Skip to content

Data, reconciliation & reportingClient work

Measurement Plan and Event Taxonomy for Your Product Team

I define what each product event means, where it comes from, who owns it and how your team proves it matches a real business action.

For
Product teams building or changing their measurement
Checked

Sounds familiar?

Tick what applies to you

The situation Data, reconciliation & reporting
Everyone has an event list. Nobody has the same definition of an event.

Tick the lines that describe your case.

Describe my task

How I solve it

What I build

I build a measurement plan your team can implement and review. It starts with business questions, then defines the events that can answer them. Each entry records its source of truth, trigger, payload, identity, destinations and acceptance checks. I include versioning and ownership so the plan can survive the next product release.

The process

How it works

6 steps. Scope and a fixed price are agreed before the first one.

  1. Agree the decisions the team needs to make and the records that can support them.

  2. Inventory existing events and resolve conflicting definitions.

  3. Define names, triggers, required fields and the owner of each business action.

  4. Specify duplicate handling, consent behaviour and identity gaps.

  5. Give the developer synthetic payloads and tests for success, failure and retries.

  6. Agree the rollout, QA responsibilities and how later changes are reviewed.

Handover

What you get

  • A measurement plan tied to the team's actual questions.
  • An event dictionary with a source of truth and owner per event.
  • Synthetic examples and testable developer tasks.
  • A rollout checklist with open questions and unimplemented paths visible.

Built with

  • An event dictionary
  • business-record definitions
  • typed payload examples
  • browser and server collection maps
  • destination mappings
  • a QA matrix
  • a versioned change log

Proof

Done before, with dates and numbers

Client work Done for real clients. Client details are anonymised.

Before → after

For the marketplace, conflicting event counts became canonical event and backend-truth contracts, with versioned changes and rollback. The specification covered more than the accepted implementation: offers were not deployed and purchase instrumentation had not started. The SaaS backing is an audit, with no completed revenue pipeline implied.

  • UK online marketplace

    canonical event and backend-truth contracts, with explicit ownership and change records. Acceptance remained provisional and purchase instrumentation had not started.

  • SaaS scheduling platform

    measurement audit. This backs the diagnosis and planning work; a completed SaaS revenue pipeline is not claimed.

What you can look at

The marketplace event-contract case shows why event identity and backend truth need a shared contract. The proposed handover for your team is a synthetic event dictionary and QA matrix, with a created account, a failed submission and a repeated callback shown separately.

Anonymised backing includes an event-contract engagement and a SaaS audit. Audit findings, specification and accepted implementation are distinct deliverables.

Price and timeline

What it costs and how it runs

A Tracking Health Check is USD 395 for one agreed measurement problem. A wider contract and implementation can be a Custom Engineering Project from USD 1,500. I quote the planning, implementation and QA scope explicitly so an approved dictionary is not mistaken for a deployed system.

QuoteFixed before work starts

Price
Tracking Health Check USD 395 for one agreed measurement problem; Custom Engineering Project from USD 1,500 for a wider contract and implementation. Discussing the task is free.
Timeline
Health Check: written verdict two working days after kickoff and confirmed access. A wider measurement plan and rollout are scoped and dated in writing.
First step
Describe the task. I reply within one working day, free, and tell you which option fits — or that you can fix it yourself.
Describe a task like this

A note from Daniilbefore you decide

When you don’t need this

If your team already has shared definitions, named owners and repeatable acceptance tests, extend the existing plan. If the only problem is one broken event, a bounded fix may be enough.

— Daniil

Questions

What people ask about this

Is an event taxonomy just a naming convention?

Names are one part. Each event also needs a business definition, a producer, fields, identity rules, consent behaviour, a destination and a test.

Does this include instrumenting every event?

Only if implementation is in the agreed scope. A plan can be handed to your developer, with QA and rollout quoted separately.

More like this

All situations
Daniil Maximkin

Hi, I’m Daniil.

I work with you from defining the problem to implementation and handover. You talk to the person who does the work. I work in English and Russian.

My story My work

Have a task like this?

Describe your task

The first answer is free, within one working day. Or write directly: next@taskfordaniel.com