The work starts with a complete content inventory and a performance read by page and cluster, traffic and rankings, conversion signals where available, engagement patterns, and decay over time.
Structural conflicts get surfaced early, cannibalization, overlap, and internal linking issues, so the real blockers show up in data. Next comes market context where competitive positioning is assessed alongside demand, SERP composition, and gaps in coverage, so the audit reflects what users search for and what competitors already own, not just what exists in the CMS.
Architecture is evaluated as a system: taxonomy, pillar and cluster relationships, linking logic, coverage depth, plus interpretability for search and AI systems. When AI visibility matters in the category, citation presence is checked as part of the diagnosis and used to inform structure changes. Findings are translated into an audit output that teams can execute:
- A scorecard of the current state (what’s earning, what’s decaying, what’s dead)
- A prioritized action plan: keep, optimize, merge, or remove for each piece
- Topic gap analysis with ready-to-brief opportunities
- Content architecture recommendations (taxonomy, clustering, internal linking)
- Clear ownership: what your content team can ship, what needs specialist support