I’ve been wrestling with this for months now. We run solid campaigns in Russia, and the numbers look good—but when we try to present them to potential US partners or investors, there’s always this moment of doubt. They ask questions like “but how does this compare to US benchmarks?” or “are these metrics even measured the same way?” and suddenly I’m scrambling.
That’s when I realized the real problem isn’t our data—it’s that we’re not contextualizing it properly for a bilingual audience. We have great case studies, but they’re siloed. Russian case studies stay Russian. US insights stay US-focused. Nobody’s bridging the gap.
So I started thinking: what if we published our best case studies as cross-market compilations? Not just translating results, but actually unpacking them with input from US-based strategists who can say “here’s how this compares to what we’re seeing on this side of the ocean.” That way, the data isn’t just impressive—it’s comparable. It’s credible.
The challenge is: how do you even structure that? Do you build it as a single narrative with side-by-side metrics? Do you get explicit quotes from US experts validating the approach? And more practically—where do you publish it so both audiences actually see it and engage with it?
I’m curious if anyone here has done something similar. How did you handle getting buy-in from international experts to co-sign your case studies? What format actually made your results feel legitimate across different regions?
This is exactly the right question, and I’m glad you’re thinking about it strategically. Here’s what I’ve seen work: the structure matters less than the methodology transparency. What US partners actually want to see is your attribution logic, not just your final numbers.
When we bring in Russian campaigns for review, the first thing we do is audit the measurement framework. Are you tracking last-click, multi-touch, incrementality? Are you accounting for platform differences between VK, Instagram, and TikTok versus US equivalents? That’s where the credibility lives.
As for the format: I’d recommend a three-part structure. First, the campaign brief (objectives, constraints, market context). Second, the methodology (how you measured, tools used, any adjustments for local market conditions). Third, the results with explicit caveats. Then add a short commentary from a US strategist who can either validate the approach or flag what they’d do differently.
The catch: you need that US expert to actually understand the Russian context, not just rubber-stamp your numbers. That’s rare. Start with someone who’s run campaigns in both regions, or has serious experience with bilingual audiences.
I’d love to see the actual metrics you’re working with. The reason I ask is that I’ve noticed a lot of cross-market case studies fail because people conflate different metrics with comparable metrics.
For example, if you’re measuring Instagram engagement in Russia as likes + comments, but US benchmarks focus on saves + shares, you’re not actually comparable. You’re just creating confusion.
What specific KPIs are you trying to benchmark? And have you actually validated them against industry standards from both regions? Because that’s the real work—not the story, but the numbers underneath it.
Also, I’d be skeptical of finding just one “US expert” to validate. You probably need 2-3 independent voices who can each review the methodology. That’s what actually builds credibility. Single endorsements feel like testimonials, not validation.
And honestly, once you have a few of these published, it becomes a recruiting tool too. I’ve seen founders use bilingual case studies to attract both Russian and US team members. Just a thought!
Here’s the honest take: most US-based folks don’t deeply care about Russian campaign specifics unless it directly impacts their ROI or teaches them something new. So the framing matters way more than the methodology.
What they do want is proof that you can deliver consistent results across different markets. That’s the real benchmark—not “our CPM in Russia vs. the US,” but “we know how to adapt our strategy and still hit our numbers.”
I’d structure the case study around that narrative: what assumptions did we make? What surprised us? What would we do differently next time? Those answers are way more valuable than a side-by-side metrics comparison.
As for getting US experts involved: start with people in your network, not cold outreach. They’re more likely to engage if there’s an existing relationship. And make it easy for them—don’t ask them to “validate” the whole thing. Ask them specific questions about methodology or results, then quote them.
Also, what’s the actual campaign? Beauty, tech, e-commerce? The category changes everything about how you frame the benchmarks.
Also, if the case study is about inluencer campaigns specifically, PLEASE include some of the actual content or screenshots. Data is cool, but seeing what actually resonated? That’s gold.
One question: are you looking to use this case study to recruit more creators for future campaigns, or is it purely for investors and partners? That changes how you’d present the creator angle.