“Mystery shopper” project an overreaction
From Mr P. S. Armstrong, MRPharmS
Always be wary of pamphlets printed on good quality glossy paper and liberally punctuated with photographs of smiling people. They are invariably public relations exercises promoting a cause or justifying an existence. In general, their content is insubstantial and inconsequential. But not so the article in the November (2008) edition of Your Society (p1).
(PDF 380K)
The “mystery shopper” project will enrage many community pharmacists. Moreover, this misguided response to two small and unscientific surveys, carried out by the magazine Which? (PJ, 27 September 2008, p349) and the Daily Mail (PJ, 18 October 2008, p434), is an overreaction. These are not publications on which I would place any great weight.
The response epitomises the reason why practising community pharmacists are so disaffected with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. This body has become highly bureaucratic (and I use the word in its pejorative sense) and it is perceived as self-serving.
Steve Churton, the President, has already admitted that the Society has not listened sufficiently to its membership and entreats us to forget the past and start again. I am afraid that is just not good enough.
It is the Society that has to change radically, both in its structure and its attitude to its members. It has to recognise the pressures that community pharmacists are under.
The ever increasing workload is demanding, unremitting and stressful, and we are only talking about core services. The imposition of greater levels of bureaucracy, the financial insecurity engendered by the category M debacle and the pressures to accommodate new roles add to this stress.
Furthermore, the continual encroachment of the corporate sector into retail pharmacy subjects more pharmacist managers to the primacy of the bottom line.
When David Pruce, then director of practice and quality improvement at the Society, was asked to address this problem, he responded that he was actively seeking “a validated tool to assess workload and appropriate staffing levels” to remedy the situation (PJ, 12 April 2008, p436).
One might well be forgiven for thinking that the present activities of the Society represent the death throes of an endangered species. And, if that is the case, Mr Pruce will no longer need to pursue his search.
If the Society and the National Pharmacy Association are serious about resolving any shortcomings in either the manner or the substance of interactions with customers seeking advice, they should put in place a fully financed training programme. The use of spurious customers to achieve its aims is a betrayal of trust and demeans the Society.
It would also behove the Society to remember that its survival is largely dependent on community pharmacists working at ground level.
Peter Armstrong
Gilbert & Armstrong Pharmacy
Worksop, Nottinghamshire
Persecution of members
From Mr D. R. Kent, MRPharmS
The Royal Pharmaceutical Society never fails to amaze me. Persecution of its members now seems to be the prime function rather than protection of their professional interests.
I refer to the “mystery shopper” project (Your Society, November 2008, p1 PDF (380K)) — a typical knee-jerk reaction to the recent Which? report (PJ, 27 September 2008, p349). I am not a luddite and agree that some pharmacies need to put their house in order, a view amply reflected in a recent PJ Online poll.
I would have thought that the Society should have pointed out that, had the “patients” been advised to ask to speak to the pharmacist, rather than a counter assistant, then the result may have been different. I am sure that Which? was aware of this but to do so would not have suited its purpose.
Any other body proposing “mystery shoppers” (and I am aware that the National Pharmacy Association is involved) would have elicited the extreme ire of those hard-working pharmacists attempting to earn an adequate living under extreme financial constraints imposed by the Department of Health and, additionally, in the case of smaller pharmacies, by the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee.
I am not aware that the professional body of any other profession has ever mooted similar action against its members — they support, not attack.
Public confidence in pharmacy is high. Which? has, for a long time, attempted to undermine that confidence. Now it appears our own Society is joining them. At a time of transition in the structure of the profession, I doubt that this initiative will endear the Society to members who may decide that the minimum registration requirement will suffice. This will leave the Society short of members.
David Kent
Barnet, Hertfordshire
Editor, The Pharmaceutical Journal, replies
We understand the “mystery shopper” initiative was mooted long before the Which? and Daily Mail reports were published.
Mystery shoppers a useful resource
From Mr B. Shooter, MRPharmS
I have been using mystery shoppers to monitor my staff’s performance in my pharmacies for over 30 years.
They have two functions. In years gone by, before cash registers had the capability of calculating customers’ change, it was common for dishonest staff to under-ring a customer’s purchase and pocket the difference between the actual purchase and the amount registered on the till.
The mystery shopper from the security firm would report to me and, if necessary, interview the dishonest staff member.
At my remaining Aldeburgh, Suffolk pharmacy, I now use a firm who provide mystery shoppers to monitor my staff’s skills and knowledge rather than their honesty. I pay for a monthly visit and discuss with the firm the scenario that the mystery shopper should enact on each occasion.
At the beginning of the contract, the firm and I discussed a grid that should be used as the assessment tool each month.
I receive a report on the result of the visit in the form of the scored grid and comments and it is then discussed openly with all concerned. There are always good points in the report to celebrate and any less favourable criticisms identify training needs.
These are often minor, perhaps a member of staff not smiling or not wearing his or her badge. On occasion, the appearance of the shop or the attitudes of the staff are not as they should be and this is the opportunity for a more forthright discussion.
I believe that the use of mystery shoppers is a well managed approach to audit the quality control in my pharmacy and, if it is handled openly and sensitively by those who operate it, I can commend it to readers.
Barry Shooter
Bushey, Herfordshire
“Mystery shopper” service not the same as Which?
From Mr D. M. Pruce, MRPharmS, and Miss C. C. McCreedy, MRPharmS
We would like to clear up some misconceptions about the “mystery shopper” service being developed by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and the National Pharmacy Association (Your Society, November 2008, p1).
(PDF 380K)
This is not a Which? style exercise (PJ, 27 September 2008, p349) designed to catch out pharmacists. It is a service, which we will offer to pharmacy contractors, to help improve the quality of the advice given when pharmacists and their staff respond to requests for non-prescription medicines.
Participation in this service will be entirely voluntary. Visits from simulated patients will only be undertaken with the express permission of the pharmacy involved. The aim of the service is to give pharmacists and their staff a way of assessing how well they are undertaking over-the-counter sales.
Participants in the service will receive a visit from specially trained simulated patients and will receive immediate feedback on their performance. This will give the opportunity to learn from what went well, as well as identifying where they can make improvements. The results will be confidential to the participants.
This type of service was first developed in Australia,1 where it is now an established service. Pharmacists in other countries have been using similar services for a number of years.
It was received enthusiastically by pharmacists and their staff and has been seen as a good learning opportunity. We have already piloted a “simulated patient service” in some pharmacies in Scotland, where it was well received.
We are currently recruiting a project manager to further develop the service and expect to have this service available early in the new year (2009).
David Pruce
Director of Policy and Communications
Royal Pharmaceutical Society
Colette McCreedy
Chief Pharmacist
National Pharmacy Association
Reference
1. De Almedia Neto AC, Benrimoj SI, Kavanagh DJ, Boakes RA. A pharmacy based protocol and training programme for non-prescription analgesics. Journal of Social and Administrative Pharmacy 2000;17:3.
Profession needed to be fully informed
From Mr D. R. Kent, MRPharmS
Had the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and the National Pharmacy Association fully informed members of the manner in which the “mystery shopper” initiative (Your Society, November 2008, p1) was to be implemented (PDF 380K) and, most significantly, the voluntary nature of it, then my letter (PJ, 8 November 2008, p535) to the PJ last week would have been different or may not have been necessary at all.
Information provided to members on matters of such sensitivity must be full and accurate enough to allow opinions to be formed in the light of that full knowledge. On this matter, the Society and the NPA have failed.
I am still against the “mystery shopper” initiative but accept that, with certain provisions, some may find it useful. These provisions being that a refusal to volunteer is not recorded, that the inspectorate is not informed of either a positive or negative outcome to a voluntary visit and that a voluntary refusal does not, at some time in the future, trigger a clandestine approach.
I understand that some (probably few) pharmacies will wish to participate. If asked my opinion of whether pharmacies should participate or not, then I will counsel against.
Knowledge of this initiative is, through the Your Society insert to the PJ, already in the public domain and can only be seen as playing into the hands of our detractors.
David Kent
Barnet, Hertfordshire