Uber and the new science of how employers control your behavior at work

Uber and the new science of how employers control your behavior at workUber and the new science of how employers control your behavior at workUpdate As of April 5, this story has been updated with criticism about Ubers use of behavioral science.Companies are tracking and changing workers behavior in increasingly subtle ways. With big data and algorithms, workplaces are finding new ways to judge and change behavior, and employees may not even see it happening.On Sunday, The New York Times revealed how Uber employs hundreds of data andsocial scientists to dream up new ways to keep driversworking longer hours for Uber.Its a case study of what happens when social science enters the workplace. For the ride-hailing giant, treating Uber drivers like they were players in a never-ending video game was lucrative for the company, but perhaps less so for drivers who worked longer hours. Here are some big takeaways.Algorithms are exploiting our love of goalsUber scientists designed noncash reward s for drivers that cost the company very little, but would have profound psychological effects on the drivers.For instance, Uberdrivers in 2016 were quittingbefore they reached 25 rides and becameeligible for a signing bonus. The data scientists found that once driversreached 25 rides, they were much less likely to quit.To keep new drivers from leaving, the app would encourage drivers with Youre almost halfway there, congratulations The message outlined a goal that drivers didnt ask for, but with Ubers steady prodding, it became a goal driverswould bedriven to meet.We really like money goalsA 1997 study on New York Citys cab drivers found that taxi driverswork one day at a time. They set a daily income target and willquit driving when they reach that goal. Thats a behavior that Uber scientists tapped into for the Uber app.Uber drivers who would try to log off would receive pleading messages like,Youre $10 away from making $330 in net earnings. Are you sure you want to go offline? Th e accompanying graphic would show an engine gauges needle that was almost, but not quite hitting a dollar sign. Drivers would read this, be reminded of their income target, and stay logged on just a bit longer.Daily income targeting is great for Uber. Its effect on drivers is mora complicated. Driving requires attention, and long hours lead to fatigue. The income targeting also encourages drivers to drive longer hours to meet a daily goal, even when its more efficient to only drive at busier hours. This is how a Florida Uber driver featured in the article could earn a dozenexcellent-service and great-conversation badges andstill make less than $20,000 in a year more driving, but fewer fares.The default is you can always be workingUbers app automatically queues up the next ride during a current ride in a practice known as forward dispatch. Its overrides drivers decisions with the companys.Drivers dont get to see where theirnext rideis going, so they cant estimate how profitable the n ext ride will be. After drivers complained that the feature made it impossible for them to even use the bathroom, opting out of forward dispatch becamepossible, but its still inconvenient for drivers to set up that option.Thats all part of Ubers bottom line. The optimal default we set is that we want you to do as much work as there is to do, Jonathan Hall said of Ubers algorithm for drivers.And yet, a March 2017 working paperfound something positive about Ubers work culture. The researchers found that Uber drivers, who are independent contractors that set their own hours, economically benefited from the hour-to-hour flexibility to adapt work schedules to unpredictable shocks to reservation wages. This flexibility issomething that lower-wage lower-skill workers typically have limited ability to get from traditional workplaces.Uber is not alone in experimenting on employeesUber is not the only ride-hailing company to do this. As long as there is data, companies will look to analyze it .Lyft tested out money incentives with new drivers in a focus group. What the company found telling new drivers how much they were losing by workingon a Tuesdaywas more effective at getting drivers to change than telling them how much they were winning by switching to Fridays.The consultants concludedthat were sore losers and we hate losing more than we like winning.Unlike Uber, Lyft chose not to go with this loss-aversion message to its drivers.Tracking contractors and employeesis moving beyond the realm of apps, and into our bodies.Swedish startup Epicenter gives employees the option to become cyborgs, implanting a microchip intheir fingers, soemployees can wave their handsto open doors and buy food.On the upside, youll never have to worry about leaving your badge at home again. On the downside, you can always be tracked. Your babo can now see when and where youre at work under the philosophy that it makes life easier.Is Uber a sinister outlier or just one more employer gamifying employment?Reception to the Times findings has not been all positive. Quartz reporter Alison Griswold criticized the Timesfor making the use of behavioral science more sinister than it was Alternatively, whatif there was no whiff of coercion because therewasno coercion? Uber signed up a bunch of people to drive on its platform and then it gave them tips on ways to earn more money. We might consider that a trick if Ubers advice didnt actually translate into higher earnings, or if Uber promised incentivesthat it never paid, but Scheiberhas no evidence of anything like that happening.What he does have is a lot of adjective-laden insinuations that Uber is doingsomethingdark and untoward.Tech ethnographer Alex Rosenblat, whose research gets cited in the Times article, says these sinister things dohappen, but that examples werent included in the article.A different reporter pointed out that employers gamifying employment in obscure ways has already been popularized by advertising and mark eting.