# Content Performance Review

Interpret how a content asset performs against its intended reader outcome while accounting for quality, audience mix, measurement limits, and external conditions.

## Usage note

Evaluate performance against the page's intended reader outcome and a defined comparison period. Do not treat one metric, a short-term fluctuation, or correlation as proof of content quality or causation.

## How to use this template

1. Restate the asset's reader job, audience, stage, distribution, and meaningful success signal.
2. Validate the measurement period, tracking, index status, segments, and comparison conditions.
3. Combine quantitative patterns with content inspection and qualitative reader evidence.
4. Separate observations, interpretations, confidence, alternatives, and recommended decisions.
5. Assign bounded actions, annotate changes, and schedule a review against the saved baseline.

## Blank template

### Asset and purpose

- **Asset title, URL, and version:** [Enter]
- **Owner and review date:** [Name, YYYY-MM-DD]
- **Intended reader and situation:** [Describe]
- **Content job:** [Answer / Explain / Compare / Guide / Convert / Support]
- **Desired reader outcome:** [Describe]
- **Primary distribution channels:** [Search / Email / Product / Social / Direct]
- **Lifecycle stage:** [New / Established / Recently changed / Legacy]

### Measurement context

- **Review period and comparison:** [Enter dates]
- **Seasonal or campaign factors:** [Describe]
- **Product, site, or algorithm changes:** [Describe or Unknown]
- **Tracking changes or missing data:** [Describe]
- **Index, canonical, and redirect state:** [Record]
- **Sample limitations:** [Low volume, consent gaps, attribution, other]
- **Baseline reference:** [Enter saved report]

### Evidence record

- **Discovery:** [Impressions, query groups, referral sources]
- **Engagement:** [Choose behavior relevant to the page]
- **Completion:** [Task, conversion, download, support deflection, other]
- **Quality or trust:** [Corrections, complaints, survey, expert review]
- **Audience mix:** [Country, device, new/returning, relevant segment]
- **Qualitative evidence:** [Feedback, interviews, search language, support]
- **Direct content inspection:** [Accuracy, clarity, evidence, links, UX]

### Finding

Duplicate for each important finding.

- **Observation:** [State measured or observed fact]
- **Interpretation:** [Explain what it may mean]
- **Alternative explanations:** [List]
- **Confidence:** [High / Medium / Low and why]
- **Reader affected:** [Describe]
- **Consequence:** [Accuracy / Discovery / Completion / Trust / Maintenance]
- **More evidence needed:** [List or None]

### Decision and follow-up

- **Decision:** [Maintain / Investigate / Refresh / Link / Test / Merge / Retire]
- **Hypothesis:** [If we change X, reader Y may do Z because...]
- **Action and scope:** [Describe]
- **Guardrail:** [What must not worsen?]
- **Owner and due date:** [Enter]
- **Release annotation:** [Date/version]
- **Review date and period:** [Enter]
- **Decision rule:** [Keep / Iterate / Roll back / Investigate]