Client: Class Assignment | Course CGT 572| Project 2 
Advisor: Dr. Paul Parsons
Duration: 2 weeks (From design prompt introduction to Presentation)
Project Domain: System Design, User Experience, User interface design 
Brief:
Lyft is one of the fastest growing companies in the new “sharing economy.” Consider that one of the world’s largest transportation companies owns no fleet of vehicles, and employs only 1600 people, despite the fact they facilitate over one million rides per day in up to 300 US cities. One of the most important mechanisms that enables the sharing economy is qualified and accurate ratings from users, which allow operators to divert resources appropriately and reward contractors that provide high levels of customer service. The current rating system tacitly encourages users to rank their driver using only very good or very bad rankings, due to the known limitations of a five-star scale.

As given in design situation, our goal is to create a replacement for the current five-star rating system that Lyft uses to track and reward drivers in their system. We considered the ways various rating systems constrained the input of users, the ease of use (e.g., speed of input in a busy urban environment), and the ways in which this information could be used maliciously against drivers. 
Team Members: Yexin Yang, Michael Sanz
My responsibilities: Secondary and Primary Research| Conceptualization | Decision making and structuring | Presentation design
A detailed report can be accessed here.

Overall Design Process: 
The process started with a first-hand experience of the LYFT app and understanding the whole system of current rating system in LYFT. Extending the secondary research, we did a study about rating systems in Uber, Ola and other services related to card-rides. Studies regarding rating systems in general was done to understand the problems and necessities of 5-star rating system, thumbs up/down, emoji-raters on various websites and research papers. Continuing to understand secondary research, we have done primary research through interviews and survey about experiences with rating systems during car-rides. The data collected was analysed to form affinity maps, problem frame and primary persona for our design. A secondary persona was created from our background study to support the stakeholder map (shown below) and create a solution for the system. After ideation, we narrowed to one solution with three-stages of usability testing with 5 users and constant iterations of our design.
Problem Statement:

Ubiquitous nature of the rating is very restrictive not allowing the user to express problem in the ride and expecting to involve in lot of decision making without appropriate knowledge, for system to get better and affecting driver’s job.
Final solution
Among the four solutions we had, this was the realistic and immediately implementable solution into the LYFT system to make the rating better. Major features of the solution are re-designing the main page of the app for bringing the profile of the driver more upfront for the rider. Second major feature to eliminate the present 5-star rating system and introduce sliders to rate a particular component of the ride the user wanted to rate. Each solution and its effects for each stakeholder are explained below. 

CONCLUSION: How is the solution we proposed solving the problem frame stated above? 
Referring back to the problem statement, with our design of emphasis on driver profile and sliders for each criteria separately makes the user involve in decision making with appropriate knowledge. Rider can decide whether to take the ride or not from the detail profile and after the ride can choose to rate only the problem if faced any. We provide flexibility is rating with the slider or the comments section and leave the whole analysis part to the system and not the user to decide everything after the ride. This would help the system to get rich data points for teaching the drivers where they lack and provide facilities that the riders are looking for.

Rate your LYFT
19
420
5
Published:

Rate your LYFT

19
420
5
Published:

Tools