Step 1
A claim over 180 days old is one drift signal.
Public tool method · Version 1.0.0
Relevancy Audit
Use this method when you need to answer: Where has the written position drifted from current buyer and market reality? It turns the evidence you supply into a Positioning drift map by applying explicit, versioned decision rules. The result is not a benchmark or certification. It shows the strongest evidence, riskiest input, next action, owner, and review date so another reader can inspect and challenge the decision.
Last material review 2026-08-08 · Next review 2026-11-06
Question answered
Where has the written position drifted from current buyer and market reality?
The drift map separates claim age, customer evidence, competitor reframing, lost-deal signals, renewal signals, and internal disagreement.
Step 2
Customer, competitor, lost-deal, renewal, and internal signals remain separate.
Step 3
Four or more recorded signals produce Material drift; two or three produce Drift signal.
Step 4
Internal disagreement does not prove customer belief.
Step 5
Record the required inputs and label missing or estimated evidence before classification.
Assumptions and limits
- Recorded signals require external validation before a positioning change.
Usefulness hypothesis
A drift map improves the decision to preserve, test, or change a position.
Primary metric: Drift-map export or Relevancy Audit handoff
Worked example and modes
The same method, preserved entry intent.
- Claim
- We help growth teams sharpen positioning
- Last Review Date
- 2025-09-01
- Customer Description
- They help leadership determine what remains true
- Competitor Language
- Strategy operating systems
- Lost Deal Evidence
- Buyer wanted an ongoing review cadence
- Renewal Signal
- Clients rerun decision tools
Distribution package
Use, embed, and share the instrument.
Blank CSV template90-second demonstrationThree share treatmentsPlain-language answer
Embed with canonical attribution
<iframe src="https://petrichorgrowth.com/tools/relevancy-audit/embed.html" title="Relevancy Audit" loading="lazy" width="100%" height="900"></iframe>
<p>Source: <a href="https://petrichorgrowth.com/tools/relevancy-audit">Relevancy Audit by Petrichor</a></p>Ownership and change control
Who keeps the result defensible?
Product
Petrichor product
Method
Petrichor strategy
Evidence
Petrichor research
Privacy
Petrichor operations
Security
Petrichor web platform
Distribution
Petrichor growth
Support
Petrichor client experience
A material method change requires a reason, impact note, fixture rerun, semantic-version increment, and public entry in the method change log.
Related decision methods
Continue through the evidence chain.
Revenue Story
Test whether the growth narrative matches the actual revenue mechanics.
Signal Triage
Decide which market signals require action, observation, or deliberate disregard.
Bottom-Up TAM Builder
Build a transparent market estimate from named accounts, adoption, and economics.
Related plain-language answers
Revenue Story answerSignal Triage answerBottom-Up TAM Builder answer
Method questions
What another reader should know.
What does the Relevancy Audit method produce?
A versioned Positioning drift map with visible reasoning, evidence status, next action, ownership, and review date.
What inputs does Relevancy Audit require?
Only the structured decision evidence named by the instrument. Missing or estimated inputs remain visible in the result.
Does the method use AI or a cross-customer benchmark?
No. It applies deterministic rules to the user's inputs and does not compare one customer with another.
When is the method reviewed or changed?
The current method is reviewed at least every 90 days. Material changes require new fixtures, a version increment, and a public change note.
When should the artifact move into facilitated work?
When the unresolved decision requires team challenge, evidence reconciliation, dissent, ownership, and an organizational commitment.