I’m trying to build a narrative for my CFO about why cross-border influencer and UGC campaigns are worth the investment. The challenge isn’t that I don’t have results—I do. It’s that the results are messy.
A campaign we ran had amazing reach in Russia (1.2M impressions, 8% engagement), solid but lower reach in the US (300K impressions, 5% engagement), and the revenue attribution is complicated because it’s split across two regional sales teams, two different conversion funnels, and they report differently.
When I try to present this as one unified ROI story, it falls apart. When I present it as two separate stories, the CFO asks, “So why are we doing this cross-border thing at all?”
I know people on the hub have tackled this. How do you actually compile cross-border case studies that don’t make executives question the strategy? What metrics do you include? How do you frame the ROI when outcomes don’t look the same across regions?
I’m also curious: are there existing case studies on the platform I should be learning from? What’s the structure that actually works for the C-suite?
This is something I see a lot of people struggle with, and it’s real. Here’s what I tell teams: don’t try to force one story. Instead, tell a portfolio story.
Frame it like this: “Here are three cross-border campaigns. Each had different objectives. Here’s what worked, what we learned, and how those learnings are compounding value over time.”
Executives care less about perfect metrics and more about pattern. If you can show that cross-border campaigns are improving over time (engagement increasing, CAC decreasing, partnership quality improving), that’s a story.
Also, consider non-financial ROI: partnership ecosystem. How many reliable US partners did you build through these campaigns? How many now trust you enough to do repeat work? That’s the real value that ROI spreadsheets miss but executives should care about.
One practical thing: I’ve seen teams on the hub share their case study templates. They use a format like: Challenge → Strategy → Results → Learnings → Projected Impact. It’s simple, and it builds confidence because you’re not hiding the messy parts. You’re showing that you understand what worked and what didn’t.
Okay, here’s the framework that actually works with CFOs: Don’t start with the campaign. Start with the business problem.
Frame 1: “We needed to expand into the US market without rebuilding from scratch. Goal was to acquire 1,000 qualified leads at <$50 CAC while building brand credibility.”
Frame 2: “We ran three cross-border campaigns using Russian influencers and UGC adapted for US audiences. Results: 850 leads acquired, average CAC $48, and 23% of those leads became repeat customers within 90 days.”
Frame 3: “Compared to our benchmark (traditional US digital marketing at $75+ CAC with 12% repeat rate), cross-border campaigns outperformed on efficiency and quality.”
Frame 4: “Secondary benefits: we built relationships with 8 vetted US partners, reduced reliance on expensive US agencies, and created a template for future market entries.”
Notice: I’m not trying to make Russian and US performance look the same. I’m showing Russian performance (reach, engagement) as part of the strategy (build brand credibility), and US performance (leads, CAC, repeat rate) as the business outcome.
CFOs don’t care about engagement metrics. They care about: did it make/save us money, did it reduce risk, did it build assets we can reuse? Answer those three, and you’re done.
I struggled with this too. What changed it for me: I started tracking portfolio metrics instead of campaign metrics.
Instead of saying “Campaign X earned 500K impressions,” I said: “Our US marketing infrastructure now includes 12 vetted creators and 3 agencies with proven cross-border experience. This infrastructure reduces future campaign setup time from 8 weeks to 2 weeks and reduces vetting costs by 60%.”
That’s something a CFO can value: asset building + operating efficiency. Not just campaign-level ROI, but capability-level ROI.
I don’t work with executives, but I think about this from a partnership perspective: the brands that can show me real outcomes from their campaigns also tend to invest in better briefs and longer-term partnerships. Brands that can’t or don’t track ROI? They tend to be one-off deals.
So from my view: the ability to build and present a solid case study is actually your superpower for retaining and deepening partnerships. It’s not just for the CFO; it’s for the next influencer or agency you pitch to.
Here’s the framework I use when building ROI cases for the C-suite:
Section 1: Objective Alignment
- State the business objective (e.g., “Acquire 1K qualified US leads in Q3”)
- State the hypothesis (e.g., “Cross-border campaigns can achieve this at 30% lower cost than traditional US marketing”)
Section 2: Methodology
- What we did, who we partnered with, timeline, total investment
- Keep this brief—executives skim this
Section 3: Results (The Money)
- Primary KPIs only: leads acquired, CAC, revenue influenced, ROI %
- Show 1 to 3 numbers that matter to your business model
- Don’t bog this down with engagement metrics
Section 4: Comparative Context
- vs. benchmark (what would traditional US marketing have cost for same results?)
- vs. internal goal (did we hit the objective?)
- vs. industry standard (how do we compare to peers?)
Section 5: Learnings & Playbook
- What worked, what didn’t, why
- What we’re changing for next iteration
- This builds credibility—shows you’re thinking, not just executing
Section 6: Strategic Assets Built
- Partners, creators, templates, IP, processes
- Quantify the value of reusing these (lower time/cost for next campaigns)
CFOs love seeing playbook development because it de-risks future spending. “If we can run the next campaign 30% faster because we have the template, that’s built-in efficiency.”
Read the platform’s case study library (if one exists) and reverse-engineer the best ones. Notice what they prioritize. That’s what your exec audience cares about.