We are all judged by the company we keep

And so it is in business. Our businesses have always been judged, by competitors and consumers alike, by our professional connections: do we employ reputable accountants and lawyers? Are our web designers well-regarded? You get the gist.

Well, now the same can be said of your reviews solution. We will illustrate this with an anecdote (names and locations will not be disclosed, but all other information is factual).

The story so far...

Back in September we were invited to pitch our review management service to a reasonably substantial multi-location business. As always in these situations we first did our homework (we call this a 'review audit', as every client will know). We take an in-depth look at the business - on its own website(s) and in search. 

In this instance there was much to see. Beginning with Google (after all, the first port-of-call for almost all consumers): few of their locations passed the Google filter (they scored between 1.2 and 3.7 in the main). Then onto the independent reviews sites, where there was an intriguing pattern. They appeared on no less than five separate sites, but that was not what interested us - we were immediately struck by the disparity in scores between the sites - from less than 2.0 out of 5 on three but virtually perfect - way above 4.0 - on the other two.

What was happening? Well, we have been around the block a few times, and we have files bulging with evidence of reviews sites' interesting business models, so we conducted our pre-sale conference call with the business with our eyes (and ears) wide open, and armed with the following questions:

1. Why have you invited HelpHound to pitch?
2. What strategies have you adopted in the past?
3. Why are those not working for you?
4. How do you imagine that HelpHound will be any different?

The answers were, to say the least, interesting...

1.  Because the results HelpHound have produced for your clients are exceptional

2.  We have tried almost every reviews solution and heard that HelpHound are the acknowledged experts

3.  Because we now realise just how important Google is and you are the only one 'blowing the Google trumpet'

4.  You will help us look great everywhere we need to, on Google and on our own website 

So far, so good. Or was it?

 Why would the same business in the same location score so badly on Google and so well on the independent reviews site?

We needed to understand just why there was such a disparity between Google (and one of the independent sites) and the other independent reviews sites. Unfortunately the answer did not bode well for any future relationship, and it went something along these lines...

"We were sold those two solutions on the basis that we could pick and choose which clients to invite to write reviews."

...oh dear. We explained why there would have to be a change of mind-set if they were to come aboard with HelpHound. And at that point we agreed to call it a day.

When will some businesses (and nearly every reviews site) get it? That if reviews are to work for your business, they must be seen to be genuine, not just the individual reviews themselves, but the overarching methodology of the reviews mechanism the business adopts as well. It must not favour the business over the consumer.

Further reading:

• Goodbye Yelp - why would the biggest reviews site on the planet quit the UK?
• Purplebricks and Trustpilot - how one business threatening legal action against a reviews site told us so much about another reviews site
• HelpHound's Resolution™ - taking the 'fear' out of review management for good businesses

A competitor attempts to undermine your reviews' credibility...

...by attacking any weaknesses in your reviews system. It happens. It's such an obvious target. So let's see how a HelpHound member responds.


Q 1:  'How come your score is so good?'

A:   Because we are good. All of our customers are invited to write a review - look at this button on our website...even people who are not registered with us as customers, in the strictest sense, can write a review...whenever they want...

Q 2:  'Your reviews must be filtered in some way?'

A:  The only process that is applied to reviews is moderation. A HelpHound moderator reads every review and if there appears to be anything in it that might have the potential to mislead another consumer, or be factually incorrect - then reviewer and business are simultaneously contacted by HelpHound so the situation can be resolved (HelpHound call this process Resolution™ - here's more on that)


Q 3:  'HelpHound works for you, not the consumer?'

A:  Someone has to pay! But, seriously, our reputation stands or falls on HelpHound's probity - if HelpHound are seen as favouring businesses our reviews lose all their value; worse: it would be a PR disaster for us both


Q 4:  'Your customers need to be invited to write a review?'

A:  No, our customers, and even non-customers (potential customers, for instance) can write a review whenever they want (see that button again). Reviews from customers and non-customers are treated in exactly the same way
 
 
Q 5:  'It looks as if only positive reviews find their way to Google?'

  If a client of HelpHound's looks this good it is because they are this good - there's nothing at all preventing anyone at all posting a negative review to Google (and not all reviews sites can say that)

A:  If positive reviews are showing on Google then it means we are doing a good job, for two reasons: first, anyone can post a review to Google at any time - more than 20 million people in the UK are now registered to do so, so if our system somehow prevented reviews going there there would be nothing at all stopping a customer writing a negative review direct to Google - and second, HelpHound software automatically invites everyone who has a review posted to our website to write a review to Google as well
 

Q 6:  'No-one has ever heard of HelpHound?'

A:   HelpHound are a business service, not a reviews site. But, to be candid, aside from Google and TripAdvisor (and maybe Yelp) most consumers don't recognise reviews sites either (a recent survey by Rightmove found that: 'Where reviews were read, most (42%) were on Google, followed by [the business's] own website (36%), Trustpilot (11%)...and Feefo (2%).') HelpHound clients don't rely on name awareness - although this is increasing as HelpHound grows - but the self-evident probity of the HelpHound system 


Conclusion?

Review management is the route to take for great businesses - one of our clients even stated that their business had joined because they saw HelpHound as the 'Gold Standard' - and by that they meant that sub-par businesses would be unable to adopt review management, it is simply too open - they will need to seek out other solutions (that will not enable them to satisfactorily answer all the six questions above).


Further reading:

• more on the Rightmove survey
• results - certified by Google
• our latest take on the reviews sites - the End Game

Don't let your business fall victim to 'Drifting Down'

'Drifting Down'? What exactly is that? Let us explain...

You business - like every other business - started life with no Google reviews. Now businesses - including yours - fall into one of the following categories:

1. No Google reviews
2. Google reviews - and no engagement
3. Google reviews -  and engaged

For the time-being let us concern ourselves with businesses falling under headings 1 and 2, because they are the ones that will be vulnerable to 'Drifting Down' (more on 3 later)...

Businesses in these categories will often find that their first reviews result in them either looking like this...

   

Of hundreds of customers only nine - demonstrably happy ones - have bothered to leave a review. Not engaged.

Or this...

   

This time, of thousands of patients, the majority of the nineteen who have bothered to leave a review have left a negative one. Not engaged.

...through no real fault of their own.

The point is - the former could easily become subject to 'Drifting Down' and the latter already has. 

 

If you doubt the power of reviews and their correlation with revenue we strongly suggest you read this report by Michael Luca of Harvard Business School

Drifting Down is where natural human behaviour kicks in, to the detriment of the business and, importantly, to the detriment of potential customers/clients/patients of that business, who are deterred from using it (if you doubt this read this article from BrightLocal, or this one on the positive benefits), as follows:

• the business gets its first reviews, hopefully positive - all is well
• the business gets its first negative review - this must be taken very seriously, because if it is mishandled (or ignored), the 'Drifting Down' process will begin. The business's Google score will already have been impacted, and will no longer be a perfect 5.
• the 'first negative' has an interesting impact - not only does it make the business look less than perfect (not necessarily a bad thing of itself) it 'gives permission' to subsequent reviewers - and readers of the business's reviews - to post their own negative reviews (we call this the 'me too' syndrome). We see this all the time, a business has no negative reviews, maybe for years, and it gets just one, then, within months, it has a whole clutch
• this is the beginning of Drifting Down - and it is exacerbated when a business has many reviews, some of which are negative - consumers who might otherwise write a positive review will not do so - for two reasons, first: they are put off doing so by the negative reviews (they don't want to go against the flow) and second: they begin to say to themselves 'business X has lots of [positive] reviews, they don't need mine' - and that leaves the way clear for those negatively motivated, for whatever reason, to write a negative review. Before you know it the business looks like this...

   There's nothing intrinsically wrong with this business - we're betting - they have just failed to engage with review management, and this has resulted in a higher proportion of their reviews being from dissatisfied customers

 ...failing the Google filter (by scoring less than 4.0) and with a massive mountain to climb to get back north of that critical number. And that mountain will only become higher, and steeper, as the months and years pass.

The answer?

Be a 'Category 3' business. Adopt review management - pure and simple. Engage with your customers now - and show the world just how good you are...

...not perfect, but pretty nearly so - and certainly not 'Drifting Down'.

How was this achieved? By a combination of actively inviting clients to write a review - by email and by incorporating this simple button into their website...

Not rocket science, just modern proactive professional review management - pure and simple.


 

One reviews site warns against another - what is going on?

'Something is rotten in the state of Denmark' is a famous quotation from Hamlet often misattributed to Hamlet (it is spoken by Marcellus, an officer of the guard, when he and Hamlet encounter the 'Ghost' of Hamlet's father on the battlements of Elsinore). But, if you were to give credence to many reviews of another of Denmark's famous sons - Trustpilot - on a rival reviews website you might be forgiven that the 'rottenness' persists to this day.

Let's look at the facts, and then try to draw some conclusions. Here is TrustPilot's listing on another reviews website - Reviews.io (also known as Reviews.co.uk):

The header:

The header minus that warning flash:

 The reviews summary:

So far:

We have one reviews site that is hosting over three hundred reviews of another, much larger reviews site. So lets see if they are hosting similar reviews for an even larger site: Yelp.

Or TripAdvisor?

...both massively larger than TrustPilot.

So what is happening here? Well, we cannot be sure - so lets delve deeper, and look at some of the reviews - of TrustPilot, on Reviews.io...

As we have already established, the overwhelming majority are negative (261 are 1* and 14 are 2*, leaving just 27 at 5* - some of which, at least, Reviews.io are alleging are posted nefariously by agents of TrustPilot).

Here are the last five one star reviews...

What do we notice? Let's stick to the facts...

1. Every positive review contains elementary spelling errors; this is very unusual - at HelpHound we moderate thousands of reviews a month, and part of that moderation process involves correcting any spelling error that might reasonably be expected to mislead a reader; we estimate that we only have to correct one in ten reviews, at most. If you read Google reviews (as we all do) you will see that very few contain such bizarre English.
2. Nearly every review contains accusations of malpractice by TrustPilot - the word trust (in the negative sense - 'untrustworthy'. 'cannot be trusted' is used in almost every review) in our experience is usual for reviewers, especially negative reviewers, to focus much more on service delivery from a business like this ('the product/service was not fit for purpose' or 'the software did not work') rather than this almost one-track focus on 'trust'
3. Reviews sites like TripAdvisor 'red flag' businesses, but they always highlight the perceived failing in a reasonable amount of detail, as is required by natural justice (otherwise how can the business under review possibly address the issue?)
4. The negative reviews are, in general, pretty well written, and have the ring of truth whereas, to be honest, an awful lot of these are not and do not
5. Let us look at a sample of the positive reviews of TrustPilot...

...where they are 'wrong' is that they are generally written, like the first two here, erroneously - the reviewer has attempted to review another business (presumably a TrustPilot client) and simply mistaken Reviews.co.uk for Trustpilot! The first review here is obviously not of a reviews site, the second is self-evidently of a locksmith and third, we would be so bold, rings pretty true to us.

Conclusion?

We will leave that to you, dear reader (hence the question mark), but suffice to say, the more verification and visible authentication of the reviewer the better. Regular readers know that we have preferred Google over reviews sites for many years now, partly for this very reason (fake reviews are much easier to spot) those reading this article who are new to HelpHound should just search this blog for our many articles on the subject.

To be fair, here is Reviews.io's entry on TrustPilot.
 

Reviews sites - the end game

As regular readers will know, we have been 'sellers' of the independent reviews sites for quite a while now.  At a meeting with a potential client in early November we were rigorously examined over our reasoning and realised that the arguments against the independent sites and for Google reviews have, if anything, only become stronger in the last few months, hence this article.

We strongly recommend that anyone considering a reviews solution for their business read the following. 

Introduction and background

Reviews websites (including websites incorporating reviews - such as TripAdvisor and Booking.com) sprang up in the early days of what some were then calling Web 2.0 (shorthand for the responsive web) - in the mid noughties, from roughly 2004 onwards. Their USP - for businesses - was that their site would show prominently in search and would become the 'go to' site for consumers looking for that kind of business. Sites like Yelp (appealing to everyone) and TripAdvisor (for hotels and restaurants) boomed. That was then. At the beginning of the current decade Google joined the fray. 

This is where our story starts - Google disrupted the world of reviews as only they know how. In this article we are going to look at the current position of reviews sites by reference to two different models (we are calling them 'A' and 'B') and then comparing them with Google and Google reviews. Then we will go on to draw a definitive conclusion - for that, read on.


Review site A

• is an 'open' site - meaning that anyone can write a review on whatever business they choose at a time of their own choosing
• in order to 'ensure accuracy' the site has a mechanism whereby the business can challenge any review. That review is then suspended pending the reviewer providing 'proof of purchase'

Advantages - for the consumer

• The ability to write a review of any business at a time of their own choosing 

Disadvantages - for the consumer

• The same as under 'Advantages' - it is well-nigh impossible for the reviews site to identify fake or malicious reviews - written by competitors (negative) or the business (positive) or those with a grudge (disgruntled ex-employees, for example)
• human nature being what it is, very few consumers - expecting to see their negative review appear live on the site - can be bothered to jump through the 'proof of purchase' hoop. This is seen as an advantage by some businesses (but see 

Advantages - for the business

• The virtual guarantee of a positive review, providing the business picks the right target consumers and the timing of the invitation to review
• Potential star rating in PPC through Google partnership*

Disadvantages - for the business

• The 'open' nature of the site is open to abuse - by competitors or disgruntled ex-members of staff, for instance
• Any system that makes it in any way difficult for a consumer to write a negative review on a reviews site will drive those reviewers to the obvious alternative - Google. We rarely go a day without coming across a business that has adopted a site like this that then goes on to look great on that site and much less good on Google

*Google partnership - reviews sites can become Google partners so their clients business's scores show under their Google ads. Seen in isolation this, at first, looks an attractive proposition. In reality - when Google reviews and the rest of the reality of this article is taken on board, that advantage is far outweighed by the disadvantages of such a solution. The message to businesses is loud and clear - look great in natural search and the calls and visits will flow.

Notes:

On face value, a sensible solution. But - and there is a big 'But' - the system is open to abuse: businesses have been alleged to systematically appeal negative - as opposed to potentially inaccurate or misleading - reviews, leading to 'score inflation' and an inaccurate impression of the business being created, on the reviews site and in search. 

At the meeting referred to in the introduction to this article a director of the business began by saying "I hope you are not going to recommend one of those 4.9 sites?" We were able to reassure him that we were not.


Review site B

• is a 'closed' site - meaning that the only people invited to write a review are those the business chooses, and the review is written at the time of the business's choosing

Advantages - for the consumer

•  the knowledge that every review is written by a genuine customer of the business in question

Disadvantages - for the consumer

• the inability to read reviews written at the time of the reviewer's choosing (for example: customers are commonly invited to review products immediately post-purchase - the consumer, asking themselves 'How did those shoes wear?' is unlikely to find an answer to their question on a closed reviews site). 
• there is no facility for that same consumer to return to write a review after weeks, months or years' of using the product or service under review
• there is no facility for multiple stakeholders in a transaction to write a review - in a property sale, for instance, there is often more than one person who may feel they have a valid reason to write a review. If they are not invited by the reviews mechanism employed by the business they have little alternative but to write their review on an 'open' site - Google being the obvious first port-of-call 

Advantages - for the business

• the elimination of spurious reviews, such as those written by competitors or disgruntled employees - by only inviting customers with verified email addresses
• the virtual guarantee of a positive - 4 or 5 star review
• potential star rating in PPC through Google partnership

Disadvantages - for the business

•  none (excepting reputational - see 'Conclusions' below)

Notes:

This kind of site tilts the playing field too far in the direction of the business - especially in the case of service businesses where there may be multiple stakeholders in the transaction. It is also reliant for accuracy - and compliance with the CMA regulations - upon the business inviting reviews from all its customers - again, straightforward for product-based businesses such as online retailers but problematic from a credibility point-of-view for service-based businesses. 


Google

Now for the 'big daddy'...

• Google is an 'open' site - meaning that anyone can write a review on whatever business they choose at a time of their own choosing

Advantages - for the consumer

• the ability to write a review of any business at a time of their own choosing
• the knowledge that that review will be viewed by the widest possible audience

Disadvantages - for the consumer

• the same as under 'Advantages' - it is well-nigh impossible for Google to identify fake or malicious reviews - written by competitors (negative) or the business (positive) or those with a grudge (disgruntled ex-employees, for example). If the review passes Google review policies it stands.

Advantages - for the business

• visibility - second to none

Disadvantages - for the business

• the 'open' nature of Google reviews is open to abuse - by competitors or disgruntled ex-members of staff, for instance
• dissatisfied consumers are estimated to be motivated to write a review by a factor of fifteen times, so businesses who do not find a solution to Google reviews will statistically be over-represented by that kind of customer

Notes: 

Your business needs Google reviews. The reviews sites' visibility in search has been eroded to the point where no serious industry commentator would suggest that there is a viable alternative to Google reviews - especially if, as you inevitably will, you will be asked to justify your reviews mechanism to your customers. The only question each business needs now ask it just how to engage with Google reviews.


Conclusions

There are three issues at play here - and we will deal with them under three headings: reputation, competition and compliance.

• Reputation

If your reviews solution is bought into question it is your business's reputation that suffers. Uncertainty over their reviews filter and the number of self-evidently fake reviews published by Yelp, for instance, has led to many businesses to fight shy of their reviews solution.

• Competition

Your competitors are constantly looking for gaps in your marketing armour. If they are able to question your reviews solution they are able to considerably strengthen their competitive edge. No business should put itself in a situation where it has to defend its chosen reviews solution. Businesses who choose a solution other than Google will need to have a cast-iron answer for potential customers who ask them why they are not using Google reviews - and, currently, there is none (we would be the first to advise our clients if there were).

• Compliance

The CMA has teeth and it will use them (see this). Here is an article that analyses the CMA's letter to businesses with a commentary on every point. The main thrust, though, is that businesses must not use a system that gives them an edge over their customers - the customer always has a prima facie right to have their review published at a time of their own choosing.

In summary: if reviews sites had not existed pre-Google reviews, no-one would be inventing them now.
  

And finally - the killer punch  

There are two kinds of businesses that harness the undoubted power of reviews: reactive - where there is no sales interaction, such as online retailers, and proactive - where there is a human sales process, such as estate agency or financial advice, where the business acquisition process is invariably competitive. Let us see why adopting the right solution is just so critical for the latter (we'll use estate agency in this example)...

An agent finds themselves pitching against a competitor (don't they always?) and the competitor has used reviews sites like 'A' or 'B' above. All they have to do is draw the potential client's attention to the flaw(s) in those solutions and their pitch - and, crucially, their probity, is fatally undermined. 

Our Advice

Business reputations take years to make and, Weinstein-like - can be ruined in minutes. It is incumbent on all businesses to choose a reviews solution that not only benefits them in the short term, but protects and enhances their reputation in the long-term. That is why HelpHound exists - as professional review managers we are here to ensure that our clients always have the best reviews solution for their business, and if A or B above were that solution, that is what we would be advising.

Google has disrupted the world of reviews to the extent, currently, that Google reviews are the only solution - they have the highest visibility (by such a margin as to be untouchable) and they are least open to attack under the three headings above. 

That does not mean they are the perfect solution for businesses or consumers, far from it. And that is where HelpHound comes in: we add value for both sides of the equation. For businesses we allow them to publish independently verified reviews on their own sites whilst minimising the chance that an unfair, inaccurate or misleading review is published (on their site or on Google) and for consumers we ensure that the reviews we and Google publish are a full and fair guide to that business's suitability to their needs.


Further reading:

Stockmarkets have consistently downgraded quoted reviews sites for years now. Here are just two articles...

• Yelp
• TripAdvisor

...and, in both cases, the core issue, besides a rocky earnings path, is the bogeyman in the background: Google reviews.

Fear inviting reviews direct to Google? You would be right to do so - the following articles explain...

• a guide to HelpHound's moderation process
• the Fear Factor - how some businesses were afraid of engaging with reviews

Some reviews sites think they have a powerful brand, and suggest that will help add credibility for the business. Yelp is the biggest reviews site in the world, with a market capitlisation just short of $4bn - but we meet people every day who have never heard of it. Rightmove recently conducted a survey of consumers and found that the major reviews sites targeting estate agency had name awareness in low double figures at best...

'Where reviews were read, most (42%) were on Google, followed by [the] agents' own website (36%), Trustpilot (11%), allAgents (6%) and feefo (2%)' 

• Here is the full article

And with that we will end.

How does your business look against its competitors?

It something all businesses should spend just a little more time on - checking how they show in search against their peers.

Let's look at some examples...

In a specific search - your potential customer knows you, or they are responding to some of your marketing or a recommendation form a colleague or friend. They search specifically for your business. Let's look at a client of ours (nameless for the moment)...

...Google helpfully provides five alternative businesses in their knowledge panel. What is to stop that potential client straying (Google don't just put them there for fun, they know a percentage will click on them)? So what can the business in question do?

They can harness the power of their customers' opinions, first by having lots of great reviews and the resulting Google score...

 

...which leads the potential customer straight to the reviews themselves...

...and to the three rich snippets that Google gets from those reviews...

...then they have independently verified reviews on their own website...

 ...that are pulled through to organic search by Google...

...to give them a star rating and score there. Which, taken all together, mean that your potential customer is much less likely to be diverted away.

Now - local search - where the customer knows what type of business they want, but has an open mind as to exactly the business(es) they are going to contact. Here reviews back up the business's showing in the Google Maps 3-pack and in organic search...

 ...again, ensuring the business looks great, with eye-catching scores and stars in both.

Action?

Perform both searches on your business (we recommend our clients do so at least monthly) and see how your business is performing. Keep a record, so you can track improvements.

If you would like to see the actual numbers (in terms of increased visits and calls) when a business that is doing everything else right from an online marketing point-of-view joins HelpHound read this case history.

The future of reviews - emoticons?

We suppose we shouldn't be surprised...

...but we will monitor the situation, and only block them if their use gets out of hand!

Killer reviews - an example

But first - what exactly is a 'killer review'? There is no exact definition, but the one we loosely came up with some years ago goes as follows...

"A review that has the potential, all on its own, to stop the phones ringing." 

 Now let's look at an example...

This is a typical 'killer' review - it is well-written and contains convincing detail. The business concerned has a handful of five star reviews as well, but these will be neutralised in the eyes of many (most?) prospective customers by a review like this. The fact that the review is four years old is irrelevant - prospective customers will invariably check out the 'worst' tab when reading reviews - and that takes this review to the top of the pile.

Some one star reviews are next to harmless (they are seen as rants, or simply the venting of the odd dissatisfied customer) but reviews like this un-tick all the boxes a reasonable person might be reasonably want ticked before contemplating making contact, let alone purchasing a product or service. A reasonable person might expect the following from any business...

• courtesy
• efficiency
• professionalism
• help
• communication
• response

...all of which are mentioned in this review, alongside some of the negatives no consumer - or business - wants to see...

• "terrible"
• "nobody answers"
• "rude"
• "pain"
• "pointless"
• "worst customer care"
• "fooled"
• "warning"
• "go elsewhere"

 ...all, taken together - or even singly, are the kind of thing that stops a potential customer making that first crucial contact - picking up the phone or clicking 'visit website'. In short: a 'killer' review.

Killer reviews in context

Killer reviews can be, and often are, the only review a business has received, but not necessarily; the fact that a business may have many complimentary reviews does not, of itself, always dilute the effect of a killer review.

Nothing puts a business off reviews faster than a killer review, and that leads it straight down the wrong path - to denial. Ignoring a killer review won't make it go away, and it certainly won't prevent it from being read (on the contrary: it can often be the catalyst for 'me too' reviews).

The correct strategy, of course, is to do exactly the opposite - engage. First by responding to that killer review, then by responding to any/all other reviews, whether complimentary or not.

This has three key effects on those reading the review(s): it shows the business's side of the story, it shows that the business cares and it 'warns' anyone thinking of posting a similar review that any future critical reviews will not go without a response from the business.

The response itself...

  One of our all-time favourite responses. It wins hands down for brevity - but whether or not it wins any prizes for positive customer relations or PR is altogether debatable.

We see so many awful responses to killer reviews: angry ('how dare you!'), defensive ('all lies') and understandable ('we have no recollection'). The first two of these should never see the light of day, the third can be improved upon. Let's see...

"Dear Mr Hill, I am so sorry that we were not able to meet your expectations. We do endeavour to provide the very highest level of service for all our customers and we always explain how we carry out our work, from initial estimate through to firm quotation and then to carrying out the job. 

It would seem that confusion has arisen over the difference between 'initial estimate' and 'firm quotation' in this instance and this has, understandably, led to the circumstances you describe, where our initial quotation (and 'sketches') have been mistaken for the latter. We always return calls within two hours (as you know, we are all engaged in the workshop or on site).

If we can be of any help in the future please do not hesitate to contact me personally.

A B Smith

Managing Director"

The key elements of this response...

• it addresses the criticism made in the review. Replying, as so many do, with 'We would love to address the issues you have raised, please email me on arthur.smith@smithandco' fails to address the concerns of those reading the review and your response. It is important to remember your audience: your potential customers (besides, in reality it is unlikely that someone who has posted a critical review will check back to read any response)
• It is scrupulously professional and polite
• It gently corrects misapprehensions in the review
• It ends on a positive note

So - our action checklist...

There are basically only two things a business - in this situation or not - needs to do:

1. Respond to every review
2. Initiate a review management programme to generate more reviews

 Further reading:

•  Responding to reviews - the unforeseen benefits