This component asks whether wider public account and authority supports an accurate, useful account of the business. Complete it for the offerings, locations and customer situations in your assessment scope.
What to gather
Gather priority tourism listings, partner profiles, booking platforms, customer evidence and the external sources cited in your AI observations.
Carry out the review
Check the identity, offering, locations and supported claims. Record materially outdated descriptions and who can request a correction. Consider relevance and evidential support as well as the number of mentions.
Open the related practical guide or exercise.
Questions to answer
- WA1 — Is the business accurately represented on important destination, tourism or industry websites?
- WA2 — Are important business directories and official profiles accurate and consistent?
- WA3 — Do partner, distributor and booking-platform profiles describe the current offering correctly?
- WA4 — Is there credible customer evidence supporting important experience and performance claims?
- WA5 — Do reviews and public discussions provide useful evidence about the customer experience?
- WA6 — Does relevant media, editorial or comparison coverage reflect the current business?
- WA7 — Are the business identity, locations, offerings and major claims consistent across important external sources?
- WA8 — Are outdated or incorrect third-party descriptions identified and addressed with suitable evidence?
- WA9 — Do the sources cited in AI answers provide relevant support for the claims made?
Choose your scores
Use a whole-number score for each question and record supporting evidence. The examples below show how the levels apply to this component.
| Score | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| 1 | Required external profiles are absent or materially wrong, or important claims lack supporting evidence. |
| 2 | Some useful listings and customer evidence exist, but coverage, accuracy or follow-up is inconsistent. |
| 3 | Relevant external sources accurately describe the business, important claims have credible support and a repeatable correction process exists. |
| 4 | An owner reviews priority sources, investigates unsupported descriptions and tracks correction requests and outcomes. |
| 5 | Recurring customer and AI findings guide improvements to external information and supporting evidence, with subsequent review of what changed. |
Start at 3 and check whether the important requirement is implemented and repeatable. Use the lower score if a material part of the higher level is missing. Use U for checks still outstanding and N/A only where the requirement does not apply.
Record your result
In the assessment workbook, open Readiness → Wider public account and authority. For each question, retain the page or report, date checked, finding and next improvement. The workbook calculates the component average and shows evidence coverage.
Highlight questions scored 1 or 2 even when the average is higher. Give outstanding checks an owner. Return to the information foundations overview to continue the other components.