Coworking-Spaces - How A Phenomenon of The Sharing Economy Builds A Novel Trend For The Workplace and For Entrepreneurship - SpringerLink

27/11/2019 Coworking-spaces: how a phenomenon of the sharing economy builds a novel trend for the workplace and for
trend for the workplace and for entrepreneurship | SpringerLink
Coworking-spaces: how a phenomenon of the sharing

economy builds a novel trend for the workplace and for
entrepreneurship
Review of Managerial Science
January 2018, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 317–334 | Cite as
Ricarda B. Bouncken (1) Email author (bouncken@uni-bayreuth.de)

Andreas J. Reuschl (1)
1. Chair of Strategic Management and Organization, University of Bayreuth, , Bayreuth, Germany
Review Paper
First Online: 22 September 2016
6.8k Downloads
32 Citations
Abstract
The sharing economy brings a new phenomenon—coworking-spaces. One aspect of coworking-spaces is the sharing
of office space; another is the sharing of social spaces beside the office. Both give rise to social interactions and thus
knowledge
We and idea
use cookies to exchanges
personalisewhich mightand
content provide
ads,more than a mere
to provide socialsharing
mediaof working-spaces but of
entrepreneurship or of incubation. Coworking-spaces stimulate the finding of mates for teams, projects, and
features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of
entrepreneurship. This paper introduces coworking-spaces into management research. We deliver an understanding
our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners in accordance
of coworking-spaces and then identify key factors which lead to our conceptual model. Our model assumes that
❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy
performance, Statement.
especially You can performance
entrepreneurial manage yourimproves
preferences
by thein Manage
learning processes among coworking-users
Cookies.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11846-016-0215-y 1/33
27/11/2019 Coworking-spaces: how a phenomenon of the sharing economy builds a novel trend for the workplace and for entrepreneurship | SpringerLink
that take upon the individual efficacy, trust and community among coworking-users. All the concepts have a positive
relation. Yet, opportunism, often as knowledge leakage, will directly and indirectly spoil learning processes and
entrepreneurial performance as it reduces their antecedents trust and community building.
Palabras clave
Espacio de coworking Emprendimiento Autoeficacia Innovación abierta Aprendizaje Revisión de literatura
Clasificación JEL
M130 M190 Ø350 L260
1 Introducción
Espacios de coworking en todo el mundo. Hoy, más de 500,000 personas utilizan los más de 2000 espacios de
coworking en todo el mundo (Johns y Gratton 2013 ). Los espacios de coworking alquilan infraestructura de oficina a
sus usuarios, además de dar acceso a un centro social (Capdevila 2013 ; Gandini 2015 ; Moriset 2014 ; Pohler 2012 ;
Spinuzzi 2012 ). Los espacios de coworking traen 'otro ladrillo' a la tendencia global de una "economía compartida"
impulsada por la economía digitalizada (Belk 2014) Coworking integra diferentes elementos de conceptos de oficina
en el hogar, comunidades de oficinas, telecentros, teletrabajo, trabajo virtual, equipos virtuales, incubadoras y
comunidades de prácticas, pero ofrece específicamente una comunidad de trabajo intersectorial con más flexibilidad,
autonomía y oportunidades para socializar. Interacción. En comparación con los equipos de proyecto o los equipos
virtuales en las jerarquías a menudo rígidas de las empresas establecidas (Chesbrough y Teece 1996 ; Pawar y Sharifi
1997) los usuarios de coworking pueden elegir equipos y procesos de trabajo de manera más flexible. Los principales
usuarios de los espacios de coworking, particularmente en los distintos espacios de coworking especializados, son los
trabajadores independientes, autónomos o microempresas. La reducción de las tareas administrativas, el acceso a
buenos
We uselugares
cookiesy las
to interacciones sociales que
personalise content andproporcionan inspiración,
ads, to provide permiten intercambiar puntos de vista,
social media
aprender de otros, formar equipos y proyectos motiva el uso de espacios de coworking. Del mismo modo, los
usuarios de coworking pueden desarrollar lazos sociales, aprender de otros y mejorar conjuntamente la generación e
implementación de ideas en el espíritu empresarial (Hughes et al. 2011 ), similar a la incubación (Hughes et al. 2007
with
). our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage
Cookies.
Sin embargo, investigaciones anteriores de gestión han ignorado por completo esta nueva tendencia. Nos faltan
conocimientos sobre las formas y procesos en los espacios de coworking y cómo los usuarios de coworking pueden
mejorar su situación empresarial o económica. Por lo tanto, este documento tiene como objetivo proporcionar una
comprensión integral de los espacios de coworking y sus formas y desarrollar un primer modelo conceptual con
mecanismos clave de los espacios de coworking.
Aportamos un nuevo fenómeno en la investigación de gestión que proporciona una definición de coworking y
criterios para las diferentes configuraciones de coworking. Suponemos que diferentes usuarios de coworking y
espacios de coworking establecerán condiciones muy desiguales de comportamiento y éxito en los espacios de
coworking. Además, contribuimos con un primer modelo conceptual inspirado en investigaciones previas sobre
relaciones sociales para la transferencia de conocimientos y el aprendizaje que mejora la incubación y el espíritu
empresarial (Hughes et al. 2007 , 2011 , 2014 ; Felin y Hesterly 2007 ; Hite y Hesterly 2001 ; Frankenberger et al. .
2013) Asumimos que el coworking tiene algunas analogías con la incubación de negocios. Observamos
específicamente a los usuarios de coworking que siguen el espíritu empresarial y las redes en el espacio de coworking
(Hite y Hesterly 2001 ; Hughes et al. 2011 ). Contribuimos a la investigación de que la incubación mejora la
innovación, el crecimiento y el rendimiento de las empresas jóvenes, respectivamente, las de los usuarios de
coworking (Hughes et al. 2007 ). Recomendamos futuros estudios siguientes fundamentos teóricos de la red social y
socio-emocional teoría de la riqueza (Cesinger et al. 2016 ).
2 Comprender el fenómeno del espacio de coworking
2.1 Antecedentes de economía compartida
Impulsado por tecnológico (Belk 2014 ; Oskam y Boswijk 2016 ), económico (Hartl et al. 2016 ; Moehlmann 2015 ), y
del medio ambiente (Cohen y Kietzmann 2014 ;. Hamari et al 2015 ) consideraciones, las personas se organizan cada
vez más el consumo colaborativo de los bienes y servicios a través de internet (Belk 2014 ). El sistema de consumo
We use cookies
colaborativo mejorato la
personalise content
utilización de and ads,
la capacidad to provide
y aumenta social mediaambiental. Cohen y Kietzmann ( 2014)
la sostenibilidad
features
describenand to analyse
la economía our traffic.
compartida comoWeunalso share
sistema eninformation about comparten
el que las personas your use ofrecursos subutilizados en
our site
redes witha our
punto social
punto. media, advertising
La economía compartida and analytics
incluye partners
“actividades en pares para obtener, dar o compartir el❯ Manage Cookies
in accordance
basadas ✓ OK
acceso a bienes y servicios, coordinados a través de servicios en
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage línea basados en la comunidad” (Hamari et al. 2015 ,
Cookies.
p. 1) . La economía compartida se relaciona con el valor percibido de la propiedad. Los consumidores disfrutan de
bienes y servicios solo cuando son requeridos o deseados sin obtener la propiedad y las obligaciones involucradas
(Belk 2014 ).
La economía compartida se estima en un valor de 100 mil millones de dólares 2010 (Lamberton y Rose 2012 ) y sirve
a una variedad de áreas de negocios como comida, alojamiento, tráfico o, por ejemplo, medios de entretenimiento
(Hartl et al.2016). Especially the business areas traffic and accommodation offer sharing economy show cases. For
example, shared mobility offers economic and environmental advantages, as the total number of cars and the
produced emissions are reduced (Cohen and Kietzmann 2014). Another prominent example is Airbnb, a web-based
network that enables peer-to-peer accommodation sharing. Airbnb can directly compete with traditional hotels,
leading to decreasing occupancy and turnover while users can profit from declining prices (Oskam and Boswijk
2016).
The trend of sharing also facilitates collaborative creation (co-creation) of goods and services. Customers become
part of the value creation (Oskam and Boswijk 2016). Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004) noted co-creation as new
source of competitive advantage as the direct interactions between firms and their customers have the potential to
create unique experiences. Crowdsourcing refers to the participative completion of a task against some kind of
economic or psychologic compensation (Estellés-Arolas and González-Ladrón-de-Guevara 2012). Self-organizing
crowds do not even need focal firms for value creation. Instead, communities with motivated and creative members
offer support for ideas and innovations (Franke and Shah 2003). However, using the wisdom of the crowd for co-
creation is not limited to a virtual environment. Co-creation activities can be transferred to real settings (Schopfel et
al. 2015). For example, the website Meetup (http://meetup.com (http://meetup.com)) enables internet groups—the
crowd—to organize meetings in the real world. Bilandzic and Foth (2013) highlight that Meetup enables motivated,
often highly creative and skilled individuals, groups and crowds to meet and collaborate on specific tasks. These
groups need a suitable place with appropriate infrastructure and equipment to support the completion of tasks.
Public libraries as well as coworking-spaces can host such groups. So far it is unclear how such spaces should be set
up, how the inherent communities work, and which business models suit the users and providers of coworking-
spaces (Franke and Shah 2003; Frankenberger et al. 2013; Gandini 2015).
We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media

2.2 Definition of coworking-spaces
our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners in accordance ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
Specialized, often new entrant institutions provide coworking-spaces
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage as their core business model. Established firms
offer coworking-spaces to increase creativity, innovation, and incubation, typically to their employees. Coworking-
Cookies.
spaces offer office and social space for temporary or long-term use according to availability (e.g. a café) for its users
(Capdevila 2013; Gandini 2015; Moriset 2014; Pohler 2012; Spinuzzi 2012). Research shows different nuances of
coworking-spaces (see Table 1). Spinuzzi (2012) explains coworking-spaces by the co-presence of professionals in the
same space. Capdevila (2013) highlights the resource sharing and community building among individuals in
coworking-spaces. Bilandzic and Foth (2013) stress the close interaction between coworking-users (meet, explore,
experience, learn, teach, share, discuss). Moriset (2014) highlights the community-climate. Moriset (2014)
emphasizes coworking-spaces building (Oldenburg 1989; Oldenburg and Brissett 1982) a “Third place”, a working
place besides the classical office and home-office. Coworking-spaces support a volatile ‘start-up-lifestyle’, a safe
harbor for spontaneous ‘gigs’, stable social networks and interactions to initiate and promote new projects and
contacts (Clark 2007).
Table 1
Definitions of coworking-spaces

with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage
Cookies.
Authors Methodology Definition of coworking-space
Coworking spaces are shared workplaces utilised by different sorts of knowledge

professionals, mostly freelancers, working in various degrees of specialisation in the vast
domain of the knowledge industry. Practically conceived as office-renting facilities where
workers hire a desk and a wi-fi connection these are, more importantly, places where
Gandini Literature
independent professionals live their daily routines side-by-side with professional peers,
(2015) review
largely working in the same sector – a circumstance which has huge implications on the
nature of their job, the relevance of social relations across their own professional
networks and – ultimately – their existence as productive workers in the knowledge
economy. (p. 194–195)
Coworking Communities are co-located groups of independent workers – freelancers,

remote workers, or entrepreneurs – where members do their own work but in parallel.
Observations Members typically pay a fee for access to an open, collaborative space that includes
Garrett et and semi- shared amenities such as open tables, conference rooms, a kitchen, and office supplies,
al. (2014) structured as well as community-building activities and a loose social structure. Assuming office
interviews amenities can easily be obtained in a home or rental office, and coffee shops can provide
a basic social environment, we propose that a sense of community is what sets coworking
spaces apart from alternative work spaces. (p. 1–2)
Moriset Beyond the room layout, coworking is first an atmosphere, a spirit, and even a lifestyle.
Theoretical
(2014) (p. 7)
[A] co-working space [is a place] where social learning emerges as a result of people
sharing the same workspace for their creative activities. It is conceived as a public
Bilandzic
Observations community centre for peer collaboration and creativity around digital culture and
We
anduse
Fothcookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media
and interviews technology, i.e. a place for people to meet, explore, experience, learn and teach, and
(2013) and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of
features share and discuss topics around creative practices in various areas related to digital
our site with our social media, advertising
technology. (p. 2) and analytics partners in accordance ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
Cookies.
Authors Methodology Definition of coworking-space
Coworking-spaces are defined as localized spaces where independent professionals work

Capdevila
Theoretical sharing resources and are open to share their knowledge with the rest of the community.
(2013)
(p. 3)
Spinuzzi Interviews and [Coworking-spaces] are open-plan office environments in which they work alongside
(2012) case study other unaffiliated professionals for a fee (…). (p. 399)
We additionally underline that coworking-spaces provide high levels of autonomy. Autonomy includes the access
and the use of the office infrastructure and amenities at self-regulated working hours. Different to work within the
hierarchy, coworking-users have the autonomy of working and communicating where, when, with whom, how long,
and to which intensity and openness. Coworking-users decide autonomously to take the opportunity—not the
necessity—to interact with others on loose terms or very intense, to be open in job-related issues and private issues,
to receive feedback, to provide feedback, and to intensify private and business relationships. Autonomy additionally
serves experimentation and creativity.
Further, coworking-users have low responsibilities for administrative tasks such as insurances, cleaning, or e.g.
waste disposal that are typical for shared offices (Pohler 2012). Coworking-users have the freedom to pursue
business and non-business targets. Although the term coworking includes “work”, users of coworking spaces might
seek leisure and socio-cultural desires besides the professional work, possibly combining both elements. Thus,
coworking allows autonomy and dynamic combinations of task-related and leisure targets as well as combinations
of social and economic targets. The nexus of these can further drive creativity.
Coworking-users are flexible in the duration of their memberships, their targets and tasks, and the development of
relationships with others indicating a possible fluid character of relationships and projects. Because of coworking-
users’ divergent tasks, norms, behavior, and a possible temporary character of team and project structures they may
not necessarily develop specific communities of joint values, norms, and behavior role models that increase
our site with and
commitment our belonging
social media,
of theadvertising
users to the and analytics
space. Yet, the partners
private and in work
accordance
related relationships emerging in ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy Statement.
coworking-spaces Youinteraction
from the direct can managein theyour preferences
office or the socialinspace
Manage
can proceed in times without co-
presence in the coworking-space.
Cookies.
Working in coworking-spaces provides advantages for structuring the users’ work and work-hours. The spatial
separation of private and occupational areas specifically allows for a psychological differentiation between “working
mode” and “leisure mode” which self-employed persons often lack (Pohler 2012). Simultaneously, coworking-users
can create an individual work rhythm according to their life situation. This helps to improve individual satisfaction,
communication, collaboration, learning, and job performance as does the social nearness.
We thus define that coworking-spaces provide their individual or institutional users a flexible and highly
autonomous use of both office and social space that eases the direct personal interaction among the coworking-users
for social, learning, cultural and business related interests. Social interaction may have diverse forms and intensities
bringing inspiration and increasing knowledge sharing among coworking-users not only during the physical co-
presence in the coworking-space but also afterwards. Coworking-spaces refer to the idea of a sharing economy in two
dimensions providing the access to shared physical assets (office, infrastructure, cafeteria etc.) and the sharing of
intangible assets (information, knowledge etc.). The specificity of coworking-spaces may attract certain more
homogenous individuals who might develop some shared sets of norms, rules, and behavior which build a
coworking-space culture or coworking-community.
3 Categorizations of coworking
3.1 Types of coworking-users
Self-employed individuals, freelancers, and entrepreneurs, but also dependent contractors and consultants use
coworking-spaces (Gandini 2015; Spinuzzi 2012). A first international survey shows that 54 % of the coworking-
users are freelancers, 20 % are entrepreneurs (with own employees), 20 % are dependent contractors, and most of
them work in creative and new media industries (Foertsch 2011). Spinuzzi (2012) by 17 interviews finds that
coworking-users focus on revenues and income or on social and cultural goals. Especially persons who strive for
independency, free collaboration, and values like community, networks, and open-source projects use coworking-
We use(Lange
spaces cookies to personalise
2011). content
Coworking-users oftenand
haveads, to provide
unusual social media
combinations of competencies and creative potentials,
features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about
atypical career paths, pursuing creative (architects, designer, journalists) andyour use professions
digital of (software
our site with
developer, our consultants,
digital social media, advertising
social and analytics
media agents) partners
(Gandini 2015). in accordance
Coworking-users can aim on primarily using ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
equipment and services, learning from others or socializing with
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manageothers. Bilandzic and Foth (2013) classify:
Cookies.
Utilizer use coworking-spaces to profit from the technological infrastructure.
Learner use coworking-spaces to acquire knowledge, visit events, and exchange with peers.
Socializer search for recognition and acknowledgement in coworking-spaces.
3.2 Coworking-space provider
A coworking-space can be provided by a coworking-space firm, a public institution (e.g. chamber of commerce or
library), a university (Bouncken 2016), or a company (e.g. google) which runs the coworking-space besides their
business for the public or within their company boundaries for employees only. To cover the diverse institutions, we
introduce the term ‘coworking-space-provider’.
Coworking-spaces can have diverse ownership and governance structures influencing whether the coworking-space
is open to the public or to specific users only. Public coworking-spaces (e.g. firms, institutions, universities, libraries)
offer a membership open to everyone. Different to public providers, incumbent firms or corporate coworking-spaces
can restrict the access to infrastructure and social structure. Typically, membership requires employee status. Thus
elements of dependency and hierarchy of the company remain and will influence the targets and behavior of the
coworking-space users. Especially IT-companies (e.g. Google or Apple) offer coworking-spaces to foster creative and
open social interaction exclusive for their temporary and permanent employees. Yet, incumbent firms also offer
coworking-space to their employees and to the public (e.g. ‘Modul57’ in Hannover run by the company TUI). We
thus find, public, private, and semi-private–public forms of coworking-space-providers. These forms of coworking-
space-providers influence the accessibility of the public or of a specific group to a coworking-space and the
coworking-climate respectively the development of a coworking-space’s organizational culture. Coworking-spaces
can influence their users and the community development by their business model, user-selection mechanisms,
artifacts, interior design, cafeterias, or events. Yet a coworking-space culture is strongly influenced from the dynamic
interaction among individuals.
Alongside ownership, coworking-spaces can have different levels of dependence to other institutions of power or
legal relations to other organizations, institutions, or public authorities. These have implications on the type of
coworking-user, their autonomy, targets, and tasks—and again the coworking-space’s organizational culture.
Cookies.
Furthermore, the relationships of a coworking-space to other organizations will influence its targets that not
necessarily are primarily in receiving rents from users. Coworking-spaces that are related to Universities, technology
incubators, or companies might be primarily interested in knowledge exchange, learning, and innovation. State
owned coworking-spaces might aim to foster occupational rates and entrepreneurship in the region.
Coworking-space-providers do not need to own the building or office but may rent the space themselves from others.
Similar to the hotel business, coworking-space-providers might develop specific elements of corporate design,
corporate architecture, and corporate systems, covering specific service levels and functionalities and even brands or
franchise systems. This will trigger the development of different business models of coworking-space-providers
which might be object to future research.
3.3 Classifications around coworking-spaces
Garrett et al. (2014) and Gandini (2015) classify coworking-spaces along their participants (knowledge
professionals, freelancers, peers, remote workers, entrepreneurs), the co-presence and the collaboration (work in
parallel, social interaction, networking, side-by-side working), the infrastructure (desks, wi-fi connection,
conference rooms, kitchen, office supplies), and the community (daily routines, sense of community, social
environment). Spinuzzi (2012) uses differences in coworking-spaces’ design, interior, flexibility of opening hours,
place, homogenous values and the professionalization for the classification of coworking-spaces. We develop six
dimensions describing forms of coworking-spaces in Table 2. The most important are explained in the following. The
dimensions influence the functionalities (see for analogies Kambil et al. 2000). For example, coworking-spaces
might primarily provide a nice working environment by its interior and selection of users. Differently, coworking-
spaces might concentrate on incubation and thus aim to bring entrepreneurs together, facilitate business
development, even funding and thus allow fast venturing (Kambil et al. 2000). Also incumbent firms might establish
internal coworking-spaces only for their employees or for externals also to improve creativity and innovation. The
inclusion of labs (e.g. Fablab) may trigger specific technology developments and venturing in specific fields which
might accelerate venturing.
Table 2
Six dimensions of coworking
Cookies.
Dimensions Description Content
Individual Coworking-users’ characteristics and targets determine their behavior in coworking-

characteristics spaces and coworking-communities. A basic classification distinguishes between
Coworking-
and targets of utilizers (utilization of equipment, space, and infrastructure), learner (knowledge
users
coworking- exchange and acquisition), and socializers (search for recognition and
users acknowledgment)
Social A central function of coworking-spaces is the enhancement of social interaction.

interactions Events, trainings, and e.g. further activity offerings promote networking, cross-
Social
between linking, and contact initiation on a social level. The end is to integrate individual
intensity
coworking- members, users, and participants into a community which is related to the specific
users coworking-space
Institution of Affiliation of Coworking-space provider have public, private, or semi-private–public forms and
the coworking- exhibit different levels of dependence to other institutions of power or legal relations
coworking- spaces to to other organizations, institutions, or public authorities. The organizational form
space other and affiliations impact the type of coworking-user, their autonomy, targets, tasks, and
provider organizations the accessibility and culture of coworking-spaces
Availability Coworking-spaces can be set up as stand-alone facilities or e.g. single rooms in

and design of private (office buildings) or public (library) facilities. The available space is
coworking- purposefully separated into working areas (meeting-rooms, workplaces, desks,
Physical space, offices) and social interaction areas (kitchen, cafeteria, café). Coworking-spaces
assets equipment, provide technological infrastructure (internet, Wi-Fi connection, intranet, specific
technical web-content, software) and equipment (printer, fax, phones, further hardware,
infrastructure, binders, folders, paper) for members, users or participants. The technological
and supplies equipment has to be adjusted to possible specializations of a coworking-space
Cookies.
Dimensions Description Content
Opening Coworking-spaces provide different membership models (flexible, hourly, daily,

hours and weekly) with regulated access to infrastructure (internet, desks, printers, meeting
Availability
accessibility rooms) and services (events, matchmaking, procurement). Accessibility attracts
models specific users and offers a structuring element for the private life and work routines
Composition
The composition of professional groups in coworking-spaces determines
of
Professional collaboration and competition among coworking-users. Coworking-spaces may offer
professional
focus and trainings, events, presentations, and other activities to support members, users and
groups in
competition participant in their work, impart knowledge, and help to promote networking, and
coworking-
contact initiation
spaces
3.3.1 Size
Coworking-spaces can be set up as stand-alone facilities (Spinuzzi 2012) or integrated into other buildings (e.g.
libraries, Schopfel et al. 2015). Coworking-spaces can be small with few members who intensively utilize the
coworking-space, meet frequently, and build tight relationships (Pohler 2012). Coworking-spaces can rely on a
community of nearly anonymous users who appreciate variety, diversity, and the inspiration of new faces on a daily
base. While the first case offers a stable, integrated, and secure community, the benefits of the latter case are
grounded in a great availability of non-binding relationships and cooperation-forms with diverse and changing
coworking-users (Pohler 2012). When a coworking-space expands easy and familiar interactions between users
become lower (Pohler 2012).
3.3.2 Interior
The design of the available space itself is a distinguishing feature of coworking-spaces. Coworking-spaces
our site withintegrate
purposefully our social media,
lounge advertising
areas, andbars
cafés, or e.g. analytics partners
to provide in accordance
space for interaction between coworking-users ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy
(Bilandzic Statement.
and Foth You can
2013; Capdevila 2013;manage
Spinuzziyour preferences
2012). in Manage
Capdevila (2013) summarizes all office related equipment
Cookies.
in coworking-spaces as shared-resources. Specific equipment attracts coworking-users from specific professional
backgrounds and industries. Coworking-users form the creative industry might demand special multimedia
equipment or software, coworking-users from the fashion-industry might desire sewing machines, coworking-users
from technology-related industries need, e.g. 3D printers or laboratories (Bilandzic and Foth 2013; Schopfel et al.
2015). Coworking-spaces also can offer shared labs attracting additional professionals or use the co-location to
technological incubators.
3.3.3 Membership model
Coworking-spaces are typically open every day at every time (24/7). Yet, limited opening times are possible. Specific
flexible short-term offers make coworking-spaces attractive many interested persons, e.g. permanent employees,
freelancers, and travelers or incumbent firms that rent office or conference space. Today, the majority of coworking-
spaces operates via hourly payment or a membership-model including flexible memberships of hours, days, and
weeks (Capdevila 2013; Gandini 2015; Garrett et al. 2014; Moriset 2014; Spinuzzi 2012). Membership usually covers
access to infrastructure like printer, scanner, fax devices, and e.g. 3D-printer. Higher fees can entitle coworking-
users to continuously use a certain workplace, desk, or an individual office. Additional fees cover the rent of
conference venues. Recently coworking-spaces have started providing extra services of conference venues like
presentations by experts or trainers, social events, meeting rooms, order procurement, matchmaking, trainings (e.g.
web design), and incubation as well as open innovation integration with temporary availability. These services can
request additional payment or might be complementary. Hence, the services provided by coworking-spaces may
conduct different forms of coworking-spaces having diverse functionalities. Additional infrastructures, (e.g. labs) will
lead to new models. For example, firms already rent out computer tomography on an hourly base to physicians. This
trend of a sharing economy might increase in the future and provides similarities to coworking-spaces.
3.3.4 Professional focus
Coworking-spaces can be open to all occupational groups and industry sectors, or specialize in specific occupational
groups, industry sectors, technologies, business models, or social targets. Coworking-spaces can also specialize on
self-employed persons, founders, and founder teams from the social and cultural entrepreneurship area (Lounsbury
and Glynn 2001). Social entrepreneurship is characterized by entrepreneurs offering non-economical or partly
We use cookies
economical to personalise
solutions content
with social value and
(Dacin et ads, to provide
al. 2011). Culturalsocial media
entrepreneurship refers to social and often
features and to(Lounsbury
artistic projects analyse our traffic.
and GlynnWe alsoHigh
2001). share information
levels aboutexpertise
of overlapping your useof of
coworking-users from the same
industry
our sector
site with ourwillsocial
increase the impact
media, performance
advertising and the utilization
and analytics partners inofaccordance
social relationships (Gandini 2015). So far❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage jobs that improve the
coworking-spaces attract individuals with certain personalities or similar (creative)
professional interaction but cause more competition among coworking-users. We do not know if more homogenous
Cookies.
or less homogenous professionals improve fast venturing (Kambil et al. 2000).
3.4 Key mechanisms, development of a conceptual model, and future research
3.4.1 Nexus of community, trust, and learning versus opportunism
Coworking-spaces increase social relations including social feedback, trust, learning, and collaboration between
experts with different expertise, e.g. graphic design, copywriting, web-design, web-development, or search engine
optimization (Spinuzzi 2012). Coworking-spaces break up the isolation of freelancers and self-employed persons,
especially present in digital jobs (Moriset 2014). Coworking-spaces can provide (early stage) entrepreneurs an
opportunity for the development of more sophisticated networks over and above the mere social ties which they
typically begin with (Hite and Hesterly 2001; Kambil et al. 2000). The networks with the potential knowledge, skills,
and contacts build a vital force for ‘incubation’ that new young firm or founder teams achieves from its network for
the value it creates (Hughes et al. 2007). Thus, coworking-users forming new ventures can improve innovation,
growth, and performance when they take upon the network advantages in the coworking-space (Hughes et al. 2007;
Kambil et al. 2000). Coworking-users might increase their entrepreneurial performance when taking upon the ties in
the coworking-space and particularly when the coworking-space provides links to incumbent firms (Hughes et al.
2011). Different forms of social network capital might have diverse effects of the success of the coworking-users as
for other entrepreneurs (Hughes et al. 2011).
The co-presence and the possibly similar attitudes of coworking-users may develop a community with shared
working behaviors, diverse capabilities, and similar concepts of life, again improving their social integration,
satisfaction, and well-being that can have additional economic advantages because of the better work-life-situation
(Moriset 2014; Capdevila 2013; Garrett et al. 2014). This culture may increase the trust level among coworking-users
and provide guidance that substitutes the non-existing organizational rules as existent in hierarchies of incumbent
firms. The form of interaction and community building might lead to different forms of value creation and
incubation performance (Hughes et al. 2007). Spinuzzi (2012) shows that coworking-users specifically seek the
opportunity to acquire and share knowledge, learn, and receive feedback in coworking-spaces. The simultaneously
open, yet close collaboration offers a variety of learning advantages which have already been investigated in alliance
research (for example Das and Teng 1998; Phelps 2010). Intensified social interaction, strengthened networking,
We use cookies
exploration to personalise content
of complementarities, knowledgeand ads, toand
transfer, provide social
learning media create potentials for creativity,
specifically
features
unexpected and to analyse
serendipity our traffic.
(Graebner We innovativeness
2004), also share information
and improvedabout yourbusiness
or new use of models. The social
our site with
interaction ourcan
thus social media,
improve advertising and
coworking-user’s analytics
economic partners
situation, working alone on their business model ❯ Manage Cookies
eveninbyaccordance ✓ OK
and more
with stronglyStatement.
our Privacy by forming links
You to
canother users or
manage external
your firms that
preferences in they integrate in the business model.
Manage
However,
Cookies. intense communication, trust and time spent to find, evaluate, build, and maintain ties might also distract
from ‘real’ work and reduce the creation of novel products or business models (Hughes et al. 2007). Future studies
might explore how community interacts with trust and how it shapes coworking-users’ task fulfillment. Also, Hughes
et al. (2014) find that the absence of prior knowledge which is often the case for entrepreneurs and specifically for
nascent coworking-entrepreneurs constrains them to transfer learning outcomes achieved through social capital
behaviors into performance. Furthermore, alliance research also points at risks of opportunism and unintended
knowledge drain (Becerra et al. 2008; Das and Teng 2001; Langfield-Smith 2008, particularly for novel business
models (see Bouncken and Fredrich 2016). The open exchange and collaboration between coworking-users and with
external companies creates risks around an unintended drain of ideas and knowledge. It is unclear how opportunism
risks and trust (emotional trust, calculated trust, institutionalized trust, see Bachmann 2000) emerges in coworking-
spaces and affects collaboration and learning. Trust among coworking-users might have a special character
(understanding based) as the involved parties struggle with the same difficulties (lack of money, resources, and
market access) and should know that they achieve more together than they could alone. Coworking-spaces’
community building, networking, and interaction allowing to share and to co-create knowledge might improve the
absorption of ideas and learning from others (see below) and thus economic performance and entrepreneurship
(Capdevila 2013). Thus, future studies can explore how community and trust emerge, interact with each other and
with the risk opportunism on learning and finally on economic or entrepreneurial performance.
3.4.2 Entrepreneurial self-efficacy
According to Shane and Venkataraman (2000) entrepreneurial behavior refers to the recognition, seizing, and
exploitation of opportunities that may lead to economic success. As coworking-users strive for independency, free
collaboration, values like community, networks, and open-source projects (Lange 2011), they are prone of
entrepreneurship (Gandini 2015) and can take advantage from the coworking-space’s infrastructure and social
space. Coworking through an inspiring work environment advances entrepreneurship. Studies show that due to a
lack of resources, decisions of entrepreneurship and micro companies are often not oriented on optimization
principles, but represent the attempt to reach goals with the available resources (Berends et al. 2014). The social and
material resources of coworking-spaces can support entrepreneurs and micro-companies in their decisions.
Coworking can take on learnings from previous research on self-employed persons and freelancers and offer
solutions for their problem of isolation, which impacts psyche, physique, and professional performance. Lévesque et
al. (2002) assume that the decision to become self-employed or being a freelancer depends on personalities.
Consequently, specific personality traits and motives drive self-employment and drive entrepreneurship occurring in
coworking-spaces, but may be influenced by environmental factors also. Gohmann (2012) explains the decision and
features
drivers toand to analyse our
be self-employed traffic.
based Weenvironment.
on the also share information
A study basedabout
on 18your use of
countries shows that economic freedom
is a general driver for self-employment. We assume that coworking-spaces offer an institutional environment ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy
promoting Statement.
self-employment and You
thecan manage
connected your preferences
advantages in Manage
for individuals, bringing some extra accelerator for
entrepreneurship.
Cookies. Thurik et al. (2008) show that high unemployment motivates individuals to found start-ups and
to become self-employed and that self-employment reduces unemployment. If coworking exhibits similar
mechanisms it might have individual and social advantages. Guerra and Patuelli (2014) investigate the relationship
between job satisfaction and self-employment: dissatisfaction of job compensations with dependent work drives self-
employment in Switzerland. Based on a survey in 15 European countries, Noorderhaven et al. (2004) show similar
results.
Entrepreneurship research paid interested on the relationships between entrepreneurial style and self-efficacy
(Kickul et al. 2009), startup-success and self-efficacy (Kolvereid and Isaksen 2006) while pursuing entrepreneurial
goals (Arora et al. 2013; Baron et al. 2016), entrepreneurship intentions (Boyd and Vozikis 1994), its persistence
(Cardon and Kirk 2015), repetition of entrepreneurial behavior (Hsu et al. 2015), and venturing success (Utsch and
Rauch 2000). However, other studies stress threats like hubris (Bullough et al. 2014). We assume that coworking-
spaces can be a harbor for entrepreneurs and strengthen the self-efficacy of coworking-users, specifically towards
their entrepreneurial actions (McGee et al. 2009). The main reason is that coworking-spaces allow pushing ideas
without hierarchical restrictions (particularly compared to dependent employment) and with better infrastructure in
coworking-spaces based on mutual learning and knowledge transfer (particularly compared to freelancers outside of
coworking-spaces). Research on entrepreneurial success highlights the importance of self-efficacy, the perceived
individual ability for entrepreneurial ventures (McGee et al. 2009). Trainings offered in coworking-spaces have an
additional positive effect on self-efficacy (Zhao et al. 2008). Future studies can investigate self-efficacy in coworking-
spaces from two perspectives.
3.4.3 Model
From the key mechanisms explained above we develop a first conceptual model for coworking-spaces. We model the
dependent construct simply as performance. This might be economic performance in terms of orders but will mostly
be business model performance or venturing performance. We assume that learning among coworking-users is a
main trigger for performance. Yet also the self-efficacy will have a strong impact about how risk-taking and
proactivity of the coworking-users propagates their business model. The lack of hierarchy in the coworking-space
might be substituted by trust and community. These two aspects will have single and joint positive effects on
learning among coworking-users. They also might have a positive interaction with self-efficacy. Opportunism often
present as misuse of knowledge or contacts will have several direct and indirect negative influences. It will reduce
the development
We use cookiesoftotrust and community
personalise contentasand
wellads,
as learning. Our social
to provide model media
(see Fig. 1) demands empirical validation in
future studies.
Cookies.
Fig. 1
Proposed research model
4 Discussion and conclusion
Coworking-spaces are increasing in number and scope world-wide. This paper introduced this phenomenon of
management practice, embedded in the sharing economy into research into research. The few studies (Capdevila
2013; Gandini 2015; Moriset 2014; Pohler 2012; Spinuzzi 2012) are either semi-scientific, internet blogs, or come
fromuse
We non-management and non-economic
cookies to personalise content backgrounds.
and ads, to provide social media
Public
our siteand company
with (corporate)
our social media,coworking-spaces offer the spatial,
advertising and analytics partnerstechnological, and social structure to facilitate ❯ Manage Cookies
in accordance ✓ OK
and improve independent self-employment, freelancing, entrepreneurship,
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage and micro-business without losing access
to professional networks. Coworking-spaces allow communication and learning creating professional communities,
Cookies.
which could serve as pools of ideas, knowledge, know-how, skills, and innovation for private and business clients
advancing their business model. Coworking allows flexibility and social interaction that can stimulate their members’
inspiration, the exchange and development of ideas among coworking-users, the development of teams and projects
in the coworking-space, the autonomous collaboration among coworking-users and incumbent firms—all improving
learning among coworking-users fostering personal satisfaction, venturing, and/or business model development.
The access to communities and networks as well as the separation of private and work environment in coworking-
spaces positively relates to coworking-users’ self-efficacy and thus performance. However, coworking-spaces bear
risks of self-exploitation, competition, knowledge leakage or the loss of social security within self-employment.
Especially opportunism and competition will reduce key positive effects of learning, knowledge exchange and
performance in coworking-spaces. We contribute a conceptual model on key factors on performance influenced by
trust, community, learning, self-efficacy that are affected negatively by opportunism.
We advocate further conceptual and empirical research upon coworking-spaces. One line of future research could
relate to the testing of our conceptual model. Further work could analyze the antecedents, processes, and outcomes
of entrepreneurship, and business model innovation in the context of coworking-spaces. Further, future research can
explore the basic mechanisms of communication and collaboration in coworking-spaces and the processes affecting
entrepreneurship, self-efficacy, open innovation, learning, and business model innovation under consideration of
satisfaction, community, learning, innovation, and e.g. performance. Future studies could investigate coworking-
specific antecedents (community set-up, infrastructure, availability of trainings, availability of diverse skills, or e.g.
knowledge sharing) and consequences (entrepreneurial success, new product development, or e.g. time to market) of
self-efficacy. Studies could provide a better understanding about possibilities to improve self-efficacy through
professional (trainings, events, or e.g. networking activities) and social interactions (events, socializing activities, or
e.g. design of the social-hub) in the coworking-space. Other studies can dig deeper on the challenges and risks of
coworking threatening job security and social security. Considering the social networks that evolve and operate in
coworking-spaces, future research could measure the forms of coworking-users’ social capital and the effects on
venturing (Hughes et al. 2011). Coworking-users will follow economic motives but also non-economic motives. We
thus recommend using socioemotional wealth (SEW) logics to explain the targets and behavior of coworking-users
as shown valuable for decision making in family firms (Cesinger et al. 2016).
References
Arora P, Haynie JM, Laurence GA (2013) Counterfactual thinking and entrepreneurial self-efficacy: the moderating
our
role site with our social
of self-esteem media, advertising
and dispositional and Theory
affect. Entrep analytics partners
Pract doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00472.x❯ Manage Cookies
in accordance
37:359–385. ✓ OK
(https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00472.x)
Cookies.
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00472.x)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?

title=Counterfactual%20thinking%20and%20entrepreneurial%20self-
efficacy%3A%20the%20moderating%20role%20of%20self-
esteem%20and%20dispositional%20affect&author=P.%20Arora&author=JM.%20Haynie&author=GA.%20Laurenc
e&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=37&pages=359-
385&publication_year=2013&doi=10.1111%2Fj.1540-6520.2011.00472.x)
Bachmann R (2000) Trust-conceptual aspects of a complex phenomenon. In: Lane C, Bachmann R (eds) Trust
within and between organizations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 298–322
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Trust-
conceptual%20aspects%20of%20a%20complex%20phenomenon&author=R.%20Bachmann&pages=298-
322&publication_year=2000)
Baron RA, Mueller BA, Wolfe MT (2016) Self-efficacy and entrepreneurs’ adoption of unattainable goals: the
restraining effects of self-control. J Bus Ventur 31:55–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.08.002
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.08.002)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.08.002)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Self-
efficacy%20and%20entrepreneurs%E2%80%99%20adoption%20of%20unattainable%20goals%3A%20the%20restr
aining%20effects%20of%20self-
control&author=RA.%20Baron&author=BA.%20Mueller&author=MT.%20Wolfe&journal=J%20Bus%20Ventur&vo
lume=31&pages=55-71&publication_year=2016&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jbusvent.2015.08.002)
Becerra M, Lunnan R, Huemer L (2008) Trustworthiness, risk, and the transfer of tacit and explicit knowledge
between alliance partners. J Manag Stud 45:691–713. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00766.x
(https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00766.x)
title=Trustworthiness%2C%20risk%2C%20and%20the%20transfer%20of%20tacit%20and%20explicit%20knowled
ge%20between%20alliance%20partners&author=M.%20Becerra&author=R.%20Lunnan&author=L.%20Huemer&j
ournal=J%20Manag%20Stud&volume=45&pages=691-713&publication_year=2008&doi=10.1111%2Fj.1467-
6486.2008.00766.x)
We
Belkuse cookies
R (2014) Youtoarepersonalise content
what you can access:and ads,and
sharing to collaborative
provide social media
consumption online. J Bus Res 67:1595–1600.
features and to analyse our traffic.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001 We also share information about your use of
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001)
CrossRef
our (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001)
site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners in accordance ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
title=You%20are%20what%20you%20can%20access%3A%20sharing%20and%20collaborative%20consumption%2
Cookies.
0online&author=R.%20Belk&journal=J%20Bus%20Res&volume=67&pages=1595-
1600&publication_year=2014&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jbusres.2013.10.001)
Berends H, Jelinek M, Reymen I, Stultiëns R (2014) Product innovation processes in small firms: combining
entrepreneurial effectuation and managerial causation. J Prod Innovat Manag 31:616–635. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12117
(https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12117)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12117)
title=Product%20innovation%20processes%20in%20small%20firms%3A%20combining%20entrepreneurial%20eff
ectuation%20and%20managerial%20causation&author=H.%20Berends&author=M.%20Jelinek&author=I.%20Rey
men&author=R.%20Stulti%C3%ABns&journal=J%20Prod%20Innovat%20Manag&volume=31&pages=616-
635&publication_year=2014&doi=10.1111%2Fjpim.12117)
Bilandzic M, Foth M (2013) Libraries as coworking spaces: understanding user motivations and perceived barriers to
social learning. Libr Hi Tech 31:254–273. doi: 10.1108/07378831311329040
(https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831311329040)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831311329040)
title=Libraries%20as%20coworking%20spaces%3A%20understanding%20user%20motivations%20and%20perceiv
ed%20barriers%20to%20social%20learning&author=M.%20Bilandzic&author=M.%20Foth&journal=Libr%20Hi%
20Tech&volume=31&pages=254-273&publication_year=2013&doi=10.1108%2F07378831311329040)
Bouncken RB (2016) University coworking-spaces: criteria, dimensions, and potentials of a new venture hub. Int J
Technol Manag (forthcoming)
Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?
q=Bouncken%20RB%20%282016%29%20University%20coworking-
spaces%3A%20criteria%2C%20dimensions%2C%20and%20potentials%20of%20a%20new%20venture%20hub.%2
0Int%20J%20Technol%20Manag%20%28forthcoming%29%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%
20%20%20%20%20)
Bouncken RB, Fredrich V (2016) Good fences make good neighbors? Directions and safeguards in alliances on
business model innovation. J Bus Res 69:5196–5202. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.112
We use cookies
CrossRef to personalise content and ads, to provide social media
features and to(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
Google Scholar analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of
title=Good%20fences%20make%20good%20neighbors%3F%20Directions%20and%20safeguards%20in%20allianc
es%20on%20business%20model%20innovation&author=RB.%20Bouncken&author=V.%20Fredrich&journal=J%2
0Bus%20Res&volume=69&pages=5196-5202&publication_year=2016&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jbusres.2016.04.112)
Cookies.
Boyd NG, Vozikis GS (1994) The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and
actions. Entrep Theory Pract 18:63–77. doi:10.1.1.477.4240
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The%20influence%20of%20self-
efficacy%20on%20the%20development%20of%20entrepreneurial%20intentions%20and%20actions&author=NG.%
20Boyd&author=GS.%20Vozikis&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=18&pages=63-
77&publication_year=1994)
Bullough A, Renko M, Myatt T (2014) Danger zone entrepreneurs: the importance of resilience and self-efficacy for
entrepreneurial intentions. Entrep Theory Pract 38:473–499. doi: 10.1111/etap.12006
(https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12006)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12006)
title=Danger%20zone%20entrepreneurs%3A%20the%20importance%20of%20resilience%20and%20self-
efficacy%20for%20entrepreneurial%20intentions&author=A.%20Bullough&author=M.%20Renko&author=T.%20
Myatt&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=38&pages=473-
499&publication_year=2014&doi=10.1111%2Fetap.12006)
Capdevila I (2013) Knowledge dynamics in localized communities: coworking spaces as microclusters. SSRN.
doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2414121 (https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2414121)
title=Knowledge%20dynamics%20in%20localized%20communities%3A%20coworking%20spaces%20as%20microc
lusters&author=I.%20Capdevila&journal=SSRN&publication_year=2013&doi=10.2139%2Fssrn.2414121)
Cardon MS, Kirk CP (2015) Entrepreneurial passion as mediator of the self-efficacy to persistence relationship.
Entrep Theory Pract 39:1027–1050. doi: 10.1111/etap.12089 (https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12089)
title=Entrepreneurial%20passion%20as%20mediator%20of%20the%20self-
efficacy%20to%20persistence%20relationship&author=MS.%20Cardon&author=CP.%20Kirk&journal=Entrep%20
Theory%20Pract&volume=39&pages=1027-1050&publication_year=2015&doi=10.1111%2Fetap.12089)
Cesinger B, Hughes M, Mensching H, Bouncken R, Fredrich V, Kraus S (2016) A socioemotional wealth perspective
on how collaboration intensity, trust, and international market knowledge affect family firms’ multinationality. J
We
Worlduse cookies
Bus to personalise
51:586–599. content and ads, to provide
doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2016.02.004 social media
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.02.004)
features
CrossRef and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.02.004)
Google
our siteScholar
with our(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
social media, advertising and analytics partners in accordance ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
title=A%20socioemotional%20wealth%20perspective%20on%20how%20collaboration%20intensity%2C%20trust%
2C%20and%20international%20market%20knowledge%20affect%20family%20firms%E2%80%99%20multination
Cookies.
ality&author=B.%20Cesinger&author=M.%20Hughes&author=H.%20Mensching&author=R.%20Bouncken&author
=V.%20Fredrich&author=S.%20Kraus&journal=J%20World%20Bus&volume=51&pages=586-
599&publication_year=2016&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jwb.2016.02.004)
Chesbrough HW, Teece DJ (1996) Organizing for innovation: when is virtual virtuous? Harvard Bus Rev 74:65–73
title=Organizing%20for%20innovation%3A%20when%20is%20virtual%20virtuous%3F&author=HW.%20Chesbro
ugh&author=DJ.%20Teece&journal=Harvard%20Bus%20Rev&volume=74&pages=65-73&publication_year=1996)
Clark J (2007) Coworkers of the world, unite! http://prospect.org/article/coworkers-world-unite
(http://prospect.org/article/coworkers-world-unite). Accessed 15 Mar 2016
Cohen B, Kietzmann J (2014) Ride on! Mobility business models for the sharing economy. Organ Environ 27:279–
296. doi: 10.1177/1086026614546199 (https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026614546199)
title=Ride%20on%21%20Mobility%20business%20models%20for%20the%20sharing%20economy&author=B.%20
Cohen&author=J.%20Kietzmann&journal=Organ%20Environ&volume=27&pages=279-
296&publication_year=2014&doi=10.1177%2F1086026614546199)
Dacin MT, Dacin PA, Tracey P (2011) Social entrepreneurship: a critique and future directions. Organ Sci 22:1203–
1213. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0620 (https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0620)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0620)
title=Social%20entrepreneurship%3A%20a%20critique%20and%20future%20directions&author=MT.%20Dacin&a
uthor=PA.%20Dacin&author=P.%20Tracey&journal=Organ%20Sci&volume=22&pages=1203-
1213&publication_year=2011&doi=10.1287%2Forsc.1100.0620)
Das TK, Teng B-S (1998) Between trust and control: developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Acad
Manag Rev 23:491–512. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1998.926623 (https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1998.926623)
title=Between%20trust%20and%20control%3A%20developing%20confidence%20in%20partner%20cooperation%2
0in%20alliances&author=TK.%20Das&author=B-
S.%20Teng&journal=Acad%20Manag%20Rev&volume=23&pages=491-
512&publication_year=1998&doi=10.5465%2FAMR.1998.926623)
Das TK, Teng
features and B-S (2001) Trust,
to analyse control,
our traffic. Weand riskshare
also in strategic alliances:
information an integrated
about your use framework.
of Organ Stud 22:251–
283. doi: 10.1177/0170840601222004 (https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840601222004)
Cookies.
title=Trust%2C%20control%2C%20and%20risk%20in%20strategic%20alliances%3A%20an%20integrated%20fram
ework&author=TK.%20Das&author=B-S.%20Teng&journal=Organ%20Stud&volume=22&pages=251-
Estellés-Arolas E, González-Ladrón-de-Guevara F (2012) Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. J Inf Sci
38:189–200. doi: 10.1177/0165551512437638 (https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551512437638)
title=Towards%20an%20integrated%20crowdsourcing%20definition&author=E.%20Estell%C3%A9s-
Arolas&author=F.%20Gonz%C3%A1lez-Ladr%C3%B3n-de-
Guevara&journal=J%20Inf%20Sci&volume=38&pages=189-
Felin T, Hesterly WS (2007) The knowledge-based view, nested heterogeneity, and new value creation: philosophical
considerations on the locus of knowledge. Acad Manag Rev 32:195–218. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.23464020
(https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.23464020)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.23464020)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The%20knowledge-
based%20view%2C%20nested%20heterogeneity%2C%20and%20new%20value%20creation%3A%20philosophical
%20considerations%20on%20the%20locus%20of%20knowledge&author=T.%20Felin&author=WS.%20Hesterly&j
ournal=Acad%20Manag%20Rev&volume=32&pages=195-
218&publication_year=2007&doi=10.5465%2Famr.2007.23464020)
Foertsch C (2011) The coworker’s profile. http://www.deskmag.com/en/the-coworkers-global-coworking-survey-
168 (http://www.deskmag.com/en/the-coworkers-global-coworking-survey-168). Accessed 09 Mar 2016
Franke N, Shah S (2003) How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing
among end-users. Res Policy 32:157–178. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00006-9 (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-
7333(02)00006-9)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00006-9)
title=How%20communities%20support%20innovative%20activities%3A%20an%20exploration%20of%20assistanc
e%20and%20sharing%20among%20end-
users&author=N.%20Franke&author=S.%20Shah&journal=Res%20Policy&volume=32&pages=157-
178&publication_year=2003&doi=10.1016%2FS0048-7333%2802%2900006-9)
features and toK,analyse
Frankenberger Weiblenour traffic. WeO also
T, Gassmann share
(2013) information
Network aboutcustomer
configuration, your usecentricity,
of and performance of
open business models: a solution provider perspective. Ind Mark Manag 42:671–682. ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage
doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.05.004 your preferences in Manage
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.05.004)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.05.004)
Cookies.

title=Network%20configuration%2C%20customer%20centricity%2C%20and%20performance%20of%20open%20b
usiness%20models%3A%20a%20solution%20provider%20perspective&author=K.%20Frankenberger&author=T.%
20Weiblen&author=O.%20Gassmann&journal=Ind%20Mark%20Manag&volume=42&pages=671-
682&publication_year=2013&doi=10.1016%2Fj.indmarman.2013.05.004)
Gandini A (2015) The rise of coworking spaces: a literature review. Ephemer Theory Polit Organ 15:193–205
title=The%20rise%20of%20coworking%20spaces%3A%20a%20literature%20review&author=A.%20Gandini&journ
al=Ephemer%20Theory%20Polit%20Organ&volume=15&pages=193-205&publication_year=2015)
Garrett LE, Spreitzer GM, Bacevice P (2014) Co-constructing a sense of community at work: the emergence of
community in coworking spaces. Acad Manag Proc. doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2014.139
(https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2014.139)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Co-
constructing%20a%20sense%20of%20community%20at%20work%3A%20the%20emergence%20of%20community
%20in%20coworking%20spaces&author=LE.%20Garrett&author=GM.%20Spreitzer&author=P.%20Bacevice&jour
nal=Acad%20Manag%20Proc&publication_year=2014&doi=10.5465%2Fambpp.2014.139)
Gohmann SF (2012) Institutions, latent entrepreneurship, and self-employment: an international comparison.
Entrep Theory Pract 36:295–321. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00406.x (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2010.00406.x)
title=Institutions%2C%20latent%20entrepreneurship%2C%20and%20self-
employment%3A%20an%20international%20comparison&author=SF.%20Gohmann&journal=Entrep%20Theory%
20Pract&volume=36&pages=295-321&publication_year=2012&doi=10.1111%2Fj.1540-6520.2010.00406.x)
Graebner ME (2004) Momentum and serendipity: how acquired leaders create value in the integration of technology
firms. Strateg Manag J 25:751–777. doi: 10.1002/smj.419 (https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.419)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.419)
title=Momentum%20and%20serendipity%3A%20how%20acquired%20leaders%20create%20value%20in%20the%
20integration%20of%20technology%20firms&author=ME.%20Graebner&journal=Strateg%20Manag%20J&volum
e=25&pages=751-777&publication_year=2004&doi=10.1002%2Fsmj.419)
our siteG,with
Guerra our social
Patuelli media,
R (2014) advertising
The role and analytics
of job satisfaction partners
in transitions in self-employment.
into accordance Entrep Theory Pract ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy
40:543–571. Statement. You can
doi: 10.1111/etap.12133 manage your preferences in Manage
Cookies.

title=The%20role%20of%20job%20satisfaction%20in%20transitions%20into%20self-
employment&author=G.%20Guerra&author=R.%20Patuelli&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=40&pa
ges=543-571&publication_year=2014&doi=10.1111%2Fetap.12133)
Hamari J, Sjöklint M, Ukkonen A (2015) The sharing economy: why people participate in collaborative consumption.
J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. doi: 10.1002/asi.23552 (https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23552)
title=The%20sharing%20economy%3A%20why%20people%20participate%20in%20collaborative%20consumption
&author=J.%20Hamari&author=M.%20Sj%C3%B6klint&author=A.%20Ukkonen&journal=J%20Assoc%20Inf%20
Sci%20Technol&publication_year=2015&doi=10.1002%2Fasi.23552)
Hartl B, Hofmann E, Kirchler E (2016) Do we need rules for “what’s mine is yours”? Governance in collaborative
consumption communities. J Bus Res 69:2756–2763. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.11.011
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.11.011)
title=Do%20we%20need%20rules%20for%20%E2%80%9Cwhat%E2%80%99s%20mine%20is%20yours%E2%80%
9D%3F%20Governance%20in%20collaborative%20consumption%20communities&author=B.%20Hartl&author=E.
%20Hofmann&author=E.%20Kirchler&journal=J%20Bus%20Res&volume=69&pages=2756-
2763&publication_year=2016&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jbusres.2015.11.011)
Hite JM, Hesterly WS (2001) The evolution of firm networks: from emergence to early growth of the firm. Strateg
Manag J 22:275–286. doi: 10.1002/smj.156 (https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.156)
title=The%20evolution%20of%20firm%20networks%3A%20from%20emergence%20to%20early%20growth%20of
%20the%20firm&author=JM.%20Hite&author=WS.%20Hesterly&journal=Strateg%20Manag%20J&volume=22&p
ages=275-286&publication_year=2001&doi=10.1002%2Fsmj.156)
Hsu DK, Wiklund J, Cotton RD (2015) Success, failure, and entrepreneurial reentry: an experimental assessment of
the veracity of self-efficacy and prospect theory. Entrep Theory Pract. doi: 10.1111/etap.12166
We useScholar
Google cookies(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
to personalise content and ads, to provide social media
title=Success%2C%20failure%2C%20and%20entrepreneurial%20reentry%3A%20an%20experimental%20assessme
nt%20of%20the%20veracity%20of%20self-
efficacy%20and%20prospect%20theory&author=DK.%20Hsu&author=J.%20Wiklund&author=RD.%20Cotton&jou
rnal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&publication_year=2015&doi=10.1111%2Fetap.12166)
Cookies.
Hughes M, Ireland RD, Morgan RE (2007) Stimulating dynamic value: social capital and business incubation as a
pathway to competitive success. Long Range Plann 40:154–177. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2007.03.008
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2007.03.008)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2007.03.008)
title=Stimulating%20dynamic%20value%3A%20social%20capital%20and%20business%20incubation%20as%20a
%20pathway%20to%20competitive%20success&author=M.%20Hughes&author=RD.%20Ireland&author=RE.%20
Morgan&journal=Long%20Range%20Plann&volume=40&pages=154-
177&publication_year=2007&doi=10.1016%2Fj.lrp.2007.03.008)
Hughes M, Morgan RE, Ireland RD, Hughes P (2011) Network behaviours, social capital, and organisational learning
in high-growth entrepreneurial firms. Int J Entrep Small Bus 12:257–272. doi: 10.1504/IJESB.2011.039006
(https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2011.039006)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2011.039006)
title=Network%20behaviours%2C%20social%20capital%2C%20and%20organisational%20learning%20in%20high-
growth%20entrepreneurial%20firms&author=M.%20Hughes&author=RE.%20Morgan&author=RD.%20Ireland&a
uthor=P.%20Hughes&journal=Int%20J%20Entrep%20Small%20Bus&volume=12&pages=257-
272&publication_year=2011&doi=10.1504%2FIJESB.2011.039006)
Hughes M, Morgan RE, Ireland RD, Hughes P (2014) Social capital and learning advantages: a problem of
absorptive capacity. Strat Entrep J 8:214–233. doi: 10.1002/sej.1162 (https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1162)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1162)
title=Social%20capital%20and%20learning%20advantages%3A%20a%20problem%20of%20absorptive%20capacit
y&author=M.%20Hughes&author=RE.%20Morgan&author=RD.%20Ireland&author=P.%20Hughes&journal=Strat
%20Entrep%20J&volume=8&pages=214-233&publication_year=2014&doi=10.1002%2Fsej.1162)
Johns T, Gratton L (2013) The third wave of virtual work. Harvard Bus Rev 91:66–73
title=The%20third%20wave%20of%20virtual%20work&author=T.%20Johns&author=L.%20Gratton&journal=Har
vard%20Bus%20Rev&volume=91&pages=66-73&publication_year=2013)
We useA,cookies
Kambil Eselius to
ED,personalise
Monteiro KA content
(2000)and
Fastads, to provide
venturing: social
the quick media
way to start web businesses. MIT Sloan Manag
features
Rev 41:55and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of
Google
our siteScholar
with our(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
social media, advertising and analytics partners in accordance ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
title=Fast%20venturing%3A%20the%20quick%20way%20to%20start%20web%20businesses&author=A.%20Kamb
il&author=ED.%20Eselius&author=KA.%20Monteiro&journal=MIT%20Sloan%20Manag%20Rev&volume=41&pag
Cookies.
es=55&publication_year=2000)
Kickul J, Gundry LK, Barbosa SD, Whitcanack L (2009) Intuition versus analysis? Testing differential models of
cognitive style on entrepreneurial self-efficacy and the new venture creation process. Entrep Theory Pract 33:439–
453. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00298.x (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00298.x)
title=Intuition%20versus%20analysis%3F%20Testing%20differential%20models%20of%20cognitive%20style%20o
n%20entrepreneurial%20self-
efficacy%20and%20the%20new%20venture%20creation%20process&author=J.%20Kickul&author=LK.%20Gundr
y&author=SD.%20Barbosa&author=L.%20Whitcanack&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=33&pages=
439-453&publication_year=2009&doi=10.1111%2Fj.1540-6520.2009.00298.x)
Kolvereid L, Isaksen E (2006) New business start-up and subsequent entry into self-employment. J Bus Ventur
21:866–885. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.06.008 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.06.008)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=New%20business%20start-
up%20and%20subsequent%20entry%20into%20self-
employment&author=L.%20Kolvereid&author=E.%20Isaksen&journal=J%20Bus%20Ventur&volume=21&pages=8
66-885&publication_year=2006&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jbusvent.2005.06.008)
Lamberton CP, Rose RL (2012) When is ours better than mine? A framework for understanding and altering
participation in commercial sharing systems. J Mark 76:109–125. doi: 10.1509/jm.10.0368
(https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.10.0368)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.10.0368)
title=When%20is%20ours%20better%20than%20mine%3F%20A%20framework%20for%20understanding%20and
%20altering%20participation%20in%20commercial%20sharing%20systems&author=CP.%20Lamberton&author=
RL.%20Rose&journal=J%20Mark&volume=76&pages=109-
125&publication_year=2012&doi=10.1509%2Fjm.10.0368)
Lange B (2011) Re-scaling governance in Berlin’s creative economy. Cult Unbound J Curr Cult Res 3:187–208.
doi: 10.3384/cu.2000.1525.113187 (https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.113187)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.113187)
Google
We useScholar
cookies(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Re-
scaling%20governance%20in%20Berlin%E2%80%99s%20creative%20economy&author=B.%20Lange&journal=Cul
t%20Unbound%20J%20Curr%20Cult%20Res&volume=3&pages=187-
208&publication_year=2011&doi=10.3384%2Fcu.2000.1525.113187)
Langfield-Smith K (2008) The relations between transactional characteristics, trust and risk in the start-up phase of
Cookies.
a collaborative alliance. Manag Acc Res 19:344–364. doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2008.09.001
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2008.09.001)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2008.09.001)
title=The%20relations%20between%20transactional%20characteristics%2C%20trust%20and%20risk%20in%20the
%20start-up%20phase%20of%20a%20collaborative%20alliance&author=K.%20Langfield-
Smith&journal=Manag%20Acc%20Res&volume=19&pages=344-
364&publication_year=2008&doi=10.1016%2Fj.mar.2008.09.001)
Lévesque M, Shepherd DA, Douglas EJ (2002) Employment or self-employment: a dynamic utility-maximizing
model. J Bus Ventur 17:189–210. doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(00)00063-X (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-
9026(00)00063-X)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(00)00063-X)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Employment%20or%20self-
employment%3A%20a%20dynamic%20utility-
maximizing%20model&author=M.%20L%C3%A9vesque&author=DA.%20Shepherd&author=EJ.%20Douglas&jour
nal=J%20Bus%20Ventur&volume=17&pages=189-210&publication_year=2002&doi=10.1016%2FS0883-
9026%2800%2900063-X)
Lounsbury M, Glynn MA (2001) Cultural entrepreneurship: stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources.
Strateg Manag J 22:545–564. doi: 10.1002/smj.188 (https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.188)
title=Cultural%20entrepreneurship%3A%20stories%2C%20legitimacy%2C%20and%20the%20acquisition%20of%2
0resources&author=M.%20Lounsbury&author=MA.%20Glynn&journal=Strateg%20Manag%20J&volume=22&pag
es=545-564&publication_year=2001&doi=10.1002%2Fsmj.188)
McGee JE, Peterson M, Mueller SL, Sequeira JM (2009) Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: refining the measure. Entrep
Theory Pract 33:965–988. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00304.x (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2009.00304.x)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Entrepreneurial%20self-
efficacy%3A%20refining%20the%20measure&author=JE.%20McGee&author=M.%20Peterson&author=SL.%20Mu
eller&author=JM.%20Sequeira&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=33&pages=965-
Moehlmann
our site withMour
(2015) Collaborative
social consumption:
media, advertising and determinants of satisfaction
analytics partners and the likelihood of using a sharing❯ Manage Cookies
in accordance ✓ OK
economy option again. J Consum Behav 14:193–207. doi: 10.1002/cb.1512
with our Privacy Statement. You can manage your preferences in Manage (https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1512)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1512)
Cookies.

title=Collaborative%20consumption%3A%20determinants%20of%20satisfaction%20and%20the%20likelihood%20
of%20using%20a%20sharing%20economy%20option%20again&author=M.%20Moehlmann&journal=J%20Consu
m%20Behav&volume=14&pages=193-207&publication_year=2015&doi=10.1002%2Fcb.1512)
Moriset B (2014) Building new places of the creative economy: the rise of coworking spaces. In: Paper presented at
the 2nd Geography of Innovation Conference, Utrecht University, Utrecht
Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?
q=Moriset%20B%20%282014%29%20Building%20new%20places%20of%20the%20creative%20economy%3A%20
the%20rise%20of%20coworking%20spaces.%20In%3A%20Paper%20presented%20at%20the%202nd%20Geograp
hy%20of%20Innovation%20Conference%2C%20Utrecht%20University%2C%20Utrecht)
Noorderhaven N, Thurik R, Wennekers S, Av Stel (2004) The role of dissatisfaction and per capita income in
explaining self-employment across 15 European countries. Entrep Theory Pract 28:447–466. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2004.00057.x (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00057.x)
title=The%20role%20of%20dissatisfaction%20and%20per%20capita%20income%20in%20explaining%20self-
employment%20across%2015%20European%20countries&author=N.%20Noorderhaven&author=R.%20Thurik&au
thor=S.%20Wennekers&author=Stel.%20Av&journal=Entrep%20Theory%20Pract&volume=28&pages=447-
Oldenburg R (1989) The great good place: Café, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores,
bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. Paragon House Publishers, New York
title=The%20great%20good%20place%3A%20Caf%C3%A9%2C%20coffee%20shops%2C%20community%20center
s%2C%20beauty%20parlors%2C%20general%20stores%2C%20bars%2C%20hangouts%2C%20and%20how%20the
y%20get%20you%20through%20the%20day&author=R.%20Oldenburg&publication_year=1989)
Oldenburg R, Brissett D (1982) The third place. Qual Sociol 5:265–284. doi: 10.1007/BF00986754
(https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986754)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986754)
title=The%20third%20place&author=R.%20Oldenburg&author=D.%20Brissett&journal=Qual%20Sociol&volume=
5&pages=265-284&publication_year=1982&doi=10.1007%2FBF00986754)
our siteJ,with
Oskam our social
Boswijk media,
A (2016) advertising
Airbnb: the future and analyticshospitality
of networked partners businesses.
in accordance
J Tour Futur 2:22–42. ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
with our Privacy Statement. You
doi: 10.1108/JTF-11-2015-0048 can manage your preferences in Manage
(https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-11-2015-0048)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-11-2015-0048)
Cookies.

title=Airbnb%3A%20the%20future%20of%20networked%20hospitality%20businesses&author=J.%20Oskam&auth
or=A.%20Boswijk&journal=J%20Tour%20Futur&volume=2&pages=22-
42&publication_year=2016&doi=10.1108%2FJTF-11-2015-0048)
Pawar KS, Sharifi S (1997) Physical or virtual team collocation: does it matter? Int J Prod Econ 52:283–290.
doi: 10.1016/S0925-5273(97)89241-9 (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(97)89241-9)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(97)89241-9)
title=Physical%20or%20virtual%20team%20collocation%3A%20does%20it%20matter%3F&author=KS.%20Pawar
&author=S.%20Sharifi&journal=Int%20J%20Prod%20Econ&volume=52&pages=283-
290&publication_year=1997&doi=10.1016%2FS0925-5273%2897%2989241-9)
Phelps CC (2010) A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm
exploratory innovation. Acad Manag J 53:890–913. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2010.52814627
(https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.52814627)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.52814627)
title=A%20longitudinal%20study%20of%20the%20influence%20of%20alliance%20network%20structure%20and
%20composition%20on%20firm%20exploratory%20innovation&author=CC.%20Phelps&journal=Acad%20Manag
%20J&volume=53&pages=890-913&publication_year=2010&doi=10.5465%2FAMJ.2010.52814627)
Pohler N (2012) Neue Arbeitsräume für neue Arbeitsformen: coworking Spaces. Osterr Z Soziol 37:65–78.
doi: 10.1007/s11614-012-0021-y (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11614-012-0021-y)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11614-012-0021-y)
title=Neue%20Arbeitsr%C3%A4ume%20f%C3%BCr%20neue%20Arbeitsformen%3A%20coworking%20Spaces&aut
hor=N.%20Pohler&journal=Osterr%20Z%20Soziol&volume=37&pages=65-
78&publication_year=2012&doi=10.1007%2Fs11614-012-0021-y)
Prahalad CK, Ramaswamy V (2004) Co-creation experiences: the next practice in value creation. J Interact Mark
18:5–14. doi: 10.1002/dir.20015 (https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20015)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20015)
We useScholar
Google cookies(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Co-
creation%20experiences%3A%20the%20next%20practice%20in%20value%20creation&author=CK.%20Prahalad&
author=V.%20Ramaswamy&journal=J%20Interact%20Mark&volume=18&pages=5-
14&publication_year=2004&doi=10.1002%2Fdir.20015)
Schopfel J, Roche J, Hubert G (2015) Co-working and innovation: new concepts for academic libraries and learning
Cookies.
centres. New Libr World 116:67–78. doi: 10.1108/NLW-06-2014-0072 (https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-06-2014-
0072)
CrossRef (https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-06-2014-0072)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Co-
working%20and%20innovation%3A%20new%20concepts%20for%20academic%20libraries%20and%20learning%2
0centres&author=J.%20Schopfel&author=J.%20Roche&author=G.%20Hubert&journal=New%20Libr%20World&v
olume=116&pages=67-78&publication_year=2015&doi=10.1108%2FNLW-06-2014-0072)
Shane S, Venkataraman S (2000) The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad Manag Rev 25:217–
226. doi: 10.5465/amr.2000.2791611 (https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.2791611)
title=The%20promise%20of%20entrepreneurship%20as%20a%20field%20of%20research&author=S.%20Shane&a
uthor=S.%20Venkataraman&journal=Acad%20Manag%20Rev&volume=25&pages=217-
226&publication_year=2000&doi=10.5465%2Famr.2000.2791611)
Spinuzzi C (2012) Working alone together: coworking as emergent collaborative activity. J Bus Tech Commun
26:399–441. doi: 10.1177/1050651912444070 (https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651912444070)
title=Working%20alone%20together%3A%20coworking%20as%20emergent%20collaborative%20activity&author=
C.%20Spinuzzi&journal=J%20Bus%20Tech%20Commun&volume=26&pages=399-
Thurik AR, Carree MA, van Stel A, Audretsch DB (2008) Does self-employment reduce unemployment? J Bus
Ventur 23:673–686. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.007 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.007)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Does%20self-
employment%20reduce%20unemployment%3F&author=AR.%20Thurik&author=MA.%20Carree&author=A.%20St
el&author=DB.%20Audretsch&journal=J%20Bus%20Ventur&volume=23&pages=673-
686&publication_year=2008&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jbusvent.2008.01.007)
Utsch A, Rauch A (2000) Innovativeness and initiative as mediators between achievement orientation and venture
performance. Eur J Work Organ Psy 9:45–62. doi: 10.1080/135943200398058
(https://doi.org/10.1080/135943200398058)
We use cookies
CrossRef to personalise content and ads, to provide social media
(https://doi.org/10.1080/135943200398058)
features and to(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
Google Scholar analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of
title=Innovativeness%20and%20initiative%20as%20mediators%20between%20achievement%20orientation%20an
d%20venture%20performance&author=A.%20Utsch&author=A.%20Rauch&journal=Eur%20J%20Work%20Organ
%20Psy&volume=9&pages=45-62&publication_year=2000&doi=10.1080%2F135943200398058)
Cookies.
Zhao X, Mattila AS, Eva Tao L-S (2008) The role of post-training self-efficacy in customers’ use of self service
technologies. Int J Serv Ind Manag 19:492–505. doi: 10.1108/09564230810891923
(https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230810891923)
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The%20role%20of%20post-training%20self-
efficacy%20in%20customers%E2%80%99%20use%20of%20self%20service%20technologies&author=X.%20Zhao&
author=AS.%20Mattila&author=L-
S.%20Eva%20Tao&journal=Int%20J%20Serv%20Ind%20Manag&volume=19&pages=492-
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016
About this article

Cite this article as:
Bouncken, R.B. & Reuschl, A.J. Rev Manag Sci (2018) 12: 317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-016-0215-y
Received 25 April 2016

Accepted 15 September 2016
First Online 22 September 2016
DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-016-0215-y
Publisher Name Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Print ISSN 1863-6683
Online ISSN 1863-6691
About this journal

Reprints and Permissions
Personalised
our site with our social recommendations
media, advertising and analytics partners in accordance ❯ Manage Cookies ✓ OK
Cookies.
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.
Not logged in Not affiliated 191.91.123.81

Cookies.

Coworking-Spaces - How A Phenomenon of The Sharing Economy Builds A Novel Trend For The Workplace and For Entrepreneurship - SpringerLink

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Coworking-Spaces - How A Phenomenon of The Sharing Economy Builds A Novel Trend For The Workplace and For Entrepreneurship - SpringerLink

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

27/11/2019 Coworking-spaces: how a phenomenon of the sharing economy builds a novel trend for the workplace and for

trend for the workplace and for entrepreneurship | SpringerLink

Coworking-spaces: how a phenomenon of the sharing

January 2018, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 317–334 | Cite as

Ricarda B. Bouncken (1) Email author (bouncken@uni-bayreuth.de)

1. Chair of Strategic Management and Organization, University of Bayreuth, , Bayreuth, Germany

2 Comprender el fenómeno del espacio de coworking

2.1 Antecedentes de economía compartida

We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media

We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media

Authors Methodology Definition of coworking-space

Coworking spaces are shared workplaces utilised by different sorts of knowledge

Coworking Communities are co-located groups of independent workers – freelancers,

Authors Methodology Definition of coworking-space

Coworking-spaces are defined as localized spaces where independent professionals work

3.1 Types of coworking-users

Utilizer use coworking-spaces to profit from the technological infrastructure.

Socializer search for recognition and acknowledgement in coworking-spaces.

3.2 Coworking-space provider

3.3 Classifications around coworking-spaces

Dimensions Description Content

Individual Coworking-users’ characteristics and targets determine their behavior in coworking-

Social A central function of coworking-spaces is the enhancement of social interaction.

Availability Coworking-spaces can be set up as stand-alone facilities or e.g. single rooms in

Dimensions Description Content

Opening Coworking-spaces provide different membership models (flexible, hourly, daily,

3.3.3 Membership model

3.3.4 Professional focus

3.4 Key mechanisms, development of a conceptual model, and future research

3.4.1 Nexus of community, trust, and learning versus opportunism

3.4.2 Entrepreneurial self-efficacy

Proposed research model

4 Discussion and conclusion

Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?

Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?

Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?

Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?

Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?

About this article

Received 25 April 2016

About this journal

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.

Not logged in Not affiliated 191.91.123.81

We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen