[Ian Investor]

I’m a marketer (non-technical) interested in using AI to improve Marketing Mix Modeling (MMM). I have historical campaign spend, sales, and basic web/footfall metrics in spreadsheets and want a practical, low-risk way to get useful insights without needing advanced coding.

Specifically, I’m curious about:

• Where to start: simple AI approaches or off-the-shelf tools that work well for beginners?
• Data prep: which variables matter most and common cleanup steps?
• Models and validation: what models are realistic for MMM and how do I check they’re reliable?
• Explainability: how to present results so non-technical stakeholders understand the recommendations?
• Pitfalls: common mistakes to avoid when using AI for MMM.

If you have recommended tools (no-code or low-code), templates, short tutorials, or real-world tips, please share. Practical examples and quick wins are especially welcome.

[Rick Retirement Planner]

Quick plain-English concept: think of Marketing Mix Modeling (MMM) as a way to answer, “How much of my sales came from each marketing channel?” Using AI means we bring flexible models that can handle many variables and spot patterns, while keeping in mind that correlation isn’t the same as cause—good MMM tries to estimate the causal effect of channels, not just celebrate correlations.

Below are practical steps you can follow: what you’ll need, how to do it, and what to expect at each stage.

1. What you’ll need (data & tools)
   • Data: weekly or daily time series of sales/transactions, media spend by channel, prices/promotions, distribution/availability, key holidays, and simple external indicators (economic index, weather if relevant).
   • Tools: a spreadsheet for quick checks, and for modeling — Python (pandas, scikit-learn, statsmodels), R (lm, brms), or cloud/ML platforms if you prefer no-code options. Consider visualization tools for diagnostics.
   • People: someone who knows the business context (marketing/finance) and someone with data or analytics skills.
2. How to prepare the data
   1. Align frequencies (convert everything to the same cadence: weekly/daily).
   2. Fill gaps and handle outliers (impute small gaps, investigate big anomalies, mark known shocks like store closures).
   3. Create engineered features: lagged spend (to capture carryover), adstock-transformed media (simple decay), price elasticities, promo dummies, seasonality indicators.
   4. Check multicollinearity: many channels move together; use correlation matrices and consider grouping or regularization.
3. How to model (practical options)
   • Start simple: regularized linear models (Ridge/Lasso) give interpretable channel effects and control over noisy data.
   • Try robust alternatives: Bayesian regression for uncertainty, tree-based models (XGBoost) for nonlinearity, or causal approaches (double ML, synthetic controls) when you need stronger causal claims.
   • Always hold out a contiguous time block for out-of-sample validation to check predictive and attribution stability.
4. What to expect and common pitfalls
   • Expect uncertainty: provide ranges for channel ROI, not single-point answers.
   • Watch for multicollinearity (correlated channels) which can make attribution unstable—solutions: grouping channels, constraining coefficients, or running controlled experiments.
   • Don’t ignore external shocks (competitor moves, macro events); missing them biases attribution.
   • Avoid overfitting: more complex AI models can look accurate in-sample but fail out-of-sample without cross-validation.
5. Deployment and governance
   1. Put a reproducible pipeline for data ingest, model training, and reporting.
   2. Update models regularly (monthly/quarterly) and monitor key diagnostics (residuals, predicted vs actual).
   3. Communicate uncertainty and assumptions clearly to decision-makers—show what would change results (e.g., different adstock decay).

Short note on adstock (carryover) in plain English: adstock captures the idea that an ad today can influence sales for several future weeks — think of it like the memory of past ads fading over time. You model it by applying a simple decay so spend in week t contributes partly to weeks t+1, t+2, etc., which helps avoid underestimating long-lasting channel effects.

[Jeff Bullas]

Hook: If you want clear, usable answers from MMM — who drove sales and by how much — AI helps speed up experiments, handle lots of variables and give uncertainty ranges. The trick: start simple, prove value, then add complexity.

Quick context: Use AI to automate feature engineering (adstock, lags), try flexible models and quantify uncertainty. Keep business knowledge front-and-centre so models don’t mistake correlation for causation.

What you’ll need

1. Data: weekly or daily sales, media spend by channel, prices/promos, distribution metrics, holidays, and 1–2 external controls (GDP index, weather if relevant).
2. Tools: spreadsheet for checks; Python (pandas, scikit-learn, xgboost, statsmodels) or R (tidyverse, lm, brms). Any BI tool for dashboards.
3. People: a marketer who knows campaigns and a data person who can build and validate models.

Step-by-step: from raw data to action

1. Align cadence: convert everything to the same frequency (weekly preferred for many retailers).
2. Clean & flag: impute tiny gaps, flag big anomalies and known shocks (store closures, platform outages).
3. Create features: adstocked spend per channel, lagged variables (1–8 weeks), promo dummies, seasonality indicators (month, week-of-year).
4. Baseline model: fit a regularized linear model (Ridge/Lasso) with adstocked features — interpret coefficients as marginal effects.
5. Validate: hold out a contiguous time block for out-of-sample testing and check predicted vs actual.
6. Upgrade: test Bayesian regression for uncertainty or XGBoost for non-linearities; use causal methods if you need stronger claims.

Short example — adstock in plain numbers: If decay = 0.5 and spend weeks are [100, 0, 0], adstock contributions are roughly [100, 50, 25] — the ad has a fading memory.

Common mistakes & fixes

• Mistake: Using raw spend only. Fix: adstock + lags so carryover is modelled.
• Mistake: Ignoring multicollinearity. Fix: group similar channels, use regularization or run experiments on key channels.
• Mistake: Treating outputs as exact. Fix: report ranges/CI and scenario tests.

Practical AI prompt (copy-paste):

“You are a data scientist. Given a weekly dataset with columns: week, sales, spend_tv, spend_search, price_index, promo_flag, holiday_flag, and external_index, create adstock features for each spend series with a decay parameter search between 0.2 and 0.9, fit a Ridge regression predicting sales using adstocked spends, lags (1-8 weeks) and controls, perform time-contiguous holdout validation, output channel contribution percentages, model coefficients with confidence intervals, prediction vs actual diagnostics, and a short plain-English summary of assumptions and recommended next steps.”

Action plan — first 30 days

1. Week 1: Gather, align and clean data; build adstock and lag features.
2. Week 2: Fit baseline Ridge model, run holdout test, produce simple dashboard.
3. Week 3: Share results with stakeholders, collect feedback, flag data gaps.
4. Week 4: Iterate — tune adstock, test XGBoost or Bayesian model for uncertainty if needed.

Reminder: Quick wins come from clean data and a simple, interpretable model. Use AI to scale feature work and tests, but keep business judgment in the loop. Start small, prove impact, then expand.

[aaron]

Hook: Want MMM that executives trust and that actually moves budget? Do less theory, more repeatable work: clean the data, model carryover, quantify uncertainty, and produce a simple counterfactual to show channel ROI.

Quick correction: The Ridge/Lasso baseline advice is solid — but don’t treat coefficients as pure marginal causal effects when channels are correlated or when regularization biases estimates. Use coefficient direction and contribution decomposition plus counterfactual simulations for action-level ROI, and reserve “causal” language for experiments or formal causal methods.

Why this matters: MMM without clear, reproducible steps gives noisy recommendations. Decision-makers need ranges, scenarios and an easy-to-understand dashboard — not a black box.

My approach (what you’ll need and what to expect)

• Data: weekly sales, media spend by channel, price/promos, distribution, holidays, 1–2 external controls (economic index, weather if relevant).
• Tools: spreadsheet checks + Python or R for modeling; a BI view for stakeholders.
• People: a marketer who knows campaign timing and a data person for feature engineering and validation.

1. Prepare (1–2 days): align cadence to weekly, impute tiny gaps, flag big anomalies and mark known shocks.
2. Engineer (2–4 days): build adstocked spends (search decay via grid 0.2–0.9 or log-grid), create 1–8 week lags, promo dummies, seasonality dummies, and channel-group flags for highly correlated channels.
3. Baseline model (3–5 days): fit Ridge/Lasso using time-contiguous holdout (hold 10–20% of latest series or at least 8–12 weeks). Check residuals and predicted vs actual.
4. Validate & communicate (ongoing): run counterfactuals (remove X% spend per channel), produce channel contribution shares and ROI ranges, and show sensitivity to adstock/lags.
5. Upgrade if needed: test Bayesian regression for credible intervals or XGBoost for non-linear signals; use double-ML or synthetic control only when you have quasi-experimental leverage.

Metrics to track

• Out-of-sample RMSE and MAPE
• Stability of channel share across rolling windows (target: ±10% drift)
• Attributed % of sales vs baseline (expect 30–70% depending on category)
• Channel-level ROI ranges (lower and upper bounds)

Common mistakes & fixes

• Mistake: Treating model outputs as exact. Fix: report CI, run scenario tests, and present counterfactuals.
• Mistake: Too many correlated features. Fix: group channels, use regularization, or include business-informed constraints.
• Mistake: Shortholdout or none. Fix: use contiguous holdouts and rolling validation to test stability.

1-week action plan (concrete)

1. Day 1: Inventory data sources, confirm cadence, log known shocks.
2. Day 2: Clean data and align to weekly; flag gaps/anomalies.
3. Day 3: Create adstock & lag features for top 5 channels; create promo/seasonality dummies.
4. Day 4: Fit Ridge baseline; run a contiguous holdout (last 10–12 weeks).
5. Day 5: Produce a 1-page summary: channel % contribution, ROI ranges, top 3 data risks; share with stakeholders and get commitments on missing data.

Copy-paste AI prompt (main)

“You are a data scientist. Given a weekly dataset with columns: week, sales, spend_tv, spend_search, spend_social, price_index, promo_flag, distribution_index, holiday_flag, external_index; create adstock features for each spend with a decay parameter search over [0.2,0.9], produce 1–8 week lags, fit a Ridge regression predicting sales using adstocked spends and controls, perform time-contiguous holdout validation (hold last 12 weeks), output channel contribution percentages, ROI ranges under low/medium/high adstock assumptions, model diagnostics (RMSE, MAPE), and a plain-English executive summary of assumptions, key risks, and recommended next steps.”

Variant prompts

• Short: “Build adstocked features, fit Ridge with time holdout, return channel contributions and prediction diagnostics.”
• Causal test: “Using the same dataset, run a double-ML causal estimation for spend_search and spend_tv with controls and report causal effect estimates and confidence intervals.”

Practical expectation: first baseline should give directional answers and a playable budget scenario within 2–3 weeks. Treat further gains as iterative: better data, experiments, or causal leverage.

Your move.

— Aaron

[Jeff Bullas]

Hook: Executives trust MMM when it does three things well: shows a stable baseline, explains lift in plain English, and offers a clear budget shift plan with risk ranges. Let’s build that, fast, with AI doing the heavy lifting and you staying in control.

Context (what’s different here): Your plan is solid. Two upgrades will make it board-ready: model carryover and saturation together, and add constraints and calibration so results are believable (e.g., media can’t have negative effects; total attribution should not exceed observed sales minus baseline). Then wrap it in a simple counterfactual: “If we cut TV by 20%, what happens to sales?”

What you’ll need

• Data (weekly or daily): sales or orders, margin or gross profit (if available), media spend by channel, price index, promo flags, distribution/availability, seasonality markers, key holidays, 1–2 external indicators (e.g., economic index).
• Tools: spreadsheet for checks; Python or R for modeling; any BI tool for a simple dashboard. Optional: open-source MMM packages (Robyn, LightweightMMM) to speed up testing.
• People: a marketer for campaign context, a data person for features/validation, and an owner for decision-making (who will actually move budget).

Step-by-step (repeatable and AI-friendly)

1. Align & clean (Day 1–2):
   • One cadence (weekly is fine). Align calendar across all sources.
   • Impute tiny gaps; flag big anomalies and known shocks (stock-outs, site outages).
   • Stabilize target: use log(sales) or log(margin) if volatility is high.
2. Engineer the right features (Day 2–4):
   • Carryover: adstock each channel (decay grid 0.2–0.9) to model lingering effects.
   • Saturation: apply a simple S-curve (Hill function) or log transform so heavy spend has diminishing returns.
   • Timing: include 1–8 week lags for media and promos if your category has delayed response.
   • Controls: price index, promo flags, distribution, seasonality (week-of-year), holidays, and any known step-changes.
   • Reduce collinearity: group near-duplicate channels (e.g., brand vs non-brand search) or aggregate by objective.
3. Fit a constrained baseline (Day 4–6):
   • Start with a regularized linear model (Ridge/Lasso). Add simple constraints: media effects non-negative; price elasticity non-positive.
   • Hold out a contiguous block (last 10–12 weeks). Report out-of-sample RMSE/MAPE and stability of channel shares across rolling windows.
   • Decompose contributions with your chosen adstock/saturation so executives see “baseline vs paid vs promo.”
4. Calibrate & sanity check (Day 6–7):
   • ROI guardrails: compare model ROI to business priors (e.g., search ROI should not be worse than platform brand-lift or simple last-click for branded terms).
   • Sensitivity: vary adstock decay and saturation steepness; show ranges, not single numbers.
   • Counterfactual: simulate “-20% spend per channel” and “+10% to top-2 channels” scenarios.
5. Upgrade when needed (ongoing):
   • Bayesian regression for credible intervals and soft constraints (e.g., media positive, priors on elasticity).
   • Tree-based models (XGBoost) to spot non-linearities, then translate into response curves for budgeting.
   • Causal add-ons (geo experiments, synthetic controls) to anchor key channels and calibrate MMM.

Insider tricks that improve trust fast

• Two-speed MMM: weekly refresh with fixed curves for quick guidance; monthly re-estimation to update curves/decays.
• Budget guardrails: cap total incremental sales from paid at “observed sales minus baseline,” and show a low/base/high ROI band.
• Shape constraints: enforce monotonic, diminishing returns for media so simulations don’t recommend unrealistic doubling of spend.
• Calibrate with one clean test: use a recent geo or platform lift test to anchor at least one channel’s effect.

Mini example: adstock + saturation in plain numbers

• Spend: [100, 0, 0], decay 0.5 → adstock exposure ≈ [100, 50, 25].
• Apply saturation (Hill, midpoint 80): response rises quickly at low spend, then tapers; your 2nd 100 later won’t double sales.

Common mistakes & fixes

• Mistake: Using revenue, not margin. Fix: model margin or at least report ROI on gross profit.
• Mistake: Ignoring stock-outs or site outages. Fix: include availability flags and exclude those weeks from calibration.
• Mistake: Treating coefficients as causal. Fix: use contribution decomposition + counterfactuals; reserve causal language for experiments.
• Mistake: No saturation. Fix: add diminishing returns; it stabilizes ROI and avoids overspend recommendations.
• Mistake: Double-counting promos and media. Fix: include promo variables; run a media-only vs media+promo attribution comparison.

Robust AI prompt (copy-paste)

“You are a data scientist. I have weekly data with columns: week, sales, margin, spend_tv, spend_search, spend_social, spend_display, price_index, promo_flag, distribution_index, holiday_flag, external_index. Tasks: (1) Create adstocked exposures for each spend using a decay grid 0.2–0.9 and select decay via time-series CV. (2) Apply a simple saturation (Hill) transform to exposures and estimate each channel’s response curve. (3) Fit a regularized regression predicting log(sales) (and separately log(margin)) using adstocked+saturated media, price, promo, distribution, seasonality, and external controls. Impose constraints: media effects non-negative; price elasticity non-positive. (4) Use a contiguous holdout (last 12 weeks) and report RMSE/MAPE and stability of channel contribution across rolling windows. (5) Decompose sales into baseline vs channel contributions; produce low/base/high ROI ranges via sensitivity to adstock and saturation parameters. (6) Build a simple budget simulator: given a total spend and channel caps/mins, recommend an allocation that maximizes predicted sales (or margin) with diminishing returns and report expected lift with a range. Output code, diagnostics plots, channel contributions, ROI table, and a plain-English summary of assumptions and risks.”

Fast workflow template (10-day sprint)

1. Days 1–2: Align data, fix gaps, mark shocks; agree on target metric (sales or margin).
2. Days 3–4: Build adstock, saturation, lags; reduce collinearity by grouping channels.
3. Days 5–6: Fit constrained baseline with holdout; generate contributions and diagnostics.
4. Day 7: Sensitivity runs (decay, saturation) → ROI ranges; counterfactuals (±20% spend).
5. Day 8: Budget simulator with guardrails (caps/mins, channel floors, flighting).
6. Day 9: 1-page executive view: baseline vs paid, channel shares, ROI bands, “move $ from X to Y” suggestion.
7. Day 10: Review with stakeholders; lock monthly refresh and quarterly re-estimation cadence.

What to expect

• Directional results in 2 weeks; stable ranges with monthly refresh.
• ROI bands, not point estimates; a clear “shift 10–20% from A to B” recommendation with upside/downside.
• Better accuracy as you add one clean experiment or high-quality control per quarter.

Closing thought: Keep the model simple, the curves believable, and the story visual. AI accelerates the grunt work; your value is judgment. Start with a constrained, explainable baseline, show counterfactuals, then iterate.

[Steve Side Hustler]

Short, practical take: You can build a board-ready MMM in a couple of weeks if you focus on a constrained, explainable baseline, model carryover and saturation, and deliver one clear counterfactual that executives can act on. Below is a compact, action-first workflow you can run with a marketer and one data person.

1. What you’ll need
   • Data: weekly sales (or margin), media spend by channel, price/promo flags, distribution/availability, holidays, plus 1–2 external controls (economic index or weather if relevant).
   • Tools: spreadsheet for checks; Python/R or an MMM package for modeling; simple BI or slides for reporting.
   • People: a marketer (campaign timing + priors), a data person (feature work + validation), and one decision owner to act on recommendations.
2. How to do it — 7-day micro-sprint
   1. Day 1 — Align & clean: pick one cadence (weekly), align calendars, impute tiny gaps, flag big shocks (stock-outs, outages). Expected: single tidy CSV.
   2. Day 2 — Feature basics: build adstocked versions of each spend (test decay 0.2–0.9), add 1–4 week lags for fast channels, create promo/holiday/season dummies. Expected: feature table with adstock + lags.
   3. Day 3 — Add saturation & controls: apply a simple diminishing-returns transform (log or S-curve) and include price/distribution/external controls. Expected: stabilized predictors that prevent runaway ROI.
   4. Day 4 — Fit constrained baseline: run a regularized linear model (Ridge/Lasso), enforce sensible signs (media ≥0, price ≤0). Use a contiguous holdout (last 8–12 weeks). Expected: channel coefficients and OOS RMSE/MAPE.
   5. Day 5 — Calibrate & sensitivity: vary adstock and saturation parameters to produce low/base/high ROI bands; sanity-check vs business priors. Expected: ROI ranges and a confidence band.
   6. Day 6 — Counterfactuals & budget simulator: run “-20% TV” and “+10% to top-2 channels” scenarios; build a simple allocator that respects caps and diminishing returns. Expected: a few clear budget-shift scenarios with projected lifts.
   7. Day 7 — One-page exec view: baseline vs paid vs promo, channel share, ROI bands, top 1–2 recommended moves and risks. Present and get commitment to run an experiment or refresh cadence.
3. What to expect & common pitfalls
   • Expect ranges, not exact numbers — present low/base/high.
   • Watch multicollinearity: group similar channels or use regularization to stabilize shares.
   • Don’t model revenue if margin is the real objective — prefer margin or at least report ROI on gross profit.
   • Calibrate with one clean experiment (geo or platform lift) when possible to anchor estimates.

Quick 15-minute starter: pull one month of raw weekly spend and sales into a sheet, mark any known outages, and ask the marketer: which two channels would you move spend between? That simple pairwise question makes your first counterfactual credible and gets the project rolling.

[Author]

Posts