Audit Questions

<aside> ⚠️ A research project that exceeds our plagiarism threshold (more than 20%) will result in an automatic audit score of 1 (even if other parts of the project meet the minimum quality standards), and the analyst’s permissions to the platform will be subject to removal.

</aside>

Research jobs are audited against the following questions:

Rating Scale: Y = Yes, P = Partial, N = No

1. Was the Analyst's approach logically sound? (8 Total Points)

   Research Quality Requirements

   For the following two questions, an analyst can be awarded 0-3 points.

   Yes= 3 points, Partial = 1 point, No= 0 points

   • Did the logic used to research make sense? (Y/P/N) 3 points
     • The research approach was logical, meaning it made sense to use this approach to answer the research.
     • If it was a Client Update, we proved due diligence with three alternate creative strategies.
   • Was the research well organized? (Y/P/N) 1 points
     • Headers correlate with the RCs and make sense.
   • ChatGPT- The transcript is attached in the comment section and shows a good-faith effort to use the tool. (Y/N) 2 Points
     • A good-faith effort consists of a minimum of 5 interactions with ChatGPT. If your original ask does not come out the way you desired, this means asking clarifying questions in the chat. You do not necessarily need to start a new one.
   • Did the Analyst base the Research on credible sources? (Y/N) (2 Total Points)
     • Were the sources credible? (Y/N) 2 points
       • This means avoiding sources that are biased, unsubstantiated, inexplicably out-of-date, or "open source" (editable by anyone).
       • Unsubstantiated blogs are not a substantial source of information. An effort is made to use original sources, not third-party sites.
   • Data visualizations and any spreadsheet or slide graphics are professional, well-organized, and easy for the client to read? (Y/N) (2 Total Points)
     • The data visualization needs to be relevant to the research and presented directly below the summary.
     • Slides or spreadsheets were well organized, easy for the client to read, and professional.

   Customer Experience Requirements

   For the following questions, if the analyst does not meet these criteria, a point is deducted for each category.

   • Included a Summary that was relevant. Answered the client's question if applicable. No= -1 point
     • Deliverables are uploaded through the Custom Deliverable box.
   • Included a Creative Solutions section to address any data availability issues. No= -1 point
     • If it was a CU, the missing information was specified, helpful findings were introduced, and the client was told additional information was available in the Research Strategy.
   • Used Notes to explain assumptions, proxies, triangulations, or other potentially confusing client experiences. No= -1 point
   • Included Research Strategy that named at least one specific source. No= -1 point
     • If it is a CU, three creative strategies are used, and a hypothesis is provided as to why the information is available, all backed by sources.
   • All findings have a citation. (a minimum of one citation per bullet point) No= -1 point
   • Did the Analyst cite a direct link to quotes, text, and statistics obtained from the source? No= -1 point

1. Did the Analyst provide a comprehensive response to the client's inquiry? (10 Total Points)

Research Quality Requirements

For the following two questions, an analyst can be awarded 0-3 points.

Yes= 3 points, Partial = 1 point, No= 0 points

• Were all the research criteria addressed? (Y/P/N) 4 points

  • If it is a CU, Provide 3-5 helpful findings for the missing parts in a PCU and 5-7 helpful findings for a FCU. This does not mean that we need to provide 3-5 helpful findings for every piece of missing information. You will provide 3-5 helpful findings, in total, for each section that has missing information.

• Was the information that was provided accurate and relevant? (Y/P/N) 3 points

  • An analyst who incorrectly reports multiple data points to the client will automatically receive 0 points for question #3.

• Was the research comprehensive? (Y/P/N) 3 points

  • It is reflective of the hours invested in the research, each RC is addressed adequately, and there are 5 sources per 3 hours of research.
  • Headers have a minimum of three bullet points.
  • When the Comprehensiveness/robustness of a request is questionable, the audit team will use a combination of the following best practices to make a judgment on the audit score, in relation to the type of request and data availability:
    • Total number of headers per request: In general, each 3-hour request should have 2-3 headers (except SS/Slide requests).
    • Total number of bullet points per request: In general, we aim for 12-15 bullet points per 3-hour request (except SS/Slide requests).
    • Addressing all Research Criteria: By definition, if all the RCs are not addressed, a report would not be considered robust/comprehensive.
    • Word count: In general, we aim for 600 words per 3-hour request (except SS/Slide requests).

  <aside> 💡 An analyst that presents a client with a Client Update, when it is clear the information is actually available will automatically receive a fail for this section. Repeated offenses will be sent to Admin for review. Permissions will be subject to pause or removal.

  </aside>

Customer Experience Requirements

• Did the Analyst include at least 1 relevant image per 3-hour increment? No= -1 point
  • Spreadsheet and slide presentation requests are exempt.
• Was the Analyst’s professional writing error-free? No= -1 point
  • The response did NOT include over 3 spelling/grammar mistakes, and there were no instances where information was not understandable.
  • (Note: Not understandable is defined as incorrectly used words or phrases or multiple spelling/grammar mistakes that make it difficult to understand what the analyst was trying to communicate).