The Problem with “It Depends” in Paid Search
In the world of Pay-Per-Click (PPC) advertising, there is a phrase that has become a universal shield for experts facing difficult questions. Whether it is a high-stakes client meeting, a session at a major marketing conference, or a thread on a digital marketing forum, you will inevitably hear those two words: “It depends.”
Usually accompanied by a knowing nod or a sympathetic smile, this phrase is the ultimate conversation stopper. While technically accurate—because digital marketing is indeed a landscape of variables—it offers absolutely zero utility to the person asking the question. It is a placeholder for an answer rather than an answer itself. As the industry evolves and data becomes more accessible, the “it depends” excuse is increasingly viewed as a professional cop-out.
This issue isn’t exclusive to PPC. SEO pioneer Aleyda Solis famously called out this exact pattern in the search engine optimization community, noting that it has become an industry-wide epidemic. Whether you are managing Google Ads, social media campaigns, or organic search strategies, the refusal to provide concrete guidance under the guise of “complexity” hinders progress and erodes trust between specialists and stakeholders.
Why We Default to the “It Depends” Cop-Out
To move beyond this phrase, we first have to understand why we use it. Not every question in PPC is equally difficult to answer. We can generally categorize queries based on their complexity and the amount of data required to provide a meaningful response. Usually, “it depends” is reserved for the hardest questions because the stakes of being wrong are higher.
Consider the spectrum of PPC questions:
- Simple factual questions: “What is the maximum number of Responsive Search Ads (RSAs) per ad group?” This requires no interpretation; you simply look up the current Google Ads documentation.
- Data-driven interpretations: “Why did my Cost Per Acquisition (CPA) spike last week?” This requires looking at the data and applying a layer of interpretation to identify the cause.
- Predictive queries: “What will my Return on Ad Spend (ROAS) look like if I increase the monthly budget by 30%?” This requires data, interpretation, and an understanding of market context and diminishing returns.
- Strategic Prescriptions: “What bid strategy should I use for a new product launch?” This is the peak of complexity. It requires data, interpretation, context, and a deep understanding of the business’s specific priorities and risk tolerance.
The more variables involved, the more an expert feels the need to hedge. However, being an expert means having the ability to navigate that complexity for the client. That is where the PACT framework comes into play.
Introducing the PACT Framework: A Strategic Alternative
The PACT framework is designed to replace “it depends” with structured, actionable insights. PACT stands for Process, Anchors, Conditions, and Trade-offs. This framework assumes that you are providing advice in a context where you may not have the asker’s live data immediately in front of you—such as during a presentation or a preliminary discovery call. Even without a live dashboard, the PACT framework allows you to provide an answer that is 100% more useful than a simple “it depends.”
P: Process – Providing a Structured Path to the Answer
For diagnostic and prescriptive questions, the most valuable thing you can give someone is a map. If you cannot give them the final answer because you lack their specific data, you can give them the exact process you would use to find that answer.
As David Rodnitzky famously noted, an agency without a process is just a collection of individuals running around doing things. High-level PPC management requires repeatable structures. When a client asks a “why” or “should I” question, your response should be a walk-through of your internal methodology.
The Power of Flowcharts and Decision Trees
Visual aids are incredibly effective at breaking down the “it depends” wall. One of the most legendary examples in the industry is the Rimm-Kaufman Group’s (now Merkle) performance troubleshooting flowchart from their Dossier 3.2. It took the massive, daunting question of “Why did my performance drop?” and turned it into a series of binary “Yes/No” checkpoints.
By providing a flowchart, you shift the conversation from a vague mystery to a logical investigation. You can show the user how to check for technical errors, then competitive shifts, then seasonal trends, and finally landing page issues. Similarly, for “Should I?” questions, decision trees—like those used by Aleyda Solis for SEO decision-making—help stakeholders visualize the logic behind a strategic pivot.
A: Anchors – Grounding the Conversation with Data and Examples
An “anchor” is a piece of evidence-based data that provides a baseline for the conversation. Instead of saying a result “depends” on the industry, you provide the industry standards and explain how they vary. This grounds the hypothetical in reality.
Using Benchmarks Effectively
Benchmarks are the most common form of anchors. If someone asks what a “good” conversion rate is for an e-commerce store, “it depends” is technically true, but saying “The average for health and beauty is 3.3%, while electronics usually sits around 1.9%” provides immediate value. The more specific the benchmark (segmented by industry, platform, or region), the more authoritative your answer becomes.
The “Usual Suspects” and the 80/20 Rule
In many PPC scenarios, the Pareto Principle applies: 80% of problems are caused by 20% of the variables. Instead of a 50-step process, you can offer a “Usual Suspects” list. If a CPA spikes, you can say: “Usually, it’s one of these five things: a change in tracking, a new competitor entering the auction, a budget cap being hit, a negative keyword conflict, or a landing page error. Check these first.” This gives the asker a high-probability starting point.
The Weight of Case Studies
Real-world examples are powerful anchors. If a client asks what will happen if they consolidate their campaigns, you can share a specific (anonymized) result: “In a recent account spending $50k a month, we consolidated 12 campaigns into four. We saw a 20% improvement in CPA after the initial 14-day learning period, though we did lose some granular reporting on specific product categories.” This moves the answer from a “maybe” to a documented “this is what happened before.”
C: Conditions – Naming the Hidden Variables
When you say “it depends,” what you are really saying is that the answer is conditional. The PACT framework suggests that instead of being vague, you should explicitly name those conditions. This shifts the burden of the “dependency” back onto the data points that matter.
The “If [X], Then [Y]” Logic
This is the most direct replacement for “it depends.” If a client asks, “What happens if I double my budget?” your answer should be structured around the conditions of their specific auction. For example:
- “If your current Impression Share is below 50% and you are budget-constrained, doubling the budget could nearly double your conversions.”
- “If your Impression Share is already 90%, doubling the budget will likely lead to significantly higher CPAs as you fight for the final, most expensive clicks in the auction.”
By framing the answer this way, you are teaching the client how the system works while providing a range of possible outcomes based on their current status.
The Reversibility Test: Type 1 vs. Type 2 Decisions
Another way to use conditions is to categorize the decision itself. Jeff Bezos famously popularized the concept of Type 1 and Type 2 decisions. Type 1 decisions are “one-way doors”—they are irreversible or very expensive to undo (like changing your entire domain or restructuring a decade-old account architecture). Type 2 decisions are “two-way doors”—they are easily reversible (like testing a new ad headline or a different bidding strategy).
When someone asks if they should try something, the condition of reversibility is a great guide. If it’s a Type 2 decision, the answer isn’t “it depends”; the answer is “The risk is low, so we should test it and see.” This empowers teams to move faster on low-stakes experiments.
T: Trade-offs – Surfacing the Choices
In high-level digital marketing, there is rarely a “perfect” choice. Every strategic move involves a sacrifice. When experts say “it depends,” they are often struggling with the fact that every path has a downside. The PACT framework encourages you to be transparent about these trade-offs.
Balancing Competing Priorities
Instead of searching for the “right” answer, explain the options and what each one gives up. A classic PPC example is campaign consolidation. If you consolidate, you gain more data for Google’s AI to learn (Smart Bidding), but you lose the ability to set specific budgets for specific product lines. The trade-off is Learning Speed vs. Granular Control.
By presenting the trade-off, you allow the stakeholder to decide which priority is more important to the business right now. You aren’t just an ad manager; you are a strategic consultant helping them navigate business choices.
Calculators and Interactive Logic
Sometimes, the best way to explain a trade-off is to let the user run the numbers. Tools like a “Build vs. Buy” calculator or a Target ROAS calculator allow users to input their own margins and risk tolerance. When the user sees that a higher ROAS target might result in lower total volume, they understand the trade-off through their own data. This turns a subjective “it depends” into a mathematical reality.
Implementing the PACT Framework in Your Daily Workflow
Moving away from a decade-long habit of saying “it depends” won’t happen overnight. However, you can start small by utilizing a “cheat sheet” based on the type of question you are asked.
If you are asked a Diagnostic question (Why?), reach for a Process (Flowchart) or a Condition (Checklist). If you are asked a Predictive question (What will happen?), reach for an Anchor (Benchmark/Case Study) or a Condition (If/Then logic). If you are asked a Prescriptive question (What should I do?), reach for Trade-offs or Processes (Decision Trees).
Adopting the PACT framework does more than just provide better answers; it builds professional authority. It demonstrates that you have a deep understanding of the mechanics of PPC and that you are confident enough to share your logic with others. In an era where AI can provide basic facts, the value of a human expert lies in their ability to navigate nuance and provide a clear path forward through the “it depends” fog.
Conclusion: Setting a Higher Standard for PPC Experts
The goal of the PACT framework isn’t to pretend that PPC isn’t complex. It is to acknowledge that complexity and provide a structured way to handle it. Whether you are writing a blog post, presenting to a CMO, or mentoring a junior buyer, try to catch yourself the next time those two words rise to the tip of your tongue.
By replacing “it depends” with a process, an anchor, a condition, or a trade-off, you provide clarity where there was once confusion. You move from being a technician who manages a platform to a strategist who manages outcomes. The next time you are faced with a difficult question, remember that your audience isn’t looking for a perfect prediction—they are looking for a professional direction.