Wondering if anyone got the answer to this? We're running into the same issue.
Thanks,
Kelly
A few ways to do this.
1. Create a form that has only the UTM fields on it (all type=Hidden, pulling from the URL params). Inject the form into the page but don't display it. If any of the fields have values, call form.submit (the user will not ever see the form, but data will be stored as individual lead fields in Mkto).
2. Parse the info out of the URL yourself. Call a custom Munchkin 'viewWebPage' action (/utm/campaign/campaign12345, etc.). The lead will then have this action in their Activity History so you can search on it easily without going into the query string.
3. Search the query string as an additional constraint.
I found this slideshare from a Marketo webinar (I'm guessing) that might be helpful.
Campaign attribution - how to capture all touch points using Marketo
I am not sure I will have the time to test it this week, but I would appreciate if someone did and shared results.
Best,
Hussam
Hussam AlMukhtar that session from 2010 does contain some still-current info, but most of it isn't germane to this specific question.
It's best to look at the problem this way: "How do I track the lightest possible touch that comes in from search -- a single anonymous web view?"
The most direct answer is "You already are." Visit Web Page activities do contain the query string, which you can include as a Constraint in a SL filter. However, the query string isn't parsed into Lead fields or into a special type of activity this way. So if you want more precision/findability, you can do one of things I mentioned, which will either fill in fields on the lead or give you a synthetic search-specific URL to look for.
If the Munchkin tracking code is present on the page (see Admin > Munchkin), then it should capture the visit to the page in the lead's activity log. Then, you can use the Visited Web Page smart list filter, adding the querystring constraint to it. That will tell you which leads have done so. Like this:
... which is exactly what I wrote above...