Slashdot Mirror
High Score, Low Pay: Why the Gig Economy Loves Gamification (theguardian.com)
Ostracus writes: Using ratings, competitions and bonuses to incentivise workers isn't new -- but as I found when I became a Lyft driver, the gig economy is taking it to another level. [...] The language of choice, freedom, and autonomy saturate discussions of ride hailing. "On-demand companies are pointing the way to a more promising future, where people have more freedom to choose when and where they work," Travis Kalanick, the founder and former CEO of Uber, wrote in October 2015. "Put simply" he continued, "the future of work is about independence and flexibility." In a certain sense, Kalanick is right. Unlike employees in a spatially fixed worksite (the factory, the office, the distribution centre), rideshare drivers are technically free to choose when they work, where they work and for how long. They are liberated from the constraining rhythms of conventional employment or shift work. But that apparent freedom poses a unique challenge to the platforms' need to provide reliable, "on demand" service to their riders -- and so a driver's freedom has to be aggressively, if subtly, managed. One of the main ways these companies have sought to do this is through the use of gamification.
Simply defined, gamification is the use of game elements -- point-scoring, levels, competition with others, measurable evidence of accomplishment, ratings and rules of play -- in non-game contexts. Games deliver an instantaneous, visceral experience of success and reward, and they are increasingly used in the workplace to promote emotional engagement with the work process, to increase workers' psychological investment in completing otherwise uninspiring tasks, and to influence, or "nudge," workers' behaviour. This is what my weekly feedback summary, my starred ratings and other gamified features of the Lyft app did. There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that gamifying business operations has real, quantifiable effects. Target, the US-based retail giant, reports that gamifying its in-store checkout process has resulted in lower customer wait times and shorter lines. During checkout, a cashier's screen flashes green if items are scanned at an "optimum rate." If the cashier goes too slowly, the screen flashes red. Scores are logged and cashiers are expected to maintain an 88% green rating. In online communities for Target employees, cashiers compare scores, share techniques, and bemoan the game's most challenging obstacles.
Simply defined, gamification is the use of game elements -- point-scoring, levels, competition with others, measurable evidence of accomplishment, ratings and rules of play -- in non-game contexts. Games deliver an instantaneous, visceral experience of success and reward, and they are increasingly used in the workplace to promote emotional engagement with the work process, to increase workers' psychological investment in completing otherwise uninspiring tasks, and to influence, or "nudge," workers' behaviour. This is what my weekly feedback summary, my starred ratings and other gamified features of the Lyft app did. There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that gamifying business operations has real, quantifiable effects. Target, the US-based retail giant, reports that gamifying its in-store checkout process has resulted in lower customer wait times and shorter lines. During checkout, a cashier's screen flashes green if items are scanned at an "optimum rate." If the cashier goes too slowly, the screen flashes red. Scores are logged and cashiers are expected to maintain an 88% green rating. In online communities for Target employees, cashiers compare scores, share techniques, and bemoan the game's most challenging obstacles.
there's a book about this phenomenon, called freakonomics. it has interesting economics questions like, "why do drug dealers live with their mums?", despite something like a 25% death rate, and the answer turns out to be that they earn LESS money than if they went and worked for macdonalds, but they are attracted to the POSSIBILITY of becoming the "Drug Overlord". the big boss.
also just as interestingly, the moment they get a serious girlfriend, the researcher found that they quit immediately and... went to work for macdonald's. which leaves me really, really concerned as to why and how lyft and uber drivers are being psychologicall hoodwinked....
Which means burnout, which results in how to game the system, which results in cheating and theft and high turnover. Disposable workers == disposable companies == disposable investors == disposable customers, basically management by psychopath, so the system works until it blows up taking the company with it. The gig economy is just sly PR=B$ for piece labour, labour camp labour, you have a job today, you can leave the camp to work and when work is over you return.
The gig economy you choose when you work but wait a fucking minute you can not choose to live no where, eat nothing, be naked, cold and wet and be shot by law enforcers for being a homeless nut. There is no choice in the gig economy in capitalism, straight up worker exploitation, work for peanuts or starve and die and the people who take home the bulk of the profits, do none of the labour.
The gig economy to be functional would require a base pay from the government and the gig is extra, otherwise societal collapse, just the way it is.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The problem with games is that you can create perverse incentives. You couple the game success elements with actual work goals and assume that people motivated to win game points will also wind up achieving the work goals. But if the rewards are tied to the game success elements (points, stars, etc) people often find out how to earn these elements without achieving the work goals.