In a time when most of our interactions are impersonal, electronic exchanges, how do we communicate satisfaction, or not? “Thank you for your recent purchase,” so begins the message, “please take a few minutes to give us feedback on your items.” Where in a restaurant the server is gauging us along the way, web portals and phone applications are little more interactive than a blank sheet of paper. As such, those who do business through the internet are left to take our temperature via survey.

In many cases, the companies, governments, nonprofits and others engage professional pollsters to determine the quality of these remote interactions. “Was the interface easy to use (please rate on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest)?” It is good to seek evaluation from those we encounter. How might our lives be different if each element of our day was divided into discrete and measurable events? “Was the folding of laundry: 1. Exceptional, 2. Adequate or 3. Needs Improvement?” Or we might query, “On a scale of 1 to 5, did the conversation about staying out past curfew meet expectations?” Hopefully, we are already pursuing insight into how those around us perceive our time spent with them. Are we honest? Respectful? Consistent?

Like in the digital world, our invitation to critique must be sincere. Are the inquiries specific enough for real insight or so general as to prevent honest exchange? Is the assessment manipulative or tracking legitimate improvement? Can we like the customer service representative but dislike the customer service? Can we be satisfied by a process but dissatisfied with an outcome? How many one-star ratings would we get if our children, spouses or co-workers were encouraged to evaluate us while in conflict? Do we then give-in to keep our average up?