The QA methodology that AAMT (now AHDI) promoted - is fundamentally flawed. Posted: Sep 23rd, 2016 - 9:13 am In Reply to: Anybody want to dish any real dirt about what goes on - behind the scenes of QA? SM
Without going into that here, I'll just say that it's possible some of the issues you see might be arising from the method itself, which is amateurish and was not developed by anyone who had training in the principles of quality control.
But if you suspect any sort of skullduggery, as at one time I did, you might do what I did, which was to save a capture of each and every document that I transcribed for a 2-week period so that I could refer to what I submitted, as opposed to what the document looked like after QA handled it.
I used an inexpensive screen capture program called FastStone Capture. I chose it because (a) it could capture a scrolling document, not just what could be seen on the screen, and (b) I could save it in PDF format, as opposed to something like a JPEG image.
So before sending, I captured what I had transcribed. I used the job number as the file name, meaning that (a) they were in numeric order in my Windows directory, and (b) they were easy to relate to the QA report because all we got was the job number.
It seemed cumbersome the first few captures, but in no time I had the capture process down to about 10 to 15 seconds. I felt this was a very reasonable added "burden", given the reason I was doing it.
I won't go into what I found because it isn't relevant to what anyone else might experience, especially anyone not working for the same company that I was - which now would be everyone since the company sank beneath the waves several years ago.
Other than taking a measure such as this, I can't think what you might do to prove (or disprove) your suspicions.
Post A Reply Reply By Email Options
Complete Discussion Below: (  marks the location of current message within thread)
|
