Review Update inspired by our Community Center Hosts

[Laura_C]

At the end of last year, we announced several updates outlining new policies to help address irrelevant and biased reviews, a topic many of you understandably have expressed concern about. Thank you for all the feedback you gave in response to this, I've been reading all your comments and additional ideas on what you would like us to focus on next.  

Although only a few weeks have passed since then, your suggestions are already making a difference. 

One feature we've just launched (yes! It is already live!!), is adding a prompt to the overall rating section of the review process for guests:

If a guest gives 5 stars for all subcategories ie. Cleanliness, Accuracy, but then selects 4-star as an overall rating, a prompt flagging this to the guest will appear.

It was 100% your comments in these threads that inspired us to ensure this work happened. Shoutout to our hosts who brought this to our attention: @Sarah977, @Paola4, @Susanna0, @Laura108, @LuisCarlos1, @Aaron79, @Mariana58, @Justo6, @Rodrigo569, @Elmari0, @Melodie-And-John0, @Dee51, @Brian1595, @Peggy137, @Heidi313, @Ela22, @David64, @Anne8553, @Keita5

Of course, there were many other suggestions given and this is just the beginning of our work to make improvements in this area. Please do continue to share your ideas across the Community Center and we look forward to providing you more updates throughout the year.

~ Laura

[Helen350]

@Huma0 Are you sure? (I've never been a guest.) But I know the way we hosts rate guests changed during your period away from the CC...... Previously we could leave star ratings blank, or only rate 'communication' leaving 'house rules' & 'cleanliness' if we wanted, eg for no shows. In those days some of my reviews from guests also were blank, i.e. a guest rated me overall & on one or two sub categories, but the others did not feature.... Now we have to rate all 3 areas re guests to proceed - or we did when they changed to several pages - I haven't checked since it went back to one.... No guests since Christmas/New Year!

[Huma0]

PS if you are still wondering what I am going on about, read the post here, where I explain it in a bit more detail:

https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Hosting/The-General-Confusion-About-Star-Ratings/m-p/866168

[Jennifer1421]

@Huma0 

Thank you for posting this!. I had not twigged to this at all, but much more about the stats makes sense. For example: why that number in the listing that says "X# of recent guests have said this place is sparkling clean" has never moved in tandem with my reviews. It completely makes sense now -  it stops counting if a guest doesn't leave a sub-category star for cleanliness. (Even though I'M shown that they did). HA! It's like a little light just went on for me.

Of course, it does beg the question about why we're not given official information about this. It would seem pretty darn pertinent to the conversation. @Laura_C -if what Huma is saying is a fact, why wouldn't this be acknowledged by you and your team, rather than telling us about what you're changing? Why not say, "Actually, hosts, oftentimes the discrepancy you're seeing is because the guest has NOT actually left you any subcategory stars"?

[Ute42]

.

@Huma0  

I didn't know that, very strange. Someone must have done the programming on this, why would one decide to fill up all the blanks with 5*? Not that this is an important issue in the overall review disaster, but it shure is a main reason why so many hosts complain, they got an overall 4* rating but 5* in all categories all across the board.

[Ute42]

.

@Paul1255, @Emilia42 , @Rowena29 , @Huma0 

I'm afraid what I am writing here will be terribly disappointing to You.

The original idea of the review system was, that guests and hosts who had been in contact with each other would write a review about the other person. Future guests and host could read theses reviews and decide, if they would be a good match. These times are long gone.

Over the course of the recent years airbnb found out, that reviews can be used for something completely different than assuring a good match. The review system today is a marketing tool to „motivate“ hosts to provide an exceptionally hight hosting quality. In order to avoid a bad review, hosts have to do everything in their power to fulfil the wildest, often unappropriate demands and accept real bad guest behavior.

Guests check in at midnight, 5 hrs outside the check-in window, guests bring a dog to a no pet listing, guests bring additional unannounced people. You can always deny entry to such guests, but they will leave You a bad review. And this is the only reason why guests can leave a review „even if the guest doesn’t stay in or enter the listing“. Lizzie posted this stipulation on july 12, 2018.

https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Hosting/To-Clara-Liang-Product-Director-Last-min-cancellation-be...

• As a host, You can always make a damage claim through the resolution center, but You will get a bad review.

• If a guest cancels and he or she wants the money refunded way beyond the cancellation policy, You can always reject that, but you will get a bad review.

• You can always enforce Your houserules, but You will get a bad review.

Laura writes:

• One feature we've just launched (yes! It is already live!!), is adding a prompt to the overall rating section of the review process for guests: If a guest gives 5 stars for all subcategories ie. Cleanliness, Accuracy, but then selects 4-star as an overall rating, a prompt flagging this to the guest will appear.

And what if the guest ignores the flag and still rates 1* overall bc he didn't get a refund? Well, the guest can still do so.

This flag is nothing but cosmetics. All the real issues we hosts have with the reviewsystem remain untouched. And You know what?

• Airbnb will never ever change anything substantial in the review departement.

Why is airbnb successful? Is it bc their internet-site is so great, bc their search functions are fantastic, bc their booking software is so reliable, bc the service reps are outstanding?

No. The driving force for airbnbs success are we, the hosts. No other platform in the world has hosts that bend over so much backwards to accomodate their guest as airbnb hosts do. Why are they doing it? They do it in fear of a bad review.

Lura just wrote one true sencence:

• While it would be way easier to eliminate them (the reviews and the star system) ….... we know that it would actually decrease the confidence that guests have in booking a home, so our hosts overall would have less bookings.

Correct. The reason why we get many bookings on airbnb is airbnbs guest centric policy. Guests know that, and that's why they book on airbnb. Guest on airbnb have the „confidence“ that they will always get what they want. And some of them know that very, very well.

The downside of this policy is, that the guest quality is on a dive. Airbnb made homesharing popular, but in the end they will remembered as the company that ruined the guest quality in short term rentals.

Dear Paul and Emilia, unfortenately I have to tell You this:

• The current airbnb review system is designed to downgrade our average rating followed by the loss of the superhost badge. We all live under the constant fear of bad reviews. And airbnb will never ever change this.

All the issues You are complaining about are intentionally, wilfully implemented by airbnb, we all can complain about it in a million posts and it will change nothing.

[Rowena29]

@Ute42 

I wasn't surprised or disappointed to hear your interpretation.

I am cynical also and strongly suspect you are largely  right.

However I have no patience at all with that element of society who whinge adn whine, but then when it's suggested to them that they take action they say, "what's the point, nothing will ever change."

I"m well aware that my comments will almost certainly fall into a void, at least I have had  a go. I know it almost certainly won't help, but I guess it can't hurt.  It's like beatign your head against a brick wall though, so I only do it from time to time!

I do find the knee jerk verbal response in relation to eliminating unfair reviews  "we know that it would actually decrease the confidence that guests have in booking a home" a bit galling. Based on what scientific and statistical evidence that has been independently and rigorously assessed?

What about decreased HOST  confidence in airbnb failing to fulfill their own published protocols?

For instance, Laura in her first video of the new review system, when discussing irrelevant reviews, used as a specific viable example "New York was too cold" as a irrelevant statement that could cause a review to be removed..  3 weeks later, a Brisbane host received the comment "Brisbane was too quiet".  Everyone advised her under the new rules this would be seen as irrelevant. Nope. She tried 5 separate times I believe, quoting the new rules.  Each CS rep told her it was the guests opinion and was a valid useful statement for future guests.

So even if some of the suggestions were taken on board, for all practical purposes, they probably wouldn't be implemented anyway.

[Huma0]

@Rowena29 

That is a good point. How is this idea of 'irrelevance' in reviews going to be implemented? Even if it will eventually have an impact, I suspect it will take a while before the CS reps are updated and stop simply quoting back, "It was the guest's experience."

[Lisa723]

@Huma0 @Rowena29 

FWIW, I tried to get three old reviews removed based on the new "relevance" criteria and succeeded with two of them (after escalation). The third was not removed because the guest's reason for a lower rating (traffic in the general portland metropolitan area, when we are on a rural dead end) was disclosed only in private messages, not in the review itself, which was generic.

[Susan17]

@Huma0 @Lisa723 @Rowena29 @Paul1255 @Ute42

@Huma0 asked "How is this idea of 'irrelevance' in reviews going to be implemented?" Well, here are a couple of examples... 

From Airbnb's Dispute Moderation for Reviews document... 

Examples of Relevance Violations and Non-Violations. 

Irrelevant: “Don’t trust the taxi drivers in this city, they take the worst routes!”
Relevant: “Don’t trust the taxi drivers in this city, they take the worst routes! On top of that, I arrived at this listing and it was in complete disrepair and the host never responded to my concerns.”

Irrelevant: “This guest was such a liar. There was no way she is a real doctor.”
Relevant: “The guest showed up late to check-in and then yelled at me for not waking up fast enough to let her in. She was rude and easily annoyed for the entire reservation. I would hate to experience her bedside manner.”

Good luck with trying to explain all that to the CX agents, or expecting them to be able to grasp the "subtle nuances" between relevant and non-relevant content. 

[Paul1255]

@Susan17  

Wow. I think I'm having trouble explaining it to myself, let alone anyone else 😉

[Susan17]

@Paul1255 

I know, P! Clear as mud... 😉

[Ute42]

.

Hi @Rowena29 

Thank You for Your answer. Could You post a link to the post of that Brisbane host that  received the comment "Brisbane was too quiet".?

[Rowena29]

Hi @Ute42 I'd happily do so, but I don't have the link.

This host reached out via the Brisbane airbnb  community FB page.

They work a little differently to this community in that you are logged on as your FB persona, not your airbnb persona - so there is no way to access contributors airbnb profiles or airbnb listings.  ( I suspect some contributors like it that way actually, some of them are rather secretive).  Sometimes they say enough things over a long enough period of time that you can do a search and figure out which listing is theirs   - if you can be bothered.

she copied and pasted the comments the guest left onto the thread. His comment was something like "a nice clean unit, but I found Brisbane too quiet" He left 3 or 4 stars for overall. He was there on New Year's eve and expected "action"  in the streets like Madrid I suppose.    

[Huma0]

@Ute42 

I understand your frustration and many of your arguments. The changes that are being made seem too small and not addressing the major problems and that may well be a deliberate attempt to appease hosts without significantly changing anything.

However, it is true that hosts CONSTANTLY complain on the CC about getting a 4 star overall rating from guests who rate them 5 stars in every category, hence my responses here trying to demystify how the ratings are displayed. I've tried to explain this before but people will always change the topic.

I get it. Stats are pretty boring to a lot of people (including me) and it's far more interesting to rant about the overall review system, but I think it's always better to educate yourself about how something really works rather than endlessly tearing your hair out over it (I'm not saying you do the latter. Sounds like you don't!).

RE what you say about hosts having to bend over backwards and ignore all sorts of cr^p in order to ensure good reviews, I'm not sure I believe in that anymore. A few months ago, or maybe longer, I stopped caring so much about ratings. I have mostly stopped even encouraging guests to leave a review. I also stopped accepting guests if I felt uneasy about them and if I have to cancel, I will (but I'll get Airbnb to do it for me). If I'm not happy with a guest's behaviour, I will say something about it. If they break something, I will say something!

It is working for me. My ratings have gone up and my bookings have not suffered at all (in fact I really don't worry about that anymore either) so no, you don't need to be a doormat to get good reviews and be a  Superhost. I think that's a bit of a myth.

[Jennifer1421]

@Huma0I agree that it is perhaps a myth, but it's one that is certainly encouraged by Airbnb.

@Ute42: I find myself waffling back and forth about this issue.

On one side of the argument is Airbnb's need to have some sort of metric with which to weed out very poor quality listings, and ratings are likely the easiest way to do so. It IS an important part of any business model to ensure quality control. In this business's instance, there is also a huge marketing motivation to have inflated ratings. The PR material is not nearly as compelling if it has to say, "Our listings receive 4.0 ratings from guests, on average". 4.9 looks so much better, doesn't it?

On the other side: It is also an exceedingly simple way to implement the "Carrot and Stick", which you deftly allude to when you say, "hosts have to do everything in their power to fulfil the wildest, often unappropriate demands and accept real bad guest behavior." We allow unacceptable behaviour in order to conform to a completely unrealistic requirement in order to continue receiving bookings, so that we can make some money from our assets. This mindset may be the myth that Huma was talking about, but it also ensures we are not delisted through poor metrics. (Though honestly, I'm not sure that such a thing happens much - there's a host in my city with a 4.5 overall rating who has had that rating for months, and she hasn't been delisted. Nor has it affected her bookings. Huma's "myth" in action, seemingly.

As @Emilia42 said upthread, hosts "educating" guests on the review system, as it currently stands, is getting out of hand (ie: rating a host a "4" is a vote to have them removed from the platform). Feeling the need to let guests know this in order to continue hosting, by keeping a high rating, is distasteful on both host and guest sides, and further, has led to a completely unreliable system - but is HAS fed into the "high ratings" narrative that Airbnb like to promote. See what they did there????

@Laura_C's response to Paul and Emilia is very telling in this regard. To paraphrase: "Yes, we know the duality of what a "4-star" means is wrong".  Yet there is no allusion to correcting it. There is no intention of matching "good to good" ratings on the platform's side. Falsely inflating ratings, by keeping hosts paranoid, is this company's bread and butter.