Lead Reporting
Part of Lead generation reporting
Building a monthly inbound demand review
Run a monthly inbound demand review with a compact enquiry pack, handoff checks and a decision log that preserves unresolved data.
A monthly inbound demand review should end with a few accountable decisions: what demand arrived, which requests the team could act on, where work stalled, and what to check next. Circulate the definitions and exceptions with the figures so participants can discuss the requests behind a change.
Prepare one review pack
Define the reporting month in the relevant Australian time zone, and state when later outcomes were checked. Show new enquiries received during that month separately from decisions made during the month about older enquiries. An opportunity opened for an older request is progress on that earlier cohort, not new inbound demand.
| View | Include | Check beside it |
|---|---|---|
| Demand received | Distinct genuine enquiries by service and known source | Submissions, exclusions and unknown source |
| Intake decisions | Accepted, not accepted and awaiting-decision enquiries | Decision rule and age of pending work |
| Response | Requests awaiting a relevant first reply | Original receipt time and owner |
| Later progress | Opportunities and verified customer milestones from older cohorts | Cohort and outcome review date |
| Exceptions | Missing record links, changed definitions and tracking faults | Owner and proposed resolution |
Use the business's agreed definitions. Date a rule change, and avoid presenting figures from before and after it as directly comparable.
Hear from each handoff owner
Ask the intake owner about requests that failed to reach the right person. Ask sales to review a small set of accepted, not accepted and pending cases. Ask marketing to show the page, offer and available source evidence behind a notable change. A campaign total alone cannot explain why an individual request was accepted.
Reconcile the intake total first, then review decisions, channels and later outcomes. If the denominator is unsettled, defer a rate-based conclusion. If many cases await a decision, assign an assessment owner before judging campaign quality from acceptance figures.
Test explanations against requests
More genuine requests for work the business does not offer may suggest an unclear page or offer. Fewer accepted requests may reflect a different mix of needs, a changed rule or incomplete assessment. Unknown source does not establish direct demand. Read examples and check the relevant records before choosing an explanation.
If the pack includes figures from the GA4 Lead acquisition report, label them by their platform source. Keep that platform view separate until it has been reconciled with request records.
Pros and Cons of Using GA4 Lead Acquisition Report Data
- Pro: Provides platform-level source attributionYes
- Con: May not align with internal request records without reconciliationYes
- Pro: Useful for identifying high-performing channelsYes
- Con: Cannot explain individual request acceptance without supporting recordsYes
Close with a decision log
For each issue, record the observation, missing evidence, action, owner and check date. “Compare requests marked outside service area with the page's stated service boundary” is a task a team can complete; “improve lead quality” is not.
A small source group may not support a spend change, yet it may justify checking a form or assigning an owner to a queue. At the next review, start with the previous actions and the requests received since. Preserve uncertainty where the records still do not settle a decision.
