Resolution™ - the Owner's Manual

It is high time we revisited our old friend Resolution, for established clients as well as recent adopters. Resolution - our name for the act of moderating reviews pre-publication - is like the spare tyre in the boot of your car: you hope you never have to use it, but when you do you want to be absolutely sure it works. And for that you need some instructions; here they are.


Resolution™ - taking the 'fear' out of reviews

There is a very good reason why most businesses, especially high-value service businesses and the professions, have not fully - or compliantly* - engaged with reviews and that is the well-founded fear that a single well-written but inaccurate or misleading review has the potential to do significant damage to their business's reputation.

That is why Resolution™ exists - there's not a day that goes by that our moderators don't forward a review like this to a client. And guess who is often happiest that we do? The reviewer! People don't want to write inaccurate reviews, but - being human - they sometimes do. Resolution minimises the chances of a review like this being published - and it works (just ask any of our clients).

* 'compliantly': compliance with UK law when inviting reviews is a whole subject on its own; for a full explanation, read this article.

The nuts and bolts...

The process

1. You invite your customer to write a review - or, in the case of a HelpHound client, your customer avails themselves of the link on your website to do so
2. Your customer posts their review 
3. The review is read by one of our moderators
4. If it contains no issues the review is immediately put live on your website and the reviewer is asked, by HelpHound, automatically, to copy it to Google
5. If it contains a comment that is potentially misleading or inaccurate, our moderator will send it to you (whilst simultaneously telling the reviewer that it has been forwarded to you)
6. You respond to the reviewer
7. At the end of the Resolution process, when our moderators see that the 'conversation' has been concluded, we invite the reviewer to post their final review

Phases 4 - 7 bear closer examination...

Phase 4: Resolving issues pre-publication

No consumer wants to read inaccurate and/or misleading reviews. If those reviews do harm to the business, which they will, no-one benefits. It is an anomaly yet to be resolved that a scoring system - like the Google 1 - 5 stars - does not take into account inaccurate reviews: in theory - and quite often in practice - a business can have a terrible Google score as a result of half a dozen completely unfair and/or inaccurate reviews (we are often contacted by businesses that have seen enquiries fall off and/or are failing the Google filter because of this). 

Phase 5: Engaging with your customer through Resolution™

This works very effectively: your customer welcomes the mechanism with open arms - as a non-confrontational way to correct any misleading or inaccurate content in their review.

Important note: Resolution is all about correcting potentially misleading or factually inaccurate reviews - it is emphatically not a way of 'filtering out' negative reviews. In this sense it is important to note that Resolution can be just as vital in the context of some otherwise positive reviews - those that mention financially sensitive information or rate the business as 5* but include otherwise misleading or incorrect information.

Phase 6: Responding to the reviewer

We encourage our clients to respond through the moderation system, rather than picking up the 'phone or emailing direct. Why? Because we have plenty of experience that tells us that if your customer has chosen to communicate via a review - at your invitation - then they react more positively if you respond through the same mechanism. Of course, you, (and we) can take every case on its merits - that's one of the strengths of the system: it is infinitely flexible. 

On top of this, we get many comments from reviewers saying how much they welcome HelpHound's third-party involvement. Our clients and their customers also value our moderators' counsel when drafting responses.

Phase 7: Inviting the final review

This is the crucial element of the process that gives your reviews their credibility: the fact that every reviewer has a right to have their opinion heard - and are aware of this from the outset. Being able to say that to prospective customers wins business. The fact that so few reviewers who have had inaccurate or potentially misleading reviews moderated go on to publish a final review is a tribute to the effectiveness of the system in resolving issues - it is a fantastic CRM tool - and is wholeheartedly welcomed by consumers. 

A Case History

We have one client who to date has had over 70 cases through Resolution (across multiple branches). Only four of these have resulted in a final published review, either on their website or on Google. They currently score between 4.7 and 4.9 on their own websites (with over 800 reviews there) and between 4.5 and 5.0 on Google (with over 600 reviews there). It goes without saying that this is a well-managed and thoroughly consumer-focused business - as HelpHound clients tend to be, by definition.

Finally

Over the years of seeing thousands of conversations in moderation we have built up a wealth of experience, so please do ask for our advice if you are in any doubt as to how a response should be worded.


N.B. Resolution is definitively not a mechanism for businesses to 'head off negative comment', it is a mechanism to ensure that - as far as possible - comments are fair and accurate, so if your business, or a member of staff, has made a mistake then your customer is 100% entitled to refer to this in their review - and score your business accordingly. Indeed, if a customer wants to post a review that they know to be inaccurate (few do), they have the right to do so - remembering that you always have the right-of-reply.




 

Resolution™ - how it adds value for both business and consumer

Let us quickly recap on how Resolution™ works:

1. The review is submitted
2. The reviewer is verified by HelpHound as a bona-fide customer of the business
3. The review is moderated by HelpHound to ensure it complies with HelpHound's T&C's
4. If positive: the review is published on the business's website; if negative, containing inaccuracies or misleading statements (or, if positive, but contains issues that our client would rather address privately): the review is placed in Resolution™. Reviews in Resolution are immediately forwarded to the business for comment. Simultaneously, the reviewer is told the business will be responding to their review
5. Once the business has responded: the reviewer is invited to submit their final review

 Now to the key question: Why is this process fair (and helpful) for both parties?

• Negative reviews harm businesses; even one negative amongst many positives has the potential to do significant harm

• In the early days of reviews there was a common misconception amongst businesses that the 'occasional negative' would be harmless (or even 'add credibility'); indeed, this can be the case with certain types of business: a review for a Japanese restaurant stating that the customer 'Did not like raw fish' might deflect little business, but a review of an estate agent erroneously accusing the business of 'coercing their client into selling at an artificially low price' has the potential to do significant harm to that business

• It can therefore only be fair to allow the business an opportunity to address whatever issue their customer may have before any review is published

• Negative reviews often contain inaccuracies and misstatements of fact; Resolution™ gives both parties an opportunity to correct these away from the glare of the web (we often see positive comments about this from reviewers)

• Some have suggested that 'right-of-reply' is sufficient redress for the business; this would be the case if users then went on to reassess their original review. In reality they do not, so the only opportunity for both sides to establish the facts of the matter (and therefore generate accurate and useful review content for potential customers) is pre-publication

• Resolution™ enables us to weed out 99% of fake negative reviews well before they might otherwise be published. Our appeals process (Retro-Resolution™) allows businesses to appeal reviews which they consider to be of questionable authenticity

• With Resolution™ (and therefore also Dialogue™) the reviewer always retains the right to have their final review published

• Consumers do not have to engage with the business through Dialogue/Resolution

The end result...

...on the business's website:

 

 Notice the key phrase: '...you can be confident these reviews are genuine unfiltered opinions'

...and on Google:

Dialogue provides reliable reviews that consumers can trust. This enables them to make purchasing decisions based on those reviews, benefiting both the consumer and the business concerned.
 

Resolution - working for you and your customer

Resolution™ is a key component of Dialogue, so it's vitally important that all our clients understand exactly how it works; so first some background...

Why do consumers write negative reviews?

Sites like TripAdvisor and Google Places would like to think it's about warning others to avoid the business in question. Our experience dictates otherwise: they think it's the easiest way to get the business's attention

The introduction of Resolution

We brought in Resolution so that businesses and their customers could raise and discuss issues before a review was posted. So there would be an easier and fairer way to 'get the business's attention'.

Why?

Because running (and choosing) a business is just as much about how a company addresses issues where an element of their product or service has gone wrong. Reviews that simply highlight problems are often unhelpful to both the business and their potential customers. 

We realised that a service that allowed them both an opportunity to resolve (hence the name) whatever issue had arisen would be helpful.

How, exactly, does Resolution work? 

Let's itemise the steps:

1. The customer writes their review
2. HelpHound's moderators read the review, posting positives straight away, but sending any reviews that contain issues to the business
3. The business responds - through HelpHound
4. This process is repeated until the customer is happy
5. The customer is invited to post a new review*

*This last point is critical. We sometimes meet potential clients who have seen what we have achieved for their competitors and assume that we have some magic formula that makes negative reviews go away. 

That (enabling our clients to select or edit reviews) would mean that Dialogue (and all the reviews its shows) would lose all credibility.

Now let's look at results

HelpHound processes thousands of reviews every month, for all kinds of businesses, and this gives us very accurate feedback (remember that we see both sides of the conversation, and we speak with the business and their customer independently as well):

• For every 100 reviews posted through Resolution less than 1 results in the customer taking up the invitation to post a 'final' review. 
• That review often reads along the lines of "I had a problem but ABC business resolved it."
• Less than 1 in 500 feel the need to post about their experience anywhere else on the web

And how we achieve them...

Our moderators work very closely with our clients to ensure a positive outcome for every review that enters Resolution. They effectively 'mediate' between our clients and their customers.

And the effect for the business:

• Very valuable feedback
• Increased customer retention
• Improved online reputation

Resolution is seen by our clients as a valuable addition to their customer service efforts, and one that would be very difficult, whatever their resources (both human and financial) to replicate in-house, because it is HelpHound's very independence from the business that makes it work so effectively.

Remember: our reputation is at stake alongside your own!

Reviews and the Law - an important update

One of our most important roles as review managers is to make sure our clients comply with the law as it relates to reviews - in letter and in spirit.

The law?

Most businesses, when we first meet them, are unaware that reviews are governed by legislation. But, just as with almost every aspect of business life these days, they are. On 1 April 2014 the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) took over many of the functions of the Competition Commission and the Office of Fair Trading.

Under CMA rules - which are enforceable in law -  it is illegal for a business (or their agents) to:

• post fake reviews of their own business
• post fake reviews of another business
• not publish negative reviews
• offer inducement - money or gifts - in exchange for reviews

In addition, it is illegal to do anything to intentionally mislead the public (consumers). This may include:

• describing testimonials (selectively invited customer opinions) as reviews
• selectively inviting customers to write reviews (what regular readers of this blog know we describe as 'cherry-picking')

Common practices that flout the letter or the spirit of the CMA rules

We see examples like the ones below nearly every day. They are mostly innocent, resulting from ignorance of the rules. Just as important, they do the business no favours in the eyes of the sophisticated consumer (or competitor).

This is a screenshot from an estate agent's website. We cannot be absolutely sure that they are contravening the CMA code, but the fact that the 'reviews' themselves are not independently verified and that all twenty-one of the reviews displayed were written on the same day over six months ago might lead to understandable concern.

• inviting testimonials from customers and displaying them as reviews
• selecting 'happy' customers to write reviews, and, by definition, positively excluding 'unhappy' ones - whether to the business's own website or to an external site

HelpHound's standpoint

Our systems are expressly designed to comply with the CMA rules, in word and spirit. This is why Resolution incorporates the 'promise to publish' and why all our clients incorporate a 'Write a Review' button into their websites, offering anyone the opportunity to write a review, whenever they choose to do so (and as often as they wish). 

It is also why the invitation to copy the review to Google (or the nominated external site) is automatic - not at HelpHound's or our client business's discretion.

Your questions answered

Can you expand on HelpHound's 'promise to publish'?

Anyone - and we mean absolutely anyone - has the ability to write a review to a HelpHound client's website. They don't have to wait to be invited - and they will always be invited to publish their review.

How does that work in the context of Resolution?

Here's a detailed overview of Resolution. Resolution is designed to fulfill two purposes:

• to make sure our clients' reviews portray as accurate a picture of their business as possible, for the benefit of future customers
• to show to potential customers of the business in question that they will be able to write a review - and have that review published - at any time during (or after) their relationship with that business

So a customer can write an intentionally misleading review of our business and have that review published?

In theory - yes. It's the price paid for complete transparency (and the credibility that flows from that transparency). In practice it very seldom happens - and if it does happen the business always has the right-of-reply. 

Resolution is designed to minimise the chances of an inaccurate or misleading review being published by allowing the business and the reviewer to engage pre-publication. But the reviewer will always be invited to post their review. In the many years of experience we have of operating Resolution (and the many thousands of reviews that we process on behalf of reviews and our client businesses) we can count the instances of a reviewer persisting in publishing a review containing an error of fact on the fingers of one hand. Inaccurate or misleading reviews benefit no-one - and that's the reason for having Resolution in the first place.

Are there any more safeguards?

We will do our best to establish that the reviewer has (or has had) a relationship with the business. If we can establish that the reviewer has purely malicious intent we will revert to the reviewer and ask them for more particulars of their relationship with the business. No-one - not HelpHound, nor our clients, nor - most important of all, consumers - benefits from the kind of reviews that have got sites like Yelp a name for publishing false and malicious reviews. 

In summary

This as much about compliance with the law as about being - and being seen to be - open and honest. Our advice can be summed up with two 'Don'ts' and two 'Do's':

• Don't confuse testimonials with reviews - a business cannot, by definition, publish its own reviews without verification by an outside agency
• Don't select - 'cherry-pick' - those customers who you invite to write reviews
• Do allow all your customers to write a review
• Do allow them to write that review at any time they wish

If you follow these simple guidelines you will find that your business is rewarded by those consumers who appreciate openness and honesty.

 

Reviews and the Law - an important update

One of our most important roles as review managers is to make sure our clients comply with the law as it relates to reviews - in letter and in spirit.

The law?

Most businesses, when we first meet them, are unaware that reviews are governed by legislation. But, just as with almost every aspect of business life these days, they are. On 1 April 2014 the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) took over many of the functions of the Competition Commission and the Office of Fair Trading.

This is an extract of a letter from the CMA to businesses - the full letter, and our notes on it, is available here

Under CMA rules - which are enforceable in law -  it is illegal for a business (or their agents) to:

• post fake reviews of their own business
• post fake reviews of another business
• not publish negative reviews
• offer inducement - money or gifts - in exchange for reviews

In addition, it is illegal to do anything to intentionally mislead the public (consumers). This may include:

• describing testimonials (selectively invited customer opinions) as reviews
• selectively inviting customers to write reviews (what regular readers of this blog know we describe as 'cherry-picking')

Common practices that flout the letter or the spirit of the CMA rules

We see examples like the ones below nearly every day. They are mostly innocent, resulting from ignorance of the rules. Just as important, they do the business no favours in the eyes of the sophisticated consumer (or competitor).

This is a screenshot from an estate agent's website. We cannot be absolutely sure that they are contravening the CMA code, but the fact that the 'reviews' themselves are not independently verified and that all twenty-one of the reviews displayed were written on the same day over six months ago might lead to understandable suspicion

• inviting testimonials from customers and displaying them as reviews
• selecting 'happy' customers to write reviews, and, by definition, positively excluding 'unhappy' ones - whether to the business's own website or to an external site

HelpHound's standpoint

Our systems are expressly designed to comply with the CMA rules, in word and spirit. This is why Resolution incorporates the 'promise to publish' and why our clients incorporate a 'Write a Review' button into their websites, offering anyone the opportunity to write a review, whenever they choose to do so (and as often as they wish). 

It is also why the invitation to copy the review to Google (or the nominated external site) is automatic - not at HelpHound's or our client business's discretion.

Your questions answered

Can you expand on HelpHound's 'promise to publish'?

Anyone - and we mean absolutely anyone - has the ability to write a review to a HelpHound client's website. They don't have to wait to be invited - and they will always be invited to publish their review. 

While this may seem a little nerve-wracking for the business - potentially opening it up to unfair criticism (and even 'fake' reviews) please read on - there are very good reasons why our clients have succeeded with reviews. Perhaps most important of all, it means the business does not make the common mistake of inadvertently driving its unhappy customers to write potentially inaccurate or misleading reviews elsewhere - commonly on Google.

How does that work in the context of Resolution™?

Here's a detailed overview of Resolution. Resolution is designed to fulfill two purposes:

• to make sure our clients' reviews portray as accurate a picture of their business as possible, for the benefit of future customers
• to show to potential customers of the business in question that they will be able to write a review - and have that review published - at any time during (or after) their relationship with that business

So a customer can write an intentionally misleading review of our business and have that review published?

In theory - yes. It's the price paid for complete transparency (and the credibility that flows from that transparency). In practice it very seldom happens - and if it does happen the business always has the right-of-reply. 

Resolution is designed to minimise the chances of an inaccurate or misleading review being published by allowing the business and the reviewer to engage pre-publication. But the reviewer will always be invited to post their review. In the many years of experience we have of operating Resolution (and the many thousands of reviews that we process on behalf of reviews and our client businesses) we can count the instances of a reviewer persisting in publishing a review containing an error of fact on the fingers of one hand. Inaccurate or misleading reviews benefit no-one - and that's the reason for having Resolution in the first place.

Are there any more safeguards?

We will do our best to establish that the reviewer has (or has had) a relationship with the business. If we can establish that the reviewer has purely malicious intent we will revert to the reviewer and ask them for more particulars of their relationship with the business. No-one - not HelpHound, nor our clients, nor - most important of all - the consumer benefits from the kind of reviews that have got sites like Yelp a name for publishing false and malicious reviews. 

In summary

This as much about compliance with the law as about being - and being seen to be - open and honest. Our advice can be summed up with two 'Don'ts' and two 'Do's':

• Don't confuse testimonials with reviews - a business cannot, by definition, publish its own reviews without verification by an outside agency
• Don't select - 'cherry-pick' - those customers who you invite to write reviews
• Do allow all your customers to write a review
• Do allow them to write that review at any time they wish

This client got to look like this on Google...  

 ...and this on their own website...

...by doing everything we describe above - in compliance with the regulations.

If you follow these simple guidelines you will find that your business is rewarded by those consumers who appreciate openness and honesty.

If you have any more questions - about what we do here at HelpHound or what you are currently doing with regard to reviews - please do not hesitate to speak to us.

Resolution™ - managing inaccurate or potentially misleading reviews

One of the prime concerns we hear from every single potential client is "What can we do about negative reviews?"

And often we sense that the immediate response they would most welcome would be something along the lines of "we have a mechanism that will prevent them being published, either on your own website or anywhere else."

But that's not our response. Our response is guided by two things:

• sensible business practice
• the CMA regulations governing reviews

Let's look at both of these:

Sensible business practice

Just let's suppose, for argument's sake, we did have a system that magically filtered out negative reviews; what would the real-world impact of such a system be? 

We don't have to look far for our answer, as there are plenty of independent review sites that operate systems that favour the business, either by denying the reviewer the right to post a review unless specifically invited or by having a mechanism that allows the business to impose conditions on the publication of negative reviews.

Both these systems have the same medium to long-term effect. They drive dissatisfied customers to post to Google - the one site a business needs to look at its very best on. We see examples all the time. Here is just one...

 The same business - on an independent review site (L) and on Google (R). An increasingly common disconnect, almost always caused by the business inviting 'happy' customers to post to the reviews site, leaving 'unhappy' customers no option but to post to an open site - Google being the obvious choice

Sensible business practice dictates that whatever system a business adopts it must positively welcome all kinds of reviews from everyone and anyone. After all, Google does. 

What happens next is important. At HelpHound we value our own reputation as a force for good in the somewhat murky world of reviews, and to maintain that reputation means treating both sides of the review equation equally - we have to be seen to be fair and credible to both business and consumer, and we need to be seen to be adding value in both directions. That means that the business should be fairly and accurately represented through its reviews and that the consumer should be able to rely on those reviews as an aid to their purchasing decision.

Inaccurate reviews - in this case pricing - help neither business nor consumer

Fake reviews, of any kind, help no-one. Inaccurate or misleading reviews ditto.

HelpHound's Resolution™ to the rescue - for both parties

The full process is detailed in this article. To summarise, Resolution™ is designed to minimise the chances of fake, inaccurate or misleading reviews being published, as none of these benefits anyone.

Here's an example. This review was posted recently:

Under the terms of Resolution™ - understood by both business and their customer - the review is first submitted to the business for comment. In this case there had been misunderstandings between the two parties concerned, as well as miscommunication (there were language issues). Resolution™ allowed for private communication between both parties and, again, as of right, the customer is invited to post a review after that communication (which can be their original review, but seldom is). This is what they did post:

Some might say that it would be helpful for both reviews to be published (and there is nothing to stop the reviewer doing so) but that would be to assume we inhabit a perfect world in which everyone communicates in both directions every time. Far too often a consumer will post an inaccurate or misleading review - often straight to Google - leaving the business nothing to do but post its own response. But that harms the business's reputation unfairly, especially through Google's scoring system - an unfair or misleading 1* review, even responded to by the business, remains to impact the business's score - a shorthand guideline increasingly used by consumers to winnow out a shortlist (and by Google itself through its filter).

The CMA regulations

A full analysis can be found here. Two of the core principles of the CMA regulations (which have the force of law in the UK) are:

• that the reviewer should be able to write a review at any time of their own choosing
• that the business must do nothing to prevent that review being published

At HelpHound our clients incorporate a button like this on their websites so absolutely anyone* may write a review at any time...

And we promise to publish any genuine review. And this means that the reviewer can have an inaccurate or misleading review published. The fact that they seldom do is down to Resolution™.

And one final point: always remember that, whatever review system you employ, your competitors will often attempt to undermine it. If it favours the business at the expense of the consumer, or if it is seen to be non-compliant, that hands a significant weapon to them.


*This surprises some businesses t first, until it is pointed out to them that they often have many more stakeholders than they have customer email addresses: husband/wife/partner/neighbour/employee/potential customer/'friend' of customer/professional advisor of customer and so on...any of whom can write a review of the business to Google at the click of a mouse, and often do - unless they are given a more attractive alternative.

Our Charges - an overview

Dialogue has been working for clients for two years now - and we have had an immense amount of feedback on our charging structure. We are using this blog post to explain how this now works, but first a word of reassurance for existing clients - none of this will change the basis on which you became a client; we are enormously grateful to those of you who 'had faith' in the early days of Dialogue, particularly as it is you that have enabled us to prove its effectiveness!

The basis of charging for Dialogue:

As our existing clients know: Dialogue is much more than just a very effective 'piece of software', every post is read by one of our moderators and negative posts require intensive input from our client services team: they monitor both sides of the conversation between our clients and their customer. Input is often needed in both directions: advice form us to your customer on how best to phrase their concern, and advice to our clients on how best to respond. All leading to the incredibly high success rate of Resolution*.

The second 'tier' of advice we provide to clients is in proactively making the very best of Dialogue in their marketing. Karen and her team provide advice and support to all our clients on this - examples include:

• effective placing of the Dialogue 'module' on clients' websites - e.g. on multiple pages
• bespoke designs for the module
• tailoring the questions asked
• varying the email inviting the review to increase response
• other techniques to increase response - e.g. follow-up
• ways of incorporating Dialogue into the sales process
• ways of incorporating Dialogue into marketing campaigns
• ways of incorporating Dialogue into advertising
• dovetailing Dialogue with your social media strategies
• incorporating Dialogue into POS strategies

and, perhaps most important of all - sharing your fellow clients' experiences.

So - to summarise - there is the software that simply hums away in the background (which, in itself, is in a constant state of development and improvement) and the 'management, support and advice' provided by our client services team under Karen Hutchings.

So we have developed a charging structure that, as far as possible reflects our own costs in providing market leading software and ongoing support. This relates to the volume of work predicted - setting up, and ongoing management and support - in its most basic sense: 'the number of reviews we will be processing'.

For new clients:

We establish a 'guestimate' of the volume of work and then prepare an individual quotation. This consists of a one-off fee for design and implementation, a basic monthly fee and the standard charge for processing each negative (Resolution™).

This charging structure will be guaranteed for the first 18 months. For the first six months there is no contract, after six months we will conduct a client review with you: and the first objective of this review will be to establish that Dialogue has been a profitable exercise;  we will make suggestions for improvements (if any) to processes and the way you are using Dialogue and and ask you for two things:

1. to sign a contract for the next 12 months
2. to give us a review of your experience so far with Dialogue

We hope this helps - if you have any questions at all please don't hesitate to contact Karen Hutchings (karen.hutchings@helphound.com) or your business member advisor.

 *Resolution - a success story all of its own: so far in 2012 over 97% of cases that have gone through the Resolution process have resulted in no final review being posted. Why? Because Resolution has enabled our clients to have an off-line conversation with their customer and resolve whatever issue has been raised. A win for the client, a win for the customer - and more often than not resulting in a customer who might otherwise have sought to move their business elsewhere (whether hotel guest or and estate agent's landlord client) being retained.

Resolution™ - why it works

Resolution works so effectively that some clients 'know it works, but don't exactly know why it works'. This is understandable, so in this post we address the 'Why?'

First - some statistics:

• about 3% of all reviews we moderate are put into Resolution for a response from our client - and they can range from an outright complaint to an issue we feel our client should have the opportunity to address privately
• Of those, just over 98% result in a satisfactory outcome - a improved final review or...
• In over 95% of cases - no final review at all

Let's examine these further...

Why are only 3% of initial reviews negative?

All of our clients are paragons! Seriously though, only good businesses join HelpHound. Dialogue simply doesn't work for a badly run business. But no business is perfect, and that's why Dialogue exists - not to give consumers a way of hurting businesses, but a way for them to get mistakes rectified. 

For some, let's call them the 'mildly dissatisfied', the simple act of inviting the review through HelpHound will be enough to make them think again about posting anything, anywhere - they simply say to themselves 'never mind' and nothing happens.

How does Dialogue achieve such a high rate of 'satisfactory outcomes'?

The answer to this is partly because our clients take reviews in Resolution seriously - they respond immediately and the reassure their customer that their point has been taken on board and acted upon. 

And its partly because our moderators are very good at overseeing the process - they won't let a reviewer 'rant' and they won't let our clients 'rant back'.

Why do so few customers go on to post a 'final review'?

We know the answer to this because we see both sides of the conversation: it's because they didn't really want to write a review in the first place. They simply wanted an acknowledgment from the business that it had a point to answer.

Examples of this include:

• Mistakes - Customers who say "Something went wrong - if you can reassure me that it won't happen again I'll continue to use your business."
• Financial issues - Customers who wanted clarification: "I didn't understand your charges."
• Misunderstandings - customers who thought the service included something when it did not: "We were expecting a spa at your hotel."
• Personality - the customer who 'got out of the wrong side of bed' - often resolved by explanation or simple apology "We're sorry." 

The bottom line is that Resolution works - it's one of the core features of Dialogue - helping our business members ensure that their customers have a way of communicating with them without having to post publicly on the web.

We hope this helps, if you would like further clarification please contact Karen Hutchings (karen.hutchings@helphound.com) or your business membership advisor.

Your business and reviews - your New years' resolutions for 2019

Here are our suggested resolutions for 2019 - and we make a firm guarantee for businesses that adopt them: you will do more business in the year ahead.


Resolution 1

Get a hundred reviews to your website. You will then stand a chance of looking like this in search...

...and the way consumers react will change; the cynicism will fall away, no longer will you hear comments such as 'I bet they're all written by friends and family' - your reviews will be believed. 


Resolution 2

Get fifty reviews to Google - and, just the same as with your own reviews, improve your chances of looking like this...

...some will look at this Google 3-pack and say 'but the others look OK' and so they do, at first glance, but they need to ask a supplementary question: 'are they complying with the CMA regulations? Do they invite all their clients to post reviews, or are they cherry-picking?'

...top of search, top of the three-pack, most reviewed amongst your competitors. Then check your Google My Business monthly report to see just how many more clicks and calls you are getting. With a fair wind it will look like this...

Resolution 3

Respond to your reviews - wherever they may be...

...for two reasons: first, you will look as if you care, and this impresses prospective customers; second, you will be sending out a signal to anyone out there that might be tempted to post any unfairly critical comments. That message? 'We will respond'. Oh - and just like the example above, use your name and position when you post your response - it looks so much better than customerservices@abc.com.

Resolution 4

If you are currently using a reviews site - change up to professional review management. Reviews sites now have so many disadvantages compared to Google reviews we're not going to bother listing them here - for those of you that missed the articles here's the latest - but we would just ask you to compare any HelpHound client with a business employing one of the reviews sites. Look at this search...

...see a reviews site*? Reviews in the organic search? The business's own, moderated by HelpHound. Reviews for the Web? Same again. But 171 reviews on their own site and 115 on Google, scoring 4.7 and 4.8 respectively? Put yourself in the potential customer's shoes - you're going to consider them, aren't you? Another angle - put yourself in their competitors' shoes - uncomfortable now isn't it?

So - adopt these four New Year's Resolutions and see your business thrive in 2019. A Happy New Year to one and all.


*Interestingly Rightmove conducted a survey of its users a while ago, asking them if they recognised two reviews sites: Trustpilot and Feefo. The results? Just over one in ten recognised Trustpilot, one in fifty recognised Feefo.

HelpHound for hotels - Resolution™ working for everyone

This is a very simple - but extremely common - example of Resolution™ in action. A regular guest says nothing, either in hotel or at checkout. But this review is received:

 The scores say it all - we don't need to show you the accompanying review!

HelpHound moderators place it in Resolution™ - simultaneously emailing the reviewer and the hotel, inviting the hotel to respond, privately, to the reviewer, which they do. This paragraph from the hotel's much longer response is key:

And that's exactly what this guest did. Leaving this review of their most recent stay today:
 

Four words that say it all. A happy guest and a regular customer retained. 

This is an example of Resolution™ working for everyone concerned. not all guests want to raise their concerns face-to-face, for a multitude of reasons. For those guests this aspect of HelpHound's service enables them to resolve whatever issue might otherwise occasion them to look elsewhere for accommodation next time and the hotel retains the guest's loyalty and custom.