Build a practical 90-day marketing plan for your firm.

Choose the work the firm wants to win.

Name one priority service and the buyer who needs it. Describe the priority tightly enough for someone handling an enquiry to distinguish a finance leader seeking integration support from an individual seeking urgent professional help, with the relevant service boundaries visible. Record the problem, buying trigger, market and exclusions together.

Capacity belongs in this decision. Ask the delivery lead how much additional work the team could accept, which expertise is available and what would require another hire or partner. A busy team may need better-fit enquiries rather than more volume. Write down what would make the plan inappropriate, including a service you are pausing or a market you cannot responsibly serve.

Finish this stage with a sentence the whole team can use: We want enquiries about this service, from these buyers, in these circumstances. If partners disagree, resolve that before commissioning assets. The Goals and constraints sheet gives those disagreements somewhere visible to land.

Follow one buyer decision through the website.

Walk from discovery to verification to enquiry. How might the buyer first hear about the service? What would they check before trusting the firm? What information would make contacting you useful? Capture actual recurring questions from your team, using approved summaries rather than copying confidential conversations into a planning file.

A referred consultancy buyer may already know your name but need to check whether you have handled the relevant operating problem. An architecture client may need to understand your role in a completed project, the constraints and how the team worked with other specialists. Put the missing answer beside the page or asset that should provide it.

Choose a primary next step for that journey. Keep discovery requests, newsletter subscriptions and resource downloads separate in the page design and measurement plan because they represent different decisions, with their own evidence of completion. A reader using a useful tool has completed a learning task, not automatically become an opportunity.

Inspect what already supports the service.

Use the Current evidence sheet to record the relevant service page, expert profiles, useful articles, published proof and contact path. Open the pages on a phone as well as a larger screen. Note what you actually found, its source and when you checked it. Mark inaccessible reports as unknown. An empty export is not evidence that demand is zero.

Search and AI-assisted discovery depend on dependable source information. Use Google's guidance on established SEO foundations to maintain clear, accessible source pages for its generative search features, without treating the work as a promise that an AI answer will include your firm.

Where local discovery matters, verify the real-world business facts and profile eligibility before planning changes. Being able to serve a city does not establish an office there. The foundation review should identify a concrete dependency, such as inaccurate hours or an unclear service page, rather than become a months-long audit that prevents useful work.

Source: Google's guide to generative AI search features

Source: Google Business Profile representation guidelines

Select connected actions with a clear reason.

Choose the smallest set of actions that makes the buyer journey more complete. Before paying for more visits, check whether a reviewed service-page revision, a useful expert article and an agreed enquiry definition would help the buyer understand the offering and the next step. Equal activity across four channels is unnecessary.

Describe each task as an output someone can inspect. Replace improve content with draft and approve a service-page section answering the buyer's implementation question, and record the pillar, dependency and evidence you expect to review. The pillar organizes responsibility within Growth 360, while the business rationale explains why the task is in this plan.

Separate foundation work, activation and subsequent improvement. These are dependencies rather than fixed monthly promises. Activation can wait until claims are approved and the contact path works. Later changes should follow evidence about the actual response, including poor fit or unanswered enquiries, rather than a schedule that assumes success.

Make expert input and approval part of the plan.

Every action needs a delivery owner and an approval owner. Record both responsibilities even when one person owns delivery and approval, then specify the client's contribution, such as an interview, technical clarification, approved project evidence, account access or a decision about exclusions. An agency cannot infer professional facts that only the firm knows.

Reserve time for those contributions before setting intended timing. A partner with no review time is a real constraint. Agree which decisions can be delegated and which need a principal's judgment. Record a dependency when permission or a factual answer is missing, instead of treating the draft as approved because the due date has arrived.

Keep permissions separate from availability. A photograph on a project folder or a quotation in an old presentation may still need its intended use checked, and the workbook can hold a permission status and reference to an approved system. It should not become a public store of client identities, case records or private files.

Keep cost assumptions visible and editable.

List external costs and internal time separately. Media spend, agency work, production and third-party costs answer different questions, so identify what each estimate includes. Use your own currency and unit consistently. The workbook contains no recommended fee or standard allocation because the right scope depends on the firm and the work.

Record the basis and confidence of an estimate in the Budget assumptions sheet, including whether it is an approved quote, a planning assumption or still unknown. Read the Action plan totals alongside the count of entered estimates so the team can see what supports the sum and avoid treating a partial set of inputs as a complete budget.

Do not combine hours and currency into one total. If you choose to value internal time, enter a documented assumption in your own financial planning system and keep its basis visible. Before approving the plan, ask what would be deferred if capacity or spending changed. That tradeoff is more useful than an unsupported return projection.

Choose checkpoints that lead to decisions.

A 90-day horizon creates a manageable planning conversation. It does not promise a result within 90 days. Set a review date and the evidence needed to continue, change, pause or investigate each action, including early checks that a page, permission and contact journey are ready for activation.

Later reviews can compare the enquiries received with the agreed service fit, alongside available search or campaign evidence. Keep reporting windows and cost scope explicit. For a small or immature cohort, record whether the next decision is to keep observing and who owns that follow-up, with the reason for withholding a stronger conclusion visible in the review.

Protect the underlying information. Keep lead-level qualification and confidential matter details in approved private systems, using suitable aggregates for marketing analysis and following Google's prohibition on sending personally identifiable information to Analytics. A marketing review can use appropriate aggregates and anonymous issue categories without placing private answers in analytics events.

Source: Avoid sending personally identifiable information to Analytics

Illustrative example: a consultancy plans one service journey.

A fictional consultancy wants to develop its post-acquisition integration service for finance leaders. Its partners agree to exclude software implementation and individual career advice. The delivery lead confirms capacity for discovery conversations, while the principal can contribute an interview and review an anonymized explanation of the firm's approach.

The team finds that the service page lists capabilities but never explains what happens during the first assessment. It plans a reviewed page revision, a source-backed article about integration readiness and an intake prompt that asks about the business problem without requesting confidential transaction details. Advertising remains a later decision, dependent on the page and measurement brief.

The example workbook shows those connected tasks with fictional role owners and relative timing. Costs and expected enquiry volumes remain blank. At the first checkpoint, the team checks whether the page answers the agreed buyer questions and whether the approved contact route works. It has not claimed a lead increase or completed a real campaign.

Adapt the review for legal work and architecture projects.

For a law firm, start with matter fit, jurisdiction and the responsible attorney's review. A page explaining how an initial conversation works may be useful, but it must not imply that every enquiry creates a client relationship or that a result is guaranteed. Name the authorized reviewer and keep case-specific information outside the public planning file.

Before preparing an architecture project story, record the studio's exact role, project status, client approval and image rights so the evidence gives a buyer more context than the photographs alone. Identify which design choices can be explained publicly and which collaborators should receive credit. A published project can help a buyer evaluate fit only if the description is accurate and its use is authorized.

Use these differences to change the tasks and dependencies, rather than swapping industry names in the same calendar. When professional review or image permission is unavailable, make the constraint visible in the plan and choose another evidence source or delay the item until its owner can resolve the dependency.

Complete the workbook and agree the next decision.

Start in Instructions, then complete Goals and constraints and Buyer questions, and add the pages and evidence you inspected to Current evidence. Enter tasks in Action plan only when their purpose and dependency are clear. Use the dropdowns for pillar and status, while leaving unavailable estimates blank.

The Budget assumptions sheet records the source of cost and time estimates. Review decisions captures the checkpoint, evidence, interpretation and agreed next action. Illustrative example is deliberately separate from the clean working sheets. Read it for the method, then write your own plan in the blank areas without carrying fictional entries into a real budget.

Bring the draft to the people responsible for delivery, approval and follow-up. Remove tasks nobody can own and resolve the prerequisites for those you keep. Save the agreed version privately, with a date and review owner. Growth 360 can support the connected delivery, but the workbook is useful whether you work with an agency or run the plan internally.

Sources and review.

Platform sources were checked on 2026-10-28. Recommendations are Growth Friday's planning guidance. Fictional scenarios demonstrate the tools, and are not client results or observed platform responses. No named human review is claimed.

• Google's guide to generative AI search features
• Google Business Profile representation guidelines
• Avoid sending personally identifiable information to Analytics