Difference between revisions of "Milestone 4 researchinprogress Results: Managers for both workers and requesters"

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "'''THEME 1 - Results:''' '''Problem Statement (problem being addressed):''' How might workers+requesters work together to produce higher-quality results? ---- Efforts are m...")
 
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
'''Problem Statement (problem being addressed):'''
 
'''Problem Statement (problem being addressed):'''
 
How might workers+requesters work together to produce higher-quality results?
 
 
----
 
----
 +
 +
'''How might workers+requesters work together to produce higher-quality results?'''
  
 
Efforts are made to increase the result quality. However, the given examples appear to be overlooking certain aspects. For example, if the work is reviewable by others, then how do we ensure that new workers do not affect the uniqueness of others’ work? For example, certain jobs require us to give reviews about things/ write something in our own words. If this is readable by all, there is a possibility that another worker may take out points from this to complete his part of this task. Thus, a plagiarism check might be needed for certains tasks. Also, both the given tasks produce higher quality result only by checking the work done by workers. There might be cases where poor quality work is due to some fault of the requester. For example, the question may not be comprehensible properly by most people. Then, it might not be fair to put a worker’s work as inefficient. Thus, a check on requesters tasks also needs to be kept.
 
Efforts are made to increase the result quality. However, the given examples appear to be overlooking certain aspects. For example, if the work is reviewable by others, then how do we ensure that new workers do not affect the uniqueness of others’ work? For example, certain jobs require us to give reviews about things/ write something in our own words. If this is readable by all, there is a possibility that another worker may take out points from this to complete his part of this task. Thus, a plagiarism check might be needed for certains tasks. Also, both the given tasks produce higher quality result only by checking the work done by workers. There might be cases where poor quality work is due to some fault of the requester. For example, the question may not be comprehensible properly by most people. Then, it might not be fair to put a worker’s work as inefficient. Thus, a check on requesters tasks also needs to be kept.

Revision as of 05:42, 25 March 2015

THEME 1 - Results:

Problem Statement (problem being addressed):


How might workers+requesters work together to produce higher-quality results?

Efforts are made to increase the result quality. However, the given examples appear to be overlooking certain aspects. For example, if the work is reviewable by others, then how do we ensure that new workers do not affect the uniqueness of others’ work? For example, certain jobs require us to give reviews about things/ write something in our own words. If this is readable by all, there is a possibility that another worker may take out points from this to complete his part of this task. Thus, a plagiarism check might be needed for certains tasks. Also, both the given tasks produce higher quality result only by checking the work done by workers. There might be cases where poor quality work is due to some fault of the requester. For example, the question may not be comprehensible properly by most people. Then, it might not be fair to put a worker’s work as inefficient. Thus, a check on requesters tasks also needs to be kept.

Credits for the idea (inspiration):

We compared the two given examples and observed the similarities (Peer Review System and Quality Control Managers). We tried to identify the incompleteness in the similarities of both the given examples and made efforts to complete the ‘gap’ which appears to exist in both of them. This lead to a new idea made up of some fixtures in the given idea. The new idea is basically an extension for the idea of Quality-Control-Managers.

Explanation of our idea:

The main idea is to make a different set of employees apart from requesters and workers who would review the task. This would lead to a better quality result of the task being delivered by the workers and accepted by the requesters. The idea involves two parties of managers would be required one each for workers and requesters. The party of managers for the workers would handle all the issues faced by the workers and would forward the queries to the requesters. For example, say a worker has an issue in understanding the task or finds that a certain change in the structure of task can result in better outcomes, then they can share this issue with their managers and they would try to solve it. The other party would be managers of requesters who would handle all the issues of the requesters. The main aim of this party would be to check the work for plagiarism and review the work to filter out the incorrect submissions. This is an efficient idea because it helps the workers and requester both on an interactive level to get rid of their problems and deliver a better outcome.