VIP's review process, clarified
Jinfo Blog

By Nancy Davis Kho

Item

In my three years of working with VIP Magazine one of the things I've come to value most is the company's focus on process: refining, improving, and revisiting the systems that support the vision of our publication to offer top-notch content that enables our readers to supports budget decisions around information products and services. Through deliberate consideration we've come up with a process that is responsive to reader feedback, encourages vendor participation, and enables reviewers to develop unbiased, comprehensive reviews.

So when the process goes off the rails, I feel like I need to offer an apology to our readers.

We're just putting the finishing touches on our April issue, which will include in-depth reviews of ProQuest Dialog's new offering for the STM market, as well as an update on ZoomInfo and its newly revamped process for data gathering and quality assurance. But we had planned to feature a review of SNL Financial for April, and touted the forthcoming review in recent issues of VIP and FreePint.

Just to provide some background on how VIP works with vendors: we start months ahead of time to let vendors  know that we've had reader requests for a review, and offer them an opportunity to work with us. In so doing, we send sample copies of both the full review and the shorter  Executive Summary, which appears in the body of the magazine itself, and answer any questions about the review process and VIP reader demographics. The vendors pay nothing to have their product featured, but we do ask that they give our reviewers unfettered product access as well as designate a single point of contact to whom the reviewer can direct any questions.

We also offer vendors something unusual: a chance to fact check a pre-publication version of the full review. This is not for their approval, but rather to allow vendors to update coverage numbers, content offerings or clarify functionality that, in the course of working with complex products, our reviewers may simply not have had a chance to uncover. The vendor comments are carefully considered in developing the final document, but we verify any corrections independently. Most vendors respect our efforts to create an objective, third party review and do not try to inject marketing and PR spin into their comments back to us.

Christine Buck, director of marketing, Global Institutional Software for Morningstar, Inc.  recently said, "Working with the team at VIP Magazine was effortless. They clearly described the independent review process and were extremely professional". Fortunately, Christine's reaction to working with us is the norm for vendors, and we are gratified to have built long term relationships with many of them that enable us to preview new product developments for readers of VIP and the LiveWire blog.

Unfortunately, when we provided a pre-publication copy written by veteran VIP reviewer and info pro Heidi Longaberger to SNL Financial, they requested that we not run it in any form. We are honouring their request, the first in the magazine's history.

On behalf of the VIP team, I apologise for promising a review that we are unable to run. I invite you to contact me at nancy.daviskho@freepint.com if you have any questions or feedback on the overall review process, and assure you that we are once again revisiting it to see what we can learn from this situation.

« Blog