Buying-committee simulation · LinkedIn ad campaign
EXP CCO-c727be79 · 2026-07-22 · Healthcare-ITSM3
Destination under test · www.acemecorp.io/unitedhealth/

Creative B is pulling attention and converting at a workable level, but the campaign’s biggest drag is the LP asking for a demo/contact after a low-commitment promise.

Winner · winner Creative B
180 agents — recorded passes Details
Committee
3 compiled buyers · 30 seeds each
Spread
90 seeds × 2 creatives, each read under 3 behavioural profiles
Reporting
benchmark-anchored — direction and confidence, never a point rate
Determinism
same fingerprints, same buyers — replayable, not re-generated
Where each finding landed on the funnel 4 working · 3 broken
180 recorded passes · 90 seeds × 2 creatives
01
Impression
4 findings
Creative A single image
winner
Creative B single image
Click-through benchmark 0.52% outperforming low sample
02
Click
handoff
Scent trail intact Both creatives hand the click a page that repeats their promise. The loss is not the trail — it is what the page asks for next.
03
Landing page
1 finding
Post-click conversion benchmark 3.5% inconclusive low sample
04
Form
2 findings
End to end benchmark 0.018% inconclusive low sample

Blocks are generic — only the labelled stages carry meaning, because they are the stages findings were tagged with. Cyan is working, magenta broken. Rates are never shown as point values: each stage reports the published benchmark, the direction against it, and how much sample sits behind that call.

W1 · Working Impression stage · low severity CH TD EB

Specific tool-stack callout drives clicks

In Creative A and B, naming "Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty" alongside "fragmented alerts" makes the hook highly specific to multi-tool environments, prompting incident-response leaders to click to verify signal unification.

Reason code hook specific · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“They call out fragmented alerts across Splunk, ServiceNow and PagerDuty — that multi-tool alert pain is exactly what I'm dealing with.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the impression stage — 15 clicks of 180 impressions.

Roles that reacted: Champion, Technical Decision Maker, Economic Buyer

15 clicks of 180 impressions

low confidence at 5% · sample 180 · severity low · stage counter

W2 · Working Impression stage · low severity CH TD EB

Named pain point (fragmented alerts slowing response) resonates

The ad’s problem statement—"fragmented alerts make a fast response harder"—clearly names the operational pain, aligning with Major Incident and ITSM owners’ day-to-day friction and improving click-through intent.

Reason code pain point named · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“They call out fragmented alerts across Splunk, ServiceNow and PagerDuty — that’s the exact multi-tool signal-silo problem slowing our incident response.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the impression stage — 47 clicks of 180 impressions.

Roles that reacted: Champion, Technical Decision Maker, Economic Buyer

47 clicks of 180 impressions

low confidence at 20% · sample 180 · severity low · stage counter

W3 · Working Impression stage · low severity CH TD EB

Credible enterprise scale anchor supports the click decision

The ad provides a concrete scale proof point—"UnitedHealth insures 50M+ people"—which adds credibility and stakes for protecting "critical health platforms," helping enterprise buyers take the message seriously enough to click.

Reason code credible numbers · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“UnitedHealth called out by name and the ad lists Splunk/ServiceNow/PagerDuty plus ‘unify signals into one incident view’ — I want to see integration details and real MTTR outcomes.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the impression stage — 46 clicks of 180 impressions.

Roles that reacted: Economic Buyer, Champion, Technical Decision Maker

46 clicks of 180 impressions

low confidence at 20% · sample 180 · severity low · stage counter

W4 · Working Landing page stage · low severity CH TD EB

Landing page reinforces the ad promise with UHG case study + integrations

Post-click, the page matches the ad’s "unify signals" promise by featuring a "UnitedHealth case study" plus explicit "Integrations (ServiceNow, PagerDuty, Jira)" and "IT Knowledge Graph," reducing doubt that the single-incident view is real.

Reason code promise delivered · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“UnitedHealth case study + visible integrations (ServiceNow, PagerDuty, Jira) and a clear 'Get a demo' CTA — worth scheduling to validate real-data correlation and bi-directional ITSM workflow.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the landing page stage — 16 conversions of 108 clicks.

Roles that reacted: Technical Decision Maker, Champion, Economic Buyer

16 conversions of 108 clicks

low confidence at 9% · sample 180 · severity low · stage counter

B1 · Broken Form stage · critical severity CH TD EB

LP pushes demo/contact with no low-effort deliverable

Creative A/B say acemecorp can "unify signals into one incident view" and use a low-commitment CTA ("Learn more"), but the destination’s primary CTAs are "Get a demo" / "Contact us" without an immediate, concrete takeaway, making the next step feel too high-effort.

Reason code offer not worth form effort · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“Hero matches the ad, but the page pushes 'Get a demo' / contact sales without concrete metrics or clear integration proof (ServiceNow/PagerDuty details or real-data outcomes), so not worth giving my contact now.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the form stage — 88 bounces of 108 clicks.

Roles that reacted: Champion, Economic Buyer, Technical Decision Maker

88 bounces of 108 clicks

high confidence at 73% · sample 180 · severity critical · stage counter

B2 · Broken Impression stage · medium severity CH TD EB

Ad hook is too generic: 'unify signals' lacks concrete outcome

Creative A/B lead with "fragmented alerts" and "unify signals into one incident view," but the hook stays at category level and doesn’t specify a measurable outcome or concrete behavior, so it doesn’t earn a stop-scroll.

Reason code hook too generic · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“Mentions 'fragmented alerts' and lists tools, but gives no specific outcome or numbers on noise reduction or integration details — too generic for me to stop scrolling.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the impression stage — 72 ignores of 180 impressions.

Roles that reacted: Champion, Economic Buyer, Technical Decision Maker

72 ignores of 180 impressions

medium confidence at 33% · sample 180 · severity medium · stage counter

B3 · Broken Form stage · low severity CH TD EB

LP lacks concrete integration proof tied to tools named in ad

The ad explicitly calls out "Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty" and promises unification, but the destination doesn’t surface clear integration specifics at the decision point, so clickers don’t see proof that the stated tool-sprawl is actually unified.

Reason code asset value unclear · seen on Creative A and Creative B

“Hero and UnitedHealth case study line up with the ad, but the page pushes a demo/sales contact and shows no clear bi-directional ITSM integration or hard outcome metrics. Not worth scheduling a sales demo right now.”

Captured during the pass, not written afterwards.

Recorded at the form stage — 1 bounces of 108 clicks.

Roles that reacted: Champion, Technical Decision Maker, Economic Buyer

1 bounces of 108 clicks

low confidence at 0% · sample 180 · severity low · stage counter

Pick a mark on the funnel — or a row below — to open that finding's record: why it matters, the verbatim line a buyer left, and how much of the run stands behind it.

Everything the run found

CH · TD · EB · Impression
CH · TD · EB · Impression
EB · CH · TD · Impression
TD · CH · EB · Landing page
CH · EB · TD · Form
CH · EB · TD · Impression
CH · TD · EB · Form

What to fix, in the order the funnel loses people

Ranked against recorded drop-off, not creative order. Every fix sits on the stage it repairs; tick fixes and the rail on the right shows which stages stop leaking.

Where each fix landed on the funnel 5 fixes · 2 stages touched
01
Impression
1 fix
02
Click
handoff — no fix lands here
03
Landing page
no fix lands here
04
Form
4 fixes

Each mark is a fix, sitting on the stage whose recorded drop-off it repairs — the same spine the working and broken findings are pinned to. Pick one to open its record.

Add a low-effort LP primary CTA: “Get the Splunk+ServiceNow+PagerDuty Incident Unification Checklist (PDF)” with inline ungated preview + optional email delivery; demote “Get a demo” to secondary.

Form · critical severity · closes B1 · unblocks CH · EB · TD

Why this rank

The current LP jumps to high-commitment demo/contact CTAs, creating a mismatch with the low-commitment “Learn more” ad intent and reducing perceived value for the click. A concrete takeaway lowers effort while still progressing qualified visitors.

Evidence behind it
Recorded
88 bounces of 108 clicks
Confidence
high confidence at 73% · sample 180 · severity critical
Stage
Form

Add a “See it in action” LP section with 3 annotated screenshots/GIF: alert ingestion (Splunk), ticket sync (ServiceNow), on-call routing (PagerDuty) + one-paragraph “how it works” sequence.

Form · critical severity · closes B3 · B1 · unblocks CH · EB · TD

Why this rank

Clickers need concrete evidence that disparate tools are unified beyond a generic claim. A simple, visual flow tied to the ad’s tool stack makes the unification promise legible without requiring a demo first.

Evidence behind it
Recorded
88 bounces of 108 clicks
Confidence
high confidence at 73% · sample 180 · severity critical
Stage
Form

If any form remains, switch to 2-field capture (work email + role) and label it “Email me the checklist” while keeping a no-form “View online” option; remove phone/company size until post-download.

Form · critical severity · closes B1 · unblocks CH · EB · TD

Why this rank

The LP currently asks for a high-commitment next step, which heightens friction versus the ad’s low-commitment CTA. Minimal capture aligned to a clear deliverable reduces effort while preserving an opt-in path for follow-up.

Evidence behind it
Recorded
88 bounces of 108 clicks
Confidence
high confidence at 73% · sample 180 · severity critical
Stage
Form

Rewrite Creative A/B headline to a concrete outcome: “Cut MTTR by unifying Splunk + ServiceNow + PagerDuty into one incident timeline” (or “Stop swivel-chair triage—one incident view across Splunk/ServiceNow/PagerDuty”).

Impression · medium severity · closes B2 · unblocks CH · EB · TD

Why this rank

“Unify signals” is category-level and doesn’t specify a tangible result or behavior change, so it doesn’t earn attention. An outcome-first hook tied to the named tools clarifies value and improves stop-scroll relevance.

Evidence behind it
Recorded
72 ignores of 180 impressions
Confidence
medium confidence at 33% · sample 180 · severity medium
Stage
Impression

Above the fold, add an “Integrates with” strip + 3 short proof bullets: “Pulls alerts from Splunk,” “Syncs tickets bi-directionally with ServiceNow,” “Routes/ack with PagerDuty,” each linking to the exact integration page.

Form · low severity · closes B3 · unblocks CH · EB · TD

Why this rank

The ads name Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty, but the LP doesn’t show integration specifics at the decision point. Immediate, tool-named proof closes the credibility gap and reassures clickers the promised unification is real.

Evidence behind it
Recorded
1 bounces of 108 clicks
Confidence
low confidence at 0% · sample 180 · severity low
Stage
Form
If you ship this queue 0 ticked

Nothing ticked — 2 stages of the funnel still leak.

Impression → click leaking
Click → landing page holds
Landing page → form leaking
Roles unblocked
CH TD EB

Tick a fix to see what stops leaking

How each buyer moved — and where they stopped

Every compiled buyer cleared the feed and clicked — the ad is not the constraint. Where they stop, and why their own priors stop them, is below. Creative B’s benchmark-anchored CTR suggests the message is resonating, and its CVR indicates the path can convert. The main friction is "LP pushes demo/contact with no low-effort deliverable": ads offer a low-commitment "Learn more," but the page forces "Get a demo"/"Contact us" with no immediate takeaway, creating a commitment cliff.

Impression Click Landing page Form
carried through stopped here held, but lukewarm click any cell to open that buyer’s record for that stage

Selecting a cell retrieves a stored record. It does not compose a new answer.

CH · the feed

Champion

Director, Major Incident & Problem Management

Served in every declared behavioural state before this buyer had any reason to care. What survived that is below.

What earned the stop

In Creative A and B, naming "Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty" alongside "fragmented alerts" makes the hook highly specific to multi-tool environments, prompting incident-response leaders to click to verify signal unification.

What nearly lost it

Creative A/B lead with "fragmented alerts" and "unify signals into one incident view," but the hook stays at category level and doesn’t specify a measurable outcome or concrete behavior, so it doesn’t earn a stop-scroll.

Baseline state
Ideal
Heuristic
SocialProof over LossAversion
Fingerprint
4b5b34fe9f6ab081
CH · the click

Champion

Director, Major Incident & Problem Management

The moment the promise made in the feed meets the page. This is where the scent trail either holds or breaks for this buyer.

Creative A → destination · intact

The Director, Major Incident & Problem Management said the "Hero matches the ad" and that the "Hero + UnitedHealth case study are relevant," but felt the page pushes "Get a demo" / contact sales without "concrete metrics" or "clear integration proof."

Creative B → destination · intact

The Director, Major Incident & Problem Management noted the hero and UnitedHealth case study match the ad, but reacted negatively to the sales-forward “Get a demo” CTA and said it was “not worth handing contact now.”

Baseline state
Ideal
Heuristic
SocialProof over LossAversion
Fingerprint
4b5b34fe9f6ab081
CH · the page on its own terms

Champion

Director, Major Incident & Problem Management

Conditional on this persona reaching the destination (independent of whether they would have clicked).

Why the page landed this way

Director, Major Incident & Problem Management is converting strongly because the hero headline about protecting critical health platforms, the UnitedHealth case study and ‘trusted by enterprise IT teams’ signals align directly with incident- and problem-management priorities and the platform’s AI detection and response capabilities.

Page verdict
strong
Recorded
14 of 30 passes converted on the page
Vs benchmark
outperforming vs 3.5% · medium sample
Baseline state
Ideal
Heuristic
SocialProof over LossAversion
Fingerprint
4b5b34fe9f6ab081
CH · stopped at the form

Champion

Director, Major Incident & Problem Management

The Director, Major Incident & Problem Management liked the ad's hook but dropped out when the landing page pushed a 'Get a demo' contact form without concrete metrics or clear ServiceNow/PagerDuty integration proof.

Top failure

Landing page required contact/demo while lacking tangible results or explicit ServiceNow/PagerDuty integration details, so the offer wasn't worth submitting a form.

What they wanted instead

Must integrate bi-directionally with our ITSM and collaboration tools so responders stay in their existing workflows

Recorded
21 bounces of 37 clicks
Confidence
medium confidence at 41% · sample 60 · severity critical
Baseline state
Ideal
Heuristic
SocialProof over LossAversion
Fingerprint
4b5b34fe9f6ab081
TD · the feed

Technical Decision Maker

Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner)

Served in every declared behavioural state before this buyer had any reason to care. What survived that is below.

What earned the stop

In Creative A and B, naming "Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty" alongside "fragmented alerts" makes the hook highly specific to multi-tool environments, prompting incident-response leaders to click to verify signal unification.

What nearly lost it

Creative A/B lead with "fragmented alerts" and "unify signals into one incident view," but the hook stays at category level and doesn’t specify a measurable outcome or concrete behavior, so it doesn’t earn a stop-scroll.

Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
e238e8d37fabcffc
TD · the click

Technical Decision Maker

Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner)

The moment the promise made in the feed meets the page. This is where the scent trail either holds or breaks for this buyer.

Creative A → destination · intact

The Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner) said the "Hero matches the ad" and mentions a "UnitedHealth case study," but cited missing "ServiceNow bi-directional integration details" and "hard noise-reduction numbers" while the primary CTAs are "Get a demo" / "Contact us."

Creative B → destination · intact

The Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner) felt the page “matches the UnitedHealth hook,” but said it wasn’t worth giving contact info because the primary CTA is a demo/contact and it lacks “bi-directional” ServiceNow proof and “hard noise-reduction” metrics above the fold.

Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
e238e8d37fabcffc
TD · the page on its own terms

Technical Decision Maker

Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner)

Conditional on this persona reaching the destination (independent of whether they would have clicked).

Why the page landed this way

Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner)’s experience is roughly representative: the page acknowledges integrations and platform capabilities like ServiceNow but focuses on product overview and a case study instead of deeper integration or implementation specifics that platform owners scrutinize.

Page verdict
average
Recorded
3 of 30 passes converted on the page
Vs benchmark
inconclusive vs 3.5% · low sample
Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
e238e8d37fabcffc
TD · stopped at the form

Technical Decision Maker

Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner)

The Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner) declined to hand over contact details—skeptical about a page that only pushes a demo form without bi-directional ServiceNow proof or clear noise-reduction metrics.

Top failure

Landing page asks for contact/demo before showing ServiceNow-specific validation or quantified noise-reduction outcomes (OFFER_NOT_WORTH_FORM_EFFORT).

What they wanted instead

Must provide proven bi-directional integration with ServiceNow ITSM (create/update/close, assignment, and state synchronization) without breaking existing governance

Recorded
34 bounces of 36 clicks
Confidence
high confidence at 82% · sample 60 · severity critical
Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
e238e8d37fabcffc
EB · the feed

Economic Buyer

VP of IT Service Management

Served in every declared behavioural state before this buyer had any reason to care. What survived that is below.

What earned the stop

In Creative A and B, naming "Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty" alongside "fragmented alerts" makes the hook highly specific to multi-tool environments, prompting incident-response leaders to click to verify signal unification.

What nearly lost it

Creative A/B lead with "fragmented alerts" and "unify signals into one incident view," but the hook stays at category level and doesn’t specify a measurable outcome or concrete behavior, so it doesn’t earn a stop-scroll.

Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
7809afcbe75bb81f
EB · the click

Economic Buyer

VP of IT Service Management

The moment the promise made in the feed meets the page. This is where the scent trail either holds or breaks for this buyer.

Creative A → destination · intact

The VP of IT Service Management noted the page "matches the ad" and shows a "UnitedHealth case study" but said it mainly offers a "Get a demo/Contact us" path with "no auditable ROI" and "no pricing or low-effort download."

Creative B → destination · intact

The VP of IT Service Management said the page aligns on the UnitedHealth hook and case study, but found the offer “not worth handing over contact details” due to “Get a demo” / “Contact us” and “no auditable ROI” or “clear pricing.”

Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
7809afcbe75bb81f
EB · the page on its own terms

Economic Buyer

VP of IT Service Management

Conditional on this persona reaching the destination (independent of whether they would have clicked).

Why the page landed this way

VP of IT Service Management’s experience is roughly representative: the LP’s enterprise trust signals and high-level outcomes address executive concerns but the content centers on a single customer narrative and product overview rather than tailored governance or strategic-metrics detail.

Page verdict
average
Recorded
4 of 30 passes converted on the page
Vs benchmark
outperforming vs 3.5% · low sample
Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
7809afcbe75bb81f
EB · stopped at the form

Economic Buyer

VP of IT Service Management

The VP of IT Service Management declined to hand over contact after the landing page matched the ad but only offered a 'Get a demo' sales path with no auditable ROI or pricing, citing OFFER_NOT_WORTH_FORM_EFFORT.

Top failure

Gated contact/demo without auditable ROI or pricing — the offer wasn't worth the form effort (OFFER_NOT_WORTH_FORM_EFFORT).

What they wanted instead

Must provide an auditable ROI model (MTTR reduction, fewer escalations/bridge calls, lower ITSM operational cost) with baseline + post-implementation measurement plan.

Recorded
32 bounces of 35 clicks
Confidence
high confidence at 78% · sample 60 · severity critical
Baseline state
Skeptic
Heuristic
LossAversion over AuthorityBias
Fingerprint
7809afcbe75bb81f
Pick a cell to open that buyer’s record for that stage.

The scent trail, creative by creative

What the ad promised, set against what the destination actually said
Creative A intact Landing Page
The LP repeats the same promise language as the ad ("Protect UnitedHealth Group’s critical health platforms") and supports the incident/alert-noise narrative ("Alert noise is slowing UnitedHealth’s operations").
The ad promised The page said back
Protect UnitedHealth Group's critical health platforms Protect UnitedHealth Group’s critical health platforms
acemecorp can unify signals into one incident view not repeated on the page
Learn more not repeated on the page

1 of 3 promises are answered in the page’s own words. Links are drawn only where the destination repeats the ad — nothing is inferred.

How each buyer read the handoff
CH The Director, Major Incident & Problem Management said the "Hero matches the ad" and that the "Hero + UnitedHealth case study are relevant," but felt the page pushes "Get a demo" / contact sales without "concrete metrics" or "clear integration proof."
TD The Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner) said the "Hero matches the ad" and mentions a "UnitedHealth case study," but cited missing "ServiceNow bi-directional integration details" and "hard noise-reduction numbers" while the primary CTAs are "Get a demo" / "Contact us."
EB The VP of IT Service Management noted the page "matches the ad" and shows a "UnitedHealth case study" but said it mainly offers a "Get a demo/Contact us" path with "no auditable ROI" and "no pricing or low-effort download."
Creative B intact Landing Page
The LP repeats the same UnitedHealth-specific protection and alert-noise framing as the ad (“Protect UnitedHealth Group’s critical health platforms” and “Alert noise”), aligning the promised problem/solution narrative even though the primary CTAs push “Get a demo” / “Contact us.”
The ad promised The page said back
Protect UnitedHealth Group's critical health platforms Protect UnitedHealth Group’s critical health platforms
UnitedHealth insures 50M+ people across commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid plans not repeated on the page
fragmented alerts make a fast response harder not repeated on the page
AcmeCorp can unify signals into one incident view not repeated on the page

1 of 4 promises are answered in the page’s own words. Links are drawn only where the destination repeats the ad — nothing is inferred.

How each buyer read the handoff
CH The Director, Major Incident & Problem Management noted the hero and UnitedHealth case study match the ad, but reacted negatively to the sales-forward “Get a demo” CTA and said it was “not worth handing contact now.”
TD The Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner) felt the page “matches the UnitedHealth hook,” but said it wasn’t worth giving contact info because the primary CTA is a demo/contact and it lacks “bi-directional” ServiceNow proof and “hard noise-reduction” metrics above the fold.
EB The VP of IT Service Management said the page aligns on the UnitedHealth hook and case study, but found the offer “not worth handing over contact details” due to “Get a demo” / “Contact us” and “no auditable ROI” or “clear pricing.”

Walk any finding back to what produced it

W1

Specific tool-stack callout drives clicks

Working · Impression stage · low severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“They call out fragmented alerts across Splunk, ServiceNow and PagerDuty — that multi-tool alert pain is exactly what I'm dealing with.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code hook specific · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

15 clicks of 180 impressions

low confidence at 5% · sample 180 · severity low

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

15 clicks of 180 impressions

Confidence

low confidence at 5% · sample 180 · severity low

Evidence kind

stage counter

W2

Named pain point (fragmented alerts slowing response) resonates

Working · Impression stage · low severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“They call out fragmented alerts across Splunk, ServiceNow and PagerDuty — that’s the exact multi-tool signal-silo problem slowing our incident response.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code pain point named · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

47 clicks of 180 impressions

low confidence at 20% · sample 180 · severity low

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

47 clicks of 180 impressions

Confidence

low confidence at 20% · sample 180 · severity low

Evidence kind

stage counter

W3

Credible enterprise scale anchor supports the click decision

Working · Impression stage · low severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“UnitedHealth called out by name and the ad lists Splunk/ServiceNow/PagerDuty plus ‘unify signals into one incident view’ — I want to see integration details and real MTTR outcomes.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code credible numbers · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

46 clicks of 180 impressions

low confidence at 20% · sample 180 · severity low

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

46 clicks of 180 impressions

Confidence

low confidence at 20% · sample 180 · severity low

Evidence kind

stage counter

W4

Landing page reinforces the ad promise with UHG case study + integrations

Working · Landing page stage · low severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“UnitedHealth case study + visible integrations (ServiceNow, PagerDuty, Jira) and a clear 'Get a demo' CTA — worth scheduling to validate real-data correlation and bi-directional ITSM workflow.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code promise delivered · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

16 conversions of 108 clicks

low confidence at 9% · sample 180 · severity low

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

16 conversions of 108 clicks

Confidence

low confidence at 9% · sample 180 · severity low

Evidence kind

stage counter

B1

LP pushes demo/contact with no low-effort deliverable

Broken · Form stage · critical severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“Hero matches the ad, but the page pushes 'Get a demo' / contact sales without concrete metrics or clear integration proof (ServiceNow/PagerDuty details or real-data outcomes), so not worth giving my contact now.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code offer not worth form effort · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

88 bounces of 108 clicks

high confidence at 73% · sample 180 · severity critical

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

88 bounces of 108 clicks

Confidence

high confidence at 73% · sample 180 · severity critical

Evidence kind

stage counter

B2

Ad hook is too generic: 'unify signals' lacks concrete outcome

Broken · Impression stage · medium severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“Mentions 'fragmented alerts' and lists tools, but gives no specific outcome or numbers on noise reduction or integration details — too generic for me to stop scrolling.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code hook too generic · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

72 ignores of 180 impressions

medium confidence at 33% · sample 180 · severity medium

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

72 ignores of 180 impressions

Confidence

medium confidence at 33% · sample 180 · severity medium

Evidence kind

stage counter

B3

LP lacks concrete integration proof tied to tools named in ad

Broken · Form stage · low severity · Creative A and Creative B

1 · Compiled before the ad ran

CH Champion · TD Technical Decision Maker · EB Economic Buyer

4b5b34fe9f6ab081 e238e8d37fabcffc 7809afcbe75bb81f

2 · Read in every declared state
Skeptic 25% of runs
Distracted 50% of runs
Ideal 25% of runs
3 · Evidence from the run

“Hero and UnitedHealth case study line up with the ad, but the page pushes a demo/sales contact and shows no clear bi-directional ITSM integration or hard outcome metrics. Not worth scheduling a sales demo right now.”

Verbatim from the run file, not rewritten · reason code asset value unclear · seen on Creative A and Creative B

4 · What it cost the funnel

1 bounces of 108 clicks

low confidence at 0% · sample 180 · severity low

CH TD EB
Evidence weight

1 bounces of 108 clicks

Confidence

low confidence at 0% · sample 180 · severity low

Evidence kind

stage counter

Reproducibility record

Everything needed to re-execute this run and diff the result against it.

Run id
CCO-c727be79
Experiment
CCO-c727be79
Campaign
campaign creative ab · 2 Creatives · funnel type lp
Created / completed
2026-07-22T14:39:31.001427Z → 2026-07-22T14:57:50.175485Z · 18 min of execution
Schema
v3 · status completed
Integrity
180 simulations from 90 seeds · roles ch, eb, td · creatives Creative A, Creative B
Profiles covered
SKEPTIC 25% · DISTRACTED 50% · IDEAL_DESPERATE 25%
Persona fingerprints
ch-4c759e50 → bd6f97db21bf5873 eb-b2712a16 → bc9b5517b964803a td-23fe6e26 → d9f8fcc99a378dde
Benchmark anchoring
anchored = benchmark x (raw / sim_reference), clamped to [0.05x, 5x] benchmark · bucket linkedin_lp_cold

Running a prompt vs running this simulation

Same question · different machinery 180 passes, replayable by fingerprint.
A prompt
This simulation
Reader
Invented at answer time, shaped by the phrasing of the question.
3 buyers compiled from market evidence and frozen by fingerprint before the campaign ran.
State
One implied state: attentive, reading every word.
3 declared profiles — skeptic, distracted, ideal desperate — weighted up front.
Passes
One. Ask again, get a different critique.
180 independent passes recorded across 2 creatives.
Sees
The creative. No page after the click, no second buyer.
The whole funnel — impression, click, destination, form — and where each buyer stops.
Rates
A guess, or nothing at all.
Direction against a published benchmark, with the sample and confidence behind the call.
Under a finding
An assertion. Nothing to point at.
Compiled trait, role, verbatim line, counted denominator.
Re-run
A new answer, not comparable to the last.
Same fingerprints, same buyers — replayable and diffable.

What went in, before the artifact was seen

180 passes · 90 seeds · 3 behavioural profiles · 3 compiled buyers
Input 1 · the artifacts
Channel linkedin · sponsored content
Destination Landing Page — https://www.acemecorp.io/unitedhealth/
Target CTA Schedule a meeting
Lead intent cold
Committee Healthcare-ITSM3 · bc-d239ef05
Company AcmeCorp
Mode campaign creative ab · ad
Run CCO-c727be79 · CCO-c727be79
Input 2 · the seed plan
CH Champion baseline profile · Ideal · 30 seeds × 2 creatives 37 of 60 passes reached the page
TD Technical Decision Maker baseline profile · Skeptic · 30 seeds × 2 creatives 36 of 60 passes reached the page
EB Economic Buyer baseline profile · Skeptic · 30 seeds × 2 creatives 35 of 60 passes reached the page
Each bar is one seeded run reached the page stopped in the feed

Each mark is one independent pass of one compiled buyer over one creative. Roles are never averaged — the funnel matrix is assembled from per-role outcomes afterwards.

Creative A single image · cr_fa00d167
Headline
Protect UnitedHealth Group's critical health platforms
Intro text
UnitedHealth insures 50M+ people across commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid plans. With four APM tools, Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty in play, fragmented alerts make a fast response harder. AcmeCorp can unify signals into one incident view.
Text in image
AcmeCorp · Alert noise is slowing UnitedHealth's operations · Schedule A Meeting · Multi-tool Alert
CTA button
Learn more
Creative B single image · cr_f63f2a8a
Headline
Protect UnitedHealth Group's critical health platforms
Intro text
UnitedHealth insures 50M+ people across commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid plans. With four APM tools, Splunk, ServiceNow, and PagerDuty in play, fragmented alerts make a fast response harder. AcmeCorp can unify signals into one incident view.
Text in image
AcmeCorp · Alert noise is slowing · UnitedHealth's operations · Multi-tool Alert · Schedule A Meeting
CTA button
Learn more
Behavioural profile weighting
Distracted — low motivation, scrolling 50%
Skeptic — high scrutiny, hunting for the catch 25%
Ideal — actively looking for this 25%

Every seeded buyer is drawn into one of these states before the ad is served — half the run reads the feed distracted, a quarter reads it hunting for the catch. A finding that only survives the ideal state is not the same evidence as one that survives all three.

Benchmarks this run is anchored to
Click-through benchmark 0.52%
Post-click benchmark 3.5%
Benchmark bucket linkedin_lp_cold
Cost per click $8.5

Rates are reported as direction against these published benchmarks, with the sample behind the call — never as a point estimate. anchored = benchmark x (raw / sim_reference), clamped to [0.05x, 5x] benchmark

Input 3 · the committee, as compiled

Frozen by fingerprint before the campaign ran. Re-run the same fingerprints and you get the same buyers.

CH Champion

Director, Major Incident & Problem Management · Healthcare and Medical · Hospital & Health Care

Motivated, internally visible change-agent who moves fast when a solution makes them look credible across leadership, but demands proof it will land smoothly in the existing ITSM/IM stack.

Baseline state
Ideal
Fingerprint
4b5b34fe9f6ab081 · compiled 2026-08-12 · 1.1.0-pins
State vector, as compiled
budget sensitivity 30–60
urgency 70–90
domain sophistication 60–85
skepticism 35–60
Decision heuristics
Social Proof 55%
Loss Aversion 45%
Anchored against
PagerDutyMoogsoftDatadog
Dominant biases
Outcome BiasAuthority BiasOptimism BiasRecency Bias
Will veto if
  • Correlation value collapses if upstream alerts are not perfectly normalized and the vendor has no practical path to remediation
  • Any sign that core capabilities required for incident automation are gated behind surprise upsells or unclear packaging
Will adopt if
  • Must integrate bi-directionally with our ITSM and collaboration tools so responders stay in their existing workflows
  • Must demonstrate measurable reduction in alert noise and faster triage using our real incident data (not a toy demo)
TD Technical Decision Maker

Director, ITSM Platform Engineering (ServiceNow Platform Owner) · Healthcare and Medical · Hospital & Health Care

Adopts only when the platform proves it can preserve systems integrity at scale with verifiable integrations, deterministic controls, and measurable noise reduction.

Baseline state
Skeptic
Fingerprint
e238e8d37fabcffc · compiled 2026-08-12 · 1.1.0-pins
State vector, as compiled
budget sensitivity 35–65
urgency 30–55
domain sophistication 80–95
skepticism 75–92
Decision heuristics
Loss Aversion 70%
Authority Bias 30%
Anchored against
PagerDutyMoogsoftDatadog
Dominant biases
Loss AversionAmbiguity AversionStatus Quo BiasConfirmation Bias
Will veto if
  • Requires ripping and replacing existing monitoring/observability investments to achieve baseline value
  • Cannot explain or control correlation/automation logic well enough to pass platform engineering review and change governance
Will adopt if
  • Must provide proven bi-directional integration with ServiceNow ITSM (create/update/close, assignment, and state synchronization) without breaking existing governance
  • Must demonstrate measurable alert-noise reduction and incident deduplication at enterprise scale using our real data (not a toy dataset)
EB Economic Buyer

VP of IT Service Management · Healthcare and Medical · Hospital & Health Care

Adopts only when ROI is proven with auditable financials, clear ownership, and low downside risk; otherwise defaults to delay or reject.

Baseline state
Skeptic
Fingerprint
7809afcbe75bb81f · compiled 2026-08-12 · 1.1.0-pins
State vector, as compiled
budget sensitivity 85–100
urgency 35–60
domain sophistication 55–75
skepticism 85–100
Decision heuristics
Loss Aversion 70%
Authority Bias 30%
Anchored against
PagerDutyMoogsoftDatadog
Dominant biases
Loss AversionStatus Quo BiasAnchoring BiasSunk Cost Fallacy
Will veto if
  • No transparent, defensible pricing and no clear breakdown of what is included versus add-on upsells for core workflows.
  • High implementation risk: requires highly normalized upstream data with no realistic plan/timeline to get there, making outcomes uncertain.
Will adopt if
  • Must provide an auditable ROI model (MTTR reduction, fewer escalations/bridge calls, lower ITSM operational cost) with baseline + post-implementation measurement plan.
  • Must integrate bi-directionally with our ITSM and collaboration tools (and support SSO via IdP) without forcing a rip-and-replace of existing monitoring.