Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 91 replies
  • Subscribers 2566 subscribers
  • Views 6759 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

  • Having been chosen as a finalist for the first road test after this system has been in place (which I hope will have the desired outcome of more roadtests completed) I have an issue with the first question.

     

    Congratulations. This means you are part of the short list of applicants who will be forwarded to the supplier for their selection of the official winners.

    Your application will be forwarded as well as your answers to the following questions. Please answer the following questions by replying to this message:

    1. What is your work status? (Full time job, part time job, student, not working/retired)?

    I do not see how telling a third party my current work situation is relevant in any way, shape or form.

     

    I don't want to seem negative in any way, could the option "choose not to say" be added?

     

    Regards

     

    Greg

  • in reply to gregoryfenton

    And how does it affect the selection process: full time job = less time to work on the review, so less likely to complete it on time?

  • in reply to gregoryfenton

    Greg,

     

    Thanks for the feedback.

     

    My only intent of asking this question was to get a sense of an applicant's time availability. I had gotten some messages indicating that they did not complete the road test because of school, work, job issue, life changes, etc. These things always come up but may have caused the predicament Roadtests are in. Clearly, this question needs to be re-visited.

     

    Would a better question be:

     

    How much time per week would you have available to spend on this roadtest:

    0-5 hours

    6-10 hours

    More than 10 hours

     

    Randall

  • That would be a great alternative, for me the answer would be "More than 10 hours" in the average week.

  • in reply to gregoryfenton

    Thanks. I will address this change before the system gets finalized.

     

    Clearly, two heads are better than one. Sometimes one gets tunnel vision when you're trying to establish something new. So, I needed the input.

     

    Randall

  • in reply to gregoryfenton

    Greg Fenton wrote:

     

    I do not see how telling a third party my current work situation is relevant in any way, shape or form.

    It could be that they want to get a good "spread" of reviewers - professionals, hobbyists & students ... ?

  • in reply to rscasny

    Randall

    I can see that this sort of question would be very useful ASSUMMING the participants actually answer it truthfully.

    Given the promises in the past, they might decide to tick 10hrs plus regardless, which doesn;t help you decide.

     

     

    I was looking back at some of the Raod Test Applications and found this gem.

    How To Write A RoadTest Review

     

    I wonder if you couldn't update the guide with some other examples and a guide as to the time taken.

    They could signal that they have read it and pick one to indcate how much time they expect to take.

     

     

    mark

  • in reply to awneil

    In the questionnaire for the finalist its stated as "Have you completed all of your previous RoadTests Reviews for which you  were selected as an official RoadTester? (Yes, No, In progress, First  Time Applicant)".

    Maybe the number of completed road tests would be interesting, but probably Randall can find that out more easily than I can do image

  • in reply to mcb1

    ...ASSUMMING the participants actually answer it truthfully.

     

    Mark makes an excellent point! The type of roadtesters that take and run would also be likely to be dishonest on their application, in order to win the "free stuff".

    The honest roadtester might err on the side of caution, promising fewer hours just in case something comes up.

     

    Ultimately that then means the wrong type of roadtesters end up with a higher likelyhood of winning the roadtest.

     

    -Nico

  • in reply to mcb1

    I like that link,  I think an updated version of that being attached to all RoadTest participants should help the ones who truly want to participate.