The longer I am in this business, the more I see that schedulers/MSCs will do anything to get a job assigned... and shoppers will do about anything to get a shop accepted. as will proofreaders.

I used to believe that this industry required a high level of integrity. I don't see that anymore. And, I guess that is why I shop or do audits less and less. Are there any shoppers left with integrity, you know, those that will walk away instead of compromising .... or, is the work as a shopper just about money.

Yes. will walk away and not compromise.

I was taught integrity/honesty/ethics, it's all about "do the right thing -- even when no one is watching".

What is this about?

It began in a different thread when shoppers (me among them) complained that some tests have questions which can only be answered by calling the scheduler for help. For instance, what is on the side of the gas pump, but the picture only shows the front? What is the 2019 answer when only the 2017 Guidelines are provided? What is the June POP when the Guidelines only show the May POP. MsBaker said that we (me included) were cheaters because we got assistance from the schedulers, without which assistance on a question, only a lucky guess leads to passing. She considers getting assistance on a test which is supposed to be an open book test to be unethical.

If you weren't given the correct tools to pass the test, what other recourse did you have? Ms. Baker was wrong for calling you cheaters...so wrong.

Well then, I agree with Ms Baker but at the same time I disagree with her. She is basing her thesis that every shopper and scheduler and msc is in it for the money only and will do anything to earn it on reports of a small percentage of people. Well, she is wrong about a lot of us. Ms Baker, you have written 250 posts in 7 years of forum membership. You must speak up when shoppers make statements that you believe will send them down the wrong path. And read the posts that many of us write advising those on the wrong path. Perhaps you have not seen those and in disgust have stopped reading the threads where shoppers profess to "cheating" before seeing the response from the rest of us. I see lots of integrity in this forum.

I suppose, like any group of people, there will be a few baddies. Sometimes people just need to be reminded of what's right & wrong. Do right and set a good example.

So a scheduler answering questions when the instructions are incomplete or unclear is wrong?

I totally acknowledge that all information should be made available equally. I also imagine that ensuring that instructions are up-to-date isn’t always something the scheduler can accomplish. I guess it’s better if all the approved shoppers are ones who made a good guess? I don’t get it.

It's not like we are practicing medicine. I didn't understand where the thread was going, initially, but I don't agree that getting help in order to properly complete an audit or shop is unethical. The client and MSC want to make sure that shoppers understand how to conduct the visits properly.

I do agree though about giving out the answers so that some one can complete the test and do the shop. This is a question of education versus just ignoring the value of the test. I have never had to ask a scheduler for help with a test but if they point you in the right direction, perhaps send you the section of the guidelines that have the answer or even look at it themselves to make sure the guidelines are clear and explain why your answer is incorrect and what the correct answer is then I am fine with it. If they give you the right answer without an attempt to figure out why you chose the wrong answer and help you then you may very well be doing the job incorrectly in the future. That will waste everyone's time and perhaps be the cause for issues where shoppers write in saying they did not get paid.

I would absolutely agree with ceasesmith that integrity is 'doing the right thing even when no one is looking.' That being said, I would agree that asking questions--whether here on the forum or to the scheduler or MSC directly--is not lacking integrity when it is to clarify confusion or because needed information is just not provided. Over the years there have been a few scammers who felt the need for integrity did not apply to them, but mostly they disappear from the forum fairly promptly or clean up their act.

Consider this: when we don't understand shop instructions or there are contradictions/unclear/missing info, we contact the scheduler for clarification. How is this test situation any different? It's OUR JOB to ask them.

This entire industry is really based on Integrity, one either has it or not, can it be taught, yes as a young child. We have so many flakes in the business, folks without Integrity do not last long.
I always try and do the right thing, I try and stick by my ethic code. Remember KARMA is a B____!!!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/18/2019 06:32PM by Irene_L.A..

When I read the OP, I envision shoppers cutting corners and falsifying reports, schedulers misleading shoppers as to the amount of work and/or pay for a shop, and editors changing answers to make sure a client does not reject/challenge a report.

I have written some very good and some VERY bad evaluations. I've only had a client ask about two of them (both bad). I explained what happened to the project manager and, in once case, provided an audio recording to back myself up. In the other, the client reviewed video surveillance. Both shops went through and I was paid. I continue to work in good standing with both MSC's. I've not been around or done as many shops as some folks. However, I have completed quite a few shops over the last three-plus years to feel very comfortable in stating that MOST MSC's work professionally with shopper reports.

Do schedulers make shops sound more attractive than the really are? Yes. I'll roll my eyes at quite a few of the email ads I see. However, as long as they pay me what they promise and honestly answer questions when I ask about workload, I'm good. I've only had two schedulers mislead me about the amount of work in a shop. One replied with an "LOL" when I asked about the expected workload after my shop was approved. I am hesitant to do more shops for that MSC (though they seem to be a popular one for many folks) - I figure it is a scheduler issue. The other MSC is notorious here...

As for shoppers.... There have been quite a few things shoppes have admitted to, when posting here.... Editors and schedulers have posted about some antics some shoppers have tried to pull, too. I am certain that there are a handful of shoppers who cut some corners. I also suspect that most of them don't last long.... I don't have the background to know if this is a new issue or one that's been around for as long as there have been mystery shoppers. I suspect, so some degree, it has been around for quite a while...

@MFJohnston wrote:

I am certain that there are a handful of shoppers who cut some corners. I also suspect that most of them don't last long.... I don't have the background to know if this is a new issue or one that's been around for as long as there have been mystery shoppers. I suspect, so some degree, it has been around for quite a while...

Yes, over the years I have helped with emergency cleanup after a shopper falsified a whole string of reports and I'm sure others have done the same, whether they were aware of the fraud by the person originally assigned the work or not. Eventually we all suffer from the fraudsters because it leads to distrust of the MSCs of all shoppers as well as to increased shop requirements to try to make fraud more difficult, limitations on how many shops a shopper may take and extend payment time so that if the client declares fraud the shopper has not already been paid. The saddest part of this, however, is the adversarial environment that grows between shoppers and MSCs.

I think because a very small portion of shoppers might be unethical, it makes the honest and ethical ones (like ourselves), having to prove where we were just a little harder. Like Geo Verify, pictures, names, exterior shots and landmarks, receipts. (I realize most of those we have all had to provide those) but because of the small sector of dishonest shoppers, even our trash-can pictures at the Burrito Joint are scanned through photo DNA to make sure we did not take that off the internet. To me this comes down to having to prove that you were actually at the shop you said you were at....

Perhaps if fee for these "fun easy" jobs were at least minimum wage or above and included a bit of help outside your radius, they may get more reliable shoppers...low pay and bad shoppers seem to attach to each other.
The old saying "you get what you pay for" seems apropos.

Can relate to the comments about issues with the test instruments. What is anyone to do? Is it unethical to provide such a test instead of replacing it quickly with a better one? Is it unethical to work with shoppers who are known to be capable and get them to the point of completing the related shops on time?

I used to work at a place that involved scripted questionnaires. The quality of those instruments varied. I still remember another interviewer explaining to a respondent that the question that sounded like a quadrupled negative was supplied by the sponsoring agency and not made up on the spot by the interviewer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2019 11:47PM by Shop-et-al.

I have no idea about other shoppers, I know that money does not make me have integrity or not. I have integrity and am honest. Asking for help from schedulers or editors is what makes me a better shopper. I want to do the shop right the first time.

This OP is a bunch of ado's about nothing.

Some of the shops we complete aren't even used by the client. Sometimes the client wants a mystery shop program just to check a box and say they have one. If the business ever gets sold they'll point to their mystery shop program to show how "well managed" the business is, even though the data is fabricated/exaggerated. Right now as I type this some mid level manager is pointing to arbitrary mystery shop data that's never even been audited to show "improvement" in his business segment. I used to work payroll at a midsize national convenience chain and overhearing a manager on the phone with an MSC telling them they they wanted higher scores on the evaluations or they would move to another MSC.

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2019 07:02PM by Jbrz123.

I have an opposite of integrity of the shopper, but integrity of the client. Recently I took a bank job to open a savings account, where the instructions said nothing, just ask about promotions, get copies and open account
of 100.00 minimum.
I went to do it, wanting to open a new account, and once house is sold, would be set up with more funds. I was told (almost talked out of) bank has no promotions and charges an 8.00 fee for funds under 500.00 on a daily basis. I did not know nor was expecting a fee and didn't open account even though in a couple months I'd have much more in there than 500.00. Banker was not helpful, and report was denied. Would you put this client (huge) in fault of not having Integrity? Forty minutes I can't get back.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2019 12:26AM by Irene_L.A..

I've been thinking about this more. These companies have basically outsourced compliance and "integrity" to a bunch of low paid contractors. It's a race to the bottom and the lowest bidder gets the contract.

Think about GCS with their BVA's, pharmaceutical audits, educational audits, etc. These are actually important assignments with great consequences if somebody messes up. However, anyone with a pulse who's willing to take them at $20 a pop can sign up. I wonder if that college admissions scandal involving the students who cheated on the SAT could have been prevented if the companies involved stop cutting corners.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2019 12:33AM by Jbrz123.

My job didn't go to the lowest, it paid well......wasn't about that.

Irene - I am not questioning what you wrote, just expressing amazement at such a customer-unfriendly bank. I have encountered banks that charge a daily fee when a checking account is overdrawn, but I have never encountered a bank that charges a daily rather than a monthly fee for a balance that is above zero but below a required minimum. I thought that a $35 monthly fee for not maintaining $300 on any one or more single day was high, but $8 per day is $240 a month, which is essentially 50% of the $500 threshold for no fees. I find that mind-boggling. In the last year, I have done mystery shops for 5 different banks. Over the past 10 years, I have done mystery shops for about 20 different banks. About half had minimum daily balances (more than $5) in order to avoid a monthly fee and many of those provided 30 to 60 days after account opening to reach the minimum. The bank you describe must really, really not want low balance accounts. I generally look online to see what accounts and requirements are for a bank before I go into to open an account for a mystery shop. $500 is somewhat steep, but I might have done it if the fee was reasonable and if I thought that I would get additional teller shops at the same bank. That doesn't change my opinion that the bank is very customer-unfriendly.

@Irene_L.A. wrote:

I was told (almost talked out of) the bank has no promotions and charges an 8.00 fee for funds under 500.00 on a daily basis. I did not know nor was expecting a fee and didn't open account even though in a couple months I'd have much more in there than 500.00.

)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2019 06:54PM by lbtweety47.

If this is for the bank that was known as The Bank of Italy back In the very early 1900s, then they charge $8 per month after 60 days from opening if your balance falls below $500. There are shops available now to cancel savings accounts at same bank - so you can cancel your account and make money doing it.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2019 06:55PM by lbtweety47.

In the last year, I have shopped the former Bank of Italy, the former stagecoach company, the big green bank whose parent is a Canadian bank, two regional banks based in Pennsylvania, and two banks located only in NJ and none of them charge a daily fee for too low a balance in a savings account. Three of them (the largest ones) charge a monthly fee. The other four (the four smallest) required a minimum balance of either $1 or $5. Even the three large ones have a grace period of between 30 and 90 days to bring the balance up to their required minimum balances (which range from $100 to $500). I currently have accounts in the big three and one of the others so that I can do teller shops and occasional CSR shops, so I know their current policies. I just checked the other two online out of curiosity.

I wish I knew the bank Irene visited so that I could find it online and submit the $8 per day fee in my nomination for the most customer-unfriendly bank in the US.

This was for the largest bank in the country (not bank of Italy), but close....I'm sure your instincts now lead you to it....bank of _____.go for it.