360 Secure SkillHub
360 安全技能中心

Creator Performance Audit

面向电商或品牌团队的影响力创作者投放审计:按完整成本、跨平台表现、互动真实性和转化贡献评估创作者,输出保留、加投、重谈或淘汰的决策与行动建议。

leooooooow
leooooooow
热度 51.85
最近更新 2026-07-06 23:16:21
分类:营销依赖:纯提示词应用场景:市场分析 / 报告撰写 / 社交媒体 / 推荐

安装技能

复制下面的话术发给你的 Agent,它会通过 secure-skills 检索并安装该技能。

执行命令安装此 skill: npx secure-skills-cli add creator-performance-audit
Metadata
name
creator-performance-audit
description
Audit creator/influencer performance for commerce teams — score creators on reach quality, engagement authenticity, conversion contribution, and cost efficiency, then output a keep/scale/renegotiate/drop decision with evidence.

Creator Performance Audit

Turn scattered creator campaign data into a clear keep / scale / renegotiate / drop decision.

Quick Reference

Decision Strong Acceptable Weak (avoid)
Success metric Revenue or profit per creator dollar (tracked links/codes) Engaged-view CPM + assisted conversions Follower count, raw likes
Attribution Dedicated codes/links + post-purchase survey Platform attribution with stated window "Sales went up that week"
Engagement check Engagement rate vs account's own 90-day baseline Vs category benchmark Vs global average across niches
Authenticity Comment quality sampling + follower growth curve Spot-check comments Trust the media kit
Cost basis Full cost: fee + product + shipping + usage rights + agency Fee + product cost Fee only
Verdict One of keep/scale/renegotiate/drop per creator, with thresholds Ranked tiers "Mixed results, continue monitoring"
Sample window Last 3-6 campaigns or 90 days Last 2 campaigns Single post

Solves

  1. Vanity-metric decisions — creators get renewed for likes and views that never convert.
  2. No cost truth — fees look fine until product, shipping, usage rights, and agency cuts are added.
  3. Fake or drifted audiences — inflated engagement, bought followers, or an audience that no longer matches the buyer profile.
  4. One-post judgments — a viral fluke or a flop drives the renewal decision instead of a stable sample.
  5. Un-comparable creators — TikTok CPMs vs Instagram saves vs YouTube AVD, with no common scorecard.
  6. No action at the end — audits that end in "interesting" instead of keep/scale/renegotiate/drop.

Use when

  • Deciding whether to renew, scale, renegotiate, or drop specific creators
  • Building a quarterly creator portfolio review
  • Comparing creators across platforms on one scorecard
  • Vetting a creator's real performance before a bigger commitment

Do not use when

  • Prospecting brand-new creators with no campaign history (that's vetting, not auditing — this skill only covers pre-commitment vetting checks partially)
  • You need raw data extraction without synthesis
  • The question is creative strategy, not performance

Inputs

  • Creator list with platform(s) and campaign history (posts, dates, deliverables)
  • Cost data: fees, product cost, shipping, usage rights, agency commissions
  • Performance data: impressions/views, engagement, clicks, conversions, revenue (tracked links/codes if available)
  • Business context: target audience, margin structure, campaign goals
  • Optional: category benchmarks, past audit results

Workflow

Step 1 — Fix the question and the window

Define what "performing" means for this business (profit per dollar, CAC vs blended CAC, content library value) and set the sample: minimum 2-3 campaigns or 90 days per creator. Note any creator being judged on a single post — flag as low-confidence.

Step 2 — Assemble full cost per creator

Fee + product cost + shipping + usage/whitelisting rights + agency commission + internal handling. This is the denominator for everything. See references/metrics-benchmarks.md for the cost checklist.

Step 3 — Normalize performance across platforms

Compute the common scorecard (references/metrics-benchmarks.md): engaged-view CPM, engagement rate vs the creator's own baseline, CTR, conversion rate, revenue per creator dollar. Platform-specific metrics stay as secondary evidence.

Step 4 — Run authenticity checks

Follower growth curve (spikes = suspicion), engagement-to-follower ratio vs category norms, comment quality sampling (generic emoji walls vs real questions), audience geo/demo match to buyer profile. See references/audit-framework.md.

Step 5 — Score and classify

Score each creator on the four axes (reach quality, engagement authenticity, conversion contribution, cost efficiency) and map to a verdict: keep / scale / renegotiate / drop, using the thresholds in references/audit-framework.md.

Step 6 — Write the action plan

Per creator: verdict, evidence (2-3 numbers), and the concrete next step (new rate, different deliverable, usage-rights renegotiation, replacement candidate). Portfolio-level: concentration risk, budget reallocation.

Step 7 — Self-check

Run assets/audit-checklist.md before delivering. Output follows references/output-template.md.

Worked Example 1 — Three creators, one budget

Input (summary): DTC skincare brand, 3 creators over 90 days.

Creator Platform Full cost Views Eng. rate Tracked revenue
A TikTok $6,800 (3 posts) 2.1M 6.2% $4,100
B Instagram $4,500 (4 posts) 380K 4.8% $9,700
C TikTok $9,000 (3 posts) 4.6M 1.1% $2,300

Output (verdict section):

B — SCALE. Revenue per dollar 2.16, best in portfolio; engagement steady vs her 90-day baseline (4.8% vs 4.5%); comments show purchase-intent questions. Action: propose 6-post quarterly package before her rates adjust; add usage rights for ads — her post #2 outperformed our best paid creative. A — KEEP (watch). RPD 0.60 looks weak, but 71% of tracked conversions came from the one post with a direct product demo; the two "lifestyle" posts converted ~0. Action: renew at same rate but change the brief to demo-format only; re-audit after 2 posts. C — DROP. RPD 0.26 with the portfolio's highest cost. Engagement 1.1% vs TikTok category norm ~4%; follower curve shows two +80K single-day spikes (likely purchased); comments are generic emoji strings. The 4.6M views are not reaching buyers. Action: do not renew; reallocate $9K → B's package ($6K) + test one new demo-style creator ($3K).

Worked Example 2 — Single creator renewal call

Input (summary): Gadget brand, creator on YouTube, $12K for 2 dedicated videos + 1 short. Views 640K total, AVD 4:10 on 9-minute videos, 3,900 clicks, 210 orders tracked ($18,900 revenue), gross margin 38%.

Output (verdict section):

RENEGOTIATE. Revenue per dollar 1.58 but margin-adjusted return is 0.60 — below the 0.8 renewal bar. The content itself performs (AVD 46%, CTR 0.61%, CVR 5.4% — all healthy), so the problem is price, not the creator. Action: counter at $8.5K for the same package (breakeven at current conversion is $7.2K) or same fee with usage rights + a dedicated coupon push in the first 48h, where 63% of his conversions happened. Low-confidence note: 2 videos is a thin sample; lock a 2-video test at the new rate before any annual deal.

Common Mistakes

  1. Judging on follower count or raw views — reach that doesn't hit buyers is a cost, not an asset.
  2. Fee-only cost math — product, shipping, usage rights, and agency cuts routinely add 30-60% to true cost.
  3. Comparing engagement across niches — a 2% rate can be great in one category and terrible in another; compare to the creator's own baseline first.
  4. Ignoring the content variable — a "bad creator" may be a bad brief; check whether specific formats converted before dropping.
  5. Single-post verdicts — always state sample size and mark thin samples low-confidence.
  6. Skipping authenticity checks — follower spikes and emoji-wall comments invalidate every downstream metric.
  7. No margin adjustment — revenue per dollar above 1.0 still loses money on thin margins.
  8. Ending without a verdict — every audited creator gets keep/scale/renegotiate/drop plus a next step.
  9. Ignoring content library value — usage rights for a top-performing creative can justify an otherwise marginal deal; price it explicitly.

Resources

  • references/output-template.md — standard audit report structure
  • references/metrics-benchmarks.md — scorecard metrics, formulas, and cost checklist
  • references/audit-framework.md — four-axis scoring, authenticity checks, verdict thresholds
  • assets/audit-checklist.md — pre-delivery quality checklist