# Campaign adaptation brief

Version: 2026-10-25. Companion page: https://maestrogtm.com/account-based-marketing-examples/

Choose a case, record what actually happened, then describe how you would adapt the mechanism to your accounts. If both your buying situation and case are unknown, leave the case unselected until you clarify the situation. Replace the brackets below. Write Unknown when you lack a fact, or Not applicable with a reason. Blank placeholders are not inputs. Numbers quoted from a case study are not facts about your campaign. If a count could refer to either, keep your campaign count Unknown until clarified. Keep proposed numbers and response windows labeled Proposed until agreed.

Use account aliases and role names. You do not need personal emails, phone numbers, credentials, customer identities, or raw call transcripts. A redacted summary of the buyer's problem is enough to start.

Before filling in the brief, classify each number you plan to use. Only a number explicitly describing your campaign belongs in your inputs. Keep ambiguous values Unknown and ask which campaign they describe.

| Number | What it describes | Historical case / Explicit reader campaign input / Ambiguous |
|---|---|---|
| [number] | [meaning and unit] | [provenance] |

## 1. Your campaign inputs

- Brief title: [title]
- Owner role and date/version: [role; date; version]
- Selected case and reason: [BioCatch / Bonterra / Snowflake / Genesis / unsure; why it fits]
- Buying situation: [new acquisition / active opportunity / customer expansion / unknown]
- Your offer and the buyer's problem: [describe both]
- Eligible accounts and exclusions: [rule; account count if known; optional aliases]
- Buying roles and known coverage: [roles; known count; what supports it]
- Existing signals: [event; source/system; observation window; what it tells you]
- Channels and assets available: [what you can actually use]
- Budget and team capacity: [constraints; zero is a valid budget]
- Sales owner and follow-up capacity: [role; capacity; any agreement already made]
- Current baseline: [metric; numerator; denominator; unit; period; cohort; source, or Unknown]

## 2. What the selected source documents

- Case and source URL: [choose a source card below]
- Account selection and people: [documented facts only]
- Offer, creative, and channel sequence: [documented facts only]
- Sales handoff: [documented facts, or Not reported in source]
- Reported result: [exact unit, population, and period if supplied]
- Measurement limits: [missing denominator/window/comparator; influenced versus causal]

## 3. Your proposed adaptation

Label this section Proposed. Separate your inputs from recommendations that still need discussion.

- Mechanism to borrow and why: [connect it to your buying situation]
- Cohort and eligibility rule: [who qualifies and who does not]
- Buying roles: [who needs the message]
- Message, offer, and proof asset: [what they will see and why it answers their problem]

| Stage | Entry rule | Asset/message | Channel | Next action | Owner role |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [stage] | [observed rule or proposed threshold] | [asset] | [channel] | [action] | [role] |

## 4. Sales handoff

| Signal | Routing destination | Owner role | Response window | Follow-up action | Stop or exit rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [signal] | [system/team] | [role] | [agreed, proposed, or Unknown] | [action] | [rule] |

Freeze the measurement cohort after pre-launch eligibility checks. Later operational exits, such as an escalation, opt-out, or disqualification, stop delivery or follow-up but do not remove an account from the original measurement denominator. Report later exits separately. Never remove nonresponders or unfavorable outcomes to improve a rate.

## 5. Measurement

- Primary account-level outcome: [what change you will count]
- Numerator and denominator: [exact definitions; count each qualifying account once]
- Fixed cohort and observation window: [which accounts; start and end rules]
- Data source and reporting owner: [system; role]
- Secondary engagement diagnostic: [a signal that helps explain progress]
- Baseline and comparator: [what exists; Unknown if absent]
- What the measurement can show: [observed or influenced outcomes; causal impact only with a defensible comparison]
- What stays separate: [people, accounts, opportunities, acquisition, and expansion as applicable]

## 6. Open questions and next action

- What needs confirming: [the decisions that change the plan]
- Who can resolve it: [role]
- Next planning action: [one concrete action]

This brief describes a draft. It does not send messages or activate campaigns. Do not turn another company's reported results into your forecast.

## Source cards

These are reports published by participating vendors. Their results describe those programs; they do not predict yours. Missing detail stays missing. The version date of this resource is not the date a campaign ran.

### BioCatch with Marketbridge

Sources: https://www.influ2.com/blog/marketbridge-campaign-spotlight and https://www.influ2.com/case-studies/marketbridge

Influ2 describes three journeys. Unengaged accounts were selected through intent and firmographic data. Engaged accounts were segmented by role, region, and engagement. Pipeline contacts, including CISOs, CSOs, and fraud leaders, were tied to active Salesforce opportunities. Messaging changed with stage and role. The spotlight lists LinkedIn and Google delivery, HubSpot signals and workflows, and Salesforce mapping. BioCatch's exact scoring thresholds and response window are not reported. A three-click CMO trigger in the agency case describes Marketbridge's broader workflow; it must not be assigned to BioCatch.

The reports describe 6x more accounts entering active pipeline. Absolute counts, baseline, and observation window are absent. This is an account count comparison, not a revenue multiple. The claim that 100% of late-stage deals had an engaged contact does not mean 100% of the account list engaged. These are two related vendor reports about one case, not independent confirmation.

What to adapt: different messages and next actions for clearly defined account stages.

### Bonterra

Source: https://www.influ2.com/case-studies/bonterra

Influ2 describes buying-stage account lists and segments of 5–15 stakeholders per account across customer expansion, competitor, and event cohorts. Expansion ads offered additional success services to existing customers. Contact engagement went to Sales in Slack. Leadership intervened if a rep had not followed up within 24 hours; contacts entered a Salesloft sequence mapped to their interactions. Bonterra's stated engagement rule included a click OR viewing all ads in a journey. That is its rule, not a universal indication that someone wants a sales conversation.

The expansion campaign reported 19 influenced opportunities and four closed-won deals in four months. The account denominator, revenue, and isolated causal effect are not supplied. The opportunities were not 19 new customers, and the report does not establish four incremental wins caused by ads.

What to adapt: an offer for a defined customer need, with a named sales owner and an agreed follow-up action.

### Snowflake

Source: https://www.adroll.com/resources/case-studies/how-snowflake-builds-1-1-abm-experiences-that-scale

This AdRoll case, migrated from RollWorks, describes using sales conversations or intent to select accounts. Personalized Uberflip destinations connected ads and sales-stage CTAs with a rep's note and photo. ABM warmed accounts for 2–4 weeks; selected SDRs then engaged them, and AEs took appropriate opportunities. Around half of target accounts were existing customers.

The case reports 75% more SDR-booked meetings in ABM accounts quarter over quarter; a 3x meeting rate in the SDR hyper-aligned 1:1 subset quarter over quarter; and 38% more accounts with SDR meetings, with the exact period for that measure unclear. These measures have different populations and units. Absolute denominators and a control group are not supplied. Do not apply any of these increases to a new campaign forecast.

What to adapt: account selection, a consistent ad-to-page message, and a clear SDR handoff. The described program's 2,000-plus campaigns are not a requirement for adopting that sequence.

### Genesis

Source: https://www.mutinyhq.com/case-studies/how-genesis-built-an-enterprise-abm-program-with-a-team-of-two

Mutiny describes a two-person marketing team targeting 2–3 decision makers across 20 accounts. The direct-mail campaign used F1 remote-control cars and personalized ID cards. The team created 20 account-specific pages in a day and gave the links to assigned salespeople for follow-up after packages arrived.

The body reports that 10% of cold accounts receiving the campaign converted to a meeting. The delivered-account denominator and observation window are not explicit, so do not infer exactly two meetings from 20 targeted accounts. The headline's 3x comparison uses unsourced, inconsistent industry benchmarks rather than a measured before-and-after result. Its 80% time-reduction figure lacks an explained calculation. Do not use either headline claim.

What to adapt: connect the initial touch, account-specific page, and sales follow-up. A proposed adaptation can omit gifts; that does not change what Genesis actually did.