Difference between revisions of "Jsilver Reputation ideas"

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 3: Line 3:
 
I will post a collection of reputation ideas (among other ideas) that have been scattered in my mind and notes since January 2015 and even much prior, based on my experience (as a worker, team manager, client) particularly in oDesk since 2012. I've shared them countless times here on Slack (publicly and privately), Meteor, and Wikis.
 
I will post a collection of reputation ideas (among other ideas) that have been scattered in my mind and notes since January 2015 and even much prior, based on my experience (as a worker, team manager, client) particularly in oDesk since 2012. I've shared them countless times here on Slack (publicly and privately), Meteor, and Wikis.
  
 +
Acronyms used:
 +
RS= Reputation system
  
  
 
==End-of-task Itemized Rating (Applicable to worker and client)==
 
==End-of-task Itemized Rating (Applicable to worker and client)==
* A client would rate a worker based on skills used in a particular task and based on other criteria (domains quality of work; communication/responsiveness; cooperation and work ethics/professionalism, deadline/turnaround; efficiency (like cost and time); and accuracy/consistency). This is essential so that future clients would not bet blind on such worker. On the other hand, a worker could rate a client based on that 6-domain criteria plus another criteria: knowledge of task. (criteria mentioned here may not be accurate nor final)
+
* A client would rate a worker based on skills used in a particular task and based on other criteria (domains quality of work; communication/responsiveness; cooperation and work ethics/professionalism, deadline/turnaround; efficiency (like cost and time); and accuracy/consistency). This RS is not perfect but would reflect a rating for each skill used in a task or project, rather than the typical "limited-view" 5-star rating. This is essential so that future clients would not bet blind on such a worker; If done in conjunction with interviewing the worker and checking the worker's job history, the client would have a very good idea of the worker's skills and experiences.
 +
 
 +
On the other hand, a worker could rate a client based on that 6-domain criteria above plus another criteria: knowledge of task. (criteria mentioned here may not be accurate nor final)
  
 
==Implicit signals (Applicable to worker and client)==
 
==Implicit signals (Applicable to worker and client)==
 
* Rating is done during job application evaluation phase. This is a great way of providing reputation coverage throughout the worker (and client) population. I believe this could be implemented much easier than other reputation systems. See [http://crowdresearch.stanford.edu/w/index.php?title=Summer_Milestone_9_Reputation_Systems_research_and_exploration#On_Assigning_Implicit_Reputation_Scores_in_an_Online_Labor_Marketplace_.5B18.5D]
 
* Rating is done during job application evaluation phase. This is a great way of providing reputation coverage throughout the worker (and client) population. I believe this could be implemented much easier than other reputation systems. See [http://crowdresearch.stanford.edu/w/index.php?title=Summer_Milestone_9_Reputation_Systems_research_and_exploration#On_Assigning_Implicit_Reputation_Scores_in_an_Online_Labor_Marketplace_.5B18.5D]

Revision as of 21:56, 3 August 2015

Reputation Ideas by Jsilver

I will post a collection of reputation ideas (among other ideas) that have been scattered in my mind and notes since January 2015 and even much prior, based on my experience (as a worker, team manager, client) particularly in oDesk since 2012. I've shared them countless times here on Slack (publicly and privately), Meteor, and Wikis.

Acronyms used: RS= Reputation system


End-of-task Itemized Rating (Applicable to worker and client)

  • A client would rate a worker based on skills used in a particular task and based on other criteria (domains quality of work; communication/responsiveness; cooperation and work ethics/professionalism, deadline/turnaround; efficiency (like cost and time); and accuracy/consistency). This RS is not perfect but would reflect a rating for each skill used in a task or project, rather than the typical "limited-view" 5-star rating. This is essential so that future clients would not bet blind on such a worker; If done in conjunction with interviewing the worker and checking the worker's job history, the client would have a very good idea of the worker's skills and experiences.

On the other hand, a worker could rate a client based on that 6-domain criteria above plus another criteria: knowledge of task. (criteria mentioned here may not be accurate nor final)

Implicit signals (Applicable to worker and client)

  • Rating is done during job application evaluation phase. This is a great way of providing reputation coverage throughout the worker (and client) population. I believe this could be implemented much easier than other reputation systems. See [1]