Also known as: Dispute Resolution, Discrepancy Management
Discrepancy Resolution is the agreed process for handling gaps between a partner's reported numbers and the broker's, deciding whose figure prevails and how differences are settled. It defines the tolerance, the evidence and the arbiter.
Discrepancy resolution is a clause and a workflow, not an ad-hoc negotiation. The contract sets a tolerance band, for example 5 percent, below which the broker's figures prevail as the transaction of record. Gaps above the band trigger a defined escalation: both sides produce evidence, usually server logs or tracker exports, and investigate the root cause together.
The value is that it converts an emotional argument over money into a mechanical procedure. When a 9 percent gap appears, nobody debates who is trustworthy; they follow the agreed steps, pull the logs, and typically find a concrete cause such as a mis-fired pixel or a failed postback, which is then corrected and the payout adjusted. Because the tolerance and the tie-breaker source are fixed before any dispute, the relationship survives the disagreement and the partner gets to the correct number quickly rather than through a drawn-out standoff.
The MSA defines the acceptable discrepancy band and whose figures win within it.
Each period the partner and broker line up their conversion counts.
Gaps inside the band default to the broker; larger gaps escalate.
Both sides pull server logs or tracker exports to find the root cause.
The identified error is fixed and the payout adjusted to the true figure.
Why it matters for partnership: Every long-running partnership eventually hits a numbers mismatch. Having a pre-agreed resolution process, rather than an ad-hoc argument, keeps the relationship intact and gets the partner paid the correct amount quickly.
The MSA states that discrepancies under 5% default to the broker's figures, while gaps above 5% trigger a joint log review. When a 9% gap appears, both pull server logs and find a mis-fired pixel, which is corrected.
| Aspect | Within tolerance | Above tolerance |
|---|---|---|
| Example band | Under 5 percent | Over 5 percent |
| Default outcome | Broker's figure stands | Joint investigation |
| Evidence needed | None | Server logs / tracker exports |
| Effort | Low, automatic | High, collaborative |
Agree the discrepancy tolerance and the tie-breaker source (whose logs win) inside the contract, before any dispute arises.
Having no defined tolerance, so every small tracking gap turns into a relationship-damaging argument.
For small gaps within tolerance, typically the broker's, since they hold the transaction of record; larger gaps require joint investigation.