Research question and scope
Published September 10, 2026.
This study asks whether manual loyalty point adjustments match the source transaction and program rule in effect at the time, and whether duplicate or unlinked corrections occur. The scope includes posted manual adjustments in selected programs during a fixed period. It excludes automated accruals except where needed to reconstruct the expected balance.
Methodology
Freeze a versioned copy of eligible program rules, promotion terms, rounding logic, and approval thresholds. Select a reproducible stratified sample by adjustment type, program, channel, and operator group. Recalculate expected points from the source transaction, discounts, returns, and promotion conditions.
Reviewers should test transaction linkage, rule version, calculation, approval, customer notification, and correction identifier. A second reviewer independently recalculates a subset. Record inaccessible transactions and ambiguous promotional terms rather than forcing them into correct or incorrect categories.
Measures and analysis
Report exact-match rate, absolute and directional variance, duplicate-adjustment rate, missing-link rate, and time to correction. Separate base points, promotional points, reversals, and goodwill awards. Provide denominators, reviewer agreement, and confidence intervals when the sample design supports estimation.
Inference boundaries and limitations
The audit evaluates recorded adjustments, not the overall financial value or customer perception of the program. An accurate calculation may still rely on confusing terms. Missing source data prevents a conclusion and should not be counted as an error without additional evidence. Findings do not generalize across programs with different rules.