(featured image source unknown)
A change has occurred between users and organisations: the rating system. Essentially, technology is bridging a communication gap between the two misunderstood strangers with a rating (score).
Whether it’s a like, a star, or a score, ratings are making strangers accountable for their actions, and therefore allowing economic exchanges to be conducted with less stress (apparently). I rate you – you rate me, everyone’s happy. This is the advent of the “sharing economy”. Whether you like it or not, strangers could be rating you out-of-10 on Peeple to help others decide whether to accept your friend request.
In the case of Uber, a Driver’s credibility is reliant on the trust formed between the Rider and the Driver. For the Rider, the rating is an assurance that their experience will be ideal. But for the Driver, the rating could be the decider of their employment. An Uber driver score can not fall below 4.7 or their employment is terminated. Feedback is often anonymous, and even if it’s not, the user rating the review is never assessed on their own credibility. When industries become more reliant on user feedback to assess their own employees and decisions, there is a genuine fear that the balance of who’s right and wrong is not equal.
Uber’s review system isn’t perfect. But the “sharing economy” is changing how industries deal with the relationship between Uber driver and passenger, between Employee and the employer, and between two strangers. I’ll be exploring this relationship through a 4-part podcast, examining topics like how we form and interpret ratings (or data), and how the design of a rating system affects a review.
Leave a comment below about what should you be able to review that you can’t? How might that affect the service/product?