Custom Intent Data: How to Choose the Signals That Fit Your Buyers

Custom intent data starts with your definition of a good customer. You choose the topics, relevant websites, and buying signals that make sense for your offer, then use sales feedback to refine that starting point. Cortex Marketing AI positions this control at the center of its two-way intent approach. The result is a process built around your market rather than a category selected for everyone.

Start with the purchase decision

Write down the decision your customer is trying to make before selecting a keyword. Someone researching warehouse automation might need sensors, consulting, software, or an entire conveyor system. Those purchases have different budgets, decision makers, and timelines. A useful signal map separates the problems your company solves from adjacent interests. Interview a salesperson who can describe recent successful deals. Ask which questions appeared early, what alternatives the buyer considered, and what finally made the opportunity a good fit. Those details provide a stronger starting point than a long list of loosely related terms.

Use three source categories

Organize potential sources into direct solution research, comparison research, and background education. Direct solution research concerns the exact job your product performs. Comparison research considers alternatives, vendors, or implementation approaches. Background education explains the broader problem. All three can be useful, but they should not receive identical treatment. An educational reader may need a guide. An active evaluator may need a demonstration or an estimate. Availability and granularity of external signals vary, so confirm which sources and events can actually be used in your campaign.

Make exclusions part of the design

An exclusion is often as useful as an inclusion. A software company may want buyers researching paid implementations while excluding students looking for a free classroom example. A local business may need to exclude areas it cannot serve. A distributor may need to exclude products it does not stock or support. Write these boundaries beside the positive signals. This creates a shared definition that marketing, sales, and your data partner can discuss. It also gives you a practical way to investigate why an audience feels too broad.

How Cortex makes the learning specific to you

The Cortex difference is the combination of source control and customer-specific learning. For marketing managers, that means discussing the websites, topics, and buying signals that fit the offer, then using actual outcomes to refine the next audience decision.

According to Cortex’s product brief, scoring can begin about 24 hours after a list subscription. The model can learn from customer information fed into the process, including customers who were not on the original list. Useful feedback can come from qualified inquiries, won and lost opportunities, and relevant website or customer behavior available in the configured workflow.

The proprietary value is the learning connected to your niche, offer, geography, and sales cycle. It is not a promise that every signal guarantees a purchase or that every underlying contact is exclusive worldwide. Ask how the customer-specific model, source access, and data rights work in your agreement. The aim is an audience strategy that reflects your business more closely as reliable feedback accumulates.

This is the practical meaning of two-way intent data, sometimes searched as “2 way intent data” or “2 way data intent”: market information informs action, and business outcomes inform the next round of targeting.

A practical example to discuss with your team

The following scenario is hypothetical and illustrates a workflow, not a claimed client result.

A commercial cleaning company wants medical-office contracts, but broad cleaning interest also attracts residential shoppers and people researching household products. It narrows its source plan around commercial purchasing needs.

The first decision is what to count. The team defines a positive outcome as an inquiry matching your solution, budget range, and buying timeline. It also records interest in a related topic that your product cannot solve separately, so activity does not automatically become a success in the report. This creates a more useful basis for reviewing the audience.

The proposed source discussion includes:

1. Commercial service comparisons.
2. Research about recurring facility maintenance.
3. Customer outcomes from the intended business segment.

After the campaign begins, the team reviews actual records rather than relying only on a summary score. It checks whether the right people received attention, whether follow-up happened, and whether the outcome labels describe what the buyer confirmed. If the evidence points to a source mismatch, it revises the source plan. If the audience fits but execution failed, it addresses the operational problem.

The review focuses on sales acceptance rate. The team keeps the offer and major process changes visible so it can interpret the result. The lesson is a repeatable decision process: use the signal to form a hypothesis, use the conversation to confirm fit, and use the outcome to improve the next hypothesis.

Use a source map your team can explain

A practical source map connects each input with a reason it might matter. For a defined solution for a specific buyer problem, consider these starting categories: commercial service comparisons; research about recurring facility maintenance; customer outcomes from the intended business segment. They are planning inputs to discuss, not a claim that every possible event is available from every provider. Confirm the actual coverage, granularity, and refresh expectations before relying on a source.

For each category, ask which buying question it helps answer. Does it suggest awareness of the problem, comparison of options, or a later-stage decision? The same source can contain several kinds of activity, so keep the interpretation proportionate to the evidence. A topic match is not a substitute for qualification.

Give every source a purpose and an owner for review. If a source repeatedly produces poor-fit inquiries, investigate the reason. It may need a narrower definition, a different message, or removal from the pilot. If a source produces fewer but stronger opportunities, do not discard it solely because its volume is lower.

The value of customization is that you can have this discussion in concrete terms. Instead of accepting an unexplained audience, you can ask what went into it and what the outcomes suggest changing. Keep the map short enough to use in an ordinary working meeting. It should support decisions, not become a complicated document that nobody updates.

Design a comparison that answers a real question

A pilot becomes easier to evaluate when you specify the alternative. Compare the intent approach with your current process for a defined solution for a specific buyer problem, using the same definition of a qualified outcome. Keep the offer, service area, and follow-up expectations reasonably consistent where practical. Otherwise, several changes can make the result difficult to interpret.

Decide in advance that sales acceptance rate is one of the measures the team will review. Also record the volume behind the rate. A promising percentage based on two conversations should not receive the same confidence as a stable pattern across a larger, relevant set of outcomes. Small samples can guide the next test without establishing a universal conclusion.

Track meaningful campaign changes as they happen. A new price, different salesperson, improved response time, or unavailable product can affect results independently of the audience. You do not need a complicated research program to keep those facts visible. A simple dated change log can make the review much more useful.

At the end of the test, ask what the evidence supports. You may have a reason to expand, refine the source map, improve execution, or observe longer. A useful pilot does not have to produce a dramatic result immediately. It should reduce uncertainty about a commercial decision and make the next step clearer than it was before you started.

Look for the reasons behind poor-fit inquiries

When a campaign produces poor-fit inquiries, group them by reason before making a broad judgment. In the context of a defined solution for a specific buyer problem, the issue might be an unsupported need, unsuitable territory, wrong buying stage, or a misunderstanding created by the message. Those problems require different fixes. A single bad-lead category hides the distinction.

Review enough examples to identify a pattern. One unusual inquiry may not justify changing the campaign. Repeated requests for something you do not offer deserve attention. Check whether the source definition, ad, or page accidentally encourages that interpretation. Sometimes the right correction is a clearer explanation rather than a different audience.

Use exclusions deliberately. An exclusion should reflect a business reason you can explain, not frustration with a small sample. Keep a record of the change and review whether it improved qualified outcomes. If the exclusion removes too much useful volume, revisit the assumption.

This process gives negative feedback a constructive role. You are not simply marking records as failures; you are identifying which conditions make the campaign less relevant. Cortex’s two-way intent approach can incorporate those lessons into the customer-specific strategy. The result should be a more precise working definition of the buyers you can serve, supported by evidence from your own market rather than guesswork alone.

Read the result in the context of the buying cycle

The time between first interest and a completed purchase affects how you interpret the campaign. If a defined solution for a specific buyer problem involves several decisions, early responses may reveal fit before they reveal revenue. Keep those stages visible. An accepted opportunity is useful evidence, but it should not be reported as a completed customer.

Compare groups that have had a reasonable opportunity to progress. Newer inquiries naturally contain more unresolved outcomes. If you mix them with older records without explanation, the conversion rate can become misleading. A simple cohort view, organized by when inquiries entered the process, can help your team see the pattern.

Update delayed outcomes when they become known. A prospect who returns after a pause should not remain permanently labeled as a failure. Equally, a verbal expression of interest that never becomes a qualified opportunity should not stay in a success category indefinitely. Consistent updates make the feedback more informative.

Use the review to decide what to do next. If fit is strong and the sales cycle is simply unfinished, more observation may be appropriate. If fit is weak, waiting alone may not solve the problem. A two-way intent process is valuable when it helps distinguish those situations and refine the next action. The right response depends on the evidence, not on an arbitrary reporting deadline.

Questions to answer before the next campaign

Which sources can we select directly?

Start with the business definition in this guide and apply it to a few recent records. Where the team disagrees, clarify the rule before expanding the audience. A useful answer should change how you select, qualify, or serve a prospect.

What signal detail will be available for review?

Bring this question into the setup discussion with Cortex and the person responsible for follow-up. Confirm the actual workflow, available information, and ownership of the next action. Write down the answer so it remains clear after the campaign launches.

How do we remove an irrelevant topic or audience?

Start with a short source map you can explain. Add sources when they contribute relevant opportunities, and remove sources that consistently produce the wrong kind of inquiry.

Does a strong intent signal guarantee a customer?

No. A signal helps prioritize a possible opportunity. The buyer’s actual need, your offer, timing, and execution still influence the result. The advantage of a two-way process is that those real outcomes can help refine future decisions.

Make your next audience decision more informed

If you want to choose your custom intent sources, bring one priority offer, a few representative customer examples, and your main acquisition challenge. Cortex can help you discuss sources, signals, feedback, and a sensible first test.

Book a call with Cortex Marketing AI to explore a plan built around your customers. Explore Cortex’s custom buyer intelligence approach.