Commenting on "who is gig work good for?" - fascinating juxtaposition. I think you've really hit on something - the difference between the way we approach fee for service work and "salaried employment." when you want to hire someone to provide a service for which you will pay an agreed upon amount for said service, you want reviews, the more public the better. this transparency is of course related to the way apps provide ratings, the way reviews are published on Google, and also reviews are published on every product website you may peruse. but the ubiquity of referrals for salaried work - there is an acceptance of secrecy and private connections. people may make it known that they are very connected, but are less likely to reveal the specifics of those connections, because that may diminish the social capital they have accrued. there is a lot to unpack there, but i'm sure it is at least partly related to the fact that some people are vehemently opposed to having their connections exposed for a variety of personal reasons, whereas other have had to fight tooth and nail to ascend through corporate structures, and are understandingly protective of the networks they have cultivated to get there. with regard to gig work, everyone is subjected to the same rules - public reviews for all (fancy restaurants and food trucks, inclusive). but with non-gig work, if we create a more transparent system, will all levels of an org be subjected to said transparency? will management also be hired according to said transparent system? people are protective of networks and referrals are private because i think there is still a significant zero-sum mentality - you ascended so i could not. you got hired so i did not. there is of course always competition, even in a gig economy. but perhaps the lens is more likely to be the sector, opposed to the individual. less cults of personality. less ascension of individuals.
Commenting on "who is gig work good for?" - fascinating juxtaposition. I think you've really hit on something - the difference between the way we approach fee for service work and "salaried employment." when you want to hire someone to provide a service for which you will pay an agreed upon amount for said service, you want reviews, the more public the better. this transparency is of course related to the way apps provide ratings, the way reviews are published on Google, and also reviews are published on every product website you may peruse. but the ubiquity of referrals for salaried work - there is an acceptance of secrecy and private connections. people may make it known that they are very connected, but are less likely to reveal the specifics of those connections, because that may diminish the social capital they have accrued. there is a lot to unpack there, but i'm sure it is at least partly related to the fact that some people are vehemently opposed to having their connections exposed for a variety of personal reasons, whereas other have had to fight tooth and nail to ascend through corporate structures, and are understandingly protective of the networks they have cultivated to get there. with regard to gig work, everyone is subjected to the same rules - public reviews for all (fancy restaurants and food trucks, inclusive). but with non-gig work, if we create a more transparent system, will all levels of an org be subjected to said transparency? will management also be hired according to said transparent system? people are protective of networks and referrals are private because i think there is still a significant zero-sum mentality - you ascended so i could not. you got hired so i did not. there is of course always competition, even in a gig economy. but perhaps the lens is more likely to be the sector, opposed to the individual. less cults of personality. less ascension of individuals.
Commenting on "who is gig work good for?" - fascinating juxtaposition. I think you've really hit on something - the difference between the way we approach fee for service work and "salaried employment." when you want to hire someone to provide a service for which you will pay an agreed upon amount for said service, you want reviews, the more public the better. this transparency is of course related to the way apps provide ratings, the way reviews are published on Google, and also reviews are published on every product website you may peruse. but the ubiquity of referrals for salaried work - there is an acceptance of secrecy and private connections. people may make it known that they are very connected, but are less likely to reveal the specifics of those connections, because that may diminish the social capital they have accrued. there is a lot to unpack there, but i'm sure it is at least partly related to the fact that some people are vehemently opposed to having their connections exposed for a variety of personal reasons, whereas other have had to fight tooth and nail to ascend through corporate structures, and are understandingly protective of the networks they have cultivated to get there. with regard to gig work, everyone is subjected to the same rules - public reviews for all (fancy restaurants and food trucks, inclusive). but with non-gig work, if we create a more transparent system, will all levels of an org be subjected to said transparency? will management also be hired according to said transparent system? people are protective of networks and referrals are private because i think there is still a significant zero-sum mentality - you ascended so i could not. you got hired so i did not. there is of course always competition, even in a gig economy. but perhaps the lens is more likely to be the sector, opposed to the individual. less cults of personality. less ascension of individuals.
Commenting on "who is gig work good for?" - fascinating juxtaposition. I think you've really hit on something - the difference between the way we approach fee for service work and "salaried employment." when you want to hire someone to provide a service for which you will pay an agreed upon amount for said service, you want reviews, the more public the better. this transparency is of course related to the way apps provide ratings, the way reviews are published on Google, and also reviews are published on every product website you may peruse. but the ubiquity of referrals for salaried work - there is an acceptance of secrecy and private connections. people may make it known that they are very connected, but are less likely to reveal the specifics of those connections, because that may diminish the social capital they have accrued. there is a lot to unpack there, but i'm sure it is at least partly related to the fact that some people are vehemently opposed to having their connections exposed for a variety of personal reasons, whereas other have had to fight tooth and nail to ascend through corporate structures, and are understandingly protective of the networks they have cultivated to get there. with regard to gig work, everyone is subjected to the same rules - public reviews for all (fancy restaurants and food trucks, inclusive). but with non-gig work, if we create a more transparent system, will all levels of an org be subjected to said transparency? will management also be hired according to said transparent system? people are protective of networks and referrals are private because i think there is still a significant zero-sum mentality - you ascended so i could not. you got hired so i did not. there is of course always competition, even in a gig economy. but perhaps the lens is more likely to be the sector, opposed to the individual. less cults of personality. less ascension of individuals.