A prospect hears your radio spot on the morning commute. Two weeks later, after a rear-end collision leaves them with a herniated disc, they type your firm's name into Google, click your branded search ad, and call the tracked number. Your CRM records it as a Google Ads case.
That's not wrong — Google captured the contact. But radio generated the demand. Your attribution model decides which channel gets credit, and that decision directly controls where your next $75,000 in budget goes.
Most PI marketing directors never consciously chose an attribution model. Their CRM chose for them. The default is almost always last-touch: whatever channel the prospect used to make contact gets full credit for the case. For firms running TV, radio, and billboards alongside Google and Facebook, that default systematically misprices your entire channel portfolio.
This guide covers the three attribution models, what each gets right and wrong for PI marketing, and the practical approach that gives you an accurate picture of where your signed cases actually come from.
PI Cases With Multiple Channel Touchpoints
55–70%
Prospects spending $100K+ monthly with TV, radio, or billboard typically show multi-channel paths before signing
Google Ads Credit Inflation Under Last-Touch
20–40%
At firms running mass media, Google Ads receives credit for cases mass media built — last-touch misses the source
PI Firms Using First-Touch Data in Budget Decisions
<10%
Most firms default to last-touch exclusively and never measure how cases were first generated
What Attribution Models Are (and Why They Matter)
An attribution model is a rule that assigns credit when a prospect converts to a signed case. If they touched three channels before signing, the model decides how to distribute — or concentrate — that credit across them.
Credit drives dollars. The channel that earns credit for signed cases is the channel that gets more budget next month. Mis-attribution isn't a reporting problem — it's a budget allocation problem. Firms spending $200K per month that consistently over-credit Google and under-credit mass media will eventually defund the channels actually building their case pipeline.
The Three Attribution Models Every PI Marketing Director Should Know
| First-Touch | Last-Touch | Linear (Multi-Touch) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which channel gets credit? | Channel that first introduced the prospect | Channel the prospect used to make contact | All touched channels, equally weighted |
| CRM default? | Rarely | Almost always | Requires setup |
| Best for measuring | Brand & awareness channels (TV, radio, billboard) | Digital conversion channels (Google Ads, web forms) | Full-funnel portfolio efficiency |
| Biggest risk for PI | Ignores the channel that closed the case | Credits digital for demand mass media built | Complexity — few CRMs support it natively |
| Setup required | Intake first-heard question | CRM default | Custom tracking |
| Practical for PI firms? | Yes — as a secondary view | Yes — primary view | Yes — with RI platform |
How each model distributes credit when a prospect touches multiple channels before signing
Last-Touch Attribution: The Default and Its Flaw
Last-touch is how your CRM probably works right now. Every call tracking number, UTM parameter, and lead source field captures the final channel a prospect used before contacting your firm. That channel gets the case.
For digital-only portfolios, last-touch works reasonably well — the last digital interaction usually did the heavy lifting. But PI firms spending on TV, radio, and billboards operate on a different funnel. Mass media creates awareness. Digital captures the demand mass media built. Under last-touch, digital gets all the credit.
The result is predictable. TV and radio look expensive. Google Ads looks efficient. Partners cut mass media budgets. Google budgets grow. Then, six months later, impression share holds steady but signed case volume drops — because the brand awareness fueling those branded searches is gone.
First-Touch Attribution: What It Captures (and What It Misses)
First-touch credits the channel that first introduced the prospect to your firm. Billboard seen first — billboard gets credit. Radio ad heard before the Google search — radio gets credit.
This model reveals demand generation that last-touch hides. A TV campaign reaching 400,000 viewers monthly might show only 60 attributed cases under last-touch. Switch to first-touch and that number climbs to 180 — because 120 more prospects searched your firm name or called a direct number after seeing the TV spot, and last-touch gave all of them to Google.
The limitation: first-touch ignores what closed the case. A prospect who first heard your radio ad three months ago but only called after a Facebook retargeting ad isn't fairly attributed to radio alone. First-touch over-credits awareness channels for cases that needed a digital nudge to convert.
How Attribution Model Choice Changes Your Budget Decisions
The cost-per-case numbers you report to your managing partner depend entirely on which attribution model produced them. Take a firm spending $250,000 per month across TV, Google Ads, Facebook, and radio, signing 50 cases. The same budget, the same cases — different attribution model, completely different budget conversation.
Illustrative example: same 50 signed cases, different attribution model, different channel costs. Numbers are directional — your firm's results depend on channel mix and prospect journey data.
Under last-touch, TV and radio look expensive; Google Ads looks efficient. Under first-touch, the picture flips — Google is expensive because it's capturing intent that mass media already generated. Neither view is fully correct, but most PI firms make million-dollar budget decisions seeing only one of them.
The PI-Specific Attribution Problem: Long Consideration Windows
PI attribution is harder than most industries for one structural reason: injury events don't always trigger immediate legal action. A prospect who hears your radio ad in January may not call until March — after injuries don't resolve and their insurer lowballs them. In those two months they may have searched your firm name, visited your site, seen a Facebook retargeting ad, and driven past your billboard a dozen times.
Which channel gets credit? Last-touch: whatever they clicked when they finally dialed. First-touch: the January radio spot. Neither fully reflects the multi-month journey. That's why the best PI firms run dual-view attribution — last-touch as the primary operating metric, first-touch as a strategic check on mass media performance.
Intake is also a factor. A prospect who calls from an organic Google search after seeing your TV commercial all week will often self-report TV as the reason they called — but your call tracking logs it as organic search. That gap is why the intake source question matters more than most firms realize.
The Practical Attribution Approach for PI Marketing Directors
You don't need a sophisticated multi-touch platform to get a more accurate picture. Two parallel practices give most PI firms 80% of the clarity they need.
Keep last-touch as your primary operating metric.Your CRM source tags, call tracking numbers, and UTM parameters stay exactly as they are. Last-touch gives you a signed-case count per channel that's consistent and reproducible — the number that feeds your monthly report and your cost-per-case calculation.
Add a “first heard about us” field to every intake call. Separate from the lead source your call tracking populates, add one question: “Before you called today, how did you first hear about our firm?” Give specialists a simple dropdown: TV, radio, billboard, internet search, friend or family referral, social media, direct mail, other. This captures first-touch data at zero additional cost. No new platform, no data engineering project — just two weeks of intake training and one CRM field update.
After 60–90 days of dual data, compare the two views. If last-touch shows Google Ads producing 25 cases but first-touch shows 12 of those callers self-reporting TV or radio as their first introduction, your mass media is driving significant demand that Google is capturing. That single insight changes your next budget conversation.
Single Attribution View (Last-Touch Only)
- TV and radio appear to produce few cases at high cost per case
- Google Ads appears efficient because it captures branded and direct searches
- Mass media budgets face cut pressure based on apparent poor performance
- Managing partners see no evidence that brand channels are generating demand
- Budget shifts toward digital — lead volume eventually drops as brand awareness erodes
Dual Attribution View (Last-Touch + First-Touch Intake Data)
- TV and radio first-touch attribution shows true demand-generation contribution
- Google Ads credit adjusted — some cases credited back to mass media that drove the initial search
- Mass media budget defended with first-touch case counts alongside last-touch digital data
- Managing partner sees full picture: which channels create demand vs. which close it
- Budget decisions use both metrics — optimizing for the full funnel, not just the last click
Connecting Attribution to Your Revenue Intelligence View
Attribution modeling becomes most powerful when it's connected to signed case data, not just lead data. First-touch intake questioning tells you which channels generate cases. Connect that to settlement outcomes six to eighteen months later and you can ask a sharper question: which channels generate the cases that settle at the highest value?
A radio campaign that looks expensive on last-touch cost per case might be producing a disproportionate share of high-value truck accident and catastrophic injury cases — matters that settle at three to five times your average. First-touch attribution surfaces that relationship. Last-touch hides it entirely.
See how this works across your full channel portfolio in the marketing ROI dashboard or explore how intake performance data connects to source attribution at a case level.
Most PI marketing directors are one intake field and one reporting session away from closing their attribution blind spot. Firms that run both views make better budget decisions and defend mass media investments with data instead of instinct.
If you want to see how RevenueScale surfaces first-touch and last-touch attribution side by side — connected to signed cases and settlement outcomes across every channel — book a demo. We'll walk through what both views look like for your current channel mix.