Not sure what you mean. I was replying to a post by Shop2LiveinFL. MSPA is a 5013c, non profit organization


BBird0701 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dcrector Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > IMSC is a for profit whereas MSPA is a non
> profit.
>
>
> I had no idea you were so funny, Doug.

IMSC is a for profit. MSPA is a non profit

SteveSoCal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Isn't the IMSC set up as a NPO?
>
> I want to know why anyone finds it acceptable for
> shoppers to take on the financial burden of
> providing their own MSPA approved education, yet
> continue to work at the same rate when the
> majority benefit derived from that education is a
> cost savings to the MSCs utilizing those shoppers?
> I know a few MSCs that offers an increased pay
> rate for experienced shoppers, as it saves the MSC
> time and money to utilize those shoppers.
>
> So a question for Doug; Will shoppers that take
> part in the MSPA approved training receive a
> higher rate of pay from MSPA member companies in
> exchange for their participation?

Or when, right? Or if?

I lost what trust and respect I had in the MSPA when they let Freeman remain a proud member of the MSPA for quite a while, while they were stiffing many shoppers of their pay. New shoppers look to the MSPA company member list as a mark of reliable companies to shop. Allowing them to remain so long resulted in a lot of people not getting paid or reimbursed.

For the record, I am not anti-MSPA. I would consider myself to be pro-shopper.

I am saddened by some of the decisions made by both organizations in the name of shopper education. I had high hopes that the MSPA would come to the table something that was inclusive of all shoppers, but it seems to me the shopperfest just another version of basic shopper training. If I don't feel like I need education or introductions to more companies, the shopperfest is of little value to me.

As far as payment goes; obviously the MSPA cannot dictate payment terms, but would it be out of the question to ask member companies to offer an incentive for shoppers to go through the training?

dcrector Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IMSC is a for profit. MSPA is a non profit


Doug, don't you think it would be a fair statement to say that the MSPA was created to support it's for-profit members? I think that touting the 5013c status can be somewhat misleading. All of the MSPA members are in business to make profit.

My big issue with the IMSC during it's formation and why I walked away from being involved was specifically the profit structure. I wanted it to be non-profit organization and many took issue with that. I though that in the end they set it up as a 5013c but I may be wrong.

Either way, profits are being generated from shopper education at the expense of shoppers and that is what saddens me, considering the pay rate of shoppers. Shoppers could use the money put toward any conference and instead apply it toward taking a class at their local community college. That would help them much more in the future than specialized training IMHO. In fact, I think some community colleges offer classes in mystery shopping.

-30-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/06/2014 04:50AM by Shop2LiveinFL.

2008-2009 was my turning point.

MSPA had to do it's due diligence before we could terminate their member status. By not doing so could have resulted in serious legal issues. MSPA based its decision on several complaints shoppers submitted in writing. There were, I believe 3-4 complaints that we investigated before making the decision. I know that on the forum there were many complaints but the investigation began before these complaints were posted and I don't believe any of the written complaints came from the shoppers on this forum. We can not take any action based on the posts on any forum.


BBird0701 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Or when, right? Or if?
>
> I lost what trust and respect I had in the MSPA
> when they let Freeman remain a proud member of the
> MSPA for quite a while, while they were stiffing
> many shoppers of their pay. New shoppers look to
> the MSPA company member list as a mark of reliable
> companies to shop. Allowing them to remain so long
> resulted in a lot of people not getting paid or
> reimbursed.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/2014 01:19AM by dcrector.

Yes, some community colleges do offer mystery shopping classes. But what is really being taught? One of the things we are working on is consistency. You can go to 4 different colleges and learn about the same thing, but some classes may contradict what other classes offer. For example, I attended a class at a community college in Seattle to see exactly what was being taught. The instructor told the students that if they should forget to observe something to make up an answer and award full point value. Basically, telling the shopper to lie. So, if you never shopped before you would take this advise at face value.

As for increase in pay. I belong to the California Restaurant Association, the Washington Restaurant association and the Washington Association of Legal Investigators. All these organizations offer training in several areas. These associations can not set prices if you take their training? Just because my company belongs to an association for private investigators does not mean they can tell me what to charge my clients.

I think all associations are created to support its for profit members.

I go to several conferences put on by chambers and other associations where I have to pay. I always learn something and network with others in my fields. Sometimes you have to invest in yourself.

Doug, I agree with much of what you said. I understand the need for consistency and I know you are coming from a place of trying to help shoppers and MSCs work together.

Obviously mystery shopping companies need to turn a profit. I'm not bothered by the for-nature profit on the industry. I also agree that people need to invest in themselves.

That said, the MSPA courses have not created consistency in reporting in the past. The two presenters at the conference on dining evaluations represent companies that have markedly differing reporting styles, as does your company and 20 other MSPA companies I can think of. Some are first person. Some are third person. Some use the employee name and others don't. Some allow ethnicities to be used and other's will grade a shopper down for that. Some like the word 'guest', other's like 'partner'. Some don't allow you to even mention if another person was with you.

If you can't create consistency amongst the MSPA member companies in the reporting requirements, how can you assure shoppers that the training you offer will help them? Much it really comes down to how intuitive, attentive and and educated the shoppers already are. That's why I always recommended writing classes to my shoppers when I was a scheduler. Putting an ill-prepared shopper through the MSPA course is still going to result in preferred and known shoppers getting the best assignments. I just want to make sure that shoppers understand the reality of that.

The MSPA conferences were put on hold? My understanding was the first IMSC conference was held in Las Vegas at the same time the MSPA conference was being held at another venue and shoppers were not invited to the MSPA event.

And my understanding is the IMSC is a not-for-profit. Considering how little they actually charge, it is hard to imagine there is any profit to be had.

The IMSC shoppers were invited to an evening reception at that Las Vegas conference, but were not allowed to attend the conference sessions. Something like 9 or 10 of the MSPA former presidents also appeared together at one formal IMSC session where they told us some MSPA history, provided dire warnings about the need for us to lobby our congress members on behalf of the MSPA legislative agenda and, in three cases, bluntly told us that they had so many shoppers on their rolls that we were, "a dime a dozen" (actual quote from one of the founders) and could be dismissed without any concern on the part of the MSCs. They tehn all took questions from the audience. Asked about video shopping as a growth segment of the industry, they predicted that video shopping was a "flash in the pan" and several stated that it could not be marketed to their clients. As a group, they predicted the swift demise of video shopping. Questions from shoppers about MSPA promoting comparability across MSCs when it came to editing style books, reporting styles, and similar items of interest to shoppers were uniformly dismissed with various versions of, "We did not organize to promote comparable standards; standards for shoppers are entirely up to the individual companies." It was also at this session that they pretty much all agreed with the statement that MSPA "found that it could not make shopper training pay off."

The IMSC shoppers were invited to an evening reception at that Las Vegas conference, but were not allowed to attend the conference sessions. Something like 9 or 10 of the MSPA former presidents also appeared together at one formal IMSC session where they told us some MSPA history, provided dire warnings about the need for us to lobby our congress members on behalf of the MSPA legislative agenda and, in three cases, bluntly told us that they had so many shoppers on their rolls that we were, "a dime a dozen" (actual quote from one of the founders) and could be dismissed without any concern on the part of the MSCs. They then all took questions from the audience. Asked about video shopping as a growth segment of the industry, they predicted that video shopping was a "flash in the pan" and several stated that it could not be marketed to their clients. As a group, they predicted the swift demise of video shopping. Questions from shoppers about MSPA promoting comparability across MSCs when it came to editing style books, reporting styles, and similar items of interest to shoppers were uniformly dismissed with various versions of, "We did not organize to promote comparable standards; standards for shoppers are entirely up to the individual companies." It was also at this session that they pretty much all agreed with the statement that MSPA "found that it could not make shopper training pay off."

dcrector Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MSPA had to do it's due diligence before we could
> terminate their member status. By not doing so
> could have resulted in serious legal issues. MSPA
> based its decision on several complaints shoppers
> submitted in writing. There were, I believe 3-4
> complaints that we investigated before making the
> decision. I know that on the forum there were
> many complaints but the investigation began before
> these complaints were posted and I don't believe
> any of the written complaints came from the
> shoppers on this forum. We can not take any
> action based on the posts on any forum.


Sine the Freeman debacle is apparently up for discussion and some are wondering how the distrust of the MSPA escalated, I would like to point out the timeline and events that occurred:

-As early as April of 2011, posters were complaining on this forum about payments from Freeman being slow/non-existant.

-Around March 2012, Freeman engaged an outside scheduler to bring in fresh shoppers, as apparently their existing shoppers were starting to refuse taking shops due to lack of payment.

-June 12, 2012 A supposed Freeman employee posts here that the company in near bankruptcy and then quickly deletes the post.

-June 29, 2012 The MSPA posts on Facebook an assurance to shoppers that Freeman is not going bankrupt and asks shoppers to be patient with expected payments. They later remove the post after suspending Freeman from the MSPA, but not before I copied it and posted it into this thread:

[www.mysteryshopforum.com]

-July 19, 2012 Jacob writes an open letter the MSPA that can be seen here:

[www.mysteryshopforum.com]

-July 26, 2012 The MSPA suspends Freeman's status as an MSPA member.

[www.mysteryshopforum.com]

-August 10, 2012 Bill Freeman sends out a letter to select shoppers, explaining his proposal for paying shoppers, bringing the pay cycle current and apologizing. I believe this was probably thaw last public comment from the company. It's my understanding that no shoppers were paid after that point and the company subsequently ceased mystery shopping operations, leaving shoppers on the hook for untold thousands of dollars. You can read the letter here:

[www.mysteryshopforum.com]

-March 9, 2014 Doug sends a newsletter to his database of shoppers, commenting on his opinion of shopper forums and touching on the Freeman issue. You can read it here:

[www.mysteryshopforum.com]

-September 15, 2014 Doug claims in the quoted post above that the MSPA investigation on Freeman began before any complaints were posted on the forum.

So, we are to believe that an investigation by the MSPA was started in early 2011 and concluded more than a year later, and coincidentaly 7 days after Jacob's open letter was published. At no time did any representative from the MSPA address the complaints on the forum or suggest to forum members that the a formal complaint should be lodged with the MSPA regarding Freeman. Doug is named in Jacob's letter and was actively posting on this forum at that time. In addition, the MSPA was publicly defending Freeman's position less than a month before they were suspended.

How are shopper's supposed to have any trust in an organization that operates in that manner? They were actively encouraging shoppers to continue shopping for Freeman while it was apparently under investigation for non-payment, and absolutely no regret or apology for that was offered to shoppers. The post was simply removed.

SteveSoCal Wrote:


> How are shopper's supposed to have any trust in an
> organization that operates in that manner? They
> were actively encouraging shoppers to continue
> shopping for Freeman while it was apparently under
> investigation for non-payment, and absolutely no
> regret or apology for that was offered to
> shoppers. The post was simply removed.

This. This 1000%.

I am glad Steve has a lot of time to make a timeline.
I am not going to rehash the Freeman situation. The only thing I will say is this forum, or any other forum, had nothing to do with their membership being terminated.
In the past I hosted a BlogTalk radio show and invited shoppers to call in "live" to ask questions about the industry and MSPA. Although we had a lot of listeners shoppers never called in. As recently as a month or so ago Pam from IMSC had the president of MSPA on a conference call and invited shoppers to send in their questions. Only a few submitted their questions.
We have promoted Shopperfest. Granted, not everyone can attend, but shoppers who do attend have the opportunity to ask questions to the board and other MSP owners.
I have attended several IMSC conferences and have met several who are on this forum, including Waltsmaven. No one has ever voiced their concerns about MSPA with me in person. Many opportunities to communicate have been offered yet shoppers voice their dissatisfaction of MSPA on this forum.
Usually I do not post on this forum but when shoppers post things that are speculation I will chime in.
I have talked to Steve several years ago and he seems to be a nice guy and has constructive things to say. I do value his input on this forum.
I know there are those who distrust MSPA no matter what I say BUT if any member of this forum would like to discuss your concerns feel free to email me at doug@nwlpc.com and we can set an appointment to talk.

For the record, I do actually believe that the suspension of Freeman was not directly related to postings here…and who can say if the uproar on the message boards prompted shoppers to file a formal complaint or not? I had the common sense to not shop for them so I was not in a position to file a complaint or I probably would have.

I guess my main issue is that it was handled poorly. There was some obvious cover-up that took place regarding the initial posting backing Freeman, and very little direction from the MSPA to shoppers on how to best approach the situation. A post early on when complaints where made here directing shoppers to file a formal complaint could have potentially had the situation resolved much earlier and saved unsuspecting shoppers thousands of dollars. You gotta admit that the aftermath of that debacle hurt the image of the mystery shopping community overall. Worldwide!

As I have said previously, I have hopes the staff changes at the MSPA will result yield positive results. I had reason to interact with Dan Denston recently and found him to courteous, helpful, responsive and professional. My previous attempts in contacting the MSPA did not yield such positive results.

I am also not saying that shoppers should not attend conferences. I am just somewhat disappointed in the program and concerned that it will give newer shoppers the impression that big changes in their shopping careers are assured for paying the fee and attending. It would have been nice to perhaps see a roundtable with some more experienced shoppers talking about real-work applications of what was being taught, and an option for networking without attending the classes.

As far as the interview with Pam and the MSPA president goes; I think the way that was promoted, conducted and reported back was lacking. I was on a flight returning from a shop during the time of the call and could not join in. As far as I know, the results of the call have not been reported anywhere. When I suggested posting questions on the forum to get some potentially more anonymous input, that idea was quickly rebuffed and forum members were directed to simply email their questions to the IMSC, so at no time was it apparent how many or what questions had been submitted. I am guessing the two questions I posted on that thread were not asked. I think asking shoppers to email the IMSC directly to 'ensure anonymity' was probably not the best approach at fielding questions.

I've been shopping for a long time (been to Volition, but just came across this forum today). I've seen so many changes and companies come and go.

I've never sat through an IMSC conference (or any prior MSPA conferences), but I'm glad they are there. More opportunities to train up shoppers. Shoppers not doing their job right hurts the rest of us.

I'm glad MSPA is creating ShopperFest. I'm glad they opened up a "shopper membership".

I also run a company and we are a part of several trade associations, like MSPA, in our own industry. Their roles are to help their members. They are not in for profit themselves, but to help their members be profitable. I still shop because I like what others are doing in there businesses and what's important to them, although to be fair my wife and I don't do nearly the number of shops that we used to.

I see all these shots at MSPA and had to respond. Maybe a lot of people don't know how this stuff works. But here is what I see.

If MSPA takes care of their shopping company members as they should, hopefully the companies do well and we all have opportunities. If they provide us with education as shopper members, hopefully we as shoppers do well and more opportunities come about.

They aren't going to do that for free, but, from my experience with other associations, there is no way at $125 for a shopper registration at their conference that they can be making much if any money at all. I was a banquet manager early my career...in today's dollars, I don't even know how they can be paying the F&B tab at $125. The last conference I went to was a $1300 registration fee and I thought they cheaped on alot of stuff.

I'm not here to lobby for a special side or point of view, but I don't everyone here understands what the typical function and costs of an association are. I was shopping before there was an MSPA or an IMSC, and I see them both adding in positive ways over the years, without these Machiavellian motivations attributed to either one of them.

If I can get free to attend shopperfest I will be glad to write a synopsis.

I guess my last thought is that as I get older, I get sadder about know matter what the motivations of someone or something is, there are always people tear down. When I was signing up today, I read the rules about being positive. If someone does something wrong, well then I guess it is what it is. But I thank Doug Recter for coming on here and trying to explain. If I owned a company, I wouldn't with all the Negative Nellies here. And wouldn't that make a better forum if more owners and executives came here and shared information? The reason I never even looked for any board like this is I saw all the sniping on Volition and said who needs this? Who benefits from this? No one. Not me. Probably not the companies (although in fairness, I also learned some good things, so there is a great purpose, but wow, some people need their meds more frequently...some awful haters to each other on boards).

I took a time out today and found this page and then my fingers couldn't resist tying something (OK it might also have had something to do with last night's bible study and being convicted to speak when encountering inequity). But truthfully, I'm glad that there is an MSPA and they seem to be growing again. And be nice to each, people! OK, back to work for me.

I bought a Silver Certification last year.. I'm still not sure what I paid for exactly. That should say something.