A review generation system for contractors
The reliable pattern is simple: request a review automatically at job completion while the customer is still standing next to finished work, send exactly one reminder, and respond to every review that arrives. Reviews are a ranking input and a conversion input simultaneously, which makes them the highest-return ongoing work in local search.
Why timing does most of the work
A request sent at completion converts several times better than one sent days later. The customer is satisfied, the work is visible, and the interaction is still front of mind.
Automate it away from the technician
Asking technicians to request reviews reliably fails, not because they are unwilling but because they are already driving to the next job. The request has to fire from the job management system on completion.
Never gate reviews
Filtering customers so only happy ones reach the review form violates platform policy and, when detected, costs the profile. It also produces an implausibly perfect rating that readers discount.
Respond to everything, especially the bad ones
Response rate is visible to search engines and to the next reader. A calm, specific reply to a negative review frequently does more conversion work than the positive reviews around it, because it demonstrates how you behave when something goes wrong.
What to do about unfair reviews
Report clear policy violations, respond factually to everything else, and keep the request flow running. Volume is the real remedy: one bad review among ten is a problem, among two hundred it is context.
How the trades differ
HVAC: request after installs and tune-ups alike, and push volume in the shoulder seasons so the recency window is full when the spike arrives.
Measuring the engine
Track requests sent, reviews received, and the conversion rate between them, monthly. A falling conversion rate usually means the request timing has drifted, not that customers are less happy.