How many people did the contact log show?
Check your own volunteering example before you claim what happened.
The question
In a fictional training interview, the panel asks when you changed your mind after checking evidence. You helped send invitations for a volunteer welcome session. Your first draft says “I engaged 12 people.”
- Outgoing messages12 rows.
“What would you tell the panel after checking the contact log?”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: What does the first count measure?
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Describe the count as outgoing messages.
The strong move. That is what the log actually lists.
Describe 12 people as engaged.
Tempting, but it misses something. The log has no distinct person count or record of replies yet.
See how a strong candidate says it
“It counts 12 outgoing message rows. I’d check which people they went to before I describe how many people we contacted.”
Why it works: The unit in the log is a message row.
Step 2: What would you check in the export?
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Delete repeat rows before counting any sends.
Tempting, but it misses something. Those sends still happened and belong in the send total.
Compare recipient and reply fields.
The strong move. These separate who was sent a message from who replied.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I’d match messages by recipient and count replies separately. I’d keep the outgoing total in the record.”
Why it works: The export can tell you whether the same recipient got more than one send.
Step 3: How would you correct your example?
The export has 12 sends to 9 distinct recipients, including 3 repeat sends. 6 distinct recipients replied.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Give the send, recipient and reply counts separately.
The strong move. Each count answers a different question.
Say nine people replied after removing repeat sends.
Tempting, but it misses something. Nine is the number of people sent a message. Only six replied.
See how a strong candidate says it
“We sent 12 messages to nine people. Six of those people replied. I took “12 people engaged” out of my answer.”
Why it works: Twelve sends minus three repeat sends gives nine distinct recipients. Six of the nine replied.
Step 4: What remains open?
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Say the three people ignored the invitation.
Tempting, but it misses something. A missing reply does not tell you what the person saw or did.
Give the corrected count and say what remains open about receipt.
The strong move. Three distinct recipients have no reply in the export.
See how a strong candidate says it
“For three recipients, I have no reply in the export. I’d ask what could confirm receipt. My example shows how I corrected the count.”
Why it works: A missing reply leaves receipt open. The record supports the correction you made.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Say 12 sends, nine distinct recipients and six people who replied.
- Because
- The export shows three repeat sends and leaves three recipients without a recorded reply.
- What would change it
- A receipt or direct confirmation could resolve whether an outstanding person received the invitation.
Common traps
- Counting message rows as people.
- Treating a missing reply as a known outcome.
Check your answer
- Did I name the unit each time?
- Did I explain what I changed?
- Did I leave receipt open where it was unknown?
- Did I keep the send total?
Last reviewed Nov 11, 2026