Reviews, directory entries, aggregator data, employer sites, press archives. Most of it was created by someone else, much of it is out of date, and all of it is read before anyone calls.
Inconsistency is not a tidiness problem. It decides which version gets repeated.
A process for soliciting them properly, a standard for responding, and escalation so a serious complaint reaches a person before it reaches a public reply. We do not buy, trade or incentivise reviews.
What candidates read before they apply, and what a journalist reads before they call. Usually the least managed surface in the business and often the most consequential for hiring.
The company as described across aggregators, directories and industry registers. Inconsistency here propagates into search and into the answer engines, which cite whatever corroborates.
What surfaces from the past, what is still accurate, and what has been superseded by events but is still the first thing returned.
Mentions across platforms, forums and communities relevant to your sector — including the ones that never appear in search but are read closely by the people in it.
Knowing what the record says before an event, so a response is a decision rather than a scramble. Most of the value of this work is realised on a day nothing happens.