<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
| **Research Quality Requirements- Elements that are necessary for quality research. If the analyst meets this requirement, they can be awarded 0-3 points.
| Yes= 3 points, Partial = 1 point, No= 0 points** | |
|---|---|
| Customer Experience Requirements- Elements that are necessary for an optimal client experience. If the analyst does not meet these criteria, a point is deducted for each category. | Total Possible Points 10 |
| Was the Analyst's approach logically sound? | |
| Did the logic used to research make sense? • 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. | 3 |
| Was the research well organized? Headers correlate with the RCs and make sense. | 1 |
| ChatGPT- The transcript is attached in the comment section and shows a good-faith effort to use the tool. 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. | 2 |
| Did the Analyst base the Research on credible sources? • This means avoiding sources that are biased, unsubstantiated, inexplicably out-of-date, or "open source" (editable by anyone).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. | 2 |
| Data visualizations and any spreadsheet or slide graphics are professional, well organized, and easy for the client to read. The data visualization needs to be relevant to the research and presented directly below the summary. Slides or spreadsheets should be well organized, easy for the client to read, and professional. | 2 |
| **Included a Summary that was relevant. Answered the client's question if applicable. | |
| -** Deliverables are uploaded through the Custom Deliverable box. No= -1 point | |
| Included a Creative Solutions section to address any data availability issues. |
◦ 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. **No= -1 point** | |
| 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. - 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. No= -1 point | | | 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 | | | Did the Analyst provide a comprehensive response to the client's inquiry? | | | Were all the research criteria addressed? (Y/P/N) ◦ 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. | 4 | | Was the information that was provided accurate and relevant? (Y/P/N) ◦ An analyst who incorrectly reports multiple data points to the client will automatically receive 0 points for question #3. | 3 | | Was the research comprehensive? (Y/P/N) ◦ 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).
▪ T**otal 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: I**n general, we aim for 600 words per 3-hour request (except SS/Slide requests).
💡 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. | 3 | | 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). • Note: Question marked N and awarded 0 out of 12 points for intentional plagiarism (level more than 20%) or excessive quoting. Check your work using this free plagiarism tool. Excessive quoting is defined as choosing to quote a source instead of restating the information in your own words for ≥50% of the research report's content. This does not include instances where direct quotes were required by the client/Interpreter. A research project that exceeds our plagiarism threshold will result in an automatic audit score of 1, and the analyst’s permissions to the platform will be subject to removal. | | | Total Possible Points | 20 |
Answers to the questions above are translated into a score of 5, 3, or 1.
In addition to answering the above questions, Auditors fill out a field with feedback or advice to help you succeed. The Auditor’s responses and comments are then auto-generated into an email that is sent directly to the Analyst along with their Audit score. If you have any questions or concerns, please respond to the email.