# Review-response framework | 121 CRM > Prepare a proportionate and privacy-aware review response. Use this practical, editable-on-page structure with instructions, a fictional example and clear review limits. Prepare a proportionate and privacy-aware review response. This template provides a compact working structure, prompts for the information that matters and shows how Cedar Legal Admin might complete it. It is guidance, not proof of legal, commercial or operational sufficiency. ## Review-response framework at a glance Fictional completed example for Cedar Legal Admin, a fictional professional-services team. ## Capabilities explained ### Review monitoring Pulls supported connected-platform reviews into a central reputation view. **How it works:** Runs an approved campaign, publishing or reputation process through connected channels and profiles. **Why a business would use it:** Helps a team see new feedback without checking every connected profile separately. **Limitations:** Platform policies, connection expiry, delivery, public responses, usage and add-on charges can vary. **Human responsibility:** A person must approve content and handle negative feedback, policy issues and publishing failures. ### Review responses Supports drafting or publishing replies where the connected platform and permissions allow it. **How it works:** Runs an approved campaign, publishing or reputation process through connected channels and profiles. **Why a business would use it:** Keeps public responses visible and assigned while retaining human judgement for sensitive feedback. **Limitations:** Platform policies, connection expiry, delivery, public responses, usage and add-on charges can vary. **Human responsibility:** A person must approve content and handle negative feedback, policy issues and publishing failures. ### Conversations inbox Brings supported connected message threads into a shared operational inbox. **How it works:** Handles an eligible customer interaction through a configured inbox, number or connected channel. **Why a business would use it:** Helps a team see the customer history and coordinate replies from one working view. **Limitations:** Delivery, message types, geographic coverage, approval and charges vary by channel and provider. **Human responsibility:** A person must own sensitive conversations, failed delivery and any situation outside the approved script. ### Contacts Stores a person or lead with contact details, activity, ownership and related records. **How it works:** Stores or organises supported business data under configured fields, permissions and record rules. **Why a business would use it:** Gives a team one place to understand who a customer is and what has happened. **Limitations:** The platform does not make imported, duplicated or incomplete data accurate without review. **Human responsibility:** A data owner must define the record model and resolve quality, ownership and access exceptions. ## Complete the review-response framework in a short working session Bring the people who understand the source work and the people who will own the result. Complete the first version with evidence to hand, then test it rather than polishing it in isolation. ### Set a narrow scope Name the process, team, data population and decision covered by this review-response framework. Create another record when the owner, purpose or risk is materially different. ### Use observable wording Write facts, rules and expected results that another person can inspect. Replace words such as “quick”, “complete” or “automatic” with a time, population, event or named responsibility. ### Record uncertainty Mark missing evidence and unresolved decisions openly. Do not turn an unknown entitlement, data condition or approval into a positive answer simply to complete the sheet. ## The four parts of this review-response framework The prompts are deliberately small. Add a field only when it changes configuration, testing, ownership or a later decision. ### 1. Review context Describe review context for the exact scope being reviewed. Include the source of the information, the person responsible for keeping it current and the evidence that would show the entry is wrong or incomplete. ### 2. Facts safe to acknowledge Describe facts safe to acknowledge for the exact scope being reviewed. Include the source of the information, the person responsible for keeping it current and the evidence that would show the entry is wrong or incomplete. ### 3. Response draft Describe response draft for the exact scope being reviewed. Include the source of the information, the person responsible for keeping it current and the evidence that would show the entry is wrong or incomplete. ### 4. Escalation or publication decision Describe escalation or publication decision for the exact scope being reviewed. Include the source of the information, the person responsible for keeping it current and the evidence that would show the entry is wrong or incomplete. ## A completed extract for Cedar Legal Admin Cedar Legal Admin uses the template for one bounded CRM change. The example is intentionally modest: it shows the quality of a useful entry without suggesting a universal answer. ### Review context The team wants one agreed record and owner for website enquiries received during working hours. Success means each valid enquiry has a source, owner and dated next action. ### Facts safe to acknowledge Amina owns the working definition; Sam covers absence. The office team can edit the record, while managers can review exceptions and results. ### Response draft The team tests five ordinary examples plus a duplicate, an opt-out, missing information and an unassigned record. Every mismatch is logged for correction. ### Escalation or publication decision A person reviews the result after two weeks. Activation or wider use proceeds only if the sample reconciles and staff can handle exceptions without a private workaround. ## Treat the template as a decision record, not a certificate A completed worksheet helps people inspect their reasoning. It does not itself establish compliance, product availability or a successful implementation. ### Check the evidence Ask whether every important statement has an identifiable source and whether that source covers the current scope. Recheck vendor capability and account configuration separately. ### Test the handover Give the record to someone who did not write it. If they cannot explain the owner, rule, exception and next action, revise the wording before relying on it. ### Set a review trigger Review after a failed test, material process change, supplier change, new channel, altered responsibility or evidence that staff are bypassing the agreed method. ## Frequently asked questions ### Can we use this review-response framework without changing it? Use the structure as a starting point, but adapt the scope, fields, evidence and approvals to the real process. Delete prompts that do not affect a decision and add only those you can maintain. ### Is the review-response framework a legal or compliance template? No. It is an operational planning aid. Obtain appropriate professional advice where the work involves legal, regulatory, contractual, clinical or other specialist obligations. ### Does completing the review-response framework confirm a 121 CRM entitlement? No. Product features and account availability must be checked against the live configuration and agreed commercial scope before implementation. ### Who should approve the completed review-response framework? The person accountable for the affected process should review it with the people responsible for data, configuration, customer communication and exception handling. ## Related CRM pages - [/crm/guides](https://121.direct/crm/guides) - [/crm/guides/crm-implementation-checklist](https://121.direct/crm/guides/crm-implementation-checklist) - [/crm/templates/reporting-definitions](https://121.direct/crm/templates/reporting-definitions) This Markdown alternative contains public product information only. It provides no access to CRM accounts, records, credentials or payment execution.