When a review or a rating goes badly
It will happen. What you do in the next day matters more than the rating itself.
4 min read
Everybody who does this for long enough gets one. A client who was unhappy about something you did not know about, or something that was genuinely not your fault, or occasionally something that was.
The first thing worth knowing is how much weight it actually carries. On BarkCheck the owner half is capped at a fifth of your score, and it is averaged across every rated sit in your window. One bad one moves the number and does not end anything. Nobody is ever removed over a score here.
Do not reply on the day
Almost every reply written within a few hours of reading a bad review is worse than the one written the next morning. There is no deadline. Wait.
Separate the true part from the unfair part
Most bad feedback has some of each. It is tempting to argue the unfair part, and that is exactly the part that will make you look defensive. Answer the true part plainly, and let the rest go.
If something genuinely went wrong, say what you have changed. "You were right that I should have called sooner. I now message the same evening if anything is off." That sentence does more for the next client reading it than any defense.
What the research says about feedback
One large review pooled 607 results and found feedback improved performance on average, but made it worse more than a third of the time. The pattern behind the failures is consistent: feedback that lands on the person hurts, feedback about the task helps.
That applies to how you read it too. "They said they had to chase me for an update" is a fact about a task and it is fixable. "I am bad at this" is not a fact about anything and there is nothing to do with it.
Then let it age out
Your score reads the most recent 200 finished tasks, so a bad stretch stops counting as newer work replaces it. That is deliberate. The most it can ever take to move past something is 200 tasks, however long you have been doing this.
Where this came from
We summarized these. We did not run them, and we are not affiliated with anyone who did. If a claim above matters to you, read the original rather than taking our word for it.
- Kluger, A. N. & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance. Psychological Bulletin, 119.
Used here for: That over a third of feedback interventions reduced performance, and that person-directed feedback is the reliable way to make things worse.
Think we have got something wrong, or read a study we should include? Tell us. We would rather fix it than defend it.
