Review requests
Invite eligible customers after the configured service milestone.
Coordinate review requests, triage new feedback, approve public responses, and turn recurring issues into accountable operational work.
Your honest review helps other customers. No incentive or preferred rating is requested.
The customer invitation, Google review path, independent private feedback, response status, owner, recovery action, and location trend stay connected.
Invite eligible customers after the configured service milestone.
See rating, text, location, date, owner, and response state.
Route feedback by rating, topic, location, and urgency.
Draft, edit, approve, and record the public response process.
Turn operational issues into assigned, traceable follow-up work.
Compare rating, response time, themes, and open issues.
Who it's for
Ask at the right moment and keep customer follow-up attached to each review.
Give local teams ownership while central leaders retain brand and escalation oversight.
Coordinate drafts, approvals, issue follow-up, and reporting across client locations.
Customers see a neutral Google review invitation and a separate private feedback option; the team sees delivery, public reviews, and internal service-recovery work in one process.
After a verified service milestone, send a neutral invitation. Customers can choose the Google review link or send private feedback independently; the system records delivery without using sentiment to hide either path.
Your honest review helps other customers. No incentive or preferred rating is requested.
Open the review beside its location, date, response state, topic, and linked customer journey where available. Assign ownership without copying feedback into a separate tracker.
Drafts, edits, approval, publication state, private outreach, assigned actions, and the final resolution remain visible together without exposing private customer details in the public response.
Local teams handle service context while central leaders maintain response standards and spot cross-location patterns.
See new, drafting, waiting, approved, and published responses in priority order.
Investigate service context, assign corrective action, and report resolution without editing central policy.
Compare rating movement, response time, issue volume, and recurring themes by location.
Standard reputation tools show ratings and replies. Component.app can adapt request eligibility, ownership, approval, service recovery, and multi-location oversight.
Define the completed journey, consent, frequency, delivery channel, and contact preferences. The same neutral Google review option is not hidden based on predicted or submitted sentiment.
Route drafts by rating, topic, location, or brand risk. Suggested wording remains editable, and a named person confirms sensitive or consequential responses before publication.
Review the source material, draft, safeguards, and assigned follow-up before confirming the public outcome.
Approved responses can be prepared for Google Business Profile or another selected connection when its API and permissions allow. Publication outcome and manual fallbacks stay visible on the record.
Requests, reviews, response decisions, and operational action remain part of one traceable reputation process.
A completed customer journey meets the configured request rules.
The system links context and proposes owner, topic, and priority.
A person checks sensitive responses and service-recovery actions.
Record the response outcome and close accountable follow-up work.
It helps teams coordinate eligible review requests, monitor incoming Google reviews, assign ownership, review responses, manage service recovery, and report reputation trends.
No. It creates a consistent and policy-controlled request process, but customers decide whether to review and what rating to give. Requests should not be conditioned on a positive rating.
Yes. Reviews and issues can route by location, rating, topic, service, or urgency while central teams retain oversight.
The system can prepare a draft from approved guidance and available context. Sensitive or consequential responses should remain editable and require human review before publication.
It can connect to selected third-party providers where their APIs and the agreed setup support the required workflow. The exact data exchanged, actions available, and ongoing provider fees depend on that integration.
Public response workflows can restrict fields and require checks so private journey details stay in the internal record. Your team remains responsible for appropriate wording and access.
The system can support PDPA obligations through role-based access, purpose and consent records, correction workflows, retention rules, and appropriate security controls. Compliance also depends on your policies, hosting, integrations, and day-to-day data handling.
Show us when you request reviews, who approves responses, and how service issues are resolved. We will connect those decisions in one system.