Message governance and attribution for B2B GTM · Design partner release

You know which channel produced the pipeline. You don't know which message did.

Naros holds your positioning as a structured system, drafts every campaign asset from one governed messaging decision, and keeps that decision identifiable into HubSpot and LinkedIn. Performance comes back by message, not only by channel.

Apply as a design partner Run the two checks first

For B2B SaaS marketing teams running demand gen on HubSpot · Six places

No customers yet. Everything on this page is either something you can verify yourself, or something we are telling you is not built.

01 / The problem

Your CRM reports the channel. It has no field for the message.

Every company at your stage already has the pieces — positioning, ICP definitions, a CRM, campaigns across five or six channels, dashboards on all of it. What nobody has is the thing that connects them. Your CRM reports the channel that produced the leads and has no field for the message that converted them. So the campaign that worked cannot be repeated on purpose, and the one that failed cannot be ruled out. It produces numbers. It cannot produce knowledge.

The three ways this goes wrong, and how Naros closes it →

02 / Why your stack can't close it

Every tool you have does its job well. None of them owns the messaging decision.

This is not a gap you close by adding another tool in one of these categories. It sits between them.

What you use

What it does well

What it cannot own

Docs & Notion

Hold your positioning, ICPs and messaging framework in one readable place.

A document has no authority over the campaign being built on Tuesday. It informs. It cannot govern.

People & agencies

Turn strategy into strong, context-aware campaigns that a template never could.

Every handoff is another interpretation. Quality depends on who was briefed, and on what they remembered.

AI tools

Produce good copy fast, and get better when you give them your framework as context.

Each prompt is an isolated event. Output improves. No record survives of which strategic decision each output represents.

HubSpot & channels

Launch campaigns, capture engagement and track what happens downstream.

They report the variables that were sent to them. The messaging decision was never one of them.

Analytics & BI

Slice performance by channel, campaign, source, audience and funnel stage.

Rich data at the wrong grain. Cost per channel, not per message. Reports tied to campaign names, not to arguments.

Engineering has version control. Sales has a CRM. Finance has a ledger. Each of them took a thing the company depends on and made it a record instead of a habit. Messaging never got that layer, which is why it still runs on documents, briefs and whoever was in the room. Your company has a strategy. It governs nothing you actually say.

03 / How Naros works · one thing survives the journey

Your strategy already exists. It just never reaches the report.

Naros adds one layer between the strategy you own and the tools you run. Every campaign is composed from one governed messaging decision, and that decision keeps an identity of its own, so what comes back is legible by message and not only by channel.

Everything in magenta is the same messaging decision. Follow it down the page.

Strategy

Yours, unchanged

PositioningICP definitions Persona profilesMessaging framework Competitive landscape

The work you already did, or the company material that contains it. Naros does not replace it. Today none of it carries into execution, which is why the line beside it is broken.

your strategy, structured

Naros

The one layer added

Structure

Your framework stops being a document and becomes a system execution can read, edit and inherit from.

Govern

Every campaign is composed from one explicit decision, checked against a codified methodology before anything is generated.

Identify

That decision is given an identity of its own, so it can be recognised again when results come back.

BLK-001

The messaging decision, now a thing with a name. This is the object everything below is about.

38 rules passed · 1 advisory

No CRM to migrate, no reporting to rebuild, no channel to re-platform.

one governed decision, carrying its identity, into every surface

Execution

Your tools, unchanged

HubSpot email BLK-001

Landing page BLK-001

LinkedIn Sponsored BLK-001

Lead Gen Form BLK-001

Content brief BLK-001

Each channel still sounds like itself. Angles, hooks, formats and length stay free to differ. The argument underneath does not.

outcomes come back, with the message still attached

Reporting

Your tools, one new dimension

ChannelCampaignSource AudienceFunnel stage Message BLK-001

The reporting you already trust, with the one variable it never had. Naros measures what Naros governs, so activity it did not produce stays outside the picture by design.

Each of these six steps in full, how the framework inherits across levels, and what the AI is structurally prevented from doing →

04 / Reporting by message

The dimension your reporting never had.

Your GTM reporting already knows where performance came from. It has never known what you were saying when it happened.

Block performance — primary attribution view Which value proposition drives pipeline

Block	Value proposition	ICP / Persona	Funnel	Leads	MQL %	SQLs	Pipeline
BLK-001	Predict and prevent churn with prescribed interventions, not health scores	Growth-Stage · VP Customer Success	MOFU	312	18.6%	47	€247K
BLK-002	Cut the reporting cycle from three weeks to three days	Growth-Stage · VP Customer Success	MOFU	198	17.5%	31	€189K
BLK-003	Stop paying for renewals your team could have savedvolume, no depth	Enterprise · Head of CS Ops	TOFU	274	9.1%	12	€61K

Real product screen, restyled with the new design system · the figures are what the product shows

Look at the third row. It produced more leads than the second and a fifth of the pipeline. That is a messaging finding, not a channel one, and no report in your stack would surface it today.

What this is not

Naros attributes outcomes to messages under a defined, configurable model. It shows association, not causation. Where the evidence does not support an assignment, the outcome stays unattributed rather than credited to a guess. Naros measures what Naros governs, so activity it did not produce stays outside the picture by design.

05 / What runs today

What runs today, and what does not.

Naros is in design-partner release. Everything on this page is either something you can verify yourself, or something we are telling you is not built. This table sits on the homepage rather than in a footer on purpose: found later, it would read like something we had hidden.

Working today

Framework generated from your own materialCorporate, ICP and persona level, fully editable
Governed campaign creationNo campaign without a validated messaging decision
Validation before launch22 deterministic rules that block the save, 16 AI-assisted checks that never do
Versioned messagesA launched campaign keeps the version it ran with
HubSpot and LinkedIn executionEmail, landing pages, Sponsored Content, Lead Gen Forms
Message-level attribution, HubSpot emailVerified event-level, end to end
Performance by message and channelSliced by ICP, persona and funnel stage

Not verified yet

Web and UTM attributionDocumented, not tested live. We are not claiming event-level web attribution until it is.
LinkedIn attribution precisionA governed channel, but it does not measure at the precision email does, and we will not pretend otherwise.
Customer resultsZero customers, zero measured outcomes. Any number on this page would be invented, so there are none.

And what Naros
will not do

It will not publish or send on your behalf.Assets arrive in your stack as drafts and your team activates them. A permanent decision, not a current limitation.
It will not claim a message caused a result.Attribution assigns credit under a defined model. Causation requires a different method, and we will not blur the two.
It will not invent attribution.Where the evidence does not support an assignment, the outcome stays unattributed. A gap is more useful to you than a guess.
It will not replace your CRM or your reporting.Naros adds a dimension to the stack you already run. Nothing gets migrated.

Proof Two checks you can run on your own systems in about twenty minutes, before you talk to us. → Your data What we do with what you give us, and how Naros uses HubSpot and LinkedIn — read, write, and why. →

06 / Design partner program

Six design partner places. We are filling them now.

If your team is running real campaigns and cannot answer which message is working, that is the problem we are building for. Design partners run their own messaging, their own campaigns and their own data through the product, and shape what gets built next.

Six places, open now · reviewed within five working days

No cost during the design partner period. What we ask for instead is candour: that you use Naros on campaigns that matter, and tell us where it gets in the way.

Behind every generation sits a documented GTM methodology, v1.0: market context, funnel stage logic, ICP to persona architecture, ACV economics, channel selection and a controlled vocabulary for message framing. Design partners get access to it during the pilot.

Naros · the mechanism, in full

The homepage makes the argument. This page shows the machine.

If you are deciding whether to put real campaigns through an early product, this is the page to read. Every step below is either working today or marked as not built. Nothing here is aspiration written in the present tense.

Apply as a design partner Run the two checks first

Six places · open now

01 / The problem, in full

Three ways this goes wrong. They end the same way.

Every company at your stage already has the pieces. Positioning of some kind, ICP definitions, a CRM, campaigns across five or six channels, dashboards on all of it. What nobody has is the thing that connects them.

STATE 01

There is no framework

Every campaign argues whatever its author believes that week. The cost: the team rebuilds the same strategic argument on every campaign, because the last one left no trace.

STATE 02

There is a framework nobody opens

It went into a drive and has no authority over the Tuesday the campaign gets built. The cost: the positioning you paid for never reaches the market it was written for.

STATE 03

There is a framework and five different prompts

Each person interprets the positioning their own way, and not one interpretation is recorded. The cost: the volume scaled. The governance did not.

All three end the same way. Your CRM reports the channel that produced the leads and has no field for the message that converted them. So the campaign that worked cannot be repeated on purpose, and the one that failed cannot be ruled out. It produces numbers. It cannot produce knowledge.

01 / The six steps

One of them happens once. The other five happen every campaign.

That asymmetry is the whole adoption cost. There is no migration, no reporting to rebuild and no channel to re-platform, because Naros sits beside the stack rather than inside it.

Setuponce

Naros reads the material you already have and structures it into a framework, at every level of your go-to-market.

Your positioning, sales decks, website, whatever contains the argument you make today. You do not start again. Corporate, ICP and persona today, with product level next. You review and edit every part of it, and where your material is too generic to execute from, it says so rather than accepting it.

This happens once, at onboarding. Everything below it happens per campaign, and the framework is edited from then on rather than rebuilt.

Every campaignfrom then on

You choose the ICP, the persona and the funnel stage.

These are not free fields. They come from the framework you approved in step 01, and the internal methodology resolves that framework for the combination you pick — ranking the channels that fit the stage and narrowing the framings to the ones your material actually supports.

ICPGrowth-stage B2B SaaSMid-marketEnterprise

PersonaVP MarketingHead of Demand GenCRO

Funnel stageTOFUMOFUBOFU

FramingOutcome clarityRisk reductionCost of inactionCategory creationMechanism differentiationIntegration advantageUnfair advantage

The four struck through assert a moat. Your framework has not established a differentiator, so they cannot be selected. Establish it and they become available. Channels are ranked, never blocked — pick the one it advises against and that choice is recorded against the message. The framing rule is the one place the product does say no.

The assistant composes the messaging decision with you, inside those limits.

It proposes the problem, the value proposition, the proof and the framing, drawn from the level of the framework that applies to that buyer. You edit any of it. What comes out is one decision with a name, and that name is what everything downstream is built from.

Checked as you edit, not after you launch. Twenty-two deterministic rules run while you edit, debounced, and block the save if they fail. Sixteen AI-assisted checks run after generation, asynchronously, and never block.

BLK-001AudienceProblem Value propositionFramingProof

You approve the decision. Only then does anything get written.

Naros drafts each asset in the form its channel needs. Angles, hooks, formats and length stay free to differ. The argument underneath does not.

HubSpot demand gen & nurture email Live

Landing pages Live

LinkedIn Sponsored Content Live

Lead Gen Forms Live

Content briefs Live

Outbound sequences Next

Paid search Next

Document & Carousel Ads Next

Real product screen, restyled with the new design system.

The assets land in your own HubSpot and LinkedIn accounts, as drafts.

You connect the accounts once. From then on Naros pushes each asset into your own HubSpot and LinkedIn accounts, and your team activates them from there exactly as it does today. Naros never sends or publishes anything on your behalf. That is a permanent decision, not a current limitation.

Nothing changes about who approves a campaign, who schedules it or where it goes out from. The only difference is what the asset arrives carrying.

Every asset carries the identity of the decision it came from.

So performance returns by message and not only by channel. Inside Naros, an attribution view shows what each message actually produced: engagement, conversions and funnel outcomes, read against the argument that was running at the time rather than against a campaign name.

Slice the same performance by

MessageChannelICPPersonaFunnel stageProduct · next

Block performance — primary attribution viewLive data

Block	Value proposition	Funnel	Leads	MQL %	Pipeline
BLK-001	Predict and prevent churn with prescribed interventions, not health scores	MOFU	312	18.6%	€247K
BLK-002	Cut the reporting cycle from three weeks to three days	MOFU	198	17.5%	€189K
BLK-003	Stop paying for renewals your team could have savedvolume, no depth	TOFU	274	9.1%	€61K

Real product screen, restyled with the new design system · the figures are what the product shows

Roadmap · not built yet
Once there is enough history behind you, the same evidence starts working in the other direction: which value propositions, framings and proof points have held up for a given ICP and stage, surfaced while you are composing the next decision instead of found months later. That is the point of accumulating the record, and it is the part of the loop still to come.

03 / Where the AI sits

The question is not whether there is AI in here. It is what it cannot do.

Messaging volume rose sharply once anyone could generate a campaign in a minute. Governance did not. Naros generates too, and most of what makes it different is a description of what the model is structurally prevented from doing.

It reads your material once

Only the first step touches your source documents. Everything after it works from the framework you confirmed, so no later step can introduce a claim your framework does not hold.

It declares gaps instead of filling them

Where your material does not support a differentiator or a proof point, it says so and names the evidence that would close it, rather than writing something confident.

It writes inside the decision, never around it

Tone, hook, format and length are the model's to choose. Who the message is for, what it claims and what backs it are not.

The rest of the constraints are the six steps themselves. Checked as you edit rather than after you launch. Approved by you before anything is written. Delivered as drafts you activate. None of that is a setting you can turn off.

04 / Validation

What blocks, what warns, and what gets recorded either way.

Governance that cannot be overridden becomes a template your team routes around. Governance that is never recorded is a suggestion. Naros does neither.

Deterministic · blocking

Twenty-two rules, and they stop the save

They run while you edit, debounced, and a failure blocks the save. The hardest of them is the framing rule: the four angles that assert a moat stay unselectable while your framework has no established differentiator. That one runs against you rather than for you.

AI-assisted · advisory

Sixteen checks, and none of them stop you

AI-assisted, run after generation and asynchronously: channel fit for the stage, thin proof, a value proposition the framework supports weakly. You can proceed against every one of them, because the person running the campaign usually knows something the rule does not.

Recorded

Whatever you chose, the version remembers

Every override is written against the version of the message that carries it. A launched campaign keeps the version it ran with, so when the numbers come back you are reading them against what was actually approved.

05 / Proof

Two checks you can run before you talk to us.

We have no customer results, so there is no logo wall here and no percentage without a source behind it. Here is what you can verify on your own systems in about twenty minutes.

Check one · 2 minutes

Open your positioning document and look at the last edit date

Then count the campaigns you have shipped since. If the second number is much larger than the first, the document is not governing anything, and nobody on your team did anything wrong.

What you are measuring whether your strategy has any route into execution at all.

Check two · 15 minutes

Pull any converted contact out of HubSpot

You will get the campaign name, the source and the lifecycle stage. Now try to retrieve which value proposition that contact actually encountered. There is no field, because nothing upstream ever wrote one.

What you are measuring whether the message exists as data in your stack. It does not.

And one you can run inside the product

Upload your thinnest, vaguest material and watch what it refuses to do

The system will decline to write you a differentiator your own documents do not support. It marks the gap, and then it closes the door on every framing that would have depended on that gap being filled. This is the only hard restriction in the product, and it runs against you rather than for you. If you are evaluating a governance product, that behaviour tells you more than any feature list.

BLK-004proof needed

Value proposition: Cut the reporting cycle from three weeks to three days
Differentiator: Not established. Your material does not support a claim of uniqueness here.

Framings available

Outcome clarityRisk reductionCost of inaction Category creationMechanism differentiation Integration advantageUnfair advantage

The four struck through assert a moat. Your framework has not established one, so they are greyed out and cannot be selected. Establish the differentiator and they become available.

08 / Your material and your data

What we do with what you give us, and what we have not decided yet.

You are being asked to upload your positioning and connect a HubSpot account. Two things are true today and can be checked. One is not written yet, and saying so is better than a paragraph that sounds reassuring and commits to nothing.

What happens to your material and your data

Naros does not store your contacts, and does not modify your data

People live in your CRM and stay there; what Naros keeps is counts and identifiers. It writes its own metadata against a campaign and does not touch your business properties.

Naros measures only what it governs, and names its AI provider

Activity it did not produce stays outside the picture by design. Use of the Anthropic API is declared explicitly in the onboarding consent, with its DPA — not folded into a general policy.

Not decided yet

What happens at the end of the pilot: whether data is deleted, retained, or exported, and whether we can cite your results as a reference. That policy is being written before the first design partner conversation, and it will be agreed with you in writing rather than assumed.

What Naros does with each platform

Naros governs the message a campaign carries. To report performance by message rather than only by channel, it needs to know which campaign a lead came from. It does not read anything it did not produce.

HubSpot

Writes

Its own metadata against campaigns and contacts, so the message a campaign carries is recorded where the campaign lives.

Reads

Lifecycle and deal data back, so a lead can be followed from the campaign that produced it to the pipeline it became.

Why

So that a lead can be attributed to the message it came from, not only to the channel.

Writes

Creates ad content, carrying the governed message into the campaign.

Reads

Identifies which campaign produced a lead.

Why

So that lead can be attributed to the message it came from.

06 / What this means for your team

Questions your team cannot answer today.

Not all of them arrive at once. This is a curve, not a switch, and it is worth knowing which part arrives when.

Week one

Which argument are we actually making, and does everyone have the same one?

Your positioning stops being a document nobody opens and becomes something execution reads. If two people on your team would describe your differentiator differently, you find that out immediately.

Every campaign after that

Who is this for, what are we claiming, and can we back it?

Composed in minutes from something that already exists, instead of rebuilt from scratch by whoever is running the campaign that week. The strategic argument stops being re-derived every time.

After five campaigns Modelled · no customer has reached this yet

Which of our value propositions is landing with this ICP, and which one only looked good in the document?

For the first time this is a comparison rather than an opinion, because the messages were structured before they ran.

After twenty Modelled · no customer has reached this yet

What should we scale, what has earned another test, and what should we stop repeating?

The second half of that question is the one that saves budget, and it is the one nobody can answer today.

And the one you get asked in the board meeting

Which message is producing pipeline with our best-fit buyers?

Today the honest answer is judgement. That is the answer this replaces.

This compounds, and nothing else in your stack does.

Every other tool in the messaging chain resets when the next campaign starts. Here, campaign twenty is composed against nineteen campaigns of evidence about what worked with whom. The messages become the asset, and they accumulate.

07 / Questions

The ones people ask first.

What if we already have a messaging framework?

Good. Bring it. Naros uses your existing messaging work as source material, structures it into the framework execution runs from, and lets you review and edit every part of it. The objective is to make good strategic work operational, not to replace it.

What if our messaging isn't well defined?

That is more common than the alternative, and it is not a prerequisite you have to solve before you start. Naros builds the structured framework from the company material you already have, and challenges the answers that are too generic to execute from rather than accepting them.

Does Naros replace HubSpot?

No. Naros sits upstream of execution and alongside the stack you already run. HubSpot remains your CRM and your execution system. Naros adds the structured messaging decision those systems do not model, and hands it back so their reporting can finally carry it.

Does message-level attribution prove what caused a conversion?

No, and we are careful about the difference. Attribution assigns credit under a defined, configurable model. Causation requires a separate method. What Naros does is make the message observable, so it can become part of a better decision instead of remaining the one variable nobody could see.

More questions, including setup effort and how activation works →

06 / Design partner program

You have seen the machine. The rest is whether it fits your team.

Six places, filling now. Design partners run their own messaging, their own campaigns and their own data through the product, and shape what gets built next.

Six places, open now · reviewed within five working days

Apply as a design partner Run the two checks first

You know which channel produced the pipeline. You don't know which message did.

Your CRM reports the channel. It has no field for the message.

Every tool you have does its job well. None of them owns the messaging decision.

Your strategy already exists. It just never reaches the report.

The dimension your reporting never had.

What runs today, and what does not.

Six design partner places. We are filling them now.

The homepage makes the argument. This page shows the machine.

Three ways this goes wrong. They end the same way.

There is no framework

There is a framework nobody opens

There is a framework and five different prompts

One of them happens once. The other five happen every campaign.

The question is not whether there is AI in here. It is what it cannot do.

What blocks, what warns, and what gets recorded either way.

Two checks you can run before you talk to us.

Open your positioning document and look at the last edit date

Pull any converted contact out of HubSpot

Upload your thinnest, vaguest material and watch what it refuses to do

What we do with what you give us, and what we have not decided yet.

Questions your team cannot answer today.

The ones people ask first.

You have seen the machine. The rest is whether it fits your team.

Privacy policy

Who we are

What we collect

What we do not do

The platforms you connect

The AI provider

What is not decided yet

Your rights

Terms of service

What Naros is

The design partner programme

Your data and material

What Naros is not

Honest limits

Changes