Muslim World Report

Urban Company and the Crisis of Reliability in India's Gig Economy

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 13, 2025 9:57 AM | 6 min read | 1273 words

TL;DR: A recent experience with Urban Company illustrates the crisis of reliability in India’s gig economy, raising concerns about consumer trust, service quality, and the potential for regulatory changes. As more consumers face unreliability, the demand for improved standards and ethical practices is likely to grow, impacting the future of gig platforms and their operational models.

The Crisis of Service Reliability in Urban India’s Gig Economy

The troubling experience of a customer with Urban Company serves as a microcosm of a critical issue within India’s burgeoning gig economy, particularly in service sectors like maintenance and repair. In this instance, a customer scheduled an air conditioning repair four days in advance, only to be informed mere moments before the appointment that the technician would not be able to attend, citing unspecified “police issues.” Such last-minute cancellations not only leave customers frustrated but also highlight the systemic unreliability that can pervade gig platforms.

This incident exemplifies profound questions regarding the dependability of gig economy platforms, especially as they expand nationwide and shift from localized, informal networks to more structured service offerings. Customers often find themselves in precarious positions, where pre-paying for a service evolves into a gamble rather than a guarantee—especially significant in a culture where refunds are virtually non-existent (Goods, Veen, & Barratt, 2019). Moreover, the heavy reliance on automated customer service systems, such as chatbots, further alienates clients, who frequently struggle to find resolution without human assistance.

Implications for the Service Economy

The implications extend beyond individual dissatisfaction; they unveil systemic issues within India’s service economy. Consider the following:

  • Digitalization and Outsourcing: Rapid digitalization and increasing outsourcing can create disconnections between consumers and companies, resulting in deteriorating trust (Hirschi, 2018).
  • Quality Assurance vs. Scaling: As platforms like Urban Company prioritize rapid scaling over rigorous quality assurance, they risk eroding consumer confidence.
  • Regulatory Backlash: Such a decline in trust can galvanize significant backlash against gig economy models, potentially leading to increased regulatory scrutiny and a reevaluation of business practices (Frenken & Schor, 2017).

What If: Consumer Trust Deteriorates Further?

What happens if this incident inspires a broader consumer backlash against gig economy platforms? If customers consistently encounter unreliability and substandard service, dissatisfaction could escalate into a movement that challenges the legitimacy of gig economy models. Possible outcomes include:

  • Shifts to Traditional Providers: Growing discontent may shift consumer preferences towards traditional service providers, exacerbating the precarious positions of companies like Urban Company and its competitors (Stanford, 2017).
  • Regulatory Responses: Authorities may feel compelled to impose stricter regulations on gig workers and their employers, setting new standards for reliability and accountability (Howcroft & Bergvall-Kåreborn, 2018).
  • Demand for Alternatives: Disenchanted consumers might seek alternatives that promote transparent pricing, reliable service, and accessible support.

Such a shift in consumer sentiment could lead to a broader societal conversation about the implications of gig work, inspiring advocacy groups focused on protecting gig workers’ rights and compensation.

What If: Regulatory Bodies Get Involved?

What if government regulators step in and establish stringent service standards for gig economy platforms? The outcomes of heightened regulation could be mixed:

  • Clarity and Accountability: New regulations could forge a clearer framework that holds companies accountable for delays, subpar service, and inadequate complaint handling (Kuhn & Maleki, 2017).
  • Stifled Innovation: Enhanced oversight may protect consumers, but it could simultaneously stifle innovation, constraining companies to risk-averse strategies.
  • Increased Costs for Consumers: Improved communication processes may compel companies to innovate in customer relationship management, potentially raising service costs (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).
  • Worker Dissatisfaction: Tighter regulations might force companies to cut worker compensation or limit gig workers’ flexibility to offset compliance costs, igniting demands for fair treatment (Stanford, 2017).

Additionally, the regulatory landscape could evolve to encompass a wider range of protections for gig workers, fundamentally altering gig platform operational models.

What If: Competing Service Models Emerge?

What if innovative service models emerge to challenge Urban Company? The discontent stemming from unreliable service may inspire new startups that prioritize a customer-centric approach. Key trends may include:

  • Technology Integration: Leveraging technology for better communication, real-time tracking, and service transparency (Amit & Schoemaker, 1993).
  • Collaborative Models: New players may explore models that blend gig workers’ flexibility with the stability of traditional employment, appealing to ethically conscious consumers (Oakey, Martínez-Sykora, & Cherrett, 2023).
  • Pressure to Adapt: Established companies may need to quickly evolve to retain their customer base, leading to sector-wide enhancements in service quality (Grönroos, 1994).

As the competitive landscape shifts, gig platforms must prioritize building community and trust with their customer base. By adopting practices that promote transparency and accountability, companies could help restore faith in the gig economy.

Strategic Maneuvers: Actions for All Involved

For Urban Company, the immediate response should involve a thorough reevaluation of customer service protocols:

  • Effective Resolution Processes: Establishing an efficient resolution process prioritizing live customer interactions over automated responses is crucial in rebuilding trust and satisfaction (Oliver, 1999).
  • Investment in Worker Welfare: Fostering relationships with gig workers through investment in training and support can ensure that service quality meets consumer expectations.

Regulatory bodies must adopt a balanced approach, ensuring consumer protection while fostering innovation within the gig economy:

  • Collaboration with Stakeholders: Establishing guidelines that foster transparency and accountability is essential for industry growth without stifling creativity (Püttgen, MacGregor, & Lambert, 2003).

Consumers, empowered by their collective experiences, should engage in advocacy for improved practices within the gig economy:

  • Grassroots Movements: These can drive corporate accountability and push for regulatory changes, aiming for an ecosystem that prioritizes service quality and ethical practices over rapid expansion (Aiken et al., 2001).

In this evolving landscape, all participants must recognize their role in shaping the future of service delivery in the gig economy. Urban Company must enhance customer service and improve worker conditions, while regulators establish frameworks that protect consumers without stifling innovation. At the same time, consumers should leverage their collective power to demand accountability and ethical practices from service providers.

References

  • Aiken, L. H., Clarke, S. P., Sloane, D. M., Sochalski, J., Busse, R., Clarke, H., Giovannetti, P., Hunt, J., Rafferty, A. M., & Shamian, J. (2001). Nurses’ Reports On Hospital Care In Five Countries. Health Affairs, 20(3), 43-53.
  • Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33-46.
  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
  • Frenken, K., & Schor, J. B. (2017). Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23, 3-10.
  • Goods, C., Veen, A., & Barratt, T. (2019). “Is your gig any good?” Analysing job quality in the Australian platform-based food-delivery sector. Journal of Industrial Relations, 61(1), 14-33.
  • Grönroos, C. (1994). From Marketing Mix to Relationship Marketing. Management Decision, 32(2), 4-20.
  • Hirschi, A. (2018). The Fourth Industrial Revolution: Issues and Implications for Career Research and Practice. The Career Development Quarterly, 66(1), 9-20.
  • Kuhn, K. M., & Maleki, A. (2017). Micro-entrepreneurs, Dependent Contractors, and Instaserfs: Understanding Online Labor Platform Workforces. Academy of Management Perspectives, 31(3), 261-277.
  • Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the Achievement Gap to the Education Debt: Understanding Achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3-12.
  • Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence Consumer Loyalty?. Journal of Marketing, 63, 33-44.
  • Oakey, A., Martínez-Sykora, A., & Cherrett, T. (2023). Improving the efficiency of patient diagnostic specimen collection with the aid of a multi-modal routing algorithm. Computers & Operations Research, 154, 106265.
  • Püttgen, H.-B., MacGregor, P. R., & Lambert, F. (2003). Distributed generation: Semantic hype or the dawn of a new era?. IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, 1(5), 70-80.
  • Stanford, J. (2017). The resurgence of gig work: Historical and theoretical perspectives. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 28(3), 327-342.
← Prev Next →