Published 13 October 2026
Historical project overview
Historical delivery example / anonymized B2B sales-intelligence software business / 2017. This case describes one paid month of SEO work for a software company serving sales and prospecting teams. The client’s name is intentionally withheld because publicity rights for the historical engagement have not been established. The account reflects Pearl Lemon’s first-hand understanding of the work and its end-of-month reporting; it is not an independent audit or a verbatim client testimonial.
Why SEO for sales technology is unusually demanding
Software serving sales teams has to compete for terms that describe products, workflows and business outcomes. Buyers may search for an underlying problem, a category such as prospecting software, alternatives to incumbent tools or the best way to integrate a new sales system. A useful SEO engagement therefore needs both technical hygiene and a content plan that addresses genuinely different intentions rather than publishing many near-duplicate pages.
The agreed work
The project began with an SEO kickoff in late 2017. Pearl Lemon received website and publishing access, discussed technical SEO questions, developed content and carried out on-site improvements during a bounded paid engagement. The historical delivery account identifies four blog posts and related optimisation work within the period. This is a completed-work claim from the agency’s historical account, not a promise that four articles always move the needle.
How we approached the assignment
1. Review what the site can already rank for
Before deciding which topics to write about, an SEO team should look at existing search positions and determine whether pages serve informational, comparison or product-buying intent. Improving a page already near relevant searches may be more efficient than creating another article in a crowded topic. We describe this methodology as relevant to the engagement; individual page-by-page recommendations have not been reproduced publicly.
2. Combine on-site fixes with focused editorial work
The campaign involved on-site work and a short content production cycle. For B2B software, the content quality test is whether a reader can identify the actual use case, required steps, limitations and next action. A vague article repeating keywords cannot substitute for a clear product explanation. Where technical changes and content work run together, tracking them separately is important for later attribution.
3. Report ranking movements without calling them sales
The end-of-month historical account described more than 150 positions of net movement across tracked Google keyword positions. That is how the project result was reported to Pearl Lemon; it is not the claim that a single keyword climbed 150 positions, that the site reached 150 first-page rankings, or that 150 leads were generated. The original keyword-by-keyword list and exact start/end denominators are not published on this page, so the aggregate should be treated as historical campaign reporting, not an independently reconstructed performance study.
Evidence: what the figures actually support
| Statement | Scope and qualification |
|---|---|
| Paid SEO work was delivered | First-hand historical client delivery account |
| Four blog posts plus on-site improvements | Reported work completed in the engagement |
| More than 150 positions of aggregate net Google movement | Historical end-of-month reporting; original keyword data not displayed or independently audited here |
| 150 new leads or customers | Not established |
| A reliable long-term ROI or revenue increase | Not established |
Aggregating ranking changes is sometimes useful for showing broad direction, but it can disguise whether commercially important terms moved. A portfolio of low-value searches can improve while the one term that drives qualified demand stays flat. For that reason we would not use this historic net-movement figure as the sole success criterion for a modern B2B software campaign.
What makes the case useful today?
It demonstrates that Pearl Lemon has undertaken paid search optimisation in a technical software category and can discuss the practical relationship between site access, technical decisions and publishing. It also illustrates how easy it would be to inflate a genuine historic metric by removing its definition. We prefer to keep the result and explain its measurement honestly.
For a contemporary programme, we would combine query-level Search Console reporting with tracked landing pages, content publication dates, key conversions, qualified-demo definitions and agreed ownership of implementation. Leading indicators would be described separately from meetings attended or revenue credited to SEO. Those are recommendations for evaluation, not retroactive claims about the 2017 project.
Historical evidence note
Attribution: Pearl Lemon’s first-hand account of a 2017 client engagement and reported end-of-month SEO movement. Identification: client unnamed for public rights reasons. Results: historically reported rather than independently verified in this article. Testimonial: no client quotation or formal external endorsement is implied.
Explore our SEO services, the case-study collection, and independently hosted reviews of other projects.
Want results like these for your own site? Book a 15-minute call with our team. Pearl Lemon campaigns start from £3,000 per month with a minimum three-month engagement.
