Rant:
This topic has been discussed in other strings, but, I feel the need to go over it again.
It seems that some of the editors of our reports want to interject their opinions, question our reports and/or instruct the shopper who was there, onsite, as to what the shopper saw and experienced and how to change their (the shopper's) report.
If I, the shopper missed something like an expired sign or ad, I completely understand.
However, when they see something that is subjective like minor damage that, onsite seems passable, while perhaps in a photo appears questionable. For me, I would appreciate their questioning of the issue rather than an instruction or demand of changing the report.
Afterall, in the axiom of "This is not a white glove audit" the shopper is instructed to adhere to that message. It seems certain editors ignore it.
Or, thinking about an MSC's guidelines, some of those guidelines are rather vague and up for interpretation.
One of the best examples for me has always been the request for a photo of what the shopper was wearing.
For instance, in the E/M report, at the end of it there is a request for a photo:

"Please upload a self photo showing your dress attire at the time of the inspection. This photo does not have to show your face, and will not be reported to the client"

Rather vague in what they want to see. Do they want to ensure the shopper is wearing their safety vest? Or, given dress codes of "business casual" does the MSC wish to see that the shopper is not wearing a tee shirt , tube top or spaghetti strapped top? In short, do they want to see that the shopper appears professional? If they want to see the shopper wearing the safety vest, why not say it like the Shell shops do?

Over the times of mystery shopping, I've been instructed to add a photo either way (without a safety vest and with a safety vest).
So, what do you do for some of these editor demands? Do you sigh, think whatever, and do as they ask. Or, do you fight with the editor?
For me, it has always been just do what they ask and move on.
Rant over.

French,

I understand your pain. Even if you make one editor happy, you don't make the next one happy. I just do me. If they want me to change something, they will inform me.

French,
I have sent pics of what I'm wearing for the E/M shops both with and without my traffic vest, and I have never been questioned about it. When Carey Medina did the "shop along" video specifically for the E/M shops, she said that you're supposed to take a selfie showing that you're wearing the traffic vest. Does that help any?

One company I work for does require a selfie to show "appropriate attire." Apparently, some shoppers do not know the meaning of business casual. One business told me that the auditor was wearing cut-off shorts and was covered in paint for a business casual required inspection.

@Morledzep wrote:

French,
I have sent pics of what I'm wearing for the E/M shops both with and without my traffic vest, and I have never been questioned about it. When Carey Medina did the "shop along" video specifically for the E/M shops, she said that you're supposed to take a selfie showing that you're wearing the traffic vest. Does that help any?

That makes the most sense to me, but, like I've said, I've had editors asking for a photo from the neck down without the vest.
It's just that when the guidelines are vague, some of the MSC editors seem to want to exercise their own opinion or interpretation. If the shopper argues that the request goes beyond what has been written, they lose and their score is downgraded further.

That's the truth French. Some of the editors have powerful interpretation skills that lack anything that resembles common sense.

To further complicate matters, there are numerous discrepancies between the guidelines, and the online and printed reports, including the vest issue.

Latest guidelines indicate the selfie must show the vest. Wording elsewhere does not. I was dinged for posting a no-vest photo taken in the bathroom mirror prior to my reveal.

I seldom argue with the editors, even if the interpretation of a shop guideline varies from one to the other. It is not worth the hassle. If it is within reason, I do what they ask. I do say something when things are clearly off or not even something I can mitigate. For a while, one of the companies that I do phone shops for had an editor who didn't seem to understand time zones. The call service was in one zone, I was in another, and the shops were all over the country. That one was a royal PITA, and I ended up impatiently explaining time zones more times than I remember.

I had an editor send a report for a bank shop back to me because "I think your email address is wrong."

It was all I could do to contain my snark on that one.

I stopped caring what the “grade” was a long time ago. What I care about is if I am going to get paid. Other than that? 10 or a 7 I don’t care. It’s mostly subjective and fighting it takes time and energy that I don’t get paid for. Guess what? I have no problem getting work.