A GEO data review should explain what changed in answers, sources, recommendations, wrong facts, competitors, and related pages. It should not turn one answer or one count into a success claim.
Why This Question Matters
Counts alone hide whether answers are accurate, whether sources are relevant, and whether users receive a trustworthy next step.
Working Steps
Compare current results with the previous baseline by question and platform.
Review answer quality, source URLs, missing facts, competitor mentions, and page changes.
Convert findings into content updates, source improvements, monitoring changes, or continued observation.
Expected Output
A staged GEO review report with evidence, unresolved questions, next actions, owners, and review windows.
Common Mistakes
- Reporting only screenshots and counts.
- Combining mention, citation, and recommendation into one status.
- Forgetting to record what changed on the website.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which metric matters most?
It depends on the business question, but mention, citation, recommendation, and answer accuracy should stay separate.
Can better AI answers prove sales impact?
No. Commercial outcomes need separate website and inquiry evidence.
What if nothing changed?
Record the stable state, review source and page gaps, and extend the observation window if needed.
