One audit. Nine connected questions.

Market reality

Is the campaign built around the category customers are actually navigating?

We test the category frame, competitive set, demand assumptions, and cultural context against how buyers actually describe the problem.

Inputs

• Category research
• Competitor positioning and offers
• Search behavior
• Social and community conversations
• Review-site themes
• Sales and customer-service notes
• Market growth, pricing, regulation, and cultural change

Tests

• Category definition matches customer language
• Competitive frame is accurate
• Demand assumptions are current
• Seasonal and cultural context is recognized
• Substitutes and non-consumption are considered
• Claimed differentiation is not category table stakes

Audience behavior

Does the campaign reflect who influences the decision and how they actually behave?

We separate buyer, user, influencer, and blocker, then test whether targeting and message reflect evidenced decision behavior.

Inputs

• Segmentation and personas
• Customer interviews and surveys
• CRM and sales data
• Search-query data
• Site behavior
• Social listening
• Customer-service conversations
• Purchase-cycle and retention data

Tests

• Buyer, user, influencer, and blocker are distinguished
• Segment definitions use meaningful behaviors or needs, not demographics alone
• Decision triggers and anxieties are evidenced
• Channel use and content consumption are evidenced
• Purchase timing and consideration length are understood
• Audience exclusions are deliberate

Positioning and perception

Does the position the company wants to occupy match what the market can understand and believe?

We compare intended position, observed perception, competitive reality, and the proof required to close the credibility gap.

Inputs

• Brand strategy
• Positioning statement
• Brand tracking
• Customer and non-customer research
• Reviews, social comments, and sales objections
• Competitor messaging
• Search results and AI-generated brand descriptions

Tests

• Intended position is clear
• Position is relevant to an evidenced customer need
• Position is distinctive within the competitive frame
• Proof makes the position credible
• Actual perception is known rather than assumed
• Campaign execution reinforces rather than contradicts the position

Offer and value proposition

Does the audience understand why acting is worthwhile now?

We test problem clarity, value specificity, price and effort, differentiation, proof, legitimate urgency, and call-to-action fit.

Inputs

• Product and service details
• Pricing and packaging
• Promotion structure
• Sales objections
• Competitor offers
• Conversion data
• Returns, cancellation, churn, and satisfaction data

Tests

• Problem and desired outcome are clear
• Value is specific and credible
• Price and effort feel proportionate to value
• Differentiation is visible
• Proof answers the perceived risk
• Urgency is legitimate
• Call to action matches readiness

Creative effectiveness

Does the creative earn attention, communicate the idea, build memory, and fit the environment?

Creative is assessed against the communication objective, audience evidence, channel context, branding, and fatigue, never aesthetic preference.

Inputs

• All campaign assets and variants
• Placement previews
• Creative briefs
• Brand guidelines
• Asset-level delivery and performance
• Attention, viewability, completion, and frequency data where available
• Creative-testing results

Tests

• Brand and message are identifiable quickly
• The asset has one dominant communication job
• Visual and verbal elements reinforce each other
• The work is recognizable and distinctive
• The creative fits placement behavior and technical constraints
• Variants test meaningful hypotheses, not cosmetic changes
• Frequency and fatigue are considered
• Accessibility and comprehension are adequate

Copy and message

Does the language match the audience's decision process and move them toward the intended action?

We test promise clarity, customer vocabulary, reasons to believe, objection handling, hierarchy, and ad-to-destination message match.

Inputs

• Ad copy
• Scripts
• Headlines
• Landing-page copy
• Emails and follow-up
• Sales scripts
• Customer language and objections

Tests

• The promise is immediately understandable
• Language reflects customer vocabulary
• Benefits connect to an evidenced motivation
• Claims have reasons to believe
• Objections are anticipated
• Message hierarchy is consistent
• Call to action is clear and appropriate
• Ad-to-destination message match is strong

Media delivery

Did the campaign reach the right people in the right contexts with sufficient quality and frequency?

We reconcile plan, delivery, placement quality, allocation, supply path, and commercial terms against the campaign objective.

Inputs

• Media plan and buying records
• Platform exports
• Ad-server data
• Placement and publisher reports
• Audience definitions
• Frequency and reach
• Geography and time
• Brand-safety, fraud, attention, and supply-path data
• Contracts and invoices

Tests

• Channel role matches audience behavior and campaign objective
• Targeting logic matches the real segment
• Reach and frequency are suitable
• Allocation reflects marginal return, not historical habit
• Placements provide sufficient quality and attention
• Fees, incentives, and supply paths are transparent
• Bidding and optimization events support the business objective
• Exclusions and controls are functioning

Destination and customer journey

Does the experience after exposure continue the promise and make the desired action easy and credible?

We assess message continuity, speed, mobile usability, hierarchy, proof, friction, accessibility, and the hand-off to sales.

Inputs

• Landing pages
• Product pages
• Forms
• Checkout or booking flows
• App-store pages
• Sales follow-up
• Email and SMS sequences
• Session recordings and heatmaps where legally available
• Performance, error, and abandonment data

Tests

• Ad-to-page message match
• Page speed and technical reliability
• Mobile usability
• Information hierarchy
• Proof and trust
• Form or checkout friction
• Accessibility
• Privacy and consent clarity
• Follow-up speed and quality
• Hand-off from marketing to sales

Measurement and business economics

Can the company trust the reported result, and does the result create economic value?

We test event integrity, attribution duplication, reconciliation with finance, incrementality, and margin-adjusted return.

Inputs

• Analytics and platform configuration
• Event dictionary
• Attribution models
• CRM and revenue data
• Gross-margin and customer-value inputs
• Returns, cancellation, fraud, and lead-quality data
• Experiments, holdouts, and lift studies
• Consent and tracking constraints

Tests

• Events fire accurately and consistently
• Source-of-truth ownership is clear
• Duplicate attribution is identified
• Platform results reconcile with analytics and business records
• Incrementality is tested or uncertainty is disclosed
• Revenue is adjusted for margin, returns, cancellation, and quality
• Optimization events predict valuable customers
• Decisions use marginal rather than average performance where possible