I've done about 15 shops for Sentry. Several of my reports have been kicked-back due to requests for additional narrative information. Is that normal? The editors seem to want me to do the yes/no check boxes as well as write a complete, interrupted narrative that addresses almost all the points in the yes/no boxes. I can understand wanting a short narrative addressing any "no" boxes, but is it expected that I also address many of the "yes" boxes in narrative form as well? It seems like a lot of work for $10 plus or minus. Should I adjust my expectations?

It is usually the clients that drive the expectations for narratives. I have not shopped for Sentry, but how many other MSC's report requirements are you comparing theirs to? Do they expect more than the norm for a given fee? That is the real question, I think?

I'm a new shopper, Walesmaven, so that is, indeed, the question. For around $10 to $15, are Sentry's narrative expectations similar to those of other MSCs? I don't have anything to use for comparison. I suppose someone who shops for Sentry, as well as for other MSCs, would have some perspective.

Like wales said, I think that is client specific instead of MSC specific. I have only done one shop for Sentry. It was an entertainment venue that was reimbursement only. The total reimbursement was around $100-120 I think (?) and the report was incredibly easy. I have not done entertainment shops for other MSCs. The closest type shop I have done was a movie theater for SS. It paid maybe $5 (?) and the reimbursement was only about $30. That report was significantly more detailed.

There are companies that I have done two similar shops for, that take similar amounts of time and pay a similar rate. The main difference being that one report required more narrative than the other. And this was all with the same MSC.

The first shop I did for Sentry was cumbersome for the exact reason you stated. The following shops were much easier. I guess I adjusted my expectations, and the narratives just flowed.

Sentry is a punching bag on this blog for a reason. They offer low paying shops and are slow to pay (yes dave your pay guidelines are published, the 60 day period still stinks). The reporting is cumbersome for the money paid out and the editors are looking for a reason to drop your shop. I did 2-3 shops for them last year and getting paid was a hassle. You can find shops in the $5 - $20 that pay faster easily, Sentry is not worth it. ACL has very helpful editors/schedulers and if you want comparable paying shops that pay alot quicker, just go to MF.

Satisfaction Services has many simple shops that require narratives of four or more paragraphs.

ACL is reimbursement only and requires heavy narratives plus for some clients pictures of every issue reported even if that blows your cover.

Learning these narratives will prepare you for companies like Coyle that require extensive chronological narratives. A typical fine dining narrative covering a bar a restaurant visit can take hours to put together.

Sentry pays fairly for what they require.

OP
There are easier similar shops for at or better pay then sentry on most of sentrys shops. They have one fine dining shop that the large reimbursement for great dinner is worth it plus a small fee but the report narrative will take an hour with guaranteed revisions needed. Sentry almost always sends back for more narrative.

I guess I am in the minority, but I like Sentry. They were one of my first companies to work with and I think their narratives helped me build my style of writing. You need to make sure to reference all questions asked, especially the ones you answer no and n/a to. By doing that, you should hit the character minimum without any problems. They do have longer narratives than most companies, but their assignments are fair and pretty straight forward. And yes, the more you do, the easier and less time consuming they become.

jlovesnyc,

You're entitled to your opinion, however, opinions are opinions and facts are facts. We have projects with requirements that range from detailed narrative to limited narrative to comments for "no" answers only. Our assignments pay at or above market rate compared to similar shops. I know of a least two companies, including one that is the belle of the ball on this site, that pay reimbursement only for casual dining assignments. In some cases, the reimbursement doesn't even cover the requirement purchase and/or the requirements of the project exceed what we require. In many cases, our payment policy is within a couple of weeks of these fan favorites.

We don't hide any information from shoppers. Company standards, assignment guidelines, and the payment policy are all available before a shopper accepts an assignment. The last thing we want is for a shopper to be surprised by an assignment requirement or company policy.

Lastly, the idea that we actively seek to reject shops is just ludicrous.

@jlovesnyc wrote:

Sentry is a punching bag on this blog for a reason. They offer low paying shops and are slow to pay (yes dave your pay guidelines are published, the 60 day period still stinks). The reporting is cumbersome for the money paid out and the editors are looking for a reason to drop your shop. I did 2-3 shops for them last year and getting paid was a hassle. You can find shops in the $5 - $20 that pay faster easily, Sentry is not worth it. ACL has very helpful editors/schedulers and if you want comparable paying shops that pay alot quicker, just go to MF.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2017 09:36PM by Sentry Marketing.

I do not. Reports are too long for small pay and there are tooany quizes. Plus schedulets are hard to get ahold of and site is hard to sign in until they FINALLY tell you there is a portal!!

I second that Sentry narrative requirement is too much for the ridiculous pay they offer (aka reimburement that don't even cover the price of food they require to buy!). They take the longest to pay out of the 40 companies I am registered with and their reports take at week to be reviewed by the scheduler...

They just rejected my shop and their reasoning did not make sense, it's almost like they found a way to not pay me for my work.
I completed three shops in the same restaurant before and they were fine, the food was great. This last time, I rated their food average because it came out barely warm and the meat looked unappetizing and when I tried to eat the chicken, I had to spit out around 1/3 of the meat because they were the skin parts. Apparently, the client didn't like the "average" rating, so they rejected my report. If they don't believe the shopper's rating of the food and nly trust the photo, why ask us to write hundreds of sentences and 20 different quiz questions about the food rating?
Let's just say I will not be eating there ever again and it's a shame because their food is usually delicious!!
I'm not saying it is Sentry marketing's fault to reject my shop but they should stick up for the shopper and not let the company they work for simply reject the whole report because of ONE score (out of 30 or so) in the whole report.
I find it unacceptable and disrespectful. It is simply not paying me for the work I did. I did not miss any guidelines and I did not wrote anything that is wrong, I recorded my observations and they even admitted that there was some skin on the chicken. The food was not presented in the "excellent way", it was "average", the other possible rating to choose from. It really boggles my mind the reasoning behind the rejection! Not even a lowered rate for the job done. Clearly I am not the only one who was not paid for the work they did for Sentry!!


The email about rejection from the company.

"After review from the client, your report is being rejected. The photo you provided was compared to your comments concerning the entree item which was not appropriately rated, affecting the scoring. For instance, you rated the meat platter as Average for presentation/appearance and commented, “The meat platter did not look appetizing. The three slices of pork were not neatly organized and the pulled chicken contained lots of skin parts.” However, the photo attached to the report does not show that the pieces of pro were stacked on top of each other and were cooked properly. The chicken in the photo shows mainly chicken with very little skin visible."

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2017 11:23PM by alycja.

@alycja
There is a difference between appearance and actual consumption. I've eaten plenty of food that was excellently presented yet was not appetizing. Though I agree that Sentry should have asked you to correct the report, I am not sure tgat they are obligated. I have negatively rated their clients for presentation, both appearance and taste for food being appetizing, as well as service and cleanliness issues. They do not reject reports because of proper objective (or when asked subjective) content. And yes, I've performed a shop for them incorrectly and not been paid. I've also had a handful of shops rejected, over the years, by Market Force, A Closer Look and at least one other MSC. It has always been my fault, the MSC is then forced to reshop the client or potentially not be paid in full for providing the required observations. Rejecting our reports costs the MSC, it is not done to pacify the client.

@isaiah58 wrote:

@alycja
There is a difference between appearance and actual consumption. I've eaten plenty of food that was excellently presented yet was not appetizing. Though I agree that Sentry should have asked you to correct the report, I am not sure tgat they are obligated. I have negatively rated their clients for presentation, both appearance and taste for food being appetizing, as well as service and cleanliness issues. They do not reject reports because of proper objective (or when asked subjective) content. And yes, I've performed a shop for them incorrectly and not been paid. I've also had a handful of shops rejected, over the years, by Market Force, A Closer Look and at least one other MSC. It has always been my fault, the MSC is then forced to reshop the client or potentially not be paid in full for providing the required observations. Rejecting our reports costs the MSC, it is not done to pacify the client.

Thank you. I indeed reported the factual presentation and the food did not look as appetizing as it did before (before I rated the food excellent score). I do know we should not compare the experience to the past experiences but dining in this location several other times as a MS, I do know that before it looked appetizing. This last time it did not, the meat looked like a mess. I would not give it a "excellent" score, I gave the next possible lower score.

I have no problem when the company rejects the shop when it was done incorrectly by the shopper. This is NOT my case. In my case, they rejected my work because don't like the "average" rating in one question and thus my issue. I did not write nor rated something that was not a fact or my impression at the time. I have the photo of the food and I am looking at it, it does strike me as unappetizing. They can't possibly not pay me because my impression supports facts. They always accepted the job when the rating was "excellent" because the food both looked good and was appetizing. This is simple not paying shopper for their hard work, I lost m money and time for this work that was unfairly rejected.

I too am new to mystery but was dismayed by the certification process. I have a master's degree in education and have been trained in testing. Their certification tests are impossible even if you take them open book. The majority of the questions are excellent illustrations in how not to write a test question.

I also found that their evaluation was twice as hard as other similar restaurant evaluations for the same price point both food and mystery shopping pay.

They are currently on my big maybe list and if they are as slow to pay as mentioned the forum they are sinking further down.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2017 11:05PM by dulcew.

Questions such as were there five slices of meat arranged perpendicular to each other on the right side of the plate or was the meat served with an internal temperature of 165 degrees do not allow for subjectivity. Whether something is "appetizing" or "tastes good" is subjective. IMO, it doesn't make sense to reject a shop over a subjective answer to a subjective question. If the MSC felt the photo fit the client's standards of excellence, they could easily change the answer and provide feedback to the shopper about how she needs to lower her standards and grade on a curve.

They do have an appeal process. Dave also participates here so might ask for you to email him. Did you use the link on their website to ask for further assistance? We only have one side so far. Also, your copy of the response appears to either have grammatical errors or was edited for here; so may not fully provide everything that was sent to you.

@isaiah58 wrote:

They do have an appeal process. Dave also participates here so might ask for you to email him. Did you use the link on their website to ask for further assistance? We only have one side so far. Also, your copy of the response appears to either have grammatical errors or was edited for here; so may not fully provide everything that was sent to you.

I copied-pasted their response as it is was sent to me. Would you like to see a screenshot of their response in PM, in case you don't believe me?

I believe you. You should forward that to Dave (@Sentry Marketing) as he likes to make sure his staff communicates properly and clearly.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2017 11:46PM by isaiah58.

I'd have to take alycja's side. I find the editors can be very subjective in their reviews. It's like they expect us to be perfect in our reviews and know what they want written. I find it especially irksome when they interpret the guidelines one way and to me I interpret it another way. The guidelines should be crystal clear so there is no room for either of us to have a report rejected. Especially if some guidelines are 5-7 pages or more long. And if the surveys are 10 or more pages long with endless questions.

Enough of my rant. If we give a accurate, honest, and complete report, we should be paid. Simple as that.

You did not include the entire text that our editor provided in the explanation for the rejection. The entire text is as follows:

Feedback: After review from the client, your report is being rejected. The photo you provided was compared to your comments concerning the entree item which was not appropriately rated, affecting the scoring. For instance, you rated the meat platter as Average for presentation/appearance and commented, “The meat platter did not look appetizing. The three slices of pork were not neatly organized and the pulled chicken contained lots of skin parts.” However, the photo attached to the report does not show that the pieces of pro were stacked on top of each other and were cooked properly. The chicken in the photo shows mainly chicken with very little skin visible. Also, comments such as “Also, the required items cost more than your reimbursement. Please consider paying more for this assignment or not requiring to order a drink” are not acceptable in the report.

In addition, you did not include the fact that you ordered dessert even though dessert is not required by the assignment guidelines. Including comments in your report that complain about the fee/reimbursement is not appropriate.

@alycja wrote:

I second that Sentry narrative requirement is too much for the ridiculous pay they offer (aka reimburement that don't even cover the price of food they require to buy!). They take the longest to pay out of the 40 companies I am registered with and their reports take at week to be reviewed by the scheduler...

They just rejected my shop and their reasoning did not make sense, it's almost like they found a way to not pay me for my work.
I completed three shops in the same restaurant before and they were fine, the food was great. This last time, I rated their food average because it came out barely warm and the meat looked unappetizing and when I tried to eat the chicken, I had to spit out around 1/3 of the meat because they were the skin parts. Apparently, the client didn't like the "average" rating, so they rejected my report. If they don't believe the shopper's rating of the food and nly trust the photo, why ask us to write hundreds of sentences and 20 different quiz questions about the food rating?
Let's just say I will not be eating there ever again and it's a shame because their food is usually delicious!!
I'm not saying it is Sentry marketing's fault to reject my shop but they should stick up for the shopper and not let the company they work for simply reject the whole report because of ONE score (out of 30 or so) in the whole report.
I find it unacceptable and disrespectful. It is simply not paying me for the work I did. I did not miss any guidelines and I did not wrote anything that is wrong, I recorded my observations and they even admitted that there was some skin on the chicken. The food was not presented in the "excellent way", it was "average", the other possible rating to choose from. It really boggles my mind the reasoning behind the rejection! Not even a lowered rate for the job done. Clearly I am not the only one who was not paid for the work they did for Sentry!!


The email about rejection from the company.

"After review from the client, your report is being rejected. The photo you provided was compared to your comments concerning the entree item which was not appropriately rated, affecting the scoring. For instance, you rated the meat platter as Average for presentation/appearance and commented, “The meat platter did not look appetizing. The three slices of pork were not neatly organized and the pulled chicken contained lots of skin parts.” However, the photo attached to the report does not show that the pieces of pro were stacked on top of each other and were cooked properly. The chicken in the photo shows mainly chicken with very little skin visible."

@Sentry Marketing wrote:

Also, comments such as “Also, the required items cost more than your reimbursement. Please consider paying more for this assignment or not requiring to order a drink” are not acceptable in the report.

Oh my. Well then.

Again, the company decides to not pay because they don't like the subjective answer to a subjective question. WOW. Talking about the unprofessional and shady.

Also Why the editor not raised those concerns then? If she thinks my comment about the insufficient pay is inappropriate (it was merely a kind suggestion to a MSC in the "MSC comments box" ), then they could have deleted that. Why do a poor job of editing the shop and send this info to a client by MSC?

@Sentry Marketing wrote:

You did not include the entire text that our editor provided in the explanation for the rejection. The entire text is as follows:

Feedback: After review from the client, your report is being rejected. The photo you provided was compared to your comments concerning the entree item which was not appropriately rated, affecting the scoring. For instance, you rated the meat platter as Average for presentation/appearance and commented, “The meat platter did not look appetizing. The three slices of pork were not neatly organized and the pulled chicken contained lots of skin parts.” However, the photo attached to the report does not show that the pieces of pro were stacked on top of each other and were cooked properly. The chicken in the photo shows mainly chicken with very little skin visible. Also, comments such as “Also, the required items cost more than your reimbursement. Please consider paying more for this assignment or not requiring to order a drink” are not acceptable in the report.

In addition, you did not include the fact that you ordered dessert even though dessert is not required by the assignment guidelines. Including comments in your report that complain about the fee/reimbursement is not appropriate.

Glad to hear from the other side.

Why did you accept an assignment when you found the compensation unacceptable? This was the fourth time you completed the assignment for this client and the compensation has not changed.

Why did you order dessert outside of the assignment guidelines?

There is not an "MSC Comments Box" on this form.

@alycja wrote:

Again, the company decides to not pay because they don't like the subjective answer to a subjective question. WOW. Talking about the unprofessional and shady.

Also Why the editor not raised those concerns then? If she thinks my comment about the insufficient pay is inappropriate (it was merely a kind suggestion to a MSC in the "MSC comments box" ), then they could have deleted that. Why do a poor job of editing the shop and send this info to a client by MSC?

@dulcew wrote:

I too am new to mystery but was dismayed by the certification process. I have a master's degree in education and have been trained in testing. Their certification tests are impossible even if you take them open book. The majority of the questions are excellent illustrations in how not to write a test question.

I also found that their evaluation was twice as hard as other similar restaurant evaluations for the same price point both food and mystery shopping pay.

They are currently on my big maybe list and if they are as slow to pay as mentioned the forum they are sinking further down.

In my opinion, the certification questions are fair... with one exception. Many of the tests I've taken ask whether a photo is required (true or false). However, if one answers "true," this is scored as incorrect. It appears many guidelines were updated sometime in February, and many now require a photo. As a new shopper who is reading the new guidelines that specifically state a photo is required, I have to answer that question as "false" otherwise I may not pass the test. Seems a little unfair to me and took extra time to figure out what was going on.

Again, Sentry Marketing replies try to derail the conversation into making it about my feedback about the pay or dessert. None of these items are "not according to the guidelines". Again, it was editor's job to remove the feedback about the pay, but of course if your editor does a poor job they still get paid at my expense?

The editor could not even use a proper grammar to write an email about the shop rejection!!! It only tells bad things about Sentry Marketing, when the editor can't do that one thing they are hired to do.

It does not change the fact that their reason for rejection is that they don't subjectively agree with my subjective answer. I have the photo of the meal and my comments about it support what is on the image and thus my feedback that the meal does not look appetizing to me.
Does a meat that is thrown on the plate with no organization and meat that is dried out and is falling off the plate can look appetizing to anyone? No. Too bad the client hates their restaurant served terrible food that day.

How unprofessional of Sentry Marketing to yet again trying to discredit a mystery shopper on this forum.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/2017 01:30AM by alycja.

@Sentry Marketing wrote:

Also, comments such as “Also, the required items cost more than your reimbursement. Please consider paying more for this assignment or not requiring to order a drink” are not acceptable in the report.

In addition, you did not include the fact that you ordered dessert even though dessert is not required by the assignment guidelines. Including comments in your report that complain about the fee/reimbursement is not appropriate.

Oh boy, I can relate. I used to get reports like this all of the time when I edited.

I'm glad that Dave posted this so that the masses can see what kind of reports come in all too frequently. Based on how people post here, you'd think that they were the best shoppers ever.

My reports aren't perfect (well, except the Coyle ones, I'm still @ 100%), but some people have no concept of how this all works.

If you are better than what was posted here, I hope you find many fun and lucrative shops.

Thank you for pointing this out to us. You are correct and we'll get to work on updating the certifications as appropriate.

@mahemj wrote:

@dulcew wrote:

I too am new to mystery but was dismayed by the certification process. I have a master's degree in education and have been trained in testing. Their certification tests are impossible even if you take them open book. The majority of the questions are excellent illustrations in how not to write a test question.

I also found that their evaluation was twice as hard as other similar restaurant evaluations for the same price point both food and mystery shopping pay.

They are currently on my big maybe list and if they are as slow to pay as mentioned the forum they are sinking further down.

In my opinion, the certification questions are fair... with one exception. Many of the tests I've taken ask whether a photo is required (true or false). However, if one answers "true," this is scored as incorrect. It appears many guidelines were updated sometime in February, and many now require a photo. As a new shopper who is reading the new guidelines that specifically state a photo is required, I have to answer that question as "false" otherwise I may not pass the test. Seems a little unfair to me and took extra time to figure out what was going on.

@LisaSTL wrote:

Questions such as were there five slices of meat arranged perpendicular to each other on the right side of the plate or was the meat served with an internal temperature of 165 degrees do not allow for subjectivity. Whether something is "appetizing" or "tastes good" is subjective. IMO, it doesn't make sense to reject a shop over a subjective answer to a subjective question. If the MSC felt the photo fit the client's standards of excellence, they could easily change the answer and provide feedback to the shopper about how she needs to lower her standards and grade on a curve.

This is what we should be focusing on here!

My shop was rejected because the company disagrees on the subjective question they asked me. Maybe I am a tough critic but in three previous shops I was very pleased with the same food. This time is was far from "excellent".