I can't seem to get some phrasing elements of reports down no matter how hard I try and I would love to get your opinions! Here's the scenario:

A report asks if the employee invited you to their business (or something very close to that). It's a yes/no question, but there is room in a narrative box to delve into more detail if desired.

One time I do the report and the employee says, "I hope to see you soon." I interpret this to be an invitation of sorts so I answer yes to the question and move on. The editor dings me and comments that this isn't an explicit invitation to visit.

I learn my lesson and the next time I do the report, a different employee says, "I sure hope to see you soon!" Having learned from my previous editorial lashing, I select the No button and explain in the narrative that while I considered the statement to be inviting and welcoming, it wasn't a direct invitation to visit. I get my report review and this time the editor says I should have selected Yes as this is clearly an invitation to visit.

So, what do you consider statements from employees that would fall under the 'inviting you to visit' a location and how can I find some common ground to answer this question going forward? Your opinions are welcomed and I invite you to respond...(sarcasm intended -- lol)

editted to correct a spelling error.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2016 02:43PM by msimon-2000.

This sounds like a response I would get from a particular MSC I have done a few shops for. My solution was to just stop doing their shops for the time being (of course, there were other problems with them as well). I can get enough shops from better MSCs to not worry about them.

I think I would try: From the tone of voice I felt invited to the business when the employee said, "I hope to see you soon!" or I did not feel invited to the business when the employee said, in a flat and automatic sounding voice, "I hope to see you soon."

We hear sincerity or lack thereof in the words, regardless of what is said. "See ya later." can mean 'looking forward to the encounter' of have the innuendo of 'only if I can't avoid it'.

You have no control over the words the associate uses, you can only go by whether you felt the words were inviting or neutral. So when you answer yes or no don't just use the words but whether you felt the associate was inviting in your answer.

I like the MSC and I also like the shops that I do. The frustrating thing is feeling like I am playing the Russian version of 'editorial roulette' every time I do reports.

They are my client, so I try to adapt my thinking to theirs when it comes to reporting, even if I personally disagree. My frustration is the moving target when it comes to what phrasing is acceptable. My normal thinking as a consumer is if I hear anything that remotely sounds like an invitation, I give them credit for making the attempt. I don't feel I have to hear, "I would like to personally invite you to visit my business." to give them credit for an inviting comment.

I would think any of the following would fit the bill:

"Hope to see you soon"
"Come back again."
"I look forward to your visit."
"Come on in and see us."
"Take a look at what we have to offer."
"Our doors are always open."

And on and on....

Don't get me started on "Did the employee give you directions to their location?" Are local landmarks acceptable? How about the closest intersection? Does the employee have to give you turn-by-turn directions from your location to theirs to receive credit for the question? Unfortunately, this is left solely up to the individual editor to decide.

I guess my biggest beef this morning is a lack of thorough examples in the guidelines which ultimately leaves the interpretation up to both the shopper's judgement and then the editor's judgement. As I click the 'submit' button on my report, I'm hoping I get the editor that thinks as I do...editorial roulette!

Flash -- great post and that is exactly how I interpret things.

Here's the rub, I am the one who heard the sincerity (or lack thereof) during the interaction, so how can an editor, who wasn't there, override my judgement? I got the impression that the editor was looking for the specific words "invitation to visit" and wouldn't accept any other commonly used substitutes.

Frustrating...

I think it all depends on the whims of individual editors. I recently did a gas station with a kiosk. I was able to take the attendant picture through the glass and also observed that the counter was neat and clean. The picture came out fine and I answered "yes" to "was the counter neat & clean" question. Editor 1 changed my answer to "no" with a comment "no store". OK, that's fine with me as long as the debrief gets accepted. The report was red-carded for a different reason and that was when I noticed the change in my answer to neat and clean. I corrected the 2nd error and re-submitted only to have it bounced back again this time by Editor 2 saying that I should be able to view the counter area even at a kiosk and if neat & clean indicate "yes" (my original answer). If "no" (Editor 1 correction) a photo is needed. I've resubmitted it a 3rd time and hope I don't get Editor 3.

Like I say, depends on the whims of the editors.

Are you simply quoting what the associate said or are you adding whether it sounded inviting or not and what was said? If you already are commenting in the text about sincerity (or lack thereof) in the words and presentation, I think you are SOL with at least some of the editors.

Obviously you can't put words in the associate's mouth. There aren't going to be suggested phrases. And even suggested phrases can sound sincere or not. (I'm thinking of the real classic on that, "My house is on the lake. Drop in some time."

@Flash wrote:

Are you simply quoting what the associate said or are you adding whether it sounded inviting or not and what was said? If you already are commenting in the text about sincerity (or lack thereof) in the words and presentation, I think you are SOL with at least some of the editors.

Obviously you can't put words in the associate's mouth. There aren't going to be suggested phrases. And even suggested phrases can sound sincere or not. (I'm thinking of the real classic on that, "My house is on the lake. Drop in some time."

On the first report, I answered 'Yes' to the question, quoted what was said, but did not go into very much detail on sincerity. I generally don't add a great deal of narrative on 'Yes" answers unless there was something unusual about the question. Of course, I explain all 'No' answers thoroughly. Result: the editor informed me that "Hope to see you soon." was not an invitation to visit.

On the second report, I answered 'No' to the question (only because of the earlier guidance from the editor), quoted what was said and did go into detail in the narrative as outlined in my original post above.

I tend to agree with the second, and most recent, editor as I also feel that was an invitation to visit. My rub is the only reason I answered this question the way I did was because of the guidance from editor #1 awhile ago. I was attempting to align myself with this MSC and editorial style with my answer even though I personally disagree with the position. Both scenarios and reports are substantially the same. The way I answered the second report was a direct domino effect from the way the editor ruled on the first report.

I hear and understand what you are saying. If you continue doing these reports you may need to provide reasons for both the 'yes' and 'no' scenarios.

There is no way we get to control who edits our reports and there are indeed the good, the bad and the ugly editors out there. The loss of a point from time to time because the editor is a schmuck is not a huge deal, though annoying.

Will they not give you examples?

@ggm2016 wrote:

Will they not give you examples?

The guidelines don't give examples and so far the only examples I've had to work from have been the two conflicting scenarios from two editors.

A list of acceptable invitations would be nice, but as flash has pointed out, it really comes down to inflection and sincerity on the part of the employee and not so much the exact verbiage used (at least in our opinion -- maybe not in the view of some of the editors).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2016 04:36PM by msimon-2000.

I'm not sure I find the two editors remarks to be as conflicting as you do. Since the first employee did not specifically invite you to the store and you did not explain further, the first editor was being stringent. The second time your narrative conveyed how the same statement actually did make you feel you were being invited even if the statement didn't conform to standards.

@LisaSTL wrote:

I'm not sure I find the two editors remarks to be as conflicting as you do. Since the first employee did not specifically invite you to the store and you did not explain further, the first editor was being stringent. The second time your narrative conveyed how the same statement actually did make you feel you were being invited even if the statement didn't conform to standards.

1st report: Employee says, "Hope to see you soon." I click yes to the question 'Did the employee invite you to visit'. (editor says not an invite)

2nd report: Employee says "I sure hope to see you soon." I click no to the question 'Did the employee invite you to visit'. (editor says this is an invite)

The sincerity was the same in both interactions. I guess it comes down to how much detail you give in narratives for yes answers. I tend to hit on the yes answers, but not go into a great amount of detail. I tend to write very long narratives as it is, and if I did go into length for all yes answers, I'd be writing reports 24/7. If I answer Yes to a question, that to me implies the employee was sincere without having to delve into great detail. Am I wrong for thinking this way?

Lisa, I don't see how these two scenarios don't conflict from an editorial standard...

I said your narrative explained it more completely in the second one. The first editor didn't have a glimpse into how the line was delivered, dull and flat as if it is said all the time or warm and welcoming making you want to visit the store.

The upscale retail jobs I do, see you soon wouldn't work. They are looking for the associate to get your email, sign you up, tell you about promotions to get you back in the store. Building a connection for the future.
Depends on what store your doing. but offering a business card, shaking your hand and saying, "Good to meet you, hope to see you again".....something like that.

@LisaSTL wrote:

I said your narrative explained it more completely in the second one. The first editor didn't have a glimpse into how the line was delivered, dull and flat as if it is said all the time or warm and welcoming making you want to visit the store.

Of course the second narrative contained more information since I answered 'No' to the question. All no answers require greater detail. I will admit that my narrative may have been somewhat rebellious in nature, since I felt forced to answer this question as NO because of the comments from the first editor when I really felt personally that the statement should have garnered a YES answer. Perhaps my opinion came through and swayed the second editor?

For the record (and the second time) I agree with the most recent editorial ruling and it aligns perfectly with my view of the scenario. My gripe I guess is that the first editor did not view my YES answer and "Hope to see you soon." as a sincere invitation to visit. That ruling then swayed me to select NO on the second report thinking that is what this MSC wanted when in fact they did not. This put me into a "Catch-22" situation where I ended up getting dinged on two reports as a result of the first editor's judgement.

@Irene_L.A. wrote:

The upscale retail jobs I do, see you soon wouldn't work. They are looking for the associate to get your email, sign you up, tell you about promotions to get you back in the store. Building a connection for the future.
Depends on what store your doing. but offering a business card, shaking your hand and saying, "Good to meet you, hope to see you again".....something like that.

Irene, As long as the MSC spells out their requirements in the guidelines and the editors rule in a similar fashion, I have no issue with whatever the client wants.

My gripe here is that I feel both my scenarios are very similar in nature. One editor ruled that this wasn't an invitation and the other says it was. So, how do I report the next shop for this MSC when the situation is similar to my first two scenarios and I am faced with this same dilemma?

@msimon-2000 wrote:

@Irene_L.A. wrote:

The upscale retail jobs I do, see you soon wouldn't work. They are looking for the associate to get your email, sign you up, tell you about promotions to get you back in the store. Building a connection for the future.
Depends on what store your doing. but offering a business card, shaking your hand and saying, "Good to meet you, hope to see you again".....something like that.

Irene, As long as the MSC spells out their requirements in the guidelines and the editors rule in a similar fashion, I have no issue with whatever the client wants.

My gripe here is that I feel both my scenarios are very similar in nature. One editor ruled that this wasn't an invitation and the other says it was. So, how do I report the next shop for this MSC when the situation is similar to my first two scenarios and I am faced with this same dilemma?

The problem always seems to be the Editor's different view on the same report. Maybe speaking to your scheduler next time may help...sorry, it's a tough call.

At the end of the day, both reports were accepted with "9" shop scores, I got paid, and the client got a solid report for their money.

I try not to dwell on "9" scores and I appreciate the editors comments if they will help me align myself more completely with the MSC and its' goals. I take my assignments seriously and try to do the very best job I can for each client. The frustration sets in when you take one editors comments to heart and it ends up affecting a future reported shop and score.

Now that I know this is a sticky editorial question for this MSC, I will take the advice from someone above and explain more thoroughly both Yes and No answers to this question and see if this helps going forward.

There really isn't a whole lot else I can do....

Just because you are not required to comment on "yes" answers doesn't mean you never should. There are MSC reports where the shopper must comment on every single question regardless.

@LisaSTL wrote:

Just because you are not required to comment on "yes" answers doesn't mean you never should. There are MSC reports where the shopper must comment on every single question regardless.

Point taken and beaten to death! I'm fairly sure my last post said exactly that I was planning on doing this very thing...

Let me ask you -- do you elaborate thoroughly on all yes answers in all of your narratives (even if this is a MSC that doesn't require all yes answers be touched on in the narrative)???

@msimon-2000 wrote:

Let me ask you -- do you elaborate thoroughly on all yes answers in all of your narratives (even if this is a MSC that doesn't require all yes answers be touched on in the narrative)???

With several companies it is de rigueur to comment on ALL questions whether they were Y/N/NA. A whole lot of grief is avoided the faster the shopper figures this out. Right off the top of my head, Service Check and Harland Clarke are two where I most frequently compose my narrative based on going down the list of questions asked and making confirming statements to each question in a cohesive narrative so they don't bother needing to ask me about anything because they couldn't find it in the narrative.

@Flash wrote:

@msimon-2000 wrote:

Let me ask you -- do you elaborate thoroughly on all yes answers in all of your narratives (even if this is a MSC that doesn't require all yes answers be touched on in the narrative)???

With several companies it is de rigueur to comment on ALL questions whether they were Y/N/NA. A whole lot of grief is avoided the faster the shopper figures this out. Right off the top of my head, Service Check and Harland Clarke are two where I most frequently compose my narrative based on going down the list of questions asked and making confirming statements to each question in a cohesive narrative so they don't bother needing to ask me about anything because they couldn't find it in the narrative.

And I do exactly the same when working for a MSC who asks for comments on every question. I also explain any yes or n/a questions that I feel are unusual in any way.

Having said that, I feel it is a waste of time, energy, and effort to write narrative comments for a straight up yes answer, that is cut and dry, for a MSC that doesn't require additional narrative for yes responses. If I am asked, "Was the business open during normal posted hours?" and they were open during normal posted hours with nothing unusual to report, then why waste room in the narrative restating something I have already answered?!

Back on topic for a moment, I may not have clearly said this earlier, but I actually did comment on the Yes answer in the narrative for the 1st report and quoted what was said to me, "Hope to see you soon." and even said something to the effect of I felt this was an inviting statement. This was the only way the editor would have seen the quote in the first place. So, actually, by expanding on a yes answer, I gave the editor the ammunition they eventually used to rule that the employee's statement was not an invitation to visit. By giving more information, I actually created the opportunity for a ruling. I surmise that had I simply clicked the yes button and not expanded on this in the narrative, then perhaps this issue never arises???!!!

Damned if you do and damned if you don't....

Msimom, Several msc I work for list the very responses you gave as acceptable for this question. If you send an email to the scheduler with a list of possible answers asking how to rate them you will hopefully get an emailed response which you can keep and then use if this issue comes up again. There have been several times when I have sent an editor a copy of an email I have gotten from a scheduler and it has been accepted by the editor.

@Irene_L.A. wrote:

The problem always seems to be the Editor's different view on the same report. Maybe speaking to your scheduler next time may help...sorry, it's a tough call.

Schedulers rarely can help out with editing issues. Many schedulers are not even fully versed in the guidelines for the shop. Their goal is to get all their shops scheduled as quickly as possible and at the lowest fee possible.

And before someone like Irene_L.A. jumps on my case, I said MANY schedulers not ALL schedulers.

My 2 cents: "Hope to see you soon" is a salutation of sorts, kind of like, ("Hope you have a nice day." It does not appear to be an invitation to come back....

If she said, "I hope you come back tomorrow for our Super Friday Sale. I will be here and we are giving away prizes. Would you be able to come back tomorrow?" This feels more like an invitation to come back to the business.

I agree with your usage SunnyDays2. I did not go into too much background detail about this shop and scenario. Both of my cases were pre-visit phone calls. So, in that context, I think "Hope to see you soon" is more of an invitation than it would be if used at the end of an onsite visit.

Sorry for not giving the exact context of the scenario upfront...

@msimon-2000 wrote:

I agree with your usage SunnyDays2. I did not go into too much background detail about this shop and scenario. Both of my cases were pre-visit phone calls. So, in that context, I think "Hope to see you soon" is more of an invitation than it would be if used at the end of an onsite visit.

Sorry for not giving the exact context of the scenario upfront...

The hardware store shop (phone) is looking to see if they invite you down to their store. The guy says, "My name is Robert. I will be here until 6 p.m.. If you can come down today, I would be happy to show you the LED lights." That is an invitation to me.