Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 91 replies
  • Subscribers 2566 subscribers
  • Views 6740 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Please Read: An Important RoadTest Program Change

rscasny

This is the third virtual "fireside chat" that I'm writing regarding the RoadTest Program. For this one, I'd like to roll out a RoadTest Program change and explain why the change is occurring.

 

To start, I'd like to share a snippet of an email I received yesterday from a vendor who participates in the RoadTest Program:

 

"We received only 13% reviews back from the RoadTests we sponsored in 2016. I would like to know the status of each of these roadtests. Are the missing reviews still being pursued? I would also like to know if the members that failed to post a review are now being flagged so we do not chose them again."

 

It was not pleasant to respond to. I had to eat "humble pie," as we say in the US, when I responded to this vendor.

 

To solve the problem, I decided I don't want to go down the road of suspending members from the RoadTest program. Suspensions sound too much like the hard rules of the military. I was in the Navy for 10 years and I didn't like tough rules back then, but I knew they were necessary given the reality of uncomfortable shipboard conditions and potentially dangerous operations we were participating in.

 

But this is a community. It should be a place to have some fun, meet new people, network professionally, be a mentor, or get mentored. Suspending people just is the wrong road to follow.

 

The way I've chosen to resolve the problem is the program change.

 

RoadTest application reports will soon include whether a specific applicant has completed all of his/her previous RoadTest reviews. I'm told by our developers this is very easy to do. We will provide this information to the vendor with a RoadTester's application. The supplier will make the decision where to select the RoadTester or not. Given the above comment by the supplier, I think the answer is self-evident.

 

Now, this change will probably cause me more work. If someone were flagged, I will have to check to see if that person is on a current RoadTest and it's before the due date of the official review. I surely don't want to penalize a conscientious RoadTester. I will also have to ensure there are not any extenuating circumstances that have caused the person not to write the review, i.e., sickness, family issues.

 

I am ambivalent about this whole thing. There are many RoadTesters who are doing a fantastic job. But a 13% success rate is not successful. I really have no choice but to implement this change.

 

Sincerely,

 

Randall Scasny

RoadTest Program Manager

Parents

  • I for one agree something needs to be done. I will not apply for a road test if I feel I can not complete it on the given schedule and also If I feel the award would be better served being given to someone else, and even then as was the case with the INA301 I may still post reviews or tutorials to help out the participants, its fun and most of the TMs like to help, it's what we're all about.

    I do get bothered though when an applicant gets a nice Scope or Analyzer or other more expensive product and then the next time you hear from them is when the next road test comes up., no review, no posts or anything in between

     

    I think your choice of dealing with this is very generous and hopefully will help weed out the collect and run types, it still won't stop the new members who sole purpose is to get a product and run, for this the only thing I have seen suggested in the past was to put min points limits on the "Better" product so if you have not been participating in the community then you dont get to review the "Big Toys" till you do.

     

    One thing that would also be bad though is if someone just posts a regurgitation of the product specs or simply a box opening, I have seen many instances in the past where the review is well to put it bluntly. Not a review. they go along the lines of "I opened the box...... it was a nice box...... The product looked like its picture and seems to meet the published specification....." you get the idea.

     

    So while I respect you measures, there may need to be more of a "Quality" check of the review, especially if from a very new member with no history of participation. A Post in the Review form does not necessarily mean a review has been done."

     

    That's my 2 cents (Pennies worth image )

Reply

  • I for one agree something needs to be done. I will not apply for a road test if I feel I can not complete it on the given schedule and also If I feel the award would be better served being given to someone else, and even then as was the case with the INA301 I may still post reviews or tutorials to help out the participants, its fun and most of the TMs like to help, it's what we're all about.

    I do get bothered though when an applicant gets a nice Scope or Analyzer or other more expensive product and then the next time you hear from them is when the next road test comes up., no review, no posts or anything in between

     

    I think your choice of dealing with this is very generous and hopefully will help weed out the collect and run types, it still won't stop the new members who sole purpose is to get a product and run, for this the only thing I have seen suggested in the past was to put min points limits on the "Better" product so if you have not been participating in the community then you dont get to review the "Big Toys" till you do.

     

    One thing that would also be bad though is if someone just posts a regurgitation of the product specs or simply a box opening, I have seen many instances in the past where the review is well to put it bluntly. Not a review. they go along the lines of "I opened the box...... it was a nice box...... The product looked like its picture and seems to meet the published specification....." you get the idea.

     

    So while I respect you measures, there may need to be more of a "Quality" check of the review, especially if from a very new member with no history of participation. A Post in the Review form does not necessarily mean a review has been done."

     

    That's my 2 cents (Pennies worth image )

Children
  • in reply to Robert Peter Oakes

    I have seen many instances in the past where the review is well to put it bluntly. Not a review

    I recall one where the comments were along the lines  .... "Is that all".

     

     

    Randall has a plan going forward so we should see where it goes.

    I'm pretty sure there will be one or two 'mistakes' but if thats all then it is a step up from the 13% rate for one supplier.

     

     

    Mark