Agency insights
Thoughts and lessons on client selection, burnout, pricing, and modernising legacy accounts, from someone who's run a Google Ads for years.
Published April 2026. Last updated July 2026.
A stranger clicks a Google ad for an auto repair shop.
They call the shop.
The service advisor books them in for an inspection.
The inspection becomes a repair order.
Two days later the customer pays a $1,200 invoice.
It's simple, the ad brought in a new customer worth $1,200.
But if the owner asks their software how much revenue the ad produced something strange happens:
None of these systems know that they're talking about the same person.
So the business can’t answer a basic question: Did this ad actually make us money?
Why is something so obvious invisible inside the software that runs the business?
If you run advertising, there are always two sets of data.
Advertising systems know what happens before the lead. They see things like:
Business systems know what happens after the lead. They see things like:
Both sides contain important information. But the systems usually don’t talk to each other.
So you can see how many leads came in. But you can’t see which ads produced real customers.
That’s the data gap.
On paper, connecting these systems sounds easy.
But in practice the chain breaks almost immediately.
Most businesses run their operations using several different tools:
Each system does its job well. But none of them were designed to answer a question like: “Which advertising lead to this invoice?” And if you're trying to run profitable ads, it's a pretty important thing to know.
You might wonder why business software doesn’t solve this already. The reason is simple:
Neither system was designed to understand the full journey from ad click to revenue. Both sides have made some efforts in bridging the gap but it's not a high priority.
Imagine John Smith fills in a contact form.
Later a customer record for Mr. J. Smith appears in Jobber.
Then an invoice appears in QuickBooks for Smith Inc.
Are those three records about the same person?
Maybe.
The most reliable way to match records is through each system’s internal ID.
For example:
These IDs are generated automatically and users can’t change them, which makes them reliable for reporting.
Here’s what that looks like in practice.
Now Litiro has Google's ID and Jobber's ID connected to the same person. When a quote or job is created in Jobber, Jobber sends Litiro the client ID.
Litiro matches it with the one already stored. We can send that to Google so Google optimises for leads who are more likely to contract, and we can track the actual value of sales from our ads.
Suddenly you can ask questions that were impossible before.
Instead of asking:
“How many leads did we get?”
You can ask:
And instead of guessing you can say things like
Our Google Ads for gutter installation generated 55 leads this month. 21 of them turned into jobs worth $84,576.
But this is impossible without the connection.
Sometimes the internal ID never makes it from one system to another.
Phone calls are a good example.
Call tracking software might capture the advertising data and report something like:
The call from +16055551234 came from Google Ads.
But the service advisor answering the phone has to type the caller’s number into the shop management system. And that’s where things get messy.
They might type:
Now we’re trying to match numbers that look completely different. So before we even try to link the systems, we have to clean up the phone numbers and standardise them.
But what happens if the service advisor types in 555-555-5555 (cell)?
The link is broken.
But that's not a total disaster. You don't need perfect tracking for it to be useful.
If you can connect even half of your leads to real outcomes, you start to see patterns:
The goal isn’t perfect attribution. It’s enough signal to make better decisions.
They pause campaigns that produce good customers because the cost per click looks high.
They increase budgets on campaigns that generate lots of leads but very little revenue.
Eventually the advertising starts to feel like it isn’t working anymore.
But the real problem isn’t always the ads. Often it’s the missing data between the click and the sale.
Until the click is connected to the invoice, advertising only looks measurable. The number that actually matters stays hidden. Even getting the answer directionally right leads to better advertising decisions.
Thoughts and lessons on client selection, burnout, pricing, and modernising legacy accounts, from someone who's run a Google Ads for years.
Understand what happens after someone clicks your advert. Subjects include offline conversions, CRM integration, attribution, auditability and marketing instrumentation.
Articles about marketing, engineering, AI and problem solving that don't fit neatly into the other topics. These are some of the ideas and experiences that have shaped how I think.
Learn how to use Google Ads to generate profitable leads. Subjects include campaign strategy, bidding, targeting, optimisation and the challenges of running lead generation campaigns.
Things I've learned about high-converting landing pages. Subjects include copywriting, page structure, forms, trust, conversion rate optimisation and user experience.
Understand why some leads become customers while others don't. Subjects include diagnosing poor leads, qualification, filtering junk leads and improving the feedback you send to Google Ads.
What happens after a lead has been generated determines if Google Ads is profitable. Subjects include first contact, follow-up, quoting, lead nurturing and turning more enquiries into customers.