A comparison of seven platforms found that ratings, rankings and incentives work together to shape workers’ visibility, opportunities and continued access.
Researchers examined official help pages, status reports, job advertisements and promotional materials from Uber, Upwork, Deliveroo, Glovo, BiTaksi, Armut and Yemeksepeti Express. The platforms covered transport, freelance work and food delivery, allowing the study to compare different forms of platform-based labor.
The documents showed that ratings were generally combined with other tools, including performance scores, rankings, bonuses, targets, status levels, matching priorities and earnings rules. International platforms more often described these systems through explicit metrics, while the Turkish platforms more often presented similar forms of control through incentives, work intensity, matching and income-related language.
How platforms steer work
Across the seven platforms, ratings were not presented as isolated feedback. The documents connected rating data with broader scores, worker visibility, access to invitations or job matches, status, rewards and the possibility of remaining active on the platform.
The study also found that bonuses, performance targets, point systems, status levels, work-intensity measures, delivery slots and earnings rules can guide workers’ day-to-day behavior. International platforms generally made their metrics and allocation rules more explicit. In the Turkish sample, similar managerial functions were more often expressed through incentive schemes, matching priorities, operational rules and parametric income structures. Despite this difference in presentation, the researchers identified a common logic: work is turned into data, data is used to assess performance, and opportunities are distributed using those assessments.
Why access and visibility matter
The findings place platform management in the context of access to work and distribution of opportunity, rather than treating ratings and incentives as separate technical features. They suggest that the way platforms organize visibility, matches, rewards and income can also determine how workers navigate their jobs and whether they continue to receive opportunities.
The comparison further indicates that control may be less visible when it is expressed through bonuses, work intensity or income formulas instead of clearly stated scores and rankings. This makes the design of these systems relevant to questions of corporate accountability and how platforms explain decisions affecting workers.
Evidence and limits
The study used qualitative document analysis of publicly available official materials from seven purposively selected platforms: Uber, Upwork, Deliveroo, Glovo, BiTaksi, Armut and Yemeksepeti Express. It analyzed how the platforms describe ratings, scores, thresholds, priorities, rewards, sanctions and incentives, rather than measuring their effects statistically.
The evidence therefore describes the management logic contained in platform documents, not workers’ lived experiences or workplace practices. The study did not directly observe workers, measure changes in earnings or access, or examine resistance to these systems. Its comparison is also limited to the selected platforms and the documents they make publicly available.
// Source
Politik Ekonomik Kuram · 2026 · DOI: 10.30586/pek.1929134
Authors: Eren Efe
Institutions: İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi
