Okay, so I know this is a bug-bear of mine but I used to do performance appraisals for 125 staff a year and I’d have been fired if I gave them all 5/5. And conversely, my staff would rightfully be very happy with a 4/5.
When did Fiverr get to the point where 5 stars means anything from (less than?) satisfactory to outstanding? Has it always been this way? I saw a post yesterday from a seller congratulating themselves on getting a buyer to change their review to a 5. It made me uncomfortable. Don’t get me wrong; I’m no saint and I like 5 star reviews as much as the next seller - I can’t afford not to. But consider if we had more variety of reviews and even 3 stars meant a seller you could trust to get the job done?
Buyers could pick a seller based on what was fit for their purpose. They need a simple task done well but for less $, pick a 3 star seller. A more complicated task where they’re more willing to pay a little extra for a little extra, pick a 4 star seller.
I know this is never going to happen by the way. I’m not an idiot. The idea of educating millions of buyers and sellers to do this is challenging to say the least. Organisational Change Management on a global scale.
But just for a moment consider Fiverr changes the wording on the reviews to something like:
5 stars = Outstanding: Performance that exceeds expectations and is consistently outstanding.
4 stars = More than Satisfactory: Performance that consistently fulfills the job requirements and exceeds expectations.
3 stars = Satisfactory: Performance that consistently fulfills the job requirements.
2 stars = Improvement Needed: Performance that does not consistently meet the job requirements.
1 star = Unsatisfactory: Performance that consistently fails to meet the job requirements.
A bell curve to demonstrate. Average and high performers should get orders. Low performers too probably if the buyer’s happy to work with that:
The awesomely good sellers would sit between 4 and 5.
The very good sellers would sit around 4, give or take a few points.
Good sellers who can do the job specified well, but with no frills and whistles, would sit around 3.
5 by it’s nature could only be awarded by a buyer who ordered more than one gig.
The buyer gets what they pay for. Higher rated sellers could charge more. Buyers would pay what they could afford and for what they need.
Admittedly the obvious immediate advantages here are for the buyers and for the higher-rated sellers. There are advantages for some of those who sit between 3 and 4 but I’m not sure most would see them given the mindset of sellers and the 5-star obsession.
Note that system things as well as mindset would have to change. The search algorithm; buyer request access; level entry rules, to name but a few.
For completeness, this is the only similar post I could find:
Continuing the discussion from What is the deal with sellers expecting only 5 star reviews?: