Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 91 replies
  • Subscribers 2568 subscribers
  • Views 6810 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

  • Randall Scasny wrote:

     

    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.

    Hi Randall,

     

    I see where you are coming from but to my mind If a member who hasn't completed a particular RoadTest, hasn't contacted you to tell you in advance of their extenuating circumstances, isn't responsive when you contact them, etc, then I don't personally see the downside in suspending them from the program. There has to be some way to dissuade people from signing up just to get free stuff and if its the price we have to pay to ensure suppliers continue to offer their products for free in exchange for a review then so be it.

     

    I was going to say we don't want a few selfish people spoiling it for everybody else, but sadly it seems it's not a few, for this particular supplier it's 87% which quite frankly is shameful, and those people (unless they have a very good reason why they haven't completed their reviews) should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

     

    Best Regards,

     

    Rachael

  • in reply to rachaelp

    Randalll, when I was reading your original document I though just the same Rachael wrote. There are limits before we are obliged to manage situations IMHO. I agree that a military style enrollment is not the best for a community. But there are members that do senseless things and in this case it is the worth, probably at least to protect the other members that spend efforts and resources trying to be correct and helpful. Also this recent roadtest I participated by Infineon, I saw almost sadly that there was too few roadtest posted after the limit date.

    I appreciate that despite these happenings also in road test there is always space for new members or first-time roadtesters, So some action against those roadtesters that did not write down absolutely nothing (without a valid reason) is more than justified as they create a damage to all.

     

    BTW I think that one concept that probably is not well clear for many members is that the road tests are not challenges. But this maybe only my personal impressione.

     

    Enrico

  • in reply to balearicdynamics

    Enrico,

     

    A couple of things have changed since I originally wrote this. (I think it's time for an full scale update; I'll put that on my work task list.)

     

    I have an assistant. I believe I introduced him to the RoadTest group awhile back. His name is Dan. He has been very helpful in doing follow up. With our launching more roadtests more frequently, I needed some help doing follow up. Dan's follow up emails have been not only good reminders, but we also discovered why some roadtesters had not posted. the two that come to mind was an illness in the family and someone lost his job and was trying to deal with it. (Once he started getting job leads, he quickly came up to doing the test.)

     

    The infineon roadtest was somewhat unique. I believe there were some board failures. for these people, I didn't feel it would be fair to them keep their deadline at the original due date. So, I extended it.

     

    People who did not do their roadtests for no good reason, I just can't use as Roadtesters. This delinquent group is getting smaller, however.

     

    As a group, the completion rate has increased quite a bit. So we are quite happy with that. Due to the quick turnaround, we are now feeling a lot more comfortable offering more roadtests because the roadtest group overall is unique and exceptional.

     

    More later...

     

    Randall

Reply
  • in reply to balearicdynamics

    Enrico,

     

    A couple of things have changed since I originally wrote this. (I think it's time for an full scale update; I'll put that on my work task list.)

     

    I have an assistant. I believe I introduced him to the RoadTest group awhile back. His name is Dan. He has been very helpful in doing follow up. With our launching more roadtests more frequently, I needed some help doing follow up. Dan's follow up emails have been not only good reminders, but we also discovered why some roadtesters had not posted. the two that come to mind was an illness in the family and someone lost his job and was trying to deal with it. (Once he started getting job leads, he quickly came up to doing the test.)

     

    The infineon roadtest was somewhat unique. I believe there were some board failures. for these people, I didn't feel it would be fair to them keep their deadline at the original due date. So, I extended it.

     

    People who did not do their roadtests for no good reason, I just can't use as Roadtesters. This delinquent group is getting smaller, however.

     

    As a group, the completion rate has increased quite a bit. So we are quite happy with that. Due to the quick turnaround, we are now feeling a lot more comfortable offering more roadtests because the roadtest group overall is unique and exceptional.

     

    More later...

     

    Randall

Children