Our assessment framework, evidence standards and editorial independence policy β so you know exactly what our reviews are based on.
Every software package is assessed across eight dimensions. We use qualitative descriptors (Very strong / Strong / Moderate / Limited) rather than numeric scores until we have verified workshop data to anchor them.
Machinery assessments focus on the factors that determine real cost of ownership, not just headline specifications.
Every page on joinery.io falls into one of four evidence categories. These are not always labelled explicitly, but this is the framework we apply.
| Content type | Examples | How we present it |
|---|---|---|
| Official / regulated fact | SG rate, Fair Work Award rates, GST, licensing | Source and effective date cited. Linked to primary authority. |
| Joinery.io benchmark data | AU workshop margins, shop rates, software adoption | Sample size, collection period and methodology stated. Only published once 100+ verified submissions reached. |
| Industry estimate | Indicative charge-out rates, kitchen pricing ranges | Clearly labelled indicative range. Source basis explained. Not presented as proprietary data. |
| Editorial assessment | Software comparisons, machinery recommendations, buying guides | Clearly presented as joinery.io editorial view, not survey result. Framework and dimensions disclosed. |
Commercial relationships never determine rankings or editorial conclusions. A vendor paying for a partner placement does not receive editorial influence over their review, comparison position or category assessment.
Sponsored or partner content is explicitly labelled. Editorial content is never labelled as sponsored. These categories do not mix.
If you are a vendor and believe an assessment contains a factual error, contact us at hello@joinery.io. We take factual corrections seriously and will update content when presented with credible evidence.