John Fossey wrote:
The main problem I see with the BB is that it's subjective - the rating and comments are based on how posters feel that day (angry? intimidated?).
Ratings are usually subjective, that's human nature, you can't do otherwise. We're not talking about a football championship here with rankings and all.
Vendors are asked to express THEIR (and therefore subjective!) opinion on HOW LIKELY IT IS THEY WILL WORK AGAIN with the outsourcer. Payment is ONLY ONE factor.
What I wish is that the BB, which is probably the most widely used reference of its sort in the industry, would adopt an objective criterion (days paid late), similar to that of
paymentpractices.net, where you simply enter the date payment was due and the date payment was actually received, and the software calculates a rating based on hard data. This need not be the
only rating, but it would be useful as being factual and uniform.
Again, the BB is not the outsourcer's payment record... Payment is surely an important thing to factor in but there are others. Talking about money, for instace, rates are important too. Rates can be very good but you get paid after 2 months, or the other way around. Just examples, of course.
Regardless of the fact that a vendor should decide his/her own rates, payment terms etc. one could express a high score even with lousy rates and payment terms because the projects are interesting, the staff very responsive and easy to get along with etc. etc. That's what comments are for.
Comments are important. I don't want to work with someone who offers me good rates and pays me 5 days later but makes my life a hell, does not reply to emails, does not provide support, clear instructions and the like. Do you?
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
