How to evaluate an SEO case study before hiring

A traffic chart is an easy thing to show in a sales conversation. It is much harder to explain which decisions changed the site, who made them, and what the chart actually measures. Those are the parts I would look for when choosing someone to work on my own website.

You do not need access to another company’s Search Console account to make a sensible decision. You need enough detail to judge whether the person understands a problem like yours and can explain their contribution without hiding behind a logo.

Start with the problem, not the industry logo

Two ecommerce projects can involve completely different work. One may need product information and category pages; the other may have millions of filter URLs competing for crawl resources. A small service website with broken language switching can be a closer technical match to your project than a large retailer with the same product range.

Write down the decision you are buying help with: diagnosing missing pages, moving a platform, organising a catalogue, or making a service easier to understand. Then ask for a case that demonstrates that kind of work. The Ramfa service guide can help separate those needs before you compare providers.

Read the case in five passes

1. Starting point: What was failing, and how was that established? “The site needed SEO” is too broad. “The category template linked only to the first page of products” describes something you can investigate.
2. Responsibility: Did the consultant diagnose, write specifications, change code, coordinate a developer, or own the whole release? A team result should not be presented as one person’s work.
3. Decision: What changed, and why was that option chosen? Look for an explanation of a trade-off, not a long list of tools.
4. Evidence: Does the evidence support the particular claim? A working redirect supports a technical outcome. A search impression does not demonstrate a sale.
5. Limits: What else changed during the period? New products, brand campaigns, seasonality and site redesigns can complicate attribution.

Google’s guide to hiring an SEO recommends asking about previous work, expected results, methods and communication. It also cautions against ranking guarantees. Use those questions to start a conversation, not as a box-ticking exercise.

A useful answer without confidential numbers

Consider this illustrative answer: “The old navigation did not expose the lower-level service pages. I mapped the missing routes, agreed which pages should remain, and prepared the implementation brief. The developer changed the menu and related links. We then checked the final destinations and confirmed the intended pages were reachable.”

That answer does not claim a traffic uplift. It tells you what was observed, who did what and how the change was accepted. You can ask to see an anonymised example of the map or the acceptance criteria. The example is a teaching scenario, not a result from a Ramfa client.

If a case does claim business growth, ask what was compared and how success was defined. A percentage without its baseline, time window and scope is hard to interpret. A provider can decline to disclose private figures and still explain the method, the work and the limitations. Confidentiality should protect the client; it should not replace an explanation.

Separate technical completion from business impact

I would record these as two different statements:

• Completed change: the agreed templates now output the correct language links, and the listed checks passed.
• Observed outcome: relevant enquiries changed during a defined period, with the measurement method and other influences stated.

The first can often be checked soon after a release. The second needs enough reliable business data. Neither statement should quietly stand in for the other. The same applies to AI search: one citation is evidence of that observation, not permanent placement. The AI search observation protocol explains how to keep those claims separate.

Do you need an SEO consultant, a developer, or both?

If nobody knows why important pages are missing, begin with diagnosis and priorities. If the cause is known and the fix requires template or server changes, you need someone who can implement it. A consultant may do both, but that needs to be explicit in the proposal.

For a WordPress migration, ask who owns the URL map, who configures redirects, who tests forms, and who decides whether the release is ready. “SEO included” is not an allocation of responsibility. Our WordPress and migration service describes the kind of work that should be scoped, while the audit deliverables guide explains what a useful handover contains.

Take these questions into the first meeting

• Which part of this case is most relevant to my site, and which part is not?
• What did you personally do, and what did the client’s team do?
• Can you show a permitted example of a finding, decision or completed check?
• What could this evidence not tell you?
• What would you need to learn about my site before recommending the same approach?

A good discussion should leave you understanding the next decision, not feeling pressured to buy a long contract. For examples of how I describe scope and responsibility, browse the Ramfa project portfolio. If you want help deciding what work to commission, SEO consulting is the relevant starting point.