Performance Marketing

This happens more often than people think. High ROAS can mask problems: you might be over optimizing for existing customers, running on branded traffic that would convert anyway, or measuring attribution incorrectly. I always look beyond ROAS at incrementality, new customer acquisition rate, and blended business metrics. If ROAS is 500% but revenue is flat, something in the measurement is lying to you.

Not entirely, but the balance is shifting. Performance Max works well when you give it strong inputs: good creative, clean audience signals, and proper conversion tracking. Where it falls short is transparency. You can't see search terms the same way, you can't control placements precisely, and reporting is limited. I use PMax alongside manual campaigns. Let the algorithm find opportunities you might miss, but keep manual campaigns running for the terms and audiences you know convert.

I have managed campaigns across 25+ countries spanning EMEA, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. Each market has its own platform dynamics, auction competition, and consumer behavior. I learned that direct translation of ad copy is never enough. You need local keyword research, market specific landing pages, and bid strategies that account for different conversion values and competition levels in each region.

I layer multiple approaches. Platform reporting gives you one view, GA4 data driven attribution gives another, and Marketing Mix Modeling gives the macro picture. No single model tells the full truth. I use incrementality testing with geo holdouts (GeoX methodology) to validate what the models are saying. When the models disagree, that's actually the most useful signal because it tells you where your assumptions need updating.

Scaling too fast without understanding diminishing returns. Every channel has a saturation curve. The first $50K in spend might return 5x, but going from $200K to $300K might only return 1.5x. I use saturation modeling to find the point where each additional dollar starts losing efficiency. Most companies just increase budgets linearly and wonder why efficiency drops. The answer is almost always to diversify into new channels or audiences before pushing harder on what's already saturated.

Both, but for different purposes. Exact match gives you control and predictability. Broad match gives you reach and discovery. I typically start with exact and phrase match to establish baseline performance, then layer in broad match with smart bidding once I have enough conversion data for the algorithm to work with. The key is monitoring search term reports closely in the first few weeks and building negative keyword lists aggressively.

I break creatives into variables: hook, message, format, CTA, and visual style. Then I test one variable at a time against a control. Most teams test completely different ads against each other and learn nothing because they can't isolate what caused the difference. I tag every creative with its variables so I can run meta analyses across campaigns and find patterns. Over time, you build a creative playbook that tells you exactly what works for each audience segment.

I have done both. I work well embedded in existing teams because I bring structure and process that compounds over time. I document everything: strategies, test results, SOPs. My goal is always to leave the team more capable than I found it. Whether I manage campaigns directly or advise an in house team, the framework stays the same.