Comment by euroderf 10 days ago
> After we found out that our manager was being evaluated on this score, we all started giving 10s no matter what.
Same with Uber and other "sharing" apps: If you can't give the highest score, it's a sort of death sentence, so don't.
Hot take: I dont care if others think 5.0 is acceptable while 4.8 is disastrous. I’ll rate 1-5 on a scale normalized at 3.0 and meaning ”meets expectations”. Luckily scores in Europe seem to be much less lopsided than in the US so giving 3’s and 4’s probably doesn’t leave someone without food on the table.
Really they should just stop having number scores and have ok/not ok and anyone with a significant number of not ok shouldn’t get any more business. Beyond that they already have a metric: driver tips.
Doesn't this mean that rating scores end up measuring the distribution of what customers believe "decent service" corresponds to, rather than the performance of the driver? And in this case, whether a driver ends up with a score above or below their peers will just reflect which customers they were fortunate or unfortunate enough to have.
> And in this case, whether a driver ends up with a score above or below their peers will just reflect which customers they were fortunate or unfortunate enough to have.
Yes. But as a customer I also have no idea what these scores are for. I'm assuming that if someone gets a terrible rating their management will speak to them. But whether they have 2.5 or 4.99 won't matter. I mean how can it matter, when everyone grades them according to their own scale? Someone might have 1 as being pass and 2 being good and 3 being outstanding and 4 or 5 being basically impossible to achieve. Someone else might have 4 being disaster and 5 being pass. You can't know. So it's always about luck. I'm at least doing my best to use the only sensible grading which is "3 meets expectations". If someone else uses 5 as pass and 4 as fail it's really a problem that Bolt and Uber created for themselves.
They do lots of journeys. They'll be graded by people with every idea about what a 3 or a 4 means. The average they eventually end up at is some combination of the average of people's idea of how a 1-5 scale works, combined with their actual service level. Which is why it's a terrible choice of rating.
No it isn't. Users should rate in good faith, but honestly and correctly. The score will retain more value if they do. There is a lot that is commonly wrong with Uber drivers:
1. If they have a phone GPS, odds are 80% that it's mounted in a hazardous way or not at all.
2. They play hideous music and should just be silent instead.
3. They take non-urgent and prolonged calls while driving.
4. On rare occasions, some drive dangerously.
All of these are good reasons to not give the highest score.
The issue is that the score is tied to someone's wellbeing and ability to earn an income in an unglamorous, insecure gig. Nothing besides actively putting me in harm's way would convince me to threaten the tenuous economic status of someone else.
e.g. Often times if a man is on an extended call, it's his wife or child, and he apologizes to me. As if calling your family is ever something to apologize for. I'm constantly appalled at how asocial social norms have become.
Great, so in addition to being guilted into tipping for ordinary, expected service so not to threaten the possible "tenuous" economic circumstances of servers, now I get guilted if I have an expectation of a professional environment when I contract a personal-taxi from a large personal-taxi dispatcher. I'm not a social service dispensary, I'm a customer. I'm paying for a service, and I'm allowed to have certain expectations for the service.
I don't think anyone is saying you can't not tip or you can't have expectations.
My problem with it is when people do these things but then maintain they're not directly, and tangibly, economically harming a lower wage person. You are, there's no way around it. It's perfectly fine to be okay with that outcome. IMO, it's not fine to pretend that outcome doesn't exist.
I think you’re ignoring an extremely real economic reality here. If this is what you want, maybe just get a chauffeur instead.
You should remember drivers can rate you right back, and for both drivers and passengers alike, being rated below 4.90 is like being rated into negative stars, the way the current system works.
What does "honestly and correctly" mean?
Users certainly aren't trained by Uber on what the ratings are intended to communicate. There is no agreed on scale.
"No issues whatsoever; smooth, helpful and professional" could be my "3" (where 3 means "as expected" and "5" is as exceptional as "1") but your "5" (where <5 indicates shortcomings).
When these five-star rating systems first came along, no rubric was provided: it seemed reasonable to me that the five stars ought to cover the range of possible experiences, from very bad to very good, and that the distribution would be Gaussian. I therefore rated everyone three stars, unless I had some reason to do otherwise.
After learning how these numbers were actually being used, the whole lopsided mess bothered me so much that I have refused to rate anyone or anything ever since; nor do I pay any attention to the rating numbers, which are clearly insane.