IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v52y2022i5p433-445.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Solving the Ride-Sharing Productivity Paradox: Priority Dispatch and Optimal Priority Sets

Author

Listed:
  • Varun Krishnan

    (Lyft Inc., San Francisco, California 94107)

  • Ramon Iglesias

    (Lyft Inc., San Francisco, California 94107)

  • Sebastien Martin

    (Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208)

  • Su Wang

    (Lyft Inc., San Francisco, California 94107)

  • Varun Pattabhiraman

    (Lyft Inc., San Francisco, California 94107)

  • Garrett Van Ryzin

    (Amazon, Seattle, Washington 98109)

Abstract

Ride-sharing platforms face a “productivity paradox,” whereby any efficiency gained through improved dispatch or pricing strategies will not benefit drivers or riders. We show that this is a limit of the traditional ride-hailing model and a consequence of the Hall-Horton driver equilibrium earning hypothesis. In response to this challenge, Lyft introduced Priority Mode (PM), which allows drivers to concentrate their work during specific prioritized hours. We prove that PM solves the productivity paradox. As a result, the average driver earnings increase, and the platform and the riders also benefit. Implementing PM requires significant changes to the platform’s dispatch and pricing policy but most importantly requires careful control of the number of drivers that can be offered the opportunity to be prioritized at any given time. In this paper, we introduce a queuing setting to model the market dynamics of PM and illustrate the challenges of this control problem. We then leverage this intuition to build a real-time priority admission control system that can balance the number of drivers offered priority and achieve the desired productivity increase. Lyft has successfully rolled out PM throughout North America, and drivers have completed hundreds of thousands of driving hours thus far. It has generated tens of millions of dollars of value that the drivers, the riders, and Lyft have shared, with the potential to generate much more when rolled out in all markets. Finally, our internal driver surveys reveal that it has been well received by drivers.

Suggested Citation

  • Varun Krishnan & Ramon Iglesias & Sebastien Martin & Su Wang & Varun Pattabhiraman & Garrett Van Ryzin, 2022. "Solving the Ride-Sharing Productivity Paradox: Priority Dispatch and Optimal Priority Sets," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 433-445, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:52:y:2022:i:5:p:433-445
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.2022.1134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.2022.1134
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.2022.1134?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Keith Chen & Judith A. Chevalier & Peter E. Rossi & Emily Oehlsen, 2019. "The Value of Flexible Work: Evidence from Uber Drivers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 2735-2794.
    2. Hao Yi Ong & Daniel Freund & Davide Crapis, 2021. "Driver Positioning and Incentive Budgeting with an Escrow Mechanism for Ridesharing Platforms," Papers 2104.14740, arXiv.org.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Alzate, 2024. "The Effects of Regulating Platfom-based Work on Employment Outcomes," World Bank Publications - Reports 42344, The World Bank Group.
    2. Daniel Freund & S'ebastien Martin & Jiayu Kamessi Zhao, 2024. "Two-Sided Flexibility in Platforms," Papers 2404.04709, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2024.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kesternich, Iris & Schumacher, Heiner & Siflinger, Bettina & Valder, Franziska, 2022. "Reservation wages and labor supply," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 583-607.
    2. Berger, Thor & Chen, Chinchih & Frey, Carl Benedikt, 2018. "Drivers of disruption? Estimating the Uber effect," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 197-210.
    3. Gordon H. Hanson, 2021. "Immigration and Regional Specialization in AI," NBER Working Papers 28671, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Hai Long Duong & Junhong Chu & Dai Yao, 2023. "Taxi Drivers’ Response to Cancellations and No-Shows: New Evidence for Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 179-199, January.
    5. George Z. Gui, 2024. "Combining Observational and Experimental Data to Improve Efficiency Using Imperfect Instruments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 378-391, March.
    6. Ghorpade, Yashodhan & Jasmin, Alyssa & Rahman, Amanina Abdur, 2024. "Do Gig Workers Prefer Money to Flexibility? Insights from a Discrete-Choice Experiment in Malaysia," IZA Discussion Papers 17093, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Alisa Tazhitdinova, 2022. "Increasing Hours Worked: Moonlighting Responses to a Large Tax Reform," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 473-500, February.
    8. Hayato Kanayama & Suguru Otani, 2024. "Nonparametric Estimation of Matching Efficiency and Elasticity in a Spot Gig Work Platform: 2019-2023," Papers 2412.19024, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2025.
    9. Steven Berry & Martin Gaynor & Fiona Scott Morton, 2019. "Do Increasing Markups Matter? Lessons from Empirical Industrial Organization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 44-68, Summer.
    10. Cosaert, Sam & Nieto Castro, Adrian & Tatsiramos, Konstantinos, 2023. "Temperature and the Timing of Work," IZA Discussion Papers 16480, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Jeon, Junkee & Park, Kyunghyun, 2023. "Optimal job switching and retirement decision," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 443(C).
    12. Hossain, Mokter & Mozahem, Najib Ali, 2022. "Drivers’ perceptions of the sharing economy for transport services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    13. Reich, Michael, 2020. "Pay, Passengers and Profits: Effects of Employee Status for California TNC Drivers," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt86s4249x, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    14. Peter Blair & Benjamin Posmanick, 2023. "Why Did Gender Wage Convergence in the United States Stall?," Working Papers 2023-001, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    15. di Porto, Edoardo & Garibaldi, Pietro & Mastrobuoni, Giovanni & Naticchioni, Paolo, 2022. "The Perverse Effect of Flexible Work Arrangements on Informality," IZA Discussion Papers 15794, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Yongwook Paik & Christos A. Makridis, 2023. "The social value of a ridesharing platform: a hedonic pricing approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 64(5), pages 2125-2150, May.
    17. Agrawal, David R. & Zhao, Weihua, 2023. "Taxing Uber," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    18. Marie Boltz & Bart Cockx & Ana Maria Diaz & Luz Magdalena Salas, 2023. "How does working‐time flexibility affect workers' productivity in a routine job? Evidence from a field experiment," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(1), pages 159-187, March.
    19. Sun, Hao & Wang, Hai & Wan, Zhixi, 2019. "Model and analysis of labor supply for ride-sharing platforms in the presence of sample self-selection and endogeneity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 76-93.
    20. Binyi Yang, 2024. "Balancing flexibility and stability: The role of outsourced service stations in managing food‐delivery platform work in China," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(4), pages 530-551, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:52:y:2022:i:5:p:433-445. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.