Projects and partners

Who may approve a policy wording change before it is published?

The writer may approve a change to the business commitment only when the merchant has actually delegated that authority within the agreed scope. Permission to draft or publish a page does not establish that delegation. Compare the current and proposed wording for changes to eligibility, timing, amounts, exceptions and customer actions. When meaning changes or is uncertain, obtain the responsible merchant decision on the exact wording and its operational effect before publication. Record a genuine editorial correction within the authority already granted rather than assuming every edit creates a new policy.

For: A research-only merchant, editor or project owner deciding whether a proposed policy edit changes what the business promises customers.

Updated 2026-10-01

Discuss my store project

Classify the edit by its effect on the promise

Put the current sentence and proposed replacement side by side. Identify who receives the promise, what the business agrees to do, when it must do it and what conditions or exclusions apply. A change in any of those elements deserves a policy decision even if the writer calls it clearer copy. The length of an edit does not measure its operational effect.

An editorial correction preserves the commitment: the customer’s options, the merchant’s duties and the relevant conditions remain the same. Use the agreed editorial authority for that work. If the original sentence admits more than one meaning, choosing one is a substantive interpretation; mark the ambiguity for the policy owner instead of silently choosing the meaning that reads best.

Check wording in context. Removing a qualification from a summary can broaden the apparent offer even when the full policy still contains it. A policy page, checkout notice and FAQ may express the same commitment in different lengths, so the owner’s decision needs to cover meaning across the affected surfaces.

Find the decision owner in the actual scope

Use the merchant’s project agreement or recorded delegation to identify who may decide policy, who may edit copy and who may publish the approved result. One person may hold all three responsibilities, but the assignment should be explicit. A publishing login, a job title or a writer’s suggested revision is not a record that the business delegated policy authority.

Prism’s how-it-works page says the consultation defines pages, processing questions and follow-up before work, and the merchant chooses which updates to make. A finding can identify a concern without resolving the business choice. If the agreed scope does not say who decides a changed commitment, ask the merchant to name that person before the change is released.

A provider’s website request can identify a problem to address, but a proposed response still needs to reflect the merchant’s actual operation. Keep the provider question and the merchant’s wording decision as separate records. Do not claim that the writer, reviewer or payment provider has supplied legal certification for the policy.

Give the owner enough information to decide

Present the exact current commitment, proposed text, reason for the change and the operational effect. Check the proposal against the procedure the relevant staff can carry out. Identify any change to who handles requests, which orders are covered, the conditions a customer must meet or the timing the business promises. If the procedure is unknown, mark it unresolved rather than smoothing over the gap in the prose.

The owner’s answer should identify the approved version or reject the proposal. A general approval of the website design does not show a decision on a later policy amendment. If the owner asks for a further revision that changes meaning, return that version for a decision within the agreed process. Do not publish a different commitment under an earlier approval.

Where the question is whether a proposed commitment satisfies an applicable legal obligation, identify that as a separate advice need. Prism’s website findings are informational and are not a legal opinion or compliance certification. Neither this worksheet nor the writer’s judgment establishes legal sufficiency or determines which wording governs earlier orders.

Publish the decided version and preserve its context

Record the approved text, decision owner, date and exact pages included in publication. Where the owner specifies an effective date or coverage for existing and future orders, preserve that instruction. If coverage is undecided, leave it open for the owner instead of assuming new wording retroactively changes earlier commitments.

After publication, compare the live policy and affected summaries with the approved wording, and record any mismatch for correction. Preserve the previous version in the merchant’s records so later questions can distinguish what changed from what was already promised. This is a practical change record; it does not decide contractual effect.

For a Prism checkout-review consultation, provide the public policy and checkout URLs, the proposed change in meaning and the unresolved responsibility. Scope, responsibilities, fees and terms are agreed before work. The inquiry asks for the website, products and question; leave out customer cases, payment details and credentials. Follow-up is by email, and the request does not book an appointment, buy a service or submit a processing application.

Policy change authority

Complete one copy for each proposed commitment change. Use the exact public wording and references to the merchant’s real approval records. A blank operational effect or authority row means the publication decision is still unresolved; a pure editorial correction can follow the editorial permission already recorded.

Worksheet entries are not submitted by Prism’s worksheet and are not saved by the site. Use record types, availability, anonymized observations, or match/mismatch results. Do not enter government identifiers, customer names or addresses, customer messages, receipt-access links, card or bank details, passwords, or keys. Send sensitive documents only through the provider’s verified secure channel.

Policy change authority. The last column is for temporary notes.
Evidence itemWhat to compareDecision it supportsYour record and next action
Current commitmentCapture the current policy sentence, public URL and version or observation date.Establishes the promise being changed rather than relying on a remembered summary.
Proposed changeCompare the exact proposed wording with the current audience, action, conditions and timing.Classifies preserved meaning, changed commitment or unresolved ambiguity.
Operational effectIdentify the actual staff procedure and resources affected by the proposed commitment.Shows whether the business can carry out the wording and which facts remain unknown.
Authorized policy ownerRefer to the agreed scope or merchant delegation naming the person who may decide this commitment.Separates policy authority from drafting work and technical publication access.
Coverage and effective instructionRecord the owner’s actual direction on when and where the new wording applies; retain open questions.Avoids silently deciding the treatment of earlier orders or inventing an effective date.
Publication decisionRecord the approved or rejected wording version, responsible decision-maker and date.Binds the release to a specific decision rather than a general website approval.
Published meaning checkCompare affected policy, checkout and summary text with the version the owner approved.Identifies publication differences that need correction without rewriting the commitment again.

These are temporary notes. Leaving or reloading this page may clear them. Worksheet entries are not sent automatically. If you copy notes into the consultation message and submit the form, Prism receives them as part of your request.

Limits

  • This workflow records the merchant’s authority and decision; it is not legal advice or a determination of which policy governs a customer’s order.
  • Prism findings do not certify compliance or establish processing approval. Implementation and publication responsibilities must be agreed for the particular work.

Related guides

Sources

  • Prism: How it works — checked 2026-09-21. Prism agrees the pages, questions and follow-up before work; the merchant chooses updates, while the provider makes underwriting decisions.
  • Prism features — checked 2026-09-21. Prism website review can examine policy content and differences between pages and checkout within agreed scope; findings are informational, not legal or compliance certification.
  • Prism solutions — checked 2026-09-21. Prism discusses storefront review and provider website questions with scope, fees and terms agreed before work; account eligibility remains the provider’s decision.
  • Prism contact — checked 2026-09-21. The inquiry asks for website, products and question, excludes card details, passwords and customer records, and receives email follow-up without creating a booking, purchase or processing application.

Discuss my store project

Planning, moving or taking over a store?

Discuss my store projectAll resources