Cited by 118Digital Economy and Work TransformationLegal and Labor StudiesManagement and Organizational Studies

An Institutional Logics Perspective on the Gig Economy

Open access
Frenken, Koen, Vaskelainen, Taneli, Fünfschilling, Lea, Piscicelli, Laura·2020·Theorizing the Sharing Economy: Variety and Trajectories of New Forms of Organizing

Abstract

We witness rising tensions between online gig-economy platforms, incumbent firms, regulators, and labor unions. In this chapter, we use the framework of institutional logics as an analytical lens and scheme to understand the fundamental institutional challenges prompted by the advent of the online gig economy. We view gig-economy platforms as corporations that organize and self-regulate markets. In doing so, they span two parallel markets: the market for platforms competing to provide intermediation services and the market for the self-employed competing on platforms to provide peer-to-peer services. Self-regulation by platforms also weakens the traditional roles of the state. While the corporation and market logics empower the platform, they weaken self-employed suppliers as platforms’ design constrain suppliers to grow into a full-fledged business by limiting their entrepreneurial freedom. At the same time, current labor law generally does not classify suppliers as employees of the platform company, which limits the possibility to unionize. The current resolutions to this institutional misalignment are sought in “band aid solutions” at the level of sectors. Instead, as we argue, macro-institutional reform may be needed to re-institutionalize gig work into established institutional logics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/s0733-558x20200000066005

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • OLPs substitute algorithmic HRM for organizational hierarchy and physical oversight to control worker behavior, and need to strike a balance between autonomy and control.

    “For instance, rather than use organizational hierarchy to control employee behavior through physical oversight, OLPs substitute algorithmic HRM and in doing so, need to strike a balance between autonomy and control (Frenken et al., 2020;Meijerink et al., 2021;Wood et al., 2019).”
  • OLPs still need to control their freelance workforce to align their behavior to strategic objectives of the OLP and clients' interests.

    “However, OLPs nevertheless still need to control their freelance workforce to align their behavior to strategic objectives of the OLP and clients' interests (Frenken et al., 2020;Gandini, 2019;Meijerink et al., 2021).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Frenken, K., Vaskelainen, T., Fünfschilling, L., & Piscicelli, L.
Venue
Theorizing the Sharing Economy: Variety and Trajectories of New Forms of Organizing
Published
2020-04-10
Pages
83-105
OpenAlex
W2898181747
Cited by
118
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 8
FWCI
116.61
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
gig economy, institutional logics, self-regulation, platform intermediation, self-employed workers, peer-to-peer services, labor law, employee classification, trade unions, entrepreneurial freedom, role of the state

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review