Google Demand Gen Without Wasting Budget

Executive leadership is approving large-scale investments into the upper funnel via Google Ads but demands a clear evaluation framework? Launching Demand Gen campaigns inevitably impacts the overall profitability metrics of an account. In this article, we detail how marketers in large and medium-sized businesses can set relevant KPIs, adapt creative assets, and correctly prove the effectiveness of media investments to stakeholders. Imagine a typical scenario during media planning: your stakeholders are ready to allocate a significant budget for upper-funnel campaigns in Google Ads for the upcoming year. But before approving the budget, they ask a perfectly logical question: "How exactly will we measure the results?" You will often hear this position from leadership: "We know it won't perform like classic Search. We are ready to accept a higher Cost Per Action (CPA) or a lower Return on Ad Spend (ROAS). Just show us how we will know it is working." This is a fair request. However, agreeing in theory to lower efficiency is one thing; watching your blended ROAS drop month after month is quite another. This is precisely the primary risk of working with Demand Gen, a Google campaign format designed to reach audiences that are not actively searching at the moment. Demand Gen allows you to introduce your brand to new audiences across platforms like YouTube, the Discover feed, Gmail, and the Google Display Network (GDN). At the same time, Search campaigns typically capture users who are further along in their purchasing journey. The challenge is that both campaign types live in the same advertising account and appear in the exact same reports. Without clearly defined expectations and an objective evaluation framework, even the most successful media investment can look like a financial failure. Below is a step-by-step guide on setting meaningful goals, aligning creatives with metrics, and making informed decisions regarding future investments. Define What Success Looks Like (Reach is Not the Ultimate Goal) In the early days of paid search, marketers had an unspoken term for ad spend that failed to generate conversions: "brand awareness." It was an industry joke, but also a highly convenient excuse for depleted campaign budgets that showed no visible returns. We tend to picture the upper funnel as a pipeline: the more people we show the ad to, the more of them will "fall through" and become customers. Under this model, increasing impression volume automatically equates to business growth. However, impression volume is not a reliable predictor of growth. Banner blindness is a documented reality. Advertising pixels record impressions even when the ad was not actually seen. Reach alone is not evidence of influence. Given the rich array of audience signals and first-party data currently available to marketers within the Google ecosystem, there is no justification for defining success merely as getting an ad in front of as many users as possible. This does not mean that every Demand Gen campaign requires a complex incrementality study to justify its existence. The more practical question is: are you reaching the right people with a message that drives them toward a meaningful business outcome? It all starts with selecting the right metrics to measure. Choose the Right KPI: A Softer Target or a Different Conversion? Can you measure Demand Gen campaigns using the same KPIs as your Search campaigns? Sometimes, yes. But most often, you will have to make a strategic decision: lower your target metric or change the actual conversion you are tracking. Scenario A: Same Conversion, Softer Target Your e-commerce Search campaigns generate an impressive ROAS. You want to acquire new customers who are not actively shopping right now, and you know that many of them will return to make repeat purchases. A high Customer Lifetime Value (LTV) can easily justify higher acquisition costs for new customers via Demand Gen. This is a solid reason to accept a lower return on the initial transaction. You do not even need to calculate LTV down to the exact cent to do this. Establish a lower target that you can defend based on customer return rates and average repeat order value, and secure upfront agreement from leadership. Scenario B: Different Conversion, Different Job Not every business can apply that mathematical model. A B2B advertiser with an 18-month sales cycle may simply not generate enough closed deals in a short timeframe for Demand Gen algorithms to effectively learn and optimize. Accepting a higher CPA in this scenario will not solve the fundamental problem of data scarcity. Instead, you should measure an earlier-stage conversion that signals real user progress down the funnel: for example, a qualified product demo request or engagement with an evaluation tool on the website. Your KPI is not just a reporting decision. When you use it for bidding algorithms, you are essentially instructing Google on what specific behavior to pursue. If you choose an overly simple conversion with little connection to actual business value, you risk getting exactly what you asked for (e.g., cheap, unqualified traffic). An earlier conversion helps the campaign pass the learning phase, but downstream results must still validate the accuracy of that choice. These results may arrive on different timelines. You might gather enough qualified leads to evaluate intermediate campaign performance this month, but it will take several more months to understand what percentage of them became actual customers. Ensure your reporting system clearly distinguishes between what you can measure now and what requires more time to analyze. Make Your Creatives Work Toward the Defined KPI Giants like Apple or Coca-Cola can skip this section. They have decades of meaning accumulated behind their logos. Everyone else should pay close attention. If your brand has not yet established a clear narrative in your audience's mind, abstract "brand advertising" will not build one. Awareness without capturing attention is not awareness at all. You have already defined what success looks like. Now, you need creatives capable of delivering it. Design your advertising assets so that they generate the exact outcome you are measuring; otherwise, you cannot objectively evaluate the strategy based on ad performance. This does not mean that every upper-funnel ad must contain a direct "Buy Now" call to action. It means the creative must guide the right audience toward the KPI you have selected. Before approving any creative asset, complete this sentence: "After seeing this ad, we want [target audience] to understand [specific idea], making them more likely to [desired action that supports our KPI]." The desired action could be a branded search query, a return website visit, or a click to explore the product in more depth. It does not necessarily have to be the final macro-conversion, but there must be a clear, logical connection between what the ad communicates and the outcome you are trying to achieve. For instance, an ad for B2B educational programs should not be an abstract "universe of possibilities"; it must clearly identify the audience (e.g., school administrators), convey a benefit, and provide a relevant next step. Segment Performance Metrics by Campaign Type It is one thing to agree that increasing upper-funnel investments will lower your blended ROAS. It is entirely another to watch it happen in practice. Your stakeholders signed off on the strategy. They understood the trade-off. But now the aggregate numbers are dropping, and it looks like the account is underperforming. The argument "we knew this would happen" is unlikely to reassure anyone. Even if every individual campaign hits its target metrics, reallocating budgets toward upper-funnel advertising can create a visually alarming overall scorecard. You need a reporting framework that clearly distinguishes an expected trade-off from an actual performance problem. Always segment budgets, targets, and results by campaign type (e.g., Search separate from Demand Gen). When the blended ROAS declines, this granularity allows you to see whether specific campaigns are missing their marks or if the shift simply reflects where the funds were redirected. Keep blended metrics visible to evaluate overall investment health, but do not let account-wide averages obscure what is actually happening at the individual tool level. Normalize Attribution Across Advertising Platforms Segmenting campaign performance helps evaluate Demand Gen within the Google Ads ecosystem. However, Google is not the only platform competing for your company's upper-funnel budgets. Furthermore, different platforms do not necessarily count conversions using the same rules. Platforms like Meta and LinkedIn may claim 100% credit for conversions that Google splits across multiple campaigns. They may also count conversions following simple ad impressions (view-through), even if the user never clicked. Discrepancies in attribution rules make direct cross-platform comparisons unfair and inaccurate. Google’s "Conversions (Platform Comparable)" metric helps level the playing field. It evaluates Demand Gen independently of other Google campaigns and includes eligible view-through conversions, bringing Google's reporting closer to the conventions used in paid social. To utilize this approach, add the following columns to your Google Ads reports: Conversions (Platform Comparable) and corresponding CPA or ROAS metrics. View-through conversions — to clearly see what portion of the result is generated solely by impressions without clicks. Retain standard conversion columns for primary performance reporting, and use the Platform Comparable metric strictly for cross-platform comparisons, aligning conversion events and attribution windows as closely as possible. Remember: comparable attribution does not equal incrementality. These metrics do not mathematically prove exactly how many additional conversions the advertising drove. The goal is not to make Google’s numbers look visually better. The primary objective is to prevent inconsistent attribution rules from dictating your budget allocation decisions. Measurement as a Continuous Dialogue Evaluating upper-funnel campaign performance is not a one-time exercise. It is an ongoing process of analyzing and adjusting attribution, targets, creatives, targeting parameters, and the business outcomes they generate. This process also requires far more than just agreeing to adjusted performance expectations. Leadership must be psychologically and analytically prepared to see blended efficiency metrics decline, even when every individual campaign is operating flawlessly according to plan. Keep communication channels open. Regularly review results against the approved KPIs, verify whether early signals (micro-conversions) are translating into actual business value, and use the acquired insights to continuously refine targeting, creatives, and budget distribution. Your ultimate goal is not to make upper-funnel metrics look attractive in a presentation, but to know with absolute certainty whether these investments create enough business value to justify the resources spent on them. Read this article in Ukrainian.