Campaign, personalisation and contact-policy teams

Send one relevant message instead of five competing ones

Three campaigns are eligible for the same customer this week. Each has a target. The customer has a contact limit and a complaint history.

View requirements The product that runs it: Campaigns & Personalisation

A pilot's requirements are specified: the data, the authority and the consent design.

Seen by the customer · SMS

From the record, not a run: what would reach them, on SMS, App, WhatsApp, USSD.

The case

Annotated from the record

What happened

Three campaigns want the same customer in the same week.

Three campaigns are eligible for the same customer this week. Each has a target. The customer has a contact limit and a complaint history.

What it reads

Every campaign the customer is eligible for
Contact frequency and the last message sent
Consent by channel
Suppression and complaint history

Checks before anything is sent

Eligibility, consent, contact frequency, suppression and conflict checks pass.

Every option considered, including doing nothing

The one campaign with the best fit for this customer, sent onceConsidered
A different channel or time for the same messageConsidered
Hold every campaign until the contact window reopensConsidered
No message, recorded with the reasonConsidered

Doing nothing is one of the outcomes, and it is recorded with its reason. The options are the record's own; a run decides between them.

Evidence record

Preview

Reference: The reference of the saved run.
Decision: One of the options, including no action, with the reason.
Checks: Eligibility, consent, contact frequency, suppression and conflict checks pass.
Evidence kept: Eligible campaigns
ranking reasons
contact history
suppression
delivery receipt
response
The measures: Response to the one message sent, against a held-out group and the contacts avoided.
Connection: Written on every record: the systems the run read, and the sample it ran on.

The shape of the record, with no values. A reference appears only after a run is saved.

The improvement, and how it is measured

Hypothesis

A customer who receives one relevant message responds; one who receives five stops reading all of them and opts out of the sixth.

Modelled

The mechanism that could produce the result, stated; the figure is measured in the pilot.

Observed

Measured in a pilot’s validate stage, on your systems, against a comparison agreed first.

The result, the mechanism, the measurement, and the record’s five answers

Desired result

Incremental revenue or retention; lower contact waste; improved conversion with margin guardrails

Mechanism

Ingest → qualify → score → apply limits/consent → assign control → execute approved action → capture delivery and business outcome → monitor/retrain

Measurement

Randomised holdout where feasible; intent-to-treat primary view; pre-declared denominator; guardrails for complaints, margin and opt-out

Measured on: Eligible population; treatment rate; conversion; incremental revenue; ARPU; churn; contact rate; margin; opt-out; decision latency

01
Desired result
The result wanted.
Incremental revenue or retention; lower contact waste; improved conversion with margin guardrails
02
Mechanism
The mechanism that could produce it.
Ingest → qualify → score → apply limits/consent → assign control → execute approved action → capture delivery and business outcome → monitor/retrain
03
Evidence required
The records kept to show it.
Decision log; eligibility snapshot; price/order response; delivery receipt; control assignment; revenue/outcome ledger
04
Costs and risks
The cost, and the ways it can go wrong.
Costs: Setup fee + annual product subscription; optional managed execution fee; optional verified-outcome fee with agreed baseline
If it fails: Fail closed on eligibility/consent/price; queue retryable events; do not duplicate orders; route exception to campaign operations
05
Measurement approach
The measure that shows it helped.
Randomised holdout where feasible; intent-to-treat primary view; pre-declared denominator; guardrails for complaints, margin and opt-out
Measured on: Eligible population; treatment rate; conversion; incremental revenue; ARPU; churn; contact rate; margin; opt-out; decision latency

Measured in the pilot's validate stage, on your systems, with the comparison agreed first. Every line above is the record's own design intent.

The business side

The change: Response to the one message sent, against a held-out group and the contacts avoided.
Running cost: Setup fee + annual product subscription; optional managed execution fee; optional verified-outcome fee with agreed baseline
What evidence supports it: Eligible campaigns, ranking reasons, contact history, suppression, delivery receipt and response.

The journey in detail

Step by step, from both sides

Step	What the customer experiences	What the operator does
The momentThe moment that started it.	Three campaigns want the same customer in the same week.	Reads every campaign the customer is eligible for, contact frequency and the last message sent, consent by channel, suppression and complaint history.
The decisionThe decision to be made.	The customer's screen is unchanged.	Ranks the one message worth sending, or none, against the contact policy.
The safeguardsThe conditions that stop it.	Still unchanged: the action waits until every check has passed.	Eligibility, consent, contact frequency, suppression and conflict checks pass.
The actionThe action that reaches the customer.	Send one message on the permitted channel at a permitted time, and hold the rest. Reaches them on SMS, App, WhatsApp, USSD.	Recommends. The system that holds the right confirms, charges or provisions.
When it goes wrongThe failure, and the recovery.	Two campaign teams both believe their message went, and the customer receives neither, because the conflict was resolved after the send windows closed.	The conflict is decided before either window opens, both teams see which message won and why, and the held campaign is re-queued for the next permitted window.
The resultThe change it made.	What changed for them is what is counted; nothing else is claimed.	Response to the one message sent, against a held-out group and the contacts avoided.
The proofThe proof anyone can check.	Can be answered for, later, from the record.	Eligible campaigns, ranking reasons, contact history, suppression, delivery receipt and response.

Operator systems remain authoritative. HeuriTel reads these to propose an action; it does not decide on their behalf.

The failure, and the recovery

What goes wrong

Two campaign teams both believe their message went, and the customer receives neither, because the conflict was resolved after the send windows closed.

What happens then

The conflict is decided before either window opens, both teams see which message won and why, and the held campaign is re-queued for the next permitted window.

The products in this journey

Runs the decision
Campaigns & Personalisation
When several campaigns want the same customer, rank them against the contact policy and consent before any of them goes, and record what was held.
Contributes
Customer Growth & CVM
the decision that says whether a commercial message is warranted at all
Contributes
Contact Centre & Customer Care
where a customer with an open complaint is handled instead of messaged
The definition it demonstratesHeuriTel Campaign Decisioning
Results it movesGrow customer revenue · Reduce fraud and identity risk

Available to see today

A pilot's requirements are specified: the data, the authority and the consent design.

Request a working session