When Product Patches Operational Cracks
A case study in fixing symptoms instead of problems
Ever notice how tech companies love slapping on fancy features instead of fixing what’s actually broken? It’s like installing a smart doorbell on a house with no locks. Here’s a perfect example from India’s cab scene and why this kind of thinking is completely backwards.
The Data Signal is a free newsletter for product, AI & data analytics enthusiasts. Hit the nifty button below to subscribe and never miss a post!
Have you ever taken an auto or cab ride from one of India’s leading cab service providers? Especially after 11 PM? Or during “late-night” hours?
You might have noticed something then. After your ride is completed, you receive multiple calls from an auto-generated voice. It usually prompts something like: “Have you reached your destination safely? Dial 1…”
Often, they “spam” the customer 4–5 times. Sometimes it stops after just one call. On the surface, this feels like a great feature. But we may need to double-click on this to understand what’s really happening and why.
First things first: I started wondering, why does this feature even exist? It feels like a reactive measure at best, and a highly inefficient one at worst. To understand this better, I’d recommend listening to one episode from The Ken (a podcast report that digs into this issue among others).
This episode outlines the poor safety protocols followed by the company. According to the report, there are barely any proper checks while onboarding new drivers. Competitors, on the other hand, typically conduct police verifications and background checks. That step is simply missing here.
So what do they do instead?
They call you after the ride ends. Sometimes once. Sometimes five times. Basically, it's a product-level fix for an operational inefficiency. And honestly, that might not be enough.
So what could be done better? A few things come to mind:
The basics first
Introduce police verification. Like other companies already do.
Operational logic over product patchwork
Give drivers the option to skip verification, but flag them clearly.
Don’t assign unverified drivers to women passengers during late hours.
Or maybe don’t assign any late-night rides to them at all (after 10 PM?).
Data-driven interventions
What % of total rides actually result in complaints? (My hunch: <1%. That 1% should get laser focus.)
Is there a pattern in routes or timings when incidents happen?
For “red zones” or flagged routes, enable active monitoring. (It might be costly but this is passenger safety we’re talking about.)
Build a credit-profile-like system for drivers. Star ratings aren’t enough. Use ride history, complaint count, and behavioural flags to score and prioritise safer drivers. (One more constraint in the Optimization problem)
These are just a few ways I think the problem could be addressed more meaningfully.
Because, let’s be honest, the current system doesn't inspire confidence. It feels like a bandaid. And reactive measures like these? They might make the news once in a while, but in the long run, they’ll remain futile attempts at patching deeper operational gaps.
The real essence of safety isn’t a notification or a call. It’s a system that doesn’t need either.
(Note: The Ken episode names a specific company, but this isn’t just about one app. These patterns show up across platforms that patch problems instead of solving them.)