the emotions of pride and guilt, to avoid overlap between the two concepts and maintain clarity of the integrated model. Two studies that merged TBP and NAM, have used emotions of pride and guilt as a result of personal norms (Shin et al., 2018; Rezaei et al., 2019). As Onwezen et al. (2013) describes, emotions of pride and guilt are associated with failing or succeeding in pro-environmental action, which is evoked by personal norm.

Moreover, these emotions could explain the influence of personal norm on the intention. As a result, the influence of personal norms on the intention is partially explained by the role of anticipated pride and guilt. Therefore, in the integration of these models, the feelings of pride and guilt are placed after the subjective norms, to increase the explanatory power of this determinant of behaviour. The next chapter will further elaborate and explain the integration of the three models.



2.8 Integrated model

The three abovementioned models/theories have not frequently been combined, only once in a research into industrial worker behaviour regarding energy savings (Lopes et al., 2019). However, they have separately (and semi-integrated) been used to map pro-environmental behaviour in a wide variety in the field. The TPB has been frequently used to describe various kinds of pro-environmental behaviour, including energy saving behaviour (Gao et al., 2017), sustainable transportation (Donald, Cooper & Conchie, 2014), and waste management (Khan, Ahmed & Najmi, 2019). The TIB and NAM give additions to areas where the TPB lacks. More specifically, TPB lacks in the description of behaviour where habits and emotions are considered (Martiskainen, 2007; Onwezen et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2017; Klӧckner, 2013). Therefore, these habits and emotions from other theories are added. The combination of the TPB and NAM have been used to describe the use of public transportation (Bamberg, Hunecke, & blöbaum, 2007), recycling behaviour (Park & Ha, 2014) and explaining prosocial behaviours (De Groot & Steg, 2009). The combination of TPB and TIB also have been used in understanding determinants of the intention to buy rhino horn in Vietnam (Vu & Nielsen, 2022).

Moreover, the TPB has been validated in the context of pro-environmental behaviour (Arvola et al.

2008), and according to Armitage & Conner (2001) it is one of the most influential theories in social and health psychology. In this research, it will be important to analyse why consumers treat their products careful or careless, and find the most important determinants of use behaviour are influential on (un)sustainable behaviour in PSSs.

2.8.1 Critique on the TPB

Despite its dominance in the field (Yuriev et al., 2020), the TPB has been criticized on a lack of research on the relationship between behavioural intentions and actual behaviours (Miller, 2017). Moreover, like mentioned before, it lacks in areas where habits and emotions are considered (Martiskainen, 2007;

Onwezen et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2017; Klӧckner, 2013). Therefore, the TIB is used since it assesses a broader range of behavioural determinants (Vu & Nielsen, 2022). By adding habits and facilitating conditions from the TIB to the TPB, a more complete view on behaviour can be described. These are determinants that are not interactive to other theories mentioned, and they are a direct influence on the behaviour that is resulting from intentions. For example, if the intentions are to act carefully, but the person does not have the facilitating conditions to behave according to these intentions, the careful behaviour cannot be performed. Therefore these determinants are placed independently from the TPB.

2.8.2 Addition of emotions

When explaining an individuals’ pro-environmental behaviour and decision making process, researchers claim that there is a need for the integration of feelings of pride and guilt (e.g. Carrus,


12 Passafaro, & Bonnes, 2008; Klöckner & Matthies, 2004; Onwezen et al., 2013). In their research into the NAM and the integration of these emotions, Onwezen et al. (2013) found that from the personal norm, anticipated feelings of pride and guilt are stimulated, and that these emotions mediate the effects of personal norms on behaviour. Moreover, Shin et al. (2018) state that: “the influence of personal norm on the intention is partially explained by the role of anticipated guilt and pride” (p. 23).

Therefore these emotions are placed after the subjective norm (as this includes norms and values of the interviewee) and keep the influence of these emotions on the intention.

The complete integrated model of the TPB, TIB, and NAM is shown in the figure below.

Constructs from the TPB are displayed with blue outlines, in orange the TIB, and in green, the NAM.

Figure 4: Integrated model of TPB, TIB, and NAM. Solid line expressed direct hypothesized effects. Dashed arrows denote weaker (i.e., secondary) hypothesized effects. Solid lines/arrows denote stronger direct connections.

The combination of these theories is used to get a comprehensive view of the determinants that can be influential on the outcome behaviour. By questioning each of these determinants, and therefore not only looking at the outcome behaviour, this research tries to explore and analyse aspects that are important for performing careful and careless behaviour. Thus searching for the reasoning why customers handle their product the way they do. Subsequently knowing the focus


13 points when wanting to change behaviour to be fitting in the concept of PSSs. The method and the how to get to this result are explained in the next chapter.

3. Method

This research is performed according to qualitative research methods in order to get an in depth understanding of the use behaviour in PSSs. The choice for a qualitative research method derives from the focus on social and individual processes and interactions within current situations, in which experiences and meaning of the participants are important (Reulink & Lindeman, 2015; Merriam, 2002;

Kalu & Bwalya, 2017). Qualitative methods are used to address questions concerned with understanding the meaning and experience of human lives (Fossey, 2002), as these methods are very useful for exploring complex phenomena (Kalu & Bwalya, 2017; Stevens & Wrenn, 2013). Despite the fact that TPB is commonly used in quantitative research methods, it has been qualitatively used to determine alcohol drinking (Luecha, Peremans & Van Rompaey, 2021), beverage consumption (Zoellner et al., 2012), and adoption of management systems (Renzi, 2011). This chapter describes the use of semi-structured interviews, the operationalisation of the theory, the way the data is analysed, and the trustworthiness of this research.

3.1 Semi structured interviews

Fossey et al. (2002) describes that interviews are used in most types of qualitative research. Since they aim to elicit participants’ view of their lives, experiences, feelings and stories. While direct observation of behaviour on a big representative scale is expensive and time-consuming, data from relatively small samples can still provide the necessary information to realistically determine the characteristics of main user scenarios. Or at the very least, to make a judgment whether current assumptions are reasonable (Scott, 2005). Therefore, 15 consumers/participants in Dutch mobility focussed PSSs were interviewed following a semi-structured interview scheme including a topic-list. Table 1 provides an overview of the interviewees. Each interviewee is given an identifier to allow for clearer referencing throughout this paper. An interview guide was made to give structure to the interviews, which can be found in Appendix III - Interview guide. Ajzen (2006) gives examples on constructing a questionnaire, this is used and translated into more qualitative questions. The interview consisted out of 4 sections;

(1) a short introduction about the purpose of the research and gain general information about the interviewee. After that (2) questions about when and how the interviewee used the product were asked to get information for follow-up questions later on in the interview. In this phase, the concept of the customer journey is used since it can help visualize the users’ actions to achieve their goal and perspective on the process or service (Halvorsrud, Kvale & Følstad, 2016; Nenonen, 2008). By asking questions like: “How do you use the product?”, and “when do you use the product, in which situations?”, a better understanding of their perspective on the service was tried to be composed. In


14 the interview, questions are asked to explain every step that the customer takes when using a product.

To gain insight in the actions of the customer during the use of the product. Thirdly, (3) questions about the different determinants of the model were asked which will be explained in Chapter 3.2. Lastly, (4) the interview was finalized with room for further additions to previously given answers, and thanking the interviewee for their time.

Semi-structured interviews and a topic list were chosen because they accommodate space for follow-up questions (Flick & Kardorff, 2004). Since pro-environmental behaviour is a rather sensitive topic, this interview format is used to allow participants to speak freely about their past or current experiences and personal difficulties (Moser & Korstjens, 2017). This guarantees that all pertinent information is gathered and that participants are free to share their perspectives (Denise & Chery, 2012).

Table 1: Overview of sample group information

Identifier Name Type of PSS Age Occupation Gender

1 O1 Interviewee 1 OV-Bike 24 Student Female

2 O2 Interviewee 2 OV-Bike 25 Socio therapist Female

3 O3 Interviewee 3 OV-Bike 21 Student Female

4 O4 Interviewee 4 OV-Bike 25 Data Engineer Male

5 O5 Interviewee 5 OV-Bike 22 Student Female

6 Sw6 Interviewee 6 Swapfiets 25 Court clerk Female

7 Sw7 Interviewee 7 Swapfiets 21 Student Male

8 Sw8 Interviewee 8 Swapfiets 25 Consultant Male

9 Sw9 Interviewee 9 Swapfiets 23 Student Male

10 Sw10 Interviewee 10 Swapfiets 25 Sports and

entertainment retail

Male 11 Sc11 Interviewee 11 Scooter


27 Trainer Male

12 Sc12 Interviewee 12 Scooter sharing

26 Architect Male

13 Sc13 Interviewee 13 Scooter sharing

27 Project manager of video production company

Female 14 Sc14 Interviewee 14 Scooter


22 Student Female

15 Sc15 Interviewee 15 Scooter sharing

24 Lawyer at the International Child Abduction Centre


All participants were students or young urban consumers. This gives the best sample since they are more interested in usage of the product, rather than owning it (Heiskanen & Jalas, 2003). Since people from different kind of mobility PSSs were interviewed, stratified purposive sampling was used as sampling method. The researcher first searched within his personal circle, and placed

announcements on social media to ask if people are willing to participate in an interview. This


15 announcement entailed the subject of the research and the question if someone is a costumer to one of the companies; Swapfiets, OV-bike, or using shared scooters. A short description of these

companies can be found in Appendix IV - Company descriptions. The interviews were conducted online and in-person in June and July 2022. The interviews were held in the interviewees native language (Dutch), with an average duration between 30 and 60 minutes. Informed consent (Appendix I - Informed consent) was obtained for each interview.

3.2 Operationalisation of the theory

The integrated model is used to answer the main research question and its sub question. Therefore, it is used to structure the interview. Ajzen (2006), describes how to construct a questionnaire with TPB.

He starts with defining the behaviour of interest in terms of its target, action, context, and time elements. This was respectively; use behaviour of products in PSSs, one cycle of the customer journey of the PSS, and the average usage of the product in PSS in the last year. Moreover, he uses scores from one to seven, these ‘Likert Scale‘ scores, will be complemented by open questions which will be described in the following paragraphs.

Attitudes were identified by asking the interviewee about their perception of the consequences of their careful or careless behaviour. A question in the interview was for example: can you tell me something about the way you use the product throughout one use-cycle? And; tell me about the feelings or thoughts that you associate with the way you use and handle the product.

To uncover subjective norms, the interviewees were asked about the level of influence of their referents, like friends and family on their outcome behaviour. Questions like: can you tell me something about the influence of referents on the way you use a product? were asked. Follow-up questions regarding their emotions of pride and guilt, and their significance on the behaviour were asked as well.

The PBC was identified through questions about the perceived degree of control of the behaviour, or the existence of factors that help or hinder the performance of the behaviour. A question like; if you wanted to change the way you use the product, tell me what would make that hard or easy?, was asked to determine the PBC.

Habits are determined by asking for habitual actions that could influence the use behaviour.

The facilitating conditions were identified by asking for opportunities or situational constrains to perform a specific (pro-environmental) behaviour. Questions like; to what extent do you think your personal situation constrains you from behaving carefully?, were asked to determine the facilitating conditions.


16 When all these concepts were formed, a perspective of the intention towards the behaviour can be determined. Moreover, determinants that are likely to have the most influence on the use behaviour can be discovered. This way, conclusions were made about the determinant that must be focussed on when changing use behaviour in PSSs.

3.3 Analysing data

The answers from the above mentioned questions are recorded, afterwards they are transcribed via the clean verbatim approach. The transcripts are processed in NVivo 20, via the ‘Codes and Coding’

technique of Miles and Huberman (1994). In figure 5, the initial steps of analysing the data are displayed. At first, a priory set of codes were made to code the interviews. These codes were established by taking the main research question, interview questions, and the integral model used into consideration (Atkinson, 2002). Examples of initial codes are ‘Attitude’ and ‘Subjective norm’.

When these codes were formed, further coding of the interviews started. Almost all the sentences were coded, in an attempt of minimizing data loss. During the process of coding there was a high chance of inadequacy of the codes, since this research has a qualitative and explorative nature.

Therefore, additional emerging codes were formed (Sim et al., 2018). Previously coded data needed to be revised, these additional codes were grouped and categorised as well. For the last step of the coding process, Atkinson (2002) describes the importance of rationalizing and re-reading the codes and coded interviews, in a chance to eliminate double codes. The data was handled by only one researcher, which contributes to the decrease of intra-rater and inter-rater variability (Bryman, 2016).

All files are stored on a private computer to ensure confidentiality of the documents. After transcribing and coding the interviews, the codes were analysed. Here, the Gioia method is used to be able to cluster and visualise the given answers, additionally it has been used to write the result section of this report (Gioia, Corley, & Hamilton, 2013).

Figure 5: Atkinsons (2002) steps of data coding



3.4 Trustworthiness, reliability, and validity of methods

The trustworthiness of a research is determined by four aspects, namely; credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability (Bryman, 2016). The credibility of the research is covered by the inclusion of an extensive literature review on behavioural determinants and triangulate this with the held interviews as a source of data. Transferability is harder to achieve because of the research’s specific context, mobility focussed PSSs, is difficult to put in another context. Broad estimations into different contexts can be made, though, because consumer use behaviour can be generalizable. This will be covered in the discussion. Dependability corresponds with reliability (Bryman, 2016). To safeguard the reliability of a research, Bryman (2016) describes three prominents that need to be considered. These prominents, and the way they integrate in this research are described in the table below.

Table 2: Safeguarding reliability of research

Prominent Meaning This research

Stability Referred to as test-retest reliability, this involves determining if a measure is stable over time.

This research is performed over a set period of time; therefore this factor of reliability cannot totally be safeguarded.

Internal reliability

The indicators that make up the scale or index must be consistent.

Guaranteed by implementing multiple sources of evidence, using well-known theories, and asking for peer feedback from experts.

Inter-rater reliability

The great deal of subjective judgement that engages in activities such as, recording of observations, or the translation of data into categories.

Only having one researcher manage the categorising and coding of the interviews, including the interview guide, and

transcriptions of the interviews.

The confirmability parallels with objectivity of the study. Moser and Korstjens (2018) define confirmability as: “the degree to which the findings of the research study could be confirmed by other researchers. Confirmability is concerned with establishing that data and interpretations of the findings are not figments of the inquirer” (p. 121). To make sure the study is repeatable, and therefore objective, research data is made available in terms of the interview guide, coding process, anonymised transcripts, and quotes in the results section (Korstjens & Moser, 2018). Moreover, an overview of the analysis to write the results section according to Gioia et al. (2013) method is given in Appendix II - Quotes supporting the results. This creates transparency in the research process and gives readers the freedom to interpret the data in their way. Higher transferability is achieved by interviewing a diversity of interviewees within the set boundaries of this research in terms of sample group and time. By setting sample boundaries, external validity is tried to be achieved.



3.5 Ethical issues

In terms of transparency and accountability of the researcher and the ethical issues of a research, Kalu

& Bwalya (2017) describe that for a good qualitative research study, the researcher should “openly stating how informed consent was sought from the research participants; demonstrating to the reader how the respondents’ anonymity was preserved, informing the reader for instance, whether the participants’ participation in the research was voluntary or not, and if liberty was theirs to withdraw from the research if they wished or chose to” (p. 49). Additionally, informing the reader whether the respondents are briefed on the research findings and if they had access to the research's eventual publication. All these points are tried to be acknowledge by letting the interviewee sign an informed consent form, which can be found in Appendix 1 - Informed Consent. The next chapter will describe the results and outcome of these interviews.

4. Results

This chapter describes the approach from the previous chapter and will therefore discuss the results from interviewing 15 users of mobility focussed PSSs. More specifically, OV-bike, Swapfiets, and shared scooters (e.g., Check, Felix, Go-sharing). During the interviews, the concepts of the integrated model were questioned. More importantly, their influence on the intention and eventual outcome behaviour.

Each of the following subchapters describes a determinant of behaviour mentioned in the theory. Each of these chapters, describes its influence on careful and careless behaviour. After that, a brief overview of the results is given. Afterwards, the performance of the model is discussed.

4.1 Perceived Behavioural Control

When asked about the PBC, interviewees mention that the questioned behaviour is fully in their control, or they have a reasonably high control over their behaviour. However, they discuss factors that could help or hinder to perform their intended behaviour. For example, the condition of the product. If the product is in good condition, the interviewee was more likely to handle the product more carefully (O1; 02). Vice versa, the product is used less careful or even careless when being in a bad condition (O1; O5; Sw8; Sw10; Sc13). Seeing others behave carefully or carelessly can have a positive and respectively negative influence on the use behaviour (O1: O2; Sw10). Moreover, they mention that their level of knowledge about the product helped, or could help increase, their level of carefulness of using the product (O2; O3; O4; Sw9; Sc12; Sc13; Sc14; Sc15). On the other hand, their lack of knowledge of the product can result in careless use behaviour (Sw6; Sw9; Sw10). Involvement by the company could help to close this knowledge gap, which may result in careful use behaviour (O2;

Sw10; Sc13). As some interviewees mention that an increased involvement could help to increase their knowledge about the product, which could result in a higher level of carefulness while using the product (Sw8; Sw10; Sc13). The flow diagram below shows different quotes that relate to a positively


19 influenced PBC. There are three main categories to be described that positively influenced the PBC, product/service-related conditions, careful behaviour others, and the own sufficiency of facilitators like the earlier mentioned knowledge gap. Supportive quotes to these categories can be found in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Clustered quotes that positively influence the PBC

The PBC of a shared scooter decreases with the execution of one of the later steps in the process, parking. Since there are limitations in terms of parking areas. Parking is only possible inside geographical limited locations known as, service areas (servicegebieden). This can cause stress since the price of renting the scooter is determined by a price per minute. Interviewee 13 (Sc13) tells the following about this:

“Sometimes these service areas are already full, for example when I go to the beach, and there are already too many scooters at the location and my scooter does not fit in the service area.

Then I must look for a place to park, which costs money and that is a little ‘stressy’, because you want to park it as fast as possible.”

As shown in the quote above, stress combined with the business model of a price per minute can, in this case, result in stress. The feeling of stress could result in careless behaviour in the parking phase.

However, no interviewee explicitly mentions this. The PBC of the bike users also decreases when they need to park their bike, as some interviewees want to lock their bike on to something, which might not be possible in every situation. Due to contractual requirements, some of them only single lock their bicycles. This is because they must be able to show the key if their bicycle is stolen. By doing this the customer does not need to pay the full price, but a reduced one (see


20 Appendix IV - Company descriptions). Moreover, the interviewees mention a considerable amount of factors that negatively influence the PBC, these factors and corresponding quotes are displayed in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Clustered quotes that negatively influence the PBC

Shown in the figure above, there are three main categories that negatively influence the PBC. Firstly, product/service related conditions that are mainly focussed at the condition of the product and the service provided by the company. Secondly, careless behaviour also having an unfavourable influence on the PBC. And lastly, own lack of facilitators is mainly focussed on the lack of knowledge customers experience when using the product.

To conclude, the PBC contributes to careful behaviour as all the interviewees mention that they have full control over their behaviour. For the use of shared scooters, the PBC decreases because of service areas and a payment method of a price per minute, which can cause careless behaviour.

Moreover, they mention factors that could help or hinder to perform their intended behaviour, therefore having an overlay with facilitating conditions. These conditions and factors will be elaborated on in the next chapter.

4.2 Facilitating conditions

The interviewees talked about Facilitating Conditions that had a positive influence on their behaviour and were facilitators for careful behaviour. However, some of these facilitators were also mentioned when talking about facilitators for careless behaviour. Resulting from the interviews, the table below is formed. Here, facilitators and their contribution to careful, or careless behaviour is displayed. Some facilitators were mentioned more often compared to others, therefore ‘+’ represents 1 or 2 mentions by different interviewees. ‘++’ Represents 3 to 6 mentions by different interviewees.



Table 3: Influence of Facilitators on Careful and Careless behaviour

Facilitators Careful behaviour Careless behaviour

Condition of the product + +

Knowledge about the product ++ ++

Age of the user ++

Wealth + +

Subjective norm/Nurture ++ +

Personal moods + +

(lack of) Interest by company + ++

Alcohol consumption ++

As shown, the majority of facilitators have a facilitating function for both careless and careful behaviour. The ‘condition of the product’ can have an influence on both careful and careless behaviour, as interviewees mention that if the product is in good condition, he/she was more likely to handle the product more carefully. Vice versa, the product is used less careful or even careless when it is in a bad condition.

The level of ‘knowledge about the product’ is seen as the amount of knowledge the interviewee has about the product. Interviews show that this can facilitate both careful and careless behaviour. As little information about the product might resolve in careless behaviour. On the other hand, having the right amount of information about the product can support careful behaviour. Interviewee O2 mentions the following: “because I have knowledge about how to use the product (…) I know how to cycle and know that you have to hold out your hand when going to the right or left, that helps with the safe use of the bike”. Careless behaviour as a result of a lower level of knowledge is mentioned by interviewee Sw6, she tells that: “the lack of information results in a sustainable unconscious choice, behaviour, or ignorance of it. I can imagine that it is not good to build new bikes all the time, but I am just not fully aware of it’’. Another interviewee (Sw9) mentions that the lack of knowledge about the product is preventing him to handle the product carefully. Because he knows little about the materials needed to fix a bike, and the costs of it.

The ‘age of the user’ is described as the increasing age of the user of the PSS, which positively influences careful behaviour in different ways, as interviewee (O5) mentioned: “yes my age helped [to behave carefully] because I don’t see the urge to mess around on the bike anymore, which maybe, If I were a child, I would. I'm older now and what is reasonable and I don't do that anymore”. Moreover, interviewee O3 talks about the awareness of traffic around her, and that as a kid she was less concerned with the traffic around her.

‘Wealth’ is described as to what extend wealth can help or hinder to perform careful and careless behaviour. Wealth is a particularly difficult concept to grasp, as interviewees mention that


22 because of the fact that they work and earn money, they are able to use the PSS. Which in a broader sense can relate to the last part in the definition of careless behaviour of Schaefers et al. (2016, p. 5)

“overuse of the accessed good”. As people who earn money, might use the service more often than necessary. On the other hand, it does not influence the way they handle the product. Some mention that they are able to use the PSS because they do not have the money to buy the product. Interviewee SW9 mentions that he does not have a lot of money and is therefore using the service, because this way he can use the product, without the costs of repairing it. Also, he mentioned that if he would have had more money, he would probably buy a product and handle it carefully. This tends to the fact that that right now, he is not handling his bike carefully. Additionally regarding owning money, Sw8 mentions that: “I am a student, and I can’t afford three Swap-bikes being stolen, so that is why I consciously (double) lock my bike, but I would do the same with my own bike”. This kind of (lack of) wealth results in careful behaviour regarding double locking a bike. Another interviewee (Sc15) mentions that because the price of the use of the scooter is determined per minute it can be a bit stressful, but because she is wealthy enough to pay for those extra minutes, she stays calm and collected and does not get affected by it. Therefore wealth can contribute to both careful and careless behaviour.

The influence of the ‘subjective norm/nurture’ is explained in chapter 4.4.

‘Personal mood’ is explained as the headspace, feeling or condition in which a person is. It appeared that the personal mood has the power to let the customer behave carefully and carelessly, as one interviewee mentions (O1):

“For example, if I have a YOLO day, and things don’t work out in study/job, I could handle my OV bike with great care to jack up my karma-points (…) but it can also workout the opposite, that I don’t care about the bike anymore, I can park it a little harder in the bicycle stand.”

Another interviewee (Sc12) mentions that he is very aware of his mood. He mentions that even if he is stressed or has an awful day, he would not take it out on the product. So that would not influence his behaviour and how he would handle the product or his actions in traffic. However, like discussed in the PBC, when talking about the parking ‘phase’ of using a shared scooter, stress can be involved.

Interviewee Sw13 tells the following about that: “then I have to look for a place to park, which costs money and that is a little ‘stressy’, because you want to park it at fast as possible”. This stress and the urge to park it as fast as possible, may result in careless behaviour. As she continues about her frustration towards the service areas; “(…) the more I get frustrated, the faster I want to race over the curb. Sometimes I think like; I just want to get rid of it. In these kind of moments I think my frustrating feeling does not contribute to careful use [of the scooter]”.


23 The ‘(lack of) interest of the company’ is described as the level of interest or attention by the company in the customer and its product. The (lack of) interest by the company also turned out to influence both careful and careless behaviour. Since too little interest by the company can be a trigger for careless behaviour, as interviewees mention that the company probably would not care if he/she handles the product with less care. An increased interest by the company, for example texting Swapfiets users if they checked the tire this morning, or check the OV-bike together after handing in the bike, could increase careful behaviour. One interviewee (Sw10) even mentions the following about the availability of Swapfiets’ customer service: “you know that their customer service is hard to reach, that is why you behave more carelessly with the bike”.

‘Alcohol consumption’ describes a certain level of consumed alcoholic drinks by the user.

Which turned out to only have an influence on careless behaviour as interviewee O2 mentions: “(...) but there are also moments I handle the bike with less care, when I drink for example”.

To conclude, facilitating conditions can have a positive influence on careful behaviour when the corresponding facilitators are fulfilled. However, only three of the facilitators can be influenced by the PSSs company. Namely, the condition of the product, knowledge about the product, and the (lack of) interest by the company. On the other hand, facilitating conditions also have a big influence on careless behaviour, as anything but the age of the user is influential on careless behaviour.

4.3 Attitude

Most people have a positive attitude towards their own behaviour, regardless if their own behaviour is careful or careless. Even people who behave carelessly do not really care that they do. Sw10 describes: “(…) you pay for a product that is always usable, but then you have a bike that does not work, so then I am like; I will just bike to their shop on a flat tire’’. Thus they still have a positive attitude towards their careless behaviour. Some tenants of an OV-bike assess the quality of the bike in the before using it (O1; O4). If the flaws are too big, they want to return their product. However, if the bike turns out to have some (heavy) flaws in a later use stage, the product is used until the planned return of the bike. Most of the shared scooter users have a very neutral attitude towards their behaviour and therefore might have lower expectations about the scooter. Moreover, if the condition of the product is worse than expected, they still use it because the choice of using a shared scooter results from the need for a quick transportation mode. Sc11:

“because I want it to be the fastest way home, I want the be home quickly as well (…) if a mirror is missing and I think it is going to fall off at any moment and needs to be fixed now: that is not my problem, because somebody else is at the cause of this problem, and I am not going to fix that because it is not my problem’’.


24 When narrowing down attitudes that contribute to careless behaviour, there are two main categories to be made. (1) Justify own careless behaviour by blaming the company, and a (2) positive attitude towards careless behaviour. Relevant quotes that are supportive to these categories are shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Clustered quotes of attitude contributing to careless behaviour

In addition, as mentioned in the chapter 4.1 about PBC, when the product is in a good condition, the interviewee is more likely to act carefully. While on the other hand, if a product is in a bad condition, the person might behave carelessly. As this changes the users’ perspective on the product this can be seen as a change in attitude of the user. Interviewee O2 gives a prime example of this: “if I get a rickety bike from them, I would handle the bike less careful compared to it being a brand new one”. There are two main distinctions to be made when talking about a attitude that positively contributes to careful behaviour namely, a neutral attitude towards using the PSSs, and their attitude towards the product and others. Corresponding quotes to these distinctions are displayed in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Clustered quotes of attitude contributing to careful behaviour

The overall attitude of the interviewees towards a PSS is generally positive, as most of them think it is a good concept. Some mention that cars/scooters are not used 99% of the time, and you need less products to satisfy the same amount of people. The ease of use and flexibility of the service are also mentioned as positive aspects. On the other hand, the fact that the quality of the products is


25 decreasing is also mentioned multiple times. Even to a point where use of the product might not feel safe anymore because of two missing mirrors (Sc15). Furthermore, multiple interviewees mention that PSSs are getting expensive.

In summary, interviewees had a generally positive view on their own behaviour in a PSS regardless if their behaviour was careful or careless. The fact that the user can have positive attitude towards their own careless behaviour is worrying, to say the least. This justification of a positive attitude towards careless behaviour can be even stronger if the product is in bad condition. Since the quality and therefore condition of the product is mentioned in this determinant and in the facilitating conditions as well, this must be taken into serious consideration as an influence on the outcome behaviour. The change in the users perspective and attitude is of great importance since this might change their careless behaviour.

4.4 Subjective norm

Within the subjective norm, the power and influence by the significant referents are questioned. The influence of family, friends and colleagues are considered. However, the influence by the person who receives the OV-bike or Swapfiets after rental also turned out to have a great, positive, influence on the level of carefullness. Since consumers have to return their bike and some social pressure appears to hand in the bike in a good condition. As interviewee O3 mentions that: “I would feel very guilty if I would hand in the bike broken/damaged (…) than I would feel very guilty and I want to prevent that from happening”. O2 talks about this subject in the following matter: “if somebody checks the bike with you when you rent the bike, (…) and at the end of the rental period, you do the same thing. I think that would influence my behaviour”. Moreover, family, friends, and external pressure like OV- bike/Swapfiets can have the influence to perform careful behaviour, as well as they have the power not to let the interviewee behave carelessly. Especially parents and the way the interviewees are raised have a big influence on the high level of careful behaviour, 8 out of 15 interviewees mentioned that parents have a positive influence on their careful behaviour. Quotes that are supportive to this manner and are therefore contributors to careful behaviour, are shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Quotes supporting subjective norm contributions to careful behaviour

Contradicting to parents, friends have the influence to let the interviewee perform carelessly.

As well as they have the power and influence not to perform careful behaviour. A lot of interviewees mention this, and the fact that it has a connection to the use of alcohol. Interviewee O2 says the




Related subjects :