Skip to main content

Getting Ready

Reports run asynchronously. A working session that tries to generate five reports from scratch will run long, run out of time, or both — do the reporting before the team is in the room.

This is the single biggest structural point in how this program runs: the working session is where your team interprets a baseline together, not where you build one from a blank slate. Everything on this page happens before that session starts.

Internal Alignment Questions​

Answer these before scheduling your first working session — they shape what you prepare and who needs to be in the room:

  1. Is our ai12z chatbot live yet? If yes, how long has it been live, and roughly how many conversations does it see per month?
  2. What's our primary domain, and what plan tier are we on? (Some reports require Business Plus or higher — check current requirements before promising a report to leadership.)
  3. Who are our top 3–5 named competitors?
  4. What are the 5–10 questions we most want a prospective buyer to get a good answer to, from an AI assistant or from our own site?
  5. Which pages matter most for this baseline — pricing, a flagship product page, a comparison page, our trust/security page?
  6. Has anyone on the team already looked at AI visibility, SEO, or GEO tooling? What did they find?
  7. Who owns follow-through after this session — who's the internal owner for the 30-day roadmap?
  8. Who else needs to be in the room — content, SEO, dev/IT (for publishing llms.txt or schema changes), and anyone who owns brand/PR presence?

Required Pre-Work, by Starting Point​

StepJust Getting StartedHave Usage History
Confirm brand name, domain, and plan tier in Organization Settings✅✅
Build the question list from intake answers✅Use conversation data instead, if available
Run Citation Monitor's initial baseline✅ (this is the Week 1 baseline — see 30-Day Roadmap)✅
Run Agent-Readiness, Site-Wide Sweep, AI Footprint✅✅
Run URL Analysis on 3–5 priority pages✅✅
Run Q&A Analysis, pull Q&A InsightsNot available yet✅
Pull current AI Referral Analytics readingNot available yet✅

Lead time: reports run as background jobs, not instantly. Submit them at least 1–2 business days before the session — Citation Monitor and AI Footprint in particular can take longer with a full competitor set. Build this into your scheduling, not into the session agenda.

Internal Data Privacy​

If your session shows real chatbot transcripts, visitor details, or referral events (once you have usage history):

  • Redact PII before the session, not live on screen. Names, emails, phone numbers, and IP addresses shown in a Q&A Insights conversation view or an AI Referral Analytics event feed should be blurred or replaced in advance if you plan to screenshot or project them, especially for a leadership-facing readout.
  • Confirm who's in the room before showing visitor-level data. A working session with your core team is different from a leadership review — check what's appropriate for the audience before you screen-share.
  • When in doubt, use the fallback example below instead of live data.

Fallback Example Dataset​

Use these when you don't have your own data yet, or when presenting to a wider internal audience before you're ready to show live numbers — they're real, previously-published examples referenced throughout this guide, not fabricated numbers:

  • Citation Monitor: a real run scored 32/100 ("Emerging"), cited only on its own branded query, with a competitor (Ada) holding 19% share of voice and winning all three uncited category queries
  • URL Analysis: a real trust-center page scored 52.4/100 — ranked reasonably in Google, but zero FAQ schema, no visible dates, vague claims like "industry-standard encryption" instead of named standards
  • Agent-Readiness: a real audit scored 68/100 ("Mostly Ready") — strong on robots.txt and sitemap, zero on llms.txt, with the report generating a complete, ready-to-publish starter file from the site's own real pages
  • AI Footprint: a real audit scored 48/100 with zero Wikipedia presence and zero confirmed review-platform listings
  • GEO Trend Comparison: a real two-period comparison showed GEO Score rising 76.0 → 78.0 and IDK rate falling 12.6% → 1.8%, while competitive intent simultaneously rose — a useful example of the loop catching a new problem, not just confirming a win

Deliverable Template​

Don't invent a new format each cycle — every deliverable in this guide shares one structure, the same Critical/High/Medium/Low tiering the real Consolidated Action Plan report already produces:

FieldDescription
ActionThe specific, concrete fix
SourceWhich report flagged it
ImpactCritical / High / Medium / Low
EffortLow / Medium / High
OwnerWho on the team is responsible
TimelineWhich week of the 30-day roadmap it falls in
Success metricWhat score or number should move, and by when it gets re-checked

Add the Owner, Timeline, and Success Metric columns to whatever export or PDF you circulate internally — the raw report output doesn't include them, and they're what turns a findings list into an actual accountable plan.

Last updated on