I agree. Silver or gold could/should reflect a shopper's qualifications. Criteria should be attached ... number of shops, ratings, demonstrated ability to follow direction and write narrative. I think Flash once suggested a requirement that three MSPs must recommend the shopper for certification.

Am I mistaken, or can a person with no shop history purchase certification?

Yes, John or Jane Doe could go purchase both silver and gold without ever having performed a shop. All they need to do is pay their $15 for silver, which I understand the test can be performed on line in 15-30 minutes and is just common sense. Previously they could have just attended the shopper conference that was presented by the MSPA to get Gold at a cost of about $100 for the conference. Now for $100 or so you can get the CD presentation for Gold and take an on line test, open book.

solideogloria Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think that having a certification/education
> process *could* potentially weed out the
> "housecoats" and make mystery shopping more
> legitimate and higher paying.

IMO that could only work if the certification tests were free. Otherwise, again IMO, it is just a measurement of who has the most disposable income.

lisams901 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IMO that could only work if the certification
> tests were free. Otherwise, again IMO, it is just
> a measurement of who has the most disposable
> income.

I do believe that certification should be free and knowledge/experience based to be meaningful. I wouldn't mind seeing a small, eg $5-15, administrative fee for various levels of certification IF the certification was indeed a viable tool that represented something other than willingness to shell out money.

My personal reaction (and you know I rarely mince words when it comes to abuse of shoppers) is that rather than being a mark of 'seriousness' that many would argue, it is a mark of 'suckerhood' and a quick indicator for companies looking for individuals willing to work for bottom dollar.

I would only do it if I perceived I was receiving something of value. Right now, I don't have that perception.

The mere fact that anyone who pays $15 for silver can immediately turn around (the same day, if they want) and get the gold CD, *even if they have never shopped previously* makes it meaningless for me, personally.

Someone here made a comment about "college costing a lot more." Sure it does. But to graduate college, you have to prepare a lot more, learn a lot more, and spend a lot more time at learning it, unless you purchase a worthless degree from a degree mill...

If the gold had a requirement of time spent in the profession, it would mean a lot more, but there is no practical way to implement it without needlessly taking up the time of MSC's.

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If the gold had a requirement of time spent in the
> profession, it would mean a lot more, but there is
> no practical way to implement it without
> needlessly taking up the time of MSC's.

Needlessly? Earned certification could revolutionize this industry.

What I meant by that is that it would be an expense for them, needing to appoint a staffer to monitor it.

But I agree with your point.

And many MSCs already have in place a visible system of evaluations and many of them have a part of their system that changes your status from 'request shops' to 'self assign'. I am sure that many companies also have an undisclosed evaluation system that sets you up as 'average' (equivalent to the startup '5' of a SASSIE company) from which you raise or lower your value as a shopper based on shops performed. As you know, Dee Shops, it would not be terribly difficult to set software to "IF registered 1 yr or more THEN check shopper average. IF shopper average 8 or more THEN check # of shops performed. IF number of shops performed is EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 10 THEN send notice to MSPA." And of course the criteria could be set to different levels or be interpreted by MSPA as eligible for brass, bronze, silver, gold, platinum etc. Run once per month or once per quarter and accumulated, for example, by SS#, there actually could be overwrite on the MSPA database and a shopper could be notified by email of their eligibility for a different level of certification every time their status changed so they could choose to pay to have their new level of certification registered or not. And if you chose not to register until you reached a certain level, that would be fine as well. Criteria could well be set as performance at or above a certain level for 3 or 5 or how many were 'determined' to be a reasonable sampling of companies would generate the registration offer.

But just certification for payment is, as you pointed out, like buying a diploma on line. Worthless except to the greater fool.

I agree but in addition to you method the shopper should pay for the certification as well and qualify though your means. I mean there needs to be the revenue stream and paying also weeds out the people that say they were around for one year and did 1 shop per month which paid $5. This would be ridiculious to make them certified like that. Lets say they did 50 of those shops and that made them gold.. Even if they did 100 shops at $5 each that would be nothing. The report shows nothing and would not make sense to make them certified based on that. I think you are on the right direction but I think paying for the service is needed. It is optional which is why paying is not an issue and hey you make your $100 up like a snap of a finger.

sharkzfanz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> and hey you make your $100 up like a snap
> of a finger.


I'm not saying you are wrong, just saying that of everyone who has replied to this topic, you are the only one who has had that experience.

Actually, last night I signed up for three more companies that use the Sassie system and two out of the three both said on the ap that they do not recognize MSPA certification.

If they are doing quality work there is no reason whatsoever why they should be paying for the currently existing type of certification as well, which is what I think you are saying. And why should a shopper revenue stream be necessary to a professional association that represents the companies that hire us, not us ourselves? While the MSPA has a code of ethics for its companies that perhaps protects shoppers by their membership lists being companies that are less likely to be scams, I note that their membership list includes one company that has behaved unethically on this board, so there are definitely no guarantees there!

As for sorting out those folks who only perform cheap/simple shops, I would leave it to greater minds than mine to figure out reporting parameters that DO actually recognize quality. My point is that the information is there in the databases that with a tweak of the software could transmit information to a reporting system that monthly or quarterly could be automated to send out invitation emails to purchase a new certification 'level' if desired. And yes, shoppers would be free to delete the email if they thought it unnecessary or send in their fee to activate that level of certification.

As for 'make your $100 up like a snap of a finger' that has definitely not been the experience of shoppers I have communicated with over the years. Privately most have indicated it was a total waste. It is pretty damning when they indicate the best part of the shopper conference was lunch because the folks at the conference were all clueless newbies and only a couple of schedulers showed up who didn't work their area of the country anyway and/or their companies had no shops in their area. The adding insult to injury was they were getting no additional or better paying job offers or acceptances.

So yes, Kern may have used certification as a criteria, but not adequately for shoppers to feel it was money and time well spent.

Sharkz, I see this claim of yours an an exception, rather than the rule, based on others not making the same claim. On two posts here you have stated that you made the $100 back "in a snap." How? Over what time frame? What specifically changed for you the day you got the gold? What was the difference in shop prices you were offered? What was the difference in the kinds of shop? Others here and at other forums are not making these claims. I get a fair amount of shops that pay extremely well, but I also get the cheap ones. I have seen so many other gold shoppers saying they get offered "more shops, but paying something they wouldn't take anyway."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2009 07:06PM by dee shops.

Lets just say in my opinion and I will never say anyone is wrong outright but if you get certified you will begin getting some emails inviting you to join. You will also be looked at by schedulers more. You need to do some foot work. Email schedulers let them know your around and willing to shop. As soon as you join a company introduce yourself and let them know your certified. This gets you in the door of new companies much much easier since they have something to evaluate you by. So if you join a few companies and use being gold as a way to get in the door you can earn at least $100 and since you got the hardest thing done which is get your food in the door you then can shop shop shop and you will earn quite a but more then the $100 over the years of working for that company.

Ok. I certainly will not argue with you and am glad you feel you got your money's worth.

And if you already had your foot in the door, did anything change?

In my case, I went ahead and got certified right away. So did it make a difference? I never really will truly know. All I know is I have tended to get a ton of shops whereas my non-certified friends have not been able to break into the business much. Do I think the system is flawed? Sure. But it's all there is for now, other than having a reputation with schedulers. In my case, I just wanted to make myself stand out. I think I read a statistic somewhere (or maybe it was on the training video) that said less than 2% of shops get flaked on by gold certified shoppers as opposed to some crazy high percentage of non-certified. So, I'd say mine paid for itself almost immediately because I didn't have to spend as much time proving myself with low paying crappy shops. I'd say if you already have quite a few shops under your belt and you're wondering if getting certified will pay off, well... it may. Probably not quickly though. I have only gotten a few e-mails in the past couple of years that were for shops only offered to gold certified shoppers. One e-mail had a whole list of shops in my area, I got them all, and they paid about $70 total. Yes, they weren't very high paying, but they were SUPER easy and didn't have much to report. They just wanted gold certified shoppers because it was important to them to have the assignment completed that particular weekend and they didn't have time to deal with flakes.

I always wondered about the high number of flakes reported. Then there was someone on here who mentioned she looked at some jobs, had never done a shop, and was afraid she might have signed up for some because she was getting emails. Her final comment was that she was going to take a few days away from considering shopping. She has not returned to the forum since, but if indeed she managed to sign up for a bunch of work by accident she will be contributing mightily to the 'flake' numbers.

sharkzfanz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree but in addition to you method the shopper
> should pay for the certification as well and
> qualify though your means. I mean there needs to
> be the revenue stream and paying also weeds out
> the people that say they were around for one year
> and did 1 shop per month which paid $5. This would
> be ridiculious to make them certified like that.
> Lets say they did 50 of those shops and that made
> them gold.. Even if they did 100 shops at $5 each
> that would be nothing. The report shows nothing
> and would not make sense to make them certified
> based on that. I think you are on the right
> direction but I think paying for the service is
> needed. It is optional which is why paying is not
> an issue and hey you make your $100 up like a snap
> of a finger.


Sharkz, you say this, but you also support the current system, which is meaningless, except if you are a newb who has never shopped previously, get the gold, then you say "email schedulers and say" you have it. FWIS, you need to make a call one way or the other. Either it means something or not. Otherwise, as I see it, it is solely a method of clearing out some more serious newbs from others. Let's be real, here. Nothing you have said has supported very experienced folks, who already have contacts and track records with MSC getting jobs that pay better or that we would not get offered anyway.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/26/2009 10:02AM by dee shops.

Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I always wondered about the high number of flakes
> reported. Then there was someone on here who
> mentioned she looked at some jobs, had never done
> a shop, and was afraid she might have signed up
> for some because she was getting emails. Her
> final comment was that she was going to take a few
> days away from considering shopping. She has not
> returned to the forum since, but if indeed she
> managed to sign up for a bunch of work by accident
> she will be contributing mightily to the 'flake'
> numbers.


That person was like a walking advertisement for all tht is wrong with current system. Sign up? Not even know you did or did not? Someone does not have the proper skillset at the outset for what is required to do this job. Attention to detail is a must. If that little effort burnt her out, she is not gonna make it.

I have been out of the system that used research data for some of the planning we did for a long time. How can the data of only 2% gold shoppers flake compared to a high percentage of non gold shoppers who flake shops hold water? A lot of companies I signed up with did not even ask if I was gold certified. Some had the question but no requirement to answer it. I guess if one did not answer it menat they were not gold certified. Who did the research and how did they do it?

If a shopper is the kind who flakes shops they will do it with or without gold certification. It has to do with the kind of person they are not the certification they have. Of course, that is just my opinion.

I can see that kind of data being generated just as I can see folks who have shelled out $15 for Silver and $100 for Gold being serious enough about "making this work" that they don't dare flake. I am appalled if 2% of Gold flake because my understanding is that all of that training is geared to trying to make them ethical and responsible since little else in this business is uniform enough to be taught.

I think I heard that data from the training DVD. It's been so long since I've watched it that I don't remember for sure if that's where I heard it. I'm going to re-watch the DVD in the next few days. I've been meaning to re-watch it just to brush up on things. I'll see if it was Cathy Stucker for sure who gave this data. I don't know who came up with it.. maybe she says. Now I want to pull out that DVD again.

Schedulers and MSC owners have quoted flake rates that have astounded me. Averaging them out, the estimates would be a rate of at least 50% overall, but well under 5% for Gold certified shoppers. This is anecdotal, but so consistent that it has some validity.

It seems quite clear from these figures that the Gold distinction does carry a value. What surprises me is that more companies do not actively and relentlessly seek these shoppers,and pay them more.

Personally, the investment certainly paid off very quickly in two easily identifiable ways: one job for $95 and another for $125 landed within a few weeks of "going for gold," both of which specified the qualification as a requirement. I was also told by an MSC for whom I now do thousands of dollars of work a year that they never would have plucked my name from from a database unless I had had the qualification: they find it a useful screening tool.

In an industry where so little education and training is available, I believe that we need to embrace that which is available to us. If you feel that it is inadequate and needs to be improved or replaced by something else, why not work to help make it happen? I am rather leery of anyone who denigrates any opportunity for education and the improvement of one's skills.

With a Masters Degree and years and years of "Continuing Education" in several fields, I do not 'denigrate any opportunity for education and improvement' but I want it to be a MEANINGFUL EXPENDITURE OF TIME AND MONEY. Unfortunately I have spent many hours and many dollars in hours of required and meaningless fluff that was a total waste. Much of the time spent for qualifying and retaining many of the licenses and certifications I held before retirement was little more than making sure we had read the appropriate materials. For one license we literally had to sit in a classroom for 40 hours while the required text was read to us--yes, the requirement was that a person needed to read it aloud to us and he could not allow discussion or questions about the material. $250 for somebody to read me a book was not a good expenditure of my time or money. Would you consider my denigration of that inappropriate???

Mystery shopping companies and the MSPA have given me little reason to want to 'improve the industry'. My best and most consistent work comes from companies who have rejected the MSPA entirely or who at least are not actively engaged with it. If MSPA companies do not care to use my services because I don't have the correct rubber stamp on my right buttock, it is definitely their loss But interestingly, they don't ask I reveal my rubber stamp to get decent jobs.

I hold the terminal degree in my field, work teaching college, and value education greatly. I do not see the gold certification as a worthwhile mechanism for learning as it currently stands. If the MSC's want to improve the training that they devised, let them. I have better things to do with my time
than work unpaid to help people that have had years to work out a better system
than they currently devised, especially when I consider the analytical brain power MSC's have on their payroll.

I am happy for those of you that feel it was a good investment. If I am missing out on opportunities because I am not gold certified, then so be it. I am not feeling that loss, as I get a large number of high paying opportunities without it.

Finally, I still have not read here where anyone with a few years of MS'ing and a great track record with a large number of companies took the gold and then their MS'ing life miraculously changed...

Ok.. just to update on the statistic... I'm rewatching the DVD now and Kathy Stucker states that the overall flake rate is about 25% and it's even higher for first-time shoppers, at about 50-60%. She said the rate is about 1% for MSPA Gold certified shoppers.

I wonder about that overall flake rate, but since I am not privy to walk away confessions, it may well be. I know that personally I have flaked on only one shop out of more than 2000 and that was because I got excited about an excursion suggested by my son and forgot entirely about a phone shop that was to be done between 2PM and 5PM. I have scrambled to reschedule when I was sick, a hurricane was pending or I had a flat tire in the driveway and couldn't get the spare to crank down from the undercarriage when I had a 1 hour window to do the job.

The MSPA Gold Certification was not designed for the highly educated nor for the autodidact. It provides solid (if not exciting) information about conducting mystery shops, how to write good narratives, the industry's code of conduct, the difference between scheduling companies and MSCs, how to build good relationships with schedulers ... set out in a way that the mythical "average" person who benefits from a structured learning environment could appreciate.

In an industry estimated to encompass anything from one to three million shoppers, it is a valuable tool for MSCs to quickly identify shoppers who have, at the minimum, learned the basic skills and can string together reasonably coherent sentences. Would it be worth it for a hobby shopper who takes a handful of assignments every now and then? Probably not. But if someone wants to get into the business on a serious basis, it is well worth the modest cost. When approaching a new MSC, I would much rather be considered as one of a select few (estimates on the number of Gold shoppers run from 5,000 - 10,000) than one of a million or more!

LadyBugg1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The MSPA Gold Certification was not designed for
> the highly educated nor for the autodidact. It
> provides solid (if not exciting) information about
> conducting mystery shops, how to write good
> narratives, the industry's code of conduct, the
> difference between scheduling companies and MSCs,
> how to build good relationships with schedulers
> ... set out in a way that the mythical "average"
> person who benefits from a structured learning
> environment could appreciate.


Then it is as I suspected - not a great investment nor a worthy investment for someone who has a few years with a good track record, already works with a large number of companies, and already has a college education behind them. To me, "the mythical average person" sounds like it is targeted at training newbies and those who may not have had to do large amounts of advanced writing.

If it is a mechanism for training newbs, which is what it sounds like, then so be it. But I don't think a brand new shopper with a DVD and few shops under their belt makes a "gold" shopper. It makes a better trained newb. If that is what it earmarked for, so be it. But then they still need a mechanism to "classify" those who have earned their stripes via good work over years in the profession.

Finally, if there are MSC's who are actually *disqualifying* shoppers with years of experience and great track records elsewhere in favor of someone with little to no track record and a gold certificate, then these people are not making good use of the number crunching brainpower of the staff on their payroll.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2009 01:44PM by dee shops.

I still guess I just don't 'get it'. Every ICA I remember ever signing has in it the ethical standards they expect of THEIR shoppers. Virtually every company has training, instructions, certifications and/or writing samples they find valid for THEIR shops. So the information is out there for free even for the newbie who is willing to read. As for how tos and other information, that is where I see shopper forums as being willing participants to keep newbies from needing to unnecessarily shell out their money for something that IMHO will not do them nearly as much good as doing some shops. Thus it continues to amaze me that folks who offer no shopper assistance on a forum come on proclaiming the great value of paying for certifications because it teaches and makes folks 'qualified'. Does Gold Certification prohibit your being helpful except in promoting Certification?