Who is Panda’ing to Whom?
If you’ve been following the news over the past couple
of weeks, you can’t have missed the little issue Food Panda has got itself in
to.
In a bid to streamline its operations and delivery
effectiveness, the food delivery company restructured its payment strategy for
its independent contractors, aiming to increase their overall earnings, but to
also reduce lost time from waiting around. Effectively, they went from
time-based plus per-delivery to a higher per delivery fee. This means that
delivery teams no longer get paid for standing around doing nothing; the
incentive is greater for them to go out and deliver.
A good business move, really.
But it ruffled some feathers, including a junior
minister who stuck his nose in to the legal workings and operations of a
privately held business. I remember not long ago when Trump did the same. Not well received.
It’s not uncommon for businesses to make fundamental
changes like this however. Streamlining operation costs is a norm in every
industry. Ensuring maximum productivity from your team also.
But the reality is, people hate change. Especially if
it means they have to work more (even if that’s for more money).
What’s been interesting about this scenario is not the
change itself, but the reaction to it. Beyond political interference, dissatisfaction from fractionally-employed short-term
team members, to the general public; the biggest reaction has been online –
with the approval rating of the company app.
Within days, the star rating for the Food Panda app
went from 4.4 to 1.3. Now that’s a huge drop. Phenomenal really. And they’re
saying its dissatisfied customers.
I am not so convinced. With several hundred thousand
ratings, a significant numerical shift like this has to be a coordinated effort
by brand sabouteours – designed to radically shift the perception of the
business. This is greater than a few existing customers being unhappy at
service or changes; this is a coordinated effort to destabilize.
Can it be proved? Well, not so easily. But on the
balance of probabilities, and on understanding how these things work, it
certainly seems extremely likely.
My interest is not in looking at who is responsible
for this attack, or the real reason/s why it is happening, but rather at how
easily a normal functioning business can be hit by keyboard warriors to
destabilize their reputation, when in fact, the business really hasn’t done
anything counter to legal operational strategies.
Social media platforms and rating systems give
consumers an advantage, but they are a double-edged sword – it doesn’t take
much to undermine an established business and cause some visible setbacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment