Last mile mobility in combination with public transport is a popular solutions to sustainable transport in increasingly urbanized societies. Over the last few years, more and more different concepts for this last mile mobility have been introduced.
What business model is best for which cases? What vehicle type suits which needs? Do certain business models work better with certain types of vehicles than others?
Product-oriented and use-oriented PSS, in particular, are not by definition more resource-efficient than business models based on product sales. PSS can have benefits for businesses or consumers, but certainly not in every instance. There are a lot of other Sustainable Business Model Innovation that can be adopted or combined to have a better impact on people, planet and profit.
How can the two cases selected learn from each other in order to develop a more sustainable business model?
Matrix of Case Selected ranked on the level of responsibility and based on their business model structure.
“Felyx is a fast, convenient and sustainable way to move through the city”
“A convenient ride for the last leg of your journey”
Felix - Service System Sketch
OV Bike - Service System Sketch
Using a system service sketch the differences between the centralised nature of OV Bike and decentralised system of Felyx were highlighted. A clear difference is also seen in the user-product interaction which is more personal for OV Bike due to the presence of guards on the moment of getting and returning the bike while it is platform-based in the case of Felyx where all the interactions happen through the mobile App.
Customer Journey Map
Both lack of a feeling of attachment since they are access-based solutions. They raise some feeling of responsibility but in different ways. OV Bike has a person that checks the bike once returned which might reduce act of vandalism and theft. With Felyx, users feel more responsible while using the product since they might perceive it as expensive and cool, so this may have a reduction effect on vandalism acts.
As mentioned in the literature review, a strategy that either Felyx and OV Bike can use to overcome the problem of ‘careless’ and therefore increase a feeling of attachment is the personalisation of the product. According to Tunn (2019) this might have positive effect on the consumer behaviour.
The multi-level perspective pathway of Felyx
he multi-level perspective pathway of OV-bike
Multi-level perspective is a framework for analysing socio-technical transitions. The model states that these transitions happen through three distinct levels and in this way deals with the complexity and resistance to change. These levels consist of the landscape, the socio-technical regime and the niche level.
A multi level perspective analysis showed a difference in the socio-technological transition pathways. OV Bike was lifted into the regime by regime actors themselves through a transformation pathway, while Felyx is a niche actor that is just entering the regime but is not mature yet.
Through sustainable business model canvases the main differences found were related to either product category type and service offer. The different vehicle types leads to different values for the consumers. For example, Felyx users might value the e-scooters for their speed, while OV Bike users might value the bikes for the exercise they get riding them. The type of service also dictates that the companies require different infrastructures and also provide different use scenarios.
