Local SEO
Add a client's Business Profile to review monitoring and Agency Pilot checks it daily or weekly. New low-star reviews alert your admins when a scheduled check finds them, and a weekly digest covers new reviews, the average and the ones still waiting for a reply.
New low-star reviews notify your admins as soon as they're picked up.
Choose how often each business is checked.
New reviews, average rating and unanswered reviews in one summary.
Each check reads the newest 50 reviews; the credit cost is shown up front.
The first check sets the baseline, so you're not flooded with old reviews.
Monitor any public profile, including a competitor's.
A bad review that sits unanswered for a week does more damage than the review itself. Monitoring puts it in front of your team the day it's picked up, so the reply — or the call to the client — happens while it still matters.
Better to find this out here than three weeks in.
Start a 14-day trial with 300 credits. Add your first client and send an onboarding link today.
Google review monitoring gives an agency a way to notice new public feedback, but the value comes from what happens after it is found. Before enabling a schedule, agree who reviews alerts, who confirms the facts with the business and who approves a public response. A notification sent to several admins does not guarantee that anyone has taken responsibility. A named owner and a simple escalation path make the process dependable.
Agency Pilot checks the selected public profile on a daily or weekly schedule and summarizes new feedback. Your team should connect that observation to an agreed client workflow. Some comments can be acknowledged through an approved tone and process; others need the owner to investigate a specific service experience. Keep the division of responsibility clear so the agency can act promptly without guessing about events it did not witness or promising a resolution it cannot authorize.
Start by checking the business identity and location. A brand with several branches may have distinct profiles, staff and customer experiences. A monitoring plan should keep those differences visible rather than treating every review as feedback about the whole business. Confirm the relevant profile with the client before relying on alerts or sharing a digest with a location manager.
The first check establishes a baseline so existing reviews do not arrive as a flood of new alerts. That is useful for starting ongoing monitoring, but it does not mean older feedback has been resolved. If historical reviews require attention, make that a separate onboarding review. Agency Pilot reads the newest reviews within the scope described for each check, so understand that scope before using the results as a claim about the entire lifetime history of a busy profile.
The monitoring schedule determines when new feedback can be detected. A daily check and a weekly check create different response opportunities, so choose deliberately for each business. Review the credit cost and the client's expectations before setting the cadence. An agency should not promise immediate awareness of every published review when the profile is checked on a schedule.
Discuss who is available to act when a review is detected. A more frequent check is most useful when someone can investigate and respond appropriately. For a multi-location account, priorities may differ according to the business's needs and staffing. Keep the schedule and responsibility in the client agreement or operating notes, then revisit them if review volume or service expectations change. The tool supplies observations; the agency and client supply the response capacity around those observations.
A low-star alert deserves attention, but the rating alone does not explain what happened. Read the available text, identify the location and ask the client to verify any relevant facts. Some feedback concerns a service problem, some reflects confusion and some may be difficult to match to a known interaction. Avoid presenting an unverified interpretation as the business's official account of the event.
Prepare a response around what the business can responsibly say. Acknowledge the concern, use the approved contact route for individual resolution and avoid exposing private customer details. If the matter requires investigation, explain that the business will review it through the appropriate channel. Agency Pilot alerts and summarizes; replying happens in the Business Profile. Keep that separate step and its required access in the workflow so the response does not remain an unassigned intention after the alert is read.
A digest can help the team review new reviews, the average rating and items still awaiting a reply. Read those measures together. An average can hide a recent pattern, while an unanswered count does not reveal whether a response is awaiting owner approval. Use the summary to decide what needs attention, then inspect the relevant reviews before drawing a conclusion.
Look for practical questions the client can investigate, such as repeated confusion about opening hours or a recurring comment about an appointment process. Describe themes carefully and avoid treating a small set of public comments as a complete customer survey. The agency can surface a pattern for discussion without claiming it has measured every customer's experience. A useful digest connects feedback with a specific conversation or follow-up action rather than only reporting whether a number increased or decreased.
Agency Pilot can monitor public competitor profiles as well as client profiles. This can help an agency understand the kinds of feedback appearing in the local market, but the comparison needs context. Businesses differ in size, customer volume and service mix. A competitor's review count or rating is not a direct measure of the client's operational quality or the amount of work the agency should promise to produce.
Use competitor feedback to identify questions about customer needs and expectations, then validate those questions with the client. Keep the client's own response process as the priority. Monitoring another business does not grant authority to reply on its behalf, and it does not reveal private details about how it requests or handles feedback. A responsible comparison relies on public observations and avoids speculation about motives, authenticity or internal practices that the evidence cannot establish.
Review monitoring and a Business Profile audit complement one another. Monitoring helps the team notice new feedback on the chosen schedule, while an audit can assess public profile details and review measures in a broader local comparison. Use the findings together when the engagement includes profile maintenance, but keep the services distinct. Neither an alert nor a report by itself edits business information or posts a reply.
At a regular client review, confirm which comments were handled, which need follow-up and whether the workflow needs adjustment. If a response waited too long because approval was unclear, fix the handoff. If feedback exposed outdated public information, assign the correction to the appropriate person. This gives review monitoring a practical role in client care: observe, verify, respond through the proper channel and improve the process based on what the team actually learned.
Choose according to the client's service expectations, review activity, response capacity and credit budget. A daily schedule creates more frequent opportunities to detect feedback than a weekly one, but someone still needs to act on it. Agree the cadence and responsible person before enabling monitoring. Avoid describing either scheduled option as instant awareness of every review at the moment it is published.
The first check establishes the baseline so historical feedback is not treated as a large batch of new activity. If the client wants older unanswered reviews reviewed, plan that as a separate initial task. Ongoing monitoring then helps the team notice newly detected feedback. Keeping those stages distinct makes it easier to understand which work belongs to onboarding and which belongs to the continuing service.
Read the review and confirm the correct business location before deciding on a response. Ask the client to verify relevant facts and determine who has authority to address the concern. Record the owner and next step in your normal workflow. A rating is a reason to investigate, not enough evidence to publish a detailed explanation of an event the agency has not verified.
The existing review monitoring feature alerts and summarizes; replies happen in the Business Profile. Make sure the person responsible has appropriate access through the client's approved process. Keep writing, approval and posting as explicit steps where needed. Otherwise, an alert may be reviewed internally without anyone completing the actual public response, leaving the client under the impression that the matter was handled.
Use a person authorized by the business who can verify the relevant facts and approve the proposed handling. The agency may help with wording, but it should not invent an explanation or promise a remedy without that authority. Establish the contact and escalation route in advance. This is especially useful when the response concerns a particular location or an event the central marketing team cannot confirm.
It should acknowledge the feedback in the business's approved voice and guide any individual resolution through an appropriate contact route. Keep it accurate and avoid disclosing private customer information. A response does not need to argue every detail publicly to be useful. The client and agency should agree on tone, approval and responsibility so the message reflects the business's actual ability to follow through.
No. It tells the team that feedback matching the alert conditions was detected. The business needs to investigate any disputed facts through its normal process. Keep the distinction between the public claim and verified information clear in internal notes and client updates. The monitoring tool provides awareness; it does not adjudicate the underlying event or establish the identity and intentions of the reviewer.
Monitor and label each relevant location clearly, and route questions to the person who can verify that branch's experience. Shared branding does not mean all reviews concern the same team or operating details. Summaries can be discussed across the account, but preserve location-specific evidence and responsibility. This prevents a central report from turning a local issue into an inaccurate statement about every branch.
Use it as a focused summary of the monitored feedback, not a complete assessment of every customer's experience. Review counts, averages and unanswered items need context and may not explain the reasons behind a change. Inspect relevant comments and discuss recurring themes with the client. The digest is most useful when it prompts specific follow-up rather than being treated as a standalone judgment of the business.
It may be awaiting a factual check, owner approval or someone with the right access to post the response. Make that status explicit in your team's process instead of assuming the alert recipient will handle everything. A regular review of outstanding items can expose a handoff problem. Resolve the missing responsibility or input, then confirm the response was actually published through the appropriate profile.
You can discuss the public figures, but explain their context. Businesses differ in review volume, service mix and operating history. A small numerical difference alone does not establish better service or explain search performance. Look at relevant feedback and the client's own process before recommending action. Keep the comparison factual and avoid using one average as a complete measure of either business's quality.
The existing feature reads public reviews and can monitor a public competitor profile. That provides observation, not management access or authority to respond. Use the information for appropriate contextual analysis, and avoid claiming knowledge of private operations or motives. A competitor's public feedback can suggest questions about customer expectations, but the client's own service and response priorities should remain the focus of the engagement.
Check whether recipients know who owns the next step, whether the client contact is current and whether approval or access is missing. More notifications will not solve an unclear handoff. Assign a responsible person and a clear response path in the normal client workflow. Then review outstanding items at an agreed interval so a detected issue becomes completed work rather than another unread message.
The existing feature covers Google reviews. Do not describe it to clients as a complete monitor for every review website or social channel. If the engagement includes other sources, define that work separately and identify how those observations will be gathered and handled. Clear scope lets the client understand what the agency is watching and where they should raise feedback found elsewhere.
Bring a concise account of new feedback, responses completed, unresolved questions and any recurring theme worth discussing. Explain the observation period and avoid overstating what a small sample proves. Ask for the specific input needed to finish outstanding work. This makes the meeting a chance to improve the client's response process and public information, rather than simply read out a rating and move on.
