Trust Centre practitioner review

Raw source preview

Raw, unprocessed file text shown below.

---
title: "Trust Centre practitioner review"
status: processed
source_type: prototype walkthrough
session_date: 2026-03-03
duration: "35m 30s"
participants:
  - Leanne Willins
  - Desmond Leo
  - Fernando Guevara
product_area: "Trust Centre"
tags: [trust-centre, data-quality, fieldwork, prototype-test, internal-practitioner]
---

# Trust Centre practitioner review

## Source file

- [trust-centre-review.docx](./trust-centre-review.docx) — original Microsoft Teams transcript export.

## Evidence relevant to launch

- After seeing the checks and evidence trail, Leanne said: “Honestly, it's just made my job so much easier” (3:01).
- She asked for a project audit report and an export of flags because customers ask what data-quality checks have been completed (4:04–6:13).
- She stressed that inconsistent-answer flags need researcher judgement rather than automatic respondent removal (10:25–12:41).
- Reviewing omnibus studies of roughly 1,000 respondents is a substantial manual task; she valued an automated evidence layer while retaining review control (23:10–24:11).
- Drawing on four years of daily manual QA, she said she had not seen a comparable cross-provider quality tool and concluded: “yes, I find value and yes, it solves the problem” (27:18–29:00).

## What this supports

An experienced fieldwork practitioner recognised the problem, the usefulness of the review workflow and the need for human decisions. This is strong product-fit evidence for Trust Centre within the current network.

## What this does not prove

The participant works within the wider group. The session does not establish detection accuracy, false-positive rates, time saved, payment or independent external demand.