/attribution

name: attribution
description: "When the user wants to work out which marketing drives revenue, or asks whether a channel is really working, which numbers to trust, or how to credit podcasts and dark social: attribution models, platforms that over-claim, MMM, incrementality and holdout tests, self-reported attribution. For tracking and UTMs, see analytics. For pixels and CAPI, see conversion-tracking. For CRM revenue, see revops. For AI search blind spots, see ai-seo."
metadata:
  version: 1.1.9

Attribution

You help users answer the hardest question in marketing: **which of my efforts actually caused this conversion and this revenue?** Attribution is where marketers lose the most money — to channels that look good in one dashboard and terrible in another, to "direct" and "branded search" that hide the real source, and to models that quietly encode an opinion as if it were fact.

This skill has two pillars. Know which one the user needs before you dive in:

• **(A) Interpretation** — choosing an attribution model, picking a measurement approach, and *reconciling the conflicting numbers* your tools report. This applies to everyone, even with zero engineering.
• **(B) Own your attribution (first-party)** — instrumenting and stitching attribution *yourself* when you control the site/app. This is the build track. Use it when the user says "I want to track this myself" or is hitting a conversion that lives on a domain they don't own.

Most requests start with (A). Reach for (B) only when they control the surface and want to build.

Product context: check for `.agents/product-marketing.md` and read it if present — business type, sales cycle, and primary conversion drive almost every recommendation here.

Boundaries — what this skill does NOT own

State these up front so you don't rebuild neighboring skills:

• **General event tracking, tracking plans, UTM setup, GA4/GTM** → **analytics**. Attribution *assumes tracking exists*. The line: analytics = "what events and how to fire them"; attribution = "how touches join to conversions and survive to revenue."
• **Ad-platform pixels, CAPI, server-side conversion tracking** → **conversion-tracking**. Attribution consumes platform-reported numbers and corrects for their bias; it doesn't set up the pixels.
• **Pipeline stages, lead lifecycle, CRM revenue dashboards** → **revops**. Attribution feeds pipeline data; it doesn't define stages.
• **Showing up in / measuring AI search** → **ai-seo**. Attribution names AI traffic as a blind spot only.

---

Pillar A — Interpretation

1. What attribution can and can't tell you

Set expectations before touching a number:

• **Attribution is directional, not truth.** It's a model of causality built from incomplete data (cookies expire, sessions fragment, offline touches vanish, people research on one device and buy on another). Treat it as a strong hint, never a verdict.
• **Every model is an opinion.** "First-touch" says the first ad gets all the credit; "last-touch" says the closing click does. Both are wrong in opposite directions. Choosing a model is choosing whose story to believe — say so out loud.
• **The attribution gap is normal, so separate outcomes from credit.** The sum of channel-reported conversions almost always exceeds real conversions, because every platform claims the same sale under its own attribution window and view-through rules. Count real conversions once, deduplicated against one source of truth, and explain platform credit separately. The two won't tie out, and a modeled allocation never replaces the conversion ledger.

When a user demands one true number, reframe: "We can get you a *defensible, consistent* number and a read on which channels are trending up. A single objective truth doesn't exist — here's why, and here's what we use to make decisions anyway."

2. Attribution models

The classic rule-based set plus data-driven — and when each one lies. **Last non-direct** is a last-touch variant (skip the junk drawer), not a separate school of thought.

| Model | Credit rule | Best for | How it lies | |---|---|---|---| | **First-touch** | 100% to the first known touch | Top-of-funnel / demand-gen valuation; short cycles | Ignores everything that closed the deal; over-credits awareness channels | | **Last-touch** | 100% to the last touch before conversion | Direct-response, quick e-comm | Over-credits bottom-funnel + branded search/direct; ignores what created demand | | **Last non-direct** | 100% to last touch, skipping "direct" | A cheap fix for direct pollution | Still single-touch; just moves the blind spot | | **Linear** | Equal credit to every touch | Long, multi-touch journeys where every step matters | Treats a throwaway visit like a demo; flatters high-frequency channels | | **Time-decay** | More credit to touches nearer conversion | Longer cycles where recency matters | Under-credits the top of funnel; still an assumption, not a measurement | | **Position-based (U-shaped)** | 40% first, 40% last, 20% middle | B2B with clear "created" + "closed" moments | The 40/40/20 split is arbitrary; middle touches get shortchanged | | **Data-driven (algorithmic/Shapley)** | Credit from modeled marginal contribution | High-volume accounts with enough conversions | A black box; needs volume; can't see offline/dark touches it was never fed |

**Platform availability note:** Google Ads and GA4 retired first-click, linear, time-decay, and position-based as selectable reporting models (2023). Those UIs offer **data-driven** and **last-click** (plus GA4's paid-channels last-click variant). Teach the full table as *concepts* and as models you can compute on your own event path / CRM / warehouse — not as Google dropdown options.

**Rules of thumb:**

• Never report a single model in isolation for a long sales cycle. Show **first-touch and last-touch side by side** — the truth lives between them, and the gap between them *is* the insight.
• Data-driven attribution needs volume.