Secret Shopper ethics

[user_50983]

I'm a fan of the channel, especially the WAN show, but I'm having moral qualms about supporting the channel given the potential ethical issues with the Secret Shopper series.

 

Namely, on the video "What Are My Sponsors Hiding?", the team members lie about missing parts or intentionally damage the products to see if the customer support representatives will send replacement parts or products (often successfully). While I think it is valuable to evaluate the customer service of a company, unless they are clearing this with the companies beforehand, this seems like it would constitute theft or fraud. Does LTT do anything to make sure this is conducted legally and ethically? Does the team okay these experiments with the companies beforehand?

[Dedayog]

3 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

I'm a fan of the channel, especially the WAN show, but I'm having moral qualms about supporting the channel given the potential ethical issues with the Secret Shopper series.

 

Namely, on the last Secret Shopper video, the team members lie about missing parts or intentionally damage the products to see if the customer support representatives will send replacement parts or products (often successfully). While I think it is valuable to evaluate the customer service of a company, unless they are clearing this with the companies beforehand, this seems like it would constitute theft or fraud. Does LTT do anything to make sure this is conducted legally and ethically? Does the team okay these experiments with the companies beforehand?

Please re-read what you wrote, out loud.

 

Does it sound as silly to you as it does to me, that they would clear this with a company first?

[user_50983]

3 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

Please re-read what you wrote, out loud.

 

Does it sound as silly to you as it does to me, that they would clear this with a company first?

No? Because if they did not that would be fraudulent and hugely unethical. I would hope that a company like LTT would take steps to avert criminality.

[Hinjima]

5 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

No? Because if they did not that would be fraudulent and hugely unethical. I would hope that a company like LTT would take steps to avert criminality.

Are you okay?

How is it unethical?

[bmx6454]

5 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

No? Because if they did not that would be fraudulent and hugely unethical. I would hope that a company like LTT would take steps to avert criminality.

how could they trust that it's a genuine response if they consult them about their plans beforehand??

[user_50983]

1 minute ago, bmx6454 said:

how could they trust that it's a genuine response if they consult them about their plans beforehand??

That is a legitimate concern, but surely not engaging in theft holds greater moral priority?

[user_50983]

4 minutes ago, Hinjima said:

Are you okay?

How is it unethical?

Because they are lying to the representatives to get free parts or products. If I purchased something from you and said dishonestly that it never arrived or was damaged to get another item for free, would that be morally acceptable?

[Hinjima]

7 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

Because they are lying to the representatives to get free parts or products. If I purchased something from you and said dishonestly that it never arrived or was damaged to get another item for free, would that be morally acceptable?

You realize this happens hundreds of thousands of times a day? all day, every day.

I would be non the wiser and send you a replacement part to make a customer happy.

I think its morally acceptable to test out companies that thousands of people shop from in order to tell the customer base what company should be avoided or not or what company has good customer support etc etc.

Lenovo won't go bankrupt because they have to send out a few sidepanels.

[RTX 3090]

10 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

Because they are lying to the representatives to get free parts or products. If I purchased something from you and said dishonestly that it never arrived or was damaged to get another item for free, would that be morally acceptable?

They didn't get free parts, they just tested their support via phone like reseating RAM. Wasted labour maybe, but they didn't commit fraudulent activity, and I think even the extra labour to phone handlers is overthinking things a bit too much. Also I'm sure if they said a part needed replacement etc they didn't send it in for a refund but just tested their reaction and see if they would accept a return or see their RMA process

[user_50983]

15 hours ago, RTX 3090 said:

They didn't get free parts, they just tested their support via phone like reseating RAM. Wasted labour maybe, but they didn't commit fraudulent activity, and I think even the extra labour to phone handlers is overthinking things a bit too much. Also I'm sure if they said a part needed replacement etc they didn't send it in for a refund but just tested their reaction and see if they would accept a return or see their RMA process

My mistake! I realized I was actually talking about the "What Are My Sponsors Hiding?" video, not the most recent one. I'll correct the OP.

 

In the "What Are My Sponsors Hiding?" video, they do get replacement parts and even main products. For example, the Jackery was intentionally damaged with a screwdriver and then replaced. 

 

I do hope that something is being done behind the scenes to make sure this is being conducted ethically.

 

15 hours ago, Hinjima said:

You realize this happens hundreds of thousands of times a day? all day, every day.

I would be non the wiser and send you a replacement part to make a customer happy.

I think its morally acceptable to test out companies that thousands of people shop from in order to tell the customer base what company should be avoided or not or what company has good customer support etc etc.

Lenovo won't go bankrupt because they have to send out a few sidepanels.

I do think this happens often, but I would like to believe most people would have the moral integrity not to do so. 

 

Most companies can financially tolerate petty theft and lost inventory to some extent, but that does not morally justify it. Even in the pursuit of documenting customer support, I don't believe one is vindicated in engaging in financial crimes.

[Dedayog]

20 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

In the "What Are My Sponsors Hiding?" video, they do get replacement parts and even main products. For example, the Jackery was intentionally damaged with a screwdriver and then replaced. 

 

I do hope that something is being done behind the scenes to make sure this is being conducted ethically.

If they did that, I am sure they handled it after the fact with the sponsor.

 

Otherwise yes, it's a dick move.

[crazzp]

1 hour ago, user_50983 said:

While I think it is valuable to evaluate the customer service of a company, unless they are clearing this with the companies beforehand, this seems like it would constitute theft or fraud. Does LTT do anything to make sure this is conducted legally and ethically? Does the team okay these experiments with the companies beforehand?

There are actual mystery shopping jobs which require them to shop, test companies customer service and provide feedback.

[Blue4130]

52 minutes ago, Hinjima said:

You realize this happens hundreds of thousands of times a day? all day, every day.

I would be non the wiser and send you a replacement part to make a customer happy.

I think its morally acceptable to test out companies that thousands of people shop from in order to tell the customer base what company should be avoided or not or what company has good customer support etc etc.

Lenovo won't go bankrupt because they have to send out a few sidepanels.

Just because it happens lots and the companies don't figure it out... That doesn't make it ethical. Neither does the size of the company. Just because it won't bankrupt a company does not mean it is ethical.

 

I get what you mean. In the grand scheme of things, it's pretty low key. But scamming a company is still unethical.

 

Doing a secret shopper isn't really unethical in my mind if after the fact ltt reaches out with their findings and offers recommendations. And offers any replacement parts returned.

[Erioch]

OP seems very concerned.  I hope OP is okay.

[Middcore]

9 minutes ago, Erioch said:

OP seems very concerned.  I hope OP is okay.

 

OP and the guy who was worried he had broken some law by buying Japanese game soundtrack CDs would get along really well, I think. 

[user_50983]

40 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

If they did that, I am sure they handled it after the fact with the sponsor.

 

Otherwise yes, it's a dick move.

Thank you! Yeah, I would hope so.

[user_50983]

29 minutes ago, crazzp said:

There are actual mystery shopping jobs which require them to shop, test companies customer service and provide feedback.

Definitely, although they are normally expected to do legitimate shopping and provide feedback. Shoplifting is usually not a part of it.  

[Blue4130]

1 minute ago, user_50983 said:

Definitely, although they are normally expected to do legitimate shopping and provide feedback. Shoplifting is usually not a part of it.  

And isn't legitimate secret shopping an opt-in business? Companies contact secret shoppers and say "hey test us out" and then the secret shoppers go to a random location at a random time.

[Erioch]

2 minutes ago, user_50983 said:

Shoplifting is usually not a part of it.  

You're accusing LMG of criminal activity. 

 

[user_50983]

2 minutes ago, Erioch said:

You're accusing LMG of criminal activity. 

 

I'm saying it is criminal or at the very least unethical if they do not clear it with the companies beforehand or take other steps to make it ethical. If they are doing this behind the scenes (e.g., checking with them beforehand, recompensing for those products), then of course, it would not be criminal. I'm hoping someone on the team can positively clarify this detail. Otherwise, they are illicitly obtaining products by deception.

[tkitch]

this seems like a lot of clutching at straw to try and find a reason to be mad at LTT.

 

This is a thing that happens every day in retail and business.  Trust me, it's not unusual.   Customers are fucking assholes and will do all sorts of shady shit to businesses on the reg.  

[Blue4130]

26 minutes ago, tkitch said:

this seems like a lot of clutching at straw to try and find a reason to be mad at LTT.

 

This is a thing that happens every day in retail and business.  Trust me, it's not unusual.   Customers are fucking assholes and will do all sorts of shady shit to businesses on the reg.  

I'll agree that this post is a little clutching and looking for a problem, but you are the second person in this thread that is somehow justifying bad behavior by normalizing it. Just because it happens a lot does not mean it is ok or should not be called out.

[kirashi]

2 hours ago, user_50983 said:

I'm a fan of the channel, especially the WAN show, but I'm having moral qualms about supporting the channel given the potential ethical issues with the Secret Shopper series.

 

Namely, on the video "What Are My Sponsors Hiding?", the team members lie about missing parts or intentionally damage the products to see if the customer support representatives will send replacement parts or products (often successfully). While I think it is valuable to evaluate the customer service of a company, unless they are clearing this with the companies beforehand, this seems like it would constitute theft or fraud. Does LTT do anything to make sure this is conducted legally and ethically? Does the team okay these experiments with the companies beforehand?

Probably best to continue the discussion in the thread for the specific video.  

That said, I kind of agree that such "tests" should ideally be cleared with a select handful of people from upper management who have ZERO ties or responsibility with the company's customer service, fulfillment, support, warranty, etc. departments. That way they'd have approval, but those who gave the approval would have no way to accidentally tamper with the results. As for how feasible this would be ... that's a whole other story entirely.

[user_50983]

38 minutes ago, tkitch said:

this seems like a lot of clutching at straw to try and find a reason to be mad at LTT.

 

This is a thing that happens every day in retail and business.  Trust me, it's not unusual.   Customers are fucking assholes and will do all sorts of shady shit to businesses on the reg.  

It is not meant to be. I do love the videos, but I have a strident moral opposition to theft in general. I am honestly a little surprised by the pushback against this (but not terribly surprised by the defense given where this is posted).

[user_50983]

1 hour ago, Blue4130 said:

And isn't legitimate secret shopping an opt-in business? Companies contact secret shoppers and say "hey test us out" and then the secret shoppers go to a random location at a random time.

Yes, exactly! Mystery shoppers are normally hired/requested by the companies/stores themselves. One could argue this introduces a conflict of interest, but it would also avert some of the ethical problems raised here.