What Drives Corporate Carsharing Acceptance? A French Case Study

Authors: Sylvain Fleury, Ariane Tom, Eric Jamet, and Elsa Colas-Maheux
Date published: February 2017
Research commissioned by: Centre for Research in Psychology, Cognition and Communication, University of Rennes 2

Why did we select this research?

Corporate carsharing allows employees to make use of a fleet of vehicles for their business travels. It offers a means of managing vehicle fleets more optimally, bringing both economic and environmental benefits. However, this kind of use can cause concerns, and even rejection in some cases.

Key findings

  • All the UTAUT* dimensions except social influence had an impact on behavioral intentions. 

  • Facilitating conditions strongly impacted behavioral intentions through the mediation of effort expectancy. Participants tended to consider that a carsharing service is easy to use if conditions facilitate it. 

  • Regarding perceived environmental friendliness, results revealed that this had only an indirect impact on behavioral intentions, mediated by performance expectancy. Carsharing was thus considered more useful if it was regarded as an environmentally friendly good practice. 

  • Effort expectancy was the most important factor in both the direct and indirect determination of behavioral intentions. 

  • According to these results, facilitating conditions strongly determine effort expectancy. One solution to enhance corporate carsharing use would therefore be to design a simple tutorial. Furthermore, the possibility of contacting a call center when any difficulty occurs would provide reassuring potential support. 


*Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, which consists of the following variables: Perceived usefulness, Perceived ease of use, Intention to use, Social influence, Facilitating conditions


References

Fleury, S., Tom, A., Jamet, E., & Colas-Maheux, E. (2017). What drives corporate carsharing acceptance? A French case study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 45, 218-227. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847816306118.