Attention Researchers: To Pay Or Not To Pay…That Is The Question.
I get a lot of calls in my office to do surveys. All of the initial calls come in during the day and I always respond the same way: if you would like me to do a survey, please call me around 7:00am. I tend to get in early and would gladly make some time available to help out this great industry. About a year ago, this interviewer called me to do a survey and of course I gave her my standard answer. Her name was Abby and she was very pleasant. The study involved CEO’s and paid an incentive of $100.00. At the end of the survey, I asked Abbey how long it would take before they would send out the incentive. She responded less than two weeks and gave me a number and some type of code that would help me if there was an issue down the road.
A month goes by and no incentive. Five weeks go by and no incentive. I figured it was time to call the number and use the code that Abby gave me. When I did, much to my surprise, it was a company I knew very well. At first I was a little taken aback that it was a company that I knew and that the incentive was not already sent out.
After a little back and forth with the company (SORRY BUT UNFORTUNATELY I WILL NOT SAY WHO IT WAS) I become more and more frustrated.
The data collection company’s position was that their client didn’t pay them the incentive so they can’t and won’t pay the respondents the incentive. They are not a bank and can’t afford to outlay thousands of dollars for incentives for respondents.
I was confused and upset about a number of things:
First and foremost that respondents are being treated like this. Respondent cooperation is the number one problem in the research industry and situations like this hurt us all. Isn’t it their responsibility to follow through with a commitment that Abby the interviewer made?
- The real question is where does the responsibility lie?
- Is it with the execution company?
- Is it with the client?
- How does your company handle incentives?
At M/A/R/C, regardless if we have collected the money, we pay the incentive within the timeframe stated.
I look forward to hearing your comments.
P.S. The end result was that after sending them two very stern emails, I finally received the incentive check.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I believe that the responsibility lies upon the execution company. The respondent is not suppose to know if the client is a good payer or not and should be treated with all respect.
Here at Albar we also pay incentive within the time frame, regardless if the client has payed or not.
I’m surprise to hear that this happens within the industry in the USA.
June 18th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Interesting topic - and a problem that many of us have faced. We often recruit teledepth projects nationally, and have, in the past, been told by our client that they will send out the incentives and that has always been a problem! We have executives around the country calling us - much as you called Abby - looking for their checks, and we can’t help them. So we instituted a company policy…. all incentives are to be paid through us, and mailed out within 7 days of the completed interview - no exceptions! And guess what… no more angry phone calls to field.
I believe that as a data collector, it is our responsibility to look after our respondents and to educate and manage our clients.
June 18th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Schlesinger also pays out the incentive within two weeks (or at the close of the study) regardless of when we receive the money from our client. Imagine if we tried to do that with Focus Groups???? we would have a mutiny on our hands at least twice a week!
June 18th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Karen,
Appreciate your response. So you do this regardless if you have collected the money from your client? I am curious are most clients pretty good about paying incentives up front?
Thanks.
Merrill
June 18th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Merrill,
We send those checks out - no matter what!
Most clients are really good about remitting advances, but there are those who want the incentives to be included in their final billing. These are all clients in good standing, so I have never had a problem. If a similar project came through from a company I didn’t know, they would have to advance incentives, otherwise I wouldn’t take the project.
June 18th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Karen,
Thanks for your response - that helps alot. I have heard from many companies that require the incentive up front or they won’t take the job.
Good way to keep respondents happy.
Thanks.
Merrill
June 18th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
I could not agree more that a sure way to turn current and potential respondents off is to be late with or God forbid, not pay the promised honoraria/incentive. We ask and expect that our partners pay the honoraria within a reasonable time after the interview. We do send advances for honoraria and expect that it be used in a timely manner, not sitting in some companies bank account drawing interest. It is the responsibility of the research company to be sure there is an advance for the honoraria and the responsibility of the vendor to send it to the respondent in a timely manner.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
If it’s a study where incentives are paid by our client, we require that money before we’ll launch the job. I’m not sure why companies are even moving forward with a project launch without that money. If we did make an exception, we would still pay the incentive. I’m surprised to hear that it isn’t a standard practice to require incentive costs up front.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
There is no question that the burden of payment of incentives lies with the company that contacted and contracted with the respondent. In order for us to convey professionalism in our industry, we need to respect the respondents that participate in our studies and part of that is timely payment of incentives. This timing should be stated up front and i believe it should be no longer 3-4 weeks from the actual interview.
It is sad when the sponsoring client does not pay their invoice or advance money needed for incentives. With that said, it is no excuse for those of us that are recruiting and interviewing respondents to not pay the respondents based upon this issue.
June 18th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
This is simple. The agreement (or contract) is between the respondent and the data collection company. If the respondent fulfills his end of the agreement (completing the survey) then the company is responsible for prompt payment as agreed.
If they don’t want to “be a bank” then they should demand an incentive deposit from their client before work commences.
Mike
June 21st, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Merrill, very substantive and important discussion. Make no mistakes it is the data collection company’s responsibility to pay the incentive. These companies need to create strong contracts and letters of agreement, to ensure they know which respondents they will be given the pass through incentive for and their people need to be aware of these parameters and do the right screening prior to guaranteeing the incentive.
If you have a contract or letter of agreement with the client specifying who will be paid, then they legally owe you this reimbursement. If you need sample contracts check the MRA website as the qualitative ones are posted and quantitative ones will be posted shortly.
Incentives are here to stay. There is a great case on this with after school programs. In these programs you have either an explicit or implied agreement to pick up your child by a specified time. This social contract is mostly observed. But, when groups apply fines, they find more violators. When these same groups try to change back to the social contract violation rates stay up. Why, because it now is an economic contract. That is now the status of participating in research in most of the populaces’ minds.
So, if you know that incentives are here to stay with respondents, you must ensure this fixed cost is covered for your company via contract with your client.
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:36 am
I completely agree with the positions stated here, and most especially that the relationship between the respondent and the collector must be protected at all costs. I now have numerous contracts with “end user” companies that require me to pay incentives up-front and invoice on the back end to streamline their accounting. This can make it challenging, but it can be managed without affecting the accounts too much.
In a way, we are banks with regard to incentives. Even if we receive the incentive the night of the group, or with the study materials at the onsite of an interviewing project we are still floating cash until that check clears. Often insisting you have it “in time to deposit it” can make a facility appear financially challenged; never a good position in the marketplace. Wire transfers are an option we’ve employed in the recent past, and that has helped a bit.
Unfortunately as the economy struggles and businesses with it, we may see more and more financial conversations like this come up. I only hope the bulk of smaller businesses - the ones most likely to get caught in the struggle - can find an eloquent way to navigate it and not allow their respondents to get caught up in it with them.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:08 am
We always billed client up front and if the study went ahead of payment, we paid knowing our client was good for it. An untested client was another matter and we would not proceed until we were paid incentive money. And, we made it a point to pay promptly. This was especially important in diary studies. Many a time I found myself inserting and sealing hundreds of envelopes to make the promised timing.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Merrill,
Very interesting topic, as a company that recruits over 500 Telephone Interviews, Web Enabled Telephone Interviews and web survey’s per month it is the never ending battle to keep on top of incentives due respondents. There was a time that we had let the client mail the incentives, however we found that respondents were having to wait up to three months to get paid in some instances. As well we were getting threatened with law suits by these respondents. How can I tell a respondent that it is the clients fault when we recruited them, and we are their main source of contact. Because of this we decided that we would now pay all respondent incentives and we also require the client to have the incentive advance to us at least one week prior to the completion of the study. As well we have hired a full time check writer who’s sole job is to write checks for these surveys.
Best,
Todd
July 2nd, 2008 at 12:46 pm
I suppose I should preface this rant by saying that M/A/R/C is NOT currently a client of mine, and has not been. I know Merrill because we worked together years ago, and my guess is that Merrill would not have much tolerance for abusing suppliers.
That said (and with all due respect to Merrill) I haven’t a lot of sympathy for a CEO who is getting jerked around over a $100 incentive for an interview. As an independent data processing supplier, I have market research clients who haven’t paid their bills since spring (It is now July) for my company’s work on on-going trackers, and who have the chutzpa to send indignant emails if their files aren’t available RIGHT NOW, even if we just got raw data JUST NOW. I send email after email after email asking the status of payment, and the basic response is “Your invoices have gone to accounting”, as if accounting were some ethereal entity in an alternative dimension.
Five years ago I would go through my invoicing once a quarter and find two or three unpaid bills. I would contact the scofflaw and point out their tardiness, and inevitably receive an embarrassed response somewhere along the lines of “My bad,” followed by promise of (and actual) prompt payment. These days I call clients who are 180 days overdue or more, and they want to know what my point is.
There certainly are some payment problems in this industry, but they are not restricted to respondent incentives.