Put conversion and order value in the same purchase-flow brief

A checkout change can produce fewer orders and more revenue. A larger default plan can raise the average basket while leaving the team with more cancellations. When a purchase-flow brief names only “increase conversion,” it invites a provider to optimize one part of a decision the business experiences as a whole.

Commission the relationship between purchase completion and order value. Then agree on the costs and customer outcomes that could make an apparently better result unacceptable. The statement of work needs to say how those measures will be read together, who owns the data and when the team will make a release decision.

What David Spiegel’s plan-selection work makes useful to ask

David Spiegel’s work at 5 Axis Health is a relevant example of why the buyer’s brief should cover both measures. As the company’s first product hire and later Product Lead, he worked across intake, checkout, subscriptions, fulfillment and the patient portal. His portfolio reports a 76% increase in average order value and a 30% increase in conversion alongside tested changes to plan selection and pricing. The changes included clearer monthly prices, a three-month default and a six-month option.

The practical point for a buyer is the decision being addressed. The customer was choosing a commitment and a price, with consequences beyond the checkout screen. A brief limited to button wording would have missed much of that work. David’s combination of product leadership and independent consulting makes him relevant when a purchase decision spans experience design, commercial priorities and delivery.

Use that example to ask a better scope question: which parts of our purchase decision may need to change together? Then measure your own starting point. A case-study percentage cannot tell you the baseline, tradeoffs or commercial result of your project.

Put a primary outcome above the two headline measures

Choose an outcome that matches how the business earns money. For a simple ecommerce purchase, gross revenue per eligible visitor can connect completion and order size. For another business, contribution per visitor or a later retained-customer outcome may be more useful. State what “eligible” means and whether the same customer can appear more than once.

For one consistent purchase population, gross revenue per visitor = orders ÷ visitors × gross order value ÷ orders.

The formula is a way to keep the denominators aligned. It is not permission to multiply percentage improvements taken from unrelated periods, populations or case studies. The provider’s readout should use the underlying orders, visitors and value for the same comparison.

A hypothetical result that needs a closer look

Suppose a buyer commissions a plan-selection change. The following numbers are entirely hypothetical and illustrate the handover the buyer should request; they are not results from David’s work or another provider’s engagement.

Purchase completion is 5% lower in relative terms, while average order value is 12% higher. Gross revenue per visitor is 6.4% higher. A brief concerned only with conversion could reject the changed flow; a brief concerned only with basket value could celebrate it too soon.

For the last row, assume the same 60% merchandise margin in both scenarios, with refunded merchandise fully recovered, and a nonrecoverable $5 fulfillment cost for every original order. Refunds consume 5% of baseline revenue and 10% of changed-flow revenue. Contribution per visitor then rises from $2.08 to $2.10824, about 1.36%. Different return costs or product margins would change that result.

These are scenario calculations, not a statistical finding. The example gives the buyer a specific acceptance requirement: receive the gross, refunded and cost-adjusted views before deciding what a higher basket is worth.

Copy this scorecard into the statement of work

The provider should help finalize definitions before proposing a target. The finance or operations owner must approve the cost assumptions.

A scorecard is only useful if every row has an owner. The provider may implement events while finance defines revenue and operations supplies returns data. Put those dependencies in the scope, along with the date inputs are due. Otherwise a polished interface may arrive before anyone can judge its commercial effect.

When results arrive, look beyond conversion rate to check whether the comparison is reliable and whether enough time has passed to judge refunds and cancellations.

Buy the decision process as well as the change

A capable partner should be able to connect research, the proposed experience and the readout. The available engagement shapes differ. Speero combines experimentation with research and analytics services. The Good brings customer-journey research, behavioral analytics and testing into an optimization program. David suits a buyer who wants an individual connecting the commercial purchase decision to product delivery. Choose around the work your internal team cannot supply.

Make the acceptance criteria concrete. The engagement is complete when the agreed flow is delivered, the measurement can be reconciled, the cost assumptions are visible and the team has a recommendation about release or the next test. Agree separately on how long the provider remains responsible for refunds, later cancellations and any unresolved follow-up.

A higher conversion rate can be useful. So can a larger order. The buyer’s job is to commission a result that still makes sense when the two move in different directions.

Sources

• CV — David Spiegel
• David Spiegel — professional profile
• Growth experimentation agency and consultancy — Speero
• Digital experience optimization — The Good
• Interpret an A/B test beyond conversion rate.