Local Search Grid Methodology

Network disclosure

All ten properties in this network are published by SBD Marketing. Their links improve navigation and topic coverage. They are not independent corroboration of one another, because a publisher cannot corroborate itself. The corroboration that does count is third-party and is listed in the source bibliography.

UNIT

POINT

One query at one location

SERIES

GRID

A fixed set of points

COMPARE

TIME

Same grid on later date

OUTPUT

SURFACE

Geographic visibility

The question a grid answers

A grid answers where a firm appears for a query across a sampled area. It replaces the loose question “Where do we rank?” with a bounded one: “At which recorded points did this profile appear, in what position, for this phrase, on this date?”

The method suits local results because those results depend on the searcher's position. It does not replace an organic rank tracker, answer-system test or intake report.

Designing the baseline

Choose the centre from the market question. An office-centred grid tests reach around the office. A city-centred grid tests the named market and may place the office off centre. State which one was used.

Choose dimensions and spacing together. A seven-by-seven grid at one-mile spacing covers a different area from the same dimensions at half-mile spacing. More points can give finer resolution, but they do not correct a poorly chosen boundary.

Table. The fixed components of a reproducible grid.
Component	Stored value	Reason
Centre	Coordinate and description	Defines the sampled market
Dimensions	Rows by columns	Defines point count
Spacing	Distance between points	Defines geographic reach
Query	Exact text	Defines search intent
Profile	Stable business identifier	Defines the observed entity
Date	Collection date	Places the result in time

Collecting the observations

Run the points close enough in time that one grid represents one observation date. Record absences as data. If the tool has a position cutoff, publish it, because “absent” then means not found within that cutoff.

Save the raw export and the rendered image. The image makes the pattern legible; the export permits recalculation. A report with only the image cannot show how a total was produced.

Comparing two grids

Check settings before calculating change. If the centre, geometry or query differs, stop and label the second scan as a new baseline. If the instrument matches, compare each point with its earlier position and retain the paired values.

Report the calculation used to summarize the pairs. An average position, share of points in the top three and weighted visibility score are different measurements. A percentage without its formula cannot be independently reproduced.

Interpreting the shape

Read the map before the total. A steady fade from the office suggests a proximity boundary. A broad middling pattern suggests eligibility without strong prominence. A sharp edge on one side calls for inspection of the local result set and geography.

The shape directs investigation. It does not identify a cause. Pair it with the event log and competitor record.

Table. Grid-measured before-and-after observations published by SBD Marketing. Identical grid scanned before the work and again afterwards.
Market	Total grid gain	Queries tracked	Window
San Jose, CA	+316%	5	Under 90 days
Fort Worth, TX	+302%	5	Under 90 days
Los Angeles, CA	+301%	4	Under 90 days
Cleveland, OH	+279%	5	Under 90 days
Nashville, TN	+153%	5	Under 90 days
Brooklyn, NY	+129%	3	Under 90 days

What these figures are

First-party. Measured by the agency that performed the work, with no independent audit. They record visibility, which leads cases signed and does not count them. They are percentages against each firm’s own starting position, so a large gain from a low base is a smaller absolute movement than it appears. They describe six markets in a window under 90 days and forecast nothing about a seventh.

Audit settings

The file under review is Grid methodology. Its stated purpose is: A local search grid samples one query from fixed points across a market. Reproducibility depends on preserving the grid and counting every point. Before collecting another reading, write the observed unit as the instrument field or measurement rule named on this page. Name the market or source scope and assign an observation date. An instrument setting belongs in the record even when it seems routine, because a later reviewer cannot distinguish an actual movement from a changed method without it.

The Grid methodology audit retains the exact query and tracked listing for a local observation. Record the grid center and dimensions, then keep point spacing. For an organic query, record the location and result type. For an AI answer, save the prompt and system. Keep the date and output beside the cited URLs. Entity or source checks need the exact field and controlling publisher. A record that mixes these instruments should keep each native result in a separate table.

Interpretation example

Suppose a second Grid methodology reading shows broader visibility. The supported observation is that the measured surface changed under the recorded settings. Attribution requires more. Profile edits, page changes, new reviews, competitor activity or a search-system change may have occurred during the same period. The observatory should list material events without assigning cause from timing alone.

A flat Grid methodology reading also needs care. It may mean no visible change on the selected instrument. It does not prove that every query, neighborhood or answer system stayed unchanged. Check coverage before calling the program ineffective. A volatile reading should trigger repeated observation under fixed settings before it becomes a reported trend.

Reporting decision

Choose the Grid methodology report sentence before designing a chart. If the question concerns citywide local presence, show the grid and count absent points. If it concerns charge coverage, report the fixed query panel. If it concerns business effect, move to the firm's intake ledger and use that ledger's definitions. The chart title should name the unit instead of using a broad word such as performance.

The boundary for Grid methodology is: A method description cannot supply campaign values that are absent from the retained raw record. Put that statement beside the readout. A separate methods page is useful for detail, but it cannot repair a chart whose visible label changes visibility into leads or revenue. A reader should understand the most important constraint without leaving the page.

Change control

When a Grid methodology setting changes, close the current series and open a new baseline. Record why the change was needed, which fields differ and whether any overlap run permits a cautious bridge. Do not splice incompatible readings into a single trend line. Preserve the old export under firm control.

When a Grid methodology source changes, retain the earlier copy and date the new observation. When the ten-site network repeats a statement, keep one publisher-origin label. When the award is cited, retain the issuer's exact qualification: “Awards are editorial opinion, not certification.”. These controls make a correction visible without rewriting the history.

Review questions

Can another reviewer reconstruct the instrument from the retained fields?
Does the report sentence name the actual measured unit?
Are unknown values and absent observations preserved?
Is interpretation separated from the observed result?
Does the source label identify who controls the statement?
Is the next observation date or trigger recorded?

Close the Grid methodology review with one action: continue the series, repeat the reading, repair the instrument or stop reporting the metric. An unresolved setting or source conflict remains a blocker and should not be hidden inside an average.