I have been doing MS since 2005. If you are newer at this, or wondering, I think that any "veteran" will tell you that writing an OBJECTIVE but highly negative report does not actually get any easier. In fact, the better you get at crafting the negative ones the longer they take to fine tune. My advice: if you need more time to write the report without just "venting", contact the scheduler, state that you have completed the shop according to the guidelines and have the proofs in hand. Then, explain that you need a bit more time and you will usually get it. It is also in that scheduler's best interest to have a report, earlier than would be the case if they had to reassign the shop because your report have been written with a blow torch.

It's SOOO much easier when they do what they're supposed to do.

I have been MS'ing for 27 years. I have turned in a few negative to really negative reports in that time. As long as they are objective, unemotional and fact-based I have never had a report questioned or returned.

I also have not have a negative report questioned or returned. But, I often have had to simmer down enough to write an objective negative report.

I can't think of a "highly negative" report off-hand. I'm not sure how I'd word things now that I think of it. It very well might take a long time for me to write.

I've had mediocre service before and even one or two actions that were pretty bad I've had to write about. But, in those cases, I usually use the language:

"The overall experience was mixed." From there I go into the positives and negatives.

If possible/appropriate, I'll even use Steven K. Scott's "sandwich method" for delivering criticism. He says in decades of doing business (he's a multi-millionaire and record-setting direct marketer, known for his commercials/informercials generating billions in sales) he's never once seen it fail. Basically, he says that when delivering criticism to someone, you can help them better accept it by first saying something positive about the person (but, make sure it is true and don't just make up something here). Then, deliver your criticism. Afterwards, say something positive again to close the conversation. The positives are the "buns," while the criticism is the "meat" in the sandwich. By cushioning your criticism this way, it helps the person take it more easily. They'll understand you see some value in them or are really on their side (not just out to tear them down) and will be more likely to accept and learn from your criticism.

If you've ever watched Shark Tank, I think a lot of the sharks use this technique (or some similar approach) when rejecting pitches. It really can be hard to criticism someone and/or turn them down.

Shoptastic,
The worst were the car sales shops. To truthfully answer the question, "What reason did the associate give for declining to discuss engine characteristics and performance?" I had to report the following. "He stated that when I returned with my husband we could discus the engine." And, that was mild compared with some of the other things said by car sales associates.

@walesmaven wrote:

Shoptastic,
The worst were the car sales shops. To truthfully answer the question, "What reason did the associate give for declining to discuss engine characteristics and performance?" I had to report the following. "He stated that when I returned with my husband we could discus the engine." And, that was mild compared with some of the other things said by car sales associates.

Yikes!

I could definitely see how writing that in a non-personal, objective tone may be tough.

I'll often use "euphemistic" ways of describing negative things, such as:

"Service did not meet expectations . . . " . . .and go on to discuss trouble areas... I've never really been insulted on a shop, but have had inattentive and disinterested service.

I'm sure you'd have to "hold back" some emotion to deal with that case above. E.g., "The sales associate responded with an inappropriate gender-discriminatory remark that precluded the possibility of continuing the interaction....." or something like that. I still use non-personalized language in these instances, but I agree it's a struggle sometimes to find the right words to convey how horrible something was.

Nice try, but the editor required that I say what was said to me. btw, I got a 10 and a nice note from the scheduler on that one.

@walesmaven wrote:

Nice try, but the editor required that I say what was said to me. btw, I got a 10 and a nice note from the scheduler on that one.

Oh, I would have included the remark too. A manager ought to know such an outrageous comment was made.

My comments were in relation to how I might go about setting up/narrating the context to what happened and describing the remark in a non-personalized way (before quoting it at some point).

Instead of: "This sexist chauvinist pig considered me unworthy of or unable to discuss what he arrogantly believed to be the the exclusive domain of XY-chromosomal homo sapiens and left me bereft of these crucial automotive details."

I proposed something more like: "The sales associate responded with an inappropriate gender-discriminatory remark that precluded the possibility of continuing the interaction."

I got the bum's rush once. I reported it exactly as it happened: The sales manager put his hand on my elbow and steered me toward the door, saying "Little lady, I think you need to go to a different dealership. There's one right across town, on 19th, that should suit you just fine."

I sure didn't get any info out of that sales manager! Not one word was spoken that addressed the item I was assigned! The entire report was negative, but unbiased and factual.

One of the very few times I truly wished I was filthy rich, so I could buy the business and fire his ***.

@ceasesmith wrote:

I got the bum's rush once. I reported it exactly as it happened: The sales manager put his hand on my elbow and steered me toward the door, saying "Little lady, I think you need to go to a different dealership. There's one right across town, on 19th, that should suit you just fine."

One of the very few times I truly wished I was filthy rich, so I could buy the business and fire his ***.

My guess is your report probably did it for you. But I totally agree as an employer and a boss that would not be okay in my organization.

I had to write a report on a restaurant once where the bartender, manager, and bus boys were all taking shots. I wasn't even mad, just shocked. I'm pretty sure the business was, too. It took almost a week for approval, where I assume they were checking the cameras and firing the whole staff. Thankfully, I was not in my home state, so I will never see those people again.
I had one time where a bartender said to me, "I should have known you had money with the Louis Vuitton and Platinum Amex." It took my boyfriend at the time all of his effort to calm me down. I ended up not putting it in the report, because I couldn't say it objectively. I was LIVID. That's not appropriate in any establishment, especially one where the bills per couple range well over $200.

I had a bartender breathing fire behind a bar once. That was fun to write up. Thankfully I even had photos of it that were time stamped.

Have told it like it is in several reports that went unchallenged including several cashiers huddled together complaining about their MIA baby daddies and their illegimate kids.
Or cashiers in other places who lacked basic communication skills and left me feeling like the unvalued customer.

Did a shop where I gave a bartender a bad report. He had just had a baby and was gushing to his regulars all about the experience. He basically ignored me. They challenged my report stating I was on my phone the whole time. I was only texting notes to myself.

My problem is I had previously shopped the same bartender and he was excellent. He had done everything right that you would like a bartender you ordered drinks and food from to do. I felt bad about giving him the bad report, but I just wrote what had happened including the new baby reference.

@panama18 wrote:

It's SOOO much easier when they do what they're supposed to do.

I feel just the opposite. When they do stuff wrong, it's easy to write about it, detailing exactly what was done. If the shop allows you to express your opinion, and asks what they could have done for you to have a great visit, even better.

I hate it when I have to write long paragraphs saying that the all the questions were answered yes. Especially when talking about location cleanliness and similar.

I submitted two negative report and both got docked a lot of points.
All my positive reports got great marks.

I'm beginning to think there is a pattern with clients.

Then what is the point of mystery shopping if clients want only positive reports?
And how would they know what you were doing? Cameras?

Are you bragging? LOL

@sparklesthekitty wrote:

I submitted two negative report and both got docked a lot of points.
All my positive reports got great marks.

I'm beginning to think there is a pattern with clients.

Did they mention why those points were docked?

It's been mentioned on the forum before that editors sometimes want shoppers to ease up on criticisms/negatives, but I haven't read it go so far as to lead to docked points if that was what happened.

@sparklesthekitty wrote:

Then what is the point of mystery shopping if clients want only positive reports?
And how would they know what you were doing? Cameras?

There could be a difference between local unit client and corporate.

Take a big company with franchisees and company-owned locations, such as Texas Roadhouse. Corporate wants to know how individual stores are doing and will fire people at company owned locations if they don't embody the company's values and do a good job. Franchisees are probably more aligned naturally with corporate (up to a certain degree) with more control over hiring decisions and possibly more embedded financial stakes. ...Actually, TXRH is a bad example, b/c they are simply a great company!....but you get the separation between corporate and local unit (whether a franchise owner or company-owned store). If local unit performance is bad, they may want to hide that from corporate. The manager's job could be on the line. Wayne Kent Taylor has talked about letting people go quickly who did not fit and if a local store is not doing it's job right, they'll get re-staffed.

It's possible push back could be coming from unit locations on negative shopper reports, while corporate actually does want the truth.

Well, one shop gave me a tough time so I'll let that go. The other one though was an outright negligent employee and I cringed writing that report going, this person might lose their job over this.

Oh wow that does make sense......But then if the local client sees the report, wouldn't they want to take some action further on?

I can't tell you the number of alcohol violation shops I've had over the years that have likely resulted in termination. It was so bad in one Airport restaurant that I was not allowed to shop there because I think they had six or seven in a row that failed with me there. I travel frequently for work so I was always in the airport so it was an easy shop but it was amazing how many people don't card for alcohol when it's required by company policy.

When writing negative reports, I try to keep it as objective as possible the employee did or didn't and state the action or comments.

Where as an editor I saw shoppers get in trouble is they tried to put emotion or feeling or tell the company what to do. That almost always had to be edited out.

Example:
The employee didn't ask for ID versus The employee wasn't doing his job and blah blah blah...

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2020 12:09AM by foodluvr.

@sparklesthekitty wrote:

Well, one shop gave me a tough time so I'll let that go. The other one though was an outright negligent employee and I cringed writing that report going, this person might lose their job over this.

Hmmm. Did they mention other issues with your report, such as grammar, length, requirements being fulfilled, etc.?

Usually when points are docked, they will tell you x/y/z needed to be improved....did ya not get that? Did they specifically say you shouldn't have written such a negative report?

@sparklesthekitty wrote:

Oh wow that does make sense......But then if the local client sees the report, wouldn't they want to take some action further on?

If you're asking if a local store would want to improve on weaknesses after seeing a report, then I'd have to think that, yes, they would want that. But, they may also want to not get in trouble with corporate too much. I think if memory serves me correctly, Wayne Kent Taylor says he only gives managers a year or two (at most) to get with the program if they are screwing up. That's totally understandable. You don't want some underperforming manager stinking up your profits and giving your restaurant a bad name. TXRH does no advertising. They rely on good word of mouth. So, they invest heavily on training and other things (free peanuts/bread, ....more staff...etc.).

I must say that as a shareholder (I bought their stock over the summer), I, too, want to know what's going on and if I saw lots of bad reports from some TXRH store unit, I'd be thinking the same was Wayne Kent Taylor....get it right or get out!

I never had issues with grammar, spelling, etc.

It was mostly when it was a difficult shop like extracting information, various call center reps, inconsistent leasing agents, etc.