Search results

Drawing on the social identity theory, this paper explores the impact of rider–driver ethnicity match on the driver’s expected ride satisfaction and willingness to perform, and rider’s trust on the driver.

The study relies on scenario-based online experiments with 291 ride-hailing drivers and 282 riders in the USA.

The findings indicate that ethnicity match between ride-hailing drivers and riders positively impact driver’s ride satisfaction and willingness to perform, and rider’s trust in the driver. The study also revealed a significant positive moderation effect of ethnic identity on the relationship of ethnicity match and those constructs.

While it may be challenging to influence an individual’s level of ethnic identity, managers can take steps to educate and train their employees regarding the impact of ethnic identity and discrimination, with a particular focus on those individuals who possess a strong sense of ethnic identity.

The findings of this research provide theoretical contributions to the existing literature on ride-hailing services and adds to the limited stream of logistics research that examines the impact of ethnicity on ride-hailing operations.

Existing literature has begun to identify the agonistic and contested aspects of the ongoing development of accountability systems. These “contests” are particularly important during periods of change when an accountability “deficit” has been identified, that is, when existing accountability systems are deemed inadequate and requiring revision. The purpose of this paper is to explore one such set of contests in the case of large technology and social media firms: the so-called “big tech”. The authors focus specifically on “big tech” because of increasing societal concerns about the harms associated with their products, services and business practices.

The authors analysed four US Congressional hearings, in which the CEO of Facebook was held to account for the company's alleged breaches and harms. The authors conducted a discourse analysis of the dialogue between the account giver (Mark Zuckerberg) and account holders (Members of Congress) in the oral testimony at the four hearings.

Two areas of contestation in the dialogue between the account giver and account holders are identified. “Epistemic contests” involved contestation about the “facts” concerning the harms the company had allegedly caused. “Responsibility contests” involved contestation about who (or what) should be held responsible for these harms and according to what standards or criteria.

The study advances critical dialogical accountability literature by identifying two areas of contestation during periods of change in accountability systems. In so doing, they advanced the theory by conceptualising the process of change as underpinned by discursive contests in which multiple actors construct and contest the “problem” with existing accountability systems. The outcomes of these contests are significant, the authors suggest, because they inform the development of reforms to the accountability system governing big tech firms and other industries undergoing similar periods of contestation and change.