Post by guest blogger Carl Saxon, Business Development Associate, PointClear.
A great way to thwart a lead or an opportunity is to stop asking questions and get into your informational session as to why your product or service is the best thing since sliced bread. What should be a common practice is to listen to the prospect’s words closely and then ask the next best question.
At PointClear, we practice active listening skills and use these skills as a major component to provide successful handoffs to our clients. Active listening helps you to clearly identify the SITUATION and the PROBLEM so you can then ask the next best appropriate cause questions that lead to the overall IMPACT and NEED questions. When practiced properly this leads to a smooth handoff to your client.
A bad example would be as follows:
You call a prospect and they immediately give you a couple of “surface” pain points. As I mentioned in a previous blog, some associates (and yes I am guilty also sometimes) want to pounce like a cat on a ball of yarn. We are set to close and we then immediately put the sales (features and benefits) hat on. After a minute of overwhelming the prospect with facts we say, “Well, what I would like to do is put you in contact with one our product specialists.” Low and behold, the prospect has questions.
A couple of things wrong here. One—who cares what we would like to do, it is about them not us. Two—we failed to ask the next best question either to clarify the situation or problem and to ask implication questions to determine need or desire.
Why not ask “Can you tell me a little more about the problem?”, “What pains does this problem cause?”, “How is that problem affecting you and the organization?”, or “If you resolved that problem how would it create a healthier environment?”
This gives you as the seller more control of the conversation and helps prevent or limit objections from being tossed at you because they are too busy now overwhelming you with facts.
Now instead of saying, ”Well, what I would like to do…”, you can say, “Based on what you have said…” in a more authoritative role versus a timid appointment setting role.
Remember—relevant questions are key to success. Controlling the conversation makes for an easier handoff and allows the prospect to verbalize their needs. If the seller says it, it is not necessarily true. If the prospect says it, then it must be true. In a sales lead transaction, he who makes the most statements loses control. “There is a sale made on every call you make.” (Yes. I stole it from the movie Boiler Room.)
I mentioned in an earlier blog my interview on the July 29 debut program of the Sales Lead Management Associations’ SLMA Radio, a series of regular talk show broadcasts touching on industry news and events and featuring interviews with industry experts. (Listen to the archive.)
My conversations with sales and marketing executives continually place sales and marketing alignment—and the lack of it—in a “top five” list of most-talked-about challenges, and I wanted to share with you comments on this topic from that interview.
Life is good when sales and marketing are fully aligned. The two organizations work in harmony on lead generation, lead qualification, lead nurturing and closing sales-ready buyers. Correctly deployed resources and effective processes just click, and they result in more sales, increased revenue and lower costs. Alignment heaven.
But when the two groups are out of sync, the path to alignment heaven takes that nasty detour south. Marketing complains that sales isn’t accepting its leads. Sales complains that marketing leads aren’t qualified. Marketing complains that sales doesn’t enter feedback in the lead database. Sales complains it doesn’t have time to nurture mid- and long-term sales prospects. “Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,” Yul Brynner might add.
While it would be easy to place blame and point fingers, neither marketing nor sales executives are really at fault as both groups have their own prudent self interests at heart. But the ongoing costs of non-alignment—inefficiencies, wasted dollars and lost sales—make it imperative that sales and marketing get on the same page as quickly as possible.
To that end, I propose a straightforward solution where sales and marketing can’t or won’t align on their own. Assuring sales and marketing alignment is grounded in the answers to the following three questions:
- What do sales and marketing need to agree on?
- How are agreement and alignment going to be assured?
- Who is going to assure agreement and alignment?
1. What do sales and marketing need to agree on?
At the very core, sales and marketing have to absolutely agree on four key points:
Lead definition and follow up actions
Sales and marketing must agree on lead definition and follow up actions based on these definitions. We see both lack of agreement on lead definitions as well as agreement on definitions but inconsistent follow up actions in handling leads. For example, Marketing Qualified Leads (MQLs) have been sent to sales with the belief that sales will accept them as Sales Accepted Leads (SALs), but sales allows them to languish unattended in a marketing/sales purgatory. And SiriusDecisions notes another purgatory inside sales when sales makes one or two contacts with SALs but discontinues action when they don’t quickly convert into Sales Qualified Leads (SQLs).
Market definition
Sales and marketing must agree on the criteria for defining the target market. If either sales or marketing thinks the market is larger than it really is, resources and dollars will be wasted chasing too many low-value prospects. If either marketing or sales thinks the market is smaller than it really is, opportunities are lost when appropriate high-value prospects are not uncovered and engaged.
Offer and messaging
Sales and marketing must agree on the focus for the offer as well as clear messaging for solutions and services. In the absence of agreement, marketing may believe the best offer is for one or more point solutions while sales is committed to selling an enterprise solution. This disconnect will wreak havoc on results.
Results measurement
Ongoing alignment must be measurable. For example, sales and marketing demonstrate great progress toward full alignment the closer the percentages of MQLs to SALs and MQLs to SQLs get to 100%. This means each step in the process needs to be measured and reported on regularly.
2. How are agreement and alignment going to be assured?
Organizations where sales and marketing have reached productive and profitable alignment are to be congratulated. It’s organizations where one of the following is occurring that I’m directing my comments:
- Sales and marketing can’t align on their own.
- Sales and marketing won’t align on their own.
- There is an assumption that they are aligned, but they really aren’t.
How are agreement and alignment going to come to these organizations and become ingrained? Here’s what needs to happen: management needs to name a single, accountable person with mediation and arbitration skills who continually measures progress and takes action to make sure things are on track.
A single accountable person—Companies with unaligned sales and marketing groups need to have a single person responsible and accountable for agreement and alignment. In the absence of consensus, this person needs to step up, understand the real problems and take action.
With mediation and arbitration skills—This person needs to have the expertise to broker and implement a consensus among sales and marketing stakeholders, a consensus that delivers agreement on and commitment to the four key points discussed above. In the absence of a consensus, this person needs to have the authority to make a decision and say, “This is the way it’s going to be.”
Who continually measures progress—This person has worked with all stakeholders to translate the four key points into measurable, no-wiggle-room objectives and to closely monitor weekly and monthly reporting.
And takes action to make sure things are on track—Assessing progress, strengths and limitations to make the tough calls needed to get things back on track, this person says, “Hey, I just want to make it clear. This wasn’t a suggestion. This was a mandate. So here’s what’s going to happen.”
3. Who is going to assure agreement and alignment?
You may be wondering, “Who’s going to do this, and what is the name of this person’s role or title?”
Taking on the question of role name first, I’ve put together a “top ten” list of what the role could be called. Be warned! The first few are tongue-in-cheek, but the list progresses toward and concludes with what feels like a workable solution.
10. Grand Poobah of Alignment
OK … more than tongue-in-cheek … patently absurd. Who could respect a role name that Fred Flintstone co-opted from a Gilbert and Sullivan opera?
9. Alignment Kingfish
Yes to implied leadership, but, again, way past irony. And there is the added risk of calling up Huey Long’s image.
8. Alignment Wizard
While wizards possess significant skill sets, we require both more decorum in our role name search as well as a belief in management science over magic.
7. Alignment Guru
A guru brings wisdom, ethical guidance and recognizable leadership, but our search calls for more authority.
6. Alignment Chieftain
Reference.com notes this title conveys leadership but qualifies it by adding, “Among many peoples, chiefs have very little coercive authority and depend on community consensus for implementing recommendations.” Our search pushes us for a role name with attributes of power that go beyond consensus building.
5. Alignment Architect
The role we’re defining does include organizing and structuring, but we need the added elements of conflict resolution and the power to make binding decisions.
4. Alignment Strategist
We’re getting warmer, but—similar to “architect”—this role name lacks bite.
3. Alignment Czar
Czar has the feel of a freestanding or dedicated role—like an individual who has the sole title of “czar.” We’re looking, however, for the name of a role that can be added to an individual’s existing organizational title. Additionally, there can be a negative connotation about how the word has been used in political contexts.
2. Alignment Authority
Getting warmer. Reference.com on authority: “the power to determine, adjudicate, or otherwise settle issues or disputes.” The downside is the sense that “authority” may convey the idea of an entity rather than an individual. We’re looking for a role name for the latter.
1. Alignment Arbiter
Finally! Reference.com delivers a role name that matches our requirements with “arbiter”:
“A person empowered to decide matters at issue; judge; umpire.”
“A person who has the sole or absolute power of judging or determining.”
The Alignment Arbiter would work to reconcile sale’s and marketing’s points of view and arrive at a consensus on each of the four points discussed above. But in the absence of a consensus, the Alignment Arbiter would be empowered to arrive at a binding mandate to assure sales and marketing are on the same page in these four areas.
Who’s going to be the Alignment Arbiter? Unless sales and marketing executives can reach consensus on their own, accountability and responsibility for assuring alignment must be elevated to as high within the organization as is necessary to effect change. Accountability and responsibility for alignment therefore ultimately rest with C-level and other senior executives, one of whom will need to become the Alignment Arbiter to assure successful sales and marketing alignment.
What’s going on in this regard within your company? Have sales and marketing reached agreement and alignment on their own? Or have you turned to an Alignment Arbiter to settle differences and get everyone on the same page? If so, what executive is the Alignment Arbiter in your organization? I’d like to hear your comments.
Who should mediate when sales and marketing alignment issues get in the way of results (lack of common lead definition, fuzzy market definition, offer problems)? What level in the organization is required for successful alignment and what should this role be called? Alignment czar? Alignment arbiter?
“Regarding lead generation, when does the role of marketers end?”
A recent blog by Parker Trewin, director of marketing communications at Genius.com, discussed responses to this question found in the 2010 B2B Marketing Skills Survey, a collaboration between Genius.com and BtoB Magazine.
Of 500+ surveyed marketers, roughly four of ten split their responses by saying marketing involvement ended at one of the following milestones: after a program goes live (5%), after a program starts to generate leads (10%), after lead qualification and lead scoring (16%), after lead nurturing (9%), or after a sale has been completed (3%).
By comparison, it’s interesting to hear that the largest group by far—58%—said marketing involvement never ends in B2B lead generation. Commenting on reasons, Parker added that “marketers increasingly remain engaged with customers even after the close to keep them informed about service offerings, company news and cross sell opportunities.”
While this is good news, the survey also showed the need for improved collaboration between marketing and sales with findings like these around data sharing and frequency of meetings:
- 54% of marketers said they share, at most, half their data with sales
- 66% of marketers said that sales shares, at most, half their data with marketing
- 58% of marketers said they met with sales once a month or less
The report summarizes the mixed findings on marketing involvement with a sober assessment:
The lack of interaction and collaboration nonetheless suggests an unfortunate outcome: sales and marketing continued to be as misaligned as ever.
The Marketing Skills Survey is an insightful read, and I think you’d enjoy it. There are six high level findings discussed, several of which may point away from conventional wisdom. For example, the report suggests marketers are moving from top-of-funnel metrics like click-through rates and website traffic to bottom-of-funnel metrics like revenue and sales accepted opportunities to gauge marketing program success.
Two encouraging lead generation trends were reported in a July 16 blog by Barry Trailer, managing partner at CSO Insights, in which he announced the availability of CSO Insight’s 2010 Lead Generation Optimization Report based on surveys of over 600 companies (1/3 in technology, 1/3 in services and 1/3 in manufacturing / non-tech / other).
Two findings are particularly great news: nearly three-quarters of surveyed firms are increasing their marketing budgets, and the number of firms tracking marketing ROI has reached a new high watermark.
Regarding marketing budgets, Barry referenced survey findings to compare last year to this year:
2009
“Sixty-seven percent had frozen or reduced their marketing budgets.”
2010
“Seventy-two percent of firms are increasing their marketing budgets.”
It’s good to see this type of movement in best marketing strategies to increase sales: away from cutting costs and toward marketing investment.
Barry also commented on the increase in companies tracking marketing ROI:
“For the first time in the seven years of this report, a slim majority (51%) of firms responding now track the ROI of their marketing campaigns.”
He added that the top three metrics used for evaluating lead generation programs were number of leads per campaign, number of leads converting to sales opportunities and revenue closed from opportunities.
It’s also good to see movement in marketing measurement best practices: away from cost per lead and toward a focus on conversion rates and ultimate revenue generated.
I’d be interested to hear what’s happening at your company around this dynamic duo of lead generation, marketing investment on the front end and marketing measurement on the back end.
1) The more leads you give to sales the less likely they'll be followed up on: Sales is conditioned to not follow up on marketing's leads. Why? Because they've been burned. They receive hundreds of so-called leads generated through tradeshows, email campaigns, webinars, whitepaper downloads, etc. and have learned that there may be, if they're lucky, 10% that are qualified. Sales has a quota and they're not going to spend the hours needed to cull through lists of low-level, so-called leads.
2) Fewer leads empower sales: Marketing can recondition sales by sending qualified opportunities, as opposed to raw, unfiltered leads. How? If marketing segments, measures, and qualifies, sales will learn to value what marketing sends their way. That translates into more deals and more revenue, and that's good for sales, marketing, and the company.
3) When leads are qualified marketing can do a better job: When marketing takes on the lead qualification role, sales gets in front of more qualified prospects. Which means marketing is able to increase its ROI as leads generated are no longer wasted. Plus the process of qualification helps marketing fine-tune its demand generation programs: if a list generated from a tradeshow, for example, is only pulling at 5%, Marketing can adjust its investments to maximize the benefits.
Want to learn more?
OK … your webinar came off without a hitch, and you’re experiencing a sense of relief. But right away you know there’s work to do around lead qualification and separating the 24 karat opportunities from the fool’s gold. The webinar “leads” are not qualified enough to be sent to the field. You also know some attendees are more qualified than others and require immediate contact—not just addition to email lists or entry in marketing automation programs.
The question arises: what are the best practices for following up on webinar attendees and registrants?
I’d like to share comments from a webinar …
Webinar Leads Demystified—Best Practices for Leveraging Both Webinar Registrants and Attendees
… my friend and colleague, Mac McIntosh, President, Mac McIntosh Inc., and I recently presented that identifies best webinar follow up practices.
Here are some of the recommendations:
1. Include all no-shows in follow up activity
With hectic schedules, a new priority may pop up and prevent attendance for a registrant. Send a follow up email with a link to the archived webinar, and include the no-show in follow up lead segmentation and lead qualification activity.
2. Segment and qualify attendees and registrants
Because some of the attendees are great prospects and some are not, it’s critical to build a segmentation and qualification model that identifies segments most likely to be qualified sales leads.
While a list of 1,000 target companies may generate a 5% lead rate, an analysis of results typically identifies segments with higher and lower lead rates. For example, let’s say there are five discrete segments of 200 companies each, and these segments have lead rates of 9%, 7%, 5%, 3% and 1% that—in total—average an overall 5% lead rate.
Following a webinar, we recommend enhancing attendee and registrant lists with data points like SIC code, revenue, employee size and growth rate. This added data helps segment the entire list into segments that range from “most likely” to “least likely” to buy. Test sample qualification calls validate the segments that have higher and lower lead rates.
Once segmented lead rates have been established through testing, a full court press should be deployed against the segments with the highest lead rates—thereby improving results and maximizing marketing dollars. Less expensive media are used to market to segments with lower lead rates, and periodic calls can be made into low priority samples to monitor buying trends.
3. Nurture, nurture, nurture
Mac noted during the webinar that about 25% of prospects bought solutions from his client companies within six months of engaging in the buying process. About 50% bought in seven to eighteen months, and about 25% bought more than 18 months out.
Lead nurturing and developing prospects have never been as important as they are now. As prospect leads move through the buying process, nurturing reinforces your working relationship, positions you as a trusted advisor, differentiates your offerings and builds a preference for your solutions.
Implementing a comprehensive lead nurturing methodology not only improves results—it assures highly compensated field resources are used efficiently and in a cost effective manner.
4. Think in multiples: multi-touch, multi-media, and multi-cycle contact
Results multiply when contact strategies are multiplied.
Multi-touch: Instead of three touches, think twelve or more contacts with a prospect. The optimal touchpoint frequency is higher than you think.
Multi-media: Successful follow up uses a smart mix of multiple media. Instead of just using the phone, integrate a number of outbound calls with voice mail messages, personalized email and direct mail.
Multi-cycle: With the largest portion of prospects buying at more than six months out, expand your planned contact from over a few days to over several weeks and several months.
5. Tailor your messaging to the reasons companies and people buy
Companies buy based on three conditions of need:
- Perceived risk of deterioration
- Opportunity to improve
- Fear of loss in their current situation
Individuals have different conditions of need:
- Recognition
- Financial gain
- Security
- Self actualization
Messaging to webinar prospect leads should vary based on what conditions of need they’re in. For example, a company perceives a risk of deteriorating conditions, and a decision maker there is acting out of a position of self actualization. This makes for a good selling opportunity as the decision maker wants to do the right thing to help the company and is willing to take a personal risk.
Vary messaging based on where prospects are with their company and personal conditions of need.
6. Match your sales effort to the prospect’s stage
There are five steps that must be sequentially addressed with prospects during the buying process:
- Find the pain
- Get agreement there is pain
- Agree to do something about the pain
- Agree to a generic solution
- Agree to a customized solution
Sales too frequently defaults to step five. Successful webinar follow up is based on confirming agreement on each step.
I’d like to invite you to share your best practices on following up on webinar prospects.
Note: The full webinar is archived and available for listening on the Target Marketing Magazine website via the hyperlinked title above.
Post by guest blogger Carl Saxon, Business Development Associate, PointClear.
You are going through your normal day and it happens, somebody actually wants to hear what you have to talk about, so you begin to go through your three pain points. The contact says, "Yes, we are experiencing all of those problems." Your heart starts pumping because now you have someone who will listen and has some pain. Being the opportunistic closer you are, you naturally go right for the kill. Using whatever closing line you have created or have been taught, you schedule a call between the contact and the Sales Representative. You now think you have a sales lead, but you have no idea what their environment is at this point.
So you ask, "To what extent do you see this as a priority to resolve?" The contact explains that it is not a pressing issue; it has been like that for years and they have been able to handle it. You now have that uneasy feeling that your lead feels weaker. However, you press on and go for the kill before they bail as you feel the pressure of objection. You then ask, "What role do you play in the evaluation process?" The contact continues to let you down and tells you they are not really involved in evaluations or decisions but would be happy to give the information to their boss. There is still some chance to salvage this. Maybe they are able to influence their boss and you can turn this in to your supervisor as a lead. You ask, "How many employees does your company have?" Your heart is crushed because the number the contact has given falls well below the needed criteria. Fifteen minutes deep into the conversation you have wasted your time. A lead would have never been generated because of the qualifications, but it did not need an entire conversation for this to be determined.
What could have been done differently to determine if this was really a sales prospect? SPIN Selling when performed correctly can be very helpful. The Implication questions can reveal many answers in conjunction with the Need-Payoff. A couple of questions after the Situation and Problem finding could have helped determine the importance of resolving the issues. Finding out what they have done in the past could've helped also. How long has it been a problem? Why have they never resolved it? What would be the benefit of solving such issues?
Fact finding is key. It separates the pros from the amateurs, the lead generators from the appointment setters.
In sales it is always be closing. In lead generation I say always be qualifying. Time is of the essence so keep it moving!
Post by guest blogger Amy Jurden, Business Development Associate, PointClear.
When I get a new list the first thing I keep in mind is that, like a deck of cards, every list has some aces. A lot of people get frustrated early on when they are rejected on the first few contacts into a new list. Business development people naturally complain about new lists early on—mostly because it is early on that the low cards fall out.
I like to look at any new list as a newly opened deck of cards. I know that the deck has four aces, but as I'm shuffling them out on the table it may take me flipping through all forty-eight non-aces before I get to the four aces. Eventually, if you keep flipping you'll get there—but isn't there a better way to identify aces earlier in the process? Yes.
One of the differentiators between PointClear and other lead generation firms is our multi-touch marketing approach. But the purpose of sending prospects e-mails or leaving voicemails isn't to leave them information in hopes that they will call or email back (though that does happen). Ultimately, the materials give me a reason to call back. I want to make the most of every phone call by gathering information so that my calls back in are more akin to counting cards in blackjack than pulls on a slot machine. Three steps help me to create more conversations, and thus generate more leads by targeting more aces.
- Before being transferred ask the receptionist if your contact is even in the office today—you don't want to be chasing down a prospect who is out of town on vacation or at a conference—the likelihood of your messages being discarded, ignored, or lost is exponential.
- If you go to the prospects' voicemail, before leaving a message zero out to reach their Executive Assistant and try to utilize them to target a time to call back—(i.e. Jack's in a meeting? Do you know when the meeting will be out?). Let them know you will be calling back and then do it—you'll be amazed at how many more conversations you will have. And while you have an admin, don't be afraid to clarify why it is that you're calling, a quick conversation may get you a referral to the right executive if you're in the wrong place and save you a lot of wasted time.
- And finally, try to get a scheduled call on the aces calendar. Ask if the Executive Assistant has the power to put you on the calendar for five minutes—if not you have lost nothing, but if they can and will, you get uninterrupted time with the decision-maker.
Unless "you're playing solitaire to dawn with a deck of fifty-one", you will find your share of aces if you make every connection count.
Two recently-released sales metrics reports share a common finding that's impacting lead generation and sales success: there is a decrease in the percentage of field and inside sales reps making quota.
In a blog posted June 16, Trish Bertuzzi, President and Chief Strategist of The Bridge Group, announced availability of the 2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation Report based on surveys of over 115 technology companies conducted in the first quarter of this year. In her post, Trish shared these key findings:
-
Since 2007: The average size of Inside Sales groups has nearly tripled.
-
Since 2007: The average sales quota has increased nearly 33% to $853k.
-
Since 2007: The percentage of reps making quota has fallen by 25%.
-
In 2010: 42% of respondents reported less than 50% of their reps at quota.
-
In 2010: Only 4% of respondents had greater than 80% of their reps at quota.
In a blog posted May 31, Barry Trailer, Managing Partner and Co-Founder of CSO Insights, announced availability of the 2010 Telemarketing/Inside Sales Performance Optimization Report based on surveys with 250 companies. Barry noted this key finding:
Certainly, there are internal factors contributing to quotas not being met.
In a February 2010 article in the Denver Business Journal, Barry and fellow Managing Partner Jim Dickie talked about an earlier CSO Insights report that noted many sales organizations were cutting sales budgets. That earlier report mentioned frozen or reduced lead generation budgets and reduced training budgets for reps. Jim added the following:
"Many of these firms then tried to 'cut their way to success' by reducing budgets. The [survey] results show that strategy was a huge mistake."
And there are external factors impacting quota attainment. In an earlier blog, I referenced OneSource's 2010 B2B Sales Pulse Survey finding that 59% of respondents report sales cycles were either significantly longer or somewhat longer than last year.
What is your take on reasons for this decline in the percentage of reps making quota?
What are your thoughts on contributing internal and external factors?
What are your ideas on ways to lift quota metrics in this tough economy?
If you want to stir emotion in a marketing VP, bring up the subject of lead follow up. Few subjects can rile like that one. Leads that are discounted, not accepted or simply ignored can cause otherwise cool-headed marketing execs to pull out their hair, especially after having worked so hard to generate them in the first place.
Having been in the business of helping B2B companies close the gap between marketing and sales for almost 20 years, and talking to execs from both sides, I could spend hours talking about why it happens. There's a lot of psychology involved—fear of failure on the part of sales, for one thing. Preconditioning also plays a role if sales is used to receiving volumes of raw, unfiltered leads that simply take too much time to cull through.
My advice? Marketing needs to take on the role of qualifying leads. All those targets who've raise their hands—signing up for webinars, downloading your white papers, clicking through on an email—need to be quickly qualified. I suggest you make that your job.
Then, only pass through the real opportunities. Instead of giving sales 100 tradeshow presentation attendees, give them the 10 that are in a position to buy.
Whether you call it lead qualification, lead management, response management, or, as PointClear does, lead development, find an easy and efficient way to do it within days of generating the lead.
Heed this tip and you can make sales more productive, show a more impressive marketing ROI, and help make your company more successful.