Our recent article about estate agents proved popular, so here we look at some numbers for a hotel.
Some salient facts about the business in question:
They accept that rates and rankings are related
They are keen to maximise guest retention
They understand that Google has increasing influence over guest behaviour
They value direct (non-OTA) bookings
They understand that excellent review performance is helpful in contract negotiations
They understand that many potential guests resort to OTAs primarily because they are denied any alternative source of reviews
That’s it – there
is nothing else that differentiates them from any other hotel apart
from a consistently positive attitude towards reviews from both
management and staff.
So – on to the results…
Reviews to their own website averaged over a three per day (108 per month)
Reviews to TripAdvisor have averaged over two per day (77 per month)
Re-posts from Dialogue to TripAdvisor have averaged over 5 (5.7) per month
Positive (4* and 5*) reviews to TripAdvisor rose by 27% by comparison with the six months previous to adopting Dialogue
Negative (3*, 2* and 1* reviews) managed through Dialogue have averaged over ten per month (all
but three of these have been resolved to both parties’ satisfaction, in private). Negative posts to TripAdvisor have fallen by 78% by comparison with the six months previous to adopting Dialogue
All the above has directly resulted in a rise of 16% in their TripAdvisor ranking over the period
Dear reader: we would like you to ask yourself two simple questions:
How would you feel if this hotel was a direct competitor?
How would your hotel benefit from results just like these?
Providing you and
your staff are good at what you do, there is no reason you should not
look just as good; because these numbers reflect a business that is
professional (but not perfect), and has simply taken the view that potential clients take notice of what their existing clients have to say.
The Sunday Times returns to one of its (and our) favourite campaigns this week: against fake reviews (here is – for those of you who can negotiate their pay-wall – the full article and their famous ‘fake hotel‘ expose of TripAdvisor) . And while we commend Amazon’s stance against publishers and writers puffing their own work, we are not sure this is any better or worse than what happens in the mainstream (getting friendly authors to write reviews and/or flyleaf quotes); perhaps there needs to be a website ‘outing’ authors who are friends?
The Times back in 2011 – not a lot has changed
But there is a very serious side to this, and it goes right to the heart of the world of reviews. And there’s much more to it than just ‘fake reviews’.
Let’s start at the beginning: why would anyone run a review website (or incorporate reviews into their website)?
To make money (surprise)! Amazon knows full-well that reviews drive business, and not just book reviews, reviews across the board. That’s fine as long as the consumer does not suffer. But look at some of the strategies and business models in place today and ask yourself if the consumer really benefits:
Selling advertising: this would be alright if good old-fashioned ads simply appeared as they do in print journalism; but what about when a company can pay to come top of search results for a particular service? Google make this pretty clear, but is every Yelp user aware that the first result in almost every search is paid for?
Selling leads: How many consumers realise that the fact that they need a ‘plumber’ is being sold (as a lead) to the plumber(s) in question?
Commission: Again: how many guests realise that they are generating commission and fees for websites like TripAdvisor and Booking.com every time they book through them? It wouldn’t be allowed if they were providing financial advice, but hotels are paying these sites anything up to 30% commission – straight out of the money consumers are paying for their rooms.
Now: why would anyone want to write a fake review of their business?
Because great reviews drive business, it’s as simple as that. Let’s mine down a little further:
Because it’s a lot easier than getting a genuine review. Great genuine reviews are predicated on building great customer relationships, otherwise all the review will do is expose the business’s weaknesses. Only businesses which provide consistently great service and have top-notch CRM find it easy to get great reviews
It’s also a lot lower-risk: the fake review is guaranteed to be complimentary (and rate the business 5*). In addition, the fake review can be tailor-made to highlight aspects of the business that the business wants to promote. Sophisticated fake review management becomes part-and-parcel of the business’s marketing and PR
But is it (lower risk)? Yes, until Google and their peers decide (like Amazon) to crack down on fake reviews (and the companies who are the subject of those fake reviews). Anyone who doubts Google’s ability to discover fake reviews (given the will) should bear in mind that Google knows every user’s search history, keystroke by keystroke!
Because their competitor has stolen a march: we see this all the time: a business loses out to a competitor and then notices that the competitor has great reviews; they panic and decide to tale a ‘short cut’
What should we do if we suspect there are fake reviews about our business?
This question may be more relevant than you might at first expect. In almost half of new businesses we visit we see reviews that Google would categorise as ‘fake’, they have been written:
By over-eager members of staff (‘I was only trying to help/please my boss’)
By staff ‘testing the system’ (‘I just wanted to see what a review looked like’)
By colleagues, friends and relations of staff (‘trying to be helpful’)
You might be surprised to hear the justification that we hear: “But we are a great business, I only wrote the review because none of my customers had.”; “Why shouldn’t I review my own business? I truly mean every word of what I wrote.” and the list goes on.
The dreaded TripAdvisor ‘Red Flag’. How long before Google introduce something similar?
None of these fall under the category of ‘malicious fakes’; malicious fake reviews are posted as part of a concerted and intentional effort to deceive. Unsurprisingly, when you think about it, we don’t often have face-to-face meetings with the businesses who are actively gaming the system (we once did meet with one who introduced us to an intern: ‘This is [name], she writes our reviews on [X website]’. They instinctively know to steer clear of us. But we know who they are (and if we do, you can be sure Google do too).
How do we identify fake reviews?
It’s part science, part art. In last night’s Antiques Roadshow a woman presented Rupert Mass with a painting she reckoned was a genuine Turner. He tried, as tactfully as he could, to disabuse her, first by explaining that he had been looking at the real thing for over forty years and he ‘knew’ it was not a Turner, then, when she persisted, he referred her to the framer’s date stamp (1872); Turner died in 1851 and stopped painting Venice over fifteen years earlier.
For us it’s the same. Our moderators read hundreds of reviews every day, so, just like Rupert Maas, they get a ‘nose’ for fakes. They also know just how to do their detective work. Let us show you just one example:
An estate agent has great Google reviews. Our moderators are asked to have a look at them. Out of the first ten they are able to positively identify that six were written by connections of the business. How? By cross-referencing the business’s own website (estate agencies invariably include staff biographies on their websites) with G+, Linkedin and Facebook (and not always the ‘suspect’s’ own Facebook or Linkedin page). In one case a review had been written by a colleague who had used the same photograph for his G+ account as his Linkedin entry, in another Linkedin identified that the reviewer was a recent ex-employee of the company under review. The other four were similar, the balance failed the ‘nose’ test (‘fake’ reviews often follow a distinctive pattern, avoiding the use of the first person ‘I, we’ for instance).
Advice for businesses
First and foremost: remember that your reputation is your most valuable business asset:
it is highly unlikely that you built that reputation overnight in the
real world, so be patient in the online world. Get a review a week to
your own website and a review a month to Google and in two years you
will look great on both.
Resist the temptation to cut corners and game the system: we have an ever growing list of businesses where we have concrete evidence that they are ‘up to no good’ and Google cannot be far behind us! What do we mean by ‘up to no good’? Examples include: employees of different branches of the same business writing reviews of their sister branch; management openly encouraging staff to write bogus reviews from their home computers; staff being asked to encourage friends and family to write bogus reviews, and the list goes on. One day Google will catch these businesses, and when they do the consequences will be dire (just ask any hotel that has been ‘red flagged’ on TripAdvisor – mind you, you will be hard-pressed to find one: they’ve mostly had to close).
If you know you have fake reviews – anywhere: have them removed by the people who posted them and warn them not to repeat their action
Advice for Google
Do everything possible to redress the positive/negative imbalance: by this, we mean the disconnect between theory and reality: in an ideal (?) world everyone would write reviews, positive or negative, whenever they used a business; in practice a negative experience provides hugely more motivation for the average consumer to write a review. This skews results against (especially SME) businesses. We often meet businesses with thousands of customers whose only reviews on Google are a solitary 1*. TripAdvisor has gone a long way towards resolving this issue by actively encouraging hotels to invite their guests to post reviews; Google should do the same.
Insist on proper authentication: make it as near as impossible as you can for anyone to write a review using anything but their true identity. We have examples of malicious reviewers setting up multiple G+ accounts to harm businesses. You have the power, just use it.
Weed out anonymous reviews: up until recently people could post as ‘A Google User’. It was a hangover from the old Google Places. Delete them all (maybe give the reviewer the option to add their identity before you do!).
Understand the difference between businesses that incentivise reviewers to write reviews and businesses that incentivise reviewers to write positive reviews: you should view the former as laudable and helpful to Google users, the latter should quite rightly continue to contravene your T&C’s. Unless you do this SMEs (which lack the volume of customers) will always struggle against the big corporates. And it’s the SMEs your users need to know most about (after all, who needs to read yet another review of McDonald’s or Sainsbury’s?
We see this occasionally, never – yet – from a client of ours, but about once a month a competitor (we assume) tries to sneak a negative review through Resolution, without success. We make it clear to all our clients that we have a ‘two strikes’ rule – first strike: warning, second strike: out. We couldn’t be more aware that the one thing that sets our reviews apart from mere testimonials and most other kinds of review is the fact that they can be relied upon by your potential customers; not just ‘ a bit’, not just ‘most of the time’ but all the time, one hundred per cent.
There’s no shortcut. If you want great reviews on your own website and anywhere else that influences your potential customers (Google for most, still TripAdvisor for many in hospitality) you have to get a system like Dialogue™ on board (you can’t verify your own reviews!) and then work hard at getting your clients to write reviews. It’s not impossible – see this success story.
What follows are actual numbers for an estate agent client (we have preserved their anonymity to spare their blushes). It was not always plain sailing, but once they began to see the results flowing they have not looked back.
Some salient facts about the business in question:
they have multiple offices
they have a spread of business across sales/lettings and new homes
That’s it – there is nothing else that differentiates them from any other agency apart from a consistently positive attitude towards reviews from both management and staff.
So – on to the results…
One branch currently has 81 Google reviews and counting!
Reviews to their own websites have averaged nearly ten (9.6) per month, per branch
Their most successful branch has over 350 reviews on its module
Re-posts to Google have averaged nearly three (2.7) per month, per branch
The company has converted over 28% of their reviews to Google
These re-posts have resulted in an average Google branch score of 4.7 out of 5.0
The company has received negative reviews at a rate of just under one in twenty; all but three of these have been resolved to both parties’ satisfaction, in private
Dear reader: we would like you to ask yourself two simple questions:
How would you feel if this business was a direct competitor?
Would you like your business to look as good as this?
Providing you and your staff are good at what you do, there is no reason you should not look just as good; because these numbers reflect a business that is professional (but not perfect), and has simply taken the view that potential clients take notice of what their existing clients have to say.
Even we sometimes fall into the trap of discussing reviews as some sort of abstract concept when that’s not at all how your potential clients see them. When people read reviews they are looking for reassurance.
Read this recent review…
…and then ask yourself some key questions:
How would I react if I were looking for an estate agent and read this review?
How would I react if I had been recommended this agent by a friend and read this review?
How would I react if I were unsure of which agent to choose and read this review?
How would I react if I were wary of estate agents in general and read this review?
So many HelpHound reviews are like this, partly because we encourage our clients to explain to their clients just why reviews are so important: to help future clients make a considered decision.
The review, chosen almost at random, tells the reader:
they were a ‘first time seller’
the transaction had been ‘handled superbly’
names of personnel who did so well
they were ‘trust[worthy]’, had ‘extensive knowledge’ and ‘answered questions straight away’
‘no time was wasted’
they were ‘efficient’, ‘friendly’ and ‘lovely to deal with’
a ‘very successful sale’ was achieved
So: does this review help anyone looking for an agent? Of course it does; it is reassuring in the extreme, even taken in isolation. In the context of the other 29 reviews on this agent’s home page it’s a sure-fire winner.
And in print (for those of you behind the pay-wall)…
There is a very serious message for service providers of any kind here; if financial advice can be dispensed by a computer, what’s to stop legal or medical advice being given in the same way? After all, online estate agencies, some of whom have sophisticated software to replace most of the human interaction in conventional estate agency, are growing more prolific by the day.
And before too many of you dismiss this as a ‘silly season story’ read the core of the article and then decide on a strategy to counter the ‘robo-advisers’.
There is no better way to convince a potential client that your ‘human touch’ is in their best interest (and therefore the best choice) than independently verified client opinions, or, as we better know them: reviews.
Dialogue™ should be a major plank in any business’s marketing strategy, no matter whether it’s used to enable it stand out against its current competitors, or any future ‘robo-competition’.
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.