Surveys and "you do not qualify for this particular survey"

[mannej]

¨qualify for survey¨ ??????? A survey by a company of their clients should be a humble ask. Not a gift. Sorry Red Roo, but this just exemplifies just how far Qantas is up its own behind. Sincé when did the company become more important than the customers who finance the whole show????

Sorry but I disagree - most online surveys do ask questions that will determine eligibility. QF is no different, and shouldn't be chastised for doing so IMO. Pushka has a fairly logical reason posted above.

 

[harvyk]

Effective research needs to be based on correct selection of clients - ie the demographic surveyed must be representative of the overall population it purports to represent. If your demographic has already responded in enough numbers then your survey experience will be terminated when you respond to that question. Nothing personal.

This is the first time I've ever heard an argument for statistics been made better through less collection of data. Now I'm no statistician, but I am someone who works with vast quantities of data (software developer as a result I've written more than my fair share of reports). When one particular group has the ability to overly influence the result (and that in itself is data) there are formulas which can be applied to level out the results so no one particular demographic does overly influence the results.

Furthermore since the processing of data takes no more than a few minutes even for the largest of data sets (I've played around with software which could easily analyze a response from every single person in Australia if you managed to get every single person to respond) it's not like in the old days where paper based survey's involved someone physically eyeballing a response. Even if the response included a written component, that's easy enough to analyze these days as well.

Besides, even if they had received enough data from my age group and there is a valid statistical reason why not to include more data in the research, then why not collect the data anyway for 2 reasons.

1. I'd never know if the data wasn't used. Seriously how would I ever find out that my data didn't go into the survey results? Am I going to be the only one in 10,000 people whom awards a 7 in an out of 10 question that the results make it obvious my data wasn't used?

2. It'd give me the warm fuzzy feeling that QF was actually listening, I've decide to spend time giving them feedback, and I'll assume that on clicking the submit button it'll actually get what I've told them.

 

[UP4014]

Yes, ask what you think then care so little they cut it off.

 

[Rox]

My point being that normally they ask for my age, and I understand that, but not "exact date of birth" .
Given that this is used to help identify/ verify your identity when dealing with financial institutions, I don't hand it out casually.

 

[Himeno]

Sorry but I disagree - most online surveys do ask questions that will determine eligibility. QF is no different, and shouldn't be chastised for doing so IMO. Pushka has a fairly logical reason posted above.

Really? "Most"?
QF surveys are the only surveys I've ever done which have kicked me out in the middle.

 

[harvyk]

Really? "Most"?
QF surveys are the only surveys I've ever done which have kicked me out in the middle.

Other survey's might have kicked you out in the middle, however they probably did it a little more tactfully.

 

[mannej]

Really? "Most"?
QF surveys are the only surveys I've ever done which have kicked me out in the middle.

Like I have said previously, I did a high number of surveys whilst at Uni (supplementary income) and did experience this with a number of the online survey sites.

QF are not the only ones who do this. As for tact, they pretty much do it in the same way, atleast you weren't completing the QF survey for financial reward.

 

[Pushka]

Harveyk I'd quote you but it's a long

By ensuring that the sample is representative of the population it is trying to measure (by excluding people once the quota for the required demographic has been reached) then the survey has ensured that one group does not have a bigger voice than what they would have if they surveyed everyone.

And they try limit sample size because people get weary esp if they were asked to respond to multiple surveys. They try to reduce the number of redundant questions people have to answer.

Why get people to waste their time when their efforts will be ignored?

 

[TomVexille]

Really? "Most"?
QF surveys are the only surveys I've ever done which have kicked me out in the middle.

I've had plenty of different surveys kick me out in the middle.

 

[Pushka]

Some surveys are better designed than others. And some might collect generic data that doesn't need to be demographically based then they come to the questions that do so you might get flicked out midstream.

I've been involved in a lot of consumer forums including a three hour panel that was a test panel to review the advertising release for the second round of Telstra. T2 I think it was called.

 

[serfty]

With the paid/reward surveys there is often a small sweetener to attempt a survey invitation with a larger benefit should one qualify and complete the survey.

 

[harvyk]

OK, so I spoke with someone who does know what they are doing with stats rather than me just guessing. Getting too much information from one demographic is not a problem as it can be weighted (as I suspected) so the results are not skewed. Therefore there was no statistical reason why QF could not have collected my survey results, thus making me feel like QF are actually listening to my gripes and thus saving AFF from a "Qantas why you no listen" thread.

 

[Pushka]

Actually. I work in market research too. And as I said earlier that while you can get everyone to do the survey and screen their data out it's a waste of their time if they are answering questions and their data won't be used. Survey fatigue and all that.

 

[harvyk]

Actually. I work in market research too. And as I said earlier that while you can get everyone to do the survey and screen their data out it's a waste of their time if they are answering questions and their data won't be used. Survey fatigue and all that.

It's not screening their data out, it's applying weightings to their data. So for instance, lets say you get 100 responses from a 25-35 age group and 200 responses from a 35-45 age group. The weighting given to each answer from the 35-45 age group is worth half of what the answer from the 25-35 age group is.

 

[Pushka]

Ok. But as I said with all the surveys about these days they are better off simply just getting responses from people in their target group.

 

[harvyk]

Ok. But as I said with all the surveys about these days they are better off simply just getting responses from people in their target group.

I guess the question I am asking is why? If I'm willing to provide my data to a survey how could that be a bad thing, especially as that data can be weighted?

You made the comment about survey fatigue earlier, wouldn't the answer there be to limit the number of surveys you send out? I mean as is evidenced by this threads existence getting a survey and been untactfully bounced out is as likely (and I would argue more likely) to annoy a customer than simply sending too many surveys for them to fill in and thus have them end up in the recycle bin (which lets face it is what no doubt happens to a good number of them already). Limiting the surveys send out and then sending out more to other customers would be a far better way of managing that "fatigue".

Furthermore unless QF wants to risk having massive fines levied against them they will no doubt be in compliance with the SPAM Act. As a result if I felt QF was sending me too many surveys I could simply click "manage my account" and unsubscribe from the surveys I am not interested in being apart of / all of them.

 

[Pushka]

If they limit the number of surveys a company sends out then they won't get the info they feel they need for their business. So they send out the number they feel people will cope with (and that's a tricky thing and you'll never satisfy everyone ).

Sometimes they might only want information from a subgroup of that population and they may not know from "account details held" who falls into that subgroup. So everyone might get the email but only say, 20-35 year old females who work, and have children, might proceed further.

Maybe they just need to word the "rejection" screen better.

 

[harvyk]

Sometimes they might only want information from a subgroup of that population and they may not know from "account details held" who falls into that subgroup. So everyone might get the email but only say, 20-35 year old females who work, and have children, might proceed further.

I'll accept that answer...

Maybe they just need to word the "rejection" screen better.

+1 billion...

 

[Pushka]

I must admit when I'm answering surveys for money I try work out their target group and answer accordingly if I'm interested. I hate it myself when people do that. But mostly I eliminate myself when they ask whether a respondent works in market research.

 

[juddles]

.......Maybe they just need to word the "rejection" screen better.

If ¨they¨ cannot make the customer feel that their time has not been wasted, they should not be in the survey industry. And I think that in this case the OP was justifiably peeved. Pissing off a surveyee should be a mortal sin in market research.