In a lead generation program, I have a trigger campaign that sends an initial follow up email after a form is submitted. I am trying to set up an second trigger campaign that will send that same follow up email with a new subject line to those leads that did not open the initial follow up email. I would like the timing for the second send to be exactly 4 days after the 1st initial email was sent (and not opened). Using the date of activity constraint on the "was delivered email" filter and choosing "in past - 4 days" seems to give me any lead that has not open the email within the past 4 days, which isn't what I'm looking for. (I've attached the smart list I built for reference). I know I can select the calendar day that was exactly 4 days ago, but I don't want to have to manually change that date every day in order for the filter to work properly. Does anyone have a solution? Suggestion? Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you!
One option is to change your smart list setup to use a "Was delivered email" trigger for the appropriate email. Then in the flow, start out with a 4 day wait step. Then have a Send Email step, but put a choice on it for "Not Opened Email" -- this will flow everyone through it once they get that email delivered, but they will be ignored if they open it by the time they complete the wait step.
How about..
1st campaign is:
Send Email First Subject,
Wait 4 days,
Send Email Second Subject
2nd campaign is:
SL: Email is Opened
Flow: Remove from flow 1st campaign.
Crystal, I would suggest you use one single campaign.
Smart List:
Trigger - Filled out Form
Flow:
1. Send Email 1
2. Wait 4 days
3. Send Email -
Choice 1
If not opened email is [email 1 - the one you originally sent]
Email: [the second one you want to send]
-
Default (leave empty)
Alternatively you could:
1. Send Email
2. Wait 4 days
3. Remove from flow -
Choice 1
If Opened email is [email you originally sent]
Campaign is (current campaign)
-
Default (leave empty)
4. Send email (the second one you want to send
Thanks Alex, this is exactly what I was looking for.
Thank you all for your awesome feedback! Very helpful and greatly appreciated. Matt's suggestion seems to fit best with what I've already built out in the program so we'll go with that.