Comparing channel efficiency

Same question.
Comparable numbers.

A guide to reviewing acquisition channels without confusing attributed activity, lead quality and business outcomes.

Begin with the decision the comparison should support.

Choosing where to investigate is different from proving which channel causes the most incremental revenue. Platform reports can help with the first question while remaining insufficient for the second.

Write the decision down before collecting a table of costs. Otherwise the easiest available metric can quietly become the objective.

Align the comparison.

Dimension Check
Period Same dates, with sales-cycle delay considered
Spend Same categories of included costs
Conversion Same event or qualification definition
Audience Comparable market, offer and territory where possible
Attribution Known windows and crediting rules
Outcomes Comparable CRM disposition quality

Separate capture from creation.

A search campaign reaching existing demand and a content-led campaign introducing a new proposition may operate at different points in the journey. Their immediate conversion rates alone do not establish their total contribution.

This is a reason to investigate the role of a channel, not a licence to excuse weak performance indefinitely. Define what evidence would support continuing or changing the work.

Watch for double credit.

Several platforms can each credit an interaction before the same sale. Adding their attributed revenue can overstate the combined business total. Reconcile against business records and keep the attribution view distinct from the financial view.

Make a bounded decision.

  1. Identify the most credible gap in the available evidence.
  2. Decide whether it needs a tracking repair, operational feedback or a controlled experiment.
  3. Make a change proportionate to what is known.
  4. Agree the review period and the conditions for the next decision.