Genuine Reciprocal Google Places Reviews, is that OK?

[Rosewood]

I have a client who works with other businesses, is it OK to have reciprocal reviews going on, they would be genuine reviews both both sides as they work for each other.

Is that OK?

Is it best for my client to use the Google Account that holds their Google Places page for doing the reviews?

Or should they have a separate account for writing reviews, not associated with their business?

I would appreciate your thoughts on this please?

Many thanks

Leo

[AlanBleiweiss]

The danger of reciprocal reviews is being flagged because they're potentially unnatural.  So if there's a one to one parity (every business that reviews another business gets a review by every one of those businesses), that's a serious concern to avoid happening. Same goes for reciprocal reviews that are always the same (4 stars each way, for example).  Too easily spotted as suspicious.

Also, if there's a concerted effort and "conspiracy" to get reviews generated (a bunch of companies join a pool of companies to "agree to review each other"), that could lead to unnatural results.  So it's a very cautious process to even consider.

The other issue is - if a business that participates only or mostly only reviews other businesses in that group, that's highly suspect.  Reviews should be spread out across a wide swath of other businesses NOT in the group, and every participant would need to have their own set of reviews to other outside businesses so no unnatural pattern emerges.

Other than that, it's perfectly valid to review other businesses when you've genuinely done business with them.

It's also perfectly valid for an official business account to review other businesses, since they're business to business transactions.  And thus, no need to have a separate account just for the sake of reviews.  (All reviews should be from an account that has a holistic profile regarding the activity on the account.  It shouldn't be mostly, or all reviews and no other activity).

[EGOL]

Ask customers to do it.  Print on receipts, mailings, email footer, etc.

[MiriamEllis]

Hi Leo,

I second Alan's very well-stated concerns on this. Google has this habit of letting things get by them for months or even years, but it's my opinion that they are quick to spot odd looking activity when they actually take the time to look. I believe what you are considering could look odd.

It's perfectly fine for a business owner to use his Places account to leave reviews of businesses with which he has enjoyed transactions, but I, personally, would steer clear of making some sort of organized, reciprocal effort out of this. In Google's dream world (and Yelp's, etc.) reviews are a spontaneous and voluntary action on the part of the customer. They are not the outcome of an organized deal. That being said, I do understand how critical reviews have become, including their number and quality, to the visible reputation and bottom line of so many businesses and it's truly tempting to team up with other business owners who are grappling with this powerful and still-relatively-new monster to give business a boost in a tough economy. In the long run, though, I think the worry probably wouldn't be worth the potential benefits. At least, it wouldn't for me.

Thanks for asking such a good question.

[MiriamEllis]

Hey Egol,

If for Google, yes. For others (read Yelp) this is a weird no-no. Nice to see you here today!

[EGOL]

Thanks for this information.

I have seen "leave a review about your transaction at......." on some of documents that I have received.

Better check the terms of use anytime a person wants to do this.

[AlanBleiweiss]

yeah it's annoying that Yelp specifically states it's against their TOS to actively solicit reviews this way, yet they are perfectly happy if you display their "We Yelp" stickers all over the place.

And oddly, places like the BBB's stand-alone "Trust-Link" reviews site is the exact opposite. They encourage business owners to seek reviews.

[MiriamEllis]

I find that Google's review policies are sort of normal, in that they are similar to the policies of others, but Yelp's are sometimes off in a corner by themselves. For example, here's a line from Yelp's TOS:

Violate our Content Guidelines, for example, by writing a fake or defamatory review, trading reviews with other businesses, or compensating someone or being compensated to write or remove a review;

(emphasis mine)

So, Yelp would explicitly frown on the hypothetical strategy Leo has put forward, whereas, Google is less clear on this. Interesting stuff.

[AlanBleiweiss]

Google is less clear most likely because they're still mostly stuck in the belief that they shouldn't reveal clarity and expect site owners to figure it out.  Which inevitably leads, every year, to more and more "what used to be acceptable isn't" complaints.

Except some tactics never were acceptable and Google's just now getting around to addressing some that they previously never considered or never got a chance to.

My latest effort is all about "does this look natural".  That of course, is then filtered through "does this look natural as Google views things in their algorithmic attempt to emulate a human's perspective.

[MiriamEllis]

And one of the chief difficulties between the local business crowd and Google arises, I believe, from Google's founding mindset of secretiveness. While understandably essential to protecting their mystery algo, it's quite another matter to publish such critical data about real local businesses while keep one hand behind one's back. I don't believe I've ever had a local business owner tell me, "I love Google." They know Google is important, but they don't love them.