How I approach growth
A campaign strategy, data analysis and experimentation plan for accessiBe's Ontario AODA compliance campaign.
Build urgency around a fixed compliance deadline
Ontario organizations with more than 20 employees must recertify their accessibility compliance every three years, and the current deadline falls on December 31, 2026. That deadline is the goal: build enough qualified pipeline for accessiBe's compliance offering before it arrives, without treating urgency as a substitute for qualification.
Three phases, one budget, rebalanced by performance
Initial allocation, rebalanced based on performance.
Capture existing demand, seed the rest
- High-intent Google Search live from day one
- LinkedIn prospecting + Lead Gen Forms
- Meta Advantage+ audience prospecting
- Awareness & video, build demand and future retargeting pools
- Start building retargeting pools
Follow the signal, not the plan
- Shift budget to the winning channel × audience × creative
- Increase retargeting weight
- Keep high-intent Search funded
- Sharpen compliance / deadline messaging
- Lean on engagement & first-party audiences
Push everything toward the deadline
- Heavy retargeting on warm pools
- High-intent Search sustained
- Strong deadline / urgency messaging
- Lead Gen + Demo campaigns
- Faster lead routing, faster meeting booking
| Channel | Role | Month 1 | Month 2 | Month 3 | Total | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brand, competitor & high-intent search: demand capture | $3,500 | $3,000 | $3,000 | $9,500 | 19% | |
| Precision Ops/HR targeting: qualified demand generation | $7,000 | $8,000 | $8,500 | $23,500 | 47% | |
| Meta | Broaden reach beyond LinkedIn's precision targeting; convert via lookalikes & retargeting | $5,500 | $6,000 | $5,500 | $17,000 | 34% |
| Total | $16,000 | $17,000 | $17,000 | $50,000 | 100% | |
The 47% LinkedIn allocation is an initial starting allocation, not a fixed commitment.
Demand capture, including brand + competitor. High-intent search around AODA, accessibility compliance, compliance deadlines, and defensive brand/competitor terms. Kept deliberately lean: in B2B, absolute search volume for a compliance term like this is low, so this channel protects intent rather than driving scale.
Reach the right professionals. Job-function targeting, Lead Gen Forms, website conversion, thought-leadership video, retargeting. Gets the largest share of budget because it is the most precise B2B channel available for this persona.
Extend reach, then convert. LinkedIn's targeting is precise but narrow; Meta's Advantage+ audience (Meta's own automated, algorithmic targeting) reaches people LinkedIn's filters miss, then MQL lookalikes and retargeting bring the qualified ones back to convert.
LinkedIn identifies the right professionals. Meta identifies the right people.
On LinkedIn specifically, we are running two distinct audiences with two distinct messages, not one merged Ops/HR list.
HR trackCompliance as an HR obligation
Message angle: AODA recertification is now an HR compliance obligation, not a legal footnote. Position accessiBe as the fastest path to recertifying on time.
Ops trackCompliance as an operational risk
Message angle: recertification is an operational deadline with real penalties for missing it. Position accessiBe as the lowest-risk way to hit it.
- 11+ employees is the closest practical LinkedIn company-size filter to the legal >20-employee threshold, not an exact match.
- Smaller organizations may not have dedicated HR/Ops leadership, which is why CEO is included on both tracks.
- Qualification still happens downstream: managers and too-small companies are filtered out at the lead-qualification stage, not the targeting stage.
- Advantage+ audience: Meta's own automated, algorithmic targeting, running as always-on prospecting
- MQL lookalike: seeded from accessiBe's actual marketing-qualified leads, running in parallel
- Retargeting: website visitors, relevant page visitors, video/social engagers, running in parallel
Future: an SQL / customer lookalike, once enough closed-won data exists.
Optimize toward pipeline, not lead volume
Primary · Business
Secondary · Quality
Diagnostic
Find the broken stage before changing the strategy
Three weeks in, performance is below expectations. First identify where the funnel is breaking, because each broken stage requires a different fix.
Possible issue: sales follow-up, routing, or lead readiness.
Possible issue: persona, targeting, offer, or message.
Possible issue: landing-page behavior, form friction, or CTA.
The data shows where quality is being won, and lost
452 ad sets · 5 ecosystems · 2 regions
Cost per MQL, by ecosystem
Spend share, by ecosystem
| Ecosystem | Ad sets | Spend | Share | Clicks | CTR | CPC | Conv. | CVR | CPL | MQL | MQL% | CPMQL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| scan | 246 | $169,151 | 55.8% | 36,505 | 0.53% | $4.63 | 1,735 | 4.75% | $97.49 | 17 | 0.98% | $9,950 |
| ada | 108 | $66,687 | 22.0% | 23,479 | 0.52% | $2.84 | 781 | 3.33% | $85.39 | 11 | 1.41% | $6,062 |
| accessibility | 58 | $39,374 | 13.0% | 8,400 | 0.55% | $4.69 | 298 | 3.55% | $132.13 | 4 | 1.34% | $9,844 |
| wcag | 24 | $17,689 | 5.8% | 3,366 | 0.58% | $5.25 | 179 | 5.32% | $98.82 | 9 | 5.03% | $1,965 |
| widget | 16 | $10,085 | 3.3% | 3,713 | 0.51% | $2.72 | 170 | 4.58% | $59.32 | 0 | 0.00% | n/a |
NAMER
EMEA
| Ecosystem × Region | Ad sets | Spend | Clicks | Conv. | CVR (LP) | CPL | MQL | MQL rate | CPMQL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| wcag × namer | 20 | $15,030 | 2,593 | 156 | 8.67% | $96.34 | 9 | 5.77% | $1,670 |
| ada × emea | 93 | $57,348 | 21,593 | 689 | 4.98% | $83.23 | 11 | 1.60% | $5,213 |
| accessibility × namer | 27 | $18,956 | 3,959 | 132 | 5.92% | $143.60 | 3 | 2.27% | $6,319 |
| scan × namer | 186 | $132,500 | 24,744 | 1,382 | 7.34% | $95.88 | 14 | 1.01% | $9,464 |
| scan × emea | 60 | $36,651 | 11,761 | 353 | 4.74% | $103.83 | 3 | 0.85% | $12,217 |
| accessibility × emea | 31 | $20,418 | 4,441 | 166 | 4.91% | $123.00 | 1 | 0.60% | $20,418 |
| ada × namer | 15 | $9,339 | 1,886 | 92 | 6.74% | $101.51 | 0 | 0.00% | n/a |
| wcag × emea | 4 | $2,660 | 773 | 23 | 4.94% | $115.65 | 0 | 0.00% | n/a |
| widget × emea | 16 | $10,085 | 3,713 | 170 | 6.97% | $59.32 | 0 | 0.00% | n/a |
WCAG × NAMER. Small, but the clearest proof of what a well-matched audience and message can do.
Scan × NAMER drives the most volume, but its downstream efficiency is weak.
Turn the data into specific optimization moves
High volume, weak downstream quality
Learn from the strongest quality signal
Already working, worth sharpening before scaling
Rebuild, don't optimize for cheap conversions
Test the message. Measure the quality.
Choose the variant that produces higher-quality demand, not simply cheaper leads.
Test 1: value proposition, ease vs. risk
Test 2: CTA / offer, audit vs. trial
A loop, not a one-time launch
Three separate questions, one working style: start from the outcome we actually need, let the data show where to lean in, and test our way to the rest.