International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 7, Issue 9 (September 2020), Pages: 1-7

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Study on factors that affect the sharing justice and network relationship to develop the engagement in freelance

 Author(s): Arphaporn Jongwiriyajaroenchai 1, *, Napaporn Khantanapha 1, Rapeepun Piriyakul 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Graduate School of Business Administration, Southeast Asia University, Bangkok, Thailand
 2Faculty of Science, Ramkhamhaeng University, Bangkok, Thailand

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3776-400X

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2020.09.001

 Abstract:

The objective of this paper was to investigate the factors that affect the sharing of justice and network relation to developing the engagement in freelance. The study was conducted from in-depth interviews and used Grab as a case study of sharing economy businesses. In-depth interviews were done with experts in sharing businesses and operators who own vehicle assets. In addition, relevant literature and theories were reviewed to consider the conceptual framework and factors obtained from this study. This study is only part of the main research that the author is currently studying. From the results of the interviews, Grab’s sharing justice had a clear sharing of financial interests along with support in finding customers. In terms of network support, there was support to work together, and Grab’s members shared their career knowledge. It was found that sharing justice and network relation could well develop the engagement in freelance and that they were highly linked to each other. According to the conceptual framework and results obtained from this study, the factors that affect the development of sharing economy businesses to create the engagement in freelance could be divided into two parts: sharing justice consisting of (1) distributive justice, (2) procedural justice, and (3) interactional justice, and network relation consisting of (1) physical support, (2) knowledge sharing support, (3) emotional support, and (4) companionship support. Finally, in the near future, after data collection and analysis have been completed, the author will present this research in a complete form that presents the whole conceptual framework because some of the content is still in the process of collecting population samples. 

 © 2020 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Sharing economy, Justice, Network relationship, Freelance

 Article History: Received 4 February 2020, Received in revised form 15 May 2020, Accepted 16 May 2020

 Acknowledgment:

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

 Citation:

 Jongwiriyajaroenchai A, Khantanapha N, and Piriyakul R (2020). Study on factors that affect the sharing justice and network relationship to develop the engagement in freelance. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 7(9): 1-7

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1

 Tables

 Table 1 

----------------------------------------------

 References (25)

  1. Allen R and Berg TVD (2014). Serialization in popular culture. Routledge, Abingdon, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203762158   [Google Scholar]
  2. Allik J and Realo A (2004). Individualism-collectivism and social capital. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(1): 29-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022103260381   [Google Scholar]
  3. Annalect (2017). Research: Instagram influencer marketing in Finland. Available online at: https://bit.ly/2AfWLAI
  4. Babic A, Stinglhamber F, and Hansez I (2015). Organizational justice and perceived organizational support: Impact on negative work-home interference and well-being outcomes. Psychologica Belgica, 55(3): 134-158. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.bk   [Google Scholar] PMid:30479421 PMCid:PMC5853938
  5. Barman MK, Baishya A, and Nembenna S (2015). Bulky guanidinate stabilized homoleptic magnesium, calcium and zinc complexes and their catalytic activity in the Tishchenko reaction. Journal of Organometallic Chemistry, 785: 52-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jorganchem.2015.02.044   [Google Scholar]
  6. Carreira J, Caseiro R, Batista J, and Sminchisescu C (2012). Semantic segmentation with second-order pooling. In the European Conference on Computer Vision, Springer, Florence, Italy: 430-443. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33786-4_32   [Google Scholar]
  7. Dworkin R (2011). Justice for hedgehogs. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vkt   [Google Scholar]
  8. Elster J (2009). Traité critique de l’homme économique, vol. I, Le désintéressement. Seuil, Paris, France. 
  9. Elster J (2011). Reciprocity and norms. In: Fleurbaey M, Salles M, and Weymark JA (Eds.), Social ethics and normative economics: 327-337. Springer, Berlin, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17807-8_14   [Google Scholar]
  10. Harper PJ (2015). Exploring forms of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB): Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Management and Marketing Research, 18. Available online at: https://bit.ly/3heXvH9
  11. Hosseinkhani M and Giyaove Q (2015). The effect of social justice in self-efficacy development of organizations and institutions employees. Asian Social Science, 11(22): 247-252. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n22p247   [Google Scholar]
  12. Krähenbühl P and Koltun V (2011). Efficient inference in fully connected crfs with gaussian edge potentials. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 24: 109-117. Available online at: https://bit.ly/3dLYZ9z
  13. Lakey B (2010). Social support theory and measurement. In: Cohen S, Underwood LG, and Gottlieb BH (Eds.), Social support measurement and intervention: A guide for health and social scientists: 29-52. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780195126709.003.0002   [Google Scholar]
  14. Matzler K, Veider V, and Kathan W (2015). Adapting to the sharing economy. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56(2): 71-77.   [Google Scholar]
  15. Meimoon I (2019). Analysis of work satisfaction on work achievement of employees Indonesian local government. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 6(8): 39-44. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2019.08.006   [Google Scholar]
  16. Perrey J and Spillecke D (2013). Retail marketing and branding: A definitive guide to maximizing ROI. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, USA. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119207900   [Google Scholar]
  17. Poramet E, Napaporn K, and Rapeepun P (2019). A study of factors that affect the self-practice of employees for the development of innovation capability of the Thai automotive industry. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 6(8): 111-118. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2019.08.015   [Google Scholar]
  18. Rahman A, Shahzad N, Mustafa K, Khan MF, and Qurashi F (2016). Effects of organizational justice on organizational commitment. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(3S): 188-196.   [Google Scholar]
  19. Robbins SP and Judge TA (2013). Organizational behavior. Pearson Education Limited, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  20. Sen AK (2009). The idea of justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjnrv7n   [Google Scholar]
  21. Sheppard BH, Lewicki RJ, and Minton JW (1992). Organizational justice: The search for fairness in the workplace. Lexington Books/Macmillan, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  22. Tasa K, Sears GJ, and Schat AC (2011). Personality and teamwork behavior in context: The cross‐level moderating role of collective efficacy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(1): 65-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.680   [Google Scholar]
  23. Taylor SE (2011). Social support: A review. In: Friedman HS (Ed.), The oxford handbook of health psychology: 189-214. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  24. Weingart LR and Cronin MA (2009). Teams research in the 21st century: A case for theory consolidation. In: Salas E, Goodwin GF, and Burke CS (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: 509-524. Routledge, Abingdon, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  25. Yu F and Koltun V (2015). Multi-scale context aggregation by dilated convolutions. Available online at: https://bit.ly/2zkl2VU