Off-Platform Threats in On-Demand Services

References

• Bai J, So KC, Tang CS, Chen X, Wang H (2019) Coordinating supply and demand on an on-demand service platform with impatient customers. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 21(3):556–570.Link, Google Scholar
• Benjaafar S, Hu M (2020) Operations management in the age of the sharing economy: What is old and what is new? Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 22(1):93–101.Link, Google Scholar
• Benjamin R, Wigand R (1995) Electronic markets and virtual value chains on the information superhighway. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 36(2):62.Google Scholar
• Cachon GP, Daniels KM, Lobel R (2017) The role of surge pricing on a service platform with self-scheduling capacity. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 19(3):368–384.Link, Google Scholar
• Chaves IN (2018) Pricing responses to platform leakage: Optimal platform design when matches are irrevocable. Working paper, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
• Colby C, Bell K (2016) The on-demand economy is growing, and not just for the young and wealthy, Harvard Business Review. Accessed January 3, 2023, https://hbr.org/2016/04/the-on-demand-economy-is-growing-and-not-just-for-the-young-and-wealthy.Google Scholar
• Edelman B, Hu P (2016) Disintermediation in two-sided marketplaces. Technical Note 917-004, Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Gu G, Zhu F (2020) Trust and disintermediation: Evidence from an online freelance marketplace. Management Sci. 67(2):794–807.Link, Google Scholar
• Gurvich I, Lariviere M, Moreno A (2019) Operations in the on-demand economy: Staffing services with self-scheduling capacity. Sharing Economy (Springer, Berlin), 249–278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagiu A, Wright J (2021). Platform leakage I. Accessed May 20, 2022, https://bit.ly/3S3KbGw.Google Scholar
• Hassin R (2016) Rational Queueing (Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hassin R, Haviv M (2003) To Queue or Not to Queue: Equilibrium Behavior in Queueing Systems, vol. 59 (Springer Science & Business Media, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holden P (2018) Weecare raises $4.2m to help parents balance career and family. Accessed February 15, 2022, https://bit.ly/3CBf7Z3.Google Scholar
• Hu M, Zhou Y (2021) Dynamic type matching. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 24(1):125–142.Link, Google Scholar
• Huet E (2015). What really killed Homejoy? It couldn’t hold on to its customers. Accessed February 7, 2020, https://bit.ly/3CBk6sT.Google Scholar
• Ibrahim R (2018) Managing queueing systems where capacity is random and customers are impatient. Production Oper. Management 27(2):234–250.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Madden S (2015) Why Homejoy failed and the future of the on-demand economy. Accessed February 7, 2020, http://tcrn.ch/1DgzgSz.Google Scholar
• Malik R, Hamm K, Schochet L, Novoa C, Workman S, Jessen-Howard S (2018) America’s child care deserts in 2018. Accessed February 15, 2022, https://ampr.gs/3VxOiNW.Google Scholar
• Moazed A (2015) How two-sided marketplace can prevent disintermediation (platform leakage). Accessed February 7, 2020, https://bit.ly/3CDRHlF.Google Scholar
• Norman DA (2009) Designing waits that work. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 50(4):23.Google Scholar
• Ozkan E, Ward A (2020) Dynamic matching for real-time ride sharing. Stochastic Systems 10(1):29–70.Link, Google Scholar
• Taylor TA (2018) On-demand service platforms. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 20(4):704–720.Link, Google Scholar
• Whitt W (1993) Approximations for the GI/G/m queue. Production Oper. Management 2(2):114–161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang Y (2018) Didi Chuxing loses RMB4bn in first half of year. Accessed February 20, 2020, https://on.ft.com/3yIcOT1.Google Scholar
• Zhu F, Iansiti M (2019) Why some platforms thrive and others don’t. Harvard Bus. Rev. 97(1):118–125.Google Scholar