Well...the custom Coyle site has always been known for extensive narrative and high-end evaluations. Gaining access to it required a lengthy application form and only those deemed worthy were allowed in.
If the company then branched out into easier shops that required less MS experience and was not as dependent on writing skills, and was potentially going to be scheduled by an outside company, wouldn't it make sense to put all those newbie shoppers into a separate database, rather than clog up a system that already has schedulers overwhelmed with requests for each assignment?
Coyle shops require entirely too much detail. I did not have a good experience with them.I did a lot of work and did not get paid because they said it was incomplete. However i wrote so many paragraphs
Couldn't agree more. I'm an experienced shopper and do a lot of high end restaurants but applied to Coyle because they have some nice resorts that I'd love to shop. So, I do a bar shop for them and get a twenty. Then, as a favor I do a <Ooops! As an experienced shopper, you need to remember your ICA! Let's just say 'coffee'> shop which was supposed to be a short form but took a lot of time because of how much detail they wanted. Then I do a long form restaurant and spent hours on it. (A <Oops! ICA again! Name of Restaurant was here... > report takes me about an hour and fifteen minutes.) The next day I get an email with a long list of ridiculous I's to be dotted and T's to be crossed. I emailed them and told them to deactivate me. Then I get a call and this nice scheduler who says that I am only fifteen minutes away from finishing the report and that it would cause a problem for her if I didn't finish my report so I told her that I was a lot more than fifteen minutes away from adding all the information they wanted but that I would spend another hour on the report and at that point I was done. I did that and 99 percent of the changes had nothing to do with the essence of the report. Anyway, the next morning I get another email with another list of requests for information. I emailed them back, told them of my promise to the scheduler and asked to be deactivated again. Why a twenty on the first report and so much trouble on the last one? It was because the first report was a shorter form that relied on a narrative to convey the essence of the experience. The last visit was a mysteryshopping nightmare with much too much needless detail in addition to the essence.
Jeannie...that's the kind of thing I was talking about. The section on "cleanliness" had about twenty or so questions asking about smudges on glass surfaces, dust on ledges, etc. I commented on the one or two problem areas and reported that the restaurant was otherwise spotless. One of the long list of things the editor wanted me to do was comment individually on each of the twenty areas that did NOT have problems. Here's another example. For all "no" answers the want a few words explaining the "no" answer. For a lot on the explanations it was not possible to do that in less than five or six words. So, another in the long list of "corrections" was to reduce those explanations to three words or less! They are crazy.