Best for
- B2B teams with long, multi-touch sales cycles
- Organizations disputing whether marketing created or influenced pipeline
- Teams that combine event, content, paid, and outbound engagement
Compare source properties, campaign engagement, forms, contacts, companies, and deals to classify marketing-sourced, marketing-influenced, and unattributed pipeline consistently.
A reconciled attribution ledger with explicit decision rules, evidence for each classification, and an exception queue for disputed opportunities.
Quick view
Check the audience, core tools, and access before you start the detailed steps.
Best for
Core tools
2 tools used across the workflow.
Access
Preview the open steps, then unlock the remaining implementation details and prompts.
Why this works
Attribution disputes are usually policy and association problems disguised as reporting problems. This workflow creates a claim-level ledger that shows which contact, touch, timestamp, and rule produced each classification. Claude applies the policy consistently but cannot resolve missing evidence without a human decision.
Expected results
Audit coverage
100% of the approved in-scope population
The workflow begins with a frozen scope and reconciles the analyzed row count to the platform control report, so coverage can be verified rather than estimated.
Evidence traceability
Every approved finding linked to a source evidence key
The data dictionary and evidence-key convention require each factual conclusion to point to a specific record, field, and as-of date.
Controlled execution
No source-system change without recorded approval and rollback data
Recommendations, approvals, and writes are separated into different steps, with pre-change exports and pilot validation before broader application.
Reusable operating cadence
A repeatable monthly review system
The Claude Skill, rule register, acceptance tests, run manifest, and closeout process turn the work into a maintained operating system rather than a one-time analysis.
Step-by-step workflow
The first 2 steps are open. Pro unlocks the remaining steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and implementation details.
30-45 min
30-45 min
Write a one-page operating charter for lead-to-revenue attribution classification before exporting any data. State the exact decision this workflow supports: how each opportunity should be classified for sourced, influenced, unattributed, or excluded reporting. Define the in-scope business units, pipelines, regions, date window, record types, and exclusions, then name one analysis owner, one HubSpot data owner, and one final approver. Record the review cadence as monthly and specify where evidence, approvals, and exceptions will be stored. Review the charter with the approver and do not proceed until the scope and decision rights are accepted.
An approved operating charter with scope, owners, cadence, and decision rights.
A narrow decision produces better analysis than a broad request to “find insights”; keep out-of-scope questions in a separate backlog.
45-75 min
45-75 min
Convert the operating policy into a rule register that can be checked against HubSpot records. Create one row per rule with rule_id, rule_name, business_reason, required_fields, calculation_or_test, pass_condition, exception_code, severity, owner, and policy_version. Start with these minimum checks: every attributed opportunity has at least one associated contact, the qualifying touch occurs before the agreed attribution cutoff, sourced and influenced rules are mutually exclusive where policy requires it, excluded pipeline is coded explicitly, and amount and stage totals reconcile to the approved HubSpot report. Give every rule an example that should pass and an example that should fail so reviewers interpret it consistently. Have the business owner approve the rule register and record any unresolved policy questions before data is scored.
A versioned rule register with pass conditions, examples, severity, and exception codes.
Version the rules independently from the workflow; changing a threshold should not erase which policy produced an earlier decision.
Pro workflow preview
Previewing 2 of 16 steps
Get the remaining 14 steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and ongoing workflow and prompt releases.
$9/month
Related workflows
Continue with workflows that share a similar GTM motion, category, or tool stack.
An evidence-linked deal-risk register, prioritized seller action queue, and reusable weekly Claude Skill for pipeline inspection.
A lifecycle-stage exception register, corrected governance rules, and a recurring audit process that protects funnel reporting.
A concise executive reality brief that separates observed results, plausible explanations, unresolved questions, and recommended investigations.