Quality Management of Bikesharing and Kicksharing Digital Services: Evaluation of NPS and CSI Indices

Quality Management of Bikesharing and Kicksharing Digital Services: Evaluation of NPS and CSI Indices

Authors

  • Larisa V. Lapidus Lomonosov Moscow State University
  • Aleksandr O. Gostilovich Lomonosov Moscow State University
  • Ivan S. Trofimov Lomonosov Moscow State University

Keywords:

Sharing economy, shared mobility, kicksharing, bikesharing, the problem of the first and last mile, consumer loyalty index, consumer satisfaction index, sharing services

Abstract

The development of the digital economy and innovative technologies have opened up unprecedented opportunities to solve the problem of the first and last mile in the field of urban mobility. Having made a trip by metro, bus or other types of public transport, a citizen is forced to walk to his / her destination. To solve this problem, digital bicycle rental services (bikesharing) and kick scooters (kicksharing) began to appear in large cities around the world, while the development of batteries and mobile digital technologies contributed to increasing the availability of such services, which manifested itself in the growth of their popularity and mass penetration into the lives of citizens. More and more new companies began to enter this market, and the task of managing the quality of bikesharing and kicksharing services was put among the priorities for both business and society and the state. The aim of the study is to evaluate loyalty index (NPS) and consumer satisfaction (CSI) with the quality of bikesharing and kicksharing digital services. The research methods include: a sociological survey (228 respondents from Moscow and the Moscow region who use bikesharing and kicksharing at least once a year); assessment of the level of loyalty using the Consumer loyalty index (NPS); assessment of the level of user satisfaction using the consumer satisfaction index (CSI). The results of the study showed that users are quite loyal (NPS = 11.84%) and satisfied (CSI = 71.04%) with the services of bike sharing and kicksharing services. The drivers of loyalty were convenience, a variety of choices and the sensations received from the trip. The drivers of satisfaction were the availability of the location, the technical condition of the vehicles and the cost of the trip. To a lesser extent, users are satisfied with the possibility of buying a subscription, trip insurance, the weight of a bicycle or scooter. Thus, despite a fairly good level of loyalty indices and satisfaction of citizens with the quality of digital bike sharing and kicksharing services, zones are allocated for further study in order to improve the quality of these services. Operators of bikesharing and kicksharing digital services should pay attention to the drivers of consumer loyalty and satisfaction, to those determinants of the quality of services with which users are less satisfied, especially if the level of importance is higher than the level of satisfaction. The results of the study will be useful to state authorities in terms of regulating bike sharing and kicksharing, taking into account the main drivers of loyalty and user satisfaction. The conclusions and results obtained can form the basis for further scientific research in order to study the dynamics of the quality level of bikesharing and kicksharing digital services, as well as to clarify and identify new determinants of quality that appear in the evolution of the services themselves.

Author Biographies

Larisa V. Lapidus, Lomonosov Moscow State University

DSc (Economics), Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Head of the Laboratory of Applied Industry Analysis

Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation.

ORCID: 0000-0002-9099-6707,
vlapidus@econ.msu.ru

Aleksandr O. Gostilovich , Lomonosov Moscow State University

PhD, Engineer of the Laboratory of Applied Industry Analysis

Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation.

ORCID: 0000-0003-4146-6934
gostaleks@mail.ru

Ivan S. Trofimov, Lomonosov Moscow State University

Postgraduate student

Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation.

ORCID: 0000-0002-7338-4207
vomifortis@gmail.com

References

Лапидус Б.М., Лапидус Л.В. Гладкая бесшовная транспортная система — инновационная модель будущего: природа, сущность, детерминанты качества // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 6: Экономика. 2017. № 2. С. 45–64.

Лапидус Б.М., Лапидус Л.В. Формирование бесшовной транспортной системы — новая парадигма открытого железнодорожного транспорта в условиях цифровой трансформации // Проблемы теории и практики управления. 2018. № 1. С. 79–88.

Лапидус Л.В., Гостилович А.О. Совершенствование качества услуг каршеринговых сервисов. Оценка лояльности и потребительской удовлетворенности // Маркетинг и маркетинговые исследования. 2023a. № 1. С. 64–77.

Лапидус Л.В., Гостилович А.О. Управление качеством шеринговых услуг: оценка уровней лояльности и потребительской удовлетворенности райдшерингом // Ars Administrandi (Искусство управления). 2023b. Т. 15. № 2. С. 272–291. DOI: 10.17072/2218-9173-2023-2-272-291

Bieliński T., Ważna A. Electric Scooter Sharing and Bike Sharing User Behaviour and Characteristics // Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12. Is. 22. DOI: 10.3390/su12229640

Canale A., Tesoriere G., Campisi T. The MAAS Development as a Mobility Solution Based on the Individual Needs of Transport Users // Proceedings of the International Conference of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering 2019 (ICCMSE-2019). Online: AIP Publishing, 2019. Vol. 2186. Is. 1 DOI: 10.1063/1.5138073

Chen M., Wang D., Sun Y., Waygood E.O.D., Yang W.A Comparison of Users’ Characteristics Between Station-Based Bikesharing System and Free-Floating Bikesharing System: Case Study in Hangzhou, China // Transportation. 2020. Vol. 47. P. 689–704. DOI: 10.1007/s11116-018-9910-7

Cohen B., Kietzmann J. Ride on! Mobility Business Models for the Sharing Economy // Organization & Environment. 2014. Vol. 27. Is. 3. P. 279–296. DOI: 10.1177/1086026614546199

DeMaio P. Bike-Sharing: History, Impacts, Models of Provision and Future // Journal of Transportation. 2009. Vol. 12. Is. 4. P. 41-56. DOI: 10.5038/2375-0901.12.4.3

Eboli L., Mazzulla G.A New Customer Satisfaction Index for Evaluating Transit Service Quality // Journal of Public Transportation. 2009. Vol. 12. Is. 3. P. 21–37. DOI: 10.5038/2375-0901.12.3.2

Fistola R., Gallo M., La Rocca R.A. Micro-Mobility in the “Virucity”. The Effectiveness of E-Scooter Sharing // Transportation Research Procedia. 2022. Vol. 60. P. 464–471. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2021.12.060

Fitt H., Curl A. The Early Days of Shared Micromobility: A Social Practices Approach // Journal of Transport Geography. 2020. Vol. 86. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102779

Hill N., Brierley G., MacDougall R. How to Measure Customer Satisfaction. Hampshire: Gower Publishing, 2003.

Huang Ch., Chang Y.-Y. A Study of Public Renting Bicycle System Considering Location and Number of Bicycle // Journal of Innovative Technology. 2019. Vol. 1. Is. 1. P. 13–20. DOI: 10.29424/JIT.201903_1(1).0002

Link C., Strasser C., Hinterreiter M. Free-Floating Bikesharing in Vienna — A User Behaviour Analysis // Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2020. Vol. 135. P. 168–182. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2020.02.020

Pieriegud J. E-mobility On-demand in the Central and Eastern European Countries: Current Trends, Carriers and Opportunities // Transport Economics and Logistics. 2019. Vol. 81. P. 143–154. DOI: 10.26881/etil.2019.81.12

Shaheen S. Cohen A., Chan N., Bansal A. Sharing Strategies: Carsharing, Shared Micromobility (Bikesharing and Scooter Sharing), Transportation Network Companies, Microtransit, and Other Innovative Mobility Modes // Transportation, Land Use, and Environmental Planning / ed. by E. Deakin. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2020. P. 237–262. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-815167-9.00013-X

Shaheen S., Guzman S., Zhang H. Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present, and Future // Transportation Research Record. 2010. Vol. 2143. Is. 1. P. 159–167. DOI: 10.3141/2143-20

Turoń K., Czech P., Tóth J. Safety and Security Aspects in Shared Mobility Systems // Zeszyty Naukowe. Transport /Politechnika Śląska. 2019. № 104. P. 169–175. DOI: 10.20858/sjsutst.2019.104.15

Xin F., Chen Y., Wang X., Chen X. Cyclist Satisfaction Evaluation Model for Free-Floating Bike-Sharing System: A Case Study of Shanghai // Transportation Research Record. 2018. Vol. 2672. Is. 31. P. 21–32. DOI: 10.1177/0361198118770193

Xue X. Wang Z., Liu X., Zhou Z., Song R. A Choice Behavior Model of Bike-Sharing Based on User Perception, Psychological Expectations, and Loyalty // Journal of Advanced Transportation. 2022. Vol. 2022. DOI: 10.1155/2022/6695977

Yang H. Huo J., Bao Y., Li X., Yang L., Cherry Ch.R. Impact of E-Scooter Sharing on Bike Sharing in Chicago // Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2021. Vol. 154. P. 23–36. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.09.012

Ziedan A., Shah N.R., Wen Y., Brakewood C., Cherry Ch.R., Cole J. Complement or Compete? The Effects of Shared Electric Scooters on Bus Ridership // Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2021. Vol. 101. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.103098

Downloads

Published

2023-12-29

How to Cite

Quality Management of Bikesharing and Kicksharing Digital Services: Evaluation of NPS and CSI Indices. (2023). Public Administration. E-Journal (Russia), 101, 27-43. https://spajournal.ru/index.php/spa/article/view/535

Issue

Section

Scientific articles

Categories

How to Cite

Quality Management of Bikesharing and Kicksharing Digital Services: Evaluation of NPS and CSI Indices. (2023). Public Administration. E-Journal (Russia), 101, 27-43. https://spajournal.ru/index.php/spa/article/view/535

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 > >> 

Similar Articles

1-10 of 212

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Loading...