Two Identity Namespaces, One Customer, Zero Matches
A B2B SaaS company wants to activate a Trial Expiring audience to a LinkedIn destination and an internal email platform. Their schema uses two identity fields: crm_id (marked as a primary identity, namespace CRMID) and work_email (marked as an identity, namespace Email). Web behavior comes in via SDK with an anonymous ECID only; the CRM feed carries crm_id + work_email but no ECID. The Trial Expiring audience qualifies on a CRM attribute (trial_end_date) AND a web event (pricing_page_view in last 7 days). The audience currently has 0 members despite 14,000 trials expiring this week. The email destination accepts Email identity; LinkedIn accepts hashed email.
1. The audience is empty. Walk through the identity graph and explain the most likely cause, then state whether the audience rule itself is wrong.
Read the worked answer
The rule is probably correct but unsatisfiable given the identity graph.
- The web event (
pricing_page_view) is tied to an ECID only - the SDK has no email or CRM ID at collection time unless the site is authenticated and identity is stitched. - The CRM feed has
crm_id+work_emailbut no ECID. So the CRM profile and the web profile are two separate clusters unless something links them. - The link must come from an authenticated web event that carries both the ECID and the email/CRM ID (e.g., login, form fill, or an identity map set on the page). If the site never sends email alongside ECID, the graph never merges, and no single profile has both
trial_end_dateandpricing_page_view.
So: 14,000 trials exist, many pricing views exist, but they live on different profiles, and the AND rule returns 0. The rule is not logically wrong; it is architecturally disconnected from the identity strategy.
Check: profile viewer on a known trial customer - confirm whether trial_end_date and the web event coexist. If not, the graph is the problem, not segmentation.
2. Propose a fix that does not require re-architecting the website, and explain the trade-off. Then address the destination identity requirement.
Read the worked answer
Fix without re-architecting: introduce a server-side or batch identity bridge - send the CRM feed with the ECID where known (e.g., from your auth/analytics backend that can join session ECID to logged-in user), or add a lightweight authenticated event on the account/login page that emits Email + ECID into the same identity map. Even a single authenticated touchpoint per user is enough to merge the clusters going forward.
Trade-off: merging is forward-looking. Historical anonymous pricing views won't retroactively attach to the CRM profile unless you re-send them with identity or rely on graph backfill (which is not guaranteed). Expect the audience to ramp over days/weeks, not instantly. Also, merging increases profile consolidation - your profile count may drop as clusters merge, which is expected and healthy.
Destination identity: the email platform needs Email - present on the merged profile, fine. LinkedIn needs hashed email - the destination must be configured to hash work_email (SHA-256) at activation, and the email must be normalized (lowercase, trimmed) before hashing or match rates collapse. Confirm the destination's identity namespace mapping points at Email, not CRMID.
Judgement point: don't 'fix' an empty audience by loosening the rule to OR - that would activate the wrong people. Fix the graph.