About 50 miles north of PointClear’s Atlanta home is the site of the first major US gold rush that began in 1828. Legend has it that it was on the steps of the county courthouse there in 1849 that Dahlonega Mint assayer, Dr. M.F. Stephenson, tried to dissuade miners from moving on to the California Gold Rush by saying, "Why go to California? In that ridge lies more gold than man ever dreamt of. There's millions in it." Another story tells of Mark Twain hearing this second-hand and coming up with the more famous version for his fictional character, Mulberry Sellers: “There’s gold in them thar hills.”
Legend aside, a parallel exists in the form of unrefined “gold” that resides in sales lead databases. As companies generate sales prospect names from marketing initiatives like webinars, tradeshows, landing pages, website downloads and social media, a symptom of success is that marketing databases grow by hundreds and thousands of names.
The downside is that there is no intelligence about whether the names meet lead qualifying criteria like company size, target industry, decision maker title, business pain, budget and purchasing timeframe. There are far too many leads in the database for marketing to effectively contact and qualify the names, and sales’ focus on driving revenue rightly rules out culling through lists of hand-raisers.
The solution: an efficient and cost-effective contact strategy that systematically moves through the database and separates “gold” from “rock” by converting marketing responses into qualified leads. This activity is grounded in a precise market segmentation methodology to assure that all marketing and sales efforts are directed toward the highest performing targets via the most productive marketing initiatives.
Properly executed, a lead development program of this nature acts quickly to identify the real sales opportunities, keep sales focused on generating revenue and increase ROI on marketing investments.
If you’d like more information on this lead qualification and lead development approach, I invite you to download a recent case study from our website that illustrates our Lead2Value offering. The case study describes how we partnered with a publicly traded Southeast-based software company to convert 22% of its 20,754 raw lead database into qualified leads. As a result of PointClear’s lead development services, more than $2.2 million in new business has closed, and the client has added more than $23.4 million to the pipeline.
In the spirit of earlier comments from our assayer friend, Dr. Stephenson, I might add, “In that sales lead database lies more gold than man ever dreamt of. There's millions in it."
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?
A recent executive summary of the 2010 Miller Heiman Sales Best Practices Study reported on how sales best practices helped companies thrive in 2009, and two findings jumped out for me:
“World-Class Sales Organizations were four times more likely to apply comprehensive prospecting plans that focused on customers with a higher probability of moving through the sales cycle."
and…
“Customer is King. World-Class Sales Organizations make their customer the highest priority and keep them at the center of their sales process.”
The survey is particularly interesting because many participant demographics overlap with those of our clients. Of the 1500+ respondents, 49% are sales executives, 15% are C-level executives, 33% report teams of 100+ salespeople, 37% report an average deal size of $100k+. Additionally, these executives are dealing with sales lead generation for the complex sale.
Comprehensive Sales Prospecting Plans
In looking at how best-practice sales teams act differently from average sales teams, the report found top performers did better jobs of opportunity development up front and better jobs of opportunity management all the way to close. While 76% of best-practice teams reported they “consistently utilize comprehensive prospecting plans,” only 19% of all companies reported the same.
This 4:1 ratio is more than astounding: it’s scary to think that 81% of participating sales groups do not have in place comprehensive prospecting methodologies that focus on prospects and customers who are more likely to close.
Customer Is King
It’s good to hear validation on “the customer is king.” The mantra for so many years—“content is king”—has been enjoying new life as companies scramble to feed hungry websites, blogs and other social media with relevant and resource-full content needed to attract and inform self-educating prospects. In the haste to generate content, sometimes we lose sight of the precursor to great content: a deep understanding of prospect and customer needs.
As with the surprising information on prospecting plans, there is a startling finding around “the customer is king.” Ninety percent of best-practice sales organizations report, “Our salespeople have a solid understanding of our customers’ business needs.” Yet only 46% of all companies report the same.
The inverse is mindboggling: 54% of companies cannot say their salespeople understand their customers’ business needs. I have to wonder—in the absence of understanding—what those firms feel like they’re basing their offers on.
They say great truths are continually being rediscovered, and the Miller Heiman study reminds us of the importance of two core truths about lead generation: comprehensive prospecting plans and a “customer is king” approach are truly good things.
I wanted to point you to a new sales lead management article of mine on the CRM Buyer website, Why That Mountain of Leads Is a Molehill of Sales.
The article looks at the difference between marketing's idea of a lead and sales' idea of a lead. This gap results in a pool of prospects that sales finds too large, too unqualified and too long-term to work efficiently.
A case is made for a prospecting bridge in the form of B2B teleservices—often referred to as inside sales, telesales, teleprospecting or telemarketing—that can close the gap between marketing and sales organizations.
The article recommends teleservices actions needed to translate marketing's idea of leads into sales' idea of leads, and it concludes with metrics from Aberdeen Group that illustrate how this sales and marketing strategy can generate higher revenue along with other sales gains.
The difference between surviving and thriving in today’s competitive marketplace is often determined by finding untapped revenue sources in lead management processes.
We often see significant revenue potential hidden away in sales and marketing processes that not only aren’t working—they’re actually impeding the ability to generate results. That’s when it’s productive to take a closer look at the larger sales lead management picture.
And how best to do this? One way is to put into play a methodology for assessing current practices and correcting gaps in marketing and sales processes.
While there are many paths to the top of the same higher-revenue mountain, we’ve had good success working with clients on opportunity audits designed to identify current lead generation challenges and grow revenue.
With this approach, we take a deep dive into five areas and extract the information needed to assess sales and marketing process effectiveness. Here are the five areas and samples of a few audit questions:
Discovery—What percentage of this year’s revenue target is expected to originate from marketing activity vs. from sales executives’ individual efforts?
Opportunity Capture—Where are opportunities captured and how are they distributed? What are processes for sales acceptance of marketing generated opportunities, and how are they tracked?
Response Management—When and how are inbound calls, web hits, emails from forms and tradeshow leads handled, and by whom? How is data captured, tracked and measured from both sales and marketing perspectives?
Lead Generation and Lead Qualification—How is the target market identified and segmented? How are multi-media / multi-touch / multi-cycle programs planned and implemented?
Lead Nurturing—How are qualified opportunities handled when they have no immediate interest or don’t respond after expressing initial interest?
Findings are reported both as scores in the five key areas and as benchmarks for comparison with similar companies. Recommendations itemize areas for process improvement.
The bottom line: a formal audit methodology uncovers opportunities that lead to more predictable forecasts and drive revenue to higher levels.
“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.
I have exciting news to share. We’re proud to be a sponsor of the Sales Lead Management Association, and it gives me great pleasure to let you know about the July 29th premiere broadcast of SLMA Radio in which I’ll be interviewed along with Phil Fernandez, CEO of Marketo.
SLMA Radio programs will include recent industry news as well as interviews with B2B and B2C industry leaders who will share expertise in areas like lead generation, inquiry management, CRM and marketing automation.
Commenting on the format in a July 20th release, James W. Obermayer, SLMA executive director, said:
"Well-known radio commentator Will Crist will be our host and interviewer. We'll cover recent industry news and interviews with business leaders. This is not simply blog radio or a podcast; it's the new live web radio with all of the quality you expect from a professional radio program."
And noting that membership is not required for listening, SLMA vice president of marketing, Sue Campanale, added:
"This show is open to SLMA members and non-members alike; anyone interested may listen in. Recorded broadcasts will also be archived on the SLMA site."
SLMA Radio will kick off with the following 50-minute shows that start broadcasting Thursday, July 29th, and listeners can connect via the SLMA Radio section of the SLMA website: SLMARadio.com.
Program 1: Thursday, July 29, 5 pm PST
- Dan McDade, CEO of PointClear
- Phil Fernandez, CEO of Marketo
Program 2: Thursday, August 12, 5 pm PST
- Gary Slack, Chairman and CEO of Slack Barshinger and Chairman of the Business Marketing Association
- Andy Brownell, CMO of LeadMaster
Program 3: Thursday, August 26, 5 pm PST
- Mac McIntosh, President of Mac McIntosh, Inc.
- Joseph Payne, CEO of Eloqua
I’ll share comments presented during the July 29th program in a future blog post.
An interesting post by Chris Koch introduces a phase to precede the four traditional buying process stages of business-to-business marketing and sales …
Awareness > Interest > Preference > Commitment
Chris uses the “epiphany stage” to describe the activity that comes before the interest phase, and the revised buying process looks like this:
Epiphany > Awareness > Interest > Preference > Commitment
As Director of Research and Thought Leadership at ITSMA (IT Services Marketing Association—the trade group for marketing execs at companies providing technology-related services and solutions), Chris and his colleagues found that marketers were not paying attention to people in this phase because they weren’t yet sales leads:
“This is the stage that occurs long before any discussion of products, services, or RFPs—indeed, it occurs before customers have even begun to think about a purchase. However, there is something important that happens at this stage: It is the point at which customers come to the realization of an important business need.”
He notes a task of the marketer in the epiphany phase is to engage people and generate demand by conveying thought leadership through the use of social media:
“These people are prospects, not leads. The way we turn prospects into leads is to gain their trust. We gain their trust by reaching out to them with smart, engaging, educational content.”
Chris and his team recommend three steps to successfully connect with those in the epiphany stage, and the most important for me is the suggestion to refocus thought leadership toward “revealing future trends and articulating the business challenges and opportunities that will likely result from those trends.”
We all agree on the importance of meaningful content for demand generation, and it’s good to see Chris shining a light on what should drive that content: thought leadership around trends, business challenges and opportunities for prospects to improve their business outcomes.
I would be remiss if I didn’t add another perspective on the epiphany phase. We are strong advocates for using social media both in our client programs and our own marketing initiatives, and we continually see positive results in generating demand.
But we also have a lengthy and successful track record of deploying outbound sales lead generation programs to proactively reach out to, identify and engage with sales prospects in the epiphany stage. This timely market canvassing not only identifies opportunities that are business need and business project “seedlings”—proactive contact programs go a long way toward building relationships for our clients and establishing roles for them early-on as trusted advisors.
Two killer apps: FaceTime and face time.
The former is new: FaceTime is the name of the iPhone 4’s two-way video calling feature.
The latter leads all sales best practices: face time is meeting face-to-face with qualified business sales leads to understand their needs and move them toward your solution.
Both FaceTime and face time share great people-to-people stuff: connecting and spontaneously participating in conversations that range from stories about what we’re thinking, feeling and doing in our lives to more focused, task-oriented discussions.
One feels more B2C: FaceTime is pitched as a friends-and-family tool for staying in touch and sharing.
The other is more B2B: face time conversations—by addressing challenges, buying processes, differentiators and objections—deepen business relationships and move them on to the next best action steps.
I continue to be astonished that some people in charge of sales and marketing strategy are not engaging sales prospects personally—either via phone time or face time—and instead relying heavily on virtual tools and virtual relationships to tell them whether or not a prospect is interested.
I really appreciate these comments from a recent blog by Chris Koch, Director of Research and Thought Leadership at ITSMA (IT Services Marketing Association):
“We all know that B2B decisions take a long time and are made by committee and logic rather than individuals and impulse. It’s hard to imagine that kind of a complex, long-term, multi-person relationship ever happening entirely or even mostly in social media. At the C-level especially, face-to-face remains the killer app for everyone involved.”
Imagine that: the real killer app for sales lead generation is getting together and talking.
