Traffic Generation 9 September 2026

Best ways to optimize for reach using video campaigns in B2B

Being non-conservative with your B2B LinkedIn strategy doesn’t mean being reckless. It means questioning campaign objectives that box you in.

Nicole Tan

The Benchmark Trap

For years, the B2B playbook on LinkedIn was simple: if you have a video, you run a Video Views objective. It's the default mode, it feels safe. You pay for views, you hit your CPV or Video View Rate targets, and you report up to management.

But here’s the problem: safe doesn’t always scale. And what of the viewers that have seen your videos? Are they likely to take the next step towards conversion based on a 3-second video watch duration?

Recently, I ran a side-by-side test on a B2B campaign. Tired of high frequencies and terrible engagements on Video Views, I changed it to the Reach objective halfway through the campaign run. The goal? Maximize unique people reached while keeping an eye on video view rate (VVR).

The result? Higher absolute reach at higher audience quality (based on job titles) and higher CTR that beat all our historical benchmarks.

This article isn’t about breaking LinkedIn. It’s about breaking the habit of being overly conservative with paid media.

The Conservative Comfort Zone (And Why It’s Costing You)

Most B2B marketers stick with Video Views because:

It’s predictable – LinkedIn’s algorithm optimizes for people likely to watch.
It’s easy to justify – “We paid for views, we got views.”
Fear of waste – “What if Reach shows my video to people who scroll past?”

But here’s what conservative thinking ignores:

Video Views objectives narrow the delivery window. LinkedIn aggressively seeks viewers within your target audience parameters, which can limit delivery and reduce unique reach, per LinkedIn's own video views ad objective documentation.
You pay a premium for “certainty.” Frequencies on Video Views are often higher than Reach, and because the algorithm limits the delivery, you also get higher impressions per viewer.
In B2B, awareness matters more than completion rates. A 50% Video View Rate from a CFO who doesn’t click is still an impression on a high-value individual.

What Happened When I Switched to Reach

Campaign setup:

Audience: decision-makers (job title-based targeting)
Creative: 15-second optimized video with the product featured and narration over on-screen captions
Budget: equal split, 14 days each
Objective A: Video Views (optimized for video views)
Objective B: Reach (optimized for unique people)

Methodology:

Both campaigns have the exact same audience targeting, using the same set of ads and equal budgets. They run consecutively for 14 days each in their own individual campaign setups to ensure any learnings during campaign run remain independent, starting with the Video Views campaign then switching to the Reach campaign. Thus, this ensures a fair test between the 2 campaigns where the only difference lies in the objective selected.

Results (averages over 14 days per objective):

Metric	Video Views objective	Reach objective
Unique reach (from total audience size)	7.2%	19.8%
Frequency	24.79	6.43
Engagement rate	0.16%	0.94%
CTR (to landing page)	0.12%	0.85%
Video Completion Rate	4%	4.45%

The Reach objective delivered >2.5x more unique people, at 4x less frequency and with much more meaningful actions taken, as seen in engagement and click-through rates. This shows that with the Reach campaign, we managed to acquire audiences that conservatively, would not be delivered these ads with the Video Views campaign. A success factor that also plays into this strategy is the level of interest indicated by the new audiences, proven with the higher click-through-rate showing that subsequently, there were also website traffic brought into the landing page. In B2B, where deal cycles can be long and frequency matters, I’ll take broader reach and actions with intent.

Why This Works: The Algorithm Shift No One Talks About

According to LinkedIn’s own algorithm behavior as documented across its ad objective guidance, the Reach objective has one job: show your ad to as many unique people as possible within budget. It doesn’t care about clicks or completions, but it does care about relevance signals.

If your video creative is good (clear thumbnail, first 3 seconds hooks), the Reach algorithm will still show it to likely viewers because:

People who watch → higher dwell time → lower cost per unique reach.
People who scroll past → algorithm learns to avoid similar profiles.

You’re essentially letting creative show its quality, not bidding strategy drive performance.

When NOT to Do This

Being non-conservative doesn’t mean being reckless. Don’t use Reach for video if:

Your hook is weak. Reach amplifies indifferent scrolling. No hook = wasted impressions.
You need completion-heavy metrics and videos long (e.g., full watch for a product demo). Use Video Views.
Your audience is tiny (<20k). Reach works best when there’s room to scale without exhausting frequency.

How to Replicate This Without Blowing Your Budget

If you want to test this, here’s a simple A/B framework:

Run both objectives simultaneously or consecutively on identical creative/audience for 14 - 21 days.
Set a hard KPI for “acceptable VVR drop.” I used a bottom-line based on previous video view campaigns' benchmarks = 9%.
Measure total unique reach, frequency and cost per 1,000 reached – not just views.
Reallocate budget if: Reach delivers ≥50% more unique reach at ≤20% lower VVR.

After 2–3 tests, you’ll know if your creative and audience can “outperform the objective.”

Conclusion: Conservative Is a Strategy, Not a Virtue

In B2B paid media, we often optimize what’s easy to measure (views, clicks) instead of what actually builds pipeline (awareness, trust, frequency). In being frustrated at the quality of audiences which came AFTER the video campaigns, I used the Reach objective as a test that forced me to stop obsessing over how long each video is watched and start caring about who is watching and what actions they bring.

Still, this means having to explain to a delicate audience how “fewer views” actually means “more opportunity" in a conservative B2B setup. Have fun!

Want to see whether your own campaigns can outperform the objective they were set up on?

Talk to NMQ about running a Reach vs. Video Views audit on your next launch →

References