Employment firm: each claim type given its own campaign, page and budget

Results as reported by our founder, from the firm’s own records; rounded. Anonymized. This is work our founder led before founding Probative; the firm’s own teams also contributed.

The starting problem

Scaling a plateaued program. A midsize, regional plaintiff-side employment practice was spending about $120K a month on advertising. Distinct claim types shared budgets, messaging and conversion goals, which hid how each one performed: a strong claim type could carry a weak one without anyone seeing it.

What we changed

1. Segmented campaigns by claim type and geography. Each claim type and area got its own campaign, so each had its own numbers.

2. Matched each segment to dedicated landing pages. Every segment led to a page written for that claim, rather than a general employment page.

3. Optimized budgets using signed-case outcomes and qualification data. Budget moved toward the segments that qualified and signed, using the firm’s own outcomes rather than lead counts (Google).

The program ran on Google Search, SEO, Meta and remarketing. Remarketing ran only within each platform’s policies, and no Customer Match or look-alike audiences were built from client lists.

The results

• Cost per signed case: $8,000 → $5,000 (−38%).
• Signed cases: 15 → 24 a month at comparable spend (+60%).
• Projected fee-value return on ad spend: 3× → 5×.
• Annual firm revenue: $4M → $6M (+50%). This is the firm’s total revenue. Many factors contributed to it, and it is not revenue we claim to have caused.
• Other wins: consultation attendance 60% → 80%; Spanish acquisition expansion; improved non-brand organic visibility.
• Engagement: 24 months.

The figures are as reported by our founder from the firm’s own records, rounded. We don’t publish the firm’s name, location or dates.

How it was measured

Signed cases were counted from the firm’s own case records, not from platform reports, and compared on the same basis before and after. Spend came from the ad accounts the firm owned. Projected fee-value return on ad spend is the projected attorney-fee value of signed cases divided by ad spend. Percentages are computed from the figures above and rounded. Today the same measurement runs every week in our Monday report, under The Probative Standard and our method for reporting results.

What this means for your firm

If every claim type shares one budget, you can’t tell which ones pay. Split them, give each its own page, and fund the ones that sign. The practice detail is on our employment law page.