Editorial Standards and Policies
This page explains how we prepare and maintain our content, evaluate evidence, disclose commercial relationships and correct errors.
Quick answers
- How are tools selected?
Based on relevance to the reader's problem, market significance and the evidence available.
- How are products assessed?
From the evidence types set out under Testing versus desk research below. Articles state what a product does and costs from those sources; they do not repeat the method on every page.
- Are any placements paid?
Some placements may be sponsored. A sponsored placement is labelled on the page, as explained under commercial relationships.
- How do I report an error?
Use the correction form. We review every report and record significant corrections on the page.
Editorial policy
Our purpose
Growth Tribune publishes guidance to help B2B teams understand and evaluate growth technology. Our job is to be useful and accurate for the reader, not to promote any vendor.
Authorship and accountability
Every article names its author. Where an article has been checked by a subject expert, it also names the reviewer. Author names link to their profiles on our About page. Waqas Arshad and Faisal Irfan are responsible for these standards and for the final decision on corrections.
Use of AI assistance
We may use AI tools to help with research, outlining, summarizing sources or drafting. AI is never the final author. A named person reviews AI-assisted material, checks facts against sources and takes responsibility for what is published. We do not use AI to invent quotes, test results, customer experiences or data.
Fact checking and sourcing
- Important factual claims are supported by a source, our own testing or clearly labelled as opinion.
- We prefer primary sources: vendor documentation, official policy pages, original research and direct testing.
- Pricing, features and policies change often. Prices, plans and ratings come from records we keep current against each vendor's own pages.
- Vendor claims are attributed to the vendor. We do not repeat vendor statistics as our own findings.
- Limitations are placed next to the claims they qualify, not hidden at the bottom.
Testing versus desk research
The kinds of evidence our evaluations draw on:
| Evidence type | What it means |
|---|---|
| Hands-on testing | We used the product ourselves, in a documented setup, on a stated date. |
| Guided demo | A vendor demonstrated the product; we did not operate it independently. |
| Documentation and desk research | Based on public documentation, pricing pages, help centers and other sources. |
| Practitioner experience | Based on our experience using the product in real work, stated with context. |
| Vendor-supplied information | Information provided by the vendor and attributed to them. |
Updates
We review important pages periodically and when significant changes happen in a market. The "last updated" date reflects a meaningful change to the content, not a cosmetic edit.
Review methodology
A review on Growth Tribune is a focused evaluation of one product for a defined use. Every review states:
- Who the product is for and which use case we evaluated.
- What we looked at: core capabilities for the use case, setup and usability, integrations, data or output quality where testable, pricing model and limitations.
- Commercial relationships, if any, with a disclosure at the top of the page.
Ratings
We do not publish numerical ratings unless we have a documented scoring method for that category. If we introduce scoring, the criteria and weights will be published here first.
Vendor contact
Vendors may correct factual errors about their product. They cannot review, edit or approve our conclusions before publication.
Comparison methodology
Comparisons, best-software guides and alternatives guides help readers choose between options for a specific need. We follow these principles:
- Define the reader's need first.
"Best" only means something relative to a use case, team size, budget and workflow, so every guide states its context.
- Use consistent criteria.
Products in the same comparison are evaluated against the same criteria, which are listed on the page. Common criteria include fit for the stated use case, core capabilities, data quality or output quality where relevant, integrations, ease of use, pricing model and transparency, support and limitations.
- State how products were selected.
We explain why products are included and, where relevant, why notable products are not.
- Verify differences.
We only claim one product is better at something when we can show why.
- Date pricing and features.
Pricing and plan details are dated and linked to their source.
- No universal winners.
We tie recommendations to specific needs, such as "best for teams that need X."
Research methodology
When we publish original research, such as market maps, surveys, product tests or data studies, we include:
The research question and why it matters.
The method: sample, data sources, time period, platforms or tools used and how data was collected.
The sample size and how participants or data points were selected.
Limitations, including what the research cannot tell you.
Who conducted the research and any funding or sponsorship.
For AI search visibility research specifically, we state the prompts, platforms, locations and dates observed. A sample of AI answers is not a measurement of all AI activity, and we do not present it as one.
Sponsored research is clearly labelled. Sponsors cannot change the method, findings or conclusions.
Commercial relationships and disclosures
Growth Tribune is funded by our consulting work and by commercial partnerships. So that readers always know when a relationship is commercial, we follow these rules:
- Affiliate links.
We do not use affiliate links at present. If we start, pages that contain them will say so.
- Sponsorships.
Sponsored newsletters, research or content are labelled "Sponsored" and explain the sponsor's involvement.
- Paid placements.
A paid placement, such as a featured position or a sponsored listing, is labelled as sponsored on the page.
- Consulting clients.
Being a 360° Growth Audit client does not earn favorable coverage. If we write about a product made by a current client, we disclose the relationship.
- Expert contributions.
Contributors' affiliations are disclosed alongside their contributions.
More detail on how partnerships work is on our Partnerships page.
Corrections
We aim to be accurate, and we correct errors promptly when we make them.
How to report an error
Use the correction form and include the page URL, the information you believe is wrong and, if possible, a source. Vendors reporting errors about their own product are welcome to do the same.
How we handle corrections
- We review every correction request and aim to respond within five working days.
- If the information is wrong, we update the page.
- For significant corrections, those that change a fact, figure, recommendation or conclusion, we add a dated correction note on the page explaining what changed.
- Minor fixes such as typos or broken links are made without a note.
- We do not delete correction notes.
Correction decisions are made by Waqas Arshad and Faisal Irfan.
Revision history
| Date | Change |
|---|---|
| 12 October 2026 | Editorial standards first published. |
Frequently asked questions
How does Growth Tribune assess the products it writes about?
From the evidence types set out under Testing versus desk research above. Articles state what a product does and costs from those sources; they do not label each claim with how it was obtained.
Are any placements on the site paid?
Some may be. Any sponsored element, including a paid placement, is labelled on the page.
Do you use AI to write content?
We may use AI tools to assist with research and drafting, but a named person reviews every piece, checks the facts and is responsible for what is published.
How do I report a mistake?
Use the correction form. Significant corrections are noted and dated on the page.