Tech companies bring back the human touch

Online dating has become so common that there is an app for almost everyone. But now the trend is coming full circle with traditional human yenta to increase success rates for people who are particularly motivated, overwhelmed or afraid that they risk carpal tunnel from all the swiping.

Offline, professional matchmakers have charged thousands of dollars for their services over the years—some people reportedly paying hundreds of thousands just to find “the one.” Ivy League-educated matchmakers. There are two tiers of matchmaking services that offer flirting advice to go on a date.

Now, online dating company Match Group is bringing the elite to the masses. Since February, the company has been testing a human matchmaking layer for its Name Match app and will offer up to two select matches to users willing to pay $4.99 per week. The Wall Street Journal reported last month that the pilot involved a 50-member team trained by the company as dating coaches. Matchmakers draw from the same algorithmically generated pool that the app already offers, but their choices are strengthened by the answers to four dating questions the app asks users for the service.

Match said that more than 30% of its members have already opted for the facility where it is offered – a high rate given the number of steps required to be paired with a so-called specialist. The company said it is now rolling out the feature in the US with the goal of being available to all of its North American users by the end of the first quarter.

Apparently it works: Users of the facility were eight times more likely to match — or mutually like each other — without an expert pick versus the service, Match said.

This type of human enhancement is being used throughout the technology sector. In retail, online styling service Stitch Fix said last week that it was working to better prioritize an la carte or “freestyle” shopping model for its users, allowing them to shop more individually from individual stores. Can select a single item to buy. The fashion company was founded on the concept of associating a human stylist with the use of an algorithm. Lately, Stitch Fix has been leaning towards giving customers more control, allowing them to do things like preview items that have been selected for them before they ship. The company said last week that it has reduced return rates and raised average order value.

Human changes are also taking place in social media. After the Journal reported Facebook’s Instagram could be harming some teen users, last week Instagram head, Adam Mosseri, told a Senate subcommittee hearing that Instagram hopes to introduce a more chronological feed approach next year. Such a feed will display the content as real people, rather than the current ranking algorithm that prioritizes user preferences and includes recommended posts. Mr Mosseri also said it would release more parental controls.

Meanwhile, Twitter has a program where it enforces priority moderation of posted content — including human inspection — on high-profile accounts, whether they belong to a real celebrity or someone who doesn’t. Those who are suddenly getting fame of 15 seconds. The program is a service to some of its most powerful users, but as it is offered to them for free, it also seems self-serving, saving the platform some level of preventable contention.

Food-delivery platforms in the US typically use algorithms to assign work to contract drivers, but it appears that ultrafast delivery may not be widely possible under a specific gig model. DoorDash said last week that it would hire a team of employees in New York City to make grocery deliveries in 15 minutes or less. Employees will deliver customer support and administrative tasks, but will also stock up and handle. DoorDash said ultrafast delivery times require more structure and organization. The change is “humanizing” it in more than one way: Employees will be paid an hourly wage as well as tips from qualified employees who receive benefits such as medical, dental and vision.

The trend is likely to have legs. Consumer and social complaints have emerged about the negative effects of automated decision making. Balancing digitization with human participation may be indispensable to prevent the worst outcomes and enhance the best. This would probably mean higher costs for tech companies; But it can also allay fears that automation is the enemy of full employment.

Matchmaker, matchmaker makes me a match: Algorithms are fine, but there’s always a catch.