authorityPowered by B2G
Assessment report
Website assessment
Read as a buying decision, not as a website, five sections, 34 pages, 19 claims mapped.
Everything in this report was read from ACT-ON GROUP's own public surfaces, the website, the manifesto, all nine LinkedIn pages, the published references, on the date above. Figures are the baseline frozen at the start of the engagement; any claim we make in ninety days is measured against them.
Your website, read as a buying decision, not as a website.
We are not judging design, speed or copywriting. One question only: does a director with a payroll problem, three tabs open and four minutes to spare, work out that you are the answer?
5/10score
Names a problem the buyer has3
Distinct from the alternatives2
Proof a stranger can check6
Qualifies, and disqualifies1
Somewhere to go when convinced4
Consistent across the four practices3
Read in 4 minutes
A well-built site for a company that already has the relationship. Nearly opaque to a stranger with a problem.
What is great, protect it
The references section is the strongest asset you own, and it is nearly invisible.
- 225 named client accounts and 83 written case studies, most firms your size publish a dozen logos.
- Real specificity in the writing. “TMA fonctionnelle GTA sur Chronos V10” (their words: functional maintenance of time-and-attendance on Chronos V10) is the kind of sentence only a practitioner writes, and a buyer trusts it instantly.
- “No ESN, made in France”, a stance against your own sector's business model. It is the only sentence on the site a competitor cannot copy.
- Four practices with genuinely different capabilities, and the market rarely has all four in one house.
Is the USP clear?No
Four practices, one sentence, repeated four times: “transformation”.
Across 34 pages we counted 19 distinct claims. Seven are made by three or more practices at once. “Digital transformation”, “organisational transformation” and “cultural transformation” appear as three separate offers with the same buyer and no distinguishing proof.
Meanwhile the one uncopyable position, refusing the day-rate staffing model, lives on the Technology page, the least-visited of the four, carried by nobody by name.
A buyer reading two of your pages cannot tell which company you are. That is not a copy problem; it is four teams writing for themselves.
What needs improving
- Lead the practice pages with the failure you prevent, not the capability you have. “Payroll programmes fail on rules nobody validated” outperforms “we deliver HRIS transformation” with the same reader.
- Put the numbers where a stranger lands. 23 years, 290 active clients, 650 consultants, no vendor commission, all real, all verifiable, none on the homepage.
- Name the buyer out loud. A payroll director should read one line and think: that is me.
- Give the 83 case studies a route in by industry and by problem, not by practice. Nobody browses by your org chart.
What needs dropping
- “Leading player in #HumanTech.” A self-awarded title in a category you invented. It costs more credibility than it buys, and LinkedIn's own algorithm cannot parse it, see the next screen.
- “Whatever your needs … we will meet all your expectations.” This refuses nothing, and a firm that refuses nothing has no specialism.
- “Cultural transformation” as a standalone offer. One page, no case study, no named owner. It dilutes the other three.
- “Allier l'Humain & la Technologie.” (their words: bringing People and Technology together) Near-verbatim on competitors' sites. We will quote them side by side once you name your real top three.
What is missing
- A named human anywhere near the offer. Buyers hire people. Every practice page is written by the company about the company.
- Anything you refuse. No “we are not the right firm if …”. That single paragraph does more qualifying than the rest of the site.
- A reason to act now. No trigger, no diagnostic, no first step smaller than “contact us”.
- Client names on 40 of the 83 case studies. “A European technology company” proves nothing. Some of those could be named with a phone call.
The honest summary
You are not short of substance. You are short of a sentence.
Everything a buyer needs is on this site, the proof, the depth, the refusal, the range. It is spread across 34 pages in the company's own vocabulary, and the one position nobody else can claim is the one you whisper. We are not going to rebuild your website. We are going to make it unnecessary for lead generation, and hand your web team the findings.
Not a blocker. None of this stops us onboarding partners. Each item lands in the company backlog and gets worked when a partner's positioning touches it, which is when the firm actually feels the cost of leaving it alone.