Expand section 2: listing integrity, temporary hours process, exposure craft, trusted-advisor tone

docs/DOP-BusinessReview_ty_grok_Aug062026.md

@@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ The operating documents are strong on philosophy, evidence rules, and process. W
 - What you will only recommend
 - What you will not touch
 
-Until that line is sharp, every engagement risks scope confusion, over-promising, or awkward conversations with the owner.
+The tone of the whole partnership is **trusted advisor**. Success depends on that. Owners should feel they are working with someone who understands these platforms at a professional level — not a junior clerk who only copies fields from one screen to another.
+
+Until the scope line is sharp *and* the advisor standard is explicit, every engagement risks confusion, over-promising, or a relationship that feels transactional instead of trusted.
 
 This document lists the open decisions in plain language.
 
@@ -66,21 +68,72 @@ Do **not** promise in Version 1:
 
 ---
 
-## 2. Keeping listings consistent across Google, Bing, Apple, Yelp, etc.
+## 2. Listings: integrity, temporary changes, and real platform expertise
 
 ### The problem
-Everyone expects Name, Address, and Phone to match. That part is straightforward.
+“Keep the listings consistent” sounds simple. It is not one job. There are three related jobs, and the service only works if all three are clear.
 
-Categories, services, special hours, attributes, and descriptions are **not** the same from platform to platform. Google’s list is not Bing’s list is not Apple’s list. There is no mapping of this in the current plan.
+### Two kinds of facts
 
-### Why it matters
-If you tell an owner “we keep your listings consistent,” they will assume more than Name/Address/Phone. When categories or services drift, you need a clear answer: was that in scope or not?
+**Stable facts (mostly set once, then watch for drift)**  
+Business name, primary address, primary phone, website URL, core weekly hours, main categories.  
+Once these are correct and aligned, the ongoing work is confirming they still match and catching accidental or third-party changes.
 
-### Decision still needed
-- For Version 1, is consistency limited to Name, Address, Phone, and basic hours?
-- Or do you also try to keep categories and services aligned — and if so, on which platforms?
+**Temporary / variant facts (need a real process)**  
+Holiday hours, special event hours, temporary closure for repairs or vacation, “reopening on [date],” seasonal hours.  
+If the owner tells Google they are closed for a week but Bing, Apple, the website, and the booking tool still show normal hours, customers get conflicting answers. That is exactly the quiet failure this service is meant to prevent.
 
-*(Not yet fully discussed.)*
+### Process for temporary changes (must be spelled out)
+
+1. **Owner notifies you once** — simple channel (text, email, short form). They should not have to log into five platforms. Example: “Closed July 14–20 for flooring. Normal hours resume July 21.”
+2. **You act on the platforms in scope** — update (or draft) the listings you manage; update or flag website hours if they are published; record the change and the end date.
+3. **Restore on the end date** — this is where most systems fail. Every temporary change carries a return date and a follow-up to put normal hours back and remove the temporary notice.
+4. **Report what was done** — what changed, where, when, and when it is scheduled to reverse.
+
+If you lack access on a platform, you prepare the exact changes and either the owner applies them or access is granted first.
+
+### The deeper layer: exposure craft (trusted advisor, not field clerk)
+
+Integrity (correct, aligned facts) is the floor.  
+**Exposure craft** is what a trusted advisor actually sells.
+
+That means professional judgment on:
+
+- Primary vs secondary category choices and how they affect discovery
+- A strong local business description — specific, credible, guideline-safe, not keyword-stuffed
+- Attributes worth completing vs noise
+- Service lists that match how customers actually search
+- Photos and basic profile completeness that support trust
+- How temporary and special hours should be handled so they help rather than confuse
+- Platform guideline boundaries (so “optimization” never becomes a suspension risk)
+
+Owners can tell the difference immediately: one vendor “updates the hours”; the other knows how Google Business Profile works in 2026 and can explain why one category choice is better than another.
+
+If the partnership is positioned as trusted advisor, the person delivering the service must hold that knowledge and keep it current. Platforms change. A static checklist from last year will quietly become wrong.
+
+### Scope boundary still required
+
+Expertise does not mean unlimited marketing work.
+
+**In scope when access and approval exist (Version 1 direction):**  
+Clear, guideline-safe listing improvements — categories, description, attributes, services, hours (including temporary), core profile completeness on the platforms you have agreed to manage.
+
+**Still out of scope or separately quoted:**  
+Ongoing social posts, ad campaigns, full brand rewrite, photography shoots, broad content marketing.
+
+When a recommendation involves judgment (not just “wrong phone → right phone”), it should come with a short plain-language rationale so the owner can decide with confidence.
+
+### Decisions still needed
+1. Which platforms are in scope for Version 1 for both ongoing integrity and temporary-hours updates? (Google only? Google + website? Google + Bing + Apple?)
+2. Is handling owner-reported temporary changes part of the standard retainer? (Recommendation: yes — high value, low frequency, directly prevents silent loss.)
+3. Notification method — one agreed way for the owner to report closures and special hours.
+4. End-date discipline — explicit rule that every temporary change has a return date and a restore step.
+5. State in the operating docs that listing work includes **exposure craft**, not only field matching — and that current platform knowledge is an operating requirement for anyone delivering the service.
+6. Edge of craft for Version 1 — exact list of what is included vs always separate (ties to section 4 and 7).
+
+### Plain-language promise to an owner (target tone)
+
+> You tell us once when hours change for a holiday, vacation, or temporary closure. We update the listings we manage and make sure the temporary notice is removed when you reopen. We also bring real judgment to categories, description, and profile setup — so the platforms work in your favor, not just “look filled in.” You should not have to become a Google Business Profile expert yourself.
 
 ---
 
@@ -111,6 +164,8 @@ Choosing better categories, rewriting the business description, writing service
 
 The “low-risk fix” rule is intentionally narrow (one simple field at a time). Anything richer sits in a gray zone.
 
+This section is tightly linked to section 2’s exposure craft. If DOP is the trusted advisor on listings, someone still has to produce or approve the words.
+
 ### Why it matters
 Without a clear rule, every non-trivial Google Business Profile improvement turns into a negotiation: “Are you writing this, or am I?”
 
@@ -121,7 +176,7 @@ Without a clear rule, every non-trivial Google Business Profile improvement turn
 
 Also still open: making “you must give us access to make changes” an explicit condition when you are expected to do the correcting (not just recommend).
 
-*(Not yet fully discussed.)*
+*(Not yet fully discussed — will be informed by the craft decisions in section 2.)*
 
 ---
 
@@ -131,7 +186,7 @@ Also still open: making “you must give us access to make changes” an explici
 Many of the biggest problems are closer to “fix once” than “watch forever.”  
 A report that mostly says “nothing broke this month” will not feel valuable to a lot of owners — especially early on, before they have seen a clear win.
 
-The model has stronger ongoing angles (platforms and AI change under the business; competitors move; new small failures appear; you take the monitoring burden off the owner). Those are real, but they are softer and need to be packaged honestly.
+The model has stronger ongoing angles (platforms and AI change under the business; competitors move; new small failures appear; temporary hours and reopenings; you take the monitoring burden off the owner; you bring ongoing judgment on how the platforms should be set). Those are real, but they need to be packaged honestly.
 
 ### Decision still needed
 - How the monthly service is described and priced so it does not rest only on “we watch for drift.”
@@ -181,15 +236,17 @@ That split is good. It is not yet sharp enough on the website and content side.
 | Watching server logs | Not in Version 1 |
 | Website monitoring level | Surface checks and consistency only; language must match that |
 | llms.txt (special file for AI) | Optional; not required for Version 1 |
+| Partnership tone | Trusted advisor — platform expertise and judgment are part of the offer, not optional polish |
+| Listing work | Includes both integrity (correct, aligned facts) and exposure craft (categories, description, attributes, services, hours done with professional judgment) |
+| Temporary hours / closures | Require an explicit process: owner notifies once, DOP updates in-scope surfaces, restore on end date |
 
 ---
 
 ## Suggested next step
 
-Finish the website-path section first (the four open decisions under section 1).  
-That is the area most likely to create confusion in a real engagement.
+Either lock the open decisions under section 2 (platforms in scope, temporary-change process as standard, notification method, end-date rule, exact edge of craft), or finish the four open decisions under section 1 (website path).
 
-Once that is locked in plain language, move through the remaining sections the same way: one clear decision at a time, written so a non-technical owner (and a future team member) can understand the boundary.
+Then continue through the remaining sections the same way: one clear decision at a time, written so a non-technical owner (and a future team member) can understand the boundary.
 
 ---