Brian Law

RCE Attribution Setting Example: Explicit, Implicit, Hybrid

Blog Post created by Brian Law Employee on Mar 6, 2016

Since understanding the results of the different RCE attribution settings can be challenging I have done my best to outline an example so you can see the differences.

 

This first example uses the Explicit Setting (Credit is given to a program if the contact reaches success and has an opportunity role/primary):

  • All records were acquired, reached success and were converted to contacts in the programs listed below.
  • The records in the Adidas and Nike programs are from the same account as one of the records in the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program. One opportunity for $18,000 was created for the contacts/account in the Adidas and Nike programs but was only associated to the record in the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program. Thus the contacts in the Adidas and Nike programs aren’t associated to the opportunity (No role/primary) created.
  • One opportunity was created for one of the records in the Healthy Eating Whitepaper. The contact is associated to the opportunity. The amount of the opportunity is $18,000. As noted above, this contact is from the same account as the contacts in the Adidas and Nike programs.
  • Two opportunities were created for other record in the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program. This contact is from a different account. The contact is associated to one opportunity which is for $13,500. The contact is not associated to a second opportunity which is for $3,333.
  • Thus, with the Explicit setting the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program will receive credit for generating 2.0 Acquisition and Success (FT and MT) opportunities totaling $31,500 ($18,000 + $13,500).

explicit1chart.png

 

Here is the same example with the Implicit Setting (Credit is given to a program if a contact in the program reaches success and there are any opportunities associated to the account. The contact in the program doesn’t need to be associated to the opportunity):

  • Since the contacts in the Adidas and Nike programs are from the same account as the contact from the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program, Acquisition and Success attribution (FT and MT) are now split between all three contacts ($18,000/3 = $6,000, 0.33 opportunities each) and the three programs.
  • Since two opportunities were created for the same account for the other record in the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program, the contact in the program will now get credit for two opportunities ($13,500, 1.0  opportunity and $3,333, 1.0 opportunity).
  • Thus, the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program will receive credit for generating 2.33 Acquisition and Success (FT and MT) opportunities totaling $22,833 ($13,500 + $3,333 + $18,000/3 = 6,000).

implicitgraph1.png

 

Here are the results using the Hybrid Setting:

  • Since Hybrid gives credit first explicitly by opportunity role/primary and if there are none then it goes by implicit the records in the Adidas and Nike programs won’t receive any Acquisition or Success (FT or MT) credit. All the credit is given to the other record on the same account which is part of the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program which is explicitly associated to the $18,000 opportunity.
  • Since two opportunities were created for the other record in the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program, the program will get credit for both opportunities ($13,500 and $3,333) even though the contact is only associated to one of them as noted earlier.
  • Thus, the Healthy Eating Whitepaper program will receive credit for generating 3.0 Acquisition and Success (FT and MT) opportunities totaling $34,833 ($13,500 + $3,333 + $18,000).

hybridgraph1.png

 

When you compare all three results you can see that the Implicit setting may give credit to a program despite having no real influence in the opportunity. The Explicit setting may do the opposite of the implicit setting and not give credit to a program which did influence an opportunity. The Hybrid setting will help account for opportunities not associated to contacts but it may not give credit to all the programs which influenced the opportunity. Finally, whether your sales team always, sometimes or never associates contacts with their opportunities might have a dramatic impact on each of the different RCE attribution settings.

 

If you find this article confusing feel free to add comments and I will do my best to clarify my article. Thanks!

 

Link to second example.

 

Link to Checklist for Attribution Reporting.

Outcomes