Rewrite §2.5: two-phase owner pacing (Phase A correction plan, Phase B ongoing change management) as gap analysis

docs/DOP-BusinessReview_ty_grok_Aug062026.md

@@ -108,16 +108,42 @@ The website is another surface for the same public facts. Name, address, phone,
 
 This is **not** website monitoring (section 1). It is consistency of content with the rest of public presence. Especially important for ChatGPT-class systems that lean on the open web.
 
-### 2.5 Responsibility (RACI) — one model for facts and wording
+### 2.5 How the work is paced for the owner
 
-| Role | Responsibility |
-|------|----------------|
-| **Owner** | Supplies true facts; notifies temporary changes; **approves** wording and material listing changes |
-| **DOP** | Monitors; drafts recommendations and listing copy (informed by craft + light competitive context); **implements** on in-scope platforms when access is granted |
-| **Access** | Prerequisite for implementation — not for diagnosis or recommendations |
+The current plan is clear on **control**: evidence, approval before publish, low-risk fixes, and access before changes. What it does not yet spell out is **how the engagement feels for the owner** over time.
 
-Default for listing copy: **DOP drafts → owner approves → DOP implements (access required).**  
-Same access philosophy covers field corrections and temporary hours.
+That gap matters. Without it, the service can feel either too heavy (owner in every decision) or too vague (unclear when setup ends and what happens when something changes).
+
+**Two phases**
+
+**Phase A — Initial corrective work**  
+Up front, you and the owner work from a structured correction plan: what is wrong, what should be true, what copy and profile choices are recommended, what photos or other decisions are needed, and in what order updates go live. This takes real owner attention. That is intentional. The foundation has to be right once so the ongoing work can stay light.
+
+The plan does not yet define this as a formal deliverable. **Work item:** a Correction Plan template (findings, target state, owner decisions, access required, publish sequence, and a clear definition of “setup is done”).
+
+**Phase B — Ongoing change management**  
+After setup, most changes are seasonal or one-off: holiday hours, a temporary closure, a phone change, a service add or drop — anything that should update the business’s **public presence** (the listings and the matching facts on the website, where that is in scope).
+
+The owner should not manage five platforms. They notify once. You handle the rest on the surfaces you manage, including putting normal hours back when a temporary change ends.
+
+The plan acknowledges temporary hours in spirit but does not yet define intake, handoff, or speed. **Work items:** one primary way for the owner to notify you; what a complete notice includes (especially end dates); and written turnaround expectations so a holiday change does not go live a day late.
+
+**Who does what (after the shape is clear)**
+
+| Who | Role |
+|-----|------|
+| **Owner** | Confirms true facts during setup. Approves the correction plan and material wording. Later: sends a short notice when something must change. Approves only when the change is more than a straightforward factual or temporary update. |
+| **DOP** | Builds the correction plan with the owner. Monitors. Drafts and, with access, publishes on agreed surfaces. Restores temporary changes on the end date. Reports what was done. |
+
+**Still open (so this section is not half-finished)**
+
+1. Exact Correction Plan template fields and definition of done for Phase A  
+2. Primary notify channel for Phase B (and what “complete enough to act” means)  
+3. Turnaround targets: acknowledge, draft, execute, restore  
+4. Which changes, after Phase A, can run without per-item approval when the notice is complete  
+5. Whether website content updates stay inside ongoing public presence or are always separate  
+
+Until those are decided, control is documented; owner-facing pacing is not.
 
 ### 2.6 AI sampling (sub-bullet under public presence)
 
@@ -128,12 +154,14 @@ Light checks against ChatGPT and Gemini (optional Claude): a few realistic local
 ### 2.7 Decisions still needed
 1. Platforms in scope for V1 (integrity + temporary hours)  
 2. Temporary-change handling as standard retainer work? (Recommendation: yes)  
-3. Notification method  
+3. Notification method (ties to Phase B intake)  
 4. End-date restore as hard rule  
-5. Confirm RACI default above (draft / approve / implement / access)  
-6. Website content consistency: standard in public-presence work? How deep (visible text vs structured data)?  
-7. AI sampling method, frequency, owner language  
-8. Foursquare / Bing Places hygiene: MVP awareness vs post-MVP depth  
+5. Correction Plan template + Phase A definition of done  
+6. Phase B turnaround targets  
+7. Standing authority after Phase A (what runs without per-item approval)  
+8. Website content consistency: standard in public-presence work? How deep (visible text vs structured data)?  
+9. AI sampling method, frequency, owner language  
+10. Foursquare / Bing Places hygiene: MVP awareness vs post-MVP depth  
 
 ---
 
@@ -142,7 +170,7 @@ Light checks against ChatGPT and Gemini (optional Claude): a few realistic local
 ### The problem
 Many high-impact issues are closer to “fix once” than “watch forever.” A monthly report that only says “nothing broke” will not feel valuable — especially before the owner has seen a clear win.
 
-Real ongoing angles: platforms and AI change under the business; temporary hours and reopenings; competitors’ public claims shift; small failures appear; you carry the monitoring burden; you keep public facts trustworthy, consistent, and discoverable for people and AI.
+Real ongoing angles: platforms and AI change under the business; temporary hours and reopenings; competitors’ public claims shift; small failures appear; you carry the monitoring burden; you keep public facts trustworthy, consistent, and discoverable for people and AI. Honest packaging should also reflect the two-phase shape in §2.5: real attention during setup, light touch after.
 
 ### Decisions still needed
 1. How the monthly service is described and priced so it does not rest only on drift watching  
@@ -169,7 +197,7 @@ Real ongoing angles: platforms and AI change under the business; temporary hours
 | Siri / Apple | Local-data surface via Apple Business Connect — not top-3 chatbot |
 | Listing work | Integrity + exposure craft |
 | Temporary hours | Notify once → update in-scope → restore on end date |
-| Content / facts RACI (direction) | Owner supplies facts & approves wording; DOP drafts & implements with access |
+| Owner pacing (direction) | Two phases: Phase A structured correction plan (heavier, joint); Phase B ongoing change management of public presence (owner notifies once; DOP executes). Control exists in the plan; pacing, intake, SLAs, and Phase A template are still gaps. |
 | Competitive intel | Light input to drafts; not a V1 product |
 | AI sampling | Sub-bullet under public presence; diagnostic only |
 | MVP focus | GBP craft, website content consistency, NAP consistency, temporary-hours discipline, light AI diagnostics |
@@ -179,7 +207,7 @@ Real ongoing angles: platforms and AI change under the business; temporary hours
 
 ## Suggested next step
 
-Lock the open decisions under **§1** (website monitoring checklist and remediation) and **§2** (platforms, temporary process, RACI confirmation, website content depth, AI sampling method), then finish **§3** packaging so included vs separate is unambiguous.
+Lock the open decisions under **§1** (website monitoring checklist and remediation) and **§2** (platforms, Phase A Correction Plan template, Phase B intake and turnaround targets, standing authority, website content depth, AI sampling method), then finish **§3** packaging so included vs separate is unambiguous.
 
 ---