You forgot, "I told my boyfriend I would call him back as soon as I could get rid of this guy/girl."

I've been skulking around the forum for years and have just signed up, mostly to post this topic. I was just totally taken aback by the whole thing.

prettygul1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have and it was basically when the person tried
> to get out of the trouble they were in. That is
> why I gladly believe in video. I wish McDonald's
> would start video shopping. It would cut out a
> lot of the foolishness they have going on in
> there.

As badly as they may need it, McDonald's probably cannot afford to do (very many) video shops. Maybe one per location per year, and even then likely only corporate stores and new franchisees as the current franchisees may be able to weasel out of them as I doubt their current contract allows for video shops run by McD's corporate.

I have been MS'ing for ten years and have been challenged twice. The first was a restaurant report with unfavorable findings whereas the employees lied about my presence there. The MS company accepted their lies over my report and it seemed to be an automatic response in the interest of keeping the client. The second also involved a staff member lying. The MS company believed me and the video backed me up, but because my face was identified on the video, I could no longer conduct shops for that credit union. It is simply an occupational hazard.

I once had to purchase and then return an $800 hand bag. This was early in my shopping career, never again would I attempt a shop like that now, but that is beside the point. I shopped the manager of the small boutique who challenged what I had reported. No, she did not offer to show me the matching wallet, and no, something else was not covered. That was the only time I had the MSC contact me with the shopped employee's response. I was pretty new, and it was horribly uncomfortable, but I just reiterated what I had said in the report, and I didn't hear anything further.

The other time I was challenged, I was accused of not having even gone to the store. And of course that happened in my rookie time. I was asked to describe their location, the displays and how I missed counting the actual number of associates in the store.

I reminded them that the question was how many associates were visible when I entered the store. If the other associates came while I was at the store, they, of course, were not included. And then I told them which stores were on the left and right sides, across them and where the Coat Check was. That the store was actually located at the back of the mall and also named the major upscale store in the vicinity. I also described how the store arranged their display, including the contents of the counter top beside the Cash Register. I explained that I had a difficult time getting a blouse and returning it to the round shirt racks because they were crowded. I practically gave them more which further gave a negative image of the store.

The shop was accepted and never again was I challenged in any shop under that MSC. But I was a nervous wreck when I received a very encouraging email from the MSC. I reminded myself that although a mystery shopper must try to be inconspicuous to the associates; when it concerns the MSC, the best way to maintain a good rapport and a good image is to ensure that he/she is remembered in a very positive way.

KathyC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have been MS'ing for ten years and have been
> challenged twice. The first was a restaurant
> report with unfavorable findings whereas the
> employees lied about my presence there. The MS
> company accepted their lies over my report and it
> seemed to be an automatic response in the interest
> of keeping the client. The second also involved a
> staff member lying. The MS company believed me and
> the video backed me up, but because my face was
> identified on the video, I could no longer conduct
> shops for that credit union. It is simply an
> occupational hazard.

So, the employee learned that mystery shopping reports are "null and void" if that employee protests the report

What have they learned? Mystery shoppers and their reports mean nothing. Unless the MSC and the client stand by the shopper, there is no point in having us there.

I had a shop at a casual dining restaurant, which disputed my report. This client said that my report had discrepancies and blatantly lied on my guest. My gut tells me it was the manger, who I privately felt was phony, but I had to be objective in my report since he did not do anything wrong.

My saving grace was that I had it on tape. However, they never were interested in listening to the tape, which would have definitely disproved their lies. The report ended up being thrown out but I was still paid. I will happily never shop for this client again. With management like that, they deserve what they get.

I have noticed that I receive much higher scores when my reports are positive. That is a bit disconcerting, especially when I have tons of data to back up my claim of "less than perfect service".

KathyC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have noticed that I receive much higher scores
> when my reports are positive. That is a bit
> disconcerting, especially when I have tons of data
> to back up my claim of "less than perfect
> service".


Same here. And that defeats the purpose of mystery shopping.
It tends to discourage shoppers to report on actual experience in
fear of ruffling some feathers.

DrSquash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> prettygul1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I have and it was basically when the person
> tried
> > to get out of the trouble they were in. That
> is
> > why I gladly believe in video. I wish
> McDonald's
> > would start video shopping. It would cut out a
> > lot of the foolishness they have going on in
> > there.
>
> As badly as they may need it, McDonald's probably
> cannot afford to do (very many) video shops. Maybe
> one per location per year, and even then likely
> only corporate stores and new franchisees as the
> current franchisees may be able to weasel out of
> them as I doubt their current contract allows for
> video shops run by McD's corporate.


McDonald's can certainly afford video shops. They're just too cheap to pay the higher fees.

dmh426,

I know that situation can be taken personally, as you did give the best report possible. The unfortunate reality is that some employees who are shopped will try to refute it. The fact that the scheduler contacted you for more information is a good thing. As an editor for a mystery shopping company, I will have clients contact me with questions because the employee refuted some of the information provided in the report. In these cases, I e-mail or call shoppers to get any details that will help avoid this situation. It's a difficult situation I don't enjoy as an editor. In some cases, it is just a misunderstanding of information. A conversation with the shopper usually leads to an amicable resolution. Most clients are going to accept the information provided, but they are asking MSCs to provide a little more detail.

On a similarly related topic, be sure your contact information with your MSC is current, such as working phone numbers and the correct e-mail address. Editors would rather send the shop through to the client than try to contact you for more information. In the instances they do, they have a very good reason for it and it is in your best interest to provide the best information possible.

Apartment shops are known to offer such rebuttals as well. The MSC seldom takes the word of the shopper.

Sometimes there is no offer from the ms company to participate in a dispute, so getting the offer is probably a good thing in most cases. I gave information about negative issues at a hotel once. Despite receiving a positive report for the manager's handling of the situation, the manager decided to "out" me. One way to get out of trouble and get a mystery shopper banned is for employees to say (for whatever reason they can muster) that they knew it was a mystery shop. Smart ones can give a good reason, something that really happened, that gave it away, even if at the time it occurred it did not. Once the claim is made the employee is "in the clear" for some reason. I guess because the focus has changed from what the employee did to what the shopper did. How can a shopper rebut the facts of what actually happened? The shopper cannot. And since the shopper also cannot see into the mind of the employee, the shopper doesn't know if the employee recognizes them as a shopper. Until the report is presented to the client and the employees have a chance to play their end of the game, the shop is not over.

This actually happened to me on the same type of shop (a storage visit). The employee was servicable but not overly helpful and missed some of the required lines the company asks them to say. I did not rip her apart, but did point out the mistakes. Since I'm pretty new to this game, I naively thought the information was used to "generally" teach employees, not single them out for missing a few questions! And also not show them my report!

In any case, after I received the rebuttal from the employee I realized she had all my information (address, email, description etc.) and remembered exactly who I was. It freaked me out. I've since decided to stick with the upscale restaurant reviews where I'm not required to give an address or a physical description. Mostly because I'm doing this as supplemental income I have the luxury of accepting a nice meal as payment.

I had a car salesman call me and tell me that my report got him terminated. Come to find out it was not true. My guess is the sales manager got with the salesman and had a good laugh over the report. I indicated in the report the salesman was not a good listener and was more of a talker. I made a comment about auto makers actually placing tablets in cars and he said the car we were driving had one. It did not, it had a camera, voice activated commands for radio etc..Not a tablet. I was talking about an actual computer built in. Anyway, the salesman continued to talk over me. He later called me and told me that he had gotten fired which worried me. Honestly it effected my work for about a week. Everything I did I was worried about. I second guessed myself on everything. I was reading where about video recording. What are thoughts about doing this. I have done it for apartment shops but to do it on every shop, yes, I have thought about it. I think it would actually help in some cases where the shop is long and there might be things you could forget. Does anyone actually use a PVR all the time? Where do you find an inexpensive one. I have some of those little button camera's (very cheap) they only last about 30 minutes.

vlade5394: Many times, if the employee forgets their name tag, they will use one that is in the basket under the counter; either a generic or someone else's.

Often, I've documented the same name, same location for different employee's, knowing that they don't have their own tag on.

Hi- Had a bank teller state he did ask if I wanted new account. Didn't. My scheduler stood behind me 100%.. She stated she thought the guy was trying to wiggle out. Would go almost anywhere for this kind of support.

The scheduler in this case did stand behind me. She said the client did too. It definitely put a bad taste in my mouth for this company, but when I understood what was going on behind the scenes, I was fine. Unfortunately, videotaping is not an option in my state. Like I said to the scheduler, how has more reason to lie- the employee or the shopper???

I wouldn't blame the MSC on this. They are responding/acting as the client asked them to. Clearly the scheduler was on your side, but they gotta get paid to pay you.

I had this happen with an apartment shop. The employee said that I walked into the apartment, threw up my hands and said "This won't work!" Many more comments were fabricated by the employee.

The company contacted me, I told them what actually happened, and they took the side of the employee. They reduced the number of jobs I could take also.

It was clear to me that the company was more interested in protecting (and keeping) the client rather than the shopper (me).

I decided that was not the type of company I wanted to work with, and I don't.

actually had this happen at a fast food shop wich took 21 minutes in th e drive thru

Merky: "Since I'm pretty new to this game, I naively thought the information was used to "generally" teach employees, not single them out for missing a few questions!

And also not show them my report!" >>

~~~~~~

Actually Merky, your personal information is shown to (targets) on car dealerships shops, apartments shops, banks shops (if you have an account there) and the list goes on..

While you want your "anonymity"... the target is entitled to view and dispute the report [in most cases,] (which I think most targets do./ get to see if the report, if it has negative/positive feedback).

We may not think they are entitled to see the report, but in many cases, their jobs are on the line.

CotePony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> vlade5394: Many times, if the employee forgets
> their name tag, they will use one that is in the
> basket under the counter; either a generic or
> someone else's.
>
> Often, I've documented the same name, same
> location for different employee's, knowing that
> they don't have their own tag on.


Yes I'm quite aware of this practice, having working in a place were something similar was not unheard of. Be assured that I reminded the MSP of this possibility in my response.

"The employee stated he "knew" he was being shopped."

Really?

You gave poor service and you KNEW you were being shopped?

Who are you kidding?

I once had a editor call me and ask "Did it really take 21 minutes to get a hot and ready pizza?" LOLOL YES IT DID!! All I kept thinking as I was waiting was "They are not going to believe this" and they didn't. She did believe me after I explained the situation.

On a similar note, I always worry if I am being "made" as a shopper for places I shop often because they can't get any other shoppers to do them. However, given the service I receive I have decided they cannot know I am the shopper or I would get much better service.

Sunnydays2,

I know exactly what you mean. I've heard this excuse come down the pipe a few times and it does seem odd. In a lot of cases, a great score means some sort of bonus. If you want that bonus, you dig deep and make sure you cover everything. Leave nothing to question.


Beyond simply using mystery shops as a teaching tool, they are also supposed to motivate employees to give their best efforts in every interaction, the thought being they can't be certain it is a mystery shopper. If you truly believe you are being shopped, do your best--go over-the-top. It can only benefit. Disconnecting because you believe it is a mystery shop serves no purpose. If it's a real customer, you possibly lose a sale. If it's a mystery shop, you suffer the consequences of a poor report.

I don't fully understand why anyone would act otherwise.

Seeing the report, I understand. I don't understand why they need our personal information, including our names, though.


SunnyDays2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually Merky, your personal information is shown
> to (targets) on car dealerships shops, apartments
> shops, banks shops (if you have an account there)
> and the list goes on..
>
> While you want your "anonymity"... the target is
> entitled to view and dispute the report (which I
> think most targets do./ get to see if the report,
> if it has negative/positive feedback).
>
> We may not think they are entitled to see the
> report, but in many cases, their jobs are on the
> line.

StormCloud,

There are some clients who use your names for internal use, such as confirmation that the rotation restriction is being observed. I don't know that we've ever provided the contact information for mystery shoppers to clients, as that is rather irregular.

Most clients will receive a copy of reports without any identification of shoppers. The information provided pertains more to the shop itself as opposed to those carrying it out.

I shopped the upscale dining room at a gaming venue several times. After one shop, the client requested that I be removed from the project because I made a scene at the hostess stand. The hostess did not get the best review. The msc called and asked me to describe myself. Since I'm a short blonde and the person in question was an Asian woman, the msc believed me and sided with me, but had to abide by the client's request. I was paid, but I could no longer shop that venue.

Shortly after, the client changed mscs. I shopped the same venue with the new msc! Then, the next year, the client went back to the first msc. The client forgot all about me and I shopped there again!

I agree with all of you who said:
--Why bother having shoppers if the employee can just refute our reports?
--Why are we penalized (not paid, removed or deactivated) because they didn't do their jobs right?
--Why don't the employees work harder if they think they're being shopped?

I wonder if any contracts are written that say that the msc and shopper get paid no matter what the report says, negative or positive. Outside of doing the shop wrong, why shouldn't we get paid? Is
there a list of mscs out there that will always pay?