I know there are many older discussions around pausing vs completely removing from nurture when someone becomes unmarketable, MQL, etc. Previously, when someone was removed from nurture, all reporting was then lost as well. I'm wondering if it's still true that all reporting is lost when someone is removed from nurture or have things changed at all in the past few years?
I haven't heard anything about a change to this reporting. Is there a reason you're asking? Is "pausing" getting in the way of something else? Just curious
Another interesting way to setup nurture "exits" is to utilize streams. So essentially you'd have a stream for each good or bad exit you define. Example: I may have a "Good Exit - MQL" stream that transitions leads into it when their status changes to MQL. I also may have a "Bad Exit - Unmarketable" stream that transitions leads into it when they unsubscribe or become invalid, etc. Now you'd still need some smart campaigns to use certain flows like pausing but this is a way some people like setting up exits simply to see at a high level (program summary level) what is going on.
Seconding Kim on this, I recently heard about creating a separate, empty stream for those that should be paused or or removed as a way of creating a bucket and easily being able to see how many people you're working with that fit that category at a glance. Also keeps them at the ready if you should decide to take some extra steps with them.
I'd also say an advantage to pausing vs removing is that when you remove someone they won't contribute to your exhausted count if they would resume at some point and finish the stream. This was something I learned after the fact in a past life. We had a setup where when someone completed the nurture they would be removed but we realized later it would've been nice to have those exhausted numbers readily at hand.