Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 91 replies
  • Subscribers 2568 subscribers
  • Views 6828 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 only found out about the RoadTest group recently, so these old posts are all new to me!

     

    I sometimes do contract work, and when I do I feel a large burden of responsibility to complete the job the client is paying for. A RoadTest should be no different: a professional contract "please do a review and we pay you in kind with the item being reviewed". Unfortunately, as Randall has seen there seems to be a lot of people who don't have the high standards we expect, especially when being "paid in advance" as it were.

     

    My company also manufactures equipment that we send out for review to professionals (i.e., established press) and bloggers (of various popularity). Similarly, we don't always get reviews done in exchange for the products we send, but it's probably more than 90% success, rather than 13% you've seen). This is probably because we are very careful to choose where we sent the products and make sure we have some good communication before the process starts.

     

    I'm wondering if a deposit scheme would filter out those that don't intend to do a review. Essentially, before the item is sent to you, a deposit (card payment) is taken from you, and this is repaid as soon as the review is posted. Maybe this is only for high-ticket items, or maybe the deposit amount is proportional to the item list price.

     

    For a high-ticket item, I'd have no problem paying a refundable deposit to show that I was serious is fulfilling the contract to which I have agreed.

     

    Once you've done a few RoadTests and are shown to be reliable, perhaps the deposit is no longer required.

  • in reply to dr-jhc

    James,

     

    I see merit in your idea of requiring a deposit on high value items, or better yet, a deposit proportional to the item value ('cause some road test items have been very expensive).

    This approach should drastically increase the fulfillment rate for reviews, but it may not impact the quality of reviews, which is another concern.

     

    I have read many Road Test reviews structured as undisciplined streams of consciousness.  Others come across as minimalist scribbles barely meeting the definition of a review.  Then there are reviews that are beautifully structured, well written publication grade pieces with obvious inclusion of important detail and full awareness of the needs of the reader.  The very best reviews often include high quality labelled illustrations, useful external hyperlinks, and well lit, tightly edited and clearly voiced video clips.  I prefer reading reviews written by experienced professionals that can offer expert opinions, or by hobbyists or students that are excited to share their learning experience in an engaging and thoughtful way.  Not every member has the skill to craft a well written and well structured review.  The range of skill runs from barely competent to professional grade.

     

    In short, there are ways to increase review fulfillment, but what are the ways to increase the consistency of review caliber?

     

    Mark A

  • in reply to Instructorman

    Mark,

     

    I agree that it's very important to maintain a high standard of reviews. All I can suggest is that RoadTest applicants include links to examples of what they are capable of. This doesn't necessarily need to be other reviews, but should at least show their level of competency in photo and/or video and how well they can write and structure their thoughts.

     

    James

Reply
  • in reply to Instructorman

    Mark,

     

    I agree that it's very important to maintain a high standard of reviews. All I can suggest is that RoadTest applicants include links to examples of what they are capable of. This doesn't necessarily need to be other reviews, but should at least show their level of competency in photo and/or video and how well they can write and structure their thoughts.

     

    James

Children
No Data