I recently did a shop for a company that normally has very clear instructions. But not this one!
There had been two scenario options, but a third one was added after the guidelines were written. The guidelines had been changed on some pages but not on others, so were inconsistent. The survey was inconsistent with the guidelines. I emailed the scheduler for clarification. She saw that the guidelines might be confusing and said they would correct them. She answered my questions, and I did the shop. As I did the survey in "real time," the questions changed to reflect the scenario I did (the added one). So that part had been corrected.
I got a follow-up email asking me to clarify an answer. The inference was that they didn't want the shopper asking a particular question, but nowhere was that stated. This was a question that any real purchaser of this item would ask, so I asked it. There was a related, but separate, topic that the shopper was definitely *not* to ask about, and I didn't. But it sounded as if they didn't want us to ask about either item. I explained that the guidelines made no mention of the item I asked about and quoted the relevant section. My shop was accepted, and the editor thanked me for the feedback.
The point of this is that it looks like the client had an expectation that wasn't spelled out in the guidelines, and neither the client nor the MSC realized that during whatever review process they have. I don't know how many other shoppers were confused by the two vs. three scenarios or how many might have asked the same question I did.
With some MSCs, I expect this type of thing, but not with this one. Which leads me to wonder, again, why they don't have shoppers review the guidelines and surveys for new projects. I know only too well that writers often think that what they wrote says what they meant, but it often doesn't. They take it for granted instead of looking at it with a neutral eye. "I know what it's supposed to say; therefore, it says it." Not always.
There had been two scenario options, but a third one was added after the guidelines were written. The guidelines had been changed on some pages but not on others, so were inconsistent. The survey was inconsistent with the guidelines. I emailed the scheduler for clarification. She saw that the guidelines might be confusing and said they would correct them. She answered my questions, and I did the shop. As I did the survey in "real time," the questions changed to reflect the scenario I did (the added one). So that part had been corrected.
I got a follow-up email asking me to clarify an answer. The inference was that they didn't want the shopper asking a particular question, but nowhere was that stated. This was a question that any real purchaser of this item would ask, so I asked it. There was a related, but separate, topic that the shopper was definitely *not* to ask about, and I didn't. But it sounded as if they didn't want us to ask about either item. I explained that the guidelines made no mention of the item I asked about and quoted the relevant section. My shop was accepted, and the editor thanked me for the feedback.
The point of this is that it looks like the client had an expectation that wasn't spelled out in the guidelines, and neither the client nor the MSC realized that during whatever review process they have. I don't know how many other shoppers were confused by the two vs. three scenarios or how many might have asked the same question I did.
With some MSCs, I expect this type of thing, but not with this one. Which leads me to wonder, again, why they don't have shoppers review the guidelines and surveys for new projects. I know only too well that writers often think that what they wrote says what they meant, but it often doesn't. They take it for granted instead of looking at it with a neutral eye. "I know what it's supposed to say; therefore, it says it." Not always.
I learn something new every day, but not everyday!
I've learned to never trust spell-check or my phone's auto-fill feature.
I've learned to never trust spell-check or my phone's auto-fill feature.