Every SEO proposal covers roughly the same six components: making a site technically findable, working out which searches are worth pursuing, structuring pages to answer them, producing the content, earning the authority that makes it credible, and measuring whether any of it worked. Providers differ far less in what they list than in how deeply they do each part — which is why comparing proposals on price tells you almost nothing.
This is a scope guide rather than a sales page. If you are collecting proposals, it should let you compare them on something more useful than the number at the bottom.
The six components, and what depth looks like
1. Technical foundation. Whether search engines can reach, render, understand and index your pages. Shallow versions run an automated crawl and hand over the report. Deep versions investigate why problems exist, prioritise by actual impact, and either implement the fixes or work directly with whoever does.
2. Keyword and intent research. Shallow versions export a tool’s suggestions and call the list a strategy. Deep versions establish which terms carry real demand, which are winnable from your current position, and what the person searching actually wants. The distinction matters enormously: in our own category, 23 keywords carried 77% of the demand and 951 carried almost nothing.
3. On-page optimisation. Titles, headings, internal linking and the structure of the answer itself. Shallow versions adjust metadata. Deep versions restructure pages so a specific question receives a specific, extractable answer — which is also what makes a page quotable by AI answer engines.
4. Content production. Shallow versions publish volume against keywords. Deep versions produce fewer pages that answer real questions with enough specificity to be worth citing. The difference is mostly research and editing, which is where the cost in content work actually sits.
5. Off-page authority. Shallow versions buy links. Deep versions earn mentions through work worth mentioning, which is slower, more expensive and considerably more durable.
6. Measurement. Shallow versions report rankings. Deep versions baseline everything at the start and report enquiries, visibility across a basket of terms, and — increasingly necessary — whether AI answers in your category name you.
How to normalise proposals before comparing them
Draw a grid. Six rows for the components above, one column per proposal. Mark each cell as covered deeply, covered shallowly, or absent.
| Component | What to look for | Common gap |
|---|---|---|
| Technical | Implementation, not just recommendation | “We provide recommendations” with no owner named |
| Research | Demand validation and winnability | A keyword export presented as strategy |
| On-page | Existing pages included, not only new ones | Scope silently limited to new content |
| Content | Volume and definition specified | “Regular content” with no number |
| Off-page | Named methods | “Link building” with no description |
| Measurement | Baseline recorded before work starts | No baseline at all |
Most proposals that appeared to differ by a wide margin turn out, once normalised, to be quoting for quite different jobs.
What has changed about this scope recently
The six components are the same as they were five years ago. What has changed is the surface they are aimed at.
When we measured 980 Singapore keywords about SEO services, keywords carrying 68% of the search volume returned an AI Overview above the ranked results. That does not add a seventh component. It changes the standard for two of the existing ones: on-page structure now needs to produce extractable answers, and measurement needs to look at whether you are named in those answers rather than only where you sit in the list beneath them.
Which is why we treat answer engine visibility as part of the same scope rather than a separate product. The underlying work barely changes; the standard it has to meet does.
What to prepare before you approach anyone
- Your domain, and which services actually generate your margin.
- What you have spent on search before, and what happened.
- Access to analytics, or an honest statement that it was never set up properly.
- A realistic view of what you would do with more enquiries.
That last one is not filler. We have seen SEO work and produce no commercial benefit because the enquiries arrived somewhere nobody was monitoring. The channel is only worth what happens after the click.
Frequently asked questions
What is included in search engine optimisation services?
Six components: technical foundation work, keyword and intent research, on-page optimisation, content production, off-page authority building, and measurement. Providers vary in which they cover and how deeply, so scope should be compared rather than headline price.
What is the difference between SEO and search engine optimisation?
Nothing. SEO is the abbreviation. Both refer to improving how well a site is found through unpaid search results, which now includes being cited in AI-generated answers.
How is SEO different from paid search?
Paid search buys placement directly and stops when you stop paying. SEO earns placement through the quality and structure of the site itself, takes months to build, and continues returning after the spending stops. Most businesses use both.
What should I prepare before approaching an SEO provider?
Your domain, a sense of which services actually make you money, what you have spent on search before and what happened, and access to your analytics. That is enough for any competent provider to scope properly.
How do I compare SEO proposals fairly?
Normalise the scope first. Write down the six components and mark which each proposal covers and to what depth. Proposals that look far apart on price usually turn out to be describing different amounts of work.
Send us your domain and we will scope all six components against your actual situation, and tell you which of them we think you need and which you do not. See how we scope an engagement, message us on WhatsApp, or send an enquiry.
Sources
Written by Charlotte Zhang, Operations Partner at Kaizenaire Pte Ltd (UEN 201932071D). Charlotte co-founded Kaizenaire with Ken Tan in 2019 and runs client delivery, after four years in operations at OCBC and HSBC.