The playbook
Marketing Attribution: Review Process
A useful marketing attribution review ends with a supported decision for each item examined. Define the evidence required before opening the report: touchpoint, conversion, window, model. These fields give reviewers a shared basis for agreeing what is working, what needs attention, and who should act.
Put the task in context
State the model and window before comparing channel performance. The same sale can receive credit in several platforms. Attribution describes an allocation method; it does not by itself prove that the sale would not have occurred without the campaign.
Set the review boundary
Choose the records or journeys that matter to the current question. Include a normal case, a recently changed case, and an exception where available. This is a diagnostic sample, not a claim that every item has been checked. Record how the sample was selected and what would justify expanding it.
Use explicit review criteria
| Criterion | Review question |
|---|---|
| Define identity events and conversion windows | Is the supporting touchpoint current and traceable? |
| Document how credit is assigned across touchpoints | Does conversion support the decision being made? |
| Compare model outputs with actual business outcomes | Can the next owner verify model? |
Inspect the evidence before assigning a result
For each item, compare the intended behavior with the observed behavior. Pay particular attention to treating attributed credit as proof of incremental causation. If it appears, record where it occurs and which assumption it contradicts. Distinguish a verified defect from an unanswered question and from a preference about how the work should look.
Where the evidence supports the known correction, explain the model's limitations and use experiments when feasible. Give that action to an accountable owner with a description of the expected result. If you cannot yet identify the cause, assign a diagnostic action rather than prescribing a speculative repair.
Record a decision that can be acted on
| Decision | When to use it |
|---|---|
| Keep | The current state serves the intended task and the evidence is adequate. |
| Revise | A specific gap is confirmed and the proposed action addresses it. |
| Investigate | Important information is missing or conflicting. |
| Retire or combine | The item has no distinct useful purpose in the current scope. |
Verify corrections and expand selectively
Recheck the affected campaign or conversion record after the owner completes the action. Then inspect other items sharing the relevant cause. A shared template, process rule, or data source may justify expanding the review. Similar wording or appearance alone is a weaker reason.
Turn the review into a decision summary
Summarize the affected scope, confirmed findings, actions, and open questions. Connect the findings to reconciled attributed outcomes using the same definition as the baseline. A good summary lets the responsible person decide what happens next without reading every working note.
Treat audience, offer, creative, destination, and tracking as connected parts of the campaign. If several change together, the result does not identify which change mattered. Record the differences before using the result to set a new budget.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixFLO run this for every client.
Start now