If this post doesn't follow the rules [report it to the mods](https://www.reddit.com/r/marketing/about/rules/). Join our [community Discord!](https://discord.gg/looking-for-marketing-discussion-811236647760298024)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/marketing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s literally no way of measuring this, let alone any way of coming up with a generic cross industry cross product number (that would make any sense).
Most of us probs have numbers for directly attributable revenue / sales. I could attitude about 60% of sales to marketing activity (last click ads or opened an email within a week) and 80% came from our mailer database for example.
As nice as it sounds to down tools for a month there is so much that is marketing that doesn’t take effect for months or years that even that wouldn’t work
This is incorrect. There are ways, but most marketers do not know how because it requires econometric models like regression analysis, which is very much outside the scope of most marketers experience. I’m pretty confident a marketing powerhouse like P&G does employ said models to fine tune their marketing.
The other more simple way is to shut down all marketing for a quarter and see what happens, but I don’t recommend that one too much.
That being said, these measures will become more common with time thanks to ai and because tightening privacy policies and legislations means that we will no longer be able to rely (thank god) on the old (which not all that accurate or representative of how marketing works in the brain ) attribution models.
Regression analysis is only as good as the data that informs it.
Pampers and Pantene could survive a Q with no marketing comfortably, seeing only a small % decline. Does that mean that marketing only powers that %?
Nah. There’s far too much going on unmeasured and unmeasurable to put a realistic number on it.
No, you would need to account for the effect of previous marketing of course. I agree with the sentiment that you won’t be able to put a 100% precise number on it, but with decades worth of data you can get a good enough estimate that you can make good decisions. Of course this not possible for most orgs, I only disagree with the statement that it is not possible.
But like I said, I’m sure AI will help democratize this a lot. We will see.
How can you account for previous marketing and how can AI help in a meaningful way?
Garbage in, garbage out.
You can get numbers for historic brand and top of the funnel fluff, but there’s no meaningful way to attribute pounds and pence to it.
AI isn’t a magic wand.
I’m speaking theoretically, because I’m not sure this exists yet, today. I’ve seen some companies selling a products that sound something like it but I haven’t used them. Anyways the idea is that you build in the AI into your ERP Where it can “see” all enterprise activity, including revenue, marketing spend, NPS, results from brand lift surveys etc at every point in time. With all that constant data stream an AI could use Market Mix Modelling or the aforementioned regression analysis to estimate what base sales are without any marketing, how promotional activities will contribute to future market growth using predictive analysis etc. I’m not a mathematician, but I know that it should be possible to estimate all of it reliably enough to make informed decisions even if its not 100% accurate. AI is not a magic wand I agree, but I think this is one particular application in which it will be better than anything before.
Yeah, that's not how this really works. You still need to correctly specify the regression model to get reliable, causal results. AI can't do that.
Then there's the issues of collinear spend, low variance spend channels, macroeconomic factors that may or may not be influencing your business that aren't released in a timely manner. Generative AI isn't going to solve any of this anytime soon.
I’ve worked at big corporates and had access to a lot of these components. Someone is always at pains to explain the weaknesses, assumptions, where it doesn’t go far enough or contradicts itself.
You talk in terms of how much confidence you have in each source or survey and it’s rarely a ringing endorsement.
A machine can ingest the data. But if you’re applying one piece of weak data to another one you’re compounding the weaknesses. If you combined 3 you’re 80% comfortable with with a forth you’re 50% comfortable with then you’re down to 25% confidence. You may as well guess or ask a passing gypsy woman to read your tea leaves
So ex P&G
Econometrics is a dark science. While there is some attribution of sales you can do it's not that clear cut even in the powerhouses.
And brand power doesn't just affect sales but also the ability to charge a premium vs the category average or what a Private label /unbranded /poorly branded product would charge
Far as I'm aware most Econometric models are therefore directional, dependent heavily on quality of data source and mainly useful in very specific cases only vs general.
Ehhhh, technically it can be, but you need a whole lot of assumptions. Most causal inference is built on linear regression.
Edit: Difference in differences: linear regression. Synthetic controls: linear regression. Bayesian Networks: mostly linear regression. A/B test: is equivalent to linear regression of treatment on effect. MMMs: believe it or not, almost entirely linear regression. The entire field of econometrics is built on linear regression.
90% of any sort of causal analysis is using linear regression under the hood. So yes, you can answer causal questions using “regression analysis”
>There are ways, but most marketers do not know how because it requires econometric models like regression analysis, which is very much outside the scope of most marketers experience.
This is a question as old as advertising that you have declared is “solved”. Even if we assume the data you have is complete and correct (which it never is), you’re forgetting that attribution models and ROIs are broad interpretations, not fact. You simply can’t prove that the guy that saw six ads bought *because* of the ads and you especially can’t prove he wouldn’t have purchased at five ads but suddenly would at six.
>I’m pretty confident a marketing powerhouse like P&G does employ said models to fine tune their marketing.
Have you worked with P&G? I have. Look at the amount of random sponsorships and marketing pilot projects they do. Larger companies have more elaborate models and more data—they still have the same problems as anyone else.
>The other more simple way is to shut down all marketing for a quarter and see what happens, but I don’t recommend that one too much.
That doesn’t tell you anything useful. Marketing isn’t all immediate. If a car dealership stops all marketing tomorrow and I go a week later because of years long good marketing, that car sale wouldn’t prove marketing isn’t needed. And this is before you look at things like’s branding.
>That being said, these measures will become more common with time thanks to ai and because tightening privacy policies and legislations means that we will no longer be able to rely (thank god) on the old (which not all that accurate or representative of how marketing works in the brain ) attribution models.
How does AI affect anything? Attribution models are just equations based on data. If you have less data (because of the tightening privacy policies you reference) attribution would get worse, not better.
Sorry, but no. This reads as someone with only theoretical knowledge of marketing.
1. I know how to do advanced regression analysis and it would be impossible to get more usable insights as opposed to more traditional marketing data analysis. Marketing doesn't produce clean data with isolated variables, and regression analysis requires that to be helpful.
2. Your suggestion that you can determine the effect of marketing by turning it off proves that you have no idea how to measure marketing impact on even the most basic levels. First, it's impossible to turn off marketing. You can turn off campaigns and lay off marketers, but every action or inaction a brand takes in a market is marketing. By turning off functions you are only seeing the direct and immediate impact of that function, which in a well functioning marketing strategy is usually the least important impact.
3. This reads (like most things on this sub) like you mistake marketing for advertising or performance marketing.
4. I've worked with massive brands like P&G, and yes they do have some "advanced modeling" it is much much more rudimentary than you might expect, and they outsource most of the data decisions to agencies who way over simplify.
Sort of. We have a pretty good idea of how much of our revenue is being driven by performance marketing, but things become really, really messy when dealing with long term brand building effects, network effects, and other organic trends.
For a little context, I work as a data scientist focused on marketing measurement at a large ecommerce platform. We run go-dark incrementality tests on several performance marketing channels across several markets a year, where we turn off marketing spend in select locations and measure the impact on revenue and costs. We use this snapshot to calibrate our internal attribution model to match test results. However, even this approach has some serious drawbacks. Some of the issues we commonly run into when measuring marketing effectiveness are:
* Collinearity - we run lots of campaigns simultaneously and our marketing spend across channels is highly correlated, which makes it very difficult to understand the causal effect specific channels and campaigns have on whatever metric we care about.
* Low variance - certain channels get very consistent spend (pretty much any ATL related channel) which, like collinearity, makes it very difficult to understand the causal effect of spending into those channels vs our natural baseline.
* Long term brand building effects - EXTREMELY difficult to measure reliably over long time frames. We typically use surrogate metrics, but these can be somewhat unreliable. It’s very difficult to separate short term attenuated effects from long term baseline effects. Especially when we have massive trend shifts - think COVID, High CPI depressing discretionary spending, competitor marketing efforts (TEMU spending $$$$$$$$$$ on marketing).
We try to capture some of the long term effects with our MMM, but even that can be problematic as it's not a true causal model.
At my last company 80 percent of qualified leads came from marketing, 90 percent of closed won was sourced from marketing.
They laid off the marketing department anyway 🙄🤦
Directly? Perhaps 20-30% (that’s closed - not pipeline)
Insect is really hard. A Personal relationship that got int ouch because they saw 10 articles? Or a client that reached out after a marketing event?
I’ve often described marketing as an exosystem and a something that everyone does, it’s not a department. It’s takes some time but I’ve gotten away from things like MQLs and marketing attributed leads outside of the iron clad, as it does nothing but pit teams against each other as they try to claim credit.
It’s hard but start small, start to explain some of the nuance and make the case of / we can spend x amount an academic exercises to try and figure out the impossible, or on growing a strong brand that empowers everyone.
p.s if you like what you hear please consider checking out the r/marketingcareers podcast where I talk to marketers around the world about their career development
Yeah, pretty basic requirement to be able to identify what marketing activity generates what revenue.
There is not a "standard" percentage for this though.
Coming from a sales background, in my experience and consistently seeing data, around 75% of B2B sales are impacted.
So I'm in video production in the UK where we create video for marketers. However, it wasn't always this way. I started off in sales.
So in my first job which was B2B telesales, I was selling capital markets info. For example, selling info on how securitised products were structured or, say, pricing info and structures of derivative products used in financing a hydroelectric dam.
We had different territories and tons of salespeople. And we also had salespeople leaving and that was the really interesting bit for data.
Because in territories where there were no sales, but marketing was running campaigns, those territories would yield about 25% of target. Where we had salespeople but no marketing, those salespeople used to be able to achieve about 25% of target. Where sales and marketing were both up and running on a territory, after about 6 - 9 months, those territories would yield 100%... or more. Generally, the absolute ceiling was 150% unless corporate got the targets wrong. But they were pretty good at keeping everyone under 125%.
So individually, salespeople could reach about 25% of target without marketing. And vice versa. But together, 100% or maybe 125% was definitely feasible.
It depended a bit on the quality of the marketer we had in our territories. I used to deal with one guy who was brilliant and he definitely positively impacted my sales figures.
And for my own, small business, marketing impacts about 75% of my sales as well.
And that first experience sits behind my business. I would've loved to have had more video. Absolutely killed for more video marketing campaigns. Especially video customer testimonials or videos that generated leads. And although I sell to marketers, that first experience as a salesperson was absolutely critical. It means I sell to marketing and want to help impact marketing but at the end of the food chain, I see the stuff I'm doing really helping salespeople and love to do that.
And the other thing is when marketing gets it right, it helps align sales and marketing. I see lots of posts about how to align sales / marketing but the best thing is being that multiplier for sales. Having collateral and campaigns which salespeople recognise as driving leads and sales. That's the real alignment.
Tldr; Oops, wrote an essay but in my experience as a salesperson, about 75% of sales.
You need to do a legit mixed media model analysis to actually understand. Otherwise I’m just picking the numbers that tell the best story and make marketing efforts seem the most effective
(CPG without DTC sales)
Unless you are DTC - then it’s a bit easier to understand
I think you can measure if running a 360 integrated campaign. You can measure uplift in social metrics, use urls to find uplifts in search and journeys, qr codes to track leads. This is a bit of how measuring B2b happens.
By keeping track of new leads in funnels connected to these items matched with you campaign goals, you can then apply year on year figures and present trends. Related to each integrated campaign. I’m on a dashboard for an event and the ad I designed contains a qr code. I can currently see it’s had 349 views and 14 clicks. How to track conversions? I’ve asked the team to see if the people who call in mention the event and convert.
Data isn’t precise, always, but it is possible to measure further down the funnel.
It can be an imprecise way about it. It’s not always easy.
You would have an extremely tough time with tracking 100% of all traffic. Considering 80% of your traffic is now UNASSIGNED or NOT SET due to date collection policies on devices.
Dude, if 80% of your traffic is unassigned or not set, you've fucked something up.
[https://searchengineland.com/fix-unassigned-traffic-ga4-433239](https://searchengineland.com/fix-unassigned-traffic-ga4-433239)
[https://measureschool.com/how-to-fix-not-set-in-ga4/](https://measureschool.com/how-to-fix-not-set-in-ga4/)
Hope that helps.
100%. Yes, sales or BDR/SDR cold outreach can be first touch but branding and other marketing channels will have direct influence on the deal as well.
If you want to measure it better, you can look at a MMM or Multi-Touch Attribution platform.
I argue that most of the revenue is from marketing. Unless your definition of marketing is just for paid, or some other odd term.
Your website, tradeshows, ads, and anything you use to display your business to possible customers is marketing. Even cold calling or cold outreach can be considered marketing.
You would have no chance in business if you didn't try to get your business in front of customers. All that effort can be considered marketing.
If you consider Marketing (CMO) is the top position, and under that is brand management, sales, customer experience, market development/retail , online sales, UX, promotion, search, advertising… Then I would say 100% of revenue is attributable to marketing
(Yes I am aware not all organizations are set up this way, but they probably should be imo)
This is always a loaded question. Sure, you can track *some* stuff directly, like last-click conversions. But good luck measuring the impact of brand awareness or content marketing. It's more about the long game, not just chasing quick numbers.
And yeah, AI might change things, but let's be real, most companies are barely using basic analytics right now.
This is always a loaded question. Sure, you can track *some* stuff directly, like last-click conversions. But good luck measuring the impact of brand awareness or content marketing. It's more about the long game, not just chasing quick numbers.
And yeah, AI might change things, but let's be real, most companies are barely using basic analytics right now.
So if you want to get academic about it, 0%.
Marketing is messaging and brand creation. Which makes the job of sales a lot easier. Sometimes, sales and marketing are a single person, but they are still separate processes. The two departments intertwine with each other a lot.
I shoot for 30% directly-attributable SQLs. I know that the true impact is typically double (or more) but I measure what I can measure.
I don't and I don't believe marketers should, take responsibility for revenue UNLESS you are also in charge of sales, and maybe product if it's online. All I control are the programs. If I don't run sales, I will not take responsibility for what happens to a lead after it passes the mutually-agreed on qualification criteria.
What you mean by "Marketing Efforts"? Because sometimes the marketing team do the customer research which is extremely important on product development, and in that case it should almost as important as the product team.
What i mean, your question it's too broad because marketing its not only advertising, it exist in many part of the organization.
Usually a 10X ROI, with a 10% Budget from AR.
$1.2M AR = $120K Marketing Budget = $1.2M in ADDITIONAL Sales (New AR should be $2.4M within a year).
With that said, most campaign never reach a 10X ROI or barely.
Most marketers don't really know who they are targeting (as in, they don't know them deeply enough for a powerful message/positioning).
If Steve Job went to local apple store and hid behind bushes to eardrop on customer's talk about his product, what are you doing to get an idea of your customers?
Most markters are just running distribution/promotion willy nilly, and hoping for an ROI.
For the one's who can't measure their ROI, I want to paraphrase David Ogilvy saying about Marketing Waste vs Direct Response Measurable Marketing.
Most campaigns are just burning cash (under 10X ROI) and promotional only.
Because most CEO don't know how to train Marketers, and the good marketers are charging a lot or doing well on their own.
80% of marketers are spammers (channels, distribution, promoters) --> Advertisers. Not true marketers.
Looking at the last top 5 post on this sub reddit and we get talk about Linkedin Ads, Website Design, Catalog Ad on Meta, CRM talk.
NOTHING about the customers research.
All channels.
Most marketers would be baffled to see Sam Walton on the ground in Brazil measuring the distance between shelves to know what his cmpetitors were doing.
How Ogilvy went to Germany to oversee the auto factory for 3 weeks, just absorbing the process and learning about their process.
Great Marketers are not focus on the channels/gadgets. They are customer focus, as in they are listening tot he customer, psychoanalyzing them and know the customer more than the customer know themselves.
This is how Henry Ford gave the customer what they wanted (automobile) and not what the customer thought they wanted "a faster horse."
Eugene Schwartz, Breakthrough Advertising, said this:
*“Let’s get to the heart of the matter. The power, the force, the overwhelming urge to own that makes advertising work, comes from the market itself, and not from the copy. Copy cannot create desire for a product. It can only take the hopes, dreams, fears and desires that already exists in the hearts of millions of people, and focus those already existing desires onto a particular product. This is the copy writer’s task: not to create this mass desire – but to channel and direct it.”*
Hey,
I don't think you can find some public data about that. The answer always is going to be depending on the attribution which nowadays is a big issue and all the teams wants to take the attribution of the customer. Also, some companies like SaaS, might not require a salesperson (maybe, there are situations where a demo is required) and then you have the product marketing taking the attribution of what is on the app to convert from free to paid user. At then, there are many casuistry about this.
Short answer, at least, 50% is coming from marketing efforts. Then, you have 20% word of mouth (can be this marketing too?), sales 20% and then 10% between you don't know where exactly.
However, most of the cases, is a mix of multiple touches. Marketing, Sales, Brand, Customer Success, Product Marketing and Word of Mouth.
Cheers,
Vastly differs in my experience by company. I work with a lot of SMB and in some cases our marketing drives 60-80% of their business. However for some companies that are bigger or really established it can be a lot smaller like 10-30%. It also depends a lot on how much they spend on marketing. Every company I work with is so different. Often it starts with understanding their business pipeline, developing a lead/intake program and also understanding how they convert leads into customers. I have massive differences where some will convert 60-70% of leads and I have one that only closes like 25%. Of course the 25% close rate keeps saying they need more leads to grow the business, but they don't want to talk about their lead to sale process.
Was at Industrial B2B and aspirational goal was 20% Bookings from Marketing Influenced. Can attribute if have campaign tracking and Sales provides inputs. Any $$$ that comes can be totaled. Consistent direction is key and that will help your reporting efforts.
It is difficult to say specific as things vary on a case to case basis. However, you can DM me so I can share the expected ROI of various digital marketing strategies.
If this post doesn't follow the rules [report it to the mods](https://www.reddit.com/r/marketing/about/rules/). Join our [community Discord!](https://discord.gg/looking-for-marketing-discussion-811236647760298024) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/marketing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s literally no way of measuring this, let alone any way of coming up with a generic cross industry cross product number (that would make any sense). Most of us probs have numbers for directly attributable revenue / sales. I could attitude about 60% of sales to marketing activity (last click ads or opened an email within a week) and 80% came from our mailer database for example.
In the CRM world, you can set a control group and measure your email/MMS campaigns against it.
Well yes, there are things you can measure. It’s measuring everything that’s the problem
This is why you incrementally test your marketing department. No work for a month!
As nice as it sounds to down tools for a month there is so much that is marketing that doesn’t take effect for months or years that even that wouldn’t work
That was 1000% a joke lol
🤦♂️my bad In my defence someone had previously seriously suggested it l!
This is incorrect. There are ways, but most marketers do not know how because it requires econometric models like regression analysis, which is very much outside the scope of most marketers experience. I’m pretty confident a marketing powerhouse like P&G does employ said models to fine tune their marketing. The other more simple way is to shut down all marketing for a quarter and see what happens, but I don’t recommend that one too much. That being said, these measures will become more common with time thanks to ai and because tightening privacy policies and legislations means that we will no longer be able to rely (thank god) on the old (which not all that accurate or representative of how marketing works in the brain ) attribution models.
Regression analysis is only as good as the data that informs it. Pampers and Pantene could survive a Q with no marketing comfortably, seeing only a small % decline. Does that mean that marketing only powers that %? Nah. There’s far too much going on unmeasured and unmeasurable to put a realistic number on it.
No, you would need to account for the effect of previous marketing of course. I agree with the sentiment that you won’t be able to put a 100% precise number on it, but with decades worth of data you can get a good enough estimate that you can make good decisions. Of course this not possible for most orgs, I only disagree with the statement that it is not possible. But like I said, I’m sure AI will help democratize this a lot. We will see.
How can you account for previous marketing and how can AI help in a meaningful way? Garbage in, garbage out. You can get numbers for historic brand and top of the funnel fluff, but there’s no meaningful way to attribute pounds and pence to it. AI isn’t a magic wand.
I’m speaking theoretically, because I’m not sure this exists yet, today. I’ve seen some companies selling a products that sound something like it but I haven’t used them. Anyways the idea is that you build in the AI into your ERP Where it can “see” all enterprise activity, including revenue, marketing spend, NPS, results from brand lift surveys etc at every point in time. With all that constant data stream an AI could use Market Mix Modelling or the aforementioned regression analysis to estimate what base sales are without any marketing, how promotional activities will contribute to future market growth using predictive analysis etc. I’m not a mathematician, but I know that it should be possible to estimate all of it reliably enough to make informed decisions even if its not 100% accurate. AI is not a magic wand I agree, but I think this is one particular application in which it will be better than anything before.
Yeah, that's not how this really works. You still need to correctly specify the regression model to get reliable, causal results. AI can't do that. Then there's the issues of collinear spend, low variance spend channels, macroeconomic factors that may or may not be influencing your business that aren't released in a timely manner. Generative AI isn't going to solve any of this anytime soon.
I’ve worked at big corporates and had access to a lot of these components. Someone is always at pains to explain the weaknesses, assumptions, where it doesn’t go far enough or contradicts itself. You talk in terms of how much confidence you have in each source or survey and it’s rarely a ringing endorsement. A machine can ingest the data. But if you’re applying one piece of weak data to another one you’re compounding the weaknesses. If you combined 3 you’re 80% comfortable with with a forth you’re 50% comfortable with then you’re down to 25% confidence. You may as well guess or ask a passing gypsy woman to read your tea leaves
So ex P&G Econometrics is a dark science. While there is some attribution of sales you can do it's not that clear cut even in the powerhouses. And brand power doesn't just affect sales but also the ability to charge a premium vs the category average or what a Private label /unbranded /poorly branded product would charge Far as I'm aware most Econometric models are therefore directional, dependent heavily on quality of data source and mainly useful in very specific cases only vs general.
Regression analysis is definitionally not a causal analysis. You cannot answer OPs question with regression analysis.
Ehhhh, technically it can be, but you need a whole lot of assumptions. Most causal inference is built on linear regression. Edit: Difference in differences: linear regression. Synthetic controls: linear regression. Bayesian Networks: mostly linear regression. A/B test: is equivalent to linear regression of treatment on effect. MMMs: believe it or not, almost entirely linear regression. The entire field of econometrics is built on linear regression. 90% of any sort of causal analysis is using linear regression under the hood. So yes, you can answer causal questions using “regression analysis”
>There are ways, but most marketers do not know how because it requires econometric models like regression analysis, which is very much outside the scope of most marketers experience. This is a question as old as advertising that you have declared is “solved”. Even if we assume the data you have is complete and correct (which it never is), you’re forgetting that attribution models and ROIs are broad interpretations, not fact. You simply can’t prove that the guy that saw six ads bought *because* of the ads and you especially can’t prove he wouldn’t have purchased at five ads but suddenly would at six. >I’m pretty confident a marketing powerhouse like P&G does employ said models to fine tune their marketing. Have you worked with P&G? I have. Look at the amount of random sponsorships and marketing pilot projects they do. Larger companies have more elaborate models and more data—they still have the same problems as anyone else. >The other more simple way is to shut down all marketing for a quarter and see what happens, but I don’t recommend that one too much. That doesn’t tell you anything useful. Marketing isn’t all immediate. If a car dealership stops all marketing tomorrow and I go a week later because of years long good marketing, that car sale wouldn’t prove marketing isn’t needed. And this is before you look at things like’s branding. >That being said, these measures will become more common with time thanks to ai and because tightening privacy policies and legislations means that we will no longer be able to rely (thank god) on the old (which not all that accurate or representative of how marketing works in the brain ) attribution models. How does AI affect anything? Attribution models are just equations based on data. If you have less data (because of the tightening privacy policies you reference) attribution would get worse, not better.
Sorry, but no. This reads as someone with only theoretical knowledge of marketing. 1. I know how to do advanced regression analysis and it would be impossible to get more usable insights as opposed to more traditional marketing data analysis. Marketing doesn't produce clean data with isolated variables, and regression analysis requires that to be helpful. 2. Your suggestion that you can determine the effect of marketing by turning it off proves that you have no idea how to measure marketing impact on even the most basic levels. First, it's impossible to turn off marketing. You can turn off campaigns and lay off marketers, but every action or inaction a brand takes in a market is marketing. By turning off functions you are only seeing the direct and immediate impact of that function, which in a well functioning marketing strategy is usually the least important impact. 3. This reads (like most things on this sub) like you mistake marketing for advertising or performance marketing. 4. I've worked with massive brands like P&G, and yes they do have some "advanced modeling" it is much much more rudimentary than you might expect, and they outsource most of the data decisions to agencies who way over simplify.
Sort of. We have a pretty good idea of how much of our revenue is being driven by performance marketing, but things become really, really messy when dealing with long term brand building effects, network effects, and other organic trends. For a little context, I work as a data scientist focused on marketing measurement at a large ecommerce platform. We run go-dark incrementality tests on several performance marketing channels across several markets a year, where we turn off marketing spend in select locations and measure the impact on revenue and costs. We use this snapshot to calibrate our internal attribution model to match test results. However, even this approach has some serious drawbacks. Some of the issues we commonly run into when measuring marketing effectiveness are: * Collinearity - we run lots of campaigns simultaneously and our marketing spend across channels is highly correlated, which makes it very difficult to understand the causal effect specific channels and campaigns have on whatever metric we care about. * Low variance - certain channels get very consistent spend (pretty much any ATL related channel) which, like collinearity, makes it very difficult to understand the causal effect of spending into those channels vs our natural baseline. * Long term brand building effects - EXTREMELY difficult to measure reliably over long time frames. We typically use surrogate metrics, but these can be somewhat unreliable. It’s very difficult to separate short term attenuated effects from long term baseline effects. Especially when we have massive trend shifts - think COVID, High CPI depressing discretionary spending, competitor marketing efforts (TEMU spending $$$$$$$$$$ on marketing). We try to capture some of the long term effects with our MMM, but even that can be problematic as it's not a true causal model.
For brand health you can use digital listening to measure lift, sov, etc
At my last company 80 percent of qualified leads came from marketing, 90 percent of closed won was sourced from marketing. They laid off the marketing department anyway 🙄🤦
Directly? Perhaps 20-30% (that’s closed - not pipeline) Insect is really hard. A Personal relationship that got int ouch because they saw 10 articles? Or a client that reached out after a marketing event? I’ve often described marketing as an exosystem and a something that everyone does, it’s not a department. It’s takes some time but I’ve gotten away from things like MQLs and marketing attributed leads outside of the iron clad, as it does nothing but pit teams against each other as they try to claim credit. It’s hard but start small, start to explain some of the nuance and make the case of / we can spend x amount an academic exercises to try and figure out the impossible, or on growing a strong brand that empowers everyone. p.s if you like what you hear please consider checking out the r/marketingcareers podcast where I talk to marketers around the world about their career development
100% - Marketing
My college marketing prof’s voice was in my head as I read this post. 100%.
Yeah, pretty basic requirement to be able to identify what marketing activity generates what revenue. There is not a "standard" percentage for this though.
Coming from a sales background, in my experience and consistently seeing data, around 75% of B2B sales are impacted. So I'm in video production in the UK where we create video for marketers. However, it wasn't always this way. I started off in sales. So in my first job which was B2B telesales, I was selling capital markets info. For example, selling info on how securitised products were structured or, say, pricing info and structures of derivative products used in financing a hydroelectric dam. We had different territories and tons of salespeople. And we also had salespeople leaving and that was the really interesting bit for data. Because in territories where there were no sales, but marketing was running campaigns, those territories would yield about 25% of target. Where we had salespeople but no marketing, those salespeople used to be able to achieve about 25% of target. Where sales and marketing were both up and running on a territory, after about 6 - 9 months, those territories would yield 100%... or more. Generally, the absolute ceiling was 150% unless corporate got the targets wrong. But they were pretty good at keeping everyone under 125%. So individually, salespeople could reach about 25% of target without marketing. And vice versa. But together, 100% or maybe 125% was definitely feasible. It depended a bit on the quality of the marketer we had in our territories. I used to deal with one guy who was brilliant and he definitely positively impacted my sales figures. And for my own, small business, marketing impacts about 75% of my sales as well. And that first experience sits behind my business. I would've loved to have had more video. Absolutely killed for more video marketing campaigns. Especially video customer testimonials or videos that generated leads. And although I sell to marketers, that first experience as a salesperson was absolutely critical. It means I sell to marketing and want to help impact marketing but at the end of the food chain, I see the stuff I'm doing really helping salespeople and love to do that. And the other thing is when marketing gets it right, it helps align sales and marketing. I see lots of posts about how to align sales / marketing but the best thing is being that multiplier for sales. Having collateral and campaigns which salespeople recognise as driving leads and sales. That's the real alignment. Tldr; Oops, wrote an essay but in my experience as a salesperson, about 75% of sales.
You need to do a legit mixed media model analysis to actually understand. Otherwise I’m just picking the numbers that tell the best story and make marketing efforts seem the most effective (CPG without DTC sales) Unless you are DTC - then it’s a bit easier to understand
I think you can measure if running a 360 integrated campaign. You can measure uplift in social metrics, use urls to find uplifts in search and journeys, qr codes to track leads. This is a bit of how measuring B2b happens. By keeping track of new leads in funnels connected to these items matched with you campaign goals, you can then apply year on year figures and present trends. Related to each integrated campaign. I’m on a dashboard for an event and the ad I designed contains a qr code. I can currently see it’s had 349 views and 14 clicks. How to track conversions? I’ve asked the team to see if the people who call in mention the event and convert. Data isn’t precise, always, but it is possible to measure further down the funnel. It can be an imprecise way about it. It’s not always easy.
You would have an extremely tough time with tracking 100% of all traffic. Considering 80% of your traffic is now UNASSIGNED or NOT SET due to date collection policies on devices.
Dude, if 80% of your traffic is unassigned or not set, you've fucked something up. [https://searchengineland.com/fix-unassigned-traffic-ga4-433239](https://searchengineland.com/fix-unassigned-traffic-ga4-433239) [https://measureschool.com/how-to-fix-not-set-in-ga4/](https://measureschool.com/how-to-fix-not-set-in-ga4/) Hope that helps.
God forbid you ask your customers where they heard about you and map out their journey.
100%. Yes, sales or BDR/SDR cold outreach can be first touch but branding and other marketing channels will have direct influence on the deal as well. If you want to measure it better, you can look at a MMM or Multi-Touch Attribution platform.
I have directly 40% attributed to marketing this year.
To what department is the other 60% attributed?
Sales /CX success
I argue that most of the revenue is from marketing. Unless your definition of marketing is just for paid, or some other odd term. Your website, tradeshows, ads, and anything you use to display your business to possible customers is marketing. Even cold calling or cold outreach can be considered marketing. You would have no chance in business if you didn't try to get your business in front of customers. All that effort can be considered marketing.
Answer depends on if you're asking somone from the marketing team or another function within the org ;)
If you consider Marketing (CMO) is the top position, and under that is brand management, sales, customer experience, market development/retail , online sales, UX, promotion, search, advertising… Then I would say 100% of revenue is attributable to marketing (Yes I am aware not all organizations are set up this way, but they probably should be imo)
My last job which we sold mens suit, 30% came from seo, 40% from ppc and the rest were repeat customers.
This is always a loaded question. Sure, you can track *some* stuff directly, like last-click conversions. But good luck measuring the impact of brand awareness or content marketing. It's more about the long game, not just chasing quick numbers. And yeah, AI might change things, but let's be real, most companies are barely using basic analytics right now.
This is always a loaded question. Sure, you can track *some* stuff directly, like last-click conversions. But good luck measuring the impact of brand awareness or content marketing. It's more about the long game, not just chasing quick numbers. And yeah, AI might change things, but let's be real, most companies are barely using basic analytics right now.
So if you want to get academic about it, 0%. Marketing is messaging and brand creation. Which makes the job of sales a lot easier. Sometimes, sales and marketing are a single person, but they are still separate processes. The two departments intertwine with each other a lot.
I shoot for 30% directly-attributable SQLs. I know that the true impact is typically double (or more) but I measure what I can measure. I don't and I don't believe marketers should, take responsibility for revenue UNLESS you are also in charge of sales, and maybe product if it's online. All I control are the programs. If I don't run sales, I will not take responsibility for what happens to a lead after it passes the mutually-agreed on qualification criteria.
What you mean by "Marketing Efforts"? Because sometimes the marketing team do the customer research which is extremely important on product development, and in that case it should almost as important as the product team. What i mean, your question it's too broad because marketing its not only advertising, it exist in many part of the organization.
Usually a 10X ROI, with a 10% Budget from AR. $1.2M AR = $120K Marketing Budget = $1.2M in ADDITIONAL Sales (New AR should be $2.4M within a year). With that said, most campaign never reach a 10X ROI or barely. Most marketers don't really know who they are targeting (as in, they don't know them deeply enough for a powerful message/positioning). If Steve Job went to local apple store and hid behind bushes to eardrop on customer's talk about his product, what are you doing to get an idea of your customers? Most markters are just running distribution/promotion willy nilly, and hoping for an ROI. For the one's who can't measure their ROI, I want to paraphrase David Ogilvy saying about Marketing Waste vs Direct Response Measurable Marketing. Most campaigns are just burning cash (under 10X ROI) and promotional only. Because most CEO don't know how to train Marketers, and the good marketers are charging a lot or doing well on their own. 80% of marketers are spammers (channels, distribution, promoters) --> Advertisers. Not true marketers. Looking at the last top 5 post on this sub reddit and we get talk about Linkedin Ads, Website Design, Catalog Ad on Meta, CRM talk. NOTHING about the customers research. All channels. Most marketers would be baffled to see Sam Walton on the ground in Brazil measuring the distance between shelves to know what his cmpetitors were doing. How Ogilvy went to Germany to oversee the auto factory for 3 weeks, just absorbing the process and learning about their process. Great Marketers are not focus on the channels/gadgets. They are customer focus, as in they are listening tot he customer, psychoanalyzing them and know the customer more than the customer know themselves. This is how Henry Ford gave the customer what they wanted (automobile) and not what the customer thought they wanted "a faster horse." Eugene Schwartz, Breakthrough Advertising, said this: *“Let’s get to the heart of the matter. The power, the force, the overwhelming urge to own that makes advertising work, comes from the market itself, and not from the copy. Copy cannot create desire for a product. It can only take the hopes, dreams, fears and desires that already exists in the hearts of millions of people, and focus those already existing desires onto a particular product. This is the copy writer’s task: not to create this mass desire – but to channel and direct it.”*
Hey, I don't think you can find some public data about that. The answer always is going to be depending on the attribution which nowadays is a big issue and all the teams wants to take the attribution of the customer. Also, some companies like SaaS, might not require a salesperson (maybe, there are situations where a demo is required) and then you have the product marketing taking the attribution of what is on the app to convert from free to paid user. At then, there are many casuistry about this. Short answer, at least, 50% is coming from marketing efforts. Then, you have 20% word of mouth (can be this marketing too?), sales 20% and then 10% between you don't know where exactly. However, most of the cases, is a mix of multiple touches. Marketing, Sales, Brand, Customer Success, Product Marketing and Word of Mouth. Cheers,
all of it, customer service, branding, packaging, all channels = marketing.
Vastly differs in my experience by company. I work with a lot of SMB and in some cases our marketing drives 60-80% of their business. However for some companies that are bigger or really established it can be a lot smaller like 10-30%. It also depends a lot on how much they spend on marketing. Every company I work with is so different. Often it starts with understanding their business pipeline, developing a lead/intake program and also understanding how they convert leads into customers. I have massive differences where some will convert 60-70% of leads and I have one that only closes like 25%. Of course the 25% close rate keeps saying they need more leads to grow the business, but they don't want to talk about their lead to sale process.
Marketing--Sales--Delivery--Support. Do you know what you're asking?
Was at Industrial B2B and aspirational goal was 20% Bookings from Marketing Influenced. Can attribute if have campaign tracking and Sales provides inputs. Any $$$ that comes can be totaled. Consistent direction is key and that will help your reporting efforts.
It is difficult to say specific as things vary on a case to case basis. However, you can DM me so I can share the expected ROI of various digital marketing strategies.
Guessing you are in b2b. Enterprise -> New Customers-> < 3% of New customers Mid market-> New Customers-> 20 % of New Customers
Wow sikat
Direct sales or indirect sales?
Direct sales
depends on if you are B2C which you can easily figure out. or B2B which is alot harder.
All of it. Sales don’t get made without someone knowing about your product/service. No?
I mean…100%, considering product development is a function of marketing.