Dual Role of Gig Workers as Entrepreneurs and Intrapreneurs: A Systematic Literature Review

Ramya Singh
Research Scholar, Amity Business School, Amity University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India; and is the corresponding author. E-mail: ramya.singh1@s.amity.edu

Archana Sharma
Professor, Amity Business School, Amity University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. E-mail: asharma@lko.amity.edu

Nimit Gupta
Professor, School of Management and Liberal Studies, The NorthCap University, Gurugram, Haryana, India. E-mail: nimitgupta1981@rediffmail.com

Over the past three years, gig workers have emerged as essential contributors to the global economy. This study endeavors to understand the details of their work activities by examining their distinctive characteristics. Academic discourse posits that gig workers embody traits of both intrapreneurs and entrepreneurs, rendering them a unique and versatile force within the workforce. Employing a systematic literature review, the study follows established methodologies and Prisma framework, meticulously scouring academic databases, peer-reviewed journals, and relevant gray literature to identify and select studies centered on the dual roles of gig workers. The inclusion criteria prioritize studies that provide insights into the motivations, challenges, and outcomes associated with entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial activities within the gig economy. The systematic review highlights that gig workers exhibit intrapreneurial commitment alongside entrepreneurial qualities, exercising authority in task selection, determining work locations, and devising effective strategies for task completion. Furthermore, the findings serve as a foundational platform for potential empirical studies in the future on the multifaceted roles played by gig workers in the contemporary and dynamic landscape of work.

Introduction
Employment has evolved over the years from the traditional employer-centric model to a more dynamic and flexible structure (Meijerink and Keegan, 2019). In the wake of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, gig workers have shattered the boundaries of conventional employment (Bajwa et al., 2018). While still working within the framework of companies, gig workers now operate on their own terms and conditions, marking a significant departure from the rigid structures of traditional employment (Dutta et al., 2021).

During the Covid-19 pandemic, gig economy took an entirely different direction with more people joining, and it got the attention of scholars and policymakers seeing classical examples like Amazon and Flipkart. Gig workers are those who work as part-time or full-time workers, but they are not committed to any one organization (Ahmadi Nursilah, 2020); they work for their needs and to provide support to their families (Pinto et al., 2023). Gig workers are employees who work under a temporary arrangement.

Digitalization has spurred growth in the number of gig workers. They work on digital platforms and receive their tasks from online portals with flexible time-scheduling, creating billions of revenue annually and producing a new platform model. Gig workers' activity is related to entrepreneurship activity and hence influences the definition of entrepreneurship (Henley, 2021). Industry disruption comes from the expectation that industry will create new innovation and new entrepreneurs will emerge with the emergence of gig economy (Burtch et al., 2018).

The review of extant literature reflects a paradigm shift in employment structure post the Fourth Industrial Revolution, emphasizing gig workers' pivotal role. The Covid-19 pandemic accentuated this trend, with examples like Amazon and Flipkart showcasing increased gig economy participation. Gig workers, prioritizing personal needs over organizational ties, engage in flexible, temporary arrangements, contributing to the adaptive nature of the contemporary workforce. Digitalization plays a crucial role, enabling gig workers to operate on online platforms autonomously, generating substantial revenues. The literature consistently underscores gig workers' influence on entrepreneurship, challenging traditional notions, and redefining practices in the evolving employment landscape. Moreover, in the context of industry disruption, gig workers, despite organizational affiliations, embody characteristics of both entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, challenging established distinctions in entrepreneurial roles (Mouazen and Hernandez-Lara, 2023).

The literature explores the transformative journey of employment structures, focusing on the evolution from traditional models to dynamic, flexible frameworks, particularly in the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Bajwa et al., 2018). Gig workers, pivotal to this shift, redefine conventional employment by operating within organizational frameworks while managing their terms independently. Gig workers, driven by personal needs, engage in temporary arrangements, contributing to the adaptability of the modern workforce (Mahato et al., 2021).

Research Question
How do gig workers navigate and succeed in balancing their roles as both entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs?

Methodology
The literature review stands as a foundational method integral to the progression of scientific knowledge, facilitating incremental advancements based on existing findings (Lame, 2019). Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) represent a robust approach for synthesizing empirical data to address specific research issues comprehensively and reproducibly. This method seeks to incorporate all available published evidence on a subject, evaluating its validity. Recognizing that knowledge expansion is contingent upon prior work, reviewing pertinent literature becomes imperative for understanding the breadth and depth of existing research, thereby identifying gaps for exploration (Xiao and Watson, 2019).

To advance the understanding of the role of gig workers as entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, this study adheres to the guidelines outlined by conducting a systematic literature review. These guidelines, known for offering evidence-based support, serve as a well-established framework for numerous systematic reviews (Salisu et al., 2021). The objective of the study is to understand the characteristics of gig workers that make them both entrepreneur and intrapreneur. Employing SLR helps in delving deeply into the subject matter, revealing pertinent insights and uncovering unknown concepts (Subramony et al., 2023). Figure 1 outlines the methodological steps followed to construct the study's framework through SLR.

Data Collection for SLR
The study collected data from different sources-Emerald, Science Direct, Sage, Inder Science, Springer, IUP Publications and others, and the database considered high impact and peer-reviewed journals, and the keywords used were 'gig workers', 'intrapreneur', 'entrepreneur', 'platform workers and entrepreneurship', and 'entrepreneurship in gig economy'; and in a sub search, 'gig workers' keyword was used, using Boolean operators "OR" and "AND".

Inclusion Criteria
The study carefully evaluated papers that are impactful in understanding the gig workers and their work as intrapreneur and entrepreneur, and gig workers' characteristics as an employee and a decision-maker. Thus the review includes papers published from 2016 to 2024, and to ensure quality of the papers, the authors selected only papers from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar database. All papers are related to gig workers and platform workers and encompass characteristics that make them take up intrapreneurial and entrepreneurial activities. The review also includes original empirical studies published in English language.

Extraction of Data
In the initial analysis stage, the study undertook a meticulous review to identify and remove redundant data. Subsequently, abstracts were assessed against predetermined inclusion criteria. Papers meeting the criteria underwent a detailed examination of their methodology and discussion sections, employing open coding through Excel and Mendeley software. The SLR framework, illustrated in Figure 2, delineates the systematic selection process for papers sourced from diverse databases.

Paper Identification
Total papers identified: 14,479 (Emerald 3,531; Sage 3,214; Elsevier 1,103; Taylor & Francis 2,339; Inder Science 1,803; Springer 1,206; and Google Scholar 1,087).

Exclusion of Irrelevant Papers
13,941 papers were deemed irrelevant and excluded from the study because they focused only on entrepreneurship.

Abstract Assessment
The abstracts of the remaining 381 papers were scrutinized, resulting in the exclusion of 132 papers, leaving 249 for further consideration.

Comprehensive Introduction Check
The introduction of each paper among the remaining 249 underwent a thorough examination, leading to the exclusion of 192 papers based on quality.

Final Selection
Finally, 57 papers, meeting the inclusion criteria, were selected for the study.

To ensure coherence in the portrayal of factors impacting gig workers and their characteristics as adopter and innovator, a comprehensive review was conducted. This involved examining the definitions and measurement items employed to evaluate adoption factors. The selected papers demonstrated consistency in terms of research question and findings.

Factors Extracted
The study sifted through the 57 identified papers and extracted important factors that influence the gig workers' characteristics that portray them as entrepreneur and intrapreneur, including: motivation (Norlander et al., 2021), work engagement (Mohsin et al., 2022), job satisfaction (Henley, 2021), workplace protection (Harpur and Blanck, 2020), flexible work hour (Mahato et al., 2021), job security (MacEachen et al., 2022), independent worker (Christopher, 2019), innovation (Bajwa et al., 2018), shared economy (Watson et al., 2021), ride sharing, self-employed, government support, self-efficacy (Bogatyreva et al., 2023), work-life balance (Page-tickell et al., 2020), and worker wellbeing (Khan et al., 2023).

Results and Discussion
A summary of publications and authors on gig workers dual roles is given in Table 1.

Figure 3 depicts the nature of published documents, categorizing them into conference papers, review papers, and empirical studies. Notably, 90% of the total documents take the form of empirical studies.

Figure 5, the researcher explores the subject areas where gig workers are most connected. Previous research indicates a substantial focus on business and management, as reflected in the maximum number of publications in this domain.

Gig workers have emerged prominently in recent times, demonstrating substantial growth (Wardhana et al., 2020) and exerting significant positive impact on the economy (Patil et al., 2023). Several researchers have highlighted their contributions, emphasizing the billions in revenue generated over the years (Dif-Pradalier et al., 2018). With an escalating trend, more individuals are drawn to join the gig economy, indicating a prospective expansion in the future (Cram, 2020).

The attractiveness of gig work lies in the unique characteristics it offers (Pinto et al., 2023). Gig workers benefit from flexible work hours (Dif-Pradalier et al., 2024), the ability to utilize personal gadgets for tasks, autonomy in decision-making related to their work, and control over factors such as time duration and working conditions. These attributes suggest a substantial influence on entrepreneurial activity (Ahsan, 2018). Despite this flexibility, gig workers face accountability in completing tasks within specified timeframes, and their performance and benefits hinge on customer reviews. Positive reviews lead to bonuses, reinforcing a dynamic akin to entrepreneurial success (Wardhana et al., 2020).

Conclusion
Through a comprehensive review of 57 studies published between 2016 and 2024, our systematic literature review aimed to delve into the determinants and theories influencing the adoption and recognition of gig workers. The focus of this extensive analysis was primarily on the gig economy.

The challenges and inequalities faced by gig workers, stemming from their non-traditional employment status (Peetz, 2023), do not hinder their commitment to exceeding expectations. Their independent working style and capacity to make decisions in challenging situations align with entrepreneurial characteristics (Vallistu, 2023). Gig workers function as entrepreneurs by creating a unique work environment and demonstrating resilience in completing tasks (Bogatyreva et al., 2023). Intrapreneurial capabilities are discernible in gig workers; their unwavering commitment to tasks, coupled with a continuous desire for learning and improvement, reflects intrapreneurial traits. In the gig economy, workers display characteristics of both innovators and adopters (Wollborn et al., 2023). Their risk-taking behavior, combined with a strong commitment to their work, positions them as individuals who actively seek opportunities daily (Subramony et al., 2023).

The gig workers' dynamic nature, marked by risk-taking (Mouazen and Hernandez-Lara, 2023), commitment, and adaptability, positions them as versatile contributors to the evolving landscape of the gig economy.

Limitations and Future Scope: The systematic literature review methodology employed imposes restrictions on database access, limiting the breadth of the study. Additionally, the predominance of studies from the Western world, specifically North America, Europe, and Australia, in the selected literature introduces a bias, neglecting perspectives from developing countries in Asia, Africa, and South America, where regulatory dynamics concerning the gig economy may differ significantly. To address these limitations, the study recommends future investigations that focus on gig economy regulations, combining theoretical frameworks with empirical evidence. This approach will help utilize the study's development as a testable instrument, fostering a more comprehensive understanding of global gig economy regulatory challenges.

References

1. Agrawal S, Schuster A M, Britt N et al. (2022), "Expendable to Essential? Changing Perceptions of Gig Workers on Twitter in the Onset of COVID-19", Information Communication and Society, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 634-653. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.2020323
2. Ahmadi Nursilah (2020), "Mapping Gig Workers as the New Economy Post Covid-19", International Journal of Communication, Management and Humanities, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 896-909.
3. Ahsan M (2018), "Entrepreneurship and Ethics in the Sharing Economy: A Critical Perspective", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 161, No. 1, pp. 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3975-2
4. Alberti G, Bessa I, Hardy K et al. (2018), "In, Against and Beyond Precarity: Work in Insecure Times", Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 447-457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018762088
5. Altura T G, Hashimoto Y, Jacoby et al. (2021), "Japan Meets the Sharing Economy: Contending Frames", Social Science Japan Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 137-161. https://doi.org/10.1093/ssjj/jyaa041
6. Bajwa U, Gastaldo D, Di Ruggiero E and Knorr L (2018), "The Health of Workers in the Global Gig Economy", Globalization and Health, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0444-8
7. Baral R and Bhargava S (2010), "Work-Family Enrichment as a Mediator Between Organizational Interventions for Work-Life Balance and Job Outcomes", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 274-300. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941011023749
8. Bogatyreva K, Verkhovskaya O and Makarov Y (2023), "A Springboard for Entrepreneurs? Gig and Sharing Economy and Entrepreneurship in Russia", Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 698-726. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-03-2021-0128
9. Burbano V C (2021), "Getting Gig Workers to Do More by Doing Good: Field Experimental Evidence from Online Platform Labor Marketplaces", Organization and Environment, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 387-412. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619846455
10. Burtch G, Carnahan S and Greenwood B N (2018), "Can You Gig It? An Empirical Examination of the Gig Economy and Entrepreneurial Activity", Management Science, March, Vol. 64, No. 12, pp. 5497-5520. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2916
11. Chandra V (2012), "Work-Life Balance: Eastern and Western Perspectives", International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 1040-1056. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.651339
12. Christopher Puusepp (2019), "Challenges with Gig Workers: A Mediator Perspective", Thesis, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University.
13. Cram W A (2020), "Algorithmic Controls and Their Implications for Gig Worker Wellbeing and Behavior", Proceedings of 41st International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Hyderabad.
14. De' R, Pandey N and Pal A (2020), "Impact of Digital Surge During Covid-19 Pandemic: A Viewpoint on Research and Practice", International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 55, June, 102171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102171
15. Dif-Pradalier M, Jammet T, Tiberghien J et al. (2024), "Platforms in the City and Cities at the Service of Platforms: An Urban Perspective on the Platform Economy and Workers' Responses", The Economic and Labour Relations Review, First View, pp. 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/elr.2023.53
16. Duhaime E P and Woessner Z W (2019), "Explaining the Decline of Tipping Norms in the Gig Economy", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 233-245. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-06-2018-0270
17. Dutta D, Mirchandani P and Anasha K P (2021), "Internal GIG Ecosystem in IT/ITeS Organisations for Non-Linear Growth", South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 280-289. https://doi.org/10.1177/23220937211013266
18. Fleetwood S (2007), "Why Work-Life Balance Now?", International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 387-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/0958519060 1167441
19. Friedland J, Balkin D B, Kuhn K M et al. (2019), "The Health of Workers in the Global Gig Economy", Globalization and Health, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0444-8
20. Gleim M R, Johnson C M and Lawson S J (2019), "Sharers and Sellers: A Multi-Group Examination of Gig Economy Workers' Perceptions", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 98, May, pp. 142-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.041
21. Harpur P and Blanck P (2020), "Gig Workers with Disabilities: Opportunities, Challenges, and Regulatory Response", Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 511-520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09937-4
22. Hartono M, Raharjo H and Ronyastra I M (2021), "What Difference Does the Gig Mobility Service Make in the Workers' Human Needs Structure?", International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 82, 103100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2021.103100
23. Henley A (2021), "The Rise of Self-Employment in the UK: Entrepreneurial Transmission or Declining Job Quality?", Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 457-486. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beab007
24. Jabagi N, Croteau A M, Audebrand L K and Marsan J (2019), "Gig-Workers' Motivation: Thinking Beyond Carrots and Sticks", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 192-213. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-06-2018-0255
25. Khan T H, MacEachen E, Premji S and Neiterman E (2023), "Self-Employment, Illness, and the Social Security System: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Solo Self-Employed Workers in Ontario, Canada", BMC Public Health, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15471-8
26. Kuhn K M and Galloway T L (2019), "Expanding Perspectives on Gig Work and Gig Workers", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 186-191. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-05-2019-507
27. Lame G (2019), "Systematic Literature Reviews: An Introduction", Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, 2019-August (July), pp. 1633-1642. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.169
28. MacEachen E, de Rijk A, Dyreborg, J et al. (2022), "Laws, Policies, and Collective Agreements Protecting Low-Wage and Digital Platform Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic", New Solutions, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 201-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/10482911221133796
29. Mahato M, Kumar N and Jena L K (2021), "Re-thinking Gig Economy in Conventional Workforce Post-COVID-19: A Blended Approach for upholding Fair Balance", Journal of Work-Applied Management, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 261-276. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-05-2021-0037
30. Mansoor Rafiq Nawaz Z, Zhang J and Ilmudeen A (2019), "Gig Workers in Sharing Economy: Conceptualizing Freelancer Value Proposition (FVP) in e-Lancing Platforms", Advances in Management & Applied Economics, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 1792-7552.
31. McDonnell Anthony, Burgess John, Carbery Ronan and Sherman Ultan (2018), "Special Issue of International Journal of Human Resource Management: Gig Work: Implications for the Employment Relationship and Human Resource Management", The International Journal of Human Resource Management. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2018.1495410
32. Meijerink J and Keegan A (2019), "Conceptualizing Human Resource Management in the Gig Economy: Toward a Platform Ecosystem Perspective", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 214-232. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-07-2018-0277
33. Mohsin F H, Isa N, Awee A and Purhanudin N (2022), "Growing Gigs: A Conceptual Report on Job Autonomy and Work Engagement on Gig Workers' Performance", International Journal of Advanced Research in Economics and Finance, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 144-156. https://doi.org/10.55057/ijaref.2022.4.1.14
34. Mouazen A M and Hernandez-Lara A B (2023), "Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, Gig Economy Practices and Women's Entrepreneurship: The Case of Lebanon", International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 249-274. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-07-2022-0116
35. Myhill K, Richards J and Sang K (2021), "Job Quality, Fair Work and Gig Work: The Lived Experience of Gig Workers", International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 32, No. 19, pp. 4110-4135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192. 2020.1867612
36. Norlander P, Jukic N, Varma A and Nestorov S (2021), "The Effects of Technological Supervision on Gig Workers: Organizational Control and Motivation of Uber, Taxi, and Limousine Drivers", International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 32, No. 19, pp. 4053-4077. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.1867614
37. Oyetunde K, Prouska R and McKearney A (2022), "Voice in Non-Traditional Employment Relationships: A Review and Future Research Directions", International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 142-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1964093
38. Page-Tickell R, Ritchie J and Page-Tickell T (2020), "Evolutionary Mismatch and Misbelief Impact on Participants in the Gig Economy", in R Page-Tickell and E Yerby (Ed.), Conflict and Shifting Boundaries in the Gig Economy: An Interdisciplinary Analysis (The Changing Context of Managing People), pp. 141-160, Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83867-603-220201012
39. Patil B S, K Sharma M, Soubhari T et al. (2023), "Quantitative Assessment of Blockchain Applications for Industry 4.0 in Manufacturing Sector", Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.04.366
40. Peetz D (2023), "Can and How Should the Gig Worker Loophole be Closed?", Economic and Labour Relations Review, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1017/elr.2023.57
41. Pinto F, Martinez R, Delgado Rodriguez M J and Murillo E (2023), "The Migrant Pay Gap in Spain: Where Do the Differences Come from?", Economic and Labour Relations Review, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 1-23. DOI:10.1017/elr.2023.37
42. Ravenelle A J (2019), "We're Not Uber:" Control, Autonomy, and Entrepreneurship in the Gig Economy", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 269-285. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-06-2018-0256
43. Road B T and Road B T (2021), "An Empirical Study on Lending Pattern and Perception of Commercial Banks Towards Small and Medium Enterprises Lending", Indian Journal of Finance and Banking, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 26-36. https://doi.org/10.46281/ijafr. v8i1.1403
44. Salisu I, Bin Mohd Sappri M and Bin Omar M F (2021), "The Adoption of Business Intelligence Systems in Small and Medium Enterprises in the Healthcare Sector: A Systematic Literature Review", Cogent Business and Management, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1935663. DOI:10.1080/23311975.2021.1935663
45. Schmidt G B, Philip J, Van Dellen S A and Islam S (2023), "Gig Worker Organizing: Toward an Adapted Attraction-Selection-Attrition Framework", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-09-2021-0531
46. Sorg C, Vestena C A, Scheper C and Zajak S (2023), "Digital Worker Feedback Infrastructures: The Digitalisation of Worker Rights Monitoring in Global Value Chains", The Economic and Labour Relations Review, Vol. 34, No. 3, September, pp. 518-535. https://doi.org/10.1017/elr.2023.36
47. Subramony M, van Jaarsveld D, Nguyen H et al. (2023), "Frontline Service Employee Research: Integration of Systematic Literature Reviews and Recommendations for Future Scholarship", Journal of Service Management, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 829-842. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-07-2023-0326
48. Sutherland W, Jarrahi M H, Dunn M and Nelson S B (2020), "Work Precarity and Gig Literacies in Online Freelancing", Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 457-475. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017019886511
49. Tassinari A, Meijerink J, Keegan A et al. (2019), "Platform Capitalism's Hidden Abode: Producing Data Assets in the Gig Economy", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 52, No. 5, pp. 1475-1495. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12641
50. Vallistu J (2023), "Digital Social Security Accounts for Platform Workers: The Case of Estonia's Entrepreneur Account", International Social Security Review, Vol. 76, No. 3, pp. 3-24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12337
51. Wang S, Li L Z and Coutts A (2022), "National Survey of Mental Health and Life Satisfaction of Gig Workers: The Role of Loneliness and Financial Precarity", BMJ Open, Vol. 12, No. 12, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066389
52. Wardhana V H K, Herlina M G, Bangsawan S and Tuori M A T (2020), "Regulatory Developments in the Gig Economy: A Literature Review", The Winners, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 141-153. https://doi.org/10.21512/tw.v21i2.6758
53. Watson G P, Kistler L D, Graham B A and Sinclair R R (2021), "Looking at the Gig Picture: Defining Gig Work and Explaining Profile Differences in Gig Workers' Job Demands and Resources", Group and Organization Management, Vol. 46, No. 2, 105960112199654. DOI:10.1177/1059601121996548
54. Wollborn P, Dornekott D and Holder U (2023), "Entrepreneurial Efforts and Opportunity Costs: Evidence from Twitch Streamers", International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 1209-1238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00849-2
55. Wood A J, Graham M, Lehdonvirta V and Hjorth I (2019), "Good Gig, Bad Gig: Autonomy and Algorithmic Control in the Global Gig Economy", Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 56-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616
56. Xiao Y and Watson M (2019), "Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review", Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 93-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971