Blog

I ran the same answer engine optimization (AEO) search audit on ScheinerInc.—the consultancy that I run for clients—across Claude, ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini. The findings revealed what AI captured accurately about ScheinerInc., what it missed about the larger problem, and the diligence question every CEO and board director should be asking right now.

Listen Now: “When AI Validates You—and When It Doesn’t” Deep Dive

Why Did I Decide to Run this AI Search Audit on My Own Company?

For the past year, I’ve been telling clients, executives and readers of this blog that AI platforms—e.g., Claude, ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini—have replaced traditional search as the way buyers discover companies, products and services.

I’ve written about “Why AI doesn’t know you exist” and what you can do about it, that third-party validation matters more than your own company’s website, and that most companies’ sales and marketing teams aren’t prepared for the shift from human search to business-to-AI (B2A) search.

I realized that I’d been telling executives to run this diagnostic on their own companies without ever publishing the results of running it on mine. That felt like a level of proof I needed to provide.

So, recently, I ran the same AEO search audit on ScheinerInc. that I’ve been running for my clients. The following results haven’t been skewed or curated in any way:

The question I looked to answer: “When a board director, CMO, or private equity operating partner uses AI to find a strategic advisor on AI visibility and brand positioning, does ScheinerInc.—or even Mike Scheiner—show up? If so, where, in what context and with what level of credibility?”

The Methodology

Putting myself in the seat of a prospective client, I categorized the search audit around three buyer search modes:

Across the three categories, I ran 12 prompts on each of the four AI platforms, resulting in a total of 48 responses. I logged into each platform with a different email so that no prior search history would influence the results. For each prompt, I captured whether I appeared, who appeared alongside me, what sources AI cited and how accurately I was represented.

What I found surprised me.

The Bright Spot that Made Me Pause

When AI was asked about ScheinerInc. or Mike Scheiner by name, all four platforms returned a detailed description that was strikingly consistent. After years of writing about AI, brand strategy and customer acquisition, my posts on this site and on LinkedIn have done more than build an audience; they’ve trained the AI platforms to categorize me accurately. None of the four positioned me as a traditional SEO agency, nor as a technical execution shop. Each one returned a version of the same read: strategic advisor, brand and digital consultancy, board-level interpreter of AI-mediated discovery.

Here’s what that looked like across the four platforms:

ChatGPT Positioned ScheinerInc. as a Strategy-Oriented Consultancy; Explicitly Not an SEO Shop
When asked to describe what ScheinerInc. does, ChatGPT placed me in the strategic advisor lane and made a point of saying the firm “seems less like a traditional SEO shop and more like a strategic digital advisor, brand/digital transformation consultancy, AI-era customer acquisition strategist.”

Two screens later, ChatGPT accurately captured my real positioning, i.e., that I’m directionally aligned for board education, digital visibility strategy and executive advisory. For deep technical AI visibility measurement or large-scale generative engine optimization (GEO) operations, the platform suggested pairing me with a vendor like Profound or AthenaHQ, which is precisely how I describe how my consultancy works with my own SEO/AEO partner to clients.

Gemini Went Further, Describing the Work that I Do as “His Exact Sandbox”

Of the four platforms, Gemini was the most direct. It told the prospect that for a company looking at declining leads, board-facing positioning, or revenue-attribution conversations, ScheinerInc. is “his exact sandbox.” That’s stronger language than I’d use when describing myself.

Perplexity Classified Me as a Strategist, Not an Execution Operator

Perplexity gave the cleanest summary: “He seems positioned more as a strategy-and-brand leader than a pure execution agency operator.” That’s the exact distinction I’ve been deliberate about for years. AI got it right.

And When AI Was Asked About Me By Name, the Read Got More Direct

The category positioning above is one layer of credibility. The second layer is what AI says when a prospect, having found my name, types it directly into the search bar to verify.

Gemini Led with an Executive Framing
Gemini characterized me as someone with “an executive-level pedigree that bridges elite brand building with highly modern digital growth.”

Claude Went Deeper—and Named a Real Trade-off

Of the four platforms, Claude was the most analytical. It described my background as “broad digital and brand strategy rather than a pure AEO/GEO specialist background—which could be a plus if you want someone who connects AI visibility to the bigger brand picture, or a consideration if you need deep technical GEO implementation.”

My First Take on These Results Was Negative

The platforms were citing me as a strategic voice on AI visibility, not as a deep technical operator who runs sophisticated GEO measurement infrastructure. That felt like a limitation to me. On the second read, I realized that this was the most useful insight from the entire audit. AI cited me accurately based on my expertise and published work—which is real validation for any prospect doing due diligence.

It also surfaced two specific gaps:

The first gap: I’m not positioned as a deep technical operator. That’s accurate, and it’s a deliberate choice. My long-time digital execution partner—who has more than 20 years of experience in SEO, AEO and digital marketing—complements my work on that side. ChatGPT and Claude both flagged this correctly. ChatGPT even named the vendors it would pair me with for that work (Profound and AthenaHQ). It also confirmed where my work fits inside a larger engagement and who the right execution partners are.

The second gap is harder, and worth calling out. There’s limited public proof of ScheinerInc.’s client outcomes—i.e., case studies, named engagements, measurable AI visibility improvements. Claude was the most direct about this, noting that it couldn’t independently verify “client outcomes, measurable AI visibility improvements, scale of engagements, depth of proprietary methodology.” That’s a fair read, and it’s the gap that I’m working to close.

The Problem AI Overlooked

AI’s read of me was useful validation. The more revealing finding came when I tested the prompts where I shouldn’t have shown up—and neither should AEO, AI search, or any mention of the structural shift in how buyers now find companies. I asked the kind of question a CMO might actually type into ChatGPT: Can you tell me why leads are way down this year, especially when marketing spend is the same?

ChatGPT’s assessment was structured and methodical—seven diagnostic patterns and a total of 20 possible causes.

To be fair, AI search did appear later in the list—“Organic traffic down → SEO rankings changed or AI search is replacing clicks” and “Search traffic fragmentation from AI answers”—but this was buried in a diagnostic flowchart that treats AI search as one of 20 possible causes, rather than as the shift that’s presently changing how buyers find companies.

The ChatGPT answer was a traditional digital marketing diagnostic. AI search appears in the list, but at the bottom—when it should be at the top. Companies losing pipeline are being told to fix the funnel, rather than to investigate how AI is bypassing the traditional marketing funnel entirely.

Can Thought Leadership Outpace Operational Maturity?

“A lot of this field is still emerging, so public thought leadership can outpace operational maturity.” — ChatGPT, on the AEO advisory category

That observation isn’t just true for me; it’s also true for the entire AEO category. Thought leadership appears to be the primary signal AI can evaluate and validate. There’s a new AEO agency getting spun up as I write this, with so-called “AI experts” claiming to have a proprietary methodology—without the operational proof to back it up.

Anyone honest about this work has to acknowledge that the category is in its early credibility-forming phase. If someone tells you they have the answer, pause and really question whether or not they’re being truthful. It was rewarding to see that AI captured me accurately. More so than I expected. It also surfaced where my work needs to be elaborated upon—i.e., more third-party validation, more public proof of client outcomes, more presence on the community platforms, such as Reddit, where AI increasingly draws its citations from.

The harder finding came from the solution-shopping prompts. Even when the prospective buyer described exactly what I do—a strategic advisor that helps a board understand AI visibility risk—my name didn’t appear. That’s the gap I’m citing honestly, and it’s the one I’m working to close.

The Question Worth Asking About Your Own Company

If you ran this same audit on your company tomorrow, would you or the service you provide show up within your sector? Would your company’s name be returned with validation or with skepticism, or would it be replaced entirely by that of a competitor? That’s what the audit exposes.

This is what I found for my own company. What does AI say about yours?

The Invitation

I’m running a small number of these diagnostics through introductions from board directors and senior advisors. If you believe that’s a conversation worth having for your company, email me here.

As always, thank you for reading and/or listening.