Inside Sales Experts

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Leaving Sales Voice Mail: The Debate Rages

Posted by Matt Bertuzzi on Wed, Sep 01, 2010 @ 09:14 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

 
I recently ran across an extremely active discussion on LinkedIn. The topic was What's the #1 Voice Mail Mistake Average Sales People Make?

At last tally, the thread had 65+ comments & I thought I'd do some analysis of the sentiments in this hot debate. The first debate point broke down around:

Which is the bigger mistake, leaving or not
leaving voice mail?


There were certainly strong opinions on both sides, but the vast majority favored using voicemail as a tool in the sales process.

The PRO VM Camp argued:
When I leave a VM, I'm not  expecting a call back. If I leave a short and compelling message, my hope is that they may take my call the next time I show up on caller id.

While the CON VM Camp countered:  
Your job is to work the phones, SPEAK to people, don't leave them messages and expect them to do your work for you and call YOU back.

-

The second debate centered around:

What mistakes do Sales People make when leaving voicemails?



The comments broke down into 4 main categories:
  • Messages that aren't sufficiently relevant to Buyers
  • Messages that are too long
  • Sounding scripted, rushed, nervous or overly casual
  • Leaving a single voicemail (the one-and-done approach) with no methodology for subsequent calls or emails

-

I wanted to share 3 comments that stuck out for me:

Make sure you prove to the prospect in the first 5 seconds of your voicemail that you have researched them, have something in common or were referred to them by a colleague or acquaintance. The goal of voicemail if you're prospecting is not to have them call you back saying I want to buy - that's not realistic (although that would be nice) but to acknowledge that there may be some potential for you to solve a business challenge they are currently facing and it's worth additional exploration.
Ray Carroll 
 

Leaving a message that says "we want to become your global partner for XX product" is much scarier than "Hi, I have a couple questions about how XX is purchased." Scary questions don't get returned (in my world).
Mike Osterhaudt 
 

Not having a game plan for the message is mistake #1. Not listening to a few practice voice mail messages is mistake #2. 
Leave a few practice messages in your own VM box. We all love the sound of our own voice, but be honest, would you return your own voice mail? If not, change your plan, sharpen the message. Rinse and repeat. 
I learn a ton about what not to do from the voice mails I get from people soliciting me. At least 95% are too long and lack a compelling reason to do anything other than hit the delete button. The challenge is to make sure I don't repeat those mistakes.
Brad Hall 

 
I would love to hear your thoughts.

  • Should sales people be leaving voicemails? 
  • What mistakes do see you Reps making?

14 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Lead Generation Metrics: Ramp, Quota & Productivity

Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Wed, Aug 25, 2010 @ 10:53 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

I'm very excited to announce the release of the 2010 Lead Generation Metrics & Compensation Report focusing on the “pipeline development" Inside Sales function.

Let me share three data points I found interesting:
  • On average, it takes 3.2 months to get a rep fully ramped and their tenure in the role is 2.1 years.
    That means you get roughly 7 quarters of productivity from a rep.  It is time we all think about our on boarding process and the investment it requires
     
  • 63% of LeadGen Reps make quota which is down 13% from 2009.
     
  • LeadGen teams are contributing between 41% to 52% of their company’s overall pipeline. 
    That is nothing to be sneezed at!

Lots more great info in the report! Our thanks to all who participated and, as always, 

feel free to call/email/comment with any questions you may have.

 

----------------------------------------

Get the Full Report:
2010 Lead Generation Metrics & Compensation

Research Report: Focusing on the Lead Generation (pipeline generation) function. 

Lead Generation Metrics & Compensation: KPIs & trends

Based on 2010 survey of 115+ B2B companies.

4 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Why are 50% of Sales Reps Missing Quota?!

Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 @ 07:20 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

Last week, Chad Levitt (of the New Sales Economy blog) reacted to this data point from our 2010 Inside Sales research report:

 In a given group, percentage of Reps making quota:

  50%

Chad commented:

The most mind boggling statistic in the sales industry has to be that 50% of sales reps are not making quota. With all the Sales 2.0 tools available and ease of finding info on the web the sales industry is still struggling to hit its goals. I want to know why.

Here was my response to Chad.

  1. We are lazy and our hiring decisions are based on gut as opposed to repeatable success
  2. We don’t invest in an effective on boarding process….we let reps sink or swim
  3. Reps don’t know who to call or what to say when they connect
  4. When they do connect they show up and throw up and it is all about them instead of the buyer
  5. Marketing develops content to fill the top of the funnel but neglects the content that would help sales move the process forward
  6. Reps think inbound marketing means “they will call me if they want something”
  7. We have no idea how to ask for referrals or mine our own customer base
  8. Sales management does not know the difference between urgent and important
  9. Quotas are top down and based on something the board hands down after they passed the peace pipe

There were some excellent comments on Chad's post. Here are 2 that stuck out for me:

"I'd go on to add that not only are the hiring decision lazy, but the firing ones seem to be, too. I've seen countless numbers of inside folks stick around WAY longer than they should have, simply because replacing them was going to take too long. Or because they fit the culture."
- Chris Snell
 
 
"Selling the how (technology, methodology, product) rather than the outcomes"
-  Robert Koehler 

Both make excellent points. Why do you think 50% of sales reps are missing quota? Please share your thoughts.
 

----------------------------------------------------

Get the Full Report:
2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation

Research Report: Focusing on the Inside Sales (revenue generation) function.

Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation: KPIs & trends

12 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Ask the Experts: Great Sales Questions

Posted by Matt Bertuzzi on Fri, Aug 06, 2010 @ 06:37 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

(This post is part or our ongoing series of Ask the Experts questions, please share your thoughts and experiences by posting comments!)
---------

Michael Pedone, President & CEO of SalesBuzz.com, started an interesting discussion on the Inside Sales Experts group on LinkedIn the other day. He asked:

What is Your Favorite Sales Question to Ask?
 

So far there are 18+ responses and I thought I might share some of the common threads.

First off, I ran a word cloud (thanks to wordle.net) on the group members' favorite sales questions. Here's what I found:

A few things jumped out at me:

  • The dominance of "You"
    More than "your company" or "your organization" - sales people are asking their prospects if/why/how things impact them directly.
     
  • "What" as king of the 5 Ws (+ 1 H)
    More than any other interrogative - sales people are relying on open ended "What" questions.
     
  • Crafting a vision for the future
    Sales people are using words like "hoping" "look" "now" "to" to convey a picture of before and (an improved) after - with their solutions as the catalyst for change.
     
Well enough from me. How about you? What are some of your favorite / go-to sales questions to move a prospect forward?

6 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Sales Productivity Tips in 10 Seconds or Less

Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Tue, Jul 27, 2010 @ 07:12 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

Being such a fan of twitter (@bridgegroupinc), I thought it would be interesting to ask some fellow “twiteratti” to contribute sales productivity tips.  But, of course they had to do so in 140 characters - or just about 10 seconds - or less!  It was a fun and interesting exercise.

Here is what I received:

rainmakermaker: "Unfinished cycles kill salespeople! Start. Run. Finish. Start. Run. Finish. Always agree to next step and date. Track starts and finishes."
Rick Roberge - Sales Consultant The RainMaker Maker
 

"Forget product, forget pitch. Tell  your prospect why a customer chose you."
Kate Mitchell - Account Development Manager Demandware
 

markroberge: "Measure the # of leads that reach out to you vs. you reach out to them.  Prioritize strategies that increase the former."
Mark Roberge - VP Sales Hubspot
 

sellingtools: "Spend more time w/prospects & less time on everything else by using tools: timedriver, egrabber, iSell, workstreamer, klpz, echosign, glance."
Nancy Nardin – Founder/Editor Smart Selling Tools
 

josianefeigon: "Meet the Dynamic Duo- VM+EM are combined for maximum response."
Josiane Feigon - CEO/Author TeleSmart Communications
 

srichardv: "Divide calling time into two activities: prospecting to find ‘em and phone stalking to connect.  Live connects beat email/vm."
Steve Richards - Co-Founder & Head Sales Trainer Vorsight
 

jillkonrath: "YOU are the prime differentiator. Not your product/service. Just you - your expertise, ideas & insights. Realize that & sales are a SNAP!"
Jill Konrath – Best Selling Author Snap Selling
 

nidanshark: "It’s not about you or your product, it’s about the buyer and their product, their buyers, their business, their day-to-day work."
Diane Fonseca - Account Development Director  Brainshark
 

pc4media: "Track your leads as they visit your site and use soc media to make timely and relevant connections via email, phone and social media sites. "
Pete Caputa - VAR Sales & Marketing Manager Hubspot
 

nedelsha: "Use social media to get referrals. Don't cold call."
Nigel Edelshain – CEO Sales 2.0
 

Sensing any trends? I absolutely did. There is a sea change going on in sellling. Those companies, managers and Reps that won't adapt are being left behind.

It is no longer about corporate control or the corporate pitch. Buyers are savvy and they want answers to real business problems not pabulum. 

 
So, what advice do you have to offer in 140 characters / 10 seconds or less? 

10 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Signal v. Noise In LinkedIn Groups

Posted by Matt Bertuzzi on Thu, Jul 15, 2010 @ 03:25 PM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 
Tags: 

Note: this post is different than what we usually write about here. It is about the Inside Sales Community (the good, the bad & the ugly). I hope you’ll stick around to hear me out.
------

As many of you know, we founded and manage the Inside Sales Experts group on LinkedIn (5K+ members – thank you very much). Trish’s vision when starting the group was to create a space where:

  • Inside Sales practitioners could share ideas and information
    -and also to-
  • Allow professionals from a variety of industries to network with people with similar interests

We have worked hard over the last 2 years to make the group a success and remain true to those 2 objectives.

Recently LinkedIn rolled out a major change to how groups are operated. In short, I and quite a few others think this new look sucks. Well not the “look” but how Groups now handle “Discussion” and “News”.

 
What does this mean?

With this change comes a combining of "News" and "Discussions". This has had the effect of burying Discussions, in my opinion, the heart of LinkedIn Groups, among the “News” posts (see image at right)

By "Discussions" I mean: 
- Questions asked by group members to other group members in the hopes of gaining/sharing information 

"News" on the other hand includes: 
- Solicitations 
- Webinar invites 
- Blog links 
- Other self-promotional material 

 
What we are doing about it?

We launched a poll to our group members asking for their input.

As of this writing, 78% expressed the opinion that we should Keep "Discussions" 100% free of "News" (solicitations, webinar invites, blog links, etc.).

One commenter, Mark Wiertsema, wrote

Inside sales experts is the best group I'm subscribing to. By far. Single reason is the good moderation, discussions that provide actual value and active contributions. Just as important for the quality: absence of (covert) ads, job postings, etc.

There are hundreds of lists where we can advertise, post openings, scream about useless innovations. Let's do that there, and keep inside sales expert the best group on LI.

We are in the process of gathering more feedback and determining the best course of action to stay true to the spirit of our group’s founding.

 
Why should you care?

Well, for 2 reasons.

  • First, LinkedIn groups are a truly amazing way to learn, and more importantly, to help our peers.
  • LinkedIn’s really isn’t at fault here. We are. LinkedIn isn’t flooding our groups with webinar invites, self-promotional news & links to articles about/for/by us. We are.

Yes, we are all in Sales & Marketing. And yes, we are supposed to market & sell. But not at the expense of learning from and helping one another. So the next time you or I or anyone wants to post to a LinkedIn group, we should ask ourselves:

Is this signal? Or is this noise?

Am I trying to foster to a discussion here? Or am I shouting down someone else’s discussion in the spirit of self-promotion?

Thanks for listening and please, please let me know what you think about the Discussion/News topic.  Better yet, let LinkedIn know.


----------
UPDATE
: Chris Herbert wrote a post called What was Linkedin Thinking? Check out his commentary and some excellent screenshots that prove the point.

1 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Trust, Increasing Deal Size & Inside Sales

Posted by Matt Bertuzzi on Wed, Jul 14, 2010 @ 07:52 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

I recently read an excellent post by Eloqua’s Steve Woods: Trust, Reputation, and Inside Sales. He argues that:

There is a significant shift underway in how we establish and build trust...

…. it is causing significant shifts in the way that people buy. While the general evolution of buyers is causing some challenges for field sales teams, the evolution of trust is opening up new opportunities for inside sales teams.

Steve presents that “historically" Inside Sales teams would close business with an average deal size under $20k. But that now "some organizations are seeing effective use of inside sales up to $100,000.”

I thought I would share a few findings from our 2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation Report that back Steve up quantitatively.

----------------------------------------------------

What is the average order size for Inside Sales?

 
Average Order Size

  $54k

Since 2007, the average order size has increased nearly 240%. Further, the percentage of respondents reporting their average order size of over $100k has more than tripled.

As one might expect, the average order size for Reps selling into the SMB is significantly lower (approximately 1/5th the size) than those for Reps selling into the Enterprise.

But what I found particularly interesting was the sharp increase in order size for Enterprise and Both SMB & Enterprise focused Inside Sales groups.

I think I’ll give the final words to Steve (note: emphasis mine)

.. the efficiencies of the inside sales model give it a significant advantage in smaller transactions. This efficiency win, combined with the new ability to build trust through means other than eye contact, are moving inside sales in many organizations from small transactions to much larger transactions. This trend is likely to continue as the communication tools and trust-building approaches continue to tip the balance in favour of the inside sales model.

What so you think? Does anything in the data particularly stand out to you?
 

----------------------------------------------------

Get the Full Report:
2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation

Research Report: Focusing on the Inside Sales (revenue generation) function.

Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation: KPIs & trends

Based on 2010 survey of 115+ B2B companies.

6 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Inside Sales Quota & Attainment [2010 Research Data ]

Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Thu, Jul 08, 2010 @ 09:32 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

[The following is an excerpt from the 2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation Report survey of 115+ technology companies located in North America.]
----------------------------------------------------

What is the annual quota per Rep?

 
Average Annual Quota

  $853k


Data at left denotes Rep Quota tiers
Data at right denotes percentage of respondents
 

----------------------------------------------------

What percentage of the group achieves quota?

 
In a given group,
% of Reps Making Quota

  50%

It is interesting to note that while target compensation has remained relatively flat since 2007 (a 1% decrease), quota has increased significantly (nearly a 33% increase).

What’s up with that?

Our buddy, Chad Levitt, shares his reactions with Sales Productivity Decline: Why did 50% of Sales Reps Miss their Number? Here's an excerpt:

That is a bloody mess for any sales organization and it begs some questions to be asked.

Here are a few that come to mind:

1.) Why are quotas going up while quota attainment is going down?
2.) Why is quota attainment going down?
3.) Why are quotas going up?
4.) Is there a disconnect between sales management and front line sales reps?
5.) Is the proper training being provided to sales reps?
6.) Is this a cyclical trend in the data or a secular shift in the way customers buy?
7.) How much of this trend is related to the 2009 recession?
8.) Do you have a repeatable and measurable sales process?
9.) Can you pilot changes in the sales process to increase rep quota attainment?

More then a few mind benders in that list, but they need to be put on the table and discussed if any organization is going to see an improvement in rep quota attainment. Many organizations will ignore the data, turn into an ostrich, and steak their heads in the sand. Don’t be an ostrich — it is not the solution.

So, how do we turn this trend around?  When was the last time we really took a long hard look at our process and skills… and I mean long and hard look.

Great sales leaders are analytical.  They know that selling is a much science as art.  They know that those who win are those who have created a formula that is unique to their buyer and their market.

So, I ask you again, how do we turn this trend around?  Any information you can share on what you analyze, or how much you invest per head in training your people or how you piloted a new sales process….whatever you have we would love to hear it.

After all, we are the best and the brightest in the selling community aren’t we?

----------------------------------------------------

Get the Full Report:
2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation

Research Report: Focusing on the Inside Sales (revenue generation) function.

Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation: KPIs & trends

Based on 2010 survey of 115+ B2B companies.

13 Comments Click here to read/write comments

6 Reasons Why Everyone Needs a Lead Qualification Team

Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Thu, Jun 24, 2010 @ 06:53 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

This is a guest post by Craig Rosenberg. Craig is Author of The Funnelholic, his very popular B2B sales and marketing blog. He is also VP of Products & Services at Focus where he oversees product creation, management, and delivery

----------------------------------------------------

These days, there are lots of buzzwords being marketed as panaceas to Marketing ROI woes:  lead management, marketing automation, content marketing, lead nurturing, etc.  Don’t get me wrong, all of these things have major impacts to your marketing bottom line. But there is a big mistake: people are talking less and less about dedicated lead qualification teams. 

In my years in the business, one thing has not changed.  The most successful lead generation/lead management programs have dedicated phone resources whose sole job in life is to take raw inquiries and qualify them before they are sent to sales

There are a couple of things you need to know upfront. First, marketing automation is not a replacement for lead qualification.  As a matter of fact, marketing automation makes the lead qualification function more efficient, that is, they can qualify more leads for your sales team. Secondly, sending a list of “scored leads” to quota-carrying sales guys doesn’t work either. As you might imagine, I listen/read tons of content on lead management and I’ve heard this a couple times and it’s ridiculous.  Actually, I take this back, you can do this if you want your marketing automation/lead nurturing initiative to fail. Lastly, no matter what you do, if you send unqualified leads to sales, you will either fail or get minimal ROI from your marketing programs. Period.

The key to every lead management process is to have a human tied to a phone-based function that sits in between lead generation and the sales team.  What they do all day is follow up on leads from marketing and based on a set of qualification criteria, decide which ones should go to sales.  You can in-source, outsource, I don’t care. But I do care if you send raw, unfiltered leads directly to sales. Here are the 6 reasons why:

  1. Sales exists to close business, let them do that please
    Just look at the numbers: today it takes 3-15 touches to generate a qualified lead.  That is NOT something you want your expensive, bag-carrying sales reps working on.  Instead, you want them focused on closing business.
      
  2. Sales reps don’t want to follow up on leads anyway
    They don’t, they won’t, and it’s a pain in the butt to get them to do it.
      
  3. You don’t want them to either
    If you are a marketer generating raw inquiries or leads, your benchmark for success is leads-to-opportunity conversion or MQL (marketing qualified lead)-to-SAL (sales accepted lead) conversion.  You won’t come close with sales doing their first voicemail follow-up.  You want someone whose sole job it is in life is to reach your leads, overcome objections, make sure they are a fit, and get them connected to sales teams. We generate leads for 100s of clients, the differential of conversion rates between clients with lead qualification teams and those without is staggering.  We have two clients who get the same leads, client with an optimized lead qualification and lead nurturing process converts leads at 40%.  The other client, passing leads directly to sales, converts at 5%. (True story).
      
  4. You get the ability to optimize the process of “connecting”
    Taking a raw inquiry and creating a qualified lead is hard but gets better with optimization.  When you isolate this process, you allow for the process to continue to improve with lifts in conversion rates and ROI along the way.
      
  5. You get data
    It’s amazing how many times I hear how marketers don’t get data because “sales isn’t updating their CRM.”  With a dedicated lead qualification team, you get data…real data on your leads so you can optimize.
       
  6. It’s a tried and true method
    I didn’t invent this.  This process has been around for years because it works.

The message is clear: make lead nurturing a priority, create a lead management process, go buy a marketing automation product, but don’t forget the phone.  Without lead qualification as part of your process, ROI will be elusive.

11 Comments Click here to read/write comments

Inside Sales 2010: Metrics & Compensation

Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Wed, Jun 16, 2010 @ 08:42 AM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

 
I'm very excited to announce the release of the 2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation Report focusing on the “quota carrying"  Inside Sales function.

At the AA-ISP Leadership Summit in May I presented some of the findings (see below)


Let me share three data points I found interesting:

  • Since 2007, the average size of Inside Sales groups has almost tripled.
    Research by SKKU and MIT predicts growth of 800,000 jobs in Inside Sales while growth in traditional, field based, sales positions stagnates.
  • Average time to ramp a new rep is 4.5 months and average tenure is 2.9 years.
    Net, net… organizations really have to think about the lifetime value of their Reps. What can you do to ensure you make the most out of each hire?  What can you do to elongate the stay of “A” players?
     
  • In the past 3 years, quotas have risen nearly 33% yet the percentage of Reps making quota has fallen by 25%.
    Further: 42% of respondents reported less than 50% of their Reps at quota. Only 4% had greater than 80% of their Reps at quota. Ouch!
     

Lots more great info in the report!  Note: We'll also be publishing similar reports for Lead Generation groups and SaaS/Inside Sales groups - so stay tuned.

Our thanks to all who participated and, as always, feel free to call/email/comment with any questions you may have.

 

Get the Full Report:
2010 Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation

Research Report: Focusing on the Inside Sales (revenue generation) function. 

Inside Sales Metrics & Compensation: KPIs & trends

Based on 2010 survey of 115+ B2B companies.

4 Comments Click here to read/write comments

All Posts | Next Page