Assessment leads to specific responses, not a general score
The audit highlights effective and problematic responses so the team can improve its guidelines based on its own history.
Reviews, comments and hotel responses
The collection includes guest comments, hotel responses, response times, sources and the subsequent handling of more complex cases.
Examples and rules to improve
AI identifies a lack of reference to specific points, inconsistent promises, repetitive formulas and examples of responses that bring the matter to a proper close.
- coverage and response time
- good and problematic examples
- rules requiring clarification
A shared standard for assessing all public responses
The audit covers responses prepared by employees and previous tools. It assesses each response against the original comment, the hotel’s knowledge and the agreed standard.
Measures handling
It checks which comments received a response and how long they waited for one.
Assesses quality
It analyses factual accuracy, tone, specificity and how challenging cases are handled.
Shows examples
Each finding is linked to a specific comment and hotel response.
How does the response audit work?
Pairing responses
The system links reviews and comments to the relevant brand responses.
Assessing criteria
AI checks timing, coverage, facts, tone, repetition and the next step.
Selecting examples
The report highlights exemplary, unclear and problematic responses, with reasons.
Change list
Findings are fed into the calibration and review of subsequent responses.
The response is assessed together with the original comment
Additional hotel knowledge can help confirm whether the information used was correct. Without a source, the audit marks a fact as impossible to verify.
What does AI use?
- reviews and public comments
- hotel responses with dates
- statuses and history of complex cases
- optional sources of property knowledge
What does the team receive?
- coverage and response time
- examples of good and problematic responses
- rules requiring clarification
The audit assesses the response, not the employee
The aim is to improve the brand’s shared rules and processes. The report should take into account the context available at the time.
The team selects the sample and audit criteria, reviews the examples and decides which findings will change the response standard.
The module does not publish or automatically amend historical responses, and does not draw conclusions about an individual’s work without context.
A clear basis for improving responses
The hotel knows which types of comments most often received no response.
Every assessment leads back to the material it was based on.
Recurring issues can be turned into calibration and review requirements.
The reputation panel provides a history of public conversations
Additional documents and hotel knowledge can help verify the facts used in responses.
Related process elements
Frequently asked questions
Does the audit cover employee and AI responses?
Yes. The same standard can be applied to all public brand responses.
Does it show specific errors?
Yes. It identifies the passage, criterion, original comment and suggested direction for improvement.
Does it measure response time?
Yes, if the panel has the publication dates of the comment and response.
Does it change communication rules itself?
No. Findings are passed to the team and the Response Calibration module.