@@#$%& wrote:
@Shop-et-al wrote:
Could it also be tantamount to our reputations? Apparently, we cannot have one with out the other... what.
Great comment. You know about reputations. Someone reputed to take their profession seriously is worth examining. Someone who is reputed to earn $50,000 to $75,000 a year as a mystery shopper (as reported by CNN and ABC News) is worth following and dissecting their habits and studies. Someone who is reputed to be . . . also takes home the same character. Each only has a limited time to earn a good reputation. Why not come to the belief on our own that reputations, earnest study, and honorable action can lead us to become better. If not, then becoming worse is just a matter of time.
Is the quantity of income from jobs in this industry the same as the quality of work performed in this industry? We need only consider the vagaries of the bonus system and shopper availability when determining how to weight the "reputed" information that you reference.
I have no interest in following or dissecting someone who earns in that range in this industry. As long as my work passes muster with the MSCs on behalf of clients, it is sufficient and eligible for the agreed-upon remuneration. As long as my earnings in this industry are sufficient for me/my household, they are sufficient. As long as I continue to reduce my work in this industry, I can (eventually) achieve a needed calibration in my life. My life as a whole will be better balanced according to my wants and needs and to the needs of my my household.
People who for any reason wish to pattern their lives after those other mystery shoppers have examples to follow because several shoppers describe in detail how they achieve their earnings levels via this large industry. Others who are so busy that there is little time to work in this industry are living lives that follow other patterns. It is not for me to judge whose life is better, more to be imitated, or anything else. It is only for me to be me, live my life, and learn a little something about all aspects of my unique life, which includes other jobs, evolves, and occasionally includes work in this large industry.
BTW, were any part-time/hobbyists/virtually invisible mystery shoppers used for a quality comparison? Were any of these types of workers in this large industry identified as having work ethics, reputations, or other qualities that were at least as fine (or proportionally as effective) as those ascribed to the higher earners/more visible mystery shoppers?
Bach is not noise, Madam. (Robert, in Two's Company)