The previous chapters indicate a superior role of the service component in performance-oriented systems. For example, the PSS literature identified an increased trend of 'servitization' within system offerings and the computational sciences explicitly declare these systems as being a service model. The three commonly described characteristics of services are intangibility, the uno-actu-principle and the integration of the external factor [Torney et al., 2009]. The first aspects refers to the non-physical character of services, whereas the second aspect describes the circumstance that a service is produced and consumed at the same time. The third prerequisite accentuates the active role of the consumer during production of the service. An abstract concept that is discussing the role of goods and services in the value proposition originates from the marketing sciences and has been directly linked to the aforementioned theories only to a very limited extend, e.g. [Kowalkowski, 2010; Kindström, 2010]. According to [Vargo and Lusch, 2008] service-dominant logic (S-D logic) as opposed to the goods-dominant logic (G-D logic) “superordinates service (the process of providing benefit) to products (units of output that are sometimes used in the process)” and furthermore “that it is not products that are the aim of the customer`s acquisition but rather the benefit available […] customers purchase solutions”. According to the authors, this concept supports a recent development of marketing from management of customers and markets towards collaboration with customers and partners to produce and sustain value [also cp. Vargo and Lush, 2004; Ballantyne and Varey, 2008; Maglio and Spohrer, 2007]. The concept of dominant logic is purely economic driven; ecological benefits of service-oriented offerings are embraced under the term 'functional economy'. According to [Stahel, 1997] the objective of a functional economy is “to create the highest possible use value for the longest possible time while consuming as few material resources and energy as possible”. As a strategy to reduce the volume and speed of the resource flow and therefore resource efficiency, Stahel proposes system solutions from a technical as well as an economic perspective, e.g. selling results instead of goods. The service-dominant logic is suitable to partially explain the phenomenon in the market diffusion or operational phase as it clarifies the importance of the service component in the system offering. Additionally it supports the evaluation of [Cusumano, 2010a] who characterizes the phenomenon as being solemnly a marketing strategy. Contrary to this perspective is the evidence from the PSS literature which identified the need to develop integrated operational tools and methods for planning, development, provision and use
phase [Meier et al., 2010]. These findings indicate an explicit need to develop strategic concepts that start well before the diffusion phase.
The phenomenon of performance-oriented systems is regularly characterized as product-sharing in certain industries, e.g. car-sharing in the mobility industry. A comprehensive classification of commodity sharing is provided by [Belk, 2010] in his recent literature review of anthropological studies which will be briefly summarized in the following. In historic terms, sharing is regarded to be the oldest and most basic form of human economic behavior. The rise of the rational choice theory, e.g [Ostrom, 1998;
Coleman and Fararo; 1993], that assumes selfish individuals competing for scarce resources accompanied the emergence of a consumer culture towards increased atomization, possessive individualism and less sharing in reality [Belk, 2007; Tuan, 1982]. The diffusion of the internet in the last decade revitalizes the patterns of sharing in western societies as new phenomena emerge, e.g. open source communities, that also attract new research. Sharing as a form of economic distribution among a group is the antidote to ownership and materialism, which are characterized by privacy and individualism. "Sharing [...] improves the efficiency of resource use, increases security by sowing seeds of reciprocal obligations, or enhances the status or mating opportunities of those who share" [Belk, 2010; based on Gurven, 2006; Hawkes, 1991;
Kelly, 1995]. Because of these characteristics, economically disadvantaged groups have widely adopted this type of collective behavior. The advantage of sharing is more solidarity without compromising the level of consumerism. A negative effect of sharing is the feeling of dependency by those who do not contribute into the commons. [Belk, 2010] discusses sharing as an economic behavior in the broader context of gift giving and commodity exchange. The author asserts that "the lines between gift giving, sharing, and commodity exchange are imprecise" [Belk, 2010] and further, that there is a continuum between pure gift, i.e. no reward expectation, and a pure trade, i.e. the exchange of money for resource. In between he detects several blurred modes of commodity exchange, e.g. the reciprocal gift that is expecting a direct or indirect benefit.
Generally, gifts reinforce connections between individuals and act as a form of social communication. The primary objective of a trade or barter is an increase of materialistic consumption which is rather impersonal. All modes of gift giving and commodity exchange along the continuum are characterized by a transfer of ownership between individuals, de jure or at least de facto. In contrast, the separation between distinct parties in commodity sharing as basis to assess a transfer is difficult. For example, an
ideal mode of sharing can be observed in the pooling of resources within private households [cp. Hunt, 2005]. Only some individuals of the family are contributing the necessary resource(s) into the family boundary, whereas all are allowed to use or consume them. Exemplary, all members of the family use the furniture or the food commons within the refrigerator. Hence, several authors accentuate the role of the ordinary social context for sharing, e.g. the family boundary or, in a larger context, the village, e.g. [Belk, 1988]. Within this boundary, sharing is not an exchange of commodities but rather a contribution into a commons. The more users contribute into the commons, the more possibilities arise for all individuals. Besides the social context, researchers also stress that the relationship between people (independent vs.
interdependent) and the relationship between people and objects (alienable vs.
inalienable) are influencing the selection of the economic behavior towards giving, sharing or exchange [cp. Humphrey and Hugh-Jones, 1992]. Remarkably, all three types of behavior are coexisting within a defined group boundary, e.g. the family. The choice of behavior depends on the occasion. Sharing as an economic behavior can be further segregated into the two types of 'sharing in' and 'sharing out' [cp. Widlok, 2004]. 'Sharing in' is closer to the notion of gift giving as it creates bonds between individuals through expanding the domain of common property, e.g. moving into the apartment of the girlfriend. Thus, this type broadens the individual, private boundary in including other (often closely related) persons. In contrast, 'sharing out' characterizes the division of a resource or commodity between individuals with the same discrete economic interest, e.g. the acquisition of an expensive sportscar. This type preserves the self/ other boundary and is not intended to create bonds. The latter type has also been detected within the notions 'collaborative consumption', e.g. [Botsman and Rogers, 2010] and 'shareconomy' [CeBIT, 2013], both reflecting on its relation towards a classic economic-driven commodity exchange. To summarize, the general social sciences provide a broader perspective on sharing as an economic behavior that comprises mixed characteristics of gift giving and classic commodity exchange. The behavior of sharing has been revitalized in western societies with the emergence of the internet. Especially the second type of 'sharing out' with a clear economic intention reflects on the phenomenon within this work. The creation of 'shareconomy', that inherently merges sharing and economy, seems most capable to serve as an umbrella term for this research, due to its strong connection to industrial praxis, i.e. integrating the firm perspective, as well as its established linkage to the notions of software-as-a-service and cloud computing of the previous chapter.