Missing slice: waveTimeline
By the time the next wave lands, the reason has been forgotten and the number is all that is left.
Eleven weeks is a long time
Long enough for a competitor to launch, run and finish a campaign before you measure again. Long enough for the reason behind a change to become a story told at a meeting rather than something anyone recorded.
Continuous collection does not make the chart twitchier. A month is the smallest window we will report on, and a difference inside the margin is marked rather than drawn. What it buys is a shorter delay between the thing happening and you knowing.
What changes when it never stops
Four waves a year
You learn in April what happened in January
You learn in February what happened in January
The cause is reconstructed from memory
The move and the week it happened are both recorded
A new question waits for the next wave
A new question is put to data already held
Between waves, you are arguing from instinct
Between waves, you are arguing from last month
Reasonable objections
Does measuring more often just give us noise?
It would if we reported every wobble. A month is the smallest window we will report on, and the platform marks a difference that sits inside the margin rather than drawing a line through it. More frequent collection buys a shorter delay, not a twitchier chart.
We already have a tracker. Why change?
Most clients keep theirs for the first year and run the two side by side. The comparison is the point: if the quarterly numbers and ours tell the same story, you have lost nothing and gained the months in between.
What does it cost to ask something unplanned?
Nothing, if the measure is already collected. That is most questions. A genuinely new measure has to enter the instrument and takes about a month.
Platform
Solutions
Resources
Privacy Policy
© All rights reserved