There is a company where I can see my shop after an editor has reviewed it. I just looked at one of them and my answers were completely changes. Not just the narrative, but some of the multiple choice answers were literaly changed. Where I selected "The interaction felt insincere" it was changed to "The associate was helpful and attentive" and so on. Then my narrative was also changed to support these answers. Basically, anything bad was taken out and only good things left in.
Has anyone seen this with their rerports before? Would you contact the company and tell them that your report was basically rewritten? Or leave it alone? I've only done 3 shops for this company, so it's not like a have a reputation that they have a reason to trust me more than their editor. But I feel this is just wrong. I have a PDF of the original report as it was submitted by me. I am tempted to contact the scheduler, but I don't want to screw up my chances of shopping with them in the future.

While I don't condone a MSC falsifying reports to keep their client happy, that is what I would suspect in this case and I think contacting the company about may be futile and potentially harmful to your relationship.

If the editor is going through the trouble to re-write a narrative, I doubt they are doing it just to be a thorn in your side. They are most likely being directed by the MSC to do this.

I think the reasoning for it is obvious. If client A hired MSC B for the shop reports and the scores continue to get better over time, client A will feel positive about the results they get from employing MSC B and keep the relationship going.

I think you are absolutely correct, Steve. Luckily (I guess) I don't get to see many of my reports post-edit or I feel I would lose all respect for some companies for the unethical practice. I noted Pollyanna changes to one report with a company and went back to look at previous reports. They had almost all been Pollyannaized, even when I was not being harsh but things were less than wonderful. On principle I rarely do shops for that MSP anymore. Of course on the positive side, I guess I will never be hauled into court to testify about a fired employee's performance during a shop. Of course the client is NOT getting what they are paying for.

I have never seen an edited report. I always wonder about what mine end up like. This is disturbing.

This is why I love audio and video recorded shops!

This was a company that uses clientsmart software. So if you shops for one, you might be able to see your edited shops.

I was really surprised to see them do it. Why even hire shoppers, just hire fiction writers.

shop-a-holic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>Why even hire shoppers, just hire fiction writers.

Because they still need a receipt and a staff name to pull off the sham.

Although I wouldn't mind one of my submissions being reworded for clarity and flow. Changing content is unethical. I spend a lot of time making sure what I'm conveying is objective. I use a lot of quotes to back it up. I'm not out to get anyone in trouble, but if they do it to themselves, that is their choice.

I do not know which company you are talking about. I would rather not know at this point. If I did, I would feel as though I would have to confront and not work for them anymore.

I've wondered if clients ever shop the MSCs. I know that I would. Plant a couple of office workers and get them to "shop" and follow up on the accuracy of the reports submitted by the MSCs.

I did shop a gas station once and the guy and his bud put out the joint when I rolled in. The MSC deleted my comment about that specific element only. I can see where something like that would be better followed up on by a private investigator.

SteveSoCal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> shop-a-holic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >Why even hire shoppers, just hire fiction
> writers.
>
> Because they still need a receipt and a staff name
> to pull off the sham.

This is so wrong in many levels. If this is the case, why bother asking the shopper to fill out the questions. Just ask for the receipt/picture. I wonder if any client actually would ask for non-edited version of the report.

walesmaven Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is why I love audio and video recorded shops!


I don't mind audio recorded shops, as they get the whole thing, but I still have some ethics issues that weigh on me due to my past job in HR and know that emps are often forced to sign agreements on the spot at the day of joining an org or not get hired afterall. But I have decided not to pursue video shops. Partly for the same reason, and even more, for the additional time they take. Yes, they pay well, right now, when few people know how to do them well. That will only go down as more people learn to do it. I don't want to wire myself, worry about equipment failures, carry 6 backup machines, worry about static electricity issues shorting the equipment, worry if the target can recognize my attire as out of character for the location, or worry about not getting paid due to any of these. Like I said on another thread about high couture..I require and GET 5X the normal pay to do their unrecorded, no target shops. They could not afford me if they went this route.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2010 10:32AM by dee shops.

There was once a televised report of a man who was convicted of something illegal totally based on the minutia of a mystery shop. The mystery shopper had to testify as to the accuracy of the report. If such a report had been altered, the case would not have held water. I for one, would not testify to a lie. Since such a practice is not unusual, it would be wise to keep complete copies of job instructions, job notes, print out of the completed report as well as a digital copy of the completed report, clearly labeled for quick access on the hard drive. Otherwise it could result in being a case of hearsay. It is impossible to control what another does, however I will not allow such a company to squeeze me into its mold. Is it ever possible to retract a report? Such a company will not thrive; eventually their bridges will be burned. They will not keep shoppers who have integrity.

I suspect that some of them are rejecting reports and then using them. I will not mention any names because I am not sure. If I am ever positive about a company doing this then I will mention names.

I figure that at the point I figure a company is low life enough that they would do that, or even consider doing that, it is time for me to stop working with that company. Even if they are not actually doing it, something that they HAVE done has given me reason not to trust them. That alone is enough not to work for/with them.

There would be no reason to have a location mystery shopped if every report came back with rainbows and puppy dogs.

These MSCs are only hurting themselves.

I had an editor to send me a request for information on a shop I had done 11 days prior. If I did not send in the requested edit they would cut my pay by 10.00. I replied to the editor that the reason we submit reports ASAP is so that the accuracy of the information is fresh in our minds. To request information 11 days after the shop is unethical and that I would not alter my report and make changes because I could not do so honestly. I told him for this reason you can keep your 10.00 and I will consider never shopping for your company again. I made no changes and was paid the full amount for my shop. I sent a copy of his email and my reply to the owner of the company. My integrity is worth more to me than their money.

Last summer, I accepted an auto dealer assignment, then was stunned when after 41 days the editor requested additional information. I responded to her query, explaining this was by far the longest elapsed period for such a request and made a mental note to at least double my fee for the future.

I would snail mail the client an anonymous letter from a city outside of your home city telling them that they are being scammed. Screw any ICA rules; they have a right to know how they are spending/wasting their money.

Of course the request for additional information may be a clarification request from the client, so who knows how long the shop was parked at different levels. My sense is that most companies get shops edited and processed on out the door quickly. If the client sends the reports along to regional, who sends them along to district, who sends them on to the location for discussion with associates, this can be very time consuming if there isn't simultaneous viewing of the material on line by multiple levels.

I had a shop sent back to me 5 times to edit. The first 2 times I fixed it. On the next three times I just sent it back and it was accepted. With no editing.oh I also had an editor tell me to elaborate on any no answers. HUH

The requirement to elaborate on any no answers in a report is fairly common. Almost all the MSPs I shop for require a comment for any no answer.

I had a shop clarification sent to me asking me if I might have mixed up shop representatives. I did two similar shops on the same day. I said, although it was three months after the shop had been submitted and paid, I did have the paperwork. According to my paperwork, all the information was correct. However, if I did mix up the two representatives,which I do not think I did, I certainly would not remember this three months later.

I hate to be naive, but I have a hard time thinking they actually change our reports, why then phone calls to verify things and point deduction on needing to get more info....they can just do what they choose, but, I don't buy it!!

firstklass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had a shop sent back to me 5 times to edit. The
> first 2 times I fixed it. On the next three times
> I just sent it back and it was accepted. With no
> editing.oh I also had an editor tell me to
> elaborate on any no answers. HUH

If they accepted the unedited resubmission the third time, why did they send it back to you two more times?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2011 12:48AM by TechSavvy.

My son, a friend of mine and myself all ddi shops for a grocery store based in Pittsburgh through Mystery Guest. When we encountered a concern that seemed not to present a rosy picture for the client, we all received phone calls wanting more info and had to cvall and explain in further detail. Be advised we all three have done many other shops with other clienst and not been questioned by them.
Anyway, eventually we were all three removed from any further shops with no answers given except that client may have id'd us, doubtful. I did contact the grocery store chain, then the client informed them they removed us because we shopped for competition. Seems finally the client may have figured it out and is looking at a new Mysteryshop company. I contacted both local and national office of Mystery Guest with no commenst from them or reinstatement, as requested. So my belief that they were sanitizing shops was a possible correct assumption.

What's ironic is, I bet some of the clients credit their perceived great customer service directly to mystery shopping, when in reality the reports they receive from their MSC are fiction. Perhaps the MSC's began by turning in unvarnished truth, but gradually began editing in a rosier picture to make it look like they're producing results. That's sad. It is frustrating to be objective and accurate in a report only to know the client may not see important areas in need of improvement.

I've had schedulers call me to question what I've said, especially on some unrecorded phone shops. I typically get my notes out as I'm talking to them to confirm everything is as I reported it. Some managers objected to what was reported, swearing they asked for my name or adhered to the other guidelines they were supposed to follow. Fortunately, when I read the schedulers my notes, they knew I was really paying attention and reported the calls accurately.

shop-a-holic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is a company where I can see my shop after
> an editor has reviewed it. I just looked at one
> of them and my answers were completely changes.
> Not just the narrative, but some of the multiple
> choice answers were literaly changed. Where I
> selected "The interaction felt insincere" it was
> changed to "The associate was helpful and
> attentive" and so on. Then my narrative was also
> changed to support these answers. Basically,
> anything bad was taken out and only good things
> left in.
> Has anyone seen this with their rerports before?
> Would you contact the company and tell them that
> your report was basically rewritten? Or leave it
> alone? I've only done 3 shops for this company,
> so it's not like a have a reputation that they
> have a reason to trust me more than their editor.
> But I feel this is just wrong. I have a PDF of
> the original report as it was submitted by me. I
> am tempted to contact the scheduler, but I don't
> want to screw up my chances of shopping with them
> in the future.

one time, an editor had told me that i had failed to back up any 'no' answers on a questionniare sufficiently. they are likely just trying to avoid potential lawsuits if they might appear to slander an employee.

if they don't tell you anything directly, it might be best to just let it go. maybe the scheduler was very busy and didn't have the time or energy to inform you or explain things to you. sometimes, if a scheduler had additional time and energy, they may bother to be concise about what they are expecting from you.

ultimately, the statement "the interaction felt insincere" is a tricky question, because it doesn't protect from individual bias.

Theoretically the questions have all been discussed ad infinitum with the client before the job, instructions and report were ever posted. If the client is okay with an opinion about whether "the interaction felt insincere" or not, then the MSP should abide by that. It is definitely an opinion question and the question is what the shopper felt. While one might be able to cite supporting details about why it FELT insincere, not always are those supporting details clearly demonstrative of why the FEELING was what it was.

Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Theoretically the questions have all been
> discussed ad infinitum with the client before the
> job, instructions and report were ever posted. If
> the client is okay with an opinion about whether
> "the interaction felt insincere" or not, then the
> MSP should abide by that. It is definitely an
> opinion question and the question is what the
> shopper felt. While one might be able to cite
> supporting details about why it FELT insincere,
> not always are those supporting details clearly
> demonstrative of why the FEELING was what it was.

okay, thanks. I've often been instructed to cite supporting details for all 'no' answers, but fact is fact and opinion is opinion. opinions, in my mind, are not factually supported. that's like asking 'how does this thread feel?'. strictly opinion. opinions don't necessarily hold up in court.

I believe that statements relating to the sincerity of someone we're shopping can be supported by factual statements. For example, I completed a phone report today and talked about how the associate I was speaking with sounded like she was reading a script and, therefore, sounded "insincere."

I don't bother to check my reports. I just don't have the time. I do, however, keep my notes and, when possible, download a copy of the report to my computer. I have also noticed a great range in the quality of the editors. Editors have contacted me twice with questions about an issue that was addressed in my report. It made me wonder how closely they were reading the report. My estimation was, not very. The only problem with the editor not being competent and/or just being lazy is that it can cost me money.

On the topic of recorded and video shops, my concern, other than the cost of equipment, is legal liability. I do believe it is illegal to record someone without their permission. Since all of the IC agreements I've signed include an indemnity clause, I'd be concerned of being left high and dry by the company.