Milestone 4 sanjosespartans

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search

Template for your submission for Milestone 4. Do not edit this directly - instead, make a new page at Milestone 4 YourTeamName or whatever your team name is, and copy this template over. You can view the source of this page by clicking the Edit button at the top-right of this page, or by clicking here.

Design Axes for 3 Themes

For each of the three themes you've chosen, talk with your team about:

  • What do these ideas tend to have in common?
  • How do these ideas tend to differ?

Use your insights from this conversation to generate design axes like we discussed in last week's meeting (see slide notes if you'd like). Write up a short paragraph (2-4 sentences) for each theme summarizing the similarities, differences, and axes inspired.

Task Clarity

Similarities:

1. Focus on improving the overall UI Design, either by designing new UI Templates that are easy to understand or getting Worker Feedback, and then designing the UI so that the initial learning curve to get accustomed to the system is not steep.

2. A Voting system to be incorporated, either for finalizing the UI Design or for approval of tasks that need to be kept on the system. Before publishing the task on the system, Requesters get a feedback from Workers. If the Feedback is positive, only then will the task be published on the platform.

3. Main point stressed is to get the maximum participation from the the Worker Community so that the Tasks are understandable and they don’t face problems getting used to the system or task. As discussed in previous meetings, each and every idea needs to be taken into account and then capitalized upon and then we should move ahead,same strategy is followed here. There is never a perfect idea,its usually a bunch of good ideas that lead to a perfect idea.

Differences :

1. New task goes to workers before it goes live :

Mainly designed for people from 3rd world countries to aim at community building and bonding. As the per capita income of the countries is generally less, so stress is given to develop the whole community.

Families participate in quality control of type of requests that exist in the platform.And those families that perform consistently are given social recognition. A downside maybe that monopoly might be established in the market.


2. Voting on HIT Design :

Once HIT has enough down votes then it needs to be redesigned,so it needs some level of expertise on the Worker’s end,so that they are able to give some valid and valuable suggestions which might be fruitful in the development process.

A important factor to be kept in mind is that the worker community needs to be mature and intelligent to give helpful suggestions else having a community with different ideas would decrease the development process rate of the Task.

3. Worker Feedback on Tasks:

Focus is on the design aspect of the task.

Feedback is received either by piloting tasks that ask for suggestions from the workers or directly asking the Workers for the same. It follows a type of approach where we need to get the responses of the Workers explicitly for getting to know what and how the tasks are being interpreted by them.

4. Task Templates :

Gives the concept to get a new Template for the Task after discussion,to decrease the learning curve time spent and having a UI as per familiarisation level of the Workers doing the task.

5. Stronger Categorization of the Work :

Make a mixture of the Workers skills and the skills required for doing the task and map them accordingly. An algorithmic approach is needed to get a Skills to Work Mapping and which should save significant time from the Worker end in finding Tasks suitable to his skills and interests.

6. Artificial Turker to understand Task :

Main aim is to bring AI and Machine Learning concepts in this field along with the interaction process of Workers and Requesters.

Empathy

Similarities:

1. All ideas aim to build a healthy worker-requester relationship.

2. Motivating the workers (by furnishing monetary and nonmonetary incentives) to encourage the workers to complete the tasks on effectively and on a timely manner. Since the incentives would be performance based it will encourage workers to keep up the good work.

3. Making the workers and requesters feel more connected by arranging meets on web or in person or by making more personalized profiles. If the workers and requesters are able to connect better it will help in developing mutual trust and understanding.

Differences:

1. Even though all the ideas essentially aim to promote understanding and developing a positive attitude amongst the workers and requesters the approach adopted by each idea to achieve so is significantly different from each other.

2. Meeting outside the system to build trust aims to improve worker-requester relation by arranging informal gathering to promote interaction, improved communication and trust between the parties.

3. Make Workers act as Requesters and vice versa poses suggestions on increasing the understanding between the workers and requesters by allowing them to walk into each other shoes. This would help each party realise the expectation of the other and also the difficulties and urgencies one might face during task completion.

4. Requesters can send gifts to workers aims to develop an efficient reward system by sending gifts, coupons, party invitations, etc. to promote healthy environment where workers would be motivated to keep up their timely deliverance of quality work.

5. A certain amount of Requester costs are reserved to pay bonuses to each worker proposes a bonus system where extra money is set aside to reward good performance of the workers. It will help to motivate the workers to boost their performance by providing an avenue of earning extra cash.

6. Humanizing worker profiles promotes connection between the two parties via more personalised profiles. User Profiles having a display picture, some interaction platform gives a human touch to the system and it allows the system to be more friendly. It can be the case that the pic is not always of the person concerned but still having something to look upon and then communicate with that person helps in making one think they are not interacting with machines.

Transparency

What do these ideas tend to have in common?

From the given ideas for Transparency :

1) Standardize task pricing

2) Required minimum wage? if you stay above the 15th percentile of “good work throughput”

3) Checkpoints where you get reviewed and paid after every N tasks

4) Offer increased compensation to the first few people who take the task

1. Three of these ideas, with number 3 being the outlier, are dark horse ideas. This perhaps implies that implementing any of these systems, while potentially very effective, is unlikely.

2. Ideas 1 and 2 rely heavily on the qualifications of the Worker. For example, idea 2 would have Workers complete a certain amount of work within a given hour. This work cannot be rejected, provided the Worker has the proper qualifications to perform the work in the first place. Idea 1 suggests that different Workers should be grouped by performance range, or similar tasks should have a common price range to educate Workers and at the same time prevent Requesters from taking advantage of Workers.

How do these ideas tend to differ?

1. All of these ideas differ immensely. Idea 1 involves a way to get workers and requesters to report information on supply and demand, thus allowing fairer pricing. Idea 2 has a similar notion, but it is based entirely on the amount of work done in a period of time.

2. While ideas 1 and 2 are focused on qualifications already had by the worker, idea 3 is heavily focused on getting the worker qualified for more work.

3. Idea 2 is very unlike the other suggestions in that it is most unlike the current crowdsourcing system. For example, while idea 1 does not exist explicitly, it is possible that some requesters would ask workers what a fair price would be before posting tasks. Similarly, if a requester is in a hurry to get work done, they might pay more (especially at first).

4. Ideas 1 and 4 essentially oppose each other. Idea 1 would have there be no benefit to workers for competing with each other--since the price would be an amalgamation of many responses, there would be no direct competition. In Idea 4, workers might specifically look for tasks in this “pledge” stage, thus increasing competition and eventually making it harder for other tasks to get noticed. These unnoticed tasks would have to go into the “pledge” stage, and so on. Interestingly, idea 1 does suggest having a “floor and ceiling,” a minimum and maximum.

5. Idea 2 mentions worker satisfaction and how it might affect pricing; the other ideas did not. This is an important issue because it affects the implementation of all the other ideas. For example, in idea 1, say the tasks being worked on involve lots of reading. Those who like reading may say the price is fair, while those who do not may ask for more money for the same task.

SanJoseSpartans - Milestone 4 - Transparency Axis.png


List of Ideas and the Theme they belong to

Provide them in whatever format you want - diagrams, sketches, table, or a combination.

Milestone 4 sanjosespartans Task Clarity: Arificial Turkers

Milestone 4 sanjosespartans Empathy: Requester and Workers Attitude

Milestone 4 sanjosespartans Transparency: Payments clear and Transparent

For each of the 3 ideas, describe (using diagrams, sketches, storyboards, text, or some combination) the ideas in further detail.

Please create a separate wiki page for each of your ideas, so we can link to them individually. The title of the wiki page should be Milestone 4 followed by your team name and a description of the idea itself (ex: Milestone 4 YourTeamName Reputation: Leveling System for Workers Leading to Better Wages). Once done, post a link to each of your THEME-related ideas to http://crowdresearch.meteor.com/ following the instructions at Milestone 4#Submitting