Milestone 4 Hawkeye

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search

Inspiration from Milestone 3


All the ideas emphasize on requesters and workers to have an interaction beyond just the general work environment. They can meet up in a place convenient for both of them, and discuss casual things as well. This also gives each other an opportunity to check the other ones perspective and develop a trust. Some ideas illustrated a need for a profile recognition policy and another idea proposed to reward theme to provide motivation. Each ones perspective to build a trust varies. Some of them think it is better to give money whereas others think interaction builds trusts.


All the ideas presented under the theme of "Reputation" have the underlying approach of ranking the workers according to their skill and performance. The role of moderator is also common among the ideas, as it is assumed that the moderator will go over the job descriptions and judge how well the task was accomplished. However there are certain differences in the approach for instance, what the ranking means to the workers and what do they gain out of it. Some approaches have said that higher ranked workers are more likely to get jobs fitting their descriptions, in another case, they get the privilege of becoming moderators.


Most of the ideas talk about the concept of payment in intervals. It can help build trust to the worker and also the requestor can get a fair idea about the progress. Also giving an initial advance payment or incentive in the beginning of the work which will make the workers more interested. The dissimilarities in the ideas include way the intervals should be decided to pay differed for each idea. Some of them spoke about the amount of time taken. Or the time interval of the the work is being done.

Flare and Focus

Problem Statement

There are many conflicts that can possibly occur between the worker and requesters. Having a moderator will solve the issue. But the moderators itself might not be good enough to resolve the problem. So we have come up with an idea that can improvise the way to choose the moderators and make sure that the work done by them is satisfactory.

Ideas that inspired

  • Resolution: Dispute resolution process
  • Reputation: Ranking top workers and making them available

Plausible Solution

The conflicts can be minimized between the worker and requester by having a moderator who is good enough to understand the problem and solve the issue. If the moderator is a person who doesn't have expertise in the particular field, it will only lead to more problems. So we are able to choose the moderators according to their expertise for a particular issue, that will improve the performance of the moderator and reduce the effect of the conflicts. The moderator is just another worker with very good profile. So the platform promotes the worker to become a moderator if the work done is appreciated. The moderators can be ranked by the platform with respect to various parameters listed below:

  1. Promote the top worker as a moderator based on the no of hits and quality of work
  2. The moderator assigned to a particular conflict should be an expertise in that field, else it will be of not much of help having a moderator.
  3. Quality of work can be rated by the requester when satisfied with the work done.
  4. No of conflicts resolved by each worker or moderator will improve the position in ladder of being a moderator.
  5. Profile of each worker has to be assessed in order to increase the credibility.
  6. No of hits the moderator gets
  7. A moderator can also be demoted if (s)he doesn't keep up to the standards that are expected to be maintained. Reasons can be such that the worker and requester are not satisfied with the result. Or the number of HITs obtained by the moderator are less than a given specified value.