No more '2 steps forward, one back'

How often do we see this? A business that has fully engaged with reviews only to see its score constantly eroded by factually inaccurate, misleading or just plain unfair reviews?

And, before we look at the solution, let us address two questions head-on...

1. Why does this matter?
2. How do we know the reviews are 'either factually inaccurate, misleading or unfair'?

Do reviews and scores matter?

They most certainly do. Whenever a business is searched online its headline review score is shown. If this score is worse than its competitors it will lose inbounds. 

The higher the score and the better the reviews underlying it, the more inbounds the business will receive through search. Proven (and provable by and for any individual business). a business scoring 4.9 will receive more inbounds than a similar business scoring 4.6. fact.

And - to make a critical point here: we are talking Google reviews. Not Yelp, not Feefo, not Reviews.io, not Trustpilot. None of those review sites' scores or reviews show consistently in search, Google's always do.

How do we - and you - know the (invariably negative (1*)) reviews are either factually inaccurate, misleading or unfair'?

Because we read the responses from the businesses. And those invariably begin along the lines of 'Thank you for taking the time to review us, but...

The review that prompted this response helped no one, not the reviewer, not the prospective clients of the business and certainly not the business itself, with the one-star rating negatively impacting the business's overall score

Now, there would be no issue, aside from both sides airing unresolved opinions, if it weren't for a) the unsettling comments made in the review, even though they may be inaccurate and b) the score attached to such reviews. They are invariably 1*. And Google's algorithm sees that and alters the business's overall score downwards as a result.

The impact

Over time, this results in a great business looking not so great*. With consumers now commonly using businesses' Google scores as a guide and a comparator this puts businesses such as the one in the screenshot above, scoring 4.4, at a distinct disadvantage when compared with a similar business scoring higher.

*There is also the impact of the individual incorrect review: there is a syndrome we in the business call 'the killer review' and every business owes it to itself, its staff and its customers, to do everything it can to avoid them. For an illustration of the impact such a review can have read this article.

Strategies that businesses are currently adopting 

1.  Not inviting reviews at all: a surprising number of businesses, especially those that take compliance with the law seriously (and we recommend all businesses do), have simply adopted a passive stance when it comes to reviews. They don't ask anyone to write a review - anywhere - and they simply respond as and when they recieve a review. 

2.  Asking happy customers to write a review: The business simply asks for a review when they know the customer is likely to rate them 5*.  

3.  Asking all their customers to fill in an e-questionnaire and then only asking those that respond positively to post a review.

4.  Using a moderated system to allow the business and its customers to resolve misunderstandings and errors of fact before the review is published.

Taking route 1 is simply handing a big win to the business's competitors, as well as allowing the business's reviews to paint an inaccurate picture of the business. Too many consumers these days consult reviews - almost always Google reviews - before making first contact, especially where high-value services and professions are concerned, for businesses to carry on down this road.

Routes 2 and 3, although still frequently - and mostly innocently - adopted by businesses, are illegal. The regulators have terms for these two practices: 'cherry-picking' for route 2 and 'gating' for route 3 (for more on this - including the draconian powers of the CMA to land on infringing businesses like the proverbial ton of bricks, please read this article).

And that leaves route 4. Moderation.

This is, currently, and for the foreseeable future, the only safe and compliant way for a business to have its reputation accurately reflected in its reviews (and, yes, we have met perfect businesses, and will undoubtedly continue to do so in future, but unfortunately those perfect businesses don't have 100% perfect customers/clients/patients).

HelpHound clients and regular readers need read no further. For those of you who are first-timers here is a short explanation of moderation. 

Moderation 

There is only one legal and legitimate way, in the UK at least, to ensure that the overwhelming majority of a business's reviews are genuine and factually correct, and it's called moderation. This is how moderation works...

1. The reviewer posts their review
2. The moderator, an entity independent of the business (and a 'real' human being, not AI or other software), reads the review to check that it is - as far as possible - genuine and factually correct
3. If there are doubts: the moderator refers to both the reviewer and/or the business for clarification
4. If needs be: the reviewer is offered the opportunity to edit their review (to correct errors of fact or potentially misleading wording)
5. At any time in this process, the reviewer has the right to publish their review, edited or not

For a full explanation read this article.

Adopt moderation and any well-run CRM-focussed business can expect their Google score to rise, and continue rising until it reaches a point where it begins attracting inbound enquiries in serious volumes. Simply because moderation will result in factually incorrect or potentially misleading 1* reviews being addressed and corrected pre-publication. For concrete results please read this article.