There is a MSC that has one client in my area, a mildly rundown sports bar. I have shopped it before. The report is among the easier reports I have completed.

This MSC has a new client. The client is an upscale restaurant chain. I signed up and am going tonight.

Earlier, I opened the report to look it over. It looked like a Coyle shop without a bar requirement. The questions and format were similar to Coyle. I am used to Coyle reports and understand the time requirements and effort required.

I was a bit surprised to see a report like this. And, it's due by midnight of the night you go.

I can't even imagine the response people will have when they open the report and see just what they got themselves into. I am even more curious to see what the final reports will look like, since this company does not seem to be one that would attract people who would want to write Coyle reports.

What’s the MSC?

I prefer not to name it.

I have found wildly different types of reports from the same msc...one check box only and the next with long narratives and lots of detail. I guess it is based on how much the client is willing to pay. I would think some msc's are open to selling their services either to a client who wants a streamlined report or probably would rather catch a client with more demanding specs for their reports and thereby making more $ for the msc. Never wait til the last day to take a look at what you applied for!

I am okay with it. I am skeptical that they will get the kind of report from their shopper base though. That's what makes little sense to me. In other areas, they shop some cell phone stores, and a few other inexpensive restaurants. That's not your shopper base for a long, detailed, drawn out report.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2019 09:47PM by Niner.

I have found that MSCs sometimes outright plagiarize entire segments of reports from other MSCs. I recently did an apartment video shop for a company that was, literally, EXACTLY like one for Ellis (EPMS.) Word for word.

Either the MSC have employees who sign up and perform shops for the competition, or the client brought in an Ellis report and said, “Here, do it like this.” Sounds like your company did that with a Coyle report.

Either way, it’s shenanigans. The MSC should reword and rework the report so it’s not blatant plagiarism.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2019 04:23PM by ColoKate63.

I'm actually interested to see if the report will go through. The instructions specifically said not to complain. I ordered a steak that was inedible. It was undercooked compared to how I ordered it, was borderline rare, and was still tough and tasteless. I took one bite and would not eat any more of it. The waitress asked my why I was not eating the steak and I told her it was not cooked as I had asked. I didn't feel good, and knew I would not eat it anyway, so I said not to worry about it. The manager then came over and took it off the bill. They handled it the way you would want a restaurant to handle these things. But, I assume I violated the "do not complain" directive. There was no way I would eat that steak though, so whatever happens, will happen.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2019 09:45PM by Niner.

My view is they are soliciting better shoppers whom this restaurant will appeal to...the way that they actually said not to complain and you had something to complain about doesn't sit right with me. They should want to know the truth, and seem to be kissing up to this client. Hope you get paid, but they have a way out....

@Niner wrote:

I'm actually interested to see if the report will go through. The instructions specifically said not to complain.

If you remember, come back next week and give us an update. I’m interested in seeing how it works out for you.

If I saw that shop with the do not complain instructions I think I would have declined signing up for the shop. There are too many possibilities to be able to comment negatively about food.

Good points. At that point, I could not have forced myself to eat that steak. I made a conscious decision that I would rather pay for dinner. We will see. So far, I have not heard back either way.

I'm in agreement with you. If I saw food that was inedible or just too rare (I like mine med-well) then I would not eat it. Similarly if I saw improper food handling or unsanitary practices then I would not eat at that place. I've seen food workers talk on their cell phone, put it in their pocket and then go back to handling food without changing gloves. I do not eat at those places. Even at ones that get bonused.

Hope your shop gets approved.

How disappointing Niner. I was guilty of the same behaviour knowing what the guidelines were. Years ago, we did a high end dining shop where the guidelines stated specifically not to send anything back to the kitchen.
Our server noticed I did not touch my meat. She asked me why. I told her it was not cooked the way I ordered it. She took it back to the kitchen and had it re-done. I never received any repercussions or questions from the MSC. I was paid but noticed I was banned from that client. Never saw their jobs again and I knew they were being shopped. I learned from this mistake. I hope you get paid!

@Madetoshop wrote:

How disappointing Niner. I was guilty of the same behaviour knowing what the guidelines were. Years ago, we did a high end dining shop where the guidelines stated specifically not to send anything back to the kitchen.

This was at least 10 years ago, but Service Check had a "do not complain" guideline as well. So, the server brings me a steak sandwich, and I had ordered grilled cheese. She placed it in front of me and announced it. I said, "That's not my meal." Swear to God - they declined that shop. Apparently, refusing the wrong order makes me memorable.

With guidelines that say don't return the meal or don't complain, they are setting up the shopper to fail. Based on your stories, I don't plan on taking any of those shops. At least some of you got paid.

@ColoKate63 wrote:

I have found that MSCs sometimes outright plagiarize entire segments of reports from other MSCs.

I do not know why you are assuming plagerism. It could be simple copying. For it to be plagerism, MSC-1 would have had to have owned the intellectual property of the survey from . It could be the the Client owned the IP and simply decided to engage MSC-2 to collect the data using the Client's form or a tweaked version of the Client's form.

@Rousseau, @ColoKate63
I have seen (likely) the same questions on the survey forms from each MSC. Assuming EPMS wrote the original questions, they would have the intellectual property rights and could have a plagiarism case. The similarity of the questions is striking and, as @ColoKate63 states, at times, the questions are identical - even with some awkward wording. However, there are things we don't know:
* Could the questions have been written by an IC working for both companies, in which case there would be no issue?
* What if the other MSC had the questions first and EPMS copied them?
* Its possible that the two MSC have/had a working relationship or agreement that allowed the duplication of questions?

Perhaps there is plagiarism. Perhaps not. When I saw it, I decided that it was not my business and simply wrote up my shop.

The shop was marked "Okay for pay." This MSC does not give you grades or editor feedback. I wrote them a Coyle level report in response to their Coyle leven form though.

Great you are going to get paid !

@Niner wrote:

The shop was marked "Okay for pay." This MSC does not give you grades or editor feedback. I wrote them a Coyle level report in response to their Coyle leven form though.

@Niner - Congratulations on your happy ending to the Saga Of The Tough Steak!
@MF - Yes, when I saw the identical wording on MSC’s report form, knowing that they are a less-than honest group to work for, I shrugged my shoulders and did the one report, haven’t done one since for them. I don’t support “those” kinds of MSCs. Thankful that they are the minority.

This is an interesting situation. Sometimes we are told do not complain. Other times we are told to find something wrong, even if everything is fine, and see how they address it. If the client is trying to "help" shoppers not stand out with its do not complain instruction, they can end up putting a neon sign above a shopper's head. Meat doneness is a standard issue with diners and would not flag a diner as a shopper, especially if something was grossly undercooked so as to be a health hazard. The "no doggie bag" directive is another issue I have with dining shops. Control the amount of the bill by specifying the maximum the shopper can order (e.g., 1 appetizer, 1 entree, 1 dessert). Don't wantonly waste food by forcing me to leave behind whatever I was too full to finish. And so we all soldier on, trying to do exactly what each MSC/client has directed for each and every shop lest our reports get rejected which means no reimbursement or shopper pay. That's our job, love it or leave it! Cheers!

I know people who get undercooked chicken and won't want it sent back. This is them as a normal person who doesn't want to upset anyone in the kitchen.

I think the instruction not to complain means that you don't raise the issue. If you're picking at your food and the server asks you, it's ok to be honest. You say, "Oh, it's a bit underdone but it's fine!" That's a normal thing.

Complaining about nothing is also normal. You can even be that person who says, "Oh, I thought I said 'no onions.' I can't eat this!" Even if you didn't inform the server that you don't eat onions, good hospitality means they make it right for you.

I once went to the bathroom and told my boyfriend to order for me (not a shop). Out came a different pork dish. The server saw my face fall and he asked, "Did you want the pernil?" Yes! I wanted pernil. I only eat pernil. I am on an all pernil diet. He swept my plate away even though I objected because really, I'm not that person. He insisted because he wanted me to have a nice meal. Who knows? Maybe he also wanted to snack on the tenderloin.

Could it be that the client has the report and tells the new mystery shopping company they want to use the same report they already have?

FWIW, had an MSC call me out via the shopped company for very undercooked chicken on a buffet line. Not once or twice, but three times. I didn't take pictures the first 2 times as I honestly didn't think the same mistake could happen that many times, but did for the 3rd. The editor didn't ask for more info after the photo. But I honestly thought they'd dispute that too.

@sandyf wrote:

I have found wildly different types of reports from the same msc...one check box only and the next with long narratives and lots of detail. I guess it is based on how much the client is willing to pay. I would think some msc's are open to selling their services either to a client who wants a streamlined report or probably would rather catch a client with more demanding specs for their reports and thereby making more $ for the msc. Never wait til the last day to take a look at what you applied for!

Unless you are doing a shop for Market Force! They don't even tell you the name of the place you are going half the time before you sign up. Then, they don't let you look at the report until you are supposed to be reporting! I hate signing up for shops with them that are a mystery. Usually, I at least Google the address to see if I can tell where they are sending me.

@ColoKate63 wrote:

I have found that MSCs sometimes outright plagiarize entire segments of reports from other MSCs. I recently did an apartment video shop for a company that was, literally, EXACTLY like one for Ellis (EPMS.) Word for word.

Either the MSC have employees who sign up and perform shops for the competition, or the client brought in an Ellis report and said, “Here, do it like this.” Sounds like your company did that with a Coyle report.

Either way, it’s shenanigans. The MSC should reword and rework the report so it’s not blatant plagiarism.

Close, but not quite. Sometimes MSC's infiltrate other MSC's shopper network in order to detect chicanery somewhere. Suppose for instance Client Company Global Business Systems has a MSC, we'll call then ShoppingEZ, and the client gets suspicious about some reports simply not being in line with others or maybe looking suspicious in some other fashion...

GBS the client hires another MSC, we'll call them TruthBeToldMS. They pay TBTMS to infiltrate SEZ and submit reports seeded with carefully selected datapoints, things like specific words and phrases and various details that can be searched easily when the report is received, but would not likely be present in a "real" report.

The investigative shoppers submit the report to SEZ, and send an exact copy of all the data to BOTH the client GBS and to investigative shopping company TBTMS.

You can imagine what happens if SEZ alters the report in some way as to constitute fraud. More than once I've submitted a report for one of my private clients using their computer in their office with them watching, and sure enough, when the report arrived later in the day, it'd been thoroughly reengineered.

Somebody's gotta stand up for the truth, ya reckon? And yes, generally things are kept hush hush when they're dealt with, and I'm so sorry but I cannot go into any detail on that part...

@Niner wrote:

I'm actually interested to see if the report will go through. The instructions specifically said not to complain. I ordered a steak that was inedible. It was undercooked compared to how I ordered it, was borderline rare, and was still tough and tasteless. I took one bite and would not eat any more of it. The waitress asked my why I was not eating the steak and I told her it was not cooked as I had asked. I didn't feel good, and knew I would not eat it anyway, so I said not to worry about it. The manager then came over and took it off the bill. They handled it the way you would want a restaurant to handle these things. But, I assume I violated the "do not complain" directive. There was no way I would eat that steak though, so whatever happens, will happen.

A client with a do not complain gag order is arguably stupid beyond belief, and I'd suspect literally wants to go out of business. They're daft if they're not paying attention enough to know when something is amiss, and a red flag that a shopper is your customer is unusual reticence to complain. Also opens the door for the MSC to simply feed the client a baloney filled, rosy picture that's totally false.

I am honest with my reports and try to objectively state what happened. They took the report. I don't know if I would return to this place though, with the "do not complain" directive.

@7star wrote:

With guidelines that say don't return the meal or don't complain, they are setting up the shopper to fail. Based on your stories, I don't plan on taking any of those shops. At least some of you got paid.

I disagree! I think they are trying to keep shoppers anonymous. If I get the wrong meal I say. “Thank you.” Food not to my liking or meat not cooked to order? “It’s fine, but I just realized today is my meatless day. Can I have a box please?”

You can complain all you want in the report.

Of course if it’s 5 Guys, I bring a wrong order to their attention immediately.

Me too - I've seen an apartment shop for a non-Ellis MSC that was parts of the Ellis report, verbatim.