Re: Questionable voting methods for Outstanding Rep Nominees of 2006
I'm not sure what to think on this one. Are they trying to buy votes, or are they trying to say "thank you if you vote for us." If the marketing people for the company would rethink this promotion and how it is being looked at by buyers,which is the ones controlling the votes, that they are trying to buy votes, it may be a good ideal to stop the promotion and say that wasn't what they were trying to do. And offer a different non-conflicting promotion.
For many years, we have been honoring Outstanding Representatives from pharmaceutical companies as nominated by our subscribers. Our original motivation was to offer praise and accolades to those representatives who were doing an outstanding job servicing pharmacy buyers. We felt that if some were recognized for their fine service, other reps would likely step forward and provide similar levels of service above and beyond what is normally expected by buyers.
As we have grown,this award has had an unexpected occurrence of becoming extremely competitive among representatives and companies, especially with this year's contest, to the extent of their being some issues with how the campaigning and voting is conducted, which was not something that could have been anticipated in creating the rules for this program.
So, unfortunately, we have decided to disband the award program for Outstanding Representative of the Year, starting now, in the middle of this year’s process, and upon further notice for the future.
We acknowledge and appreciate all of the representatives who were nominated this year, and hope you can understand our decision to cancel the award program at this time.
We also thank all the buyer-subscribers over the years who have stepped forward to nominate and recognize superior service from some of the finer representatives who call on them and assist them.
Another way for representatives to be acknowledged is the availability of our newsletter for publication of articles submitted by our buyer-subscribers, describing excellent service provided to them and their facility from one of their vendor reps. These articles would be approved by our editorial staff and we would also provide help in spelling and grammar as needed as well.
Thank you for your understanding in this decision.
Name of Facility: Summerdale Enterprises, Inc., for PPO newsletter
I do not agree with the decision to cancel the award program. The reps for Reliance should be removed and votes disregarded. There are a lot of really good reps out there that deserve the recognition!
I support Kelly Reeves. I think Reliance should be disqualified altogether and there is no reason why good reps should be barred from this recognition.
I agree. Its to bad that something like this had to happen. I wish it could of been handled differently.
The buyers need to let their best reps know, WE APPRECIATE THEM!!
I agree 100%. To cancel the contest with NO mention of the company that caused the "issues" is quite apalling to me. To avoid tarnishing one company's name many, many deserving reps were punished.