What cost per signed case leaves out

State which costs are included.

Two reports can show different acquisition costs because one counts media while the other includes agency fees, creative, technology, or intake expense. Both can be useful when their scope is explicit.

Use separate labels for media-only and broader acquisition views. Agree with finance on the cost categories and allocation approach, then keep the definition consistent between reviews. A low media cost does not describe the entire cost of acquiring and serving the matter.

Document the cost base using the cost-per-signed-case measurement guide.

See how the definition changes the number.

Consider an illustrative group of 12 signed cases associated with $24,000 in media expense. Its media-only cost per signed case is $2,000. Adding $6,000 of other agreed acquisition expenses changes the broader measure to $2,500.

Neither number establishes whether the cases are financially attractive. They describe two expense scopes. The example is not a client result, budget recommendation, or industry benchmark.

Match the expense and outcome populations.

This month’s spending and this month’s signatures may not represent the same acquisition group. Some cases originated earlier; some recent inquiries will sign later. Label a period-efficiency view accurately.

Google documents how conversion lag can make recent performance look less efficient before later outcomes arrive. A firm-level cohort view should follow a defined group of inquiries and make the observation window clear.

Compare cohorts at similar maturity and keep unresolved opportunities separate. Do not force a final acquisition conclusion from a group that is still developing.

Source: Google Ads: conversion lag reporting

See why differences in events and timing cause marketing reports to disagree.

Include the business context of the matters.

Signed cases can differ in expected fees, work requirements, referral arrangements, expenses, and collection timing. Ask finance and legal leaders to establish the relevant assumptions and uncertainty.

Distinguish signed agreements, active matters, projected fees, and collected cash. Gross settlement value is not the firm’s revenue. A marketing scorecard should connect to financial understanding without presenting unresolved outcomes as certain returns.

Case mix can also explain changes in the average acquisition number. Review the underlying groups before assuming a campaign or agency has become more or less efficient.

Use the metric to choose an action.

If acquisition cost rises, examine the steps that produce it. Did valid inquiry volume change? Did contact, qualification, or signing decline? Did the included expense scope change? Is capacity limiting the next step?

A budget decision should consider those findings and the economics the firm has approved. Sometimes a channel deserves more investment. Sometimes the first action belongs in intake or reporting.

The workbench illustrates the relationship: the same allocated media spend produces a different modeled cost per case when contact changes. It also shows unknown sources rather than assigning them a convenient channel. These are the kinds of definitions and caveats that make an acquisition review useful.

Before expanding a channel, examine intake capacity and the next marketing investment.