The method behind every table

A market on these pages is a list of named people, not a description of a segment.

We build it from the people who reacted to or commented on the public posts of the vendors in a category, inside the window. That pool gets filtered by title. When we run this for a company, the company strikes out the fits that are wrong.

A title that looks right is not buying authority. Somebody can carry the exact title and hold no budget. Somebody we filtered out can be the person who signs. We write the sampled market for that reason, and we never write buyers decide.

Reactions and comments from the sampled market on a vendor's public posts, inside a 90 day window, divided by that vendor's posts in the same window. That is market reactions per post.

Two numbers come out of it. The total describes reach across the window. The rate describes how a single post performs with the people who matter to the category.

Zero is printed as zero, with the vendor's post count next to it. A zero from 24 posts and a zero from two posts are different facts.

• Impressions. We cannot see them on somebody else's posts and neither can you.
• Follower counts. A follower is not a reaction.
• Engagement from outside the sampled market. A vendor with a large US audience scores only on reactions from the market we defined.
• Private profiles, private groups, and anything that is not public.
• Attendance. We know which events sit inside a market's most-reacted posts at company level. We do not know who is in the room and we do not claim to.

The sample is printed on every table. 170 most active of 642. 170 most active of 264.

Most active means most engagements in the category over the window. That choice carries a bias: it favours people who use LinkedIn heavily. A buyer who reads everything and reacts to nothing is invisible to this method. The tables measure the visible part of a market, which is also the part a content or ads plan can act on.

We publish the N so you can weigh a number yourself. 29 of 170 is a real share of a market. 29 of 6,000 would not be.

Voices are public creators and institutions, ranked by how many people in the sampled market engaged them inside the window. Follower count does not enter the calculation.

That is why the account at the top of a voices table often has a smaller audience than the vendor CEOs below it. Overlap with the market is the measure.

Voices are named with their role, because they are public accounts measured on public posts.

Rooms are where a market gathers. We find them by looking at which events appear inside the market's most-reacted posts, at company level, plus desk research on the category's calendar.

That produces a company level finding. It says the event is inside the conversation this market is having. It does not say who attended, and person level attendance is not something we hold or publish.

When no event shows up in a market's most-reacted posts, we write that instead of inventing one. It happened in revenue tooling.

• Vendors: named. They are public companies and every number comes from their public posts.
• Voices: named, with their role. Public creators and institutions, measured on public posts.
• The companies whose readouts produced these numbers: anonymised until they tell us otherwise. On these pages a customer is a revenue tooling vendor in the Nordics.
• Private people: never named. The people inside a sampled market reacted to a post. We do not name them and we do not publish the list.

Postelix is a brand of Unfair Advantage Ltd, Cyprus. The method is built for the European rules, which is why it runs on public engagement and on the customer's own inputs.

If a number here is wrong, tell us and we will fix it and say what changed. That includes a vendor who thinks their post count is off and a voice who wants their role corrected.

Write to help@postelix.com. When we change a published number we say what it was before and when it changed.