Accepting Q4 2026 engagements
Work · Series-B Enterprise SaaS · North America · 2025 — Present

Re-engineering the demand engine of a seven-figure ARR SaaS platform.

A category-defining vertical SaaS, scaling past Series B, had accumulated four years of legacy demand-gen architecture. Compounding ad spend was no longer compounding pipeline.

SaaS dashboard study
— Confidential · Documented in studio archive
Sector
Vertical Enterprise SaaS
Region
North America
Engagement
Tier Five — ongoing
Period
2025—Present

CAC was rising. The board was patient. The CFO was not.

A vertical SaaS platform, recently Series-B funded, was approaching the awkward middle of growth. Blended customer acquisition cost had climbed 2.4× over eighteen months. Marketing felt like an expensive black box; the leadership team disagreed about what was working and why.

The brief, from the CFO directly: "We need to know what every dollar is doing. If a channel is dead, we want to bury it. If a channel is alive, we want to feed it."

Our brief, internally: rebuild the attribution architecture from first principles, then redesign demand generation around the truths it revealed.

The dashboard was lying. Politely.

Three months of forensic work revealed what marketing leaders quietly suspect but rarely test: the attribution dashboard was telling a coherent story that was, in significant part, fictional. Last-touch attribution credited the channels closest to the buy button while obscuring the channels that created the demand to begin with.

When we ran proper geo-incrementality tests against the most expensive paid channels, two of the top five showed near-zero incremental lift. They were claiming credit they hadn't earned.

Equally surprising in the other direction: a small content programme, dismissed by the previous team as a vanity expense, was the single most productive top-of-funnel asset in the portfolio.

The most expensive line item on a CFO's marketing P&L is the channel you only think is working.

— Engagement Note, FZ Group · 2025

A measurement spine, then a channel portfolio.

Step one: build a measurement spine the team could defend in a board meeting. We unified ad-platform data, CRM stages, product analytics, and revenue into one warehouse with one attribution model — the definition of which we wrote down, signed, and agreed not to change without explicit decision.

Step two: a rolling incrementality programme. Every paid channel above a defined spend threshold was tested on a 12-week rotation. Channels that earned their place stayed and grew. Channels that didn't were paused — politely, but firmly.

Step three: rebuild creative around what the measurement actually rewarded. Long-form editorial content, technical documentation as marketing, founder-led video — all of which the old last-click model would have killed within a quarter.

Pipeline up. Spend down. Confidence restored.

Blended CAC
-62%
Over the first twelve months, with paid spend reduced rather than reallocated upward.
Qualified pipeline
+47%
Marketing-sourced opportunities up nearly half on a lower budget. CFO smiling.
Reporting confidence
1×
One unified attribution model, one source of truth, agreed by Marketing, Finance, and the board.
Next engagement

Designing an international customer acquisition system for a boutique wellness group.

Read the next case