Exploring adoption determinants of tax-subsidized company-leasing bicycles from the perspective of German employers and employees

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect  ScienceDirect  Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2016) 000–000 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2016) 000–000

ScienceDirect

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Transportation Research Procedia 41 (2019) 525–528

International Scientific Conference on Mobility and Transport Urban Mobility – Shaping the Future Together International Scientific Conference on Mobility Transport mobil.TUM 2018, 13-14 June 2018, Munich, and Germany Urban Mobility – Shaping the Future Together mobil.TUM 2018, 13-14 June 2018, Munich, Germany

Exploring adoption determinants of tax-subsidized company-leasing Exploring adoption determinants of tax-subsidized bicycles from the perspective of German employerscompany-leasing and employees bicycles from the perspective of German employers and employees Stefan Synek a*, Jörg Koenigstorfer a Stefan Synek , Jörg Koenigstorfer

a

a* of Munich, Georg-Brauchle-Ring a 60/62, 80992 Munich, Germany Chair of Sport and Health Management, Technical University

a

Chair of Sport and Health Management, Technical University of Munich, Georg-Brauchle-Ring 60/62, 80992 Munich, Germany

© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Peer-review under of thethe organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2018. Peer-review underresponsibility responsibility scientific © 2017 The Authors. Published by of Elsevier B.V. committee of the mobil.TUM18. Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2018. qualitative research; content analysis Keywords: commuting; diffusion of innovations; company bicycle leasing program; Germany; Keywords: commuting; diffusion of innovations; company bicycle leasing program; Germany; qualitative research; content analysis

Extended Abstract Extended Abstract Background Cycling is seen as a sustainable way of traveling and as a factor contributing to a more active and healthy lifestyle Background (Hendriksen et al. 2010, Humphreys et al. 2013, Martin et al. 2014, Mytton et al. 2016, Schneider 2016). In Germany, Cycling aim is seen as a sustainable of traveling andand as have a factor contributing to atomore active healthy lifestyle politicians to promote cycling way in various contexts installed measures do so. Thisand study considers the (Hendriksen et al. 2010, Humphreys et al. 2013, Martin et al. 2014, Mytton et al. 2016, Schneider 2016). In Germany, German employer-employee context (i.e., how people get to work). politicians aim to2012, promote cycling in various installed dotax so.rule This–study considers the In November it was decided that the contexts companyand carhave privilege – themeasures so-calledto1% applies to bicycles German employer-employee context (i.e., how people get to work). and e-bikes. Since then, there has been an increase in companies offering, and employees participating in, company In Novemberprograms. 2012, it was decided that the company privilegehave – theleased so-called 1% tax – appliesintoGermany bicycles bicycle-leasing Until July 2017, about 200,000car employees bicycles viarule the program and e-bikes. Since then, there has been an increase in companies offering, and employees participating in, company (Bundesverband mittelständische Wirtschaft 2017). bicycle-leasing Until July 2017, about 200,000 employees have leased provider. bicycles via the employees program incan Germany The programprograms. works as follows: Companies first sign a contract with a leasing Then, select (Bundesverband mittelständische Wirtschaft 2017). a bicycle from a participating bicycle shop. Since the lease payment is deducted from the gross salary on a monthly Theemployees’ program works as follows: Companiesand firstemployees sign a contract withup a leasing employees can select basis, taxable income decreases can save to 40%provider. comparedThen, to a regular purchase of a abicycle. bicycleThey fromcan a participating bicycle shop. Since the lease payment is deducted from the gross salary on a monthly then use the bicycle to commute to work or for private purposes (Wesp 2015). basis, employees’ taxable income decreases and employees can save up to 40% compared to a regular purchase of a bicycle. They can then use the bicycle to commute to work or for private purposes (Wesp 2015). * Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 89 2000 373 19. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Synek) * Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 89 2000 373 19. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Synek) 2214-241X © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2018. 2214-241X © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2018.

2352-1465  2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the mobil.TUM18. 10.1016/j.trpro.2019.09.085

526 2

Stefan Synek et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 41 (2019) 525–528 Author name / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2016) 000–000

To date, it is largely unknown what factors determine whether companies or employees adopt the concept of bicycle leasing. Therefore, in the present study, we aim to explore the determinants of the participation in the program by considering both employers and employees. In what follows, we describe the objectives of the research in more detail, present a brief overview of the literature, and describe the methods, results, and implications of our empirical work. We conclude by discussing the limitations of the research. Research objectives The goal of this study is to gain insights into German companies’ and employees’ perception of company bicycleleasing programs. In particular, the study aims to explore the adoption drivers and barriers at both the organizational level and the individual level. Research on the adoption of the bicycle-leasing program is relevant for two reasons: (1) to help our society (including companies) achieve the sustainability goals by informing relevant stakeholders about the adoption process; (2) to help employees increase their health by facilitating drivers and lowering barriers, based on the findings of the study. Literature review and conceptual background To date, there are no research studies that consider German bicycle-leasing programs. However, research has been conducted in other European countries that have introduced tax break bicycle-leasing programs. The German program shares some important characteristics with the Cycle to Work Scheme that has been established in the UK and Ireland. Previous studies in these countries focused on describing employees’ changes in mobility behavior as well as identifying possible changes in attitudes and motivational factors of cyclists after the participation in the program (Elliot 2010, Caulfield and Leahy 2011, Avineri and Steven 2013, Clarke et al. 2014). There are important limitations of the previous studies. First, cyclists were considered only and the perspective of companies were neglected. Also, previous studies on the adoption of sustainable innovations in the transport sector have often focused on private purchases and use of alternative vehicles (Plötz et al. 2014, Wolf and Seebauer 2014, Gruber et al. 2015, Seebauer 2015) and they have rarely taken into account the purchase decisions made by companies (Globisch et al., 2013; Gruber et al. 2015). The latter is important, however, because individuals’ decisions are influenced by the context in which they decide: If a company does not take part in the program, their employees cannot participate in the program. Second, previous studies do not link theory to their empirical study. The reference to theory, however, is important to allow for generalization, decision rules, and predictions. Our research uses the Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) Theory as a starting point to explore the drivers and barriers to fill this gap of research. According to the DOI Theory, there are five stages of the innovation-decision process: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. Rogers proposed several characteristics that influence the adoption of innovations (i.e., before and during the decision stage) at both the company and the individual level. The goal of our research is to identify those categories that influence the adoption of a bicycle-leasing program, according to users’ perceptions (including both German employers and employees). Research methodology Since we aimed to explore drivers of, and barriers for, the adoption of a bicycle-leasing program in Germany, we used a qualitative research approach. We interviewed managing directors and human resource managers from 21 companies that offered the participation in the leasing-bicycle program to their employees. Also, we interviewed 22 employees who owned a leased bicycle. The interviews were conducted between November 2016 and March 2017. Interviews were conducted via telephone and based on an interview guide that included semi-structured questions. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and paraphrased before the abstracted text was reduced to categories. Central findings were elaborated applying a qualitative content analysis according to Mayring (2000). Results, discussion, and implications Figure 1 provides an overview of the different facets that were categorized and their relation to the adoption determinants. Categories refer to relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability as well as involvement of key stakeholders (employer and employee level) and seasonality (employee level). In total, we



Stefan Synek et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 41 (2019) 525–528 Author name / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2016) 000–000

527 3

identified 15 facets at both the employer and employee level that drive adoption; we further identified nine facets at employer level and six facets at employee level that delay or hinder adoption. Figure 1: Overview of the adoption determinants and facets that drive or delay/hinder adoption of the German company-bicycle leasing program at the organizational and individual level

We contribute to the scientific literature in four ways. First, our study is the first one to systematically explore the facets that drive, delay, or hinder the adoption of bicycle-leasing programs at the organizational level (employers). Second, our study complements previous studies that were conducted in the area of employee adoption of bicycleleasing programs that have taken a quantitative approach in the sense that it proposes several facets that have been neglected so far. Third, our study contributes to the DOI Theory when applied to the adoption of means of active transportation in the sense that additional adoption determinants are proposed. Lastly, we provide insights into the acceptance of the German company-bicycle program, a relevant topic in a country that is historically connected with the car industry and that has frequently violated pro-environmental standards in the past, such as urban air pollution standards, which might be reduced via cycling. Although our research did not have the purpose to indicate which factors are more important and which are less important for the adoption of a leasing bicycle, greatest variance in the richness of the facets was found for relative advantage and complexity. In particular, benefit-and-cost trade offs (savings seemed to be most important here) determine the perceived value of the concept. Difficulties in usability may make employees either postpone or hinder the adoption of the concept. Means to reduce the perceived complexity drive adoption. Our study informs companies about drivers and barriers at both the organizational and the individual level so that they can act in more sustainable ways (e.g., reduce emissions from commuting employees) and develop target-group

528 4

Stefan Synek et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 41 (2019) 525–528 Author name / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2016) 000–000

specific programs for their employees. This can be realized by incentivizing employees who are mostly driven by financial savings via campaigns that highlight or extend financial benefits (e.g., saving when a bicycle is leased [vs. purchased regularly]. The initiative can be designed so that benefits can be calculated online, so that the program can be extended to a family member or friend (when a second bicycle is purchased), or so that savings of expenditure on gas when the car is left at home are monitored and summarized. Employees who mention concerns about the high complexity of the program may be convinced via campaigns that increase ease of use of the program (e.g., informing via the intranet, providing personal support, installing bicycle-friendly infrastructure), or via allowing collaborations between stakeholders depending on the needs of the employees (e.g., including bicycle shops that offer many e-bikes if this is desired, including specialty bike shops if this is desired, allowing leasing companies to explain the program during important meetings with staff). The peculiarities of the German program are the specification of the leasing contracts and the German tax law. Here, German leasing companies may particularly take into account a clear communication and explanation of the leasing concept and a simple outline of the tax law when they want to promote the concept to potential customers. Our study is not free of limitations. First, we did not interview companies or employees who rejected the program. Thus, there may be a positivity bias. Second, the qualitative nature of the study does not allow for assessing the relationships between the variables that potentially contribute to the adoption rate of leasing-bicycles in a company as well as the potential effects of the program. Quantitative research is needed to assess the relevance of the determinants at the levels of both the employers and the employees. References Avineri, E., Steven, F., 2013. Has the introduction of the cycle to work scheme increased levels of cycling to work in the UK? Proceedings of the 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, D.C. Bundesverband mittelständische Wirtschaft, 2017. Dienstfahrrad statt Dienstwagen. Retrieved from: http://www.managermagazin.de/unternehmen/industrie/dienstfahrrad-statt-dienstwagen-neuer-trend-in-leasing-branche-a-1157356-2.html, (last accessed February 2018). Caulfield, B., Leahy, J., 2011. Learning to cycle again: Examining the benefits of providing tax-free loans to purchase new bicycles. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 2, 42-47. Clarke, A., Laird, J.J., and Shires J.D., 2014. Cycle to work scheme – weekend warriors or daily commuters. In: Presented at the Scottish Transport Applications and Research (STAR) Conference, Glasgow, 21 May 2014. Elliott, R., 2010. Leeds Universities' cycle loan schemes: Who participates, why and do they make a difference? Master’s thesis. Institute for Transport Studies. University of Leeds. Globisch, J., Schneider, U., Dütschke, E. 2013. Acceptance of electric vehicles by commercial users in the electric mobility pilot regions in Germany. In: ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings, 12, 973–983. Gruber, J. Rudolph, C., Kolarova, V., 2015. Einflussfaktoren bei der Einführung des Lastenrads im urbanen Wirtschaftsverkehr. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 59, 115-129. Hendriksen, I.J.M., Simons, M., Garre, F.G., Hildebrandt, V.H., 2010. The association between commuter cycling and sickness absence. Prev. Med., 51, 132–135. Humphreys, D.K., Goodman, A., Ogilvie, D., 2013. Associations between active commuting and physical and mental wellbeing. Prev. Med., 57, 135–139. Martin, A., Goryakin, Y., Suhrcke, M., 2014. Does active commuting improve psychological wellbeing? Longitudinal evidence from eighteen waves of the British Household Panel Survey. Prev. Med., 69, 296–303. Mayring P., Qualitative content analysis, Forum: Qual. Soc. Res. 1 (2), 2000, 20, (last accessed February 2018). Mytton, O., Panter, J., Ogilvie, D., 2016. Longitudinal associations of active commuting with wellbeing and sickness absence. Prev. Med, 84, 19– 26. Plötz, P., Schneider, U., Globisch, J., Dütschke, E., 2014. Who will buy electric vehicles? Identifying early adopters in Germany. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 67, 96–109. Rogers E.M., 2003. Diffusion of innovations. New York, Free Press. Schneider, S., 2016. How does sport act? A biopsychosocial model. Public Health Forum, 24, 76–79. Seebauer, S., 2015. Why early adopters engage in interpersonal diffusion of technological innovations: An empirical study on electric bicycles and electric scooters. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 78, 146–160. Wesp, R., 2015. Work-Bike-Balance per Dienstrad. Lebensmittel Zeitung 43. Retrieved from: http://www.lebensmittelzeitung.net/handel/ WorkBike-Balance-per-Dienstrad-112802, (last accessed February 2018). Wolf, A., Seebauer, S., 2014. Technology adoption of electric bicycles: A survey among early adopters. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 69, 196–211.