Why performance is ruined by attribution models
When digital advertising promised complete transparency and measurability, marketers worldwide finally sighed with relief. Time-consuming discussions with clients about how to allocate scarce resources would be a thing of the past. We would know which button to push, when to push it, and what the expected revenue would be.
Years later, we’re drowning in attribution models, each claiming to reveal the true path to conversion. This obsession with perfect measurement has evolved from a promising tool into a source of conflict and confusion, often missing the bigger marketing picture.
In short
- Digital promised perfect measurement, but created false expectations
- Attribution models became increasingly complex to justify channel value
- Platforms acting as both seller and measurer creates conflicts
- Channel competition leads to missing the bigger picture
- Success lies in overall business growth, not attribution complexity
PROMISE
“Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, the trouble is I don’t know which half.” This famous quote by John Wanamaker, the 19th-century retail pioneer, haunted marketers for generations.
When digital advertising emerged, it seemed we had found the holy grail: complete transparency in marketing effectiveness. Finally, we could track every click, view, and conversion with precision.
Unlike traditional media such as television, radio, out-of-home, and print, which had always struggled with precise attribution, digital channels with their cookies and tracking pixels appeared to solve this age-old marketing challenge. Every interaction could be measured, tracked, and analysed.
COMPLEXITY
What started as a simple distinction between first-click and last-click attribution quickly evolved into an increasingly complex web of models and methodologies. Multi-touch attribution, view-through conversion windows, weighted models, and algorithmic attribution – each new approach promised to reveal the “true” value of each marketing channel.
As channels multiplied and customer journeys became more complex, attribution models tried to keep pace. Yet with each new model came new debates. Should a social media view count as much as a search click? How long should the attribution window be? Which touchpoints deserve the most credit?
It becomes even more complex when we understand that major digital platforms like Google, Meta, and TikTok act as both publishers and measurement providers. Each platform introduces its own attribution models, conveniently designed to showcase their channel’s value in the customer journey. This created an inherent conflict of interest: the same companies selling advertising were also determining how to measure its effectiveness.
When these platforms face challenges, like iOS privacy changes or cookie deprecation, they don’t just adapt their targeting capabilities, they often introduce new attribution models and metrics that help maintain their perceived value. A platform might extend view-through windows when click rates decline, or introduce new engagement metrics when conversion tracking becomes more difficult. Each change adds another layer of complexity to an already convoluted system.
This self-serving measurement approach has created a marketplace where each platform operates as judge, jury, and beneficiary of their own performance metrics. Marketing teams are left to navigate a maze of competing attribution models, each designed more to protect advertising revenue than to provide genuine marketing insights.
an YOUR CHANNELS
This explosion of attribution models has led to an unintended consequence: intense competition between channels. Each platform and channel team comes armed with their own attribution methodology, fighting to prove their worth. Social media teams point to view-through conversions, while search will emphasise last-click value. Email marketers highlight their high ROI, while display teams argue for assisted conversions.
The result? Marketers spend more time defending their channel’s value than focusing on overall business growth. This siloed thinking often leads to missed opportunities for genuine channel synergy.
IN CHAOS
The path forward isn’t through more complex attribution models. It’s through a return to fundamental marketing principles: focus on overall business growth and create a carefully orchestrated omnichannel approach. While channel-specific metrics remain useful for optimisation, they shouldn’t overshadow the bigger picture.
Success in modern marketing requires understanding that customer journeys are complex, rarely linear and always changing. If it were possible to translate these into models that had a calculated impact on sales, someone would have become very rich. But the reality is that it’s often the publishers that are cashing in, rather than the advertisers.
The goal should be to create a cohesive marketing ecosystem where channels work together, not compete for credit.
How can June2O help you?
At June20, we help brands navigate the complex world of marketing measurement. Our approach focuses on meaningful metrics that drive business growth, not just channel attribution. We focus on overall goals, using the available resources.
Looking to reassess your marketing measurement strategy? Let’s explore how we can help you develop a more effective approach that drives real business results.
Biography
Tom Vanlerberghe
TOM VANLERBERGHE, strategist at June20, began his marketing career on the client side, working with notable companies such as Kursaal Oostende, Enfinity, Smartphoto, Flyer.be, Flyeralarm, and LensOnline. With over €1 million in marketing budgets under his management, he has successfully led and challenged international marketing teams across multiple continents.
Passionate about integrating online and offline strategies, Tom has a deep expertise in marketing automation, content marketing, and privacy. His extensive experience of over 15 marketing automation platforms makes him a versatile strategist who bridges creativity with technology.
