Bitcoin Forum

The way we work is changing

We live in a world today where worker’s want greater autonomy, greater choice and the ability to follow their passions whilst building up a career’s worth of variety and experiences from multiple employers.

The average duration of any single employment has drastically decreased in what is becoming an onward going trend.  Even in companies where many dream of working, like Facebook and Google, where massages, ice latte mochaccinos, laundry service and other excessive comforts are the norm, we are seeing the average employee staying just two years. 

It is industry and career stage agnostic

Reid Hoffman, the founder of LinkedIn, talks in his book ‘The Alliance’, of structuring employment agreements not just based on roles and titles but rather clearly defined missions.  These missions come with clear end points where the team member may take on a new assignment, perhaps within the company, perhaps not.

Nor is it just in the echelons of Silicon Valley or corporate giants that we see if this trend taking hold but rather at all levels of the industrial spectrum, both in function and hierarchy.   Whether it is driving a taxi, designing a logo, writing an article, creating a legal contract, integrating a batch of code or any other uniquely defined task, we are now seeing a massive expansion of piecemeal work and delivery.

Our systems, frameworks and processes must catch up

The gig economy, as we have now come to know this fractional way of working, is here to stay and brings with it both many wonderful opportunities as well as certain challenges.   However, it creates a need for lawmakers and regulators to provide the framework in which no person can be taken advantage of, or have their human rights impugned upon. 

It also creates the need for companies to think about how they attract and retain the best talent, whilst simultaneously increasing the importance of how “Gig’ers” build out and manage their career, profile and reputation. Whilst, at the same time providing themselves with a layer of financial security.

Enter Blockchain

The concept of blockchain has the potential to dramatically accelerate the revolution ongoing in the current employment model, leapfrogging current technologies and bringing with it unprecedented levels of transparency and security.

The gains to be had by applying Blockchain to the recruitment sector and the new world of the Gig Economy are plentiful.  The implications of blockchain and Ethereum based applications for the HR and recruitment industry are enormous.

Gig Economy 3.0

First, let us imagine a world, where CVs are uneditable histories of transactions and work. Delivered with clear reviews and ratings of both client and gig’er.   Next, imagine references are no longer needed because all the evidence is online and beyond the reach of an immoral recruiter or career embellisher.

Importantly, as the payer you can know exactly what you are getting and the inefficiencies and costs of reference taking are gone
Likewise from the Gig’er’s perspective, why should a world where you are paid the moment you are finished with a task not exist?  Why, when there is no reason for delay, should the Gig’er have to wait simply for the benefit of the other business’ cashflow? Or, as is all too un-common, not be paid at all. 

It is of course understandable that it takes time to process payments and approvals etc however that is yesterday’s world.  Today we stand on the footsteps of a new aged empowered by smart contracts and automation that mean we need not imagine any of these things any longer.
We know we can build a better operating system for the gig economy.  The world deserves it and want it. 

If you would like to join us in our journey and help build a community that will launch a project focused on delivering on the above then would love to here your feedback or comments.  Thanks!!

This could be a really interesting application across many lines of work. One thing that really springs to mind is the construction industry. The use of smart contracts could really overcome the need for (often misplaced) trust. I can be sure the person coming to do the work won't wreck my house and he can be sure to get paid as soon as the work is complete. In my line of Tech work this could really help too.

What would happen if unfair or inaccurate reviews were left? Since the transaction can’t be reversed a person could be subject to abuse and unfair reviews which would affect their image. How’d you stop something like this from happening?

Such problems can be handled with a proper incentive plan. If vendor and supplier both give their view on a scale of 1-5 and then reviewers give their feedback we can get an understanding of how the reviewers rate and use data to develop a quality score of reviewers. This is a very simplistic solution to a complex question, but I am quite sure Daniel and his team will be working something much more sophisticated.

In the case of any disputes, there would be a cloud of mediators who could judge the quality of the work and make the final call.  In these cases to avoid negative sentiments, then the reviews could be written by the impartial 3rd party on their decision.  

Alternatively taking an entirely transparent view, one might say that all reviews still need to be shared - good or bad - however if the reviewer themselves- who is also reviewed by the freelancer - has a consistently poor set of reviews, then their feedback score would be downweighted etc.

Thoughts?

Absolutely this.  Too many projects have less than successful outcomes as a consequence of factors outside the project and people involved.  Your performance on a project can be measured well because of success of project while you did relatively little, or rated poorly because of personality clashes while work performed was good and productive.  If in house corporate HR controlled ratings have these sorts of problems, I don't see how and external distributed one will do better.  Many people rely on glossing over or ignoring bad projects, or bigging up small roles to advance themselves, having an un-editable history of projects, outcomes and performance would be detrimental. 

I see this as someone jumping on the blockchain bandwagon were there is no purpose for the blockchain.  Now cross-project, inter-company payments to allow you to join different teams would be a good idea.

The rating and feedback system needs to be specific to both individual tasks and overall project success. It's a good point and highlights how closely the task needs to be met with success criteria. In any case, a transparent system where both voices are clear that also has an open mediation platform has the potential to be fairer for both sides.