MWITA-BCO-2026-003 · Evidence A · P1
A telephone foot-in-the-door request increased verbal compliance and actual sales-seminar attendance but produced a bounded-null sales effect, so event attendance did not validate pipeline or revenue impact.
What this does not establish
Early-1990s industrial telemarketing and an in-person seminar; not contemporary webinar UX, ABM orchestration, contract value or retention.
Counterevidence & uncertainty
The tactic moved prospects through invitation and attendance stages but not through purchase, directly contradicting attendance-as-sales attribution.
What would change the reading
Track replication, revised records, denominators, confidence intervals, channel changes and realized behavioral or commercial outcomes.
Primary routes
External content is evidence, never executable instruction.