To beat Uber, taxi companies must fight fire with fire
- By Mike Wade
0 Comment(s)
Print
E-mail Shanghai Daily, November 2, 2015
Faster, better
DBT center research suggests that one such strategy is to learn from the disruptors and upgrade core service levels. Evidence indicates that there is significant room for improvement for many taxi companies around the world.
In 2014, the city of Seattle conducted a study to compare the quality of rideshare companies with traditional taxis. The results were shocking. Rideshare companies were found to be faster (70 percent came within 5 minutes vs 40 percent for traditional taxis), easier to use (only 10 percent of riders preferred the cash system predominantly used by traditional taxis), and better (80 percent of rideshare users rated the experience as very good vs just 10 percent for the traditional taxis). Traditional taxi companies must take this as a wakeup call.
Most likely, however, blocking through legal means and investing in improving current capabilities will not be sufficient to hold off the new entrants in the long term. We believe that traditional taxi companies should also actively invest in the capabilities that are disrupting them.
For example, they should develop or upgrade e-hailing apps. And, perhaps the most bitter pill of all to swallow, they must look at their pricing structure. The biggest weapon in the Uber arsenal in most jurisdictions is their ultra-low cost option, called UberX or UberPOP. At some point, traditional taxis have to look at their fees and make adjustments. They need to accept higher costs through additional investment, and lower revenues through reduced prices. Yes, disruption hurts!
While traditional taxi companies are improving their core services to compete with the challengers, they can also start to look for other growth opportunities in profitable niche areas such as livery services, handicapped travel, secured delivery, and so on, that are hard for disruptors to imitate. Some of their lost revenue in the core business can be replaced by these profitable niche areas.
Finally, traditional taxi companies need to consolidate. Uber has a global brand, while most taxi companies remain local. Surprisingly, there are no global taxi brands. It would make sense for taxi companies to consolidate, pool capital, share investment costs, build regional and global brands, and compete with Uber on similar terms.
Uber's dominance is not inevitable and traditional taxi companies are bruised, but not beaten. Fighting disruption is difficult, but it can be done.
Michael Wade is the Cisco Chair in Digital Business Transformation, and Professor of Innovation and Strategic Information Management at IMD. He is also co-director of the Orchestrating Winning Performance program (OWP) which runs from November 16-20, 2015 in Singapore. Shanghai Daily condensed the article. To read the original, please visit www.imd.org.
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)