Shared Mobility As a Socio-Technical System

Shared Mobility as a Socio-Technical System

An investigation of the mobility system in Augsburg

MASTER THESIS WITHIN: Informatics NUMBER OF CREDITS: 30 PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Information Architecture and Innovation AUTHOR: Wiebke Lena Henke

HAMBURG May 2020

Master Thesis - Informatics

Title: Shared Mobility as a Socio-Technical System Authors: Wiebke Lena Henke Tutor: Andrea Resmini Date: 2020-05-19 Key terms: shared mobility system, socio-technical system, experience ecosystem, Augsburg, Mobil-Flat

Abstract

A major shift in our society is the one from a goods-dominant logic to a service-dominant one. Ownership becomes less important, while services from the area of sharing economy experience a rising demand. Municipalities and private companies are adapting and different shared mobility systems are emerging from their pursuit of new forms of mobility.

In 2019, Augsburg created a shared mobility system where public transport, carsharing and bikesharing are all provided via one subscription. As this form of subscription does not have many customers yet, this thesis aims to first identify the system and research which reason and components motivate the people in Augsburg to use the system, as well as collecting different ideas for improvement. An expert interview was conducted with someone from the operator side and then customer interviews were held to get an insight from the customers’ point of view. This data was analyzed using tools from the area of information system as well as information architecture and the system was mapped out and discussed.

The system was mapped out around the user and the connections were shown, which indicated that the user wants simplicity and clarity, as too many platforms and ways to book a mobility service was stated negatively.

Acknowledgements

After studying “Information Architecture and Innovation” for two years, handing in this thesis via an online upload and not being able to celebrate with the whole IA class of 2020 feels very wrong. But difficult times require exceptional measures, and I am sure the whole class will celebrate via Zoom after (or during) the opposition.

Firstly, I would like to thank Andrea Resmini for his guidance throughout the last two years. Whenever I had a question, he gladly gave me an answer which lead to me having way more questions than before. By now I know that asking the right question is what it is about. Giving an answer is not as important, as it all depends.

Secondly, I want to thank my classmates, Wilian and Rients. Us all being in different parts of Europe makes things hard. Seeing you guys every morning in our daily Skype call to talk about our progress, discussing ideas about the thesis and philosophizing about our futures made things almost normal again.

Lastly, I would like to thank Julia, for reading this thesis again and again, as well as my family for bearing with me during this stressful time.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Research Problem...... 2 1.2 Purpose ...... 2 1.3 Research Question ...... 3 1.4 Delimitations ...... 3 1.5 Definitions ...... 4 2. Theoretical Background ...... 5 2.1 Approach to Literature Review ...... 5 2.2 Sharing Economy ...... 6 2.3 Services ...... 8 2.4 Shared Mobility ...... 10 2.4.1 Sidewalk Labs ...... 12 2.5 Information Systems ...... 12 2.5.1 Socio-Technical System ...... 13 2.5.2 Experience Ecosystem ...... 13 2.6 Shared Mobility In Augsburg...... 14 2.6.1 Stadtwerke Augsburg Organization ...... 15 2.6.2 Mobil-Flat ...... 16 2.6.3 Bikesharing ...... 17 2.6.4 Carsharing ...... 18 2.6.4.1 Station-Based Carsharing ...... 19 2.6.4.2 Free-Floating Carsharing...... 19 2.6.5 Public Transport ...... 19 2.6.6 City Zone Augsburg ...... 20 2.7 Solutions In Other Cities ...... 21 3. Methodology ...... 23 3.1 Research Philosophy ...... 23 3.2 Research Approach ...... 24 3.3 Research Design ...... 25 3.4 Data Collection Method ...... 25 3.4.1 Semi-Structured Interviews ...... 26 3.4.2 Textual Analysis...... 28 3.5 Limitations Of Methodology ...... 28 3.6 Ethical Considerations ...... 29 3.7 Interpreting The Data ...... 30 3.7.1 Customer Journey ...... 31 3.7.2 Mapping The System ...... 31 3.7.2.1 Individual Actor ...... 32 3.7.2.2 General Ecosystem ...... 33 4. Results ...... 34 4.1 Interviews ...... 34 4.1.1 Interview Employee Stadtwerke Augsburg ...... 34 4.1.2 Interviews Customers ...... 37 4.2 Customer Journeys ...... 43 4.2.1 Customer Journey 1 ...... 44 4.2.1.1 Reflections On The Customer Journey 1: ...... 47

iii

4.2.2 Customer Journey 2 ...... 48 4.2.2.1 Reflections On The Customer Journey 2: ...... 50 4.2.3 Customer Journey 3 ...... 51 4.2.3.1 Reflections On The Customer Journey 3: ...... 53 5. Analysis ...... 54 5.1 Socio-Technical Mobility System In Augsburg ...... 54 5.1.1 Creating Value ...... 57 5.2 Experience Ecosystem ...... 58 6. Conclusion ...... 64 7. Discussion ...... 67 7.1 Theory Discussion ...... 67 7.2 Methods Discussion ...... 67 7.3 Results Discussion ...... 68 7.4 Implications For Research...... 68 7.5 Future Research ...... 69 8. Reference List ...... 70 Appendix ...... vi Interview Guide ...... vi Interview Transcripts ...... viii Interview 1 ...... viii Interview 2 ...... xiv Interview 3 ...... xix Interview 4 ...... xxvi Codes used overview ...... xxx

Figures

Figure 1: Location of Augsburg ...... 15 Figure 2: Structure of Stadtwerke Augsburg ...... 16 Figure 3: Mobil-Flat ...... 17 Figure 4: switchh in Hamburg ...... 21 Figure 5: Whim in Helsinki ...... 22 Figure 6: Mapping ecosystems, based on ...... 32 Figure 7: Synthetic Map ...... 33 Figure 8: Code categories and clusters from Interviews ...... 38 Figure 9: Legend for Customer Journey ...... 43 Figure 10: Customer Journey 1, part 1 ...... 44 Figure 11: Customer Journey 1, part 2 ...... 46 Figure 12: Customer Journey 1, part 3 ...... 47 Figure 13: Customer Journey 2 ...... 48 Figure 14: Customer Journey 3 ...... 51 Figure 15: Components of socio-technical system and their connections ...... 56 Figure 16: Path IKEA 1 ...... 60 Figure 17: Path IKEA 2 ...... 61 Figure 18: Map of Mobil-Flat system ...... 62 Figure 19: Map of improvements ...... 63

Tables

Table 1: Service Definition ...... 9 Table 2: Participants of the interviews ...... 37

1. Introduction

The sharing economy, the sharing of underutilized resources against compensation (Botsman & Rogers, 2010), and the associated change in consumer behaviour is a result of the increase in networking and digitalization (Botsman & Rogers, 2010). 82% of people under the age of 30 have already used at least one service of the sharing economy (PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, 2015). In addition to the Internet or the smartphone, this digitalization also engenders a rethinking of ownership structures. The sharing economy offers an alternative to ownership and shows what happens when traditional consumption loses relevance and is replaced by a service of sharing.

This change from ownership to a sharing service also affects mobility. Fewer people want to own a car, and more and more people are using shared mobility models. There is a decrease of 13% in car ownership between millennial families and families from older generations (Klein & Smart, 2017). Moreover, the number of car owners can decrease even more when the prices for shared subscription model are lowered (Hörcher & Graham, 2020).

Companies and municipalities are becoming aware of this societal shift and are adapting their product and service portfolio with sharing services. Terms such as “Mobility on demand” and “Mobility as a Service” are gaining more attention, and new mobility systems, having different modes of mobility together, which can be defined by those terms, are evolving.

The overall aim of this thesis is to research and study the shared mobility system in Augsburg, with reference to which factors and groups influence this concept, and are being influenced by this concept. Positive and negative sides of this system are being discussed and recommendations to improve the system will be provided. The understanding of this system from the view of its users is the focal point of attention of this thesis.

After bringing awareness to the topic of shared mobility systems in the introduction, chapter 2 will give the reader a holistic overview of the backgrounds of the sharing economy, shared mobility, the aspects of services and systems itself, as well as information about the German city Augsburg and the mobility system used there. A

description of the used methodology in chapter 3 hands the thread over to chapter 4, where the collected results will be presented. Those results will be interpreted in the following analysis, and the research questions will be answered in the conclusion. A short discussion and a critical view on the thesis will be presented in the last chapter.

1.1 Research Problem

To date, limited research has been conducted about the mobility system in Augsburg, Germany. There exist few case studies regarding bikesharing, however no research has been done on the shared mobility system as a whole.

Many existing studies on shared mobility focus on the market of the USA or the Asian market, where the concepts for different modes of sharing are more common. Therefore, there exists a gap in knowledge about shared mobility for the German market.

In many case studies that were conducted to investigate certain forms of shared mobility or even the sharing economy, only the means were examined. Thus, while the researchers looked closely at the application needed to use bikesharing, for example, they neglected the impact of bikesharing on the users and on the residents living or working in the area of said bikesharing (Forte & Darin, 2017). While the application needed to use the shared mobility system is important, this thesis aims to provide a more holistic view of the system with all its components, such as the applications for the booking system, the spatial factors as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the system.

1.2 Purpose

This thesis has the purpose to conduct research in the area of shared mobility. Thereby it will focus on the following points:

• map out the scrutinized shared mobility system to show how it works • identify the different factors which are influencing the system • investigate the influence the system has on its users • identify the advantages of the system as well as possible improvements

As an outcome, recommendations will be given on how to further improve the system. For these recommendations, especially the user’s point of view is taken into account.

1.3 Research Question

The research questions which will be answered with the research and the analysis of this thesis are the following:

Research Question 1: What is the Augsburg mobility system, how does it work and what are the premises?

Research Question 2: What motivates the people in Augsburg to use the offered shared mobility system?

Research Question 3: Which changes could be made to the offered mobility system in order to motivate more people to use it?

1.4 Delimitations

This thesis has been developed within the area of information systems and user experience. Different factors that influence the user experience of the system, as well as the system itself, will be discussed in the following chapters. Recommendations will be provided. It is important to note that this thesis will not look at the economic aspects of the system but will examine the technological and operational parts.

While the theoretical background provides a holistic overview of the sharing economy and shared mobility, as well as general aspects of information systems, the researched socio-technical system is in Augsburg, and therefore only this system within the given area is discussed. This thesis will not develop a general conclusion for different mobility systems, but only for Augsburg.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic which broke out during the conduction of this thesis, fewer interviews than intended could be conducted, and therefore a stronger focus is put on the theoretical framework and its connection with the system in Augsburg. The

pandemic is also responsible for the fact that only literature and sources that were available online were used. Physical libraries were inaccessible due to the pandemic situation.

1.5 Definitions

Throughout this thesis, several technical terms will be used. Since a common understanding of these terms is crucial to the research, they will be defined in this section. These definitions are either official definitions or clarifications of how certain terms are used within this thesis. More complex terms will be explained and defined in the theoretical background (see chapter 2).

Bikesharing: a short-term rental of bikes, usually only able with a membership. Real-time locations and availabilities of bikes are shared via an application or website, which enables an online booking process. (U.S. Department of transportation, 2020)

Carsharing: similar to bikesharing; a short-term rental of cars for members, also bookable via an online tool (U.S. Department of transportation, 2020). Different forms of carsharing will be explained later.

Flat rate: a service which has a price fixed at a particular level, no matter how much the service is used (Cambridge University Press, 2020).

Means and modes of transportation is used in this thesis for the offered mobility options within the shared mobility system talked about.

2. Theoretical Background

This chapter will provide the reader with the theoretical background of the research. First the approach to the literature research is described. From section 2.2 onwards of this theoretical background the terms “sharing economy”, “service”, “shared mobility” and other for this thesis relevant terms will be defined. This thesis researches the effects a shared mobility system has on the residents and users in Augsburg. Especially the aspect of how the sharing economy and shared mobility are affecting the people will be discussed in the following chapters.

In order to later sort the researched model into the background of a socio-technical system, relevant techniques and approaches from the field of Information Systems will be described in section 2.5. As there is only little relevant literature available, a focus is put on case studies which show how socio-technical systems affect the users and people within the system.

The last part of this background is a description of the current situation in Augsburg. It is important to mention that this thesis will only look at Augsburg and therefore, the literature review only focuses on theories concerned for urban areas, .

2.1 Approach to Literature Review

To ensure a holistic literature review, a literature research was conducted. The search was carried out on the three platforms Primo, Scopus and Google Scholar by using selected keywords including “shared economy”, “sharing economy”, “shared mobility” and “mobility on demand”. For every keyword, the first 10 results were examined for how they fitted the general topic of this thesis. Since the terms “sharing economy” and “shared mobility” were coined recently (see 2.2), only articles from 2013 onwards were considered in this research. For further research, articles mentioned in the found articles were looked at and, if the topic was fitting, included in this thesis.

News articles and company driven research is also included in this thesis, as the topics of sharing economy and shared mobility are focused on strongly within the private sector.

From companies in the mentioned sector, the economic feasibility was often mentioned, which will not be considered in this research.

The articles covering socio-technical systems and how they affect the users are selected based on common literature in the field as well as the lectures during the Master programme “Information Architecture and Innovation” at the Jönköping University. The case studies researching the effects of those systems are also selected from the platforms Primo, Scopus and Google Scholar.

The information about the current situation in Augsburg are obtained by researching the information provided on the website of Stadtwerke Augsburg (swa), their social media channels, as well as new articles and observations made by the author.

2.2 Sharing Economy

Current literature has no uniform definition of sharing economy (Botsman, 2013). Therefore, the different views of various authors who coined the term sharing economy are presented below.

The American sociologist and economist Rifkin, a pioneer of the sharing economy (Staun, 2014), predicted a change in society in which access to resources is more significant than possession. According to Rifkin, networks are replacing traditional markets. Rentals or the limited use of property in exchange for various forms of compensation take the place of permanently transferring goods (Rifkin, 2007).

The term sharing economy was introduced by Botsman in her book "What's mine is yours", written with Rogers in 2010. They define the sharing economy as sharing underutilized resources, such as objects, spaces and skills, against monetary or non- monetary compensation (Botsman & Rogers, 2010). Botsman also offers a solution to the conceptual confusion that accompanies the sharing economy (Botsman, 2013). She differentiates between the different terms "collaborative economy", "collaborative consumption" and "peer economy" which are often used as synonyms for the sharing economy.

According to Botsman and Rogers, the collaborative economy is based on networks of connected individuals and communities instead of centralized institutions and is increasingly changing the way we produce, consume, finance and learn. It divides the economic forms into four sections: collaborative production, collaborative consumption, collaborative finance and collaborative education. The sharing economy is sorted by them to the sub-area of collaborative consumption. This describes an economic model in which access to ownership of products and services is made possible by sharing, exchanging, trading or renting them. Botsman differentiates between three different forms of collaborative consumption and thus also the sharing economy: a collaborative lifestyle, redistribution markets and product service systems. In a collaborative lifestyle, resources such as time, space or money are shared. Redistribution markets are platforms on which goods that are no longer or insufficiently used are redistributed. Product service systems, in turn, are used for dispossessed purposes, i.e. renting or lending resources. (Botsman, 2013)

Botsman and Rogers (2010) describe the peer economy as an economic form that enables both direct exchange of products and services between private individuals, as well as collaboration between them to develop, design or distribute products.

In an article published by Botsman two years later, she added the on-demand economy in order to be able to differentiate the terms further. That new category describes platforms that compare customer needs in real time with available offers to enable an immediate delivery of goods and services (Botsman, 2015).

Juliet Schor and Connor Fitzmaurice (2014) also defined the term sharing economy. In contrast to Botsman, Schor and Fitzmaurice consider a uniform definition of this term to be impossible and instead divide the activities within sharing economy into four different categories: recirculation of goods, building social connections, exchange of services and optimizing the use of assets. They define the activities in their contribution as follows: Recirculation of goods addresses the redistribution markets, in which an exchange of used goods takes place between private individuals, e.g. Ebay or gebraucht.de (translation from German: used). Platforms for building social connections allow underused resources to be made available to others. Examples include Airbnb or Couchsurfing with the mediation of unused living space. The third category, exchange of services, describes

platforms such as mediate services from private individuals to other private individuals (P2P) or to companies (P2B). Taskrabbit is one example. Optimizing the use of assets is described as a common use of means of production, shared assets or areas, that are used to enable production instead of consumption. This includes, for example, cooperatives, co-working spaces or platforms such as skillshare.com (Schor & Fitzmaurice, 2014). In a later work by Frenken and Schor (2017), the sharing economy is defined as different customers and consumers, who are granting each other temporary access to their underutilized goods.

While Botsman and initially also Schor, with their rather broad definitions, integrate many facets of the shared use of resources, there are other sources which consider a narrower definition to be correct. Russell Belk (2014) differentiates between "true sharing" and "pseudo-sharing". True sharing includes temporary access to resources without transfer of ownership and, contrary to the definition of Botsman and Schor, without monetary or other compensation. Hence, according to Belk, many platforms are wrongly sorted to the field of the sharing economy.

One critical aspect that can be identified in the different definitions is whether property is transferred or whether only access to the various resources is granted. If access is made possible, it is also controversial whether an entirely new capacity will be created by offering said capacity or whether already existing one will be used more intensively.

After the introduction of the different definitions of sharing economy, it needs to be stated that the broader definition from Botsman will be used throughout this thesis.

2.3 Services

The access to property, which is being granted, instead of transferring goods ultimately, is called a service. Another one's resources (the one who is offering something) are being used for the benefit of another actor (who is using the offered items for a certain time without owning them). (Lusch & Vargo, 2019)

Service itself is defined as “the process of using one's resources for the benefit of another actor” (Lusch & Vargo, 2019, p. 4). Furthermore, Moeller (2010) defines four categories

which a service needs to comply with: Intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and perishability. Those categories applied to a service are as followed:

Table 1: Service Definition (Moeller, 2010)

Intangibility Service is not material or tangible.

Heterogeneity Service experience is unique and not standardized.

Inseparability Service production and the consumption often happen simultaneously.

Perishability Service cannot be stored.

Intangibility says that a service is not material or tangible, while a good is an object which can be physically touched. The provider is offering a promise to the consumer instead of a good. The act of getting from A to B is not tangible, and therefore is a service. The fact that each service experience is unique and cannot be standardized is stated as heterogeneity. There are factors influencing the outcome, such as different providers or different users, external circumstances etc. As the experience of a ride differs due to traffic, weather conditions, the ride itself is a service as well. The production and the consumption of a service often happen simultaneously and are therefore inseparable. The service is first sold and afterwards consumed and produced. There is no set separation of the consumer and the producer and the producer needs the customers resources for the service to work. By renting a sharing car the service is produced, as the car will be made available for the rent. Lastly, the service cannot be stored but needs to be consumed when it is bought. When the carsharing car is rented, the service starts, and it cannot be stored away, as the service already includes the app and the booking confirmation etc. (Moeller, 2010)

Applying the definition of a service to the definition of the sharing economy, one can see that the change that occurs nowadays enabled by the sharing economy, is from a good's dominant logic to a service-dominant logic. By providing access to certain assets and not transferring assets, the concept of a service-dominant logic is more prevalent in today’s society.

2.4 Shared Mobility

The sharing of different modes of transportation within the sharing economy is called shared mobility.

Shared mobility refers to different, often innovative transportation methods, that offer an alternative to car ownership. Due to their innovative nature, those mobility methods often encounter barriers created by governments, mostly unintended. (Berube, 2017)

Due to the rising importance of shared mobility services, the public sector is working on accessing the market as well (Iacobucci, Hovenkotter, & Anbinder, 2017). The sharing economy, driven by many different non-public actors, is advancing at a rapid pace, which makes it difficult for the public sector to plan innovative mobility solutions within the sharing economy. While companies and private persons can work faster and often work with bigger funding, the public sector is slower to move in its innovations, creations and changes (Karim, 2017). Partnerships between private and public parties would lead to a strong and reliable transportation system which would be easier to implement than a purely private one (Shaheen & Stocker, 2018).

Car-, bike- and scooter sharing, either B2C (business to customer) or P2P (peer to peer), as well as ridesharing (e.g. carpooling or vanpooling) and micro transit are different forms of shared mobility (Shaheen & Stocker, 2018). The term microtransit denotes an IT- enabled service for multi-passenger vans. The routes are dynamically generated by the system based on the needs of the customers, and the passengers get picked up and dropped off at fixed points. (U.S. Department of transportation, 2020).

Shaheen and Stocker (2018) define different areas where the shared mobility influences the life of the users and residents living nearby.

• Transportation: shared mobility has a direct and sometimes even indirect influence on the travel behaviour of the users and people around. The utilization of personal mode of transportation differs as people are using ride sharing, or the kilometers travelled in private vehicles differ as users change earlier to a different mean of transportation. Even the emission of greenhouse gases may reduce, as people are using their cars less to get to work in a car by themselves.

• Land use: When using shared mobility, the land use changes, as less parking space in the downtown and denser populated area of cities might be needed due to the alternative mobility methods. New parks might be created out of the unused space. • Housing: As an additional result of the reduction in parking space, more housing could be built within the cities. • Economic development: People are starting to use their underused assets, and new working places could be created within the sector of shared mobility. • Healthy lifestyles: shared mobility can encourage users to take the shared bike, or to walk to the next pick up spot for the ride sharing. It also generally motivates people to leave their car at home /or to not buying a car at all. Therefore, people are more likely to be more active using the public transport and the shared mobility system. • Environmental reasons: Due to the possibility to reduce the greenhouse gas emission made by cars, shared mobility also offers climate advantages.

Those are different areas which impact the behaviour and the lives of the users of the shared mobility system by them interacting with the system and changing their behaviour, as well as the residents who might benefit from the system when parking spaces are being reduced, and parks or housing will be created. The beforehand mentioned changes are only positive ones, such as more housing space or less traffic and therefore less air pollution, while people could also be affected negatively from such a shared mobility system, as they might want to keep parking spaces downtown. Companies that profit from selling cars or services that provide parking space in the city centre might suffer even more from the new development.

As already mentioned before, everything within the area of sharing economy is considered a service and therefore everything within the area of shared mobility is also a service, as those all are ways to use another ones (underused) resources for the benefit of another party. (Lusch & Vargo, 2019)

Given the concept of shared mobility as explained above, we will consider all of the mobility related services in the city of Augsburg as a service mobility system.

2.4.1 Sidewalk Labs

One of the biggest companies in the private sector researching shared mobility is Alphabet. The Google lab for urban innovation organization is working on this topic, as presented in the 8th episode of their “City of the future” podcast. Quirk & Jaffe call a model of public transport and different sharing operators “mobility on demand” (Quirk & Jaffe, 2019). In this podcast, different solutions for urban mobility are discussed, and an interview with Sampo Hietanen the founder of the mobility concept in Helsinki, called Whim!, who coined the term MaaS (mobility as a service) is conducted. Whim! is “for the people, for the users, it’s a promise of anywhere, any time, on a whim” (Hietanen, 2019). How it works is described as following:

Say you want to go from your hotel to a karaoke bar on the other side of town. So the app shows you a few options. And so you decide “I’m going to take a bike-share.” Then you’re halfway there, and maybe it starts to rain, and the bike-share doesn’t look like such a great decision. You dock up the bike and switch to a train. Now mind you, the app has paid for all of this. You don’t need to worry about downloading a new app. You don’t have to use any new fare payments into the kiosks. You just keep going on your journey. (Quirk & Jaffe, 2019)

Hietanen stated that people desire convenience and a high level of service and that this is the reason why many people take their own car instead of using a shared mobility service. Unless those services are offering the same level of convenience and service, they will not manage to disrupt the mobility status quo. (Hietanen, 2019)

2.5 Information Systems

An information system (IS) is part of an organizational system, consisting of components for processing, storing and collecting data (Zwass, 2017). This information system provides the organization with the information needed to carry out their operations and management (Geiger et al., 2012). The understanding of the term information system differs in the extend that some researchers interpret it from a very technical point of view while the majority of the IS community defines information systems as a combination of a technical and a social part (Geiger et al., 2012). This view is used in the thesis and will further be explained in the next section.

2.5.1 Socio-Technical System

A socio-technical system consists of two parts, a social, usually human part and a technical part. The crucial thing is that one cannot separate the two parts because they only work together (Law, 2016). The system has the chance to use the knowledge and information generation potential from both the technical side as well as the human side. (Ure & Jaegersberg, 2005)

In literature, Ure and Jaegersberg (2005) defined four strategies on how to create value in a socio-technical system, namely: using a common platform, bridging the gap, creating new linkable between technical and human networks and aligning systems to create value. Using a common platform urges the creator to create the platform around the system, and not the other way round. The platform should include the whole system, and the user has to be able to use this platform. Bridging the gap means creating a system that addresses the social part as well as the technical part. In every system, there are differences on a spatial level, a language and understanding level, hierarchical level and so on. Those differences need to be overcome in order to create value within the system. Due to the advancement of the web in the last decades, many ways for coupling of technical and social aspects were generated. Creating new linkable between technical and human networks therefore opens up new spaces for social and technical transactions. Aligning systems to create value describes the importance of the awareness for problems and the alignment of different systems and knowledge bases. If a scenario occurs, which could have been avoided by having acquired more knowledge about problems, the creation of value has an obstacle. (Ure & Jaegersberg, 2005)

2.5.2 Experience Ecosystem

Zooming out of a socio-technical system, the theory of experience ecosystems is also important when aiming at defining a system.

Experience ecosystems, as defined by Remini and Lacerda (2016) and by that time introduced under the name of cross-channel ecosystem, have a clear focus on creating

and offering a positive experience to the actor, who is in the center of such a system. In later papers the name was changed from cross-channel systems to experience ecosystems.

Actors, formerly known as customers or users, have a desired state which they are pursuing by completing different tasks. They are existential for any ecosystem, as they physically shape it. The tasks are any activities that they have to perform in order to reach their desired state. By completing the tasks, an actor has different points-of-interaction, called touchpoints. Those touchpoints can be digital or physical with a person, a website or even a supermarket. All touchpoints, which can be accessed by an actor, share a seam. On those seams, information is transmitted within the ecosystem. The experience an actor has progresses from one touchpoint to another via those seams. The seams can connect touchpoints in different channels. A channel is a specific layer filled with information about an ecosystem. That information can be about a specific area of the ecosystem, but it can also be broader and contain a whole ecosystem. (Resmini & Lacerda, 2016)

Therefore, in order to improve the experience, an actor has, the information transmitted between the different touchpoints and channels needs to be transmitted into all relevant channels, so that the experience in each channel can be improved, resulting in an overall improvement. (Resmini & Lacerda, 2016)

2.6 Shared Mobility In Augsburg

Augsburg is a large city in the southwest of Germany and one of the three Bavarian metropolises. It is a university town with almost 30,000 students and a total of approximately 300,000 inhabitants. In Augsburg, a unique mobility concept was introduced that, to this date, does not exist anywhere else in Germany.

Figure 1: Location of Augsburg (Geodatenamt der Stadt Augsburg, 2020)

Stadtwerke Augsburg, the public utility company in the city, launched a new mobility concept on November 01, 2019. For the first time in Germany, there is a city-wide flat rate for various modes of transport, including public transport, bikesharing and carsharing. This model is called Mobil-Flat.

2.6.1 Stadtwerke Augsburg Organization

The Stadtwerke Augsburg have different subsidiaries which are working together in different areas. Stadtwerke is entirely a subsidiary of the city Augsburg. The organizational structure within the Stadtwerke is shown in the following organigram:

a Netze GmbH

erdgas schwaben gmbh

Stadtwerke Augsburg Energie Bayerngas GmbH GmbH

Stadtwerke M-Net Augsburg Wasser Telekommunikations GmbH GmbH

swa KreativWerk MeteringSüd GmbH & Co. Verwaltungs- KG GmbH

swa KreativWerk Stadtwerke Augsburg GmbH & Co. KG

Augsburger Localbahn GmbH

asg Augsburger avg Augsburger bayernets GmbH Verkehrs-Service- Verkehrsgesellschaft mbH Gesellschaft mbH

Stadtwerke Stadtwerke Augsburg Augsburg Projektgesellschaft mbH Verkehrs-GmbH

Stadtwerke Augsburg Carsharing-GmbH

Figure 2: Structure of Stadtwerke Augsburg (Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH, 2020)

2.6.2 Mobil-Flat

With the flat rate, the customer can use public transport, bikesharing in the city and carsharing for a fixed monthly fee. The price depends on the desired carsharing kilometers and hours. Public transport can be used unlimited in the urban area called zones 10 and 20. For bikesharing, the first 30 minutes of each ride are free, and for carsharing, the customer has either 15 free hours and 150 kilometres, or 30 free hours and unlimited

kilometres. These two subscriptions are called Mobil-Flat S (15 free hours of carsharing) and Mobil-Flat M (30 free hours of carsharing) respectively.

Billing takes place monthly and is debited to customers at the end of the month. Customers of the Mobil-Flat will be charged additionally if the free hours or kilometers included in the package have been exceeded. (Biedermann, 2020)

Figure 3: Mobil-Flat (Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH, 2020)

2.6.3 Bikesharing

The bikesharing in Augsburg is carried out by nextbike. The bikes used in the area of Augsburg are branded as "swa bikes" but are the property of nextbike and operate according to their principle, which will be described in the following section.

For the Mobil-Flat, the bikesharing works as followed: When the subscription is completed, the customers’ accounts are activated for the bikesharing service. Registration with nextbike takes place online, via an app or via the hotline. Afterwards, the customer can use the bikes via the nextbike app. The website is branded with “swa-rad.de” as a product of the Stadtwerke. However, the rental and all other services take place via nextbike. (nextbike GmbH, 2020a)

The first 30 minutes of every trip are free of charge for Mobil-Flat customers, even if several trips are carried out per day. Thereafter, they pay the nextbike's regular tariff. If the duration of a trip exceeds 30, billing is made directly by nextbike after the ride. (Biedermann, 2020)

Based on the current contractual engagement, the swa has no insight into either the application or the booking system, thus functioning more as a customer than a provider. Therefore, the organization differs greatly from that of the car-sharing branch, where the swa is the driver behind the different advancements and developments, having autonomously created the booking and locking systems, as well as the app. (Biedermann, 2020)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, nextbike offers free 30 minutes per ride in Augsburg, and four other German cities to every customer, independent of the customer’s subscription. (nextbike GmbH, 2020c) (nextbike GmbH, 2020b)

2.6.4 Carsharing

The carsharing branch was founded in 2014 by the general traffic branch and had been offering carsharing from the swa brand ever since. (Biedermann, 2020)

Registration takes place either online, via the hotline or at the Stadtwerke service point, and the driver's license is identified in person at the customer centre. Since carsharing is offered directly by the Augsburg municipal utility and does not go through a second provider, it is only available in Augsburg. Customers pay a one-time registration fee (49 €) and a monthly fee (7 €). The price for every trip is based on the time, and the distance travelled. Depending on the size of the vehicle, the prices range from 1.60 € to 3.60 € per hour and from 0.18 € to 0.36 € per km. For long uses or rentals at night, the prices are slightly lower. Customer of the Mobil-Flat do not have to pay the registration and the monthly fee. (Stadtwerke Augsburg Carsharing-GmbH, 2020)

In addition to the offer for private customers, there is also an option to register as a business customer, as well as as a student. Students do not have to pay the registration or the monthly fee. (Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH, 2020)

The carsharing is divided into two parts, the free-floating carsharing, and the station based one.

2.6.4.1 Station-Based Carsharing

Station-based carsharing is the most widespread form of carsharing, also called “round trip” carsharing. The customer rents the car and picks it up from its parking spot, makes their trip and returns the car afterwards to the same parking spot. With this method, the provider usually has less work, as the cars do not get distributed over the whole carsharing area and need to be driven back to certain spots at the end of the day. Moreover, the distribution of cars at the station does not change with this method. Customers usually book the cars in advance to ensure there is a car available when they want to have one. (Le Vine et al., 2014)

In Augsburg and the surrounding area, there are currently 192 station-based cars on 82 stations.

2.6.4.2 Free-Floating Carsharing

A newer way of carsharing is the free-floating carsharing, also called “one-way” or “point-to-point” carsharing. The car can be picked up at one point and then dropped off at another one. This model is generally used more spontaneously, as the customer needs to check if a car is available at the moment at their current location. Due to the uncertainty, if there is a car close to a customer, pre-booking is not possible with free-floating carsharing. (Le Vine et al., 2014)

In Augsburg, there are nine free-floating cars in use. All those cars a e-cars.

2.6.5 Public Transport

In cooperation with the Augsburger Verkehrsgesellschaft (Augsburg Transport Association), swa offers public transport in the region in and around Augsburg. This

includes the region of Mittelschwaben (Central Swabia), which extends south of Augsburg. The public transport service consists of five tram lines, 27 city and six night bus lines. Every year, more than 60 million passengers use those public transport services.

The swa offers different subscription plans for the usage of the public transport. A subscription means in this case an annual ticket. All the tickets listed below can be for different zones, which are different regions in and around of Augsburg. (Augsburger Verkehrs- und Tarifverbund AVV, 2020)

• Mobil-Abo 9 am: The Mobil-Abo 9 a.m. is valid Monday to Friday from 9.00 a.m onwards and all day on Saturdays, Sundays and on public holidays.

• Mobil Abo: This subscription is always valid and allows the user to take every mean of public transportation within the respective zone.

• Mobil Abo Premium: The Mobil-Abo Premium entitles the customer to take up to 4 children from 9.00 a.m. Monday to Friday and all day on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays. Monday to Friday from 18 o'clock, on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays up to 3 adults can be taken along.

Next to those forms of subscription, the customers can buy single monthly, weekly and daily tickets, as well as tickets for singles rides. Students of the university Augsburg get a “Semesterticket”, a student card with which they can use the public transport in all of Augsburg.

2.6.6 City Zone Augsburg

On 1 January 2020, the City Zone was applied in Augsburg city center. This model, under which the use of local public transport is free of charge in a certain area, is so far unique in Germany. The city of Augsburg and Stadtwerke Augsburg, which are jointly responsible for the introduction of the City Zone, hope that this will have various positive effects, as improving the air quality in the city centre by reducing motorised private transport. In addition, the measure is aimed at increasing the attractiveness of the city

centre, which could result in a strengthening of Augsburg's retail trade. (Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH, 2020)

2.7 Solutions In Other Cities

Other cities already have cooperation between public transport and mobility sharing providers. An example is the model “Switchh” in Hamburg, where customers have access to two carsharing providers and bikesharing for a monthly fee. Customers buy this service every month or as a subscription, yet still must pay for the individual use of car and bikesharing. Figure 4: switchh in Hamburg shows the pricing for the described model, where each service is billed separately peruse. Unlike the Augsburg model, where the user gets a certain amount of usage by paying a fixed price, switchh uses the pay-by-use model.

Figure 4: switchh in Hamburg (Hamburger Hochbahn AG, 2020)

Outside Germany, the Finnish capital Helsinki implemented a similar model, in which public transport, bikesharing, taxi rides, rental cars and e-scooters are combined in one

service. Public transport and bikesharing are included for the flat rate models. Depending on the flat rate model, a discount on taxi rides and free car rentals (as provided by the provider, only on weekends or unlimited) is offered. E-scooter sharing always costs as much as with the original provider. The prices range between 57 € for 30 days and 499 € per month. In Figure 5: Whim in Helsinki , the different price models can be seen.

In 2018 Whim started to expand to other cities and is available with the same principle (but different prices) in Austria, Singapore, United Kingdom (West Midlands), Belgium (Antwerp) and The Netherlands.

Figure 5: Whim in Helsinki (MaaS Global Oy, 2020)

Whim unites different providers in one service, as shown in Figure 5, while in Augsburg both bikesharing and carsharing are offered directly by the municipal utilities or under the brand of swa, which are also responsible for public transport.

Other that with Switchh in Hamburg, Whim is billing every service the customers are using together and they will only charge once a month, while Switchh bills after every use.

The Whim system and the Mobil-Flat are similar, in for example the monthly billing and the different subscription plans. The differences are that Whim offers a fixed price for certain services which still need to be paid per use, while the Mobil-Flat has a certain

amount included already. The Whim service can be used via one app, while in Augsburg there are (to this date) different app for the different services.

3. Methodology

A well-chosen methodology impacts the reliability of the conducted research and its results. Only if the philosophy, the research approach and the method are fitting for the purpose of the thesis, inaccuracies can be prevented (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009).

In the following chapter, the different parts of the methodology are investigated, and the reasons why the author chose different methods are explained in relation to the circumstances and the purpose of this thesis.

A closer description of how the secondary data was collected will not be done in this chapter, as it was already written out in 2.1 - Approach to Literature Review2.1.

3.1 Research Philosophy

Different researchers have varying interpretations of how they are understanding their surroundings and in conclusion, also their research. These distinct interpretations are called the research philosophy (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009).

To distinguish between different research philosophies, the way to look at those philosophies, the research assumptions, must be explained. There are three research assumptions, namely ontology, epistemology and axiology (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). Ontology refers to the nature of reality, epistemology is about knowledge and what constitutes as acceptable knowledge in our social reality and axiology describes the judgement of the values and ethics in the research process (Babin & Zikmund, 2016).

The five major research philosophy approaches are called positivism, critical realism, interpretivism, postmodernism and pragmatism (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). Positivism focuses on an observable social reality, hence on verifiable statements which are based on people’s experiences. The term critical realism describes the view on our experiences, taking the underlying structures of reality into account. The approach that human beings and the social worlds they created are different to physical phenomena

because they create meaning, is called interpretivism. Therefore, social research needs to be different from the research of natural sciences. The last major approach, pragmatism, values finding a practical solution and outcome more that finding abstract distinctions, in order to solve problems for future purposes. (Babin & Zikmund, 2016; Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009)

The major philosophical research approach used in this thesis is the approach of interpretivism, as this approach allowed the researcher to generate primary data through interviews which then were used to analyse the system at hand and conduct recommendations for improvement. However, the author believes that a clear demarcation between the approaches is not entirely possible. Therefore, parts of the other approaches might also have an impact on the research. Therefore, parts of the other approaches may also have had an impact on the research.

Furthermore, the researcher is aware that by using the approach of interpretivism, the collected data could be interpreted differently by the interviewer than the interviewees intended their statement to be. Other researchers reading this thesis might come to different conclusions based on the interviews, and therefore the transferability of this research could be opposed. (Scotland, 2012)

The collected data and the analysis thereof were related to the social constructs and interpreted through culture and language (ontology). The knowledge, collected from the interviewed users is based on their perspective, feelings and personal views (epistemology). Furthermore, the author did the research without prejudices and in an objective way (as far as this is possible for a human being living in a social world) and interpreted the users’ narratives and formed them into a solution or suggestions (axiology). The researcher is aware of their subjective view.

3.2 Research Approach

In literature, there exist two types of reasoning, deduction and induction. The deductive approach describes the relationship between the theory and the conducted research. It is a top-down use of theory, as first, the authors identify the relevant literature and after building a framework based on that literature, the primary data is collected. The

hypothesis is established using the theory and afterwards investigated based on the collected data (Patton, 2015). A deductive approach is often used in quantitative research, as the collected data needs to be of a sufficient numerical size (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009).

Inductive research describes the process of concepts and theories emerging from the collected, most often qualitative, data. This approach is mainly used when there is no efficient theory to base the research on and when researchers aim to develop new concepts and want to explain broader theories and models (Patton, 2015).

This thesis used gathered research results wherefrom conclusions were drawn. Therefore induction is the chosen type of reasoning. The collection of primary data is the key point, and based on that data, the mobility service was modelled, and suggestions were made.

3.3 Research Design

According to Sauders et. Al. (2009) the research design can either be quantitative, qualitative or a mixture of both. The chosen design for this thesis is the qualitative research, as this research and its methods help the author to understand not only the people interviewed but also provides a way to grasp the context in which they live in, which is cultural and social. (Patton, 2015)

3.4 Data Collection Method

In order to collect the primary data for this thesis, the author decided to conduct semi- structured interviews with different actors within the system. A semi-structured interview leaves enough room to respond to the interviewee's views, opinions, wishes and decisions, as the interview may have set questions but also the possibility to explore further into a direction that the interviewee named (Schultze & Avital, 2011). As the author wanted to leave enough room for the interviewee’s onions, ideas and views, this data collection method was selected.

The interviewees have been selected based on their different backgrounds and social groups. There was one expert interview with an employee of the Stadtwerke Augsburg Carsharing GmbH, who gave a profound interview to ensure an understanding of the different actors on the operator's side of the system. A business point of view was given, which the author noted, but the focus was still on the socio-technical part of the system. The majority of the interviewees was from the most relevant group, which includes the customers (people who already have a Mobil-Flat subscription), possible customers (people who are thinking about buying a subscription), customers in systems that are part of the bigger Mobil-Flat system (people who use only public transport, or only carsharing / bikesharing) and people who actively decided against using the subscription model.

The participants for the (possible) customer interviews were contacted via the social media platform Facebook. The author published a post with a call to participate in an interview which does not take longer than 30 minutes. The post was be published in the groups called “Neu in Augsburg - Das Original” (English: new in Augsburg – the original) and “Universität Augsburg: Schwarzes Brett” (English: University Augsburg: Notice board). The groups were selected as the most used Facebook groups in Augsburg, which were not about the topics of renting, selling and buying and event tips.

In addition to the interviews, the primary data was based on observations and research, as the author observed the use of the system in Augsburg and online on their websites and applications.

3.4.1 Semi-Structured Interviews

To conduct semi-structured interviews, the seven guidelines suggested and developed by Myers and Newman were used. (Myers & Newman, 2007) In the following, these guidelines are presented as well as the applied to the interviews conducted for the thesis at hand.

1. Situating The Researcher As An Actor

The researcher is a female master student at a university in Sweden, but currently living in Munich, Germany. As a student herself, the interviewer might be able to talk to other

students in a way that makes them feel more comfortable than a professional researcher would. As the interviewer is German, the language of the interviews was German.

2. Minimise Social Dissonance

Reducing the social distance between the interviewee and the interviewer in order to improve disclosure is important. As the majority of the interviewees were students, and therefore on a similar social level as the interviewer, this is fulfilled. The interviews were held online due to the COVID-19 situation and restrictions in Germany (Presse- und Informationsamt der Bundesregierung, 2020), therefore external reasons for social distancing, e.g. clothing, were not important.

3. Represent Various ‘‘Voices’’

To avoid any elite biases, when interviewing only certain groups of people within a system, a mix of different groups should be interviewed. This was difficult, as the call for the interviews was published via Facebook, in groups with students and people living in Augsburg. Mainly students and professionals are in those groups, therefore it was not possible to avoid all biases.

4. Everyone Is An Interpreter

The interviewees themselves are interpreting their own world, as well as the interviewer. This can lead to adapted answers, especially since the experience of giving an interview via Skype is usually an artificial event. As the research philosophy is the interpretivism, the researcher is aware of the role that their own interpretation has, but also needs to be aware of the interpretation of the interviewees.

5. Use Mirroring In Questions And Answers

In order to make the interviewees feel more comfortable, the questions within the interview were worded, if possible, with phrases and words the interviewees used in their answer to the question before. This encourages them to describe their feelings and experiences in their own words.

6. Flexibility

The interviewer needs to be flexible, as a semi-structured interview allows the topic to explore different areas than the one the interviewer researched already. Furthermore, the interviewer needs to take their subject’s moods into account and react accordingly. This was a difficult task, as noticing different emotions via an audio call was challenging.

7. Confidentiality Of Disclosures

Every interviewee was made aware that the call would be recorded, and that all data used for the research would be saved without a name to identify the subject. The recording are stored on the researcher's flash drive, and appropriate steps to provide security are taken.

3.4.2 Textual Analysis

To use the results gained from the semi-structured interviews, the interviews were analysed with the method of indexing. This was done in six different steps (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2016): The author started by (1) reading the interviews carefully, and subsequentially on the second read-through (2) marked important words, phrases and sentences, called codes. Afterwards, (3) clusters were created, based on the codes, and the different codes were (4) sorted into those clusters. Those clusters were then (5) placed into more general categories, resulting in the existence of clusters and categories. The connection between those different categories and clusters was (6) described and afterwards, the categories could be ranked according to their importance and connection to each other.

The software ATLAS.ti was used to create the codes in the interviews as well as sort the different codes into clusters and afterwards into categories.

3.5 Limitations Of Methodology

While the method of qualitative research has many advantages for the thesis at hand, there are also disadvantages and limitations which need to be considered for the bigger picture

of this thesis. Having based this research on qualitative interviews means that the sample size is smaller than it would be for a quantitative research. Using semi-structured interviews meant that single interviews are not comparable; in contrast to fully structured interviews where a clear comparison between the different data sets would have been easier due to the fact that the questions are not personalized.

Using the philosophy of interpretivism also meant that the findings might not be transparent to other researchers, as the author interpreted the data based on their own background.

The sample size in this research is based on five interviews in total, where one expert interview was to collect data about the mobility system itself and not about the users view on this system. Therefore, four interviews are used to explain how the actor sees and perceives the offered Mobil-Flat and it’s components and what wishes and improvements there are. Contacting and collecting the users via the platform Facebook means that only Facebook users were addressed to give an interview, which already is a pre-selection of the participants. This pre-selection is based on the limited possibilities to reach users during the Covid-19 pandemic. The same applied to the number of people interviewed, as the author wanted to have a bigger sample group, which was not possible due to the fact that more possible interviewees could not have been reached out to in-person in Augsburg.

3.6 Ethical Considerations

Given the way the methodology has been used in this thesis and the way this research has been conducted, the only real ethical problem to the author is the treatment of the data coming from the interviews and how the interviewees have been treated. The interviews were held digitally and remote, therefore no physical harm was done to the interviewees and the author also did not harm them in any psychological way.

All the data that was collected by the author is treated confidentially. The author also considered the four ethical considerations when collecting the data, doing the analysis and writing the results. Those considerations are avoiding harm (and doing good), informed consent, right to privacy and deception. (Patton, 2015)

Avoiding harm and doing good: The author did not have personal contact with any of the participants of the interviews. They paid attention to stay friendly and not hurt the interviewees in any psychological way. No names are published in this thesis and therefore, no career prospects might be hurt, or any damage to their reputation can be done. The author did not offer any incentives to the participants. The interviewee from the Stadtwerke Augsburg is the only one who can benefit directly from the findings of the thesis, as this research might offer some new finding to him, he was unaware of. The other interviewees participated voluntarily without any offerings (Spring 2020).

Informed consent: When asking for an interview and then again in the beginning of the interview, the interviewer explained to the participants the reasons for the research and why it is important. It was stated what the limitations of the use of the collected data is (there will be no monetary benefit made with their data) and who will get the results in the end (i.e. the University and Stadtwerke Augsburg). The author is aware of the difficulties of giving all information, therefore only the most important areas will be stated.

Right to privacy: The participants were informed that their name would be treated confidentially. In the thesis, only their demographic data is stated to be able to better interpret the answers given in the interview. The interviewees also needed to clearly state that they are aware and consent with the usage of their data for this thesis, as simply participating in the research does not automatically imply their consent.

Deception: The author clearly stated that the information in the thesis is only used to model the mobility system in Augsburg. All the participants are individual, different persons who took part in the interview out of unknown reasons. There was no incentive which might try to convince the participants to give certain, expected answers. There was no deceiving of the participants, and the research was only conducted as described to them.

3.7 Interpreting The Data

In order to interpret the data after getting the results from the interviews and the online research, different tools were used by the author. The selection of the tools was based on

the introduction of those tools in the Master programme Information Architecture and Innovation at Jönköping University as well as common literature within the field of information systems and mapping of ecosystems.

3.7.1 Customer Journey

Customer Journeys are a tool used in order to understand and afterwards improve the overall customer experience. That experience is conceptualized in a journey (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016), which displays the steps a customer goes through in the process of buying a product or using a service (Doyle, 2020). A customer journey map lists possible touchpoints a customer may encounter during their interaction with a service or during the purchase process. The actions the customers does during the process are also stated, as well as any other, influencing factors. The map is always from the view of the customer and therefore, is used to describe which experiences the customer has. It can be either emerging from collected data or prescriptive to show which customer experience is aimed for. (Rosenbaum et al., 2017)

The customer journeys conducted in this thesis were based on the interviews conducted as well as the author's observation about the sign-up process, as this was looked up step per step on the swa website.

3.7.2 Mapping The System

To map out the (eco)system, the thesis adopts the spatial syntax described by Lindenfalk and Resmini (Resmini & Lindenfalk, forthcoming) and developed from Willis' concept of "intent paths" (Resmini, 2012). An actor's experience is first described narratively, and then diagrammed as a path by means of a simple set of spatial conventions to convey the relative cognitive load of each step. Steps in the path take actors from one touchpoint to another: touchpoints are where actors interact receive, add, or modify information, and are represented by hexagon tiles. After all actor narratives have been diagrammed, they are compounded into one single ecosystem map. Contrary to paths, which describe an experience linearly through time, the ecosystem map has no directionality and only

concerns itself with the relationships between the participating elements. Therefore, this way of mapping does not make any difference between physical and digital touchpoints.

3.7.2.1 Individual Actor

The map is based on hexagonal tiles, where coloured tiles represent a touchpoint. Those touchpoints can be either personal (green), local (yellow) or remote (red). Personal touchpoints are at the immediate disposal of the user. Local is a touchpoint that is very close to the actor, may it be spatial or conceptual. If the actor needs little effort to use them, they are stronger (+), if they need more effort however, they are weaker (-). The red tiles are remote touchpoints, meaning the actor does not have them at their immediate disposal and has to either physically or conceptually cross a barrier to Figure 6: Mapping ecosystems, based on use them. The differentiation between (Lindenfalk & Resmini, 2019) stronger and weaker works on the same principle as for the local ones. (Lindenfalk & Resmini, 2019)

The touchpoints are arranged in a sequence based on the temporal order of the path. They are connected with arrows showing the direction in which the actor walks along the path. The arrows are located on grey tiles, representing the seams. They show the information flow that moves from one touchpoint to another. It is important to mention that those simple paths only represent the subjective view of one user and cannot be generalized. (Resmini & Lindenfalk, forthcoming)

3.7.2.2 General Ecosystem

To map out the general ecosystem, the map is also based on hexagonal tiles. As for the individual paths, the coloured tiles depict touchpoints and the grey tiles in between represent seams.

Figure 7: Synthetic Map (Resmini & Lindenfalk, forthcoming) The information gained from the individual paths as well as the user interviews is collected, and a synthetic ecosystem is mapped. All touchpoints mentioned by the actors are then sorted into groups. Seams connect those groups of similar touchpoints, and there is a seam between different touchpoints if one actor mentioned it at least once. As a result, the mapped ecosystem looks like Figure 7: Synthetic Map , where the different colours represent the different groups.

There is a difference between the beforehand described emergent map and a prescriptive map. The prescriptive map shows the ecosystem in its designed state from the designer’s point of view, while the emergent map is from the actor’s point of view.

For this thesis, only an emergent map was conducted, as the views of the actor are the central point of the research.

4. Results

The findings of this research are presented in the following chapter. The first section shortly introduces findings from the interview held with the employee from the Mobil- Flat operator. Afterwards, the finding from the customer interviews are stated, and to better illustrate those findings, customer journeys were conducted based on those findings.

4.1 Interviews

For this thesis, the author interviewed one employee of the Stadtwerke Augsburg, who is responsible for the Mobil-Flat and the carsharing sector. This interview was used to further describe the mobility system and to get to know some actors better. Due to some technical problems, the interview was not recorded, but notes were taken.

In addition, four interviews were held with residents of Augsburg. Those residents are either subscribers to the Mobil-Flat, only carsharing users or people who actively decided against using the Mobil-Flat or even just the carsharing. The interviews with the residents were guided by a topic guide (see Appendix). All interviews were semi-structured, and therefore, each one had a slightly different focus, which usually was introduced by the participant.

Before the first interview with a resident in of Augsburg, the interviewer held a pilot interview with two carsharing users from Munich.

4.1.1 Interview Employee Stadtwerke Augsburg

The employee of the Stadtwerke Augsburg Carsharing GmbH, Jürgen Biedermann, is responsible for the carsharing and the development and implementation of the Mobil- Flat. The interview was held via a phone call. In the following, the results from the interview are summarized:

When the Stadtwerke Augsburg decided to develop a shared mobility service, their aim was to create a closed mobility chain, where all offered modes of mobility come from the same provider. Usually, when a shared mobility system is created by bundling of different providers (see e.g. Whim!), the individual providers are reluctant to give up their brand name. Augsburg however wanted to have all transportation methods in the Mobil-Flat branded as swa Augsburg. That was the reason why swa started to create their own carsharing in addition to the already existing public transport. Only bikesharing is provided by an external company, yet the strategy of nextbike includes to brand the bikes in each city with the respective provider, hence the branding still says “swa Rad”. This structure caused some problems, as swa cannot access any customer data from nextbike and cannot exert influence on the pricing. So far, the carsharing in Augsburg is very successful. According to Biedermann, the main reason for this is that the city of Augsburg started working on this project before anyone else did, and therefore was the only actor penetrating the market at that time. If any other carsharing operator would have tried to offer their service in Augsburg before or during the swa was implementing their carsharing, the swa would probably not have been successful but most likely would have given up.

The carsharing is divided into free-floating carsharing and station-based carsharing. The free-floating carsharing was implemented not long ago and offered nine e-cars. It is possible to book spontaneously when choosing a free-floating car. The station-based cars are 192 in total and sometimes booked up to six months in advance. The stations are distributed over the city on private ground, and the swa is paying rent for those parking spaces. Each car has a set parking space. All together in Augsburg and its surroundings, there are 82 stations with one to nine cars each. Biedermann stated that most people prefer the pre-booking of station-based cars, and that the spontaneous free-floating carsharing is not as accepted by the customers yet. Also, he stated that the parking spot situation within the inner city is a reason why many people prefer the station-based cars, as the free-floating cars have a parking ticket, yet often no a parking spots are available.

There is a total of about 5,700 carsharing users. This number also includes the approx. 330 Mobil-Flat users. Half of those 5,700 users also have a public transport subscription. As reasons for the low number of Mobil-Flat users, Biedermann stated the fact that the Mobil-Flat used to be only available in a yearly subscription. By now, the swa offers up

to three trial months, where the customer can cancel on a monthly basis. The 330 Mobil- Flat users have the following background:

• 33% were before customers of carsharing and public transport

• 28% already had carsharing, but no subscription to public transport

• 13% already had a public transport subscription, but no carsharing

• 26% are completely new customers

The billing is done on a monthly basis for the Mobil-Flat. If the user uses more carsharing than included in their plan, the extra usage is billed monthly as well. The bikesharing bills the extra time, if there is any, after each ride.

The booking of the different services (except for public transport) is made via app. Each service as a different app where the users can look up their connection or book their vehicle. A common app called “swa mobil” is planned for April, but not implemented yet (Note by the author: as of May 2020, there still is no app available). The carsharing app uses an already existing system provided by cantamen, which allows the users to book cars in other cities as well, if they have their carsharing system via cantamen. The public transport app, swa FahrInfo, will be stopped as soon as swa mobil is implemented. The nextbike bikes will also be integrated into the swa mobil app. Besides the swa mobil app, the carsharing and the bikesharing app will both still exist, and customers can use them.

In order to use the carsharing, customers need to sign up and get their driver's license verified by the swa support center.

The Mobil-Flat was first announced on the swa website where all the advertisement happened in the beginning. After some time, the bus and tram lines were also used to create awareness for the flat rate, as branding was done on the outside of the vehicles.

The swa have not collected any data so far on how the customers heard about the Mobil- Flat, what made them buy the subscription and what they think could be improved. Biedermann stated that this is an area where more focus will be put upon in future, in order to further improve the concept of the Mobil-Flat and acquire more customers.

Biedermann also stated that the mentality of the people in Augsburg has a strong influence on the success of this project. The people are, according to him, known as “Schwaben” and are stereotypically known to be living a very frugal lifestyle, where they would only buy the Mobil-Flat is the bundle is cheaper than the single services in total. For the Mobil- Flat to be successful, it, therefore, needs to be cheaper than each component on its own as well as any other feasible alternative.

4.1.2 Interviews Customers

The following table offers an overview of the interviewees. As the author promised the participants that their names would not be made public, the identification of the interviewees will be made via a sequential number.

Table 2: Participants of the interviews

Participant Professional Status Age Gender Subscription

P1 Working in Marketing 56 Male AVV ticket

P2 Student 27 Male Student public transport ticket and carsharing

P3 Student 27 Male Mobil-Flat

P4 Working in Advertising 28 Male Mobil-Flat

After the first few reads through the interviews, codes were set. Thereby, sentences and remarks were coded which mainly showed the participants attitudes towards the Mobil- Flat (MF), the carsharing (CS) and the bikesharing (BS), as well as wishes and ideas for improvement. The experiences the participants already had were also coded, as well as used to conduct the customer journeys, later shown in this chapter. The codes were grouped together into clusters named “CS positive”, “CS negative”, “MF reasons” etc. Subsequentially, those code clusters were sorted into main categories, where for example

“CS positive” and “CS negative” both belonged to the category “carsharing”. A detailed overview can be found in Codes used overview0.

After those categories were created, the relationship and the connections between those categories had to be determined, and a hierarchy was constructed. The connections and the hierarchy are visualized in the figure below.

The coding was done in German, as the interviews were also held in German. To allow the reader an understanding of the process of analyzing the interviews, the clusters and categories were translated to English.

Figure 8: Code categories and clusters from Interviews User: The participants of the interviews started the interview by telling about themselves. All interviewees were male. Three were between 27 and 28 years old, and one was 56 years old. The younger ones all had or have a public transport ticket due to them being students in Augsburg and are all using the carsharing, either with the student discount (see section 2.6.4) or with the Mobil-Flat. All but one are using the public transport to get to work or to the university. Two people are currently subscribing the Mobil-Flat. While the three younger participants had a positive attitude towards the carsharing and the Mobil-Flat, the older participant stated mainly critical things. The background was defined, as the living and working location influenced if the customer took some of the offered transportation modes or if they walked.

Augsburg: The participants were mentioning problems within the city of Augsburg, such as limited parking spaces and the bad tram and bus connections in the outer city areas.

“There are hardly any parking spaces, and those are usually filled up very fast, so one seldomly has the chance to get one.” – P1

The limited parking space is also sorted into positive codes in the category of carsharing.

Bikesharing: About 11% of the codes from the different interviews were about the bikesharing. Positive as well as negative attributes about the bikesharing were mentioned, for example, the well-working app and the possibility to rent bikes in other cities with the swa Rad subscription as well. “I like that you can rent bikes in different cities” – P3

The fact that the bikes can be used one-way and the resulting flexibility was also mentioned as a positive fact about the nextbike system. “And above all to be able to simply put it down anywhere” – P3

About ¾ of the comments about the bikesharing were negative. The quality of the bikes was criticized, as well as the uneven distribution over the city. Besides, the handling of the bikes was said to be difficult, as the bikes are heavy. “These bikes are clumsy, heavy, hard to handle, and just look absolutely ugly. Renting the bikes is cumbersome and getting from A to B with these bikes is just a laborious job.” – P1

“At the city center stations, which are abundant in Augsburg city center, there are usually hardly any bicycles, because everyone takes a bicycle and then rides it back to the outlying districts” – P1

“Especially since the bicycles are pretty bad there and I prefer to take my own, because it is simply more comfortable” – P2

One customer is planning on using the bikesharing, especially during the summertime and states that it is inconvenient during the winter. The bikesharing is connected to the user, as they are using it, as well as to the Mobil-Flat, due to it being a part of the subscription. As no user stated the bikesharing to be a reason for buying the Mobil-Flat or for thinking about the flat, its importance is not as high as the carsharing.

Carsharing: Due to the fact that Mobil-Flat users as well as carsharing users were interviewed, about 26% of the codes could be sorted into the category of carsharing. It was mentioned that students often use the carsharing, as they do not have to pay the monthly fee or the registration fee. “with a student card you save both the registration fee and the monthly basic fee for carsharing and then really only pay per trip” – P2

Every interviewee commented negatively on the small number of transporters, while one additionally disliked the little number of cars in total, as well as the quality of the cars. The other participants liked the total amount of cars available, and the flexibility which those numbers provided. Spontaneous rents due to many stations and free-floating E-cars were mentioned, and the easy renting process for the cars. “here around our apartment are three stations within an easy walking distance” – P2

“I find it very flexible and pleasant, especially now with the e-cars in the city” – P2

While spontaneous rents are possible, when there are many stations around one participant, the reservation beforehand was also mentioned as positive, as the user then can be sure that they get a car at the time they need. “I actually find it pleasant to make a reservation when you simply say that you can bring in a certain amount of planning for yourself and then rely on the fact that the vehicle will be available” – P3

The carsharing is seen as cheaper than owning a car, and the parking spot situation in Augsburg encourages not having a private car, as in the inner city, only few parking spots are available, and the carsharing cars have fixed spots. The people living in Augsburg are said to be proud of the working carsharing system in their city. “And carsharing in particular is now part of the cityscape. Everywhere you look, there are swa cars with the swa logo, and we here are proud to have such good carsharing. I think most people I know have used carsharing at least once, whether as a driver or passenger.” – P4

The carsharing is connected to the user, as well as to the Mobil-Flat. It is also connected to Augsburg, as the city has ownership over the carsharing and the cars, branded with the swa carsharing logo, are everywhere in the city and belong to the cityscape. Its importance is raked higher than the bikesharing, as it was mentioned more often and was stated to be a reason for the customers to buy the Mobil-Flat.

Mobil-Flat: As the Mobil-Flat was in the main focus of the interviews, about 40% of all comments were about this subscription form. Negative aspects of the flat were stated, as well as positive ones. Besides, the reasons for using the Mobil-Flat and wishes and possible improvements were also named. The first contact with the new flat rate model often was the advertisement on the busses and trams in Augsburg and the discussion with friends and family about it. All participants have stated one of the two or both forms to be the first contact. "At the beginning, when this flat rate was just introduced, I had already heard about it, as it was in various newspapers in Augsburg" – P1

“it was also a pretty big topic at my workplace” – P4

The two Mobil-Flat subscribers criticized the switching between the apps, as carsharing, bikesharing and the public transport each have their own app. “My main point of criticism are the many individual apps for which you all have to register. And I always have to change the app if I want to use carsharing instead of bikesharing” – P3

The difference in the quality between all those apps was also stated, as the nextbike app works well, and the other two apps often have performance issues. The scope of the public transport in the Mobil-Flat was mentioned. It is only for the inner area of Augsburg and does not include the surrounding region as well, hence one participant would have to buy an extra subscription on top of the Mobil-Flat to get to work by public transport. “With the Mobil-Flat I still have to pay my AVV Ticket and then pay the inner city zone (zone 10 & 20) twice as it is already included in the AVV Ticket, as well as in the Mobil-Flat” – P1

As positive aspects, the participants stated the flexibility when going somewhere, the subscription being cheaper within the package and not having to buy single tickets. Also, not having to think about which mode of transportation is the cheapest to take and being motivated to do more, as the carsharing allows one to take a few weekend / day trips was mentioned. “The flexibility that you get with it is already worth a lot” – P2

“Otherwise, I just like not having to worry about how to get somewhere” – P3

As possible improvements within the Mobil-Flat, E-Scooters as an additional transportation mode was mentioned three times, as well as ride sharing, which was

mentioned two times. Vespa-sharing and a form of microtransit was also mentioned. “Something like e-scooters could certainly be included” – P3

“I'd rather have scooters or a Vespa sharing. Or even something like in Hamburg, there is MOIA, which is like a mixture of riding a bus and ride sharing (Author's note: Microtransit)” – P4

The two interviewees with the Mobil-Flat subscription mentioned the wish for one app which offers all transportation modes, as well as a route planner, where the fastest route is shown (with switching the transportation mode), the most comfortable where no switching would be required, and the ecological friendliest route. “A route calculator that shows which mode is the fastest way to reach your destination. With a combination of several means of transport, so that I have the fastest route to my destination, and then the most comfortable one, where I have to change the least times or something like that. And maybe the most sustainable route as well.” – P3

The Mobil-Flat itself is connected to all the other aspects. Augsburg is the owner of the Mobil-Flat, public transport, carsharing, and bikesharing are included, and the user is the one who must buy it.

4.2 Customer Journeys

In the following section, customer journeys are presented, that were created based on the results of the interviews. The customer journeys show the purchasing process of the Mobil-Flat subscription, the use at night when going out as well as a trip to a furniture store. In Figure 9, the symbols used for the visualizations of the customer journeys are described.

After each customer journey, a short summary will be provided of the outcome and learnings. While this might be more fitting in the chapter of the analysis, the legibility will be improved by having the description and the resulting outcome close to each other.

Figure 9: Legend for Customer Journey

4.2.1 Customer Journey 1

Figure 10: Customer Journey 1, part 1

The first customer journey describes the sign-up process a customer is going through when choosing the shared mobility subscription offered in Augsburg. To increase the legibility, the customer will be named Klaus.

Klaus is a new resident in Augsburg. He moved there for his new job at a fintech company. Having 20 employees, the fintech is rather small, and therefore does not offer

a cooperation with the local public transport association for a reduced price on monthly public transport subscriptions.

Thus, right after moving to Augsburg, Klaus has the need to get some means of transportation. He looks up different options, what he does mostly online from his home. He considers different possibilities: As Augsburg is not too big, he could simply walk or bike everywhere, but since it rains often, those options are not attractive to Klaus. Besides, he also likes going on weekend trips and has some family members living about 80km away, which he would like to visit every other weekend. Another option is to buy a car. This would allow him to be flexible on the weekends, to go on trips, visit friends, and when going shopping, he does not need to carry his groceries on a bike. Yet, as he lives close to the city center, parking spots are rare and underground parking is expensive. Getting a subscription for carsharing would be a solution for the parking problem, and then Klaus could still go on weekend trips.

But Klaus thinks this might be too limited, and he wants to be even more flexible. He likes going out for drinks at night in which case driving back is not a good choice. And always thinking about buying a bus ticket is something he does not like. Buying the public transport subscription would also be a solution for the user Klaus. But then Klaus would have to use the bus to go grocery shopping and to visit his family, which is living in a small village with an irregular public transport connection. Klaus sees the solution in a flat, where he can use different transportation systems. It is a monthly subscription the Stadtwerke Augsburg offers, where the user can use carsharing, bikesharing and the public transport. Klaus likes the flexibility this flat rate offers and decides to buy a subscription for it.

To do so, he visits the website of the shared mobility system and now has the option between two flat rates, called S (small) and M (medium). Both flat rates include public transport in the city zones 10 and 20, which are the zones covering the downtown area, so he can go out at night, and the zones he needs to get to work. Also included in both packages are 30min of free bikesharing for every ride, no matter how many times a day he starts a ride. The only difference between the two options is the carsharing. The S package includes 150km or 15 hours of carsharing a month, while the package M offers 30 hours of carsharing without kilometer limit. If Klaus used the carsharing more often

than included in the package, he would pay the additional usage by the hour and km. Thinking about his family living about 80km away from Augsburg, which would be 160km per visit, he decides for the M package.

Klaus clicks on the “buy now” button underneath the description of the M package and is redirected to a page where he can log in as an existing customer or register as a new one. He chooses the “new customer” field and must decide if he wants to buy the extra insurance for € 60 a year, which reduces the deductible from € 1,000 to € 300 in case of an accident. As Klaus likes to be cautious, he decides to get the insurance. He also needs to choose the starting date for the subscription, which is only possible on the first day of each month. He chooses the next possible date and then has to fill out the personal data, including his name, address, contact information, ID and driver’s license number. Besides, he has to create a password, which is needed when calling the carsharing hotline. After clicking on “continue”, he gets redirected to another form page, where he is asked to insert his bank details for the monthly payment for the service. The payment is only possible via a direct debit. Afterwards, he accepts the general terms and conditions as well as the one for motor insurance (after skimming over them quickly) and presses the “buy” button.

Further instructions are shown on the website now, as well as the message that he needs to confirm his e-mail address. After opening his e-mail provider and confirming his e- mail address, Klaus reads through the page informing him about the next steps.

Figure 11: Customer Journey 1, part 2

The instructions state that Klaus will receive his public transport ticket via mail but needs to take further steps for the bikesharing and carsharing. For the bikesharing, he must register on the swa bike website with his client number that he got after buying the subscription. He follows the instruction on the registration page, putting in his personal

data, and wonders that he has to insert a payment method again. He inserts the data anyway, and the provider draws in 1€ as a starting credit to verify the means of payment. Afterwards, Klaus receives a message that he can start using “swa Rad” now. However, the free 30min every ride will only start as soon as his shared mobility subscription does. To use the bikesharing while being on the move, Klaus downloads the nextbike app to his phone and logs in with his account.

Figure 12: Customer Journey 1, part 3

The instructions also state that he needs to verify his driver’s license at the customer center of Stadtwerke Augsburg in person in order to use the carsharing. Klaus decides to do this the day after, as there is still some time until the start of his subscription. He goes to the customer center, and the people there take his driver’s license and safe all the data connected with the license into the system. He is able to use the carsharing afterwards, as his account is unlocked.

4.2.1.1 Reflections On The Customer Journey 1:

The learnings from the customer journey are the many steps the customer has to take in order to sign up and use the Mobil-Flat. The first steps can be done at home, online, while the customer has to go to the customer center afterwards to get their driver’s license verified. The public transport card is sent to them a few days after the online registration, and for nextbike they get a code to register on their website as well. These steps that the customer has to take in order to use the Mobil-Flat, some people may find too cumbersome and are therefore discouraged from purchasing the service. The amount of apps the customer needs to use all three modes of transportations is also high and involves a lot of effort.

4.2.2 Customer Journey 2

Figure 13: Customer Journey 2

The second customer journey shows the process of a customer who wants to go out with friends to a bar in the city center in Augsburg. The name of the customer is Lara. She already has the Mobil-Flat.

Lara agrees to meet with her friends at a bar in Augsburg for the evening. She checks the weather forecast for the night, as she is unsure how to get to the bar. Right now, it’s raining, but the forecast says it will stop soon. She has different options, how to get to the bar. She could take the tram, but the next tram stop is a 15-minute walk away. Taking her own bike, or taking a sharing bike, would work, but as it is still raining, so Lara is worried that she will reach the bar being wet and cold. A taxi would be the most comfortable option, but she might already take a taxi on the way back and taking the taxi twice is a bit too expensive for her. Lara decides to take a free-floating sharing car, as she can leave it at the bar and does not have to worry about getting it back, as she wants to have a couple of drinks tonight. She takes out her phone and checks on the swa Carsharing app if there are free-floating cars close by. However, there are no cars in the proximity. She thinks about taking a station-based car, and simply not drink, but she doesn’t want that. Walking to the next free-floating car would take a long time. Lara then decides to take a sharing bike to the tram station, as there is a bike station just outside her building. Checking the nextbike app shows her, that there are many bikes at the station right now.

Lara gets ready and goes downstairs to the station, chooses a decent looking bike and scans the QR code on the bike. She receives a code via the app which she enters into the bike computer to unlock the bike. While she is riding to the tram station, the rain stops. She thinks about locking the bike at the tram station as planned, but then decides that she will be quicker at the bar if she rides the bike all the way. Lara looks up the bike stations near her destination and sees on the app that there is one close to the bar. She rides the bike there, puts the bike to one stop and closes the lock. On the bike computer, she can now confirm that she wants to end her ride. The app shows her that her ride took 35 minutes. As only 30 minutes per ride are free within the Mobil-Flat, she needs to pay for the additional 5 minutes. The extra times costs 1€, which is transferred directly from her bank account to nextbike.

Afterwards, Lara starts walking to the bar.

4.2.2.1 Reflections On The Customer Journey 2:

This customer journey shows some disadvantages of the Mobil-Flat, especially of the carsharing, as there are only nine free-floating cars provided while there are 192 station- based cars, which can only be used for round trips. Weekend trips and longer shopping trips are well suited for this model, while taking a car downtown to meet friends for drinks does not work well here. Combining different modes of transportations (bikesharing and the public transport) works well if the given infrastructure offers transition points, where customers can change between the transportation methods.

4.2.3 Customer Journey 3

Figure 14: Customer Journey 3

The third customer journey is about the customer Klaus again, who wants to go to IKEA on a Saturday to buy furniture for his new apartment. After he decides that he wants to go to IKEA, he checks on the swa Carsharing app, if there are any free transporters available for next Saturday morning. There are no transporters or bigger cars available. Klaus thinks about taking a smaller car and renting an IKEA trailer. However, he then would have to return the trailer to IKEA, and he does not know if there will be one available. Another option would be to take a small car and get the furniture delivered, but this means he would have to wait for a few days, and he had planned to use the weekend to set everything up. Also, the delivery costs might be high for bigger furniture pieces. Buying the furniture online does not seem to be a good solution for Klaus either, as he likes to get inspired in the store, and he still would have to pay the delivery fees. After some consideration, he checks if there is a transporter available later that day and sees that there is one free during the afternoon. He quickly reserves it via the app, glad that he can now sleep in on Saturday. After the reservation, he gets a confirmation shown on the app.

On Saturday afternoon, Klaus checks the app and sees that his reservation starts in 15 minutes. He gets ready and walks to the station where his booked transporter is located. The app shows him the steps he has to take to open the car. He unlocks the car with his phone as soon as he is close enough and then inserts a PIN which he set up during registration into the board computer. The glove box opens and there he finds the keys for the car.

He starts driving to IKEA. When he gets there, he simply locks the car with the key and takes the key with him. After he is done with the shopping and loading up the car, Klaus starts driving back to his apartment. There is a lot of traffic around and he gets stuck in a traffic jam. He looks at the time and realizes that he will probably not make it back within the 4 hours for which he reserved the transporter. Klaus is unsure what to do. He thinks about leaving the highway and taking a longer route where there might be no traffic, yet he does not know for sure that this will be faster. He could also keep on driving and not do anything, but he is afraid that he might be banned from the carsharing or the Mobil- Flat in general if he returns the car too late. He then decides to call the service number, which is shown on the app to tell the carsharing operator that he will be late. The person on the service hotline tells him that it is no problem, as nobody booked the car after Klaus

and prolongs the rent for one more hour. He now drives back to his apartment more relaxed and starts unpacking the furniture and bringing it upstairs once he gets there. Afterwards, Klaus drives the transporter to the same station where he got it from, puts the key back into the glove box, locks it via the board computer and stops the rent with his app. The time and distance travelled are shown on the app and he can see how many hours he still has left in his flat rate for the month.

4.2.3.1 Reflections On The Customer Journey 3:

To ensure that there is a free transporter on the weekend, the customer needs to book in advance. Having only a few transporters available makes the number of requests per vehicle very high. It is possible to use the cars for longer trips as the customer can lock the car with the key at any time at a stopover without interrupting the rental. If the rental should take longer than indicated, there is a service center that customers can call to extend the rental. It is also possible to extend the rental period via the app.

5. Analysis

The findings from the interviews presented earlier are analysed in this chapter. In order to do so, they are put into relation with relevant literature. A closer look is taken at the socio-technical system as well at the experience ecosystem and the impact these systems have on the users.

5.1 Socio-Technical Mobility System In Augsburg

The mobility system in Augsburg consists of three mobility modes, public transport, bikesharing and carsharing, combined in one subscription. The customer buys this subscription online or at the customer center of swa. The swa system then generates a code with which the customer can register for the bikesharing provided by nextbike, in Augsburg called swa Rad. As the carsharing and the public transport providers belong to the same holding as the swa, the purchase is processed for the two services by the same system. The system triggers the impulse to mail the public transport ticket to the customer and sends out an e-mail with the remaining steps to verify the driver's license in order to use the carsharing.

In addition to the technical systems described above, there is also the technical aspect of the various transport options that are offered. The booking and billing system for the bikesharing is operated by nextbike. There is an immediate settlement after each use, if the 30 free minutes are exceeded. Nextbike also takes care that at the end of each day the bikes are distributed evenly or according to a plan to the stations in the city, in order to avoid accumulation at one station or empty stations. Maintenance and repair are also part of nextbike's duties.

For carsharing and public transport, swa takes care of the further processing of the customer by personally verifying the driver's license by the customer service staff. The monthly fee and the carsharing fee for exceeding the free hours and kilometers are also debited via a swa system. The maintenance and servicing of buses, trams and cars falls within their remit, as does the inspection of stations and vehicles.

Besides the technical aspects of the system, the social aspects play an important role in making the system work. This starts with the customer, who has to accept this model and purchase it. Here, the network effect comes into play (Botsman & Rogers, 2010): the benefit increases the more people use the system, as more cars and locations will be offered when demand increases permanently (Biedermann, 2020). All customers stated to have heard about the Mobil-Flat from friends or family, either as the first contact or shortly after (P1-4). This implies that the advertising done by swa was successful in the sense of awareness, while the clarity of the message what the offered service is still needs improvement (P1+2). The people living in Augsburg are also proud of the carsharing, as the carsharing is widely spread and big compared to the size of the city and the “swa” branded cars belong to the cityscape of Augsburg (Participant 4, 2020). Proudness could be also a reason for signing up to the carsharing and might motivate people to try the Mobil-Flat as well, as this subscription is also something exclusively for their city. While the station-based carsharing is very successful in Augsburg (P2-3), another study suggests that the free-floating model is favoured by the customers (Suchanek, 2019). This might be due to cultural differences, as the mentioned study was conducted in Poland. The people in Augsburg prefer pre-booked and firm plans where they can count on (P4).

The spatial component within the social side is also important. The parking spaces for carsharing are mostly on private properties and are rented. The landlords, which are always commercial, must agree to rent space to swa for the use of carsharing. The same applies to the bike stations used by the bikesharing, and the only difference is that mostly the city is renting out spaces for the bikesharing. This proves the statement of P4, who said that especially the carsharing belongs to the cityscape. The willingness of companies in Augsburg to rent out parking space to this mobility concept indicates the overall acceptance.

The customers are the core component of this thesis. Their acceptance of the model is essential for its success, as it depends on if it is used and booked or not. Currently, the model has approx. 330 users (Biedermann, 2020), which, on itself, would not be enough to maintain the service. Due to the fact that the carsharing is popular in Augsburg (Participant 4, 2020), as it has over 5,700 users, and there are no fixed costs to have the Mobil-Flat in place (Biedermann, 2020), it can still exist.

Figure 15: Components of socio-technical system and their connections The relationships between the different components and actors are drafted in Figure 15. The symbols next to each component shows whether it belongs to the social or to the technical aspect of the system. A clear distinction is not always possible, for example, the public transport is a socio-technical system on its own. Other components might be either social or technical, depending from which perspective they are looked at. For example the bikesharing stations are here sorted into the social part, because they are in the city and therefore part of the cityscape, yet they could also be sorted into the technical part, as they have some technical aspects which allows the locking and unlocking of the bikes. It can be seen, that the user is connected to almost every component, except for the systems running in the background of the apps (booking and billing) and the reparations and maintenance which is done by the providers.

5.1.1 Creating Value

Ure and Jaegersberg (2005) defined a strategy with different components which can be used to create value in a socio-technical systems, as described in 2.5.1. This strategy can now be applied to the system available in Augsburg.

Common platform: Creating a common platform does not only mean offering all the services within on application, but also creating a platform the user is able to use in a sense-making way. This starts by putting the booking system for the three services into a common app, but also means making this app easily usable and user-friendly. All customers (P2-4) described it as very cumbersome to use different apps to book the different modes of transportation. Furthermore, both P3 and P4 said that using the apps provided by swa was not a good experience because they did not run as smoothly. Hence, the platform on which the actors can find and book the transportation methods should to be adapted to their needs and wishes.

Bridging the gap: The socio-technical system has the user as the central actor. There still is a gap between the customers and the system itself, as P2 was not able to understand the exact working of the bikesharing, and therefore does not see any appeal in buying the Mobil-Flat for the possible use of the bikesharing. Another problem mentioned concerns the complexity level of the offer. While there are two options for the Mobil-Flat, customers seem to desire more possibilities for customization. P1 would like to see an expansion of the included public transport zones, and P4 would like to find a solution for businesses to book or provide the subscription to employees. This adds more complexity to the offered solutions, but people seem to wish for that.

Creating new linkable between technical and human networks: Due to the continuing advancement in technology, more coupling between the actors using the system and the system itself could be made. A ride sharing and carsharing combining solution (Participant 4, 2020) could be implemented by investigating the routes of carsharing and general car use in Augsburg and comparing the data with the routes taken. Then it would be possible to set up free parking spaces outside the city, and carsharing vehicles can be driven one-way from there into the city with ride sharing. Different transactions could be added to the already existing system.

Aligning systems to create value: Becoming aware of past and existing problems can help the providers to avoid a repetition of those problems in the future. Sharing user data between nextbike and swa, which is not happening to date (Biedermann, 2020), might help to identify possibilities of how the different modes of transportation can better work together. Subsequentially, the swa can examine if the Mobil-Flat users are using the bikesharing, as three out of four interview participants talked mainly negatively about it. The swa might find another mobility mode to add to their portfolio, which creates more motivation for its users to buy the subscription.

5.2 Experience Ecosystem

To see this bigger picture, the mobility system can be placed into a larger experience ecosystem, which has the topic of personal transportation as its central focus since the actors are (usually) using this mobility service as a way to get to their destination and not just for the experience of using the system. In such a experience ecosystem, the swa does not have an influence on all the experiences the customer might have, but there are digital and physical channels that are also important for the experience. For example, a customer might rent a car, but gets stuck in traffic for hours. The experience is expected to be a bad one, even if the system the swa provides works really well. (Resmini & Lacerda, 2016)

The customer moves freely between experiencing a service (the carsharing provided), using a device (their phone to book a car), switching locations (goes from their flat to the car parking space) and using a certain product (the car).

The whole mobility system which is offered in Augsburg can be sorted into this bigger picture of the experience ecosystem. The different blocks of the experience ecosystem in Augsburg are as follows:

Actor: The customer who buys the Mobil-Flat is the main actor in this ecosystem, as the aim for a positive experience is focused on the actor. Other actors might be the mobility provider or other residents in Augsburg, but as this thesis researches the view on the system from the customers' point of view, they will be named as the primary actor here.

Tasks: The different tasks the customer completes to use the system are among others the sign up process to get access to the mobility flat, including the single steps for public transport, bikesharing and carsharing. The task could also be simpler, as for example checking the carsharing app if there are any free cars available.

Touchpoints: While the actor is completing the tasks, he gets in contact with the system. Those contact points are the touchpoint. The mentioned app is a touchpoint, where the actor has contact with the system. A touchpoint would also be the customer center, where the actor gets their driver’s licence verification by an employee. The first touchpoint the actor usually has with the Mobil-Flat is either seining the advertisement printed on busses or talking with friends about it.

Seams: When connecting different touchpoints, information is transmitted via a seam. The bikesharing station and the nextbike app, where the actor is checking for free bikes are connected with a server. Hence, the seam between those touchpoints is the server, where all bikes are registered and the information about their location is transmitted to the app, where the actor can access this data.

Channels: In the ecosystem of the Mobil-Flat exist multiple channels. The channel of the city, where different sharing station and public transport stops are is for example one channel. The same is applicable for the carsharing and the public transport. Another, smaller channel is one car itself, as if needs to have a parking spot, maintenance, someone who fills up the tank, the two different locking systems which each car has etc.

Those channels of bikesharing, carsharing, and public transport are all connected by the swa system and their website, which is linking to the different booking systems. The connection to those booking systems are the touchpoints, which are either the website or the different apps. The touchpoints allow the actor to do certain tasks, such as booking a bike or looking up when the next bus is arriving.

All these bricks belonging to the experience ecosystem can be either social, technical, or a mixture of both. Therefore, the socio-technical system is a part of such a experience ecosystem.

What is important about a experience ecosystem is the connection between the channels. If these connections are not functioning, the actor will have a bad experience. For

example, when the connection (the seam) between the bike station and the app does not work, the actor can book a bike via their app, but once they get to the bike station, there are no free bikes. Similarly, if the registration for the system works, but the information is not forwarded to the public transport provider, the actor never gets their bus card. Hence, the experience is a negative one as well.

Therefore, the flow of information between those channels needs to be well working in order for the actor to have a good experience. Furthermore, there needs to be a connection between of channels within the whole ecosystem to increase the attractiveness to the actor.

It still needs to be said that there is no step by step manual to create or improve such a experience ecosystem. The process to do this is to iterate through the whole system many times and observe the actions and tasks the actors does within this system (Resmini & Rosati, 2011).

The following intent paths were created to better represent one actor’s path through the system. The paths are based on the customer journey described in section 4.2.

Figure 16: Path IKEA 1

In the first path, the actor has the need to go to IKEA and therefore checks on his phone where the closest IKEA is on Google Maps. Once he has his phone, the Google Maps app is at his immediate disposal. The same goes for the carsharing app, which he checks right after and makes a reservation. A few days later, he goes to the parking space, which is physically away from him and he has to put in effort to reach that touchpoint. He now opens the car with his app, and then inserts the PIN into the board computer, so he gets the keys. Afterwards, he drives to another location (IKEA), and the path is finished.

Figure 17: Path IKEA 2

The second path describes the way back from IKEA. The customer already is in the car and takes his phone to check Google Maps. Then he calls the service hotline to tell them he will be back later due to traffic. He drives the way to his home, which does not take much effort as that is where he wants to go anyways, and afterwards has to drive to the parking spot to return the car. Since this is not his actual destination, this is seen as more cumbersome. He finishes his rent on the board computer and closes the car with the app.

These maps show the simplicity and complexity of the paths the actor undertakes. The straighter and shorter the path, the faster and easier the actor reaches their goal. While path 1 is straighter, is also includes more steps. If the path is not straight, it is user friendlier if it is slightly dropping, as this means that the touchpoints are local and therefore acquire less effort to reach. If the path rises, the actor has to reach touchpoints which are remote, may that be spatial or conceptual. If the path goes back instead of forward, the actor needs to apply more energy to reach the aim.

In this case, path 1 is mostly straight forward and has only one weak remote touchpoint, which makes is very user friendly. Path 2 includes two weak touchpoints, where one is remote and the other is local. Improvement can now be focused on the weak seams to the touchpoints, as those hinder the actor from reaching the aims with as little friction as possible.

This is the way a single actor takes trough the ecosystem. When mapping out the whole ecosystem, all mentioned components of the system are collected and sorted into groups. This was already done while coding the interview. Afterwards, those components were put into the map, as shown below.

It must be noted that this map is a simplified depiction of the system, as the codes are grouped and not every code was put on the map by itself, only the group the codes were sorted in (e.g. Positive and negative aspects of carsharing are grouped into carsharing).

Figure 18: Map of Mobil-Flat system

The different colours are to differentiate better between the clusters. For this map, the Mobil-Flat, carsharing, bikesharing and the public transport are defined as touchpoints, even tough by definition those might not be touchpoints. This is due to the fact that the actors were talking about those terms. To build up the seams between the touchpoints, defining them as touchpoints was also important.

The map shows how important the Mobil-Flat is in the system, which is not surprising. Furthermore, it is made clear that all means of transport are handled by the Mobil-Flat but are not really connected to each other. The app, on the other hand, is an important part of the system and is important for the Mobil-Flat, carsharing and bikesharing. Only a few things were mentioned without a connection to the Mobil-Flat. This includes the support for prolonging the rent, as well as the website.

A smaller ecosystem was mapped out to show the possibilities of improvement for the Mobil-Flat.

Figure 19: Map of improvements The ideas that were incorporated in Fig. 19, were either mentioned as negative aspects of the system, which implied that they needed improvement, or directly as ideas and wishes for the system. This shows that the concept of shared mobility reached the people living in Augsburg, and that they wish for more. The combination of carsharing, bikesharing and public transport does not seem to be enough anymore, as wishes for e-scooters, vespa sharing, microtransit and ride sharing were expressed. The desires of the customers also include a route planning in the app, which can be used for all modes of transportation. Besides, improvement of the bikesharing is hoped for, as the bikes are not user-friendly. Especially one common app was mentioned by all Mobil-Flat customers multiple times.

In addition the wish came up for more free-floating carsharing, as P2 wants to have more spontaneity, which corresponds with the findings from a study about the carsharing in Europe and Asia, where free-floating carsharing was more successful than the station- based one (Suchanek, 2019).

6. Conclusion

The aim of this thesis was understanding how the mobility system in Augsburg works and what its premises are. Furthermore, the reasons which motivated the customers to buy a subscription and use the system, as well as elements which could improve the system were scrutinized.

By interviewing the responsible employee at Stadtwerke Augsburg, important facts about the system could be collected as well as an understanding of the system itself was gained. The semi-structured interviews with existing customers, a carsharing user and a resident in Augsburg who actively decided against the Mobil-Flat helped showing the positive as well as the negative aspects of the system. Furthermore, ideas were collected on how the system itself could be improved. This was done by looking for solutions for the negative aspects as well as directly asking for ideas of improvement and wishes for the system to the interviewees. As the chosen research approach was interpretivism, all things said by the customers were interpreted by the researcher and new ideas about improvements were generated inductively.

The research questions, which were stated in the introduction of this thesis, were answered with the results of the interviews and the analysis thereof in connection with relevant literature. In the following section, the overall findings of this thesis are presented and answers to the research questions are provided.

The first RQ “What is the Augsburg mobility system, how does it work and what are the premises?” can be answered as followed:

The mobility system which exists in Augsburg has a social and a technical aspect, and those aspects cannot be separated, as the system is only working based on a connection of those two. The users are needed for the system to function, as well as the booking and billing system and the vehicles itself. This system stretches over many channels, for example the city area channel, the car renting channel and so on. Those channels need to be connected and an exchange of information is required in order for the system to work.

RQ2 “What motivates the people in Augsburg to use the offered shared mobility system?” and RQ3 “Which changes could be made to the offered mobility system in order to

motivate more people to use it?” have been answered together during the conducted research and analysis.

The value created in this socio-technical system motivates people to use it already. A common platform already exists in essence, as there is a common system that customers can easily book. The pain point are the different applications within this system. Furthermore, the communication between the provider and the customers has to be worked on, since there were multiple misunderstandings about the mobile flat rate. The original communication, "everything from a single source", worked very well and all participants saw this advertising campaign.

It is also desired that the complexity of the offer should be increased so that there are more possibilities for mobility, as well as different sizes of the package. Further alignment between the social and the technical aspects need to be done, since the technical part itself works well on its own, but does not fit the needs and wishes of the customers. By clarifying what the customer wants, the social requirements to the technical parts can be identified. This way possible improvements can be designed and implemented. (Ure & Jaegersberg, 2005)

It also should be stated that the term “flat rate” is not the right term for the offered shared mobility model. As stated in the introduction, a flat rate is a fixed rate that does not change, no matter how much a service is used (Cambridge University Press, 2020). This does apply for the public transport, however not for the carsharing and the bikesharing. Since the rate the customer must pay changes, depending on how much they use it, the definition of flat rate does not apply to the researched Augsburg model. As the term flat rate was used by the Stadtwerke Augsburg and the customers, this thesis also used the term as to not create any confusion. The author is aware that the term is not entirely correct though.

Summarizing the main results, the main implication for the Stadtwerke Augsburg is the recommendation to conduct interviews with more users of the Mobil-Flat and work on their communication, as two from four interviewees had a misunderstanding about the offered services. One app bundling the booking for all the offered transportation methods was already mentioned before, but this was the biggest wish for improvements. Also mentioned were more modes of transportation within the Mobil-Flat. Stadtwerke

Augsburg could find out with more research if there are some options which are accepted by its customers and applicable to their model.

Despite the limitations due to the COVID-19 pandemic during the development of this thesis, the shared mobility system in Augsburg could be examined and the customers' view of the system could be explained in detail. A map of the system was created and the customers' wishes and suggestions for improvement were worked out. A close examination of the system has made it possible to identify social and technical aspects, as well as the various channels that belong to this mobility system.

The number of interviews conducted with customers and potential customers is rather low and therefore the results of this thesis are not representative. An opinion of only these customers was collected, which may show some wishes and improvements, but the results are not transferable to all customers of the Mobil-Flat. The small number of interviews were due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which might have also influenced the participants of those interviews. Due to the unusual situation, the interviewees may have been in a stressful situation and therefore the answers may have been different than they would have been otherwise. Further research is suggested when influencing factors due to the uncertain situation are reduced.

7. Discussion

In this last chapter of the thesis, a critical view is provided on the thesis and weaknesses are mentioned. Opportunities for further research will be stated.

When the research for this thesis was started, the scope was set too big, as the author planned to map out the shared mobility system in Augsburg, find a framework and then apply this framework to different cities in order to see if the same shared mobility system was applicable there. After realizing that this goal was set too big and that the quality of research would suffer, the author scaled down the goal for the thesis such that the quality would not suffer from the scope.

7.1 Theory Discussion

The theoretical background was at first based only on the topics of sharing economy and shared mobility, as the research was planned to focus on the economical point of view. After some feedback, the focus shifted to the area of information systems, where the subject of this thesis lies. This took some time the author could have used to gain more insights into the theoretical parts they wanted to write about.

The division between the theoretical background for socio-technical systems and experience ecosystems and the methodology where tools for such systems were presented was difficult and there might have been some reoccurrences of information.

7.2 Methods Discussion

The methods were already discussed in section 3.5. They fitted the aim of this thesis, however it cannot be excluded that a different approach to the methodology would not have produced similar or even more meaningful results.

An earlier decision on the methods used in the thesis could have given the author more time to conduct the research and there might have been a bigger sample group to be interviewed.

The qualitative research that was done in this thesis could also have been combined with some more quantitative research to verify the statements made in the semi-structured interviews.

7.3 Results Discussion

In addition to the low number of interviews with customers, which was already mentioned before, the results gained in this thesis were not validated, may it either be by a bigger sample group or by a quantitative testing afterwards. The results are also not transparent, which is the biggest drawback of choosing interpretivism as the research philosophy. Other researchers reading the transcripts of the interviews might come to different conclusions. Listening to the recorded interview also might give some more insight into the emotional level of the participant, which is also not possible for other researchers.

7.4 Implications For Research

The interviewees who volunteered for this research were all male. Since the sample size is only four, this might be a coincidence. However, there is no data on the distribution of gender among the customers and hence it might be possible that only males use the service. There might also be reasons unrelated to the Mobil-Flat why only male customers were willing to give an interview after being contacted by a female researcher on Facebook. Literature only found a small gender gap in carsharing, where there were only 2% less woman than men using carsharing from a sample group (Le Vine et al., 2014), but this might implicate a research gap as the situation in Germany might be different.

The general market for shared mobility in Germany should be researched, as there are many innovative forms of transportation (carsharing, microtransit, vespa-sharing etc.) but so far only few shared mobility system. Recommendations for other cities could be made.

7.5 Future Research

Further research is suggested both in the area of quantitative research as well as qualitative. One big qualitative study could be conducted in order to gain more insights from the customers, what is working well and what are they wishing for. For this, the author suggests a focus group, as it was also planned for this thesis. A focus group is fitting if the aim is to gain new ideas and find new connections which the researchers were not aware of before (Patton, 2015). The results from this thesis can also be taken into account.

Then a quantitative study is needed in order to prove statements from the qualitative study and the gathered insights. This can help to rank options, suggested in the focus groups.

The original topic of this thesis, the development of a model and then investigate if this model would fit other cities as well is also an area for future research, given enough time and capacity.

The mobility system should also be researched from an economical point of view, as the price was often mentioned as a crucial reason for buying or not buying the subscription.

8. Reference List

Augsburger Verkehrs- und Tarifverbund AVV. (2020). Gemeinschaftstarif. Retrieved from Gemeinsame Beförderungsbedingungen: https://www.sw-augsburg.de/fileadmin/content/6_pdf_Downloadcenter/ 3_ Mobilitaet/Gemeinschaftstarif_2019_01_Bek_03.pdf Babin, B., & Zikmund, W. (2016). Exploring Marketing Research. Boston, MA, USA: Cengage Learning. Belk, R. (2014). Sharing Versus Pseudo-Sharing in Web 2.0. The Anthropologist, 18(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891518 Berube, A. (2017). Shared Mobility. Retrieved from https://deslibris.ca/ID/10090773: Équiterre: Équiterre. Biedermann, J. (2020, 03 16). Multimobility Augsburg. (W. Henke, Interviewer) Botsman, R. (2013, 11 21). The Sharing Economy Lacks A Shared Definition. Retrieved from Fast Company & Inc: https://www.fastcompany.com/3022028/the-sharing-economy-lacks-a-shared-definition Botsman, R. (2015, 05 27). Defining The Sharing Economy: What Is Collaborative Consumption–And What Isn’t? Retrieved from Fast Company & Inc: https://www.fastcompany.com/3046119/defining-the-sharing- economy-what-is-collaborative-consumption-and-what-isnt Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s Mine Is Yours: How Collaborative Consumption is Changing the Way We Live. London: HarperBusiness. Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2016). InterViews : learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. SAGE Publications Ltd. Cambridge University Press. (2020, 05 09). flat rate. Retrieved from Cambridge Business English Dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/flat-rate Doyle, C. (2020, 05 04). customer journey. Retrieved from A Dictionary of Marketing: http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198736424.001.0001/acref-9780198736424-e- 2150 Forte, J., & Darin, T. (2017). User Experience Evaluation for User Interface Redesign: A Case Study on a Bike Sharing Application. In A. Marcus & W. Wang (Eds.), Design, User Experience, and Usability: Understanding Users and Contexts (pp. 614–631). Springer International Publishing. Frenken, K., & Schor, J. (2017). Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.01.003 Geiger, D., Fielt, E., Rosemann, M., & Schader, M. (2012). Crowdsourcing information systems - definition, typology, and design. International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 2012, 4, 3562– 3572. Hamburger Hochbahn AG. (2020, 03 13). Homepage. Retrieved from Switchh: https://www.switchh.de /hochbahn/hamburg/switchh/homepage Hietanen, S. (2019, 10 11). Episode 8: Mobility on Demand. (V. Quirk, & E. Jaffe, Interviewers) Hörcher, D., & Graham, D. J. (2020). MaaS economics: Should we fight car ownership with subscriptions to alternative modes? Economics of Transportation, 22(July 2019), 100167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecotra .2020.100167 Iacobucci, J., Hovenkotter, K., & Anbinder, J. (2017). Transit Systems and the Impacts of Shared Mobility. In G. Meyer, & S. Shaheen, Disrupting Mobility (pp. 65-77). Cham: Springer International Publishing AG. Karim, D. M. (2017). Creating an Innovative Mobility Ecosystem for Urban Planning Areas. In G. Meyer, & S. Shaheen, Disrupting Mobility (pp. 21-51). Cham: Springer International Publishing AG. Klein, N. J., & Smart, M. J. (2017). Millennials and car ownership: Less money, fewer cars. Transport Policy, 53, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.08.010 Law, J. (2016). socio technical system. In A Dictionary of Business and Management (6th ed.). https://www-oxfordreference-com.proxy.library.ju.se/view/10.1093/acref/9780199684984.001.0001

/acref-9780199684984-e-5970 Le Vine, S., Adamou, O., & Polak, J. (2014). Predicting new forms of activity/mobility patterns enabled by shared-mobility services through a needs-based stated-response method: Case study of grocery shopping. Transport Policy, 32, 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.12.008 Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69–96. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0420 Lindenfalk, B., & Resmini, A. (2019). Mapping an Ambient Assisted Living Service as a Seamful Cross- Channel Ecosystem. In M. Pfannstiel & C. Rasche (Eds.), Service Design and Service Thinking in Healthcare and Hospital Management (pp. 289–314). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00749-2_17 Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2019). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic. Los Angeles, USA: SAGE Publications Ltd. MaaS Global Oy. (2020, 02 15). Whim. Retrieved from Whim: https://whimapp.com/ Moeller, S. (2010). Characteristics of services - a new approach uncovers their value. Journal of Services Marketing, 24(5), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041011060468 Myers, M. D., & Newman, M. (2007). The qualitative interview in IS research: Examining the craft. Information and Organization, 17(1), 2–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2006.11.001 nextbike GmbH. (2020a, 03 10). Information. Retrieved from swa Rad Augsburg: https://www.swa- rad.de/de/augsburg/information/ nextbike GmbH. (2020b, 03 20). Nextbikes kostenlos leihen. Retrieved from swa-rad: https://www.swa- rad.de/de/augsburg/news/augsburg-nextbikes-kostenlos-leihen/ nextbike GmbH. (2020c, 05 01). Wir sind für euch da! Retrieved from Nextbike: https://www. nextbike.de/de/ Participant 4. (2020, 05 02). Interview about the Mobil Flat. (W. Henke, Interviewer) Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Presse- und Informationsamt der Bundesregierung. (2020, 05 14). Regeln, Einschränkungen, Lockerungen. Retrieved from Bundesregierung: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/themen/coronavirus/corona- massnahmen-1734724 PricewaterhouseCoopers AG. (2015, 06). Share Economy. Retrieved from pwc.de: https://www.pwc.de/de/ digitale-transformation/assets/pwc-bevoelkerungsbefragung-share-economy.pdf Quirk, V., & Jaffe, E. (2019, 10 11). Episode 8: Mobility on Demand. Retrieved from Sidewalk Labs: https://www.sidewalklabs.com/blog/episode-8-mobility-on-demand/ Resmini, A. (2012, 01 08). Sketching intent paths. Retrieved from Andreas Resmini: http://andrearesmini.com/blog/sketching-intent-paths/ Resmini, A., & Lacerda, F. (2016). The architecture of cross-channel ecosystems: From convergence to experience. 8th International Conference on Management of Digital EcoSystems, MEDES 2016, 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3012071.3012087 Resmini, A., & Lindenfalk, B. (forthcoming). Mapping experience ecosystems as emergent actor-created spaces. In R. Chbeir, & Y. Badr, Advances in Intelligent Digital Ecosystems. Springer. Resmini, A., & Rosati, L. (2011). Pervasive Information Architecture: Designing Cross-channel User Experiences. Elsevier Inc. Rifkin, J. (2007). Access. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher Inc. Rosenbaum, M. S., Otalora, M. L., & Ramírez, G. C. (2017). How to create a realistic customer journey map. Business Horizons, 60(1), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.09.010 Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students. Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Schor, J. B., & Fitzmaurice, C. J. (2014). Collaborating and connecting: The emergence of the sharing economy. Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, 410–425. https://doi.org/10.4337 /9781783471270.00039 Schultze, U., & Avital, M. (2011). Designing interviews to generate rich data for information systems research. Information and Organization, 21(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2010.11.001 Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: Relating ontology and epistemology to the methodology and methods of the scientific, interpretive, and critical research paradigms. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n9p9 Shaheen, A., & Stocker, H. (2018). Future of Mobility White Paper. UC Berkeley UCCONNECT, January, 1–118. https://doi.org/10.7922/G2WH2N5D Stadtwerke Augsburg Carsharing-GmbH. (2020, 03 12). Unsere Privatkunden Pakete. Retrieved from https://www.sw-augsburg.de/: https://www.sw-augsburg.de/fileadmin/content/6_pdf_Downloadcenter /3_ Mobilitaet/Carsharing/swa_Carsharing_PK_Flyer_Nov.2018.pdf Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH. (2020, 03 12). Carsharing für Augsburg. Retrieved from https://www.sw-augsburg.de/: https://www.sw-augsburg.de/mobilitaet/swa-carsharing/ Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH. (2020, 03 14). Konzernstruktur & Beteiligungen. Retrieved from sw-augsburg: https://www.sw-augsburg.de/ueber-uns/unternehmen/ Stadtwerke Augsburg Holding GmbH. (2020, 05 01). Zum 1. Januar 2020: Die City-Zone kommt! Retrieved from Stadtwerke Augsburg: https://www.sw-augsburg.de/city-zone/ Staun, H. (2014). Ökonom Jeremy Rifkin - Das Ende des Kapitalismus. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Suchanek, M. (2019). Challenges of Urban Mobility, Transport Companies and System. Springer Nature Switzerland AG. U.S. Department of transportation. (2020, 04 28). Shared Mobility Definitions. Retrieved from Federal Transit Administration: https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-definitions Ure, J., & Jaegersberg, G. (2005). Invisible Architecture : the Benefits of Aligning People, Processes and Technology : Case Studies for System Designers and Managers. Swindon: British Computer Society. Zwass, V. (2017, 12 28). Information System. Retrieved from Encyclopædia Britannica: https://www. britannica.com/topic/information-system

Appendix

Interview Guide

Introduction Consent to recording

Who am I?

Is the thesis for anybody?

Purpose of thesis / interview

Mentioning confidentiality

Warm Up Living in Augsburg?

How do they get to work / university every morning?

How are they going shopping?

Main body What kind of mobility subscription do they have?

How did they hear about the Mobil-Flat the first time?

Has Mobil-Flat → What made you chose the Mobil-Flat?

How often do you use the services?

What do you see as the biggest advantage?

What is not working well?

Do you wish for any improvements?

Car-Sharing → What made you decide to use the carsharing?

(MF incl.) How often are you using the carsharing?

Do you also have a public transport subscription?

Are you also using the bikesharing?

Do you wish for any improvements in the carsharing?

Describe the process of renting a car

What is bothering you about the carsharing?

No CS/MF→ Why don’t you have the subscription?

Would you think about buying it if something changes?

What would need to change?

Cool off Would you recommend it to friends / family?

Would you like to say anything else?

Closure Thanking the interviewee

Signalling the end

Not all the questions needed to be asked or answered

vii

Interview Transcripts

Interview 1

INTERVIEWER: Guten Tag mein Name ist Wiebke Henke vielen Dank dass Sie sich bereit erklärt haben das Interview mit mir durchzuführen erst einmal ich würde das Interview aufnehmen haben Sie etwas dagegen TEILNEHMER 1: Nein habe ich nicht machen sie das gerne INTERVIEWER: Wunderbar vielen Dank dann endlich haben wir es jetzt ein bisschen mehr zu meiner Person zu der Masterarbeit wegen der wird dieses Interview führen und dann würde ich sagen beginnen wir mit dem mit dem eigentlichen Interview TEILNEHMER 1: Wunderbar, dann starten Sie mal gerne INTERVIEWER: Perfekt. Also, die Masterarbeit schreibe ich an einer schwedischen Uni, wohne aber selber in München und schreibe über das Mobilitätskonzept, was es in Augsburg gibt. Die Stadtwerke Augsburg haben eine Flatrate eingeführt, bei der Carsharing, Bikesharing und die Nutzung des ÖPNVs enthalten sind. Diese Flatrate wird Mobil-Flat genannt. Um dieses System zu untersuchen interviewe ich momentan Leute, die entweder diese Flat bereits haben, die das Carsharing nutzen oder die sich aktiv mit der Flat beschäftigt haben und dann sich dagegen entschlossen haben. Die These schreibe ich nur für die Uni und für mich, nicht für die Stadtwerke Augsburg. Ich habe mit denen ein Interview durchgeführt und einige Daten bekommen, und werde auch meine Ergebnisse am Ende mit denen teilen, aber habe keinerlei Vertrag oder dergleichen mit denen. Zudem werden alle Daten hier aus den Interviews so gesammelt, dass keine Identitäten zugewiesen werden können. Allein demographische Daten sammele ich im Rahmen dieses Interviews. Also kann nichts, was du hier sagst, irgendwie zu dir zugeordnet werden und nur ich kenne deinen Namen und werde diesen nicht weitergeben. Das Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es, das System in Augsburg zu verstehen, welche Einflussfaktoren es gibt, was funktioniert und was besser gemacht werden kann für den Kunden. Wenn du keine Fragen hierzu hast würde ich sagen, starten wir mit dem Interview. TEILNEHMER 1: Das klingt gut, dann starten Sie mal. INTERVIEWER: Magst du erst einmal etwas zu dir sagen? Wer bist du und was machst du momentan?

viii

TEILNEHMER 1: Ich bin 57 Jahre alt und bin in der Nähe von Augsburg aufgewachsen. Für meine Ausbildung bin ich dann in die Stadt gezogen und seitdem wohne ich hier. Momentan arbeite ich in der Marketing Abteilung einer Bank, etwas außerhalb von Augsburg. (Anmerkung des Interviewers: Der Teilnehmer ist männlich) INTERVIEWER: Sie haben angegeben dass sie in Augsburg wohnen, wo genau wohnen sie denn? Eher im innerstädtischen Bereich oder ein bisschen weiter außerhalb? TEILNEHMER 1: Ich wohne direkt in der Innenstadt. INTERVIEWER: Wie kommen Sie denn jeden Tag zur Arbeit? TEILNEHMER 1: Wenn ich zur Arbeit fahre dann nehme ich in der Regel die öffentlichen Verkehrsmittel. Da ich etwas weiter außerhalb arbeite, nutze ich in der Regel die Bundesbahn um zur Arbeit zu kommen. Ich besitze ein AVV mobil Abo. Das ist ein Abo womit ich die regionalen Verkehrsbände rund um Augsburg nutzen kann. INTERVIEWER: Okay sehr schön. Wie ist das denn wenn sie z.b. für einen ein Event eine Party etwas größer einkaufen gehen müssen. TEILNEHMER 1: Wenn ich größer einkaufen gehen muss das heißt wenn ich auch mal Wasserkisten oder dergleichen kaufe dann nehme ich in der Regel mein Auto. INTERVIEWER: Okay sie haben also ein Auto. Wie stellen Sie das denn unter in der Innenstadt? Wie parken Sie? TEILNEHMER 1: Ich habe eine kleine Eigentumswohnung hier in der Stadt und dazu gehört eben auch eine Tiefgarage. Hätte ich keine Tiefgarage, würde ich auch kein Auto haben, da die Parkplatzsuche in der Innenstadt hier richtig schwer ist. Es gibt kaum Parkplätze, und die Parkplätze sind in der Regel sehr schnell befüllt, vor allem von Leuten die früher Feierabend machen können. Da ich in der Regel jeden Tag erst so gegen 18 Uhr wieder zu Hause bin, habe ich da keine Chance, ein Parkplatz an der Straße zu finden. INTERVIEWER: Das heißt dann ja, dass Sie nicht die Mobil-Flat haben. Wie kommt es denn dann dass sie sich überlegt haben das Flatrate Modell der mobil-flat zu nutzen? TEILNEHMER 1: Ich hatte Ende letzten Jahres überlegt, ob ich mein Auto verkaufe da ich dieses einfach nicht so oft nutze. Zudem ist mein Auto nicht mehr das neueste und sehr anfällig für diverse Kleinigkeiten, sodass ich manchmal, wenn ich dringend ein Auto brauche, mir eins mieten muss. Das Auto wird es wahrscheinlich nicht mehr über den nächsten TÜV bringen. Ich brauche aber in der Regel ein bis zweimal in der Woche ein Auto um größere Einkäufe zu erledigen oder um meine Enkelkinder zu besuchen, die etwas weiter auf dem Land wohnen.

INTERVIEWER: Wo sie bis jetzt immer mit ihrem eigenen Auto hinfahren oder? TEILNEHMER 1: Genau! INTERVIEWER: Wie haben Sie denn das erste Mal von der Mobil-Flat gehört? TEILNEHMER 1:. Ich habe am Anfang, als diese Flatrate gerade eingeführt wurde, davon schon gehört, da dies in diversen Zeitungen in Augsburg stand. Es war zudem auf den ÖPNV Bussen aufgedruckt. Und wenn ich mich recht erinnere, hat mir meine Tochter ebenfalls von dem Abo erzählt. Soweit ich weiß, hat sie sogar ein Abo abgeschlossen. Das Modell des Carsharings und der Bike Flatrate in Augsburg finde ich momentan für mich aber nicht attraktiv genug als dass es sich lohnen würde für mich INTERVIEWER: Was genau ist denn nicht attraktiv genug für dich? TEILNEHMER 1: Also erst einmal, muss ich sagen, dass ich das Abo viel zu teuer finde! Für den Radius, indem ich das benutzen möchte, ist das für mich einfach nicht interessant. Das ÖPNV Abo, welches in der Mobil-Flat enthalten ist, umfasst nur den Augsburger Innenraum. Ich aber habe ja ein AVV Ticket, mit welchem ich besonders das Umland und zusätzlich den Innenraum nutzen kann. Mit der Mobil-Flat muss ich mir also weiterhin mein AVV Ticket zahlen und zahle dann den Innenraum zweimal da er bereits in dem AVV Ticket enthalten ist, ebenso wie in der Mobil-Flatrate. Dies ist für mich sowohl preislich als auch vom Aufwand her keine Lösung. Zudem habe ich bereits einen Autovermieter, billiger-mietwagen.de, mit dem ich sehr zufrieden bin und bei dem ich immer Mietwagen buche, sofern ich mal ein größeres Auto brauche oder mein eigenes Auto mal wieder rumgezickt. INTERVIEWER: Dies war jetzt die Preisgestaltung. Wie sieht es denn neben dem Preis ich ein Aspekt aus gibt es da Sachen die dir besonders gut oder nicht so gut an dem Abo gefallen? TEILNEHMER 1: Da gibt es auch genügend Sachen die mir nicht gefallen. Zuallererst einmal die Fahrräder. Diese Fahrräder ist in ein reines Alibi. Der Hauptaugenmerk bei den Fahrrädern, wurde eindeutig auf Haltbarkeit ausgelegt, und nicht auf die Nutzbarkeit. Diese Fahrräder sind klobig, schwer, kaum zu handhaben und sehen einfach nur absolut hässlich aus. Das Ausleihen der Fahrräder ist umständlich und mit diesem Fahrrädern von A nach B zu kommen ist einfach nur eine Wahnsinnsarbeit. Ich habe einmal versucht, solch ein Fahrrad zu nehmen, um eine relativ kurze Strecke zurückzulegen, und war absolut enttäuscht. An den Innenstadt Stationen, die es zuhauf in der Augsburger Innenstadt gibt, sind meistens kaum Fahrräder da, da alle Leute sich ein Fahrrad nehmen

und damit dann zurück in die außer äußeren Bezirke fahren. Das heißt, wenn ich kurz ein Fahrrad nehmen möchte, um sagen wir mal einkaufen zu gehen, muss ich an weitere weiter entfernte Stationen gehen und kann erst dort ein Fahrrad mieten. Dies ist einfach nur umständlich und viel mehr Arbeit als wenn man sich für wenig Geld ein eigenes gebrauchtes Fahrrad kaufen würde. INTERVIEWER: Haben Sie denn auch bereits das Carsharing ausprobiert? Was sind dabei Ihre Erfahrungen? TEILNEHMER 1: Beim Carsharing wurde, meiner Meinung nach, allein auf die Betriebswirtschaftlichkeit geachtet. Die Autos sind wahnsinnig teuer und muss immer irgendwohin rennen, um solch ein Auto zu bekommen. Auch hier sind oft die Autos in die Innenstadt an den Innenstadt Stationen ausgebucht und nur Autos auf weiter außerhalb liegenden Stationen sind verfügbar. Der Kilometerpreis ist relativ teuer und dafür ist die Ausstattung der Autos sehr sehr schlecht. Ein Wochenendtrip in solchem Auto würde einfach auch keinen Spaß machen. Selbst einmal eben zu Ikea zu fahren und dort Sachen kaufen ist mit solchem Auto schwer, weil es in der Regel eher kleinere Autos sind und die großen Autos sind am Wochenende natürlich immer vergriffen. Es mag sein, dass die Autos allem im allem günstiger sind als ein eigenes Auto mit der monatlichen Abschreibung, der Steuer und dergleichen, aber wenn ich mir vorstelle kein Auto mehr zu haben und immer irgendwohin rennen zu müssen um mir einen zu mieten, habe ich schon gar keine Lust mehr darauf. Da gehe ich lieber kurzem eine Tiefgarage, weiß wo mein Auto steht, weißt dass das Auto funktioniert oder wenn ich mal längere Trips machen möchte hole mir einen Mietwagen. Das ist deutlich einfacher und komfortabler für mich, da sehe ich es gar nicht ein mir beim Carsharing ein Abo zu holen für schlechte Autos und für viel zu viel Geld. Dies betrifft aber meiner Erfahrung nach nicht nur das Augsburger Carsharing sondern das Carsharing in jeder Stadt. Ich mache es insgesamt eher so. Ich habe eine Flatrate bei der Bundesbahn, und wenn ich an gewissen Orten ein Auto brauche, dann fahre ich mit der Bahn dorthin und Miete mir vor Ort ein Auto. Wie z.b. neulich auf der Leipziger Buchmesse. Ich bin mit der Bahn hingefahren, und da ich vor Ort gerne ein Auto haben wollte, habe ich mir vor Ort ein Auto gemietet. Dies war deutlich einfacher als mir hier in Augsburg ein Auto zu mieten und dorthin zu fahren oder gar mit meinem eigenen Auto dorthin zu fahren. Insofern passt das, was Augsburg da anbietet, einfach nicht so gut. Zumindest passt es für mich nicht so gut. Ich weiß nicht, wie viele Leute an dieser Flatrate teilnehmen, aber ich

kann mir nicht vorstellen, dass es sehr viele sind. Ich hoffe es rentiert sich für die ich wünsche dir noch alles Gute, aber für mich ist diese Flatrate einfach überhaupt gar nicht gut und ich finde sie überhaupt gar nicht ansprechen. Außerdem, muss man sagen, dass es mit so einer Kooperation mit der Energiesparte verbunden ist. Ich habe gehört, dass man seiner Energie über die Augsburger Stadtwerke beziehen muss, um solch eine Flat zu bekommen. Dies finde ich absolut unsinnig und es widerspricht doch allem was solch eine flat bietet. Das ist alles Käse finde ich. Entweder ich biete eine Flatrate an, die jeder benutzen kann, oder ich lasse es einfach! INTERVIEWER: Ok. TEILNEHMER 1: Das ist wie bei einem Gewinnspiel. Sie kaufen etwas und Sie können nur bei dem Gewinnspiel teilnehmen, wenn sie frei verkauft haben. Das finde ich unbehaglich. Sowas macht man einfach nicht. Aus Marketingsicht, ist sowas einfach absolut daneben. Zusätzlich, ich weiß nicht, ob Sie dies schon wissen, gibt es seit ein paar Wochen, seit Anfang dieses Jahres, seit Februar ungefähr, gibt es im Augsburger Innenstadtbereich die kostenlose Benutzung des ÖPNV. Das heißt, man kann kostenlos mit Straßenbahn und Bus fahren, in einem relativ begrenzten Innenstadtbereich. Ich halte das für plakativ. Sinnvoll wäre meines Erachtens gewesen, dies alles mit ein bisschen Schwung zu machen und die Park and Ride Plätze dort kostenlos anzubringen. Das ist wie "Wasch mir den Pelz, aber mach mich nicht nass" oder "gesprungen, aber nicht getraut". Welche Metapher auch immer man einsetzen möchte. Aber das ist typisch Augsburg. Aber Augsburg ist eben kein Luxemburg. Und die haben sich ja auch sicherlich überlegt, was es heißt, wenn man in der Innenstadt keine Einnahmen mehr durch den ÖPNV macht. INTERVIEWER: Ok. Du hast ja gesagt, dass deine Tochter dieses Abo hat. Was sagt sie denn darüber? TEILNEHMER 1: Das kann ich nicht genau sagen, ich habe weder etwas positives noch etwas negatives von ihr gehört. INTERVIEWER: Alles klar. Dann sind wir auch soweit durch mit dem Interview. Gibt es noch etwas, was du sagen möchtest? TEILNEHMER 1: Nur, dass ich finde, das gesamte Konzept muss überarbeitet werden, die Grundidee ist ja gut, dass alles aus einer Hand kommen soll.

xii

INTERVIEWER: Dann bedanke ich mich herzlich für die Zeit und das Interview und wünsche Ihnen noch einen schönen Tag. Bleib gesund.

xiii

Interview 2

INTERVIEWER: Guten Tag! Mein Name ist Wiebke und ich führe dieses Interview im Rahmen meiner Masterarbeit durch. Kurz am Anfang: Ist es okay, wenn ich das Interview aufzeichne? TEILNEHMER 2: Das passt. INTERVIEWER: Wunderbar, vielen Dank. Ich erzähle erst einmal kurz, was ich hier genau mache und dann starten wir mit dem Hauptteil des Interviews. Das Interview geht ca. 20 min, aber wenn wir länger brauchen ist das von meiner Seite aus kein Problem. Ich erzähle jetzt erstmal kurz was zu mir und der Arbeit und dann können wir mit dem eigentlichen Interview starten. Also, die Masterarbeit schreibe ich an einer schwedischen Uni, wohne aber selber in München und schreibe über das Mobilitätskonzept, was es in Augsburg gibt. Die Stadtwerke Augsburg haben eine Flatrate eingeführt, bei der Carsharing, Bikesharing und die Nutzung des ÖPNVs enthalten sind. Diese Flatrate wird Mobil-Flat genannt. Um dieses System zu untersuchen interviewe ich momentan Leute, die entweder diese Flat bereits haben, die das Carsharing nutzen oder die sich aktiv mit der Flat beschäftigt haben und dann sich dagegen entschlossen haben. Die These schreibe ich nur für die Uni und für mich, nicht für die Stadtwerke Augsburg. Ich habe mit denen ein Interview durchgeführt und einige Daten bekommen, und werde auch meine Ergebnisse am Ende mit denen teilen, aber habe keinerlei Vertrag oder dergleichen mit denen. Zudem werden alle Daten hier aus den Interviews so gesammelt, dass keine Identitäten zugewiesen werden können. Allein demographische Daten sammele ich im Rahmen dieses Interviews. Also kann nichts, was du hier sagst, irgendwie zu dir zugeordnet werden und nur ich kenne deinen Namen und werde diesen nicht weitergeben. Das Ziel meiner Arbeit ist es, das System in Augsburg zu verstehen, welche Einflussfaktoren es gibt, was funktioniert und was besser gemacht werden kann für den Kunden. INTERVIEWER: Magst du mir kurz was zu dir sagen? Wer bist du und was genau machst du momentan als Profession? TEILNEHMER 2: Ja klar. Also, ich bin Lars, auch wenn du den Namen nicht brauchst, und ich bin 27 Jahre alt und männlich. Momentan studiere ich noch, werde aber ab Mai fertig sein mit meinem Studium. Neben dem Studium arbeite ich als Werkstudent in einer Firma, wo ich nach dem Studium richtig anfangen werde.

xiv

TEILNEHMER 2: Ich bin aus Augsburg, und ich habe den Link für das Interview auf Facebook gesehen und dachte mir, ich habe Zeit und helfe gerne aus bei der Masterarbeit. Ich selber nutze das Car-Sharing und habe mir gedacht, ja gut, dann mache ich da auch mit, denn so kann ich dann ja auch gute Antworten geben. INTERVIEWER: Super, das freut mich sehr, vielen Dank schon einmal! INTERVIEWER: Dann lass uns gerne mal anfange. Du wohnst momentan in Augsburg? TEILNEHMER 2: Genau, ich wohne in Augsburg. INTERVIEWER: Wohnst du denn eher im Stadtzentrum, oder etwas außerhalb vom Stadtzentrum? TEILNEHMER 2: Ich wohne sogar genau im Stadtzentrum, super zentral. INTERVIEWER: Du meintest ja du studierst und arbeitest nebenbei als Werkstudent. Wie kommst du denn jeden Morgen zur Arbeit oder zur Uni? TEILNEHMER 2: Das ist jetzt natürlich ein schlechtes Beispiel, aber da ich so zentral wohne, laufe ich sowohl zur Uni als auch immer zur Arbeit. INTERVIEWER: Und wie ist es denn, wenn du mal größer einkaufen gehen musst? Für eine größere Party, oder zum Möbelladen oder zum Baumarkt? TEILNEHMER 2: Dann ist es so, dass ich früher oft das Carsharing Auto genommen habe. Meine Freundin hat jetzt aber seit 3 Wochen ein eigenes Auto, jetzt nehmen wir dann immer ihr Auto. Aber wie gesagt, davor haben wir relativ oft so ein Carsharing Auto uns geholt, hier um unsere Wohnung sind auch direkt drei Stationen. INTERVIEWER: Das heißt du hast wahrscheinlich über deine Uni das normale Semesterticket und dann noch das Abo für das Car Sahring? TEILNEHMER 2: Genau das ist ganz praktisch, als Student habe ich das Semesterticket, was im Semesterbeitrag mit drinnen ist und mit dem Augsburger Studentenausweis spart man sich sowohl die Aufnahmegebühr und die monatliche Grundgebühr für das Carsharing und zahlt dann wirklich nur je Fahrt INTERVIEWER: Und damit ist es dann recht günstig? TEILNEHMER 2: Genau das ist es dann vor allem, wenn man es dann mal nicht nutzt für drei Monate macht das auch nichts, denn man zahlt ja auch nichts. INTERVIEWER: Ja, sehr gut. Weißt du schon, ob du das Carsharing Abo weiterhin behalten wirst, wenn du kein Student mehr bist? TEILNEHMER 2: Das weiß ich auch noch nicht genau. Ich muss zumindest keine Anmeldegebühr mehr zahlen, weil ich ja schon Kunde bin, aber der monatliche Beitrag

ist glaube ich nicht allzu hoch, das kann man schon mal zahlen, wenn man einen Vollzeit Job hat. INTERVIEWER: Wie genau läuft es denn ab, wenn du dir ein Auto ausleihst? Bevor ihr das Auto deiner Freundin hattet? TEILNEHMER 2: Wenn wir zum Beispiel zu Ikea fahren, weil wir was größeres kaufen müssen, nehmen wir auch jetzt einen Transporter vom Carsharing. Das ist einfach praktischer. TEILNEHMER 2: Dann gucke ich vorher nach, wann der verfügbar ist, da es nur zwei Transporter in ganz Augsburg gibt, und dann buche ich den, wenn es uns zeitlich passt. Und dann fahren wir mit dem Transporter eben zu IKEA. INTERVIEWER: Wie lange vorher musst du denn so den Transporter reservieren, damit der an einem Samstag frei ist? TEILNEHMER 2: Das ist unterschiedlich, teilweise muss man den dann bereits eine Woche im Voraus mieten. Es kommt auch darauf an, zu welchen Zeiten man den Mieten will. Ich habe selten Lust, am Samstag zu IKEA zu fahren, wenn alle anderen fahren. Man ist aber auch immer an die Öffnungszeiten gebunden, man kann ja nicht immer fahren. Im großen und ganzen bekommt man den aber, wenn es nicht am Samstag ist, innerhalb einer Woche. INTERVIEWER: Und wie war das früher, hast du dir da mal ein normales Auto geliehen um etwas zu erledigen oder um irgendwohin zu fahren? TEILNEHMER 2: Genau, wenn wir einfach nur mal groß einkaufen gehen wollten, habe ich einfach immer spontan geguckt. Da ich wie gesagt drei Stationen um meine Wohnung herum habe, gibt es eigentlich immer freie Autos, die man dann mieten kann. Wirklich im Voraus gucke ich da nicht, da bin ich lieber spontaner. INTERVIEWER: Kam es denn schon einmal vor, dass du kein Auto so spontan bekommen hast? TEILNEHMER 2: Einmal kam das bereits vor. Dann habe ich noch kurz nach den E- Autos geguckt, davon sind auch immer ein paar in der Stadt, aber nicht an Stationen. Davon war auch keines frei, und dann habe ich einfach gesagt, dass ich wann anders einkaufen gehen werde. INTERVIEWER: Kam den denn schon einmal vor, dass du ein Auto ausgeliehen hattest und dieses Auto dann nicht zum Mietende wieder zurück bringen konntest?

xvi

TEILNEHMER 2: Das ist mir bereits ein paar Mal passiert. Es war aber zum Glück für mich nie ein Problem, weil ich habe dann einfach, während ich halt unterwegs war und gemerkt hatte, dass ich es nicht in der Zeit zurück schaffe, und konnte dann um eine Stunde oder um zwei Stunden verlängern. Das geh recht einfach innerhalb der App. Das geht aber nur, wenn es danach kein anderer gebucht hat. Was dann ansonsten passieren würde, habe ich keine Ahnung. Ich bin auch ganz froh, dass ich das nicht rausfinden muss. Ein Freund von mir hat, als es ganz knapp war und er es in der App nicht mehr verlängern konnte, einfach kurz bei der Service Hotline angerufen und die haben seine Miete dann einfach um eine Stunde verlängert. INTERVIEWER: Du sagtest ja, dass du in Augsburg bleiben wirst nach deinem Studium um dann zu Arbeiten. Überlegst du, oder würdest du dir überlegen, die Mobil-Flat zu holen, die vom swa angeboten wird? TEILNEHMER 2: Ich könnte mir sehr gut vorstellen. Also, je nachdem, wo ich arbeite und alles. Momentan laufe ich ja zur Arbeit und bin deutlich schneller, als ich es mit dem Auto sein könnte. Das heißt, es ist fraglich, ob sich die lohnt, weil ich wirklich alles zu Fuß erledigen kann. Aber prinzipiell bin ich sehr begeistert von dem Konzept der Mobil- Flat, weil ich, wenn ich sehe dass ich ein Auto brauche, es einfach reservieren kann und dann auch weiß, dass ich zu dem bestimmten Zeitpunkt auch definitiv ein Auto bekommen werde. Und es ist viel günstiger, als sich selber ein Auto zu kaufen, welches man ja auch nicht so oft nutzt, wenn man in der Innenstadt wohnt. Und ich brauche ein Auto momentan ja maximal einmal die Woche, dafür würde ich mir nie ein Auto kaufen. Aber wie gesagt, ich muss dann etwas weiter weg Arbeiten, sodass ich auch das ÖPNV Ticket brauche, ansonsten lohnt sich die Mobil-Flat nicht und ich würde mich einfach weiterhin das Carsharing Abo holen. INTERVIEWER: Alles klar. Wie ist es denn mit dem Bikesharing? Hast du das bereits einmal genutzt? Für Studenten, die sich dort anmelden, ist es ja auch in den ersten 30min jeder Anmietung umsonst, genauso wie bei der Mobil-Flat. TEILNEHMER 2: Das kann gut sein, aber ich habe es noch nie genutzt. Das Konzept finde ich irgendwie ein bisschen komisch. Vielleicht ist man doch mittlerweile von den E-Scootern ein bisschen verwöhnt, aber ich verstehe mich nicht so ganz, wie ich das Fahrrad nach der Nutzung an der gleichen Station wieder abgeben soll, wenn ich das Rad doch brauche, um irgendwo hin zu kommen. So dauert die Miete ja immer mehr als

xvii

30min, weil ich hin und wieder zurück muss. Vielleicht habe ich es auch falsch verstanden. INTERVIEWER: Tatsächlich ist es so, dass man die Fahrräder an jeder Station wieder abgeben kann, nicht nur an der, wo man das Rad angemietet hat. TEILNEHMER 2: Ja gut, aber die Stationen in der Innenstadt sind doch meistens voll, da kann man das Rad dann gar nicht abstellen. Ich weiß nicht, wie es dann läuft. Aber ich habe auch ein eigenes Fahrrad, insofern hat es sich für mich noch nie ergeben, dass ich das Rad vom Bikesharing brauchte. Zumal die Fahrräder dort ziemlich schlecht sind und ich dann lieber mein eigenes nehme, weil das einfach bequemer ist. INTERVIEWER: Hast du auch schon überlegt, das Carsharing für Wochenende Ausflüge zu benutzen? TEILNEHMER 2: Ja. Also ich hatte jetzt noch kein Auto für einen komplett Wochenendtrip gebucht, aber ich kenne welche, die das gemacht haben und die waren recht zufrieden meine ich. Ich kann es mir auch vorstellen. Ich habe mal für einen kompletten Tag ein Auto gebucht, weil das halt praktischer war, als es immer wieder abzustellen und dann neu zu buchen. Das war aber in Augsburg, als ich umgezogen bin, aber da war ich auch sehr zufrieden mit. Das ging ziemlich gut. INTERVIEWER: Würdest du die Mobil-Flat Freunden empfehlen, wenn sie nach Augsburg neu ziehen würden und sich sowieso ein ÖPNV Ticket holen müssen? TEILNEHMER 2: Also ich würde es auf jeden Fall erzählen, dass es sowas gibt. Damit würde ich es ja an und für sich natürlich auch empfehlen. Aber ich habe bis jetzt die Erfahrung gemacht, dass die Leute, die bis jetzt noch kein Carsharing nutzen, da auch generell ein bisschen abgeschreckt sind von der Flexibilität, obwohl ich es nicht ganz nachvollziehen kann, weil ich sehr flexibel und angenehm finde, gerade jetzt auch mit den E-Autos in der Stadt. INTERVIEWER: Super, vielen Dank für die Auskunft. Das war es soweit auch mit dem Interview, gibt es noch etwas, was du hinzufügen willst? TEILNEHMER 2: Nee, ich habe glaube ich alles bereits gesagt. INTERVIEWER: Dann vielen Dank für deine Zeit und das Interview und dir noch einen schönen Tag.

xviii

Interview 3

INTERVIEWER: Guten Tag! Vielen Dank für die Teilnahme an diesem Interview. Das ist ein Interview im Rahmen meiner Masterarbeit, die ich an einer schwedischen Universität in Jönköping schreibe. Und als Thema habe ich das Mobilitätssystem in Augsburg. Dieses Mobilitätssystem ist soweit relativ wenig untersucht worden bisher und ist ein sehr neues Mobilitätssystem, das es noch nicht gibt in Deutschland, in diesem Maße. Die Thesis die ich schreibe wird weder für die Stadt Augsburg geschrieben noch für sonst jemanden anderen, sondern wird alleine von mir und nur für die Universität geschrieben. Das heißt, es erhält niemand einen wirtschaftlichen Vorteil aus dieser Masterarbeit, sodass diese rein dem wissenschaftlichen Zwecken dient. Keinerlei Daten, die in diesem Interview erhoben werden, werden irgendwie weitergegeben. Die Endergebnisse werden mit den Stadtwerken geteilt werden, allerdings dient dies rein einem informativen Zwecken. Zudem werden die Namen aller Interviewpartner rausgenommen, und nur demografische Angaben werden gemacht. Hier würde ich jetzt auch kurz einmal fragen: Ist es okay, wenn ich das Interview aufnehmen werde? TEILNEHMER 3: Das ist kein Problem. INTERVIEWER: Vielen Dank. Magst du mir kurz was über dich erzählen? Wer du bist und was du momentan so machst? TEILNEHMER 3: Gerne. Ich bin 27 Jahre jung und männlich. Im März bin ich mit meiner Masterarbeit und damit meinem Studium fertig geworden und seitdem suche ich jetzt einen Job hier in Augsburg, wobei ich nicht sicher bin, ob ich hier bleiben werde, da ich bis jetzt hier nichts gefunden habe. INTERVIEWER: Wie ist denn deine Wohnsituation? Wohnst du alleine oder in einer Wohngemeinschaft? Wo in Augsburg wohnst du denn? TEILNEHMER 3: Ich wohne in einer WG, die liegt etwas außerhalb von Augsburg, ist aber dafür sehr groß. INTERVIEWER: Als du morgens immer zur Uni gegangen bist, wie bist du denn dort hin gekommen? TEILNEHMER 3: Ich bin immer mit dem öffentlichem Nahverkehr zur Uni gefahren. Eine Straßenbahn fuhr genau von mir zur Uni, das war sehr praktisch. Während der Uni habe ich noch als Werkstudent gearbeitet, da bin ich dann entweder auch mit den Öffentlichen hingefahren, was aber etwas länger dauerte als zur Uni, oder aber mit dem

xix

Fahrrad, wobei mein Rad irgendwann kaputt gegangen ist und ich es bisher nicht geschafft habe, das zu reparieren. INTERVIEWER: So was ist, wenn du ab und an mal etwas größer einkaufen gehen musst. Sei es ein Wocheneinkauf, für eine Party oder wenn du mal zu einem Möbelhaus musst? TEILNEHMER 3: Dann nutze ich in der Regel das Carsharing von den Stadtwerken. INTERVIEWER: Und wie ist es mit Wochenend-Trips, machst du sowas manchmal? Oder auch Tagesausflüge? TEILNEHMER 3: Gute Frage, ja doch manchmal. Wenn es mit der Bahn gut erreichbar ist, dann nehme ich immer eher die Bahn, aber wenn dies nicht geht, nehme ich oft ein Auto. Entweder dann einen Mietwagen oder per Carsharing, wenn das mit der Zeit und den Kilometern hin haut. INTERVIEWER: Was für ein Mobilitäts Ticket hast du denn momentan? Du sagtest zur Uni bist du immer mit dem ÖPNV gefahren, hattest du damals ein Semesterticket? TEILNEHMER 3: Genau, als ich noch Student war hatte ich das ganz normale Semesterticket. Das vermisse ich momentan auch sehr. Ich fahre recht oft in die Sadt, für Vorstellungsgespräche oder auch für meinen Aushilfsjob, auf dem Markt. Deswegen brauche ich auch jetzt ein Ticket und deswegen teste ich momentan die Mobil-Flat. Die haben so einen Test Zeitraum, wo man es drei Monate ausprobieren kann und gucken kann, ob man das als Jahresabo abschließen will. Ich denke, das ich besonders für Leute, die das Carsharing mal ausprobieren wollen. Das hatte ich aber schon vorher, als Student hat man den Monatsbetrag erlassen bekommen. Aber so kann ich drei Monate gucken, ob ich das Ticket nutzen kann, und muss mich nicht bereits auf ein Jahr festlegen. INTERVIEWER: Und was für eine Mobil-Flat hast du? Bisher gibt es ja das S Paket und das M Paket. TEILNEHMER 3: Ich habe das M Ticket, weil ich dachte, dass ich momentan ja viel Zeit habe und dann gut auch mal zum Baumarkt fahren kann um ein paar Sachen in meiner Wohnung zu machen. INTERVIEWER: Was war denn der Anstoß, dass du dich entschieden hast, dir dieses Ticket zu holen? TEILNEHMER 3: Das wurde hier in Augsburg, ich glaube es war Ende letzten Jahres, recht groß beworben. Sowohl im Internet gab es da einiges, als auch auf Bussen und den Straßenbahnen, große Plakate. In den Medien kommt man als Augsburger nicht ganz dran vorbei. Da habe ich mir das mal angeguckt. Wie sinnvoll ist das? Was nutze ich sowieso

schon. Und bekomme ich es dadurch vielleicht auch komfortabler oder anwendungsgerechter hin? Und gerade durch die Kooperation mit nextbike, also dem Bikesharing, fand ich das Angebot dann doch so gut, dass ich gesagt habe, ich hole mir das mal. INTERVIEWER: War diese Werbung die du Ende letzten Jahres gesehen hast dann auch der erste Kontaktpunkt, den du mit dieser Flatrate hattest? TEILNEHMER 3: Ich glaube schon. Ich bin mir nicht mehr ganz sicher, was zuerst war, ob ich die Werbung gesehen hatte oder Freunde von mir darüber gesprochen hatten und ich deswegen mehr auf die Werbung geachtet habe. Aber das muss so in etwa zur gleichen Zeit passiert sein. INTERVIEWER: Ja, ja, wunderbar. Wie oft nutzt du denn andere Sachen aus dem Abo als den ÖPNV. Guck dir gerne mal so deine Woche an, wie oft nutzt du das Carsharing und das Bikesharing? TEILNEHMER 3: Das Bikesharing plane zum Sommer hoffentlich häufiger zu nutzen als ich es bisher konnte. Das Wetter hat bisher ja nicht so wirklich mitgespielt, und da war Fahrrad fahren noch nicht sonderlich angenehm. Aber ich denke mal, das werde ich immer benutzen, wenn das Wetter gut ist und ich mal zum Sport will, also so 2-3 Mal die Woche dann vielleicht. Wenn das Wetter stimmt, will ich auch nicht verschwitzt in der Bahn sitzen, dann wird das ganz angenehm sein. INTERVIEWER: Und das Carsharing? TEILNEHMER 3: Hmm, gute Frage. Ich würde mal sagen, so einmal die Woche im Schnitt, vielleicht in manchen Wochen sogar zweimal. Dafür dann aber auch mal ein Wochenende nicht, also ja, im groben und ganzen vielleicht einmal die Woche. INTERVIEWER: Was gefällt dir denn besonders an dieser Flat? Also, wieso hast du dir die Flat für alles gekauft und buchst nicht immer einzeln? TEILNEHMER 3: Ich hoffe mal, dass es billiger ist, aber das habe ich ehrlich gesagt vorher nicht überprüft. Ansonsten mag ich es, mir einfach keine Gedanken machen zu müssen, unter dem Motto: Kaufe ich mir jetzt lieber eine Einzelkarte oder eine tageskarte? Nehme ich jetzt lieber ein E-Auto und kann es irgendwo abstellen oder nehme ich einfach eines von einem Parkplatz und bringe es dann nachher wieder dahin, was bequemer ist, aber manchmal bestimmt auch teurer. Und so bin ich auch motiviert, am Ende des Monats nochmal was zu machen, wenn ich sehe, dass ich noch 7 Carsharing Stunden offen habe,

xxi

dann fahre ich manchmal einfach mal zu meiner Großmutter, die wohnt eine Stunde außerhalt, und besucht sie, einfach mal so. TEILNEHMER 3: Also ist es eigentlich meine eigene Bequemlichkeit. INTERVIEWER: Gibt es denn auch Sachen, die dich an dem System stören? TEILNEHMER 3: Ja, tatsächlich gibt es da doch auch einige Sachen, die ich nicht so gut finde. Viele habe ich auch erst rausgefunden, nachdem ich mir das Probeabo bereits geholt hatte, hätte ich das vorher so genau gewusst, weiß ich nicht, ob ich mir das Abo trotzdem geholt hätte. TEILNEHMER 3: Mein Hauptkritikpunkt sind die vielen einzelnen Apps, für die man sich alle anmelden muss. Und ich muss immer die App wechseln, wenn ich statt dem Bikesharing das Carsharing nutzen möchte. Das finde ich auf die Dauer doch etwas nervig, weil ich es so nicht gut kombinieren kann, sondern immer eher nur eines der Sachen nutze. Die Apps ähneln sich zwar auch, aber doch sind sie sehr unterschiedlich im Bereich der Qualität. TEILNEHMER 3: Die nextbike App, also die App für das Bike Sahring, die finde ich gut gemacht. Ich kann mit meinem Account ja auch in anderen Städten das Bike Sahring nutzen, überall dort, wo es nextbike gibt. Generell die ist App übersichtlich, aber dann habe ich die Carsharing App dagegen. Ich finde diese App sehr mühsam zu nutzen, da die ganze Nutzung einfach nicht intuitiv ist und man sehr viele Kleinigkeiten hat, auf die man achten muss. INTERVIEWER: Wie ist es, wenn jetzt jemand von deinen Freunden, deiner engeren Verwandtschaft nach Augsburg ziehen würde, würdest du den Leuten dies Mobil-Flat empfehlen? Wiegen die Vorteile auf oder die Nachteile? TEILNEHMER 3: Nee, ich glaube, ich würde es schon empfehlen. Die Flexibilität, die man sich damit holt, die ist schon viel wert. Wie gesagt, gerade das Fahrrad ist eine schöne Sache. Und vor allem dieses einfach überall abstellen zu können, flexibel zwischen den Systemen wechseln zu können. Und ich denke auch, bevor man sich ein eigenes Auto anschafft oder sich für ein Trip ein teures Mietwagen Auto holt, den man machen kann, da kommt man auf jeden Fall deutlich günstiger weg. Rein ökonomisch macht es schon Sinn, würde ich schon empfehlen. INTERVIEWER: Ja, wunderbar. Was denkst du denn generell über dieses System? Hat so etwas eine Zukunft hier in Deutschland?

xxii

TEILNEHMER 3: Ja, ich denke schon. Ich glaube, es ist ein guter erster Schritt, aber hat auf jeden Fall noch viel Ausbaupotenzial. Wie gesagt, beispielsweise alles in eine App zu packen, wo ich dann recht einfach auswählen kann, welches Fortbewegungsmittel ich denn jetzt nehmen will, sei es der Bus, das Rad oder das Auto, und wo mir auch einfach eine Routen-Berechnung macht, die anzeigt, welches Mittel die schnellste Art und Weise ist, um zum Ziel zu gelangen. Gerne auch mit einer Kombination mehrerer Verkehrsmittel, sodass ich die allerschnellste Route zu meinem Ziel habe, und dann meinetwegen auch noch die bequemste, wo man am wenigsten umsteigen muss oder sowas. Und vielleicht noch die günstigste, wenn man sowas nicht als Flatrate anbietet, und was ich auch noch gut fände wäre die CO2 günstigste und grünste Strecke. TEILNEHMER 3: Also ich glaube, da haben wir noch viel, viel Potenzial, wenn man da die ganzen Datenstränge richtig zusammen laufen lassen kann. Aber ich kann natürlich nicht einschätzen, ob und wie dieses System auch in den größeren Städten oder auf dem Land funktionieren wird oder würde. Bei größeren Städten gibt es bestimmt Hotspots, wo sich alle Räder sammeln, wenn das Wetter zum Beispiel schön ist und alle Leute, wenn es dann regnet, fahren mit der Bahn zurück und tausende Räder stehen dann am Park. Aber ich denke mal, all sowas ist bestimmt gut lösbar irgendwann. Das ist eine Herausforderung, aber bestimmt lösbar. INTERVIEWER: Könntest du dir vorstellen, dass solch ein System auch deutschlandweit gebe? TEILNEHMER 3: Bundesweit glaube ich, dass sowas zu aufwendig wird. Man kann bestimmt gute Schnittstellen bieten. Zumindest wirkt es ja auch schon so in der nextbike App, wo man ja mit einer App die Räder in vielen verschiedenen Städten buchen kann, dass ich sage Ich kann im Prinzip in vielen verschiedenen Städten Fahrräder verschiedener Anbieter nutzen und alles über die App reservieren, sonst ja schon sehr komfortabel ist. Insofern kann ich mir das schon vorstellen, aber dann doch auch mit einer Lokalen Begrenzung, so dass ich jetzt schon nicht mit einem Carsharing Auto, was ich in Augsburg gemietet habe, dass ich nach München fahren kann und das in München stehen lassen darf. Man bräuchte dann irgendeine Rückführungsregel. Aber ja, ich glaube, das muss man erst mal gucken, wie es in verschiedenen Städten läuft, bevor man dann Deutschland übergreifend implementiert. Aber generell über eine App in ganz Deutschland auf verschiedene Transportmöglichkeiten zuzugreifen finde ich sehr gut, da

xxiii

muss man dann nur gucken, dass es nicht einfach ein Anbieter ist, der ganz Deutschland besteuert und damit ein Monopol bildet und auch die Preise wahllos festlegen kann. INTERVIEWER: Gibt es irgendeinen Service bei dem du dir wünschen würdest, dass dieser in dem Augsburger Gesamtpaket enthalten wäre? TEILNEHMER 3: Wenn in das Paket noch sowas wie Mitfahrgelegenheiten reingenommen werden würden, wäre das eine schöne Sache. Da kann man auch viel rausholen. Ich kann vielleicht auch ein Carsharing Auto benutzen, ohne alleine fahren zu müssen sondern kann dann direkt über die App anbieten, dass ich noch drei weitere Sitzplätze habe, wenn ich zum Beispiel mal einen Tag nach München fahre und dann Abends wieder zurück, oder wenn ich zu IKEA muss aber nichts großes kaufe, sodass ich noch Platz habe. So muss man auch nicht immer selbst der Fahrer sein, und man muss auch nicht immer in einer Gruppe unterwegs sein mit Leuten die man kennt. Sowas wie E-Scooter könnte man bestimmt auch mit rein packen, obwohl ich persönlich davon nicht der größte Fan bin. Man müsste jetzt nur noch einführen, dass man die Räder und Autos überall an allen Stationen abstellen darf. Wobei das ja schwer wird mit den Autos, wenn es keine Parkplätze mehr gibt, das ist bei Rädern einfacher. INTERVIEWER: Gibt es noch irgendwas, was du sonst über das System sagen willst, was dir vielleicht aufgefallen ist? TEILNEHMER 3: Generell wollte ich noch sagen, dass mir die nextbike App besonders gut gefällt. Die läuft flüssig auf dem Handy und stockt nicht, wie es die Carsharing und Fahrinfo App öfters mal machen, es ist super entspannend, da was zu reservieren, Fahrer auszuwählen, das Design ist verständlich, die Stationen zu finden ist einfach, man kann direkt sehen wie viele Fahrräder stehen noch an der Station. Es ist einfach übersichtlich und leicht zu bedienen. Und man kann in verschiedenen Städten die Räder ausleihen. Ich würde mir wünschen, sowas kann man auch für die Carsharing App machen, da sich die App bei mir des Öfteren immer aufhängt und ich die Handhabung oft nicht allzu einfach finde. Auch würde ich da gerne nach mehr Funktionen für ein Fahrzeug suchen, zum Beispiel will ich nach der Sitzanzahl suchen können und dann eben nur die Autos angezeigt bekommen, welche 6 oder 7 Sitze haben. Also die ganzen Filter Geschichten. Ich weiß es nicht, aber doch unübersichtlicher und inkonsistenter als die nextbike App. Da gibt's Buttons, die nicht immer ganz klar sind, was, was die jetzt machen, wo man herumprobieren muss.

xxiv

TEILNEHMER 3: Und die Performance ist wie gesagt viel, viel schlechter als von nextbike. Keine Ahnung, woran das liegt, aber die App lädt immer die ganze Deutschlandkarte, auch wenn ich ja nur für Augsburg suche und die Karte hat immer so eine gewisse Latenz wenn man sie bewegt. Aber an und für sich ist die App schon okay. Ich kam damit bis jetzt zumindest immer gut klar. Es sind Kleinigkeiten, die mich stören, aber alles in allem kann man mit der App machen, was man damit machen soll: Autos buchen. INTERVIEWER: Wie kannst du dem Buchungssystem recht, dass man im Voraus immer reserviert und wenn man spontan ein Auto braucht gucken muss? TEILNEHMER 3: Reservieren finde ich tatsächlich angenehm, dass man einfach sagt, man kann für sich zu einer gewisse Planung reinbringen und sich dann auch darauf verlassen, dass das Fahrzeug dann zur Verfügung steht. Das hat mir gut gefallen. INTERVIEWER: Wunderbar, das war es soweit auch schon mit dem Interview, hast du noch irgendwas, was du loswerden möchtest? TEILNEHMER 3: Nee, ich glaube ich habe alles erwähnt, was mir so an dem System aufgefallen ist und was ich gut und schlecht finde. INTERVIEWER: Dann bedanke ich mich herzlich für das Interview und wünsche dir noch einen schönen Tag. Bleib gesund.

xxv

Interview 4

INTERVIEWER: Guten Tag! Vielen Dank für die Teilnahme an diesem Interview. Mein Name ich Wiebke und dieses Interview ist im Rahmen meiner Masterarbeit, die ich an einer schwedischen Universität in Jönköping schreibe. Ist es okay, wenn ich das Interview aufnehmen werde? TEILNEHMER 4: Ja klar. INTERVIEWER: Wunderbar, danke. Also, das Thema meiner Masterarbeit ist das Mobilitätssystem in Augsburg. Dieses Mobilitätssystem ist soweit relativ wenig untersucht worden bisher und ist ein sehr neues Mobilitätssystem, das es noch nicht gibt in Deutschland, in diesem Maße. Die Arbeit, welche ich schreibe wird weder für die Stadt Augsburg geschrieben noch für sonst jemanden anderen, sondern wird alleine von mir und nur für die Universität geschrieben. Das heißt, es erhält niemand einen wirtschaftlichen Vorteil aus dieser Masterarbeit, sodass diese rein dem wissenschaftlichen Zwecken dient. Keinerlei Daten, die in diesem Interview erhoben werden, werden irgendwie weitergegeben. Die Endergebnisse werden mit den Stadtwerken geteilt werden, allerdings dient dies rein einem informativen Zwecken. Zudem werden die Namen aller Interviewpartner rausgenommen, und nur demografische Angaben werden gemacht. Magst du mir kurz was über dich erzählen? Wer du bist und was du momentan so machst? Danach starten wir dann richtig. TEILNEHMER 4: Gerne. Ich bin 28 Jahre alt und arbeite Vollzeit in einer Werbeagentur. INTERVIEWER: Wie kommst du denn jeden Tag zur Arbeit? TEILNEHMER 4: Ich nehme immer die Öffies. Ein Bus fuhr genau von mir zur Uni, das ist sehr praktisch. Und jetzt zur Arbeit nehme ich immer das Rad, wenn es nicht regnet. Ansonsten nehme ich auch dann den Bus. Ich habe diese Mobil-Flat, deswegen bin ich da flexibel. INTERVIEWER: So was ist, wenn du ab und an mal etwas größer einkaufen gehen musst. Sei es ein Wocheneinkauf, für eine Party oder wenn du mal zu einem Möbelhaus musst? TEILNEHMER 4: Dann nutze ich in der Regel das Carsharing, ich habe ja wie gesagt die Flat, und in der Regel nutze ich nicht immer die 15 Stunden, die ich im Monat habe. Deswegen gehe ich dann gerne mal etwas länger und größer Einkaufen. INTERVIEWER: Und wie ist es mit Wochenend-Trips, machst du sowas manchmal? Oder auch Tagesausflüge?

xxvi

TEILNEHMER 4: Gute Frage, ja doch manchmal. Aber meistens habe ich für sowas nicht so die Zeit. Kommt vielleicht noch. INTERVIEWER: Und was für eine Mobil-Flat hast du? Bisher gibt es ja das S Paket und das M Paket. TEILNEHMER 4: Ich habe das S Ticket, und wie gesagt, das reicht in der Regel auch. Bahn und Trams sind das wichtigste daran für mich. INTERVIEWER: Was war denn der Anstoß, dass du dich entschieden hast, dir die Mobil- Flat zu holen? TEILNEHMER 4: Das wurde hier ziemlich groß beworben, und ich fand, dass es echt gut klang. Deswegen habe ich mir das angeguckt und dann auch geholt. Und es war auch ein ziemlich großes Thema bei uns auf der Arbeit. Mein Chef hatte sogar überlegt, und das irgendwie zu Bezuschussen, aber sowas geht leider nicht. Und ich würde sowieso fast 40€ für mein ÖPNV Ticket zahlen, da zahle ich gerne die 40€ mehr, mindestens so viel würde ich dann sowieso beim Carsharing ausgeben, wenn ich das nicht im Paket hätte und das dann viel teurer wäre. INTERVIEWER: Ja, ja, wunderbar. Wie oft nutzt du denn andere Sachen aus dem Abo als den ÖPNV. Guck dir gerne mal so deine Woche an, wie oft nutzt du das Carsharing und das Bikesharing? TEILNEHMER 4: Das Bikesharing eher nie, da ist mein eigenes Fahrrad doch deutlich besser. Aber wenn ich mal, bei gutem Wetter, irgendwo hin muss, und dort mein Rad nicht stehen haben will, nehme ich das ab und an. Vielleicht so 1-2 Mal im Monat würde ich sagen. Und bei schlechtem Wetter halt nie, dann sind die Räder einfach nicht attraktiv. Da wäre es cool, wenn es etwas geben würde, was man dann nutzen kann. INTERVIEWER: Und wie oft nutzt du das Carsharing? TEILNEHMER 4: Das nutze ich schon öfters. Wie gesagt, zum einkaufen gerne mal oder auch wenn ich Freunde etwas außerhalb besuche. Dann kann ich dort zwar kein Bierchen trinken, aber dafür ist die An- und Rückfahrt entspannt. Ich habe auch direkt eine Station bei mir, da sind oft Autos frei. INTERVIEWER: Wie läuft den das Carsharing so ab? Also, von der Reservierung bis hin zur Abgabe. TEILNEHMER 4: Das funktioniert super easy. Ich gucke auf meiner App, welche Fahrzeuge wann verfügbar sind, und kann auswählen welches Ich nehme. Dabei kann ich verschiedene Filtermöglichkeiten haben so dass ich entweder sagen kann ich brauche ein

xxvii

großes Auto wie ein Transporter oder mir reicht etwas kleineres. Dann kann ich einfach entweder die Adresse oder meinen aktuellen Standort eingeben , gebe die Zeiten ein an den ich das Auto abholen und wieder zurückbringen möchte, und kann dann wie gesagt sehen welche Autos zu diesem Zeitpunkt an welchen Stationen verfügbar sind. dann wähle ich das richtige Auto aus, und kann dies reservieren. Ich bekomme eine Reservierungsbestätigung angezeigt. Dann, wenn ich das Auto abholen möchte, geh ich einfach zu der Station wo das Auto steht. Dort an dieser Station, kann ich dann mit meinem Handy das Auto entsperren wenn ich nah genug an dem Auto bin. Wenn ich das Auto dann sperrt habe, kann ich mich einfach einsetzen, und gebe in dem Bordcomputer meine PIN ein. Damit kann ich dann das Handschuhfach öffnen. In dem Handschuhfach befinden sich dann die Autoschlüssel. Dann kann ich einfach dahin fahren wo ich hinfahren möchte meine Sachen erledigen und das Auto einfach abstellen da ich ja jetzt den Schlüssel habe. Die Miete wird dadurch nicht beendet. Wenn ich das Auto wieder zurück bringen möchte, muss ich an die gleiche Station fahren wo ich das Auto hergeholt habe. Dann leg ich die Schlüssel zurück ins Handschuhfach, bestätige am Bordcomputer dass ich die Miete beenden möchte, steige aus dem Auto aus und schließe das Auto wieder mit meiner App ab. Am Anfang fand ich das etwas kompliziert, ah ich von anderen Mietwagenanbietern es bisher nur kannte dass man das Auto einfach per App entsperren kann und dann losfahren kann. Aber zurückblicken muss ich sagen, dass diese Methode wahrscheinlich doch noch ein bisschen sicherer ist. INTERVIEWER: Was gefällt dir denn besonders an dieser Flat? Also, wieso hast du dir die Flat für alles gekauft und buchst nicht immer einzeln? TEILNEHMER 4: Ein ist halt super entspannt, dass ich mir nicht lange überlegen muss, ob ich mir jetzt ein Ticket kaufe oder extra ein paar Stunden Carsharing. So kann ich einfach das nehmen, was ich brauche, und alles ist bereits im Preis mit drin. Und ich bin viel flexibler, ich kann einfach mal zu IKEA fahren mit dem Auto, oder mit einen Sharing Bike zum Hauptbahnhof. Und besonders das Carsharing gehört jetzt auch zum Stadtbild dazu. Überall stehen die swa Autos mit dem swa Logo, und wir hier sind schon stolz darauf, dass wir ein so gutes Carsharing haben. Ich glaube die meisten Leute, die ich kenne, haben das Carsharing schon mindestens einmal benutzt, ob als Fahrer oder Beifahrer. INTERVIEWER: Was stört dich denn am System?

xxviii

TEILNEHMER 4: Am meisten einfach die vielen einzelnen Apps. Ich finde es nervig, dass ich immer die App wechseln muss, wenn ich vom ÖPNV zum Carsharing will. Und das Bikesharing stimmt für mich noch nicht so ganz. Da hätte ich lieber E-Scooter oder so ein Vespa Sharing. Oder gar sowas wie in Hamburg, da gibt es MOIA, das ist wie Busfahren und uber fahren, eine ganz gute Mischung. Sowas kann man bestimmt auch von der Stadt anbieten. INTERVIEWER: Wie ist es, wenn jetzt jemand von deinen Freunden, deiner engeren Verwandtschaft nach Augsburg ziehen würde, würdest du den Leuten dies Mobil-Flat empfehlen? Wiegen die Vorteile auf oder die Nachteile? TEILNEHMER 4: Ich würde es schon empfehlen. Die Flexibilität, die man sich damit holt, die ist schon viel wert. Und ich denke auch, bevor man sich ein eigenes Auto anschafft oder sich für ein Trip einen Mietwagen holt, den man machen kann, da kommt man auf jeden Fall deutlich günstiger weg. Rein ökonomisch macht es schon Sinn, würde ich schon empfehlen. Aber wenn die Leute aus Augsburg kommen würde ist das etwas schwerer, würde ich sagen. Wir sind halt alle Schwaben hier und geizig, da muss es sich vom Preis her wirklich lohnen, bevor die meisten Leute sich das hier holen würden. INTERVIEWER: Ja, wunderbar. Gibt es denn noch irgendwas, was du dir wünschen würdest? TEILNEHMER 4: Naja, wie gesagt, sowas wie Scooter oder Vespas wären schon cool, oder MOIA eben. Und sonst eben nur eine Alternative für das Bikesharing im Winter. Keine Ahnung, was man da anbieten könnte. Vielleicht so eine Mitfahrgelegenheiten Börse? Oder Dafür irgendwie kostenfreie Parkplätze in den äußeren Stadtgebieten, sodass man so Park & Ride Sachen machen könnte. Oder ein System, dass man morgens die Carsharing Autos von den Außenbezirken in die Innenstadt fahren kann und Abends wieder zurück, aber halt in einer Fahrgemeinschaft. Das wäre glaube ich ganz cool. TEILNEHMER 4: Und was schon noch doof ist, ist, dass die Carsharing App doch recht schlecht läuft. Das sollte auch noch verbessert werden. Oder einfach alles in eine App packen, wobei ich nicht weiß, ob das geht, mit nextbike und so. INTERVIEWER: Wunderbar, das war es soweit auch schon mit dem Interview, hast du noch irgendwas, was du loswerden möchtest? TEILNEHMER 4: Habe alles gesagt denke ich. INTERVIEWER: Dann bedanke ich mich herzlich für das Interview und wünsche dir noch einen schönen Tag. Bleib gesund.

xxix

Codes used overview

Category Cluster User Subscription Living place Working place Augsburg City Zone Parking space Public Transport Public Transport Bikesharing Positive Negative Carsharing Positive Negative Wishes/Improvements Mobil-Flat Positive Negative Wishes/Improvements

xxx