Our authors
Business AI Review is an independent software review publication covering AI tools, SaaS, CRM, marketing software, productivity tools and the wider world of business technology. Every article is written and reviewed by named contributors who test the tools themselves — here is who they are.
Our work follows a documented review methodology and editorial policy, and we remain independent of the vendors we cover.
Daniel Perez
Founder & Editor-in-Chief
Daniel Perez is the founder and editor of Business AI Review. He has spent more than a decade evaluating business software and writing about technology for teams that need practical, jargon-free advice.
15 articles · AI tools & assistants · SaaS evaluation · Productivity systems
Business AI Review Editorial Team
Research & Reviews
The Business AI Review editorial team independently tests and researches the tools we cover, combining hands-on use with public documentation and verified user feedback.
9 articles · CRM platforms · Customer support software · Email marketing
How we approach authorship
Trust starts with knowing who is behind what you read. Every article on Business AI Review is attributed to a named author or to our editorial team, never to an anonymous byline, and every author has a public profile setting out their focus and their role on the publication. We do not publish ghost-written or unattributed reviews, and we do not present content as independent editorial when it is anything else. The people listed above are accountable for the guidance we publish.
Authorship standards
Authors write about the categories they focus on, and the expectation is the same across the team: form a view from genuine assessment, not from a vendor's marketing. That means using tools hands-on wherever a trial exists, reading the official documentation, and grounding claims in evidence a reader could check. Where a conclusion rests on documentation and verified user feedback rather than direct testing, we say so plainly rather than implying first-hand experience we do not have. Honesty about the basis of a recommendation is itself an editorial standard.
Editorial review procedures
Articles are produced and maintained under the supervision of the founder and Editor-in-Chief, who sets the standards every review follows and has final editorial review over the comparisons and recommendations we publish. Guides attributed to the editorial team are researched and drafted against a shared, documented process before publication. The aim of that review is consistency: that two articles in the same category are judged by the same yardstick, and that no recommendation goes out without having been checked against the criteria we hold ourselves to. The full process is laid out in our review methodology.
Update policy
Software changes constantly, and outdated guidance is its own kind of error. We revisit published articles on a rolling schedule and after any major product change, updating prices, plan limits and feature details against vendors' current pages. When we make a substantive revision, we show an "Updated" date on the article so readers can see how current the guidance is. Keeping articles accurate over time is treated as part of the job, not an afterthought once a piece is published.
Fact-checking and corrections
Before publication, factual claims — pricing, plan limits, feature availability — are verified against the vendor's own current information rather than repeated from memory or marketing. Despite that, we will sometimes get things wrong, and when we do we want to fix them quickly. If you spot an error — an old price, a feature that no longer exists, a broken link — please tell us through our contact page, including the article URL and the specific detail. We treat corrections as a priority and will update the article and its "Updated" date where appropriate. Accuracy matters to us more than being first.
Accountability and transparency
Named authorship is one half of accountability; transparency about how we operate is the other. Business AI Review is independent and reader-first: no advertiser, affiliate partner or vendor can buy a positive review, a ranking position, or inclusion in a comparison. The site is funded through affiliate commissions earned only on products we would recommend anyway, at no extra cost to you, and through clearly labelled advertising — and neither ever influences our conclusions. We explain exactly how this works in our advertiser disclosure, and the principles that govern everything we publish are set out in our editorial policy.
Taken together, these practices are how a small, independent publication earns trust: by being clear about who writes for it, how those writers reach their conclusions, how the work is kept current, and how the site makes its money. We would rather be transparent about the limits of our process — what we tested directly versus what we assessed from documentation and verified feedback — than overstate our authority, because credibility lost is far harder to rebuild than it is to keep. If anything about how we operate is unclear, we welcome the question — you can always reach us through our contact page.