Universal shopper ratings
Hoju, no gunslinging from me. That's a great idea.
Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
It would finally give some value to the MSPA.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2015 03:59PM by Hoju.
______________________________________________________________________
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2015 03:59PM by Hoju.
With a system in place to have a 'universal' rating system, how are inflated ratings addressed? We all know every MSC rates differently. What about the MSC's out there who give out 10/10's just for completing an guideline-compliant shop, without taking a second-look at the report-quality?
How does this detail whether a shopper's capable of handling narrative-heavy assignments vs. simple 1-5 question reports?
Or is this rating simply to let an MSC / scheduler know that a shopper can commit to project and submit a guideline-compliant assignment?
How does this detail whether a shopper's capable of handling narrative-heavy assignments vs. simple 1-5 question reports?
Or is this rating simply to let an MSC / scheduler know that a shopper can commit to project and submit a guideline-compliant assignment?
Very infrequently shopping the Greater Denver Area, Colorado Springs and in-between in Colorado these days.
It could be all of those. It doesn't have to be a simple 1-10 like we have in place with Sassie. It can be more detailed in much the same way the internal system that most MSC's use for themselves, but shared.
______________________________________________________________________
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
...and isn't there already a system in place for certifying shoppers that is a subject of controversy?
Many MSCs do not acknowledge gold certification status and there has been some speculation (which I agree with) that it does not guarantee a shopper's ability to perform complex shops.
If companies are interested in knowing that a potential shopper is simply an actual living & breathing entity, they should give credit to those who are registered to shop in Nevada, since at least they have had background checks and had their identity confirmed by a governmental agency.
If MSPA companies can't agree on standards for shopper education, how can we ever expect all MSCs to agree on anything?
Many MSCs do not acknowledge gold certification status and there has been some speculation (which I agree with) that it does not guarantee a shopper's ability to perform complex shops.
If companies are interested in knowing that a potential shopper is simply an actual living & breathing entity, they should give credit to those who are registered to shop in Nevada, since at least they have had background checks and had their identity confirmed by a governmental agency.
If MSPA companies can't agree on standards for shopper education, how can we ever expect all MSCs to agree on anything?
I really didn't want to take any shots.................The upside is our good work would be visible to all. The downside? How about vindictive schedulers or just really screwing up a shop to the point it is not salvageable? Right now those things don't have to haunt us across 200 MSCs. There have been a few occasions when a fresh start with a new company was welcome
Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
Maybe we could have an opt-in system.
Shoppers who will always be the equivalent of 850 might fit into the FICO-style rating system.
Others, such as me, who began as clueless blobs but have improved and now earn (not just receive) many high and perfect scores; have experienced early-career setbacks; or have score scars from some other issue, might enjoy an individualized progression or improvement log.
Our career records would include all glories and everything else.
Shoppers who will always be the equivalent of 850 might fit into the FICO-style rating system.
Others, such as me, who began as clueless blobs but have improved and now earn (not just receive) many high and perfect scores; have experienced early-career setbacks; or have score scars from some other issue, might enjoy an individualized progression or improvement log.
Our career records would include all glories and everything else.
My garden in England is full of eating-out places, for heat waves, warm September evenings, or lunch on a chilly Christmas morning. (Mary Quant)
Ok how about a system that only reports the good stuff?
But seriously though- if it's anything like FICO, your bad "credit" can be fixed.
You have to admit, it's something that could help IF It were properly implemented. It would be pretty tough to implement correctly, but it could be helpful.
But seriously though- if it's anything like FICO, your bad "credit" can be fixed.
You have to admit, it's something that could help IF It were properly implemented. It would be pretty tough to implement correctly, but it could be helpful.
______________________________________________________________________
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
It would never work. Too much work for editors. There are those who rubber-stamp "Moderate grammatical errors" when there are none, those who give auto-10s to their favorites (I love those!), and those that use a fine-toothed comb. A 100% on a Coyle hotel is a lot different that a 100% on 5-minute donation shop.
As much as I'd like to think it can work, you're probably right. The quality of the data will be its achilles heel.
______________________________________________________________________
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Certainly a system I would opt OUT of, just as I decided not to play the certification games and the IC-Pro and all the other little loop-de-loops I have seen over time.
Indeed it would take just one scheduler who was annoyed with you to ruin you system wide, or one MSP owner with whom you disagreed on a forum who decided to terminate you before you had ever did a single job for that company. How would you be able to 'fix' it if nobody was willing trust you with anything but FF at $5?
Indeed it would take just one scheduler who was annoyed with you to ruin you system wide, or one MSP owner with whom you disagreed on a forum who decided to terminate you before you had ever did a single job for that company. How would you be able to 'fix' it if nobody was willing trust you with anything but FF at $5?
How about a system that just reported the total shops completed and possibly how long we have been mystery shopping? This would certainly help the "seasoned" shoppers when applying to new companies.
@kenasch wrote:
How about a system that just reported the total shops completed and possibly how long we have been mystery shopping? This would certainly help the "seasoned" shoppers when applying to new companies.
Eh. Not all assignments are equal.
There was one time where I took on a project of simple menu audits. Each location was an assignment, but took only 5 minutes on-site and no more than 10 minutes per report. In other words, taking a picture of the menu board, uploading a receipt and submitting a report. Imagine inflating your 'total shops' with a handful of these kind of assignments vs. assignments that require multiple hours of report time.
Very infrequently shopping the Greater Denver Area, Colorado Springs and in-between in Colorado these days.
It also might limit opportunities for new shoppers unduly. One of the aspects of this business I love is that it is at least reasonably egalitarian. If the demographics are appropriate, a new shopper is likely to see a shop unless they have truly screwed up their writing sample. It is then up to that new shopper to perform so that they can continue to see shops. Even in SASSIE where a new shopper starts with a 5 rating and some of the shops require 8 or better, there usually is a shop or two that can be done to earn that 8 and go from there.
Sounds like a great idea but what about a certain mystery shopping company who deducts 2 points off of 10, if they have to contact you? 
I think it should be one or no points, as many other companies do NOT downgrade your score for having contacted you.
I think it should be one or no points, as many other companies do NOT downgrade your score for having contacted you.
Or what if you have a nitpicking or overzealous scheduler/editor who always grades harshly? (while all your other companies are very fair to you and give you great scores) won't this throw off a great shopper's FICO Shopper Score?
How about just reporting the type of shops you've done and how many you've done of each and how many you've had rejected? Something that takes the subjectivity out of it and is easy (or even automated) to report? Though that might not give an MSC enough info about you to do anything with.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2015 05:15PM by Hoju.
______________________________________________________________________
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Seriously, nobody cares that you're offended.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2015 05:15PM by Hoju.
@Hoju wrote:
How about just reporting the type of shops you've done and how many you've done of each and how many you've had rejected? Something that takes the subjectivity out of it and is easy (or even automated) to report? Though that might not give an MSC enough info about you to do anything with.
Even if different types of shops were detailed; again, most assignments are not equal or reasonably comparable.
A good example is comparing the different pretzel shops. Look at the Auntie Anne's shops vs. the Wetzel's shops. For those who've done both recently can definitely agree that the Auntie Anne's shop is a bit more complex compared to the Wetzel's shop.
Very infrequently shopping the Greater Denver Area, Colorado Springs and in-between in Colorado these days.
On several occasions at shopper conferences where MSPA reps spoke and took questions from the audience I have asked why they don't just agree on a common style book for spelling, grammar and usage. You would have thought that I was asking Coke and Pepsi to share their formulas, the way the MSPA reps reacted to such an idea. They are not in the business of promoting ANYTHING that smacks of uniformity, was the gist of every reaction to such a "radical" idea. (Yup, that Wales, the bomb throwing radical, at it again!).
Now imagine trying to herd that bunch of cats into a common rating system! Moreover, some of the best and most interesting jobs are with MSCs that are not MSPA members.
Now imagine trying to herd that bunch of cats into a common rating system! Moreover, some of the best and most interesting jobs are with MSCs that are not MSPA members.
Based in MD, near DC
Shopping from the Carolinas to New York
Have video cam; will travel
Poor customer service? Don't get mad; get video.
Shopping from the Carolinas to New York
Have video cam; will travel
Poor customer service? Don't get mad; get video.
@walesmaven wrote:
Now imagine trying to herd that bunch of cats into a common rating system! Moreover, some of the best and most interesting jobs are with MSCs that are not MSPA members.
Amen
At one time Mystery Shop Solutions (?) which is more a job board for independent schedulers than an MSP, thought to establish a rating system similar to the eBay star system. Shoppers would rate schedulers, schedulers would rate shoppers and supposedly neither side would see what the other was doing. Yeah, sure . . . I don't know that that went anywhere. Another loop-de-loop I did not choose to participate in.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.