GEO Program Planning Templates and 90-Day Launch Guide

Use these six templates to authorize a GEO program, set its boundaries, assign people and resources, choose the next work, and run the first 90 days. They put the planning methods in Chapters 2, 7, 19, and 20 into working documents.

Replace text in square brackets with the firm’s decisions. Duplicate rows or work-item records as needed. Mark an unresolved field “Pending,” name its owner, and give it a decision date. Keep one current version of each record and retain earlier approvals. All filled examples, rates, and estimates are hypothetical.

Complete A.1–A.4 together, then use A.5 to select work that fits the approved capacity. A.6 turns those commitments into a launch calendar. One person may hold several roles; the responsibilities still need to be explicit.

Template	Decision it records
A.1 Program charter	Why the program exists, what is authorized, and when leadership will decide what follows.
A.2 Scope	Which services, audiences, markets, assets, and AI experiences the initial work covers.
A.3 Responsibilities	Who delivers, reviews, approves, implements, and maintains the work—and when they are available.
A.4 Budget	The external spending and internal capacity authorized, used, committed, and forecast.
A.5 Prioritization	Which work comes next, why it matters, and whether it is ready to proceed.
A.6 90-day launch	What will be delivered, when decisions will be made, and how the next investment will be assessed.

A.1 Program charter

The sponsor and program owner complete the charter together. Keep the approved charter to approximately one page by referring to the detailed scope, responsibility, and budget records. It should settle a practical question: what work has leadership authorized, for whom, with which resources?

Charter template

Field	Entry to complete
Program and period	[Program name / ID; charter version; start date; end date]
Sponsor and program owner	[Named sponsor]; [named program owner]
Business purpose	Help [client or referrer] assess [service] when deciding [specific buying or referral decision], because [business reason].
Primary objective	[Accurate representation / relevant consideration / qualified opportunities]. Supporting objective: [ ].
Approved scope	[One-sentence boundary; A.2 version]. Initial exclusions: [ ].
Delivery commitments	By [date], complete [inspectable outputs] to [acceptance criteria]. Record detailed items in A.5 and A.6.
Evaluation	[Measures, baseline record, and evaluation-rule reference]. Rule-setting owner and deadline: [ ]. Investment review: [date].
Resources and authority	[A.3 capacity record; A.4 budget version]. The owner may authorize [defined decisions] within [limits]. Sponsor decides [scope/resource changes].
Professional and ethical standards	Use supported claims, accurate limitations, permitted disclosures, and honest attribution. Apply the firm’s publication review. Exclude fabricated evidence, impersonation, concealed promotional instructions to AI systems, and undisclosed paid endorsements.
Dependencies and unknowns	[Critical unresolved facts, evidence, permissions, access, or staffing; owner and resolution date for each]
Approval	[Sponsor name; decision; date; exact charter version; conditions]. Program owner’s acceptance: [name/date].

Charter approval authorizes the defined program and resources. Public material still requires the applicable professional review, evidence checks, and permissions. An agency brief should carry the same boundaries.

Objective and evidence worksheet

Choose the primary objective before starting. Establish the baseline before setting numerical answer-improvement targets, then record the evaluation rule before making the planned changes being evaluated. Correct urgent material errors promptly and document their effect on the comparison.

Evidence	Complete these fields
Operating	Commitment: [ ]. Completion evidence: [ ]. Owner: [ ]. Due date: [ ]. Example: approved service information published, checked, and assigned a maintenance owner.
Representation	Measure and definition: [ ]. Question group and AI experience: [ ]. Baseline/counts: [ ]. Desired change and rationale: [ ]. Review date: [ ].
Commercial	Qualified-opportunity definition: [ ]. Intake/CRM record: [ ]. Reported AI involvement and other influences: [ ]. Review period and owner: [ ].

Record what the firm can verify about completed work separately from changes observed in answers and business results. A launch can complete its planned work while the evidence of wider effects remains uncertain.

Examples of focused objectives

Consulting: Help private-equity operating partners assess the firm’s post-acquisition operating-model service by making its deliverables, implementation role, and relevant experience clear.
Accounting: Help owners evaluate the outsourced monthly accounting service by clarifying reporting responsibilities, onboarding requirements, and the boundary between this service and audit work.
Law: Help in-house counsel assess the employment-law practice by accurately explaining its services, responsible professionals, jurisdictional coverage, and matters requiring direct confirmation.

For each objective, add the approved market, responsible practice, primary evidence measure, and review date. A statement such as “be recommended more often” needs these details before it can guide work.

A.2 Scope

The program owner prepares the scope with the practice leader and the people who verify local service facts. Use a separate scope record where the delivery entity, service, jurisdiction, or language creates materially different responsibilities.

Scope statement

Field	Entry to complete
Record control	[Program ID; scope version; owner; approval date; planning period]
Scope sentence	We will examine and improve how [selected AI experiences] describe and consider [named entity and service] for [client/referrer group] facing [need or decision] in [market], using [languages].

Scope worksheet

Dimension	Included in this period	Excluded, limited, or pending
Provider	[Legal/delivery entity; brand; practice leader]	[Affiliates or network members whose capability is outside this scope]
Service	[Actual engagement; deliverables; responsibilities]	[Related services and material engagement exclusions]
Audience	[Client/referrer roles; industries; relevant client characteristics]	[Situations the firm cannot or does not intend to serve]
Geography	[Client locations; work locations; actual delivery reach]	[Unconfirmed markets or office/service claims]
Jurisdiction and language	[Applicable professional coverage; supported and reviewable languages]	[Restrictions; unapproved jurisdictional or language extensions]
Questions	[Priority buying/referral decisions; question-map reference]	[Question families deferred; reasons]
AI experiences	[Product, interface, mode, and monitoring-record reference]	[Experiences untested or outside the current observation plan]
Owned information	[Sites, pages, profiles, downloads, and approved evidence to assess]	[Systems or assets outside this launch]
Outside representation	[Relevant directories, associations, or publications to inspect/contact]	[Activities not authorized; matters controlled by outside editors]
Ongoing service	[Maintenance owners; review triggers; inquiry route and intake owner]	[Unfunded maintenance or unresolved intake responsibilities]

Keep audience location, office location, delivery reach, and professional authorization distinct. Record the actual arrangement. A shared network brand should not assign one member’s services or project history to every member.

The asset list may begin as a list to inspect. Confirm which assets need revision after diagnosis. For an external correction, the controllable deliverable is a supported request and documented follow-up; the outside publisher decides whether and when to change its material.

Scope change request

Field	Entry to complete
Request	[Change ID; requester; date; current scope version]
Proposed change and reason	[Addition, removal, or revision; client/business need; supporting evidence]
Consequences	[Added or released hours by role; external cost; maintenance; affected milestones; work displaced]
Conditions to resolve	[Service capability, evidence, permissions, reviewer, technical or measurement dependencies; owners/dates]
Decision and authority	[Approve / revise / defer / decline]; [authorized decision-maker; date; reason; conditions]
Effective records	[New scope version and effective date; corresponding A.3, A.4, A.5, and A.6 updates]

Route material factual errors outside the growth scope to the responsible owner promptly. Record that referral without silently adding the entire practice or market to the launch.

Accounting example

Include outsourced management accounting for owner-managed manufacturers served by the named entity, covering monthly reporting and onboarding in English. Exclude statutory audit, tax advice, and overseas service claims from this launch. Route inquiries to the service leader for fit and capacity review. If another partner requests tax content, record the proposed scope change and its reviewer hours before adding it to the schedule.

A.3 Responsibilities and capacity

Assign named people to decisions and work. The sponsor authorizes priorities and resources; the program owner coordinates delivery. Professional review and publication authority remain explicit. A small firm can put the same name in several rows.

Responsibility register

Program ID and period: [ ]. Register owner/version: [ ]. Fill each “Name” field with one person. Where policy requires several approvals, identify each required approval in the individual work-item record.

Responsibility	Named owner	Work or authority
Executive sponsor	[Name]	Approve purpose, scope, resources, major changes, and continued investment; resolve competing practice priorities.
Program owner	[Name]	Maintain backlog, calendar, budget, dependencies, evidence, suppliers, and decision records; escalate unresolved issues.
Practice facts and expertise	[Name]	Verify service scope, professional experience, credentials, technical claims, and material qualifications; secure expert participation.
Publication approval	[Name]	Confirm required professional review and permission checks; authorize the identified version for release.
Writing and editing	[Name]	Prepare material from approved source information; preserve qualifications; resolve comments and record changes.
Website and access	[Name]	Implement approved changes; verify the published version, relevant access settings, links, and inquiry route.
Measurement	[Name]	Maintain the collection specification, saved observations, quality checks, interpretation, and documented method changes.
Intake and business development	[Name]	Record inquiry fit, reported discovery/evaluation influences, and progress using the firm’s normal acceptance process.
Maintenance	[Name]	Keep the asset-owner register current; assign review triggers and corrections; arrange handovers.

For a regional or international firm, add the named local fact reviewer where needed. Suppliers may carry out work; keep an identified person at the firm responsible for the brief, access, acceptance, and records.

Capacity commitment

Record availability after client work, leave, and other commitments. Include expert review, routine monitoring, maintenance, and coordination. Hours already reserved here must not be counted again as spare capacity.

Person and responsibility	Committed hours or slots	Period, backup, and acceptance
[Name / responsibility]	[Hours per cycle, or dated review slots]	[Dates; backup/escalation; person’s acceptance date]
[Name / responsibility]	[Hours per cycle, or dated review slots]	[Dates; backup/escalation; person’s acceptance date]
[Name / responsibility]	[Hours per cycle, or dated review slots]	[Dates; backup/escalation; person’s acceptance date]

Field	Entry to complete
Cycle capacity check	For [period]: available hours by role [ ]; routine commitments [ ]; selected work [ ]; correction/contingency allowance [ ]; remaining capacity [ ].
Approval turnaround	[Reviewer; material covered; scheduled slot or agreed response time; backup; escalation date/contact]
Decision limits	Program owner can [ ]. Sponsor must decide [ ]. Professional approval is required from [ ] for [ ].
Overdue or urgent work	[Who receives an alert; when; who can narrow/reschedule work; who handles urgent correction].
Handover	[Location and custodian of firm-owned accounts, source records, approvals, observations, and supplier exports]

For any delegated decision, retain: [decision/item ID; exact version; decision-maker; approve/revise/decline; date; conditions; record location]. An unanswered request remains pending. Escalation resolves timing, capacity, or authority; it does not supply missing professional approval.

Law firm example

The marketing manager coordinates an employment-law page update. The practice partner verifies its service and jurisdictional statements. The designated publication reviewer checks proposed matter references and permissions, then approves the identified version. The website editor publishes that version and verifies it. If the partner misses the reserved review slot, the program owner reschedules or narrows the release and records the decision.

A.4 Budget

Build the budget from the selected work and the people needed to complete it. Track external expenditure and internal capacity separately, then show the combined resource commitment. The budget owner updates the forecast; the sponsor approves expenditure and capacity within the authority recorded in the charter.

Budget assumptions

Field	Entry to complete
Control information	[Program ID; scope/budget versions; period; currency; forecast date; owner; approver]
Cost convention	[Tax treatment; cost-recognition basis; treatment of shared tools and existing retainers]. Apply the same basis to plan, actuals, and forecast.
Internal valuation	[Hourly cost convention and what it includes; rates by role/person]. Record each hour once.
Reserve and authority	[External reserve; internal capacity reserve; who may allocate each; approval limits]
Payment and contract timing	[Payment dates and amounts; full minimum contractual commitment; costs beyond this period; renewal and cancellation deadlines]
Linked capacity	[A.3 reference; named people; confirmed availability; unresolved constraints]

In the tables below, actual expenditure means cost for work or services already received, including unpaid invoices. Future committed expenditure covers remaining obligations in the budget period. Uncommitted forecast covers further expected spending for the approved work. Keep these categories mutually exclusive. Record payment timing separately where it differs.

External expenditure template

Item / basis	Base plan	Actual	Future committed	Uncommitted forecast	Total forecast
[One-time setup]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
[Recurring tools: quantity × rate]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
[Production / specialist support]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
[Other approved item]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
Total	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]

Total forecast = actual + future committed + uncommitted forecast. Forecast overrun = total forecast − base plan. A positive result is above plan. Move a cost between categories as work progresses; an invoice already included in actuals must not also remain in commitments.

Identify the budget-line owner and supplier/contract reference for each external item: [ ]. Show the whole minimum contract commitment when a subscription or agreement extends beyond the launch. The 90-day allocation alone does not describe the obligation being authorized.

Internal capacity template

Person / role	Rate	Planned hours	Hours used	Forecast hours remaining	Forecast cost
[Program coordination]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
[Professional input/review]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
[Website implementation]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
[Measurement / other work]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]
Total	—	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]	[ ]

Planned internal cost = planned hours × stated rate. Forecast internal cost = (hours used + forecast hours remaining) × stated rate. Sum costs across rows. Include drafting, coordination, review, measurement, and maintenance wherever the firm performs them; add rows as needed. Confirm the remaining hours with the people in A.3. Estimate the remaining work afresh; do not simply subtract hours used from planned hours.

Use a consistent internal costing convention. If a person performs several functions, split that person’s time across the rows. An allocation to existing staff time is a capacity commitment even when it creates no additional payroll payment.

Approval and forecast summary

Decision field	Amount or record
Base external plan / base internal valuation	[ ] / [ ]
Total base resource plan	[External base + internal base]
Reserve held outside the base plan	[External amount; internal amount; allocation authority]
Whole-program resource ceiling	[Base resource plan + approved reserve]
Separate external ceiling and capacity limits	[External ceiling; internal limits and hours by role]
Current total forecast	[External forecast + internal forecast]
Overrun against base / headroom under ceiling	[Forecast − base] / [ceiling − forecast]
Reserve allocation or change required	[Amount; purpose; affected hours; decision-maker/date]
Action and approval record	[Re-scope / reschedule / authorize revised resources; exact version; conditions]

The forecast estimates expected cost; the approval record establishes authority. Keep the original base plan visible when allocating reserves. Add only expected costs to the forecast, rather than automatically adding the full unused reserve. Check external spending and role-specific capacity limits as well as the combined ceiling.

Worked example: day-60 forecast

Assume a 90-day budget in USD with three monthly tool charges, stated internal rates, and no taxes in the illustration. The base plan is $6,000 of external expenditure plus $9,000 of internal time. The sponsor holds an additional $500 external reserve and $1,000 internal reserve, with approval required before allocation.

External item	Base plan	Actual	Future committed	Uncommitted forecast	Total forecast
One-time setup	$2,400	$2,400	$0	$0	$2,400
Tools: 3 × $400	$1,200	$800	$400	$0	$1,200
Production support	$2,400	$1,200	$1,000	$500	$2,700
Total	$6,000	$4,400	$1,400	$500	$6,300

Internal role	Rate	Planned hours	Hours used	Forecast hours remaining	Forecast cost
Program coordination	$100	40	28	14	$4,200
Professional review	$150	20	12	10	$3,300
Website	$100	10	8	2	$1,000
Measurement	$100	10	6	6	$1,200
Total	—	80	54	32	$9,700

The external forecast is $6,300. The internal forecast is $9,700, comprising $6,000 already used and $3,700 remaining. The combined forecast is $16,000, which is $1,000 above the $15,000 base plan and $500 below the $16,500 ceiling.

The decision is whether to allocate $300 of external reserve and $700 of internal reserve. Confirm the additional two program-coordination hours, two professional-review hours, and two measurement hours before committing them. Being within the combined ceiling does not resolve missing authority or unavailable people.

Separate note on displaced client work

Field	Entry to complete
Potential displacement	[Hours and people whose GEO work may displace client delivery; alternative scheduling options]
Estimated consequence	[Amount/range; realized-fee or contribution convention; demand, realization, and displacement assumptions]
Management decision	[Accept, reduce, reassign, or reschedule; decision-maker/date]

For example, six hours that could otherwise earn $300 per hour represent $1,800 of potential gross fees under that assumption. Label the figure as potential fees, with its uncertainty. Keep it separate from the internal cost valuation unless the firm uses a coherent economic model that avoids counting the same sacrifice twice.

A.5 Prioritization

Use this template to turn findings and requests into assignable work. Start with the evidence and the client’s decision. Several observations can point to the same underlying defect; link them to one item instead of creating duplicate tasks.

Triage before ranking

Material correction: Does a potentially consequential misrepresentation need prompt professional verification or correction? Assign that action immediately. Preserve the observation and correction record.
Authority and readiness: Can the proposed action proceed with the available evidence, permissions, expertise, access, and budget? Record missing prerequisites and their owners.
Discretionary priority: Compare remaining improvements and investments using the five considerations below. Important blocked work retains its priority while ready work proceeds.

Priority assessment

Item ID/title: [ ]. Assessor/date: [ ]. Use high/medium/low with a sentence of reasoning where that helps; record effort in hours and waiting time. These judgments express the case for the work, not a probability of an AI recommendation.

Consideration	Assessment to complete
Client relevance	Which client/referrer decision improves? [ ]. Evidence of need: [observed question, intake record, research, or labeled hypothesis].
Business value	Which approved practice, market, or engagement priority does this support? [ ]. Plausible benefit: [ ].
Confidence	Finding confidence and basis: [ ]. Confidence in the proposed AI effect and basis: [ ]. Keep the two judgments separate.
Effort	Hours by role: [ ]. Scarce reviewer capacity: [ ]. External waiting: [ ]. Setup and ongoing maintenance: [ ].
Risk	If left unresolved: [ ]. Risks introduced by the proposed action: [ ]. Necessary permissions, qualifications, or safeguards: [ ].

After material corrections, favor important client decisions and prerequisites that enable other valuable work. Among similarly valuable items, consider evidence, action risk, and scarce-role capacity. Use a small diagnostic or feasibility task where uncertainty makes a larger commitment premature.

Backlog summary

Item / next deliverable	Priority and reason	Owner / readiness / next date
[ID / output]	[Urgency or rank; one-sentence rationale]	[Name; ready or blocker; date]
[ID / output]	[Urgency or rank; one-sentence rationale]	[Name; ready or blocker; date]
[ID / output]	[Urgency or rank; one-sentence rationale]	[Name; ready or blocker; date]

Work-item brief

Field	Entry to complete
Identity and evidence	[Item ID; title; finding/observation references; affected URLs or assets]
Finding and hypothesis	Verified problem: [ ]. Unresolved cause or expected effect: [ ].
Work type and disposition	[Urgent correction / bounded improvement / experiment / longer investment]; [improve / create / consolidate / retire or archive / retain / investigate].
Purpose and priority	Client decision: [ ]. Priority/reason: “We will do this next because [ ].”
Next deliverable	[One inspectable output or decision; boundaries; what is deferred]
People	Delivery owner: [ ]. Expert/reviewer: [ ]. Publication approver: [ ]. Implementer: [ ].
Readiness and dependencies	[Ready / blocked / pending decision]; [missing prerequisite; owner; decision date; linked item].
Resources and timing	[Hours by person/role; A.4 line; external waiting; milestone and due date]
Acceptance	[Facts, evidence, permissions, review, publication, or technical checks that establish completion; who accepts; required record]
Outcome observation	Intended client benefit: [ ]. Hypothesized AI effect: [ ]. Monitoring-case reference and follow-up date: [ ].
Ongoing ownership	[Maintenance owner; next review date/event trigger]
Status and completion	Delivery status: [ ]. Completed evidence/accepted by/date: [ ]. Observation status: [ ].

For a publication task, approval identifies the exact version. For an outside correction, distinguish the submitted request from the publisher’s eventual response. Close the firm’s completed deliverable against its acceptance criteria and retain the separate observation or follow-up task.

Select the next cycle only after totaling hours by role against A.3. Record what is deferred and when it will be reconsidered. A high priority does not create an available reviewer.

Three examples of different decisions

Law—urgent correction: A current team page still names a departed partner as practice leader. Verify the facts, correct the owned listing, inspect affected copies, and assign any outside correction requests.
Accounting—bounded improvement: Intake records show recurring confusion over whether outsourced accounting includes an audit opinion. Clarify the approved engagement scope. Assess later whether the relevant AI answers describe it more accurately.
Consulting—longer investment: A proposed industry benchmark may help buyers assess the firm’s expertise, but usable data and permissions remain uncertain. Fund a feasibility decision with a named sponsor before commissioning the full study.

A.6 90-day launch

Use the approved backlog to plan a bounded launch. Ninety days is the period for organizing work and making an investment decision. Set deliverable commitments the firm can verify, and evaluate AI representation and commercial results using the evidence available.

Launch cover sheet

Field	Entry to complete
Launch control	[Program ID; launch-plan version; start date; day-90 review date]
People and records	[Sponsor; program owner; current A.1–A.4 references; evidence/decision-record location]
Selected work	[A.5 item IDs in delivery order; dependencies; milestones]
By day 90	[Three to five observable operating results, with acceptance criteria]
Evaluation setup	[Baseline and collection-specification references; evaluation rules/targets and rationale; owner; date agreed]
Constraints	[Client-work peaks, leave, approval dates, supplier lead times, contract notice dates, or other limits]

Convert the day ranges below to calendar dates and name each gate decision-maker. If an urgent correction occurs before baseline collection, make it and record the event. The collection specification should be usable again; later answers may differ.

Phased launch plan

Phase	Work and completion evidence	Gate decision
Days 1–15 Confirm and establish Dates: [ ]	Confirm scope, owners, capacity, facts, initial priorities, and baseline collection. Record missing observations and unresolved dependencies. Preserve a usable collection specification.	[Named sponsor / date]: Is the launch relevant, supportable, and ready for the selected work? Record conditions.
Days 16–30 Deliver first improvements Dates: [ ]	Complete a bounded set of approved changes. Retain supporting evidence and approvals; verify the live versions, links, relevant access, inquiry route, and maintenance ownership.	[Named program owner / date]: Accept completed work and resolve remaining blockers.
Days 31–60 Make delivery repeatable Dates: [ ]	Run the next delivery and monitoring cycles. Review capacity bottlenecks, inquiry evidence, and actual resource use. Run a bounded experiment only with a stated hypothesis and evaluation plan.	[Named program owner / date]: Confirm delivery and capacity changes with the practice leader within their respective authority; submit changes beyond delegated authority for approval.
Days 61–90 Evaluate and decide Dates: [ ]	Assemble operating, representation, commercial, and cost evidence. State limitations, remaining obligations, and the proposed next useful work.	[Named sponsor / date]: Continue, revise, reduce, pause, or selectively expand; authorize the next scope and resources.

Each work item retains its professional approval requirements. A phase review accepts completed work or authorizes the next commitment; it does not replace approval before publication.

Delivery schedule

Use the A.5 work-item brief for detailed acceptance criteria and approvals. This schedule carries its item IDs forward without creating a second backlog.

Item / milestone	Named owner / due date	Dependency / completion record
[A.5 ID / output]	[Name / date]	[Prerequisite; acceptance record; actual completion date]
[A.5 ID / output]	[Name / date]	[Prerequisite; acceptance record; actual completion date]
[A.5 ID / output]	[Name / date]	[Prerequisite; acceptance record; actual completion date]

Example milestone: “Publish the accounting-service scope revision.” Completion requires verified scope, supported claims, recorded permissions and approval, a live version matching that approval, a working inquiry route, and a maintenance owner. A later monitoring review examines how answers describe the service.

Operating calendar

Review	Required inputs and decision	Schedule / owner / record
Weekly delivery	Completed work, blockers, required reviews, next commitments, and available capacity. Decide who does what next and by when.	[Day/time or written-review deadline; owner; record]
Monthly management	Delivery, representation findings, inquiry evidence, method limitations, and actual/forecast resources. Adjust priorities within authority or submit a change request.	[Dates; owner; record]
Day-90 investment	Evidence packet, total resource use, obligations, next-period proposal, and decision criteria. Authorize continuation or a change of course.	[Date; sponsor; decision record]
Next quarterly review	Review continued value, maintenance, expansion, supplier performance, and renewal deadlines. Make the next resource decision.	[Date; sponsor; record]

The day-90 meeting can serve as the first quarterly review. A solo practitioner can complete a written review at the scheduled time. Match the process to the firm’s size while retaining the decisions.

End-of-launch evidence and decision

Evidence category	Record separately
Operating	[Accepted deliverables; open material errors; blockers; overdue maintenance; hours and external spend; actual versus forecast; records supporting completion]
Representation	[Visibility, accuracy, suitability, and citations for the defined cases; denominators; review coverage; missing observations; variability; method changes; conclusions and limits]
Commercial	[Relevant inquiries; qualified opportunities; progression; accepted engagements and revenue where available; reported AI involvement; other influences; attribution limits]

Field	Entry to complete
Decision	[Continue / revise / reduce / pause / selectively expand]; [sponsor; date]
Reason	[What the evidence supports; what remains uncertain; why the proposed resource decision is justified]
Next commitment	[Approved scope/version; A.5 priorities; external spending; internal capacity; maintenance obligations]
Next useful question	[What further work or observation should establish; how; owner; capped cost; decision date]
Decision criteria	[Criteria and any numerical thresholds with rationale, agreed before the next evaluation period; record later changes prospectively]
Continuing obligations	[Accurate content to maintain; open corrections; supplier commitments; renewal/cancellation dates; record and account custody]
Expansion conditions	[Buyer need; actual service availability; usable evidence; professional/local review; maintenance owner; funded capacity; new baseline where required]
Approvals and follow-through	[Approver and exact versions; conditions; action owners/dates; next review booked]

Apply the firm’s normal client and engagement acceptance procedures to inquiries throughout the launch. GEO qualification records should support those procedures.

Completion check

The charter and scope have named approval, current versions, and clear exclusions.
Delivery, professional review, publication, and maintenance responsibilities are accepted.
Selected work fits the available people and the approved budget.
The baseline, evaluation rules, and collection limits are recorded.
Each delivered item has acceptance evidence; remaining work has an owner and next date.
The sponsor has made a documented next-period decision with a cost limit and review date.

When results remain uncertain, record the next useful question and the smallest justified commitment to answer it. Keep the firm’s useful, accurate information maintained while leadership decides how much additional GEO work to fund.

Use these templates to learn how clients and referrers recognize a need, assess professional firms, and decide whom to contact. Turn their questions into useful information and a defined set of AI monitoring cases.

Connect the research to the approved scope in A.2 and proposed work in A.5. Replace brackets with actual entries. All sector examples are hypothetical. Preserve participants’ wording separately from researcher interpretations and illustrative prompts.

☰ Table of Contents

The Generative Engine Optimization Playbook: A Guide for Professional Services >

Program Planning