@hotrod22 wrote:
Thanks for the help with this. I clearly get that they really don't care as long as the work or reports get done. I got them to approve it, so I guess I don't care that much either at this point. So, that's what they told me, stand back as far as you need to include both pump and number.
They gave me a '9' because they couldn't see the pump number for dispenser 5. There was no pump number on 5 and the number flag had fallen off. So, they didn't see a number on pump 5 and neither did I, but somehow that is my problem. But I get paid, so all is good.
Thanks for the suggestions for next time at this station
LOL I guess you could always carry a black sharpie@tstewart3 wrote:
I have thought on making a set of magnetic numbers to stick on the pumps that don't have numbers on them. But decided no, better not.
@AZwolfman wrote:
The MSC has already been mentioned, so . . .
IMO, the primary issue with Ipsos is that they tried to repair what was not broken. The main thing that I noticed about Ipsos after they took over the previous company was that they lack the ability to communicate what they want shoppers to evaluate and where they want them to report which infractions on the report. Is it possible that English composition is not the first language of those who designed the reports and guidelines?
If they had kept and used the survey forms and instructions from the company they absorbed, then auditing and reporting their shops would go much faster for shoppers. While I'm ranting, why not allow a 24-hour reporting time instead of requiring an audit that has to be shopped before 10 pm, but requiring the report to also be submitted by 10 pm?
@wrosie wrote:
Also, I believe that if whoever develops the report would actually perform a shop, they would develop MUCH better reports. Both for us to fill out and the client to interpret. Not just IPSOS but all MSCs.