Multi-attribute dynamic two-sided matching method of talent sharing market in incomplete preference ordinal environment

Abstract With the development of the mobile Internet, big data and cloud computing, talent sharing has emerged and developed in the labor market. As a new economy mode of the Internet, the talent sharing can match surplus labor with relevant needs companies and achieve the maximum interests for two sides with the help of the network platform. In this paper, we deeply investigate the matching problem of talent sharing in incomplete preference ordinal environment. Unlike the traditional two-sided matching method, which directly ignores the incomplete preference ordinal, we firstly fill the incomplete preference ordinal by using the collaborative filtering algorithm. In the two-sided matching of talent sharing, we pay full attention to the individual differences of the seekers and the solvers. Because of individual differences, the seekers and the solvers have different preferences for different decision attributes, i.e., the attribute priority matrices. At the same time, considering the psychological expectations of the seekers and the solvers, we construct the satisfaction degree matrices based on the prospect theory. Given the constraints on the attribute priority and the satisfaction degree, the bi-objective optimization model for multi-stage dynamic decision-making is established. Moreover, with the aid of dynamic decision-making process, we can obtain more matches when meeting the psychological expectations of the matching subjects. Finally, a case study of the talent sharing platform Upwork is given to illustrate the validity of our proposed method.

[1]  Kai H. Lim,et al.  Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual communities , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..

[2]  Yang Liu,et al.  Satisfied surgeon–patient matching: a model-based method , 2018 .

[3]  Fan Zhi-pin Strict two-sided matching method based on complete preference ordinal information , 2014 .

[4]  E. Hippel,et al.  User Community vs. Producer Innovation Development Efficiency: A First Empirical Study , 2013 .

[5]  Barry L. Bayus,et al.  Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community , 2013, Manag. Sci..

[6]  Eric Schenk,et al.  Towards a characterization of crowdsourcing practices , 2011 .

[7]  Xi Chen,et al.  Matching demanders and suppliers in knowledge service: A method based on fuzzy axiomatic design , 2016, Inf. Sci..

[8]  Jindong Qin,et al.  Three-way group decisions based on prospect theory , 2018, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[9]  A. Tversky,et al.  Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , 1992 .

[10]  Daren C. Brabham Crowdsourcing the Public Participation Process for Planning Projects , 2009 .

[11]  Zhi-Dan Zhao,et al.  User-Based Collaborative-Filtering Recommendation Algorithms on Hadoop , 2010, 2010 Third International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.

[12]  Lars Hetmank,et al.  Components and Functions of Crowdsourcing Systems - A Systematic Literature Review , 2013, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[13]  Q Yue Decision Method for Two-sided Matching Considering Agents' Psychological Behavior with Uncertain Preference Ordinal Information , 2015 .

[14]  Jitesh H. Panchal,et al.  Modeling the Effect of Product Architecture on Mass-Collaborative Processes , 2011, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[15]  Qinghua Zhu,et al.  Evaluation on crowdsourcing research: Current status and future direction , 2012, Information Systems Frontiers.

[16]  Xiao Zhang,et al.  Satisfied two-sided matching: a method considering elation and disappointment of agents , 2017, Soft Computing.

[17]  J. Pais Random matching in the college admissions problem , 2008 .

[18]  Jeffrey Heer,et al.  Crowdsourcing graphical perception: using mechanical turk to assess visualization design , 2010, CHI.

[19]  Edward Curry,et al.  A capability requirements approach for predicting worker performance in crowdsourcing , 2013, 9th IEEE International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing.

[20]  John Riedl,et al.  GroupLens: an open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews , 1994, CSCW '94.

[21]  Daren C. Brabham MOVING THE CROWD AT THREADLESS , 2010 .

[22]  D. Samson,et al.  Crowdsourcing: A contemporary form of project management with linkages to open innovation and novel operations , 2018 .

[23]  Hailong Sun,et al.  Service4Crowd: A Service Oriented Process Management Platform for Crowdsourcing , 2018, CSCW Companion.

[24]  Li Lin,et al.  Task Pricing Optimization Model of Crowdsourcing Platform , 2018 .

[25]  Efraim Turban,et al.  What can crowdsourcing do for decision support? , 2014, Decis. Support Syst..

[26]  Christopher L. Tucci,et al.  Crowdsourcing As a Solution to Distant Search , 2012 .

[27]  Hanieh Javadi Khasraghi,et al.  Crowdsourcing contests: understanding the effect of competitors’ participation history on their performance , 2014, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[28]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  Modeling prioritized multicriteria decision making , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[29]  Jan Marco Leimeister,et al.  Does Collaboration among Participants Lead to Better Ideas in IT-Based Idea Competitions? An Empirical Investigation , 2010, HICSS.

[30]  Pawel Popiel,et al.  “Boundaryless” in the creative economy: assessing freelancing on Upwork , 2017 .

[31]  Bora Caglayan,et al.  Competition-Based Crowdsourcing Software Development: A Multi-Method Study from a Customer Perspective , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[32]  Rong Du,et al.  A two-sided matching model in the context of B2B export cross-border e-commerce , 2019, Electronic Commerce Research.

[33]  Greg P. Griffin,et al.  Crowdsourcing Bike Share Station Locations , 2019 .

[34]  Jonathan L. Herlocker,et al.  A collaborative filtering algorithm and evaluation metric that accurately model the user experience , 2004, SIGIR '04.