TL;DR
Ask each agency to explain one real page improvement, one technical issue and one reporting decision. Compare the evidence and responsibilities behind the proposal. Confirm service and location scope, approvals, ownership and handoff terms in writing before relying on broad promises.
Give every candidate the same problem
Choose a public service or location page that you are authorized to share. Ask the agency to describe the visitor’s task, identify one material weakness and outline a useful correction. Do not require unpaid implementation; a focused explanation is enough to assess its reasoning.
Then ask how the agency would verify the facts and determine whether the correction works. This reveals more than a large sample library with no explanation of who reviewed it.
Google’s guidance on hiring SEO help recommends asking about relevant experience, communication, expected results and measurement. It also encourages understanding the proposed changes. Google’s hiring guide is a useful reference alongside your own commercial review.
Score the evidence, not the sales vocabulary
Use the same questions across candidates:
| Area | Ask to see or explain | Weak answer to investigate |
|---|---|---|
| Work quality | A specific before-and-after page decision | Only an article count |
| Technical judgment | Evidence supporting a proposed repair | A generic score without diagnosis |
| Measurement | Questions, dates, denominators and saved observations | An unexplained visibility percentage |
| Factual review | Named roles for operations and specialist approval | “AI handles accuracy” |
| Continuity | Ownership, access and handoff process | Terms left for later |
Mark each item as demonstrated, partly explained or unresolved. Avoid a weighted total that makes a serious unresolved ownership question disappear beneath attractive presentation scores.
Ask what the agency can control
An agency can propose work, execute within its access, document changes and report observations. Keep those deliverables separate from platform outcomes. Google explicitly says that meeting its requirements does not guarantee indexing or serving in Search, including its AI features. Google’s AI features guidance defines that limit. Ask what happens when the practice is mentioned inaccurately, a directory refuses a correction or the measurement method changes.
Request a sample report with its status clearly labeled: actual, anonymized or hypothetical. If it uses client results, ask what the evidence supports and whether the example is relevant to your situation. Do not accept an illustrative chart as proof of achieved outcomes.
Assess reporting through the insights, evidence and discussion provided. Ask whether a client software login is included rather than assuming access from a demonstration.
Put operational responsibilities into the proposal
Confirm which services and locations are included, who approves facts, who implements changes and what access is needed. Identify separate work such as a website rebuild, paid advertising or a scheduling integration. Review how additional work is requested and priced.
Ask who owns the domain, content, accounts and deliverable files, and what happens at handoff. Have an appropriate professional review commercial terms when needed; a marketing checklist is not a substitute for agreement review.
If a proposal offers more articles but leaves factual review unresolved, mark that dependency before comparing quantity. Evaluate which proposal addresses the actual problem, supplies evidence for its recommendations and assigns responsibilities the practice can maintain.
Frequently asked questions
Is a guaranteed recommendation a useful differentiator?
Do not use an unsupported recommendation promise as your selection criterion. Ask for specific work, transparent measurement and realistic limits; Google’s documented lack of guaranteed indexing or serving is a concrete reason to challenge blanket promises.
Should we choose only an agency with our exact specialty?
Relevant experience helps, but inspect the actual work and review process. A specialty label does not establish factual quality, technical skill or clear communication.