Article
"Sourced vs. Influenced Pipeline: Definitions, Math, ...
resources.rework.com
Quoted on this wiki
Every place a page here uses this source, in the order the words come in it.
The Named Framework: The Sourced/Influenced Distinction “| Marketing-sourced pipeline | "Which channels bring us net-new contacts?" | Budget allocation | First-touch, set at lead creation |” The two numbers are not competing. They are complementary. Using sourced pipeline to evaluate mid-funnel content effectiveness punishes marketing for work that doesn't generate leads but closes deals. Using influenced pipeline to justify acquisition budget overstates contribution by counting deals sales would have closed regardless. The framework requires both teams to agree on purpose before they agree on methodology.
The Sourced/Influenced Distinction is a two-metric attribution framework that separates pipeline measurement into two purpose-built numbers: marketing-sourced pipeline (a budget allocation metric that answers "which channels generate net-new contacts we wouldn't otherwise have?") and marketing-influenced pipeline (a content ROI metric that answers "where in the buyer journey are marketing assets making a difference?"). The framework ends attribution conflicts by giving each metric a single, agreed use case, so neither team can use one number to answer a question only the other can answer. “attribution is the identification of touchpoints that contribute to a conversion, and assigning a value to each.” The Named Framework: The Sourced/Influenced Distinction
How to Calculate Marketing-Sourced Pipeline “The foundation is first-touch attribution in the CRM.” A contact's lead source is set once, at creation, and doesn't change. If Sarah from Acme Corp downloaded a whitepaper in January, her lead source is "content." If she gets a cold call in March and an AE creates an opportunity with her, that opportunity still carries "content" as the lead source, because that's how she entered the system. The AE didn't originate the relationship; they developed it. Lead response time from that first touch is what determines whether the relationship develops at all.
The Sourced/Influenced Distinction is a two-metric attribution framework that separates pipeline measurement into two purpose-built numbers: marketing-sourced pipeline (a budget allocation metric that answers "which channels generate net-new contacts we wouldn't otherwise have?") and marketing-influenced pipeline (a content ROI metric that answers "where in the buyer journey are marketing assets making a difference?"). The framework ends attribution conflicts by giving each metric a single, agreed use case, so neither team can use one number to answer a question only the other can answer. “attribution is the identification of touchpoints that contribute to a conversion, and assigning a value to each.” The Named Framework: The Sourced/Influenced Distinction
Trade show leads get logged as "other." Event leads are often high-quality, but sloppy CRM data entry loses them in "other" or "unknown" buckets. Fix: create a specific "event" or "trade show" source category and make it required at the event lead import step. “Fix: align on contact-level vs. account-level attribution before reporting, and document the rule.” How to audit and fix lead source data:
The attribution meeting goes the same way every quarter. Marketing presents a number: 68% of pipeline was marketing-influenced. Sales presents a different number, maybe 15% of closed-won deals actually came from marketing. Leadership hears both, trusts neither, and the meeting ends with nothing resolved and a budget decision that could go either way. “They're using the same underlying CRM records and arriving at completely different answers because they're measuring different things and calling them by the same name.” Most B2B organizations fight the same attribution battle every quarter. Not because the data is wrong, but because the definitions were never jointly agreed on before the reports were built.
“Pipeline is the dollar value of open and won opportunities, and B2B teams measure it two ways: marketing-sourced pipeline (deals where marketing owned the first touch) and marketing-influenced pipeline (deals a marketing campaign touched along the way).” The attribution meeting goes the same way every quarter. Marketing presents a number: 68% of pipeline was marketing-influenced. Sales presents a different number, maybe 15% of closed-won deals actually came from marketing. Leadership hears both, trusts neither, and the meeting ends with nothing resolved and a budget decision that could go either way.
“Each answers a different question, so using one to settle the other is what starts the attribution fight.” The attribution meeting goes the same way every quarter. Marketing presents a number: 68% of pipeline was marketing-influenced. Sales presents a different number, maybe 15% of closed-won deals actually came from marketing. Leadership hears both, trusts neither, and the meeting ends with nothing resolved and a budget decision that could go either way.
Neither team is manufacturing data. They're using the same underlying CRM records and arriving at completely different answers because they're measuring different things and calling them by the same name. “Not because the data is wrong, but because the definitions were never jointly agreed on before the reports were built.” The Sourced/Influenced Distinction is a two-metric attribution framework that separates pipeline measurement into two purpose-built numbers: marketing-sourced pipeline (a budget allocation metric that answers "which channels generate net-new contacts we wouldn't otherwise have?") and marketing-influenced pipeline (a content ROI metric that answers "where in the buyer journey are marketing assets making a difference?"). The framework ends attribution conflicts by giving each metric a single, agreed use case, so neither team can use one number to answer a question only the other can answer.