Is it possible to use a query string other than the Tracking code parameter in Marketing Channels?

[Annelio]

Hi,

I have defined a processing rule in Marketing Channels based on another query string parameter than the one used in the Tracking Code query string, but the traffic does not end up in the channel connected to that rule. My question is if it is possible to use processing rules based on other query strings than the one used in the Tracking Code dimension? In other words, does it have to be tied to the Campaign variable? The data for the query string I am using is collected in a separate eVar.

[atusingh]

Hi @Annelio 
You don't necessarily have to tie the query string to any variable. You can use them directly in Marketing Channel processing rules and it will work.

If you do not see traffic being attributed to correct marketing channel w.r.t. to MC processing rules. I suggest you to check if the traffic is going to a different channel.

MC processing rules works with Top to Botton appraoch and it the conditions for the 1st rules gets satisfied, it will no longer check the condition of other processing rules and attrubite data to channel configured for 1st rule.

[Annelio]

Thank you for the quick response. The main part of the traffic is being attributed to Direct, which is a rule further down in the hierarchy, so the issue does not seem to be the processing order in this case.

[VaniBhemarasetty · Accepted solution]

@Annelio In that case, best approach is to check the data feeds hits and pick up one visitor ID and try to validate the marketing channel processing rules across the journey, to find out the root cause or you can reach out to customer care to help you identify the root cause of data getting attributed to direct channel 

[Brian_Johnson_]

@Annelio -

First, yes, you can define a marketing channel processing rule based on any other variable or parameter you want. Though, the more variables you take into consideration in your rules, the more complex and potentially error prone they will be.

If you can share a screenshot of how your rules are set up, I'd be happy to see if anything stands out that might be causing your concern. (Feel free to DM the rules to me if you don't want to post the image in the public conversation.)

[Annelio]

Thank you for your response! I discovered that there was one letter missing in the rule for the query string so I have corrected this and will continue to follow the development to see if this was the only thing causing the problem or if there may be other factors. As you say, using more variables makes the rules more complex and increases the risk for errors. This is the first time we are using another query string than the one connected to the Tracking code dimension in our processing rules. I will get back to you here or by DM if I find that the above fix does not solve the problem.