Four Stars Equals Zero in Gig Economy

[beechnut79]

The title says it all. Most if not all of the gig economy platforms, Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, etc. use a five-star rating system, which in itself is fine. But the way they administer it is very flawed to say the least. In their minds anything below five stars might just as well be zero. I would think that a lot of people would by nature be reluctant to give five stars unless the provider went way over and beyond the call of the duty, such as rescuing the family dog from ongoing traffic.  If the rating system were administered the way it should be, anything 3.5 (70 percent) or higher would be passing unless a real serious offense was committed. Uber boots drivers from their platform if their rating falls below 4.6, which is still 92 percent, very commendable on any school test. I am wondering if any of you here have any ideas as to where this four stars equals zero mentality comes from. Might also be interesting to have a discussion on how these companies can say that there people are not employees if they indeed have the power to boot them from the platform. A lawsuit waiting to happen? And also as to if this type of arrangement represents the wave of the future.

[Warren Dew]

The issue is that most people don't use the two, three, and four star ratings; they either give 5 stars as the default, or they give 1 star if something bad happened. Thus a 92%/4.6 rating means that 8% of the time, the drive doesn't show up, or fails to get to the right place, or assaults the passenger, or something like that. When you think of it that way, 4.6 doesn't seem as high.

Amazon gives a percentage rating, which is the percentage of 4 and 5 star ratings out of all ratings. I think twice before using a vendor with less than a 98% rating - too much of a chance that there will be a problem that I'll have to spend hours to straighten out.

If people actually gave a 3 star average rating instead of defaulting to 5 stars, things would be different, but that's not what people actually do.

[Eric the Green]

(11-30-2019, 07:29 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: The issue is that most people don't use the two, three, and four star ratings; they either give 5 stars as the default, or they give 1 star if something bad happened.  Thus a 92%/4.6 rating means that 8% of the time, the drive doesn't show up, or fails to get to the right place, or assaults the passenger, or something like that.  When you think of it that way, 4.6 doesn't seem as high.

Amazon gives a percentage rating, which is the percentage of 4 and 5 star ratings out of all ratings.  I think twice before using a vendor with less than a 98% rating - too much of a chance that there will be a problem that I'll have to spend hours to straighten out.

If people actually gave a 3 star average rating instead of defaulting to 5 stars, things would be different, but that's not what people actually do.

I'm looking to see what drives the overall rating down a bit. 4 stars is pretty common there. If there are no 1 star ratings, it's probably a decent product. But if there are some one stars, it shows there might be serious problems.

Reviews don't commonly indicate how long the product of service performs before it breaks. Vendors often ask for reviews right away. Sometimes I ask this question, and get a few comments from people who have owned the product a few years.

[Anthony '58]

4 stars is the equivalent not of winning silver - but of losing gold, as the widely-panned Nike ad during the 1996 Summer Olympics went.

[pbrower2a]

(11-30-2019, 07:29 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: The issue is that most people don't use the two, three, and four star ratings; they either give 5 stars as the default, or they give 1 star if something bad happened.  Thus a 92%/4.6 rating means that 8% of the time, the drive doesn't show up, or fails to get to the right place, or assaults the passenger, or something like that.  When you think of it that way, 4.6 doesn't seem as high.

Amazon gives a percentage rating, which is the percentage of 4 and 5 star ratings out of all ratings.  I think twice before using a vendor with less than a 98% rating - too much of a chance that there will be a problem that I'll have to spend hours to straighten out.

If people actually gave a 3 star average rating instead of defaulting to 5 stars, things would be different, but that's not what people actually do.

"Ordinary" should get 3 stars... Below average gets 2, and horrid gets 1. Above average gets "4" and extraordinary gets "5". Unless one is really picky with consumer purchases, "3" should be adequate. 

So if I am getting a music CD, I get a CD in the original box or jewel case (with the exception that) not broken, the CD has the performance that I am promised, and the CD is undamaged. I do not have an unusual delay, and the cost is as I expected (including delivery).  If I get the wrong CD, I am able to get a refund (2) or the right one (4) without an undue delay. 

(1) I am ripped off. The CD is unplayable due to damage. The cover does not match the item (for example, I ordered a set of Mozart symphonies conducted by George Szell and got a recording of symphonies conducted by Georg Solti instead) or is severely damaged. Or I find out after the fact that the item is bootlegged or stolen.
(2) I got it, but with an unusual delay. Maybe its owner decided to hold off on shipping it until he ripped it and put it on electronic storage and got too many to deal too fast. Or I received the CD and found hidden charges such as shipping that the seller did not mention or misrepresented. Sales or use taxes are not misrepresentations; that is the taxing authority. Tennessee has brutal sales taxes (9.5%), so blame the state and its politicians if you dislike that if you live in Tennessee. Or -- the performance is awful and the audio qualities are compromised. 
(3) I got what I expected. I can accept that the cover art is faded (the sun will do that over 20 years) but the music plays adequately. 
(4) It might as well be new if it is used.
(5) Oh, did I get service! The seller corresponded with me and asked me whether I liked what I got and asked me if he could sell me more. 

OK -- a cab drive?

(0) I am subjected to a literal crime -- assaulted or subjected to larceny. The cabbie takes off before I can get my luggage or is drunk,
(1) I am subjected to a rip-off. The cabbie has padded the fare or has taken me out of the way to inflate the fare.  This could indicate incompetence, such as if the cabbie misunderstands my instructions and takes me from O'Hare Airport to Lagrange, Indiana


 instead of Lagrange, Illinois (a Chicago suburb)

 

and I have to pay tolls on the Indiana Toll Road and the Tri-State tollway to get to Lagrange, Illinois. Maybe I fell asleep and don't wake up until I am in Lagrange, Indiana, which is about ten miles south of Exit 121 of the Indiana Toll Road. (If there is deceit, then it is in the category (0), and I might want to report the Chicago cabbie to the Lagrange [Indiana] police). 

In case you are curious, Lagrange, Indiana is a rural town that quit growing around 1880, and it in no way resembles a Chicago suburb.

(2) The cab ride was unpleasant because the cabbie insisted that I listen to music that I dislike or tried to force his political, cultural, or religious beliefs upon me. Or perhaps because of a travel incident (flat tire, accident) not his fault. The cabbie smoked or his breath reeked of curry -- or he smelled as one would expect on Friday if he takes a shower or bath every Saturday and no other day. Or perhaps he laughed at my University of Michigan logo. Or the cab reeked of alcoholic vomit from a previous fare. Or made a pass at me.
(3) I got an efficient, honest ride as one would normally expect.
(4) the cabbie told me what route I was going to take and took it, and dropped me off at the absolute best spot for access to my destination.  
(5) the cabbie did something unusually good, like pointing out a landmark of interest along the way or telling me about an upcoming event in his city.