Well this is the first time this has ever happened although I've been doing P66 gas mystery shops and/or revealed assessments for awhile. Here's what happened: I got phoned by a desperate scheduler on 8/29/19 to do four of these by end of month. They were way outside my usual area, but along the same general route so I negotiated high. The MSC agreed to pay $40 each plus $5 reimbursement.
The scheduler affirmed they were the same project type; mys shop followed by revealed assessment. I told her I could probably complete all of these immediately if I left soon (had to complete before dusk). She was very appreciative. She sent four separate confirmation email that were identical except for the location id and address. All four email said PROJECT: P66. I printed out ONE set of guidelines (35 pages) plus 4 Validation pages for the manager or employee to approve and sign. All looked good.
In the guidelines it said:
If the fueling area is closed for construction OR has the new WAVE or CREST image ... DO NOT CONDUCT THE REVEALED ASSESSMENT. If any of the pumps, Main ID sign, and/or canopy have the new image, take photos of the overall station and main ID sign, and report your mystery shop results only.
Well I was pleased to find that two of the four locations DID have the new wave and crest image so only the mystery shop portion needed to be done, which was a huge relief as only 4 station photos plus the receipts were needed. Or so I thought. The surprise came 240 miles and 6 hours later, when I got home and started the reports...
Long story shorter, two of the shops were in fact slightly different, although even the scheduler didn't catch it. The two that had the new signage apparently had a different set of guidelines that indicated a full assessment was still to be performed along with all the extra photos. Had I known this when they were offered to me I would have printed the 2nd set of guidelines that would have pertained to the two new WAVE shops. I did not know this until I actually spoke with another scheduler who investigated it and found out that although the guidelines looked identical, right down to the 8/21/19 revision date, they had a different code following the rev date. Both documents were titled the same: Retail Excellence Mystery Shop + Revealed Assessment. No mention of New WAVE, or New signage, no clues whatsoever.
So the end of the story is, two of the four shops were refused by QC. No accountability from the Scheduler, no apologies for not having mentioned these were two different projects. As usual they feel justified putting 100% of the blame on me, for what..? Not having printed four sets of guidelines for what I was told were same shops.
Had I known they were two different projects of course I would have completed all revealed assessments. But the thing that bothers me most is that even though each one of us... Scheduler, Shopper, QC, Shopper Advocate, or Client, is part of a team, it's ultimately the shopper that suffers when something isn't right. In this case the Project name definitely should have been DIFFERENT and the Guidelines should have been TITLED differently to distinguish between the two.
I suppose there's nothing that can be done. I can't force the MSC to better train their schedulers and writers to be more clear on these subjects. So should I raise a complaint or just suck it up and take the $90 loss?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2019 09:11PM by Diana98632.
The scheduler affirmed they were the same project type; mys shop followed by revealed assessment. I told her I could probably complete all of these immediately if I left soon (had to complete before dusk). She was very appreciative. She sent four separate confirmation email that were identical except for the location id and address. All four email said PROJECT: P66. I printed out ONE set of guidelines (35 pages) plus 4 Validation pages for the manager or employee to approve and sign. All looked good.
In the guidelines it said:
If the fueling area is closed for construction OR has the new WAVE or CREST image ... DO NOT CONDUCT THE REVEALED ASSESSMENT. If any of the pumps, Main ID sign, and/or canopy have the new image, take photos of the overall station and main ID sign, and report your mystery shop results only.
Well I was pleased to find that two of the four locations DID have the new wave and crest image so only the mystery shop portion needed to be done, which was a huge relief as only 4 station photos plus the receipts were needed. Or so I thought. The surprise came 240 miles and 6 hours later, when I got home and started the reports...
Long story shorter, two of the shops were in fact slightly different, although even the scheduler didn't catch it. The two that had the new signage apparently had a different set of guidelines that indicated a full assessment was still to be performed along with all the extra photos. Had I known this when they were offered to me I would have printed the 2nd set of guidelines that would have pertained to the two new WAVE shops. I did not know this until I actually spoke with another scheduler who investigated it and found out that although the guidelines looked identical, right down to the 8/21/19 revision date, they had a different code following the rev date. Both documents were titled the same: Retail Excellence Mystery Shop + Revealed Assessment. No mention of New WAVE, or New signage, no clues whatsoever.
So the end of the story is, two of the four shops were refused by QC. No accountability from the Scheduler, no apologies for not having mentioned these were two different projects. As usual they feel justified putting 100% of the blame on me, for what..? Not having printed four sets of guidelines for what I was told were same shops.
Had I known they were two different projects of course I would have completed all revealed assessments. But the thing that bothers me most is that even though each one of us... Scheduler, Shopper, QC, Shopper Advocate, or Client, is part of a team, it's ultimately the shopper that suffers when something isn't right. In this case the Project name definitely should have been DIFFERENT and the Guidelines should have been TITLED differently to distinguish between the two.
I suppose there's nothing that can be done. I can't force the MSC to better train their schedulers and writers to be more clear on these subjects. So should I raise a complaint or just suck it up and take the $90 loss?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2019 09:11PM by Diana98632.
Previously blocked poster has used numerous identities and IPs. Here's another.