What should a PR firm look for when recommending a reputation management partner?

When a PR firm puts its own credibility behind a reputation recommendation, the checklist should be demanding. Proprietary technology, because tracking the search, Wikipedia, and AI layers at a professional standard requires purpose-built tools rather than off-the-shelf dashboards – in our case IMPACT™, AIQ™, and WikiAlerts™. Genuine depth in Wikipedia and AI specifically, not a generalist who lists them. A multi-year track record, since reputation is a long game and newcomers have not been tested through real crises. Ethical methodology, above all disclosed conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia rather than the undisclosed editing that backfires and can implicate the PR firm too. Transparent reporting that shows movement and method, not vanity metrics. An integrated approach that builds durable presence across channels rather than suppression-only tactics that decay. And the temperament to operate as a true partner, white-label or named, on shared briefings and one cadence. The wrong partner does not just underperform; it creates risk the PR firm ends up owning.