A response-time promise needs an operating commitment
Keep the promise only to the extent its exact meaning is supported by actual response records and an operating commitment for the channels and hours it covers. Define when the clock starts, whether it measures a substantive first reply or resolution, and which time zone and covered days apply. Then compare real requests, including overdue and unanswered ones, with that wording. An inbox that accepts messages at all hours is not evidence of round-the-clock staffing.
For: A research-only merchant reviewing a support-time statement on its storefront, policies or customer messages.
Turn the published sentence into a measurable commitment
Copy the exact promise and each place it appears: the contact page, help answers, policy text, banners, chat entry point and automatic replies. Record the channel each statement covers. A site-wide promise may read more broadly than an email-only operating practice. A narrow statement on the contact page does not explain conflicting language that a buyer sees elsewhere.
Specify the event the statement promises. An acknowledgment confirms receipt; a substantive first response addresses the request; a resolution closes the issue. Keep separate timestamps for those events where the support system records them. Do not count an automatic acknowledgment as evidence that a person answered the question when the published wording promises a support response.
Identify the clock as the visitor would understand it. If the promise is limited to business hours, the actual hours, days and time zone need to be clear alongside the relevant statement. Record how holidays and closure periods are described. Do not silently subtract nights and weekends from an unqualified elapsed-time promise when reviewing whether it was met.
Compare the claim with complete response records
Choose and record the period you are examining, then use genuine received and first-substantive-reply timestamps from each covered channel. Normalize time zones before comparing them. For each request, determine the deadline implied by the published wording and whether the response met it. If a timestamp or thread segment is missing, keep the result unknown rather than assigning a favorable response time.
Include requests that still have no response. Their age at the time of review matters: an unanswered request already older than the promised window is relevant even though it has no completed response interval. Keep any exclusions, such as duplicate threads, explicit and consistent so the comparison does not improve merely by discarding difficult cases.
Read the evidence in the same terms as the claim. An average response time cannot establish that every request was answered within a promised maximum. A record from one staffed channel cannot establish coverage for another. Historical performance also does not show that the next shift is covered; a roster alone does not show how quickly prior requests were handled. Both the response history and the future operating commitment matter.
Assign the coverage behind the words
Name the person accountable for each covered channel and the documented hours during which someone is responsible for responding. Compare that commitment with the current roster or service agreement. Include the handoff for absence or closure only if it actually exists. Do not fill an overnight gap with an assumption that somebody will notice the message.
Check whether the promised event depends on another party. Your team may be able to acknowledge or investigate a request without being able to resolve a provider decision on the same schedule. A commitment to respond should not become a promise that a bank, carrier or contracted vendor will finish its work within your response window.
Decide what the current evidence supports. Retain wording when the defined scope and real operation support it. Clarify wording that confuses response with resolution or leaves covered hours unclear. Remove or revise a specific time claim that the available evidence cannot support. Do not simply replace it with an equally unsubstantiated claim of immediate or continuous support.
Keep the public correction consistent
The FTC's truth-in-advertising guidance states that advertising should be truthful, not misleading and substantiated across media, including websites. That general guidance does not approve a particular support sentence or determine all legal obligations for the places your business operates. Here, it supports the discipline of connecting a measurable public claim to the records behind it.
Record the owner, approved wording and date of any actual update, then check the affected public surfaces and message templates for conflicts. Keep earlier versions where they explain what an existing customer was told. A copy change does not itself provide the staffing needed to meet the new wording.
A Prism website-review consultation can consider the support claim alongside policies and business disclosures within an agreed scope. Bring the public URLs, the claim and a non-sensitive summary of the discrepancy. Scope, reporting, fees and terms are agreed before work. A review is informational; it does not certify a response-time claim or supply a support team.
Support-promise record
Complete a separate record for each materially different channel or promise. Compare real response records using the same clock the published statement describes. A blank or unknown input remains a gap; a good historical result does not replace a current coverage commitment.
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.
Support-promise record. The last column is for temporary notes.
Promise component
Record to consult
Interpretation or action
Your finding
Published time
Record to consultExact wording, page URL or message-template location, and the date you observed it.
Interpretation or actionIdentify whether the statement promises a maximum, a usual interval or another specific measure; do not substitute a different measure.
Channel
Record to consultThe email, chat, form or other route the statement actually names or accompanies.
Interpretation or actionCheck each covered route separately; evidence for one channel does not substantiate another.
Covered hours
Record to consultPublished days, operating hours, time zone and closure wording, compared with the real coverage schedule.
Interpretation or actionA message can arrive while nobody is staffed. Record the gap rather than treating availability of the inbox as coverage.
Response event and clock
Record to consultReceived, acknowledgment, substantive-reply and resolution timestamps where available.
Interpretation or actionUse the event actually promised and the stated elapsed-time or business-hours basis.
Actual response records
Record to consultA defined review period with request references, timestamp comparisons, unanswered requests and disclosed exclusions.
Interpretation or actionRecord misses and unknowns as well as replies; an average alone cannot support an every-request maximum.
Owner commitment
Record to consultAccountable role, agreed coverage and any genuine absence or closure handoff.
Interpretation or actionDetermine whether the current team can deliver the promise going forward; do not invent backup staffing.
Publication decision
Record to consultSupported wording, required correction, responsible editor and locations to update.
Interpretation or actionRetain, clarify or revise the claim based on the evidence, then record the actual published change.
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 worksheet evaluates consistency between a public promise and operating records. It is not a legal opinion or approval of a particular phrase.
Historical response records do not guarantee future performance, and a consultation does not create round-the-clock staffing or an incident-response commitment.
Use internal reference labels and summarized timing findings. Do not paste customer messages, names, contact details, payment information or credentials into the worksheet or public form.
FTC truth in advertising — checked 2026-09-28. FTC guidance requires truthful, nonmisleading and substantiated advertising across media including websites. It does not establish that a specific support-time phrase is lawful.
Prism features — checked 2026-09-21. Prism reviews product descriptions, marketing claims, policies and business disclosures together within an agreed scope. Findings are informational, not a legal opinion or compliance certification.