# Worked fictional mature readout: Harbor Systems All names, identifiers, budgets, dates, approvals, and report values in this exercise are fictional. No real campaign was launched or reviewed. Receipt names describe simulated evidence; they are not attached native records. ## Decision and responsibilities Harbor sells scheduling software to operations teams. The business question is whether its LinkedIn advertising changed product consideration in the studied audience. The decision under review is whether there is enough evidence to plan a further test of the same message. The survey cannot establish incremental purchases, qualified pipeline, or revenue. Casey prepares the record on December 18, 2026 at 10:00 UTC. Robin is the budget owner, Devon is the campaign operator, and Ellis is the results reviewer. These are fictional roles. ## Study scope and history - Account: HARBOR-01. - Study: HARBOR-BL-01. - Scope: selected campaign HARBOR-CONSIDER-01; standard Sponsored Content in the LinkedIn feed, United States, English. No CTV. - Brand: Harbor Systems. - Question count: one. - Illustrative product-consideration question: How likely are you to consider Harbor Systems? - Desired answers: Highly likely and Somewhat likely. - Undesired answers: Neutral, Somewhat unlikely, and Highly unlikely. - Question wording and answer options are illustrative. A real brief must retain the exact native wording and response mapping. - Benchmark selection: United States, Software; benchmark result unavailable in this exercise. - Campaign and study dates: November 2, 2026 at 00:00 UTC through December 1, 2026 at 23:59 UTC. - Planned final review: December 17, 2026 at 09:00 UTC, after the full 15-day post-end period. - Currency and eligible planned budget: USD 65,000 during the study. Actual campaign spend is not supplied. - Simulated SETTINGS-H-01 and ELIGIBILITY-H-01, captured November 1 at 10:00 UTC: the included campaign qualifies for one question. - Simulated ACCESS-H-01: Devon has campaign-manager access. - Simulated INVENTORY-H-01: no concurrent tests or CTV; supported scope and current restrictions checked before the proposed launch. - Simulated PLAN-H-01: Robin approves preparation. Separate LAUNCH-APPROVAL-H-01 authorizes Devon to launch this exact study. - Simulated LAUNCH-H-01: native approved study state recorded November 2. Simulated END-H-01 records its scheduled completion. - Simulated CHANGE-H-01: no scope or campaign changes recorded. These simulated receipts establish the exercise's inputs only. They do not establish account access, permission, or delivery for any reader. ## Mature readout Ellis retrieves simulated native report REPORT-H-01 on December 18 at 09:00 UTC. The scheduled end was December 1 at 23:59 UTC. The full 15-day period ended December 16 at 23:59 UTC, and the planned final review date has passed. | Field | Supplied fictional native report | | --- | --- | | Framework | Bayesian | | Question | Product consideration, as defined above | | Test total / desired / undesired responses | 200 / 44 / 156 | | Control total / desired / undesired responses | 200 / 40 / 160 | | Displayed desired-response percentages | Test 22%; control 20% | | Absolute lift | 2 percentage points | | Relative lift | 10% | | Native lift probability | 68%, a simulated report field | | Native status | No lift detected | | Estimated total lift | Unknown; not supplied | | Attribute breakdowns | Unavailable in this exercise | | Benchmark result | Unavailable in this exercise | | Scope changes | None recorded in simulated CHANGE-H-01 | The 68% probability is a fictional native output, not a value calculated from the response counts. The percentages illustrate the units. They do not recreate LinkedIn's adjusted model. Response counts exceeding the minimum for a detected-lift status do not themselves establish that status. ## Supported interpretation and next action This is a mature report with a positive displayed point estimate and the native status No lift detected. Maturity means the post-end waiting period has passed; it does not make the result conclusive. Preserve both the estimate and the status. Do not describe it as detected improvement, proof of zero effect, or a losing creative. Ellis should bring the actual report, question definition, scope, and method to the review. The missing optional benchmark and breakdowns do not justify inventing a subgroup explanation. LinkedIn advises against making performance decisions based on No lift detected; do not use the displayed 10% alone to recommend more spend. For this exercise, Casey and Ellis will review the question, scope, and evidence limits with Robin on December 21. The next campaign decision remains open. A new test would need a specific research question, a reason for the changed design, current eligibility evidence, and separate approval. No repeat launch or budget increase is authorized by this worksheet. ## Public references - Creation: https://www.linkedin.com/help/lms/answer/a461474/create-a-brand-lift-test?lang=en - Results and waiting period: https://www.linkedin.com/help/lms/answer/a590090?lang=en - Metric definitions: https://www.linkedin.com/help/lms/answer/a462020/?lang=en - Methodology and status: https://www.linkedin.com/help/lms/answer/a419979?lang=en Public rules were captured October 30, 2026. Real operators must use current account evidence; none of the simulated receipts is a live source.