7 minute read · Practical marketing guidance
On this page 5 sections
Your reports show clicks and measured actions. Your team remembers a phone call, a website request and an email from someone referred by a friend. A marketing inquiry log gives those received requests a consistent record: what the person wanted, what you know about the source, whether the work fits and what happened next.
For a Las Vegas or Henderson business, the useful comparison starts with those distinctions. “Website” tells you how a request arrived. It does not tell you whether a customer discovered you through an ad, search, social content or a recommendation.
Count requests before comparing channels
Agree on a working rule for the log. Record one distinct request for work that your business actually receives. Exclude clearly identified tests and spam from this review, and record how you made that distinction. A measured button click alone does not become an inquiry row.
When someone emails and then calls about the same job, update the existing request rather than adding another marketing inquiry. Keep the follow-up history in your working system. A separate job can be a separate request, even from the same person. If you cannot establish whether two contacts concern the same job, leave the duplication question open for staff to resolve.
This makes the unit of review explicit: distinct received requests, rather than unique people, messages or analytics events. Our Google Ads conversion tracking guide explains how different measured actions can describe the same request. The log below starts with the business record and adds the evidence you actually have.
Keep reported discovery and measured evidence separate
Ask a simple question when appropriate: “How did you hear about us?” Preserve the useful meaning of the answer. “Google” is a customer-reported source, but it does not establish whether the person saw an ad, a Maps listing or an unpaid search result. If they cannot clarify, keep it broad.
Measured evidence answers a different question. Google’s traffic-source scope guidance distinguishes First user dimensions, shown in User acquisition, from Session dimensions, shown in Traffic acquisition. The former concerns initial acquisition; the latter concerns the session’s acquisition. An event is an interaction within that measurement structure, not automatically a distinct received request.
Record the report, dimension, period and relevant limitation when reviewing measured traffic. A customer may remember the social post that introduced the business while arriving through a different route later. Those observations can coexist. Do not replace one with the other or assign an aggregate report row to an individual request without evidence of that connection.
Google’s campaign URL guidance explains that UTM source, medium and campaign parameters label referral traffic, with case-sensitive values. Such context can help interpret a link. It does not establish inquiry receipt, service fit or the customer’s whole journey. Capturing campaign context in a form or working system requires an actual configured process; it is not an automatic feature of this log.
A seven-field inquiry record
Use a spreadsheet or your existing working system. Copy these fields for each request, then define the fit and status labels with the people who handle the work. Put unknowns into the record deliberately so they remain visible during review.
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Request reference and date | A private operational reference, received date and time zone. Use it to update the same request; keep customer contact details in the established working system. |
| Contact route | Phone, website form, email, social message or another actual arrival route. Keep this separate from discovery source. |
| Requested work and area | The service requested and only the broad location needed to check coverage. Record missing details instead of assuming them. |
| Customer-reported discovery | Accurate paraphrase, how it was obtained and any uncertainty: Google unspecified, Instagram, friend referral or not reported. |
| Measured source evidence | Available campaign context or relevant report observation, its origin and what it supports. Mark unavailable evidence; do not infer an individual match from aggregate traffic. |
| Service fit | Fits, does not fit or unresolved, with the approved criterion and reason. Identify the missing fact and who will ask for it. |
| Status and next action | Stage as of the review date, verified outcome if any, responsible person, next action and due date. Keep pending work distinct from a confirmed decline or booking. |
This is a private operational record. Limit access to the people who need it and avoid copying full customer messages or unnecessary personal details into marketing summaries. A private reference can still connect to a person through other records.
Google’s Analytics privacy guidance prohibits sending personally identifiable information such as names, email addresses or personal phone numbers to Analytics. Check URLs and query parameters, campaign values and event or custom-dimension data. Do not upload this inquiry log or send its private references to Analytics on the assumption that removing a name makes every identifier safe.
Four wholly hypothetical entries
The following business, policies, requests and observations are entirely invented. Imagine a Henderson business that assembles residential freestanding furniture. For this example, it serves Henderson only and does not offer wall mounting. Those are fictional business decisions, not general service rules.
All four cards are reviewed as of October 3, 2026, at noon Pacific. “Booked” means staff found a confirmed appointment in the hypothetical working record. It does not mean money was paid or revenue earned. The private references below are illustrative log labels, not Analytics identifiers.
Request A: Google reported, specific source unresolved
Received: October 1, 2026, by phone. Work and area: freestanding desk assembly in Henderson. Reported source: the caller said Google but could not identify an ad, Maps or unpaid result. Measured evidence: unavailable. Fit: fits the fictional service and coverage. Status: staff replied; desk details remain pending. Owner and next action: coordinator to request the model information on October 5. A later email about the same desk remains part of Request A.
Request B: Instagram reported, campaign context recorded
Received: October 2, 2026, through the website. Work and area: freestanding bookcase assembly; area not supplied. Reported source: Instagram, selected by the submitter. Measured evidence: assume this fictional form has explicitly configured campaign-field capture and recorded instagram / organic_social / assembly_guide with the request. This is captured link context, not a claimed GA4 row match. Fit: unresolved because coverage cannot yet be checked. Status: reply sent asking for the area. Owner and next action: coordinator to review any response on October 5.
Request C: Friend referral, work outside the offer
Received: October 2, 2026, by email. Work and area: wall mounting in Henderson. Reported source: a friend recommended the business. Measured evidence: unavailable. Fit: does not fit because wall mounting is excluded from the fictional offer. Status: staff declined and explained the service boundary. Owner and next action: coordinator records the reason; no further action scheduled for this request.
Request D: Source unknown, booking confirmed
Received: October 3, 2026, through the website. Work and area: freestanding table assembly in Henderson. Reported source: not provided. Measured evidence: unavailable. Fit: fits. Status: staff verified a confirmed appointment in the fictional working record. Owner and next action: service coordinator to confirm appointment details through the established private contact route on October 5. The unknown discovery source remains unknown despite the booking.
Review completeness, fit and follow-up each week
Choose a regular reviewer and record the review date. First reconcile repeated contacts and excluded tests so the denominator is clear. Then inspect unresolved fit, source evidence and next actions separately. A missing area needs a service question; a missing owner needs an assignment. Neither is proof that a marketing channel failed.
In the invented four-request set, two requests fit, one does not fit and one remains unresolved: two out of four received requests have confirmed fit. Three out of four have a customer-reported discovery source, but Request A’s Google answer remains broad. Only Request B has the illustrative captured campaign context.
One out of four has a confirmed booking as of the review. Two remain open and one was declined for an excluded service. Do not turn the open requests into losses or credit the booking to a channel that has no source evidence. These counts describe the invented cards only; they support no spending or return-on-investment conclusion.
Finish with a concrete process decision. In this hypothetical review, the coordinator can clarify Request B’s area and ensure the next actions for A and B remain assigned. Over later reviews, compare consistent periods and note changes in service, staffing or marketing. Preserve unknown values rather than making the summary look complete by guessing.
A review of measurement and inquiry definitions can be discussed within an agreed digital advertising scope. Questions about search traffic and useful website destinations can inform an agreed SEO scope. Email sales@rank.vegas with your website, service, the fields you currently record and the measurement question you want answered. Leave actual customer records and passwords out of the introductory message.