Did I read on here somewhere that this program, you can't "bid" for shops?

I have never done one of these shops, on this program (thankfully, not all their shops are on this program, LOL). so I'm not sure I know how it works.

I'm not going to drive 150 miles each way for a job that pays $40. I've done the same shop for $125, which worked because I could build a profitable one-day mini route around it. But $40 isn't nearly enough.

Throw in your 2 cents worth, I wanna hear it. No scheduler listed, says e-mail that dreaded general e-mail address -- the one that never answers, LOL.

For the first few weeks of the month (not sure exactly how long it lasts) the schedulers won't get involved in the ishopfirst shops. You have to take what is offered. After that, they will entertain requests and date changes, I believe. So, doesn't look good for you for now.

I prefer the ISHOPLAST program....Where it's the LAST day and they pay $$$ to get it done.

The way I understand it, during ishopfirst, you can take it or leave it. And if you assign it to yourself and then change your mind, it's supposed to be no harm no foul if you just let it fall off your shop log.

But, it seems that some people have taken advantage of that of that. They are assigning everything they can to themselves to keep other people from getting them. And then the ones that they don't get around to or whatever fall off their shop logs, then they go back and pick them up for $5 more.

This is stuff that I think would get me deactivated, but other people seem to get away with it.

Hi - you are right that this is basically self-service. If there is a shop you want, you would sign up and complete the shop. However, I am not sure where folks get the no harm no foul part - because Ipsos definitely does expect shoppers who sign up for a shop to complete them whenever possible. Things come up of course but the iShopFirst shops should have the option of changing the date once.

And here is a notice that was on both platforms, not sure where it is now - but it is still true:

Attention Shoppers: Please only claim shops you are able to complete and fully submit by the due date listed. Shops not fully completed and submitted by their due date will be cleared from your shop log regardless of the level of completion. Excessive abandonment and reclaiming of shops is cause for deactivation from a program and/or the discontinuation of your partnership with Ipsos.

I think that they would use it as an excuse to deactivate someone who has a relatively high pay to shop ratio. However, for a newbie that is willing to do shops cheap, they will let them run wild with it.

@Morledzep wrote:

The way I understand it, during ishopfirst, you can take it or leave it. And if you assign it to yourself and then change your mind, it's supposed to be no harm no foul if you just let it fall off your shop log.

But, it seems that some people have taken advantage of that of that. They are assigning everything they can to themselves to keep other people from getting them. And then the ones that they don't get around to or whatever fall off their shop logs, then they go back and pick them up for $5 more.

This is stuff that I think would get me deactivated, but other people seem to get away with it.

thunderdeacon not sure where you get your info.

Karen, no personal animosity intended....BUT...I love this! Such PERFECT Hypocrisy from a company that just simply can't allow a shopper to make a buck off of them, as they continue , month after month, to cut fees while increasing demands!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/08/2022 04:11PM by salisburync.

I am not sure what demands are increasing? Asking that shops are completed as scheduled? Is that what you are referring to or are there other demands? I really only know about projects that I schedule, so am just truly asking if there is something else.
The projects that I am involved with haven't cut fees, so I can't speak on that - high bonuses may not be approved. So I can see if there are projects where the base fees are cut - you may just not want to do those shops.
That is the entire way being an IC works - if there is a shop that pays what is acceptable to you, you sign up for it and do it. If not you just don't.
What shops I might do are probably totally different from shops you might do - so payment would be part of that - but for me, I used to do a pizza shop, I LOVED the pizza, but it didn't pay much and didn't reimburse enough for what I needed to order - but I did it all the time. Then there are some shops that I wouldn't go across the street to do for $100 - so I just take what works for me and leave the rest.

I asked a scheduler to re-schedule a shop for me and they said to just let it fall off your list and pick it up for the new day you want.

So I get dinged because they didn't want to reschedule it for me?

For the projects that I schedule if they are autoremoved by the system then yes there is a record of that.

@wrosie wrote:

I asked a scheduler to re-schedule a shop for me and they said to just let it fall off your list and pick it up for the new day you want.

I had the same thing happen to me. I thought it was peculiar, but I let the shop fall off. Now I hope that won't count against me!

A scheduler gave me the same "advice" regarding a nicely bonused shop that I picked up with only a couple of days remaining until the due date. This area had some horrible storms during the remaining shop dates, and I did not think I would be able to complete the assigned shops. I emailed the scheduler, explained the situation, and was advised to allow the shops to fall off my shop log if I could not complete them before the due date; I could pick them back up when they appeared on the board*. I chose not to follow this advice. I managed to get the shops completed before they fell off my list. I waited in my car for over an hour so that the wind and lightning would calm down enough to perform one of the audits. I've been in the business long enough to know that you are always penalized when you miss a due date. We may see a shop log that has no citations and an average shop score of 9, but the company sees a different story.
I am in no way trying to belittle anyone - I am stating facts and not opinions. This advice was provided by Jennifer Barrick. She advised me to perform an action that would have caused penalties to my account over the long term if I had chosen to heed the advice. Shoppers need to be aware of these issues so that they know what they are getting into when assigning shops with certain schedulers. I would hold on to those emails if I were you - I always keep mine in a folder separate from my inbox.

*Edited to add - I checked my saved emails to see if all of my data was correct. I was actually given this advice 3 days after I sent the email asking for an extension (2 days after the shops were due). I choose not to ever follow this advice. Pardon the mix up - another great reason to have a folder of "Saved communications".

@wrosie wrote:

I asked a scheduler to re-schedule a shop for me and they said to just let it fall off your list and pick it up for the new day you want.

So I get dinged because they didn't want to reschedule it for me?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2022 07:19AM by patman9760.

@KarenSchedulesForIpsos wrote:

However, I am not sure where folks get the no harm no foul part - because Ipsos definitely does expect shoppers who sign up for a shop to complete them whenever possible.

Unfortunately, shoppers get this idea from communications that are not as honest as yours are, @KarenSchedulesForIpsos. I truly appreciate your additions to the forum.

@patman9760 I have seen the communications and nowhere does it say no harm, no foul - it just tells shoppers what will happen. Any mystery shopper has to know that agreeing to do a shop and then not doing it isn't exactly what the company is looking for. My personal feeling is that when iShopFirst started nothing was done with shoppers not doing shops so that shoppers could get used to the automatic removal, etc., to see how it is done. But as it goes on, the shops have to be completed, so I cannot see it being allowed to continue happening over and over.
I would also guess that you, and most of the folks who post on here, are conscientious, responsible shoppers, who rarely just let shops 'fall off' or cancel them. Unfortunately not all shoppers are like that. It is incredible to me to see the number of shops removed on a daily basis for not being completed - just on the projects that I schedule. For me personally it matters because I need to fill the shops again, but of course the bigger picture is that the shops are getting delayed. I am sure you have seen a shop available, then it is gone, then it is back, then it is gone, then it is back, etc - and that is just the sort of thing this needs to address. And I agree that it is unfortunate that the reliable shoppers also have to sort of deal with the changes.
I think in the end you all will benefit because shoppers just won't be able to grab shops, not do them, grab them again, not do them, etc
Anyway ya'll know I don't really speak FOR Ipsos, I just can relate what I know from my little corner of the scheduling world.

The tale of Upper Management and their ways to reduce costs:

I remember, long ago, when I worked in corporate. Someone in upper management had the bright idea to reduce the amount of warehouses in certain cities. This would save money they said. The salespeople howled, the product managers howled and even the business unit managers howled - to no avail.
Those warehouses were there for the immediacy of the need of the customers. Time was of the essence. Downtime to the customer meant losing their business. The margin of sales of the items needed, paid for the warehouse - staffing, etc. But they did it.
Finding the warehouses no longer there with the needed parts, the customers went to the competitor still operating. Sales fell and upper management wanted answers.

Rant:
It was my first ever flake:
Not that long ago, I once self assigned a shop in error. It was just below the actual shop I wanted on the Job Board. Yes, it was my error in not being careful -whatever.
As soon as I noticed my error (a few minutes later when I saw the incorrect shop on my Shop Log), I Immediately, notified via Email the MSC (IPSOS), that I had inadvertently self assigned the wrong shop - could they please remove it. No answer.
After a few more Emails, I finally received a reply. (Paraphrasing): "Just allow it to fall off your list of shops to do. It will do that automatically after the due date".
Never was there any caution that it would be held against me. Had there been, I more than likely, reluctantly performed the shop.
Why? Even when I first began mystery shopping, I never flaked. Even when I was a not so good shopper, I always, always did the work I was assigned. As time went on I became more proficient. I try to do every shop that I assign to myself in the very best manner, and, on time. I pride myself in my work and felt that any company that I contract with would expect and reward my efforts.
It disturbs me greatly that with beginning of the September period, IPSOS has changed the playing field so significantly that I feel they no longer value their contractors.
Why shouldn't I have expected it?
First, it was removing the third week of requested shops (as the rotation allowed), next, it was the unresponsive Emails. Then, those crazy messages about "Bling". There are the bonus amounts that have become jokes, and now, the entire rotational self assigning is gone.
I see where this is leading. Finishing shops is the goal with no regard to the quality of the report, shoppers are at the bottom of the list - just do the shop, turn it in and move on. You get a score and, if it is above a certain degree, you can continue to self assign.
And, if independent schedulers think they are safe, the "I Shop First" program is undoubtedly the method of reducing their work (and their pay).

Sorry for the long post.

@French Farmer As an independent scheduler for Ipsos - I will say this - I am in IC just like the shoppers. I very much enjoy my partnership with Ipsos and am very happy with it. If that changes, I would do exactly what I advise shoppers to do - I would just not partner with them. All of the changes that have been made and will undoubtedly be made in the future I support and see why it's being done and the need for many of these things - that is me personally. If I didn't I would end my partnership. I personally wouldn't work as a shopper or scheduler for any company if it wasn't profitable to me and I am sure everyone feels the same.

Karen chose a manner of responding I define as diplomatic. It is synonymous with a favorite adage used by my grandmother: If you don't like the peaches, don't shake the tree.

@shopperbob yes that is pretty much it! Every shopper wants something different, so I may get an email from 10 shoppers saying that the fee for 1 shop is way too low - and then another 10 emails from shoppers saying oh please sign me up I will do this today - so it just depends on the person. I try and do what makes sense for me.

@KarenSchedulesForIpsos wrote:

@French Farmer As an independent scheduler for Ipsos - I will say this - I am in IC just like the shoppers. I very much enjoy my partnership with Ipsos and am very happy with it. If that changes, I would do exactly what I advise shoppers to do - I would just not partner with them. All of the changes that have been made and will undoubtedly be made in the future I support and see why it's being done and the need for many of these things - that is me personally. If I didn't I would end my partnership. I personally wouldn't work as a shopper or scheduler for any company if it wasn't profitable to me and I am sure everyone feels the same.

Karen, please take no offense of my response to you. And I'll attempt to be diplomatic.
Nevertheless, your response to me advising me of my feelings or opinion regarding the current changes IPSOS has made, clearly illustrates why I find no reason to attend any of the ongoing IPSOS "Meet and Greets", let alone even voicing an opinion.
Yes, we (shoppers) or actually myself could attend, voice our (my) opinion of these changes and I suspect what you have advised would be the same. So why would I ever wish to take the time? What is the value?
That you say you are happy with the changes tells me that you are not listening to the shoppers or understanding their concerns.
Quite clearly stated, it is Take it or Leave it. I (or we shoppers) have no voice. Our opinions are moot.

The issue with signing up for shops and letting them fall off the board leaves too much of a gray area. On one hand, it seems that this is okay to an extent. But then, if it is happening too much, then a shopper could get in trouble. However, there's no concrete guidelines as to how much is too much. This is especially concerning when some schedulers are advising shoppers to just let them fall off. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, and maybe I'm an old foggee. But I always believed that a shopper needed to complete what they committed to. Reneging on shops is something that should only happen very rarely. And in those cases, the mystery shopping company needs to be notified immediately so those shops can get back on the board. I'm just afraid that the good shoppers, the shoppers that always get their shops done, are going to hesitate to over schedule. And then less scrupulous shoppers will take a bunch of shops and then let them go back on the board later. Where is the line? I feel like there needs to be set guidelines. For example, a specific number of shops should be defined as the dividing line between okay and not okay. Or perhaps a percentage. I think that everyone wants the system to be fair. This new system creates avenues for more unscrupulous contractors to game the system. More honorable shoppers are going to be harmed by this. It also gives the mystery shopping company leeway to deactivate shoppers for whatever reason they see fit, and all they have to do is simply say that the shopper didn't complete one or more shops. However, without clear guidelines, there is no real sense of what is okay and what is not okay. And again, having a scheduler suggest that a shopper do something that could hurt them is troubling.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2022 05:20PM by thunderdeacon.

Karen....Keep up the great work. I enjoy filling your shops when they get bonused to the level I want. I don't take the shops if I don't like the pay. Being upset about it is not going to change things. Yes, I hope/wish it would be posted higher initially, but patience pays off. I can wait and do wait and there seems to be shops available since someone doesn't complete them or they are in undesirable areas or where less shoppers are located.

My father in law says "wish in one hand, crap in the other. See which fills up faster." I don't bother wishing when it does not make sense to do so.

I think no matter what the system, someone will find a way to game it. Personally, I don't have a big issue with the way it is now. But maybe that's because I don't see any abuse happening in my area. (I generally keep tabs on shops within a 400 mile radius.) With Maritz, I would crawl over broken glass and move mountains to make sure I didn't cancel and got every single required photo. And they would do the same to get every location done on time. I have driven seven hours or extended a route for an extra day just for one $30 shop. Now with Ipsos, meeting the deadline seems less of a priority for them, so I am less willing to move mountains and will infrequently let a job drop off my list.

I think some type of rules to prevent abuse is fine. I would hope any rules would be designed to flag only flagrant abuse, and would have a manual review component. But I'm not sure if there is a one-size-fits-all formula. Someone dropping a couple of shops out of hundreds, or a new shopper making newbie mistakes, should not be clumped into the same basket as the system gamers.

@hbbigdaddy

I was drinking a cup of coffee when reading the finale of your reply. Luckily I was outside on the patio.I sprayed coffee everywhere. Thanks for the morning chuckle that is so very true!

@hbbigdaddy wrote:

My father in law says "wish in one hand, crap in the other. See which fills up faster." I don't bother wishing when it does not make sense to do so.

.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2022 09:51PM by purpleicee.