Paid media audit · Malaysia

Find what your paid campaigns need next.

If your Google, Meta or LinkedIn reports look busy but the commercial picture is unclear, a paid media audit gives your team a prioritised answer. We review the selected accounts, destination pages, conversion definitions and available sales feedback before recommending fixes or further tests.

See the approach

An apparent targeting problem may be a page that fails to explain the service, a duplicated event or an enquiry nobody follows up. Platform totals alone cannot identify the cause. We show you which issues the evidence confirms and which explanations still need a test.

01

Campaign reports disagree

Your campaign report and website records count different actions, so it is unclear which total to trust. We check the definition and available evidence behind each total.

02

The page does not support the offer

The ad promises a specific service, but the page it leads to does not explain what is covered or what a buyer needs to provide to enquire.

03

Events may count the same action twice

Browser and server events may both record one submission. We check whether repeated records are separate actions or duplicate records of the same action. Duplicate counting makes cost per conversion look lower at unchanged spend.

04

Findings have no agreed next action

The report lists problems without saying which action is recommended, who can approve it or what evidence to check next.

01

Reconcile what the reports count.

You see how each account, page and event defines a result, and where the available evidence does not agree.

02

Connect each finding to evidence.

Each finding is marked as an observed problem, a hypothesis or a record we could not check, so you know how much weight it can carry.

03

Make the next action specific.

Recommended changes come in priority order, each with an approval owner and a way to check the result. Implementation is scoped separately.

Check the evidence before blaming the channel.

We follow the buyer’s path from the offer to the enquiry and the response. Each check below asks one question and records the evidence that answers it, or the gap where evidence is missing.

For example, a maintenance provider reporting poor enquiries would need evidence of relevance, page clarity, event counting and response before blaming the channel.

Maintenance page drafts and event notes compared during a campaign review.
  1. 01 / AudienceDo enquiries match your offer?

    We review locations, reported search terms or available audience evidence alongside enquiry records, and record gaps where records cannot be matched.

  2. 02 / PageCan a buyer understand the service?

    We check coverage, scope and form requirements on the destination. An unclear page is a finding; its effect on conversion rate needs evidence or a test.

  3. 03 / EventsIs one submission counted more than once?

    We inspect definitions and, with your agreement, test the selected actions. Differences between tools may also come from attribution settings or reporting periods.

  4. 04 / SalesWhat happened after the enquiry?

    We check the available fit and response notes. Where notes are missing, we record the gap instead of judging the enquiries.

  5. 05 / PriorityWhat should the team fix first?

    We separate verified faults, proposed experiments and unanswered questions, then name an owner and a way to check the outcome.

Illustrative planning example, not a client case study.

The proposal names the work included, approval rights and people responsible. Open each part to read its boundaries.

01

Selected media accounts

Review the channels included in the brief.

See what this covers

We agree the platforms, accounts, date range and campaign types with you, then inspect the relevant structure, delivery, targeting, creative and conversion settings. Each finding names its source and period.

02

Destination and measurement

Check what happens after the click.

See what this covers

We review the relevant pages, forms and events using your available analytics and agreed tests. Reporting differences are checked against definitions, attribution settings and reporting periods before we call them errors. Tracking implementation and a full website rebuild are separate work.

03

Priorities and readout

Make the next action reviewable.

See what this covers

You receive a ranked findings register. Each entry shows its evidence, our confidence, the proposed action, an owner and how to verify it. We agree the readout and any implementation options with you. An audit does not include live campaign changes unless you separately authorise them.

Agree the scope before work starts. Each step should leave a decision or check the next person can use.

  1. 01

    Agree the question

    Together we choose the accounts, time period and the decision the audit should support. We record any missing access before analysis starts.

  2. 02

    Trace the evidence

    We review media, page and event evidence alongside your sales records, and note where records cannot be matched.

  3. 03

    Assign the next actions

    We rank findings by business consequence and confidence, then specify each fix or test, its owner and how it will be checked.

The main deliverable is a ranked findings register your team can work from: what we found, the evidence behind it and the agreed next step. It comes with the account review, destination and tracking notes, and a readout. Where the records cannot link a sale to an ad, the register says so instead of assuming the link.

Illustrative business example

A record the next person can use.

Illustrative deliverable register. These are fields to agree before work, not completed findings or results.

  1. 01 / Decision
    What was agreed

    Record the question the audit answers, the accounts and period covered, and the decision your team needs to make.

  2. 02 / Evidence
    What supports the decision

    Record the account, page or event reviewed and distinguish an observed fact from a question still open.

  3. 03 / Next check
    Who checks what happens next

    Name the person responsible, the agreed action and what evidence is needed at the next review.

This is a planning example, not a client case study. No campaign results, costs or sales outcomes are implied.

Before work begins, we confirm who provides access, who answers questions about enquiries and who approves any live change. Your team keeps that approval throughout.

Aaron reviewing papers during a discussion.

Your business approves claims and spend.

You supply accurate service facts to check ads and pages against, and a person who can confirm budget decisions.

Name the person responding to enquiries.

Record what arrived and whether it fits. Sales confirming fit is a separate step from a submitted form.

Confirm technical and production scope.

Landing-page development, original creative, server events and CRM integrations need an explicit agreement and owner.

Not the right start when

  • You need guaranteed leads, sales or a fixed cost per enquiry.
  • The service or buyer is still undefined.
  • Nobody can approve the work or respond to enquiries.

The answers should match the account, website and sales process you actually have.

What deliverables are included in the agreed scope?

You receive the agreed account review, a ranked findings register with its evidence and prioritised fixes or tests, destination and tracking notes, and a readout. The proposal confirms which accounts and pages each part covers. The audit cannot prove a sale came from an ad when the records do not support the link.

What access and people are needed?

We need read access to, or exports from, the selected ad accounts, key destination pages and analytics. Tag-manager access helps us investigate how events are recorded. A sales or CRM contact gives us enquiry context. Your team keeps approval of live changes and names the person responsible for each follow-up action.

How should we judge the results?

By whether the audit supports the decision agreed at the start and gives your team a ranked next step backed by evidence. We agree that decision and the review period before work begins. Clicks, submitted enquiries, enquiries your sales team confirms as a fit and sales are different measures, so we keep them separate. Where sales or attribution evidence is missing, we state that limit.

Is implementation included?

Not by default. The audit gives you findings and recommended fixes or tests. If you also want changes made, the proposal names each included change, who approves it and who implements it. Creative production, landing-page development, server events and customer relationship management (CRM) integration need an explicit agreement rather than being assumed. If the findings point to tracking work, our conversion tracking service is scoped separately.

Which accounts and time period does the audit cover?

Only the platforms, accounts, campaign types and date range we agree in the brief. Each finding names the source and period we inspected, so it does not imply every account has been reviewed.

Can an audit start from account exports?

Yes, for a limited review. Exports may not show the current experience or every setting. We record those limits and agree with you whether account, page or event access is needed for the question being investigated.

Does the audit make live campaign changes?

No. An audit does not include live changes unless you separately authorise them. Its agreed scope identifies findings, proposed fixes or tests and the people responsible.

Are different report totals always a tracking fault?

No. We compare action definitions, attribution settings and reporting periods before treating a difference as an error. Some discrepancies need further evidence or a test.

What if sales says the leads are poor but has no notes?

Missing feedback limits the conclusion. It is not evidence that every enquiry was poor. We review the records you have and identify what fit or response information your team should collect next.

How are verified issues distinguished from ideas to test?

Each finding is labelled as a verified fault, a proposed test or an open question. A form submission counted twice is a verified fault once we have confirmed that both records represent the same action. A belief that the page loses buyers at the form still needs evidence or a test.

A practical place to begin

Share the offer, current channels and what you need to understand about enquiry quality.

What to expect from a call ↗