Proof

The work behind the method

The Marketing Foundation Audit is not a theory. It is the same sequence I used to rebuild a law firm's growth engine over twenty-two months: instrument first, decide from data, cut what loses, compound what wins.

Twenty-two months

What changed, in four numbers

Perigon was not a struggling business when I started in September 2024. It was a well-run, faith-founded firm with real revenue and strong referral relationships. The problem was that nobody could say where a single client came from, which meant nobody could say what to do more of.

+153%
website conversion rate, from 5.72% to 14.45%
76%
better average Google position, from 44.3 to 10.5
−83%
paid search spend, with lead volume held flat
6.74x
blended return on tracked spend, refreshed weekly
The starting point

September 2024: a profitable firm flying blind

Every one of these is a foundation problem, and every one of them is something the Marketing Foundation Audit is designed to surface.

No attribution

Lead source was not captured consistently. Marketing decisions were made on instinct because there was no data to make them on.

No reporting system

No dashboard, no KPI baseline, no recurring cadence to leadership. Performance was invisible between conversations.

No intake ownership

Intake sat outside marketing. Leads arrived, and what happened next went untracked.

Paid media on autopilot

Ads ran without conversion-quality scrutiny. Cost per conversion climbed 200% before there was data to catch it.

Local search fragmented

Profiles carried a legacy firm name, inconsistent phone numbers, and conflicting service areas across a multi-office footprint.

A website that did not convert

Traffic was healthy. Conversion was not. The site was a brochure rather than an intake channel.

Result one · Website conversion

Half the traffic obsession, twice the conversions

Metric
Before
After
Change
Site conversion rate
5.72%
14.45%
+153%
Conversions per month
244
515
+111%
Sessions per month
4,270
3,565
−17%
Why this beats a traffic number

Anyone can buy sessions. Doubling the rate at which a visitor becomes an inquiry makes every future dollar, paid or organic or referred, permanently more productive. Sessions fell and conversions still doubled.

Result two · Organic search

From page five to page one

Average ranking position was 44.3 when the data begins, which is effectively invisible. I rebuilt the content strategy around attorney-authored, geographically anchored, intent-matched pages and stopped chasing volume.

Metric
Before
After
Change
Average search position
44.3
10.5
76% better
Organic click-through rate
0.46%
0.82%
+80%
Months held inside position 20
never
10 straight
sustained
Read the impression drop correctly

Impressions fell 69%, and that was the plan. I stopped ranking for irrelevant national queries. Fewer appearances, far higher, in front of people actually inside the firm's counties. Clicks per impression rose 80%.

Result three · Paid media

I recommended killing the biggest line item on the budget

By late 2025 paid search consumed roughly $13,000 a month and cost per conversion had climbed from $32 to $97. Once attribution was live, the report was unambiguous: that channel returned less than it cost.

Metric
Before
After
Change
Paid search, per month
$12,986
$2,259
−83%
Annualized spend recovered
$128,731
recovered
Total marketing spend, Jan to Jul
$30,367
$10,709
−65%
The discipline, stated plainly

I did not optimize a losing channel. I proved it was losing, took the evidence to leadership, and recommended shutting it off. Then held seven months of declining spend with lead volume flat. This is the part most agencies cannot do, because the losing channel is also their revenue.

Result four · Attribution

Every channel, ranked by what it actually returns

This did not exist before I built it. A single table showing every channel by leads, retained clients, cost per lead, close rate, and true return. It became the document that drives budget allocation at the firm, and it is the same artifact the Growth Blueprint is designed to give you.

What the table changed

Referrals closed between 59% and 76% at no acquisition cost, so I built a 148-partner referral engine with a standing visit rotation. Organic search returned 9.6x, so it earned a permanent weekly publishing cadence. One social channel produced leads at $17 that closed at 2.6%, so it was restructured into retargeting rather than scaled. Paid search returned less than nothing, so it ended. Blended return on tracked spend came to 6.74x, measured and refreshed weekly rather than projected.

The build

What did not exist in September 2024

Metrics are the outcome. This is the infrastructure that produced them, all of it built from nothing and all of it still running.

A live KPI dashboard with an automated weekly refresh off the intake system of record.
An attribution taxonomy: controlled vocabulary for lead source and disposition, enforced across CRM, call tracking, and web forms.
A ten-stage intake pipeline from new lead to signed engagement, including a no-show stage with a three-touch re-engagement sequence.
A 148-partner referral engine with a thirteen-category taxonomy across three office zones and a standing visit rotation.
A content authority program: thirty-week editorial calendar, attorney-attributed bylines, geographic anchor rotation.
A local search framework: standardized profiles, locked phone structure, tiered zip-level targeting, and a new-office launch checklist.
A review generation system with a two-step triggered ask and one-tap routing to the correct location profile.
A leadership reporting cadence: weekly performance narrative and a monthly report in a fixed seven-part decision format.
Methodology

Where every number came from

The same evidence discipline you get in an audit. Each figure above traces to a platform of record, not a spreadsheet I built to make a point.

Sources of record

Sessions, conversions, and conversion rate from Google Analytics 4. Search position, clicks, and impressions from Google Search Console. Profile views and direction requests from Google Business Profile. Paid spend and cost per conversion from Google Ads. Spend totals from the firm's accounting system. Funnel stages and close rates from the intake system of record.

Rules I held myself to

Every figure is pulled directly from a platform of record. None are estimated, modeled, or projected. Before-and-after comparisons use like-for-like windows and avoid periods distorted by tracking changes. Where a metric moved against me, it appears here anyway. Where causation is shared with factors outside marketing, I say so rather than claiming the whole result.

On credit

Firm revenue over the trailing twelve months sits well above the twelve preceding my start. I do not claim sole credit for that, and I would not let a vendor claim it either. Attorneys and service quality drive revenue. What I claim is the system that made it measurable, and the decisions that measurement made possible.

In their words

What clients say

Adamah client results and quotes appear here, each one attributed by name, role, and firm.

PLACEHOLDER: replace with the client's own words, quoted exactly and approved by them in writing before publication.

Client nameRole, CompanyMarketing Foundation Audit, month year

PLACEHOLDER: a second slot, same rules. Duplicate this card for each new testimonial.

Client nameRole, CompanyMarketing Foundation Audit, month year

The same sequence, pointed at your business

The audit is that method compressed into a fixed engagement: instrument what is not measured, find where value leaks, and put the next ninety days in priority order.