Campaign reconciliation: explain why dashboard and worksheet totals differ

Define the decision

A worksheet may count unique contacts while a dashboard counts messages across sequence steps. It may also include test records, exclude bounces or use local dates. A mismatch can be expected under those definitions. The goal is to explain the difference precisely and isolate any remaining unexplained records.

Work through the procedure

1. Write each report's scope: workspace, campaign, date range and included statuses.
2. Name the unit of every count, including people, messages and events.
3. Align timezone and observation cutoff, then compare a small shared sample.
4. Create a difference ledger for records present in one report but not the other and classify each reason before escalating.

Worked example

The following is a synthetic example for this procedure, not a customer result or performance benchmark.

Worksheet: 100 unique contacted people
Dashboard: 160 sent messages
Reconciliation: 100 first touches + 60 follow-ups
Remaining question: do all 160 belong to the same scope and cutoff?
Do not subtract 60 as 'duplicates' without checking their steps.

Read the result

The example explains a difference through sequence structure, not a defect. If a message cannot be mapped to the expected scope, that record becomes a concrete investigation item. A useful handoff includes identifiers and definitions rather than only two screenshots with unequal totals.

Check before moving on

1. Separate internal tests from business reporting.
2. Retain the original report versions when late outcomes can revise counts.
3. Check denominator consistency before recalculating percentages.

Limits and next action

This procedure does not assert that every Zintara analytics view uses the same query or unit. The overview's message cohorts are documented separately. Inspect the relevant view and source records before declaring either report authoritative.

Source: Zintara product context; calculations are defined in this guide