I am positivly the LAST person to defend MSPA! I'm the one that asked the past presidents a whole lot of hostile questions recently! I'm amomg those who think the MSPA scare tactics about pending legislation ending independent contracting are a bunch of BS because they fear that they might actually have to pay their schedulers. MSPA want us, the shoppers, to write to our members of congress to bail them out! If you think I'm a shill for the MSPA, think again.

If you are anti-MSPA, why support *their* certification program and suggest it to other shoppers?

I kinda think you are asking the wrong question to the wrong person Dee Shops. Sure the presentation sounded very pro-certification, but the real issues that Steve was raising go well beyond whether to buy a rubber stamp on your shopper ass or not.

1) Why is the MSPA not being proactive about getting their companies to behave in an ethical manner and fulfill their side of contracts with shoppers?
2) Why is it that the MSPA does not have the wholehearted support of a whole lot of good companies that treat shoppers well and have no need to tout their MSPA membership on their websites or even to get it?
3) If it is the consensus that shoppers need training to be 'good' shoppers, why isn't there a widespread no cost shopper training except by individual companies themselves?
4) Why is it that not all MSPA members even acknowledge or ask about MSPA certification? Is it perhaps because they too recognize it is marginally useful or predictive of shopper skill/success?

And yes, if I wanted lots of cheap jobs from cheap MSPs, I might shell out the $115 for the rump stamp "Certified Prime", but that certainly is not my goal in shopping!

I don't disagree with what you posted, Flash. Those are all great questions.

But Walesmaven was here pushing the cert. I stand by my question and await her answer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2009 10:23PM by dee shops.

I'm happy to hear that someone put a bit of spotlight on the actions of the MSPA, walesmaven. I did not feel like I had much support when I was up in arms about that same subject last year.

I would not consider you a shill for the MSPA, but I disagree that the decision to get certified should only be based on economics. There are ethical components to it as well.

Just as shopping for a company that treats shoppers poorly or does not pay in a timely fashion hurts all shoppers, supporting a system that requires shoppers to pay in order for them to be eligible for assignments hurts our group as a whole, even if it supplies additional profit for you.

Until we, as a group, start thinking more globally, we will remain underpaid, disrespected and controlled by an organization that does not have out best interests at heart.

Still laughing at your description above, Flash :^)

I think your questions are essentially rhetorical, since we all seem agree that the MSPA is looking out only for the MSCs. I will share my experience, which may help shed some light on question #4.

I'm sure I have posted elsewhere that my experience as a scheduler led me to generally disregard certification when scheduling. The rate of flakes had a negligible difference for me, but the quality of the reporting was markedly different. It was not in favor of the Gold certified shoppers, however

While most newbies would be concerned with doing a good job and study the instructions provided, Gold shoppers, on the other hand, would often go on assignments without full regard for the shop guidelines. It seemed to me that the gold shoppers felt they had 'earned their stripes' and were somehow exempt from conforming to the specific requirements that my MSC had.

I often heard back from gold shoppers complaining about their shop scores with statements like, "Other companies don't require that!"

I guess that answers question #3 as well. Since these MSCs are in competition with each other, what is acceptable to one may not be acceptable to another. A unified training would take an advantage away from quality MSCs and price would be the main factor for them to market with. Where would we be then?

Wow! That sure is a different experience than those who paid for it state about themselves and their other ore-happy peers. And given the company you are talking about, you are talking about long long narratives, not check the box answers. Score one for us types who don't promote the gold.

And again you pose a clear and thoughtful line of information, Steve.

I think a whole lot of my concern and disdain for the MSPA Certifications centers on the notion that by paying your money you are somehow qualified. In the 'real world' I have reviewed lots of resumes to hire folks who boasted a BA and MA and one guy who even boasted of a PhD. Unfortunately I knew the diploma mills that churned out these useless documents that represented none of the qualities that a program designed to actually educate stands for. By their very existence diploma mills cheapen the process of devoting a handful of years of your life to widening your horizons and learning.

I am in full agreement with you that there is no one body of information that shoppers need to adequately, fully and appropriately perform shops and report their observations. The time to teach responsibility and ethical behavior is with the young--if they don't learn it then, they are unlikely to learn it later. The time to learn to read carefully and with comprehension is similarly with the young, as is the ability to express yourself in writing. While all of these skills can be honed in adulthood, if they haven't been important enough to the individual to master in school, the prognosis for them being mastered for a $15 or $30 shop is poor. No amount of shelling out of cash can override or compensate for those lacks of abilities and skills. And yes, there is a false sense of superiority for having shelled out the money as those with certifications quite frequently include them in their siggy lines on emails and forum posts as if they were of badges of honor. Perhaps a better siggy line would be:

Survivor of _____ # shops
____ rejections
____ flakes
Longest narrative _____ words

LMAO Flash. That would be an interesting signature line.

Survivor of _____ # shops
____ rejections
____ flakes
Longest narrative _____ words

I'm jiggy with it It could be a big fat exaggeration though. Have to work on the credibility issue.

Survivor of _____ # shops
____ rejections
____ flakes
Longest narrative _____ words

Has my vote

Yes, unfortunately siggy lines would need to be updated over time and the 'history' of the shopper would be lost.

Make it a thread called "My History." Shoppers could update quarterly.

I can't imagine trying to come up with the first number. The rest are a breeze.

I think I cold compete on an Olympic level in the narrative length division.

somehow the same post posted twice....so I deleted this one.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/22/2009 02:11AM by dee shops.

Survivor of over 3500 shops
5 rejections
1 flake
Longest narrative 4600 words, unless you count my Master's thesis, which is MUCH longer.

This is a guestimate on the number of shops. I can't be bothered to pull up annual records and add it up, so I went on a lowball number per month that varied based on each year in order to represented a guestimate for each year that I was shopping, than added those to come up with the figure. The other numbers I knew.

Survivor of over 1500 shops as a shopper (more than that as editor)
1 rejection
1 flake
Longest narrative 23,204 words

Using the same logic as Dee to get the first number. The rejection was from 2003 and it still hurts (damm you, Bestmark). The flake was from this year and the result of a shop instruction being so ridiculous, I couldn't bring myself to go through with it when I got to the bank. The narrative was still on my desktop from a November shop.

Survivor of 3742 shops as a shopper
2 1/2 rejections
1 flake
Longest narrative around 12,000 words

I actually have numbered my shops since Day 1. 2 shops were rejected because the target refused to provide information in writing and having the information was not enough. The 1/2 was I was given specific instructions to purchase X and was supposed to have figured out myself from the general instructions that I should purchase Y and raised question about it???? We split that one. The flake was a phone shop I totally forgot to do in the 3 hour window it was to be done--I remembered it an hour and a half later. Longest narrative is an estimate because it was shorter and longer narrative pieces with then a lengthy overall narrative on a hotel shop.

There is a big difference between supporting the MSPA certification and recognizing that gold certification may be worthwhile to me and other shoppers.

BTW, I don't see anyone here supporting the idea of an independent, for shoppers, by shoppers, training and education program. In fact, some here have sneered at the first conference organized by shoppers to help educate shoppers. That conference of shoppers welcomed NON-MSPA company participants and got a windfall of support from NON-MSPA companies, as well as a few forward-looking MSPA member.

Too bad none of you were there to see nine MSPA past presidents making fools of themselves in front of a large shopper audience....and on tape! Talk about a bunch of dinosaurs! The MSPA tried everything they could think of to sink that independent conference and, then, at the last minute, offered their past presidents panel to "tell us about MSing." They were pathetic and, very condescending to shoppers. They also lost some company members, I think.

Personally, I don'y pay much attention to whether or not a company is an MSPA member; MSPA is not, and never was, for the benefit of shoppers.

Frankly the sneering comes from what was proposed. This forum and others try their darndest to educate shoppers in a no-cost environment. Asking minimum wage and lower folks to lay out $100 or more for training at an on site conference somewhere when it will qualify them for minimum wage and lower work is irresponsible. So peacocks got to parade.

walesmaven Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is a big difference between supporting the
> MSPA certification and recognizing that gold
> certification may be worthwhile to me and other
> shoppers.


What is that difference, exactly, to YOU? For I certainly miss your distinction.

By telling shoppers to get certified, by telling them that it will make them more money, you *support* the MSPA certification. By using it to make yourself more money, you support it. By supporting it, via extension, you also support the MSPA, and the mostly "good old boy" network that dominates it, even if inadvertently.

While we frequently hear from those who purchased their ore-dipped paper that they are told ores are more reliable and better shoppers, we have one ex-scheduler who worked for a firm that required detailed observations and extensive writing who is willing to state here that he was not happy with the the ore's.

If NO ONE paid attention to the MSPA's certification, and hence no one got certified, then (the few) MSC's (that use it) would not be able to use that to differentiate "good" from "bad" shoppers. (I think less of them actually do than do not, but...) The only thing that cert. does is set up a caste system built on a useless set of variables, in my opinion (yours may vary), as mostly newbs. get it. I don't think, in general, a newbie with bling does the same quality of work as someone with over 100 shops with written narrative does. More experience than 100? Even better!

> BTW, I don't see anyone here supporting the idea
> of an independent, for shoppers, by shoppers,
> training and education program. In fact, some
> here have sneered at the first conference
> organized by shoppers to help educate shoppers.
> That conference of shoppers welcomed NON-MSPA
> company participants and got a windfall of support
> from NON-MSPA companies, as well as a few
> forward-looking MSPA member.

For me, it was a combination of factors that made and continue to make this not useful. Flash got to the economic side of it, but there are personnel issues. If someone doesn't respect the people putting it together, why would s/he want to attend? Why would they need to, anyway, when so much info is available online? For FREE.

>
> Too bad none of you were there to see nine MSPA
> past presidents making fools of themselves in
> front of a large shopper audience....and on tape!
> Talk about a bunch of dinosaurs! The MSPA tried
> everything they could think of to sink that
> independent conference and, then, at the last
> minute, offered their past presidents panel to
> "tell us about MSing." They were pathetic and,
> very condescending to shoppers. They also lost
> some company members, I think.

I am not at all surprised by the behavior of the MSPA people at the conference. Not at all. Especially given the poor way most (but thankfully, not all) MSC's treat shoppers. Why would it be different in that venue?

> MSPA is not, and never was, for the benefit of shoppers.

Most of us here are well aware of that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/22/2009 06:20AM by dee shops.

Cilla, I think you are sidestepping the point that many of us are getting at.

Your decision to certify gold, simply because it's beneficial to you, appears selfish and irresponsible because you represent yourself as someone who is trying to further the education and support of all shoppers.

As much as it would have pleased me to publicly lambast the poorly administrated conference that you will so vehemently defend, I bit my tongue and severed myself from it, because that was the responsible thing to do. During the planing stage of that conference, any discussion that was not completely kissing the a** of the MSPA was immediately stifled.

While I believe your heart may be in the right place and congratulate you for giving the MSPA an earful, I think your logic is not entirely sound. You slap the MSPA in the face with one hand while patting them on the back with another.

I have always contended that a better training system needs to be put in place for shoppers, and paid for by the MSCs, rather than those who are already financially burdened. Your solution is to charge shoppers even more money to train themselves in a manner that is not officially recognized by anyone.

If any shopper is not getting the jobs they want and has $99 burning a hole in their pocket, I suggest they take a writing class at their local community college.

I am coming to realize that most of the posters here know more about shopping than anyone teaching a worthless Ore course. It is for newbies. What I find comical is a MSC stating that "Only Gold Shoppers qualify for this shop". The shop must be run by a board member of MSPA. A bloody idiot could do the shop that they require "Gold" for. I think I am in the wrong business. Maybe I should open a Platinum certification course for $500 and I will even provide free course material. Then I could really retire as I am sure that there are many non knowing newbies who will purchase my "Platinum certification course.....One step above the Gold for shoppers who really care about their knowledge base." Right!!!

Don't give the MSPA any big ideas, Doc. :-)

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Survivor of over 3500 shops
> 5 rejections
> 1 flake
> Longest narrative 4600 words, unless you count my
> Master's thesis, which is MUCH longer.
>
> This is a guestimate on the number of shops. I
> can't be bothered to pull up annual records and
> add it up, so I went on a lowball number per month
> that varied based on each year in order to
> represented a guestimate for each year that I was
> shopping, than added those to come up with the
> figure. The other numbers I knew.

Flake-I just screwed up, but it on the calendar for the wrong Tuesday, and it was one of those that you could ONLY DO that ONE day. Although that scheduler used to give me lots of shops, now I never get any. And I begged forgiveness, offered to reshop, etc. My fault totally.

Rejects-
One pizza. I ordered it "well done." Instructions say cannot modify topping-says nothing about temperature. Went back and forth. I lost. Lived to shop again, and for $$$ bonuses (but I still rarely do this pizza, as it doesn't taste very good, especially after mangling.)

One restaurant-I was late reporting and while I was editing it for final submission, it disappeared. Still shop constantly for this firm, though. My fault.

One restaurant-I misread the instructions and took a female guest when I could only bring someone of the opposite sex. Same firm as above, and I still constantly shop for them. My fault totally.

One store-store was closed, snapped pic to show, shop got rejected as it "should have been open." I was new. Didn't know to fight it. Big monolith that abuses shoppers. Wah. My bad not to know to fight. I still shop for them, but they are far from my fav, and I only pick very specific shops.

One FF. Ordered the wrong meal. I read the wrong part of the day for the instructions, and should have ordered a different meal. My fault. Big monolith. I still shop for them, but they are far from my fav, and I only pick very specific shops.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/22/2009 09:32AM by dee shops.

This thread started out, way back when, discussing flake rates of bling'd vs. bling-less shoppers. So, lets look at the 3 of us bling-less ones who posted our stats:

Shopper #1 (me): 3500+ shops; 5 rejects; 1 flake.
rejection rate: 0.001428571428571 (1/700 shops)
flake rate:0.000285714285714 (1/3500 shops)

Shopper #2: 1500+ shops; 1 reject, 1 flake.
rejection rate: 0.001428571428571 (1/1500 shops)
flake rate: 0.001428571428571 (1/1500 shops)

Shopper #3: 3742 shops; 2.5 rejections; 1 flake.
rejection rate: 0.000668091929449 (2.5/3742 shops)
flake rate: 0.00026723677178 (1/3742 shops)


There are some SERIOUSLY excellent shoppers here without gold bling. Ore-obsessed, you have competition from your peers who don't have the same value system as you. Schedulers, do you read? MSPA, do YOU?

I have only had one MSC state that they wanted ore only. It was for a shop that any one with an iq of 80 could do. I promptly took them off my list (decertified them) so that I would not be bothered with another idiot. As it may not seem, I only have 5 MSC's on my S---list and they will remain there until I wither and die. The rest have their foibles but are tolerable to good and even some excellent. Dee...You might notice I did not mention who the fools are... Doc

Yes, I did. :-)

I'm not sure if my feedback will be welcome, but I thought members of this forum might like to hear the point of view of a mystery shopping company that is a member of the MSPA.

I agree with a great deal of what SteveSoCal, Flash and Dee have stated in this thread. After being in business for 3.5 years, it's become clear to our team that we cannot correlate MSPA certification with shopper reliability or quality of work. The reality is that many of our best shoppers are not certified and some of the poorest quality work has been submitted by Gold certified shoppers. We also have Gold certified shoppers who produce outstanding work. Like Steve, we have also experienced Gold shoppers who believe that they should not have to go thorough the same assignment preparation as uncertified shoppers.

We have found that the manner in which our shopper application is completed is one way that we can predict reliability and quality. In particular, those shoppers who submit a high quality writing sample seem to be more reliable and submit higher quality work their counterparts who do not fill out the application completely.

What is really comes down to for us is a person's attitude and aptitude. I'd rather work with an inexperience new shopper who wants to do a good job rather than an experienced person who is more set in their ways. It's in our best interest to continue to improve the manner in which we prepare shoppers for assignments, communicate with our shoppers and work toward building an long-term relationship with our best shoppers.

Although we are an MSPA member, I agree with much of what has been stated about the organization and it's certification program. Flash is right on target with regard to the reasons that the current program is inadequate. In my opinion, until there is mutual accountability in our industry, any certification program is going to be meaningless. Until then, forums like this one are very valuable so that new shoppers have a peer-based resource to rely on for information.

Best wishes to all of you for a happy and safe holiday season.

Sincerely,

Dave Agius, Owner
The Sentry Marketing Group
www.sentrymarketing.com

No, I don't think the MSPA rating gives you an advantage - just costs money and gives you a headache.

Dave, I want to thank you for the well thought out input this time around on this forum. No shoppers were killed in the making of that post, LOL. :-)