|
 RSS Feed
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Thu, Jun 24, 2010 @ 06:53 AM
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Tue, Mar 23, 2010 @ 08:05 AM
 We recently had a long conversation with one of our clients on why BANT is not always an optimal lead rating system. For those of you unfamiliar with the term: B Budget
A Authority
N Need
T Timeframe This system has been around since the beginning of time and used to be the defacto standard to define a qualified lead. So, what has changed? A better question might be: what hasn't changed? The selling environment now places the initial stages of the sales cycle in the hands of the buyer. They can google, twitter, LinkedIn and blogify their way to just about any piece of information about you and your solution. That means by the time they get to you they are well versed in what you have to offer and also in what your competitors offer. This being the case, do you really want their first conversation with your Inside Sales team to be about BANT? We use an analogy: Trying to get to BANT on a qualification call is like asking to see a W2 on a first date. Yes, the information is great and lets you determine if the person is “worthy” of your effort, but you will probably miss a lot of other fabulous things about this person (read prospect) if you are too narrowly focused. Here are some additional viewpoints: Andrew Gaffney, of the DemandGenReport, wrote When BANT Becomes AINT: The New Realities Of Buying Requires Scoring Refresh. He contends that in this fluid economy you have to drop the budget question altogether as it is no longer relevant. Susan Fantle, of B2BMarketingSmarts, wrote How marketers can help prevent lost sales. She contends that "‘sales-ready’ is NOT ‘purchase-ready.’ The BANT questions are the ones that should be asked by Sales, not Marketing." What Susan infers is that sales ready and purchase ready are actually two different things and should be handled by appropriate resources. Kevin Joyce, of Market2Lead, wrote The SCOTSMAN vs. BANT for Effective Lead Management. In it, he states that “Putting these questions in a form to prospects that is just in the research phase at the time is ineffective. You may as well ask:"Would you like me to set a Sales Rep on your tail like a Rottweiler looking for a steak?" LOL! Buyers are educated today. While BANT was question 1 in the past, now it is question 3-4 or even off the table altogether during the initial stages of the conversation. So, what is the answer? Well, the answer is that there's no one answer because not every sales organization is in the same place as it pertains to pipeline. Most assuredly you have to qualify the prospect to make sure they fit your Ideal Customer Profile (ICP), but beyond that your qualification questions should be based on the requirements of the sales organization. Let me give you a couple examples: - Sales Force “A” is a team of experienced reps that have longevity with the company.
They are working on large deals with long sales cycles that require buy-in from 4 functional areas. Realistically they can effectively manage 8 opportunities at any point in time.
The key to a win for them is in identifying the right person in all 4 functional areas and having an understanding of their technical environment as well as their current challenges and openness to change.
A qualified lead for them is based on having this level of information. Once you give it to them they can launch the sales process and either engage or disqualify the prospect. Collecting this information isn’t something you can do on a web form or in one call but is the first and most crucial step in the sales process and does lay the foundation for an opportunity to develop.
- Sales Force “B” is a team of newbies.
They are all fairly new to their territories and to the company. What is the fastest way to ramp them?
The fastest way is to have them talk to as many prospects as possible so why get in the way of their doing so? Create a lead rating system that ensures (ICP) fit and then throw the lead over the fence. Let the sales team have at them.
As the team builds pipeline and needs to become more discriminating then you fine tune your lead rating system based on their new requirements.
Summary: The important thing to remember here is that you can’t just pick a lead rating system from out of a book or one that was provided by your marketing automation vendor. You have to define the system with your sales partners and base it on the realities of where the sales organization is NOW and what they need NOW. PS – NOW also means that you will review your lead rating system twice a year and fine tune it as appropriate. Otherwise NOW becomes THEN. Thanks for listening. Your thoughts? (Photo credit: billaday)
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Tue, Jan 12, 2010 @ 07:15 AM
Okay, I know I promised to publish the second part of my interview with Linda on Marketing Becoming Enablers BUT that post garnered so many comments here as well as on LinkedIn that I had to temporarily take a different path.
The following was written by Kirko Papajanis, President of Boxpilot (the World Leader in Guided Voicemail and a passionate advocate of the importance of personal contact to B2B sales and marketing) and is a very interersting comment to our position. Have to tell ya, wish I had written it! This post is a bit longer than usual but SO worth the read!
--------
Much has been written lately about lengthening sales cycles and the preference of prospects not to engage with sales reps until much later in the buying cycle. It is accepted as an idea whose time has come and heavily supported with a wealth of statistics.
Some of the highest profile minds in Marketing are responding to this trend with a renewed call to improve the development of online content, lead scoring and analytics; better understand the buyer persona and to continue to enhance automated marketing programs to provide more product/price/comparative/competitive and benefit/ROI information, for prospects to peruse at their leisure. There is a stampede onto the bandwagon to keep your sales reps away from prospects until they have basically made up their mind about what they want.
There is a misguided perception that the way to win the hearts and minds of your prospects is to leave them in peace to develop their own conclusions based on what they think they know about you.
Years from now, management will look back at this "Slap Yourself On the Top of Your Head", moment in time and ask, "What were we thinking?"
So, What Are You Thinking?
A prospect who would rather not engage with sales teams is nothing new, just a current example of why response rates for hard and soft offers have always been different.
- There is no difference between a preference for online content and the historical sales brush off, "Send me something in writing".
Sales people used to get fired for doing what companies can't seem to do enough of now, which is to give value and get nothing in return. This isn't to say content should be withheld, we have indeed past the point where that tactic is in any ones best interest, but self- serve content is NOT king and can work against you. When every selling opportunity is a little bit different, involvement, interest and trust are equally important.
- While companies are rushing ahead to provide the selective answers to prospects' most frequently asked questions, they are doing nothing to ensure that those prospects ask the right questions.
- Finally, there's an assumption that prospects are truly reading and accurately absorbing all the information they're collecting on their own. This defies human nature.
Keeping Your Sales People Away From Your Prospects is a TERRIBLE Idea.
- Many decision makers are highly intelligent quick thinkers, capable of summing up the gist of an argument swiftly.
But they have an unfortunate (for you) tendency to ignore the detail once they believe they have grasped the content. A well documented flaw of many quick thinkers is a failure to review ALL the information available to them. So, you can't be sure what content they have pulled from your materials or the materials of your competitors and you can't predict what conclusions they have come to.
- Your prospects will gravitate to the information that answers questions they already have an interest in and will respond best to information that fits their preconceived notions and preferences.
- You don't really want a level playing field and neither do your competitors.
When one of them successfully inserts a sales contact into a one-on-one relationship with a prospect, while your company is content to be held at an arms-length, you have sacrificed an irrevocable piece of the high ground and probably the sale.
- Statistics, trends, campaigns and group behaviors do not buy.
Purchase decisions are made by people who will not always behave in a predictable or even logical way. Their decisions will be influenced by factors that your company will never understand unless you can establish the dialogue that ONLY comes with personal contact and that point of contact is your sales rep.
Why Are Sales Teams Not Screaming "Bloody Murder"?
Ironically, along with all the leading edge marketing thinking, the role of the Sales Rep has been pigeon-holed into an outdated and inconsistent cliché "The Closer". In a world where the buying cycle is stretching out past the foreseeable horizon, Sales Reps still live and die by the quarterly revenue goal. To meet these goals they can't afford the time to engage anyone who isn't ready to buy. That's half the reason that Sales Reps are happy to wait to engage.
The other half of the reason is that sales people put themselves on the line. It's not a pleasant thing to expose yourself over and over to the responses of people who don't want to talk to you. So, while it's not to the credit of sales people to be willing to sit back and wait for people who WANT to talk to them, it's understandable. It's not acceptable though and unless your sales people are willing to put themselves on the line to make a personal contact with your prospects, your revenue will suffer.
Current stats all point to a failure of many nurturing programs to translate raw leads into sales and the timing and distribution of new content seems to be the leading solution, but the removal of personal sales contact is probably at least partly to blame.
The role of a Sales Rep shouldn't be diminished, but it needs to evolve. The challenge facing sales teams is to approach your prospects with enough knowledge and skill to serve the needs of both the buyer and seller. The new Sales Rep is the voice of your marketing program and will subtly take ownership of the sales process by ensuring that your prospects are not cherry picking information, but actually absorbing the right information that will lead them to make the choice to buy from you.
--------
Trish here again. Thanks Kirko. Okay readers, let us hear what you have to say. And Sales, where are you? I know you read this blog so why is it that only Marketing chimes in?
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Tue, Jan 05, 2010 @ 07:28 AM
This fall, I had the pleasure of attending Silverpop's B2B University in Boston. At the event, I shared a table with Linda Duchin the VP of Marketing from PowerSteering Software.
During breaks, Linda & I began a conversation about how the line between Sales and Marketing is starting to blur and what some of the implications of that may be.
PowerSteering provides Enterprise SaaS Project and Portfolio Management software to help large organizations manage IT, New Product Development, Six Sigma and other strategic initiatives. They were recently recognized by Forrester Research as a leader in IT and Business-Driven PPM.
I followed up with a call to Linda and here's a summary of the first part of our conversation:
------
Linda, I'm starting to be concerned about the view that Marketing is responsible for a prospect until they are scored as "sales ready". My take is that it is a slippery slope that could result in lost deals. If a prospect is in my nurture process and my competitor is fully engaged in their sales process, I think I am at a distinct disadvantage.
Now, don't get me wrong, I think it is fantastic that Marketing wants to assume more responsibility, but as a salesperson shouldn't I be the one to determine when a lead is "sales ready"? As a salesperson, my job is to convert interest to opportunity. Why delay that process?
Linda: Trish, I share your concern! In fact, I think we're already at the point where some sales organizations feel they no longer have to do outbound prospecting. Their skills in this area are starting to become rusty because they are not used to it.
So where do you draw the line? What's your vision for a best practice and how does it work within your Sales organization?
Linda: Internally, we don't use the terms sales ready or marketing ready. It just adds a level of complexity to the process that we don't need. We agreed on basic qualification parameters and we adhere to those. And when necessary, we revisit those qualification criteria.
Our internal group handles most of the leads we generate, but we do assign the customer leads directly to the Sales Reps. We sell to large global organizations so new contacts within those organizations represent potential expansion value to us. Our Sales Reps maintains the relationship with our customer, so it makes sense for them to leverage that knowledge to penetrate new groups, divisions etc.
We also send them leads for companies where they are already engaged in a sales cycle to ensure continuity of follow up We want the Sales Rep to have immediate access to any contact that may impact the ongoing sales process. It also eliminates the potential for Inside Sales to be calling into an existing opportunity.
Our goal is to have one point of contact for every Account at the relationship level and we try to facilitate this through marketing automation tools like Salesforce.com and Marketo.
At this event, and throughout the industry, there is much discussion about Sales and Marketing working together to build out lead definitions, scoring and nurture programs. Conceptually, most companies are in agreement with this strategy. What have you seen in terms of implementation?
Linda: Well, that is a bone of contention with me! You never want Sales and Marketing to be silos, but when push comes to shove, there is only so much time in the day for collaboration. At some point you have to draw a line in the sand and move forward with a strategy which of course can and should evolve through ongoing feedback. The pundits preach nirvana, but you have to make sure that this doesn't come at the cost of sales and end up becoming a distraction from selling. Practically speaking, it's already challenging just to get basic sales follow up data documented adequately.
The reality is that in the current environment, it's harder to sell than ever before. That is what has created a lot of this backlash with Marketing owning more of the process. As Marketers, we are trying to lighten the load for Sales. We are trying to give them the bandwidth they need to focus on closing business in the current quarter.
------
We will publish the rest of the interview next week. My question to you is: What do you think?
Is Marketing being forced to assume too much of the sales process? Are pipelines at risk because our Sales people are waiting for perfection as opposed to getting out there and converting interest to opportunity?
Are "sales ready" leads the bullet that moves us forward or shoots us in the foot?
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Tue, Nov 24, 2009 @ 06:54 AM
This is a guest post by Craig Rosenberg of The Funnelholic. You can find Craig on twitter at @funnelholic.
----------------------------------------------------
Most B2B marketers don't always realize that the initial follow up on your leads can make or break your conversion rate and ultimately your ROI. The B2B marketers that do realize this have adjusted - they either own lead qualification, work extensively with the sales-lead lead-qualification team or outsource to a tele-vendor who qualifies leads before they pass them to the sales-lead lead-qual group. Just generating leads or managing CPL, and so on means nothing if you aren't optimized for what happens after you generate the lead. 
So, as a person who has been providing leads to organizations for 10 years, I can say I have heard them all. Not just from the person on the phone following up, but from the marketers who gather feedback from sales. This "feedback" is from the front line of leads. If this is the feedback you are getting, sometimes fixing the follow-up first makes all the difference. Remember, if Sirius Decisions is right, 80 percent of the leads that sales disqualifies end up buying within 24 months. So those leads that "suck" many not be that bad after all.
Before I go on, I do want to say one thing I have learned: many times all "frontline" objections are solved by three things:
- Being clear about what the goal is of the call. In most cases, its two-fold: Figure out whether you should keep talking (score) and, if so, get them to the next step in the sales process (demonstration, appointment, and so on). This is where follow-up fails: Lead-qual reps think their job is to sell the product (bad call), figure out if they have read the whitepaper (hilarious). Every objection can be answered by the question "Are you the person involved in ...?" Seriously.
- Training and management - repeat after me: training and management.
- Marketing automation and lead nurturing.
So, here they are the 6 common, but easy to overcome, yet honestly, completely annoying pieces of feedback you receive on leads*:
- "They don't remember downloading the whitepaper":
Yes, I know. Since the advent of online whitepaper syndication, it has been the new buyer objection. Suckers get derailed from this objection. Seriously, why do you care? YOU know they did, so leverage that knowledge to keep on fighting. How about, "no problem, are you in charge of...?"
- "They won't call me back":
That's right, because buyers (even when buying) can't wait to call back someone so they can be subjected to BANT qualifying questions. Don't just leave "checking in and seeing if you have any questions" voicemails of the early 90s. The buyer's job is to NOT call you back or email you back (even when they LIKE you). Winning organizations have the following:
- Coordinated call/email campaigns designed to get people to connect.
- Outbound dialing service like Connect and Sell www.connectandsell.com
- An understanding that not everyone will answer their phones in 3 weeks, so nurture.
- "They don't know who we are":
Now this one CAN be solved to an extent with the lead sources that you are using, but again, is that the ultimate opening question? Who are you? Don't mind if I do.
- "They don't have a project":
Sorry that they don't have a project today, but seeing as this is the right person who is requesting information about your market, you may want to talk to them. Just to note, from our marketing programs at Tippit, we have one simple lead definition, "Right Person, Right Interest." We will pay for that. We know over time, they will buy. Just get us started.
- "They aren't the decision maker":
I know, I know, you need to talk to the CEO or VP. Well, they aren't going to download things on the Internet. I understand why we need to get to the C-suite at some point, but that's not going to happen with industrial grade, lead-generation machinery. Particularly with companies that want to do LOTS of business. If you want to hit the C-suite, put together a VITO campaign leveraging execs, make sure you have experienced outbound callers on the project and be happy with a couple leads. But don't expect your lead machine to punch out CEO's.
- "They have a project but...":
You can't have it both ways from lead gen. The perfect project ready to buy in one month with no warts attached is just NOT going to happen. If you do get projects, be happy you did. These are still leads. Here are some of my favorites:
- "They fit our employee parameters, but they only want a small amount of licenses"
- "They are already down the road"
Note: This is primarily related to leads and inquiries, depending on what you call them (not BANT scored).
*This "feedback" means there is a problem with expectation setting, process, and so on and can always be made to go away.
(Photo Credit: hugovk)
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Fri, Oct 02, 2009 @ 11:36 AM
Welcome to the 4th Quarter. Or as IDC's Lee Levitt put it "the most important quarter of the decade." Now onto today's B2B thought.
B2B Thought: Addressing the Definition of a "Lead"
I participated in a conversation over at Robert Lesser's blog on An Identity Crisis for the Sales Lead. Here is Robert's premise:
|
Do you find it startling that many sales and marketing teams still cannot agree on the definition of a sales lead?
The irony of course, is that the deliverable for sales is crystal clear - the sale. The contract is signed and the PO received. The heavy lifting from sales is finished and that of accounts receivable begins.
But for marketing, whose key deliverable is often the qualified lead, the picture is confusing: the definition of a sales lead can be all over the map. Is a lead an appointment a qualified lead(or both)? Is a lead an inquiry, a trade show visitor, a webinar registrant, a downloader of a white paper or a referral? |
Good question and one that organizations ask themselves on a regular basis!
Here is how I responded:
Let me add a twist. Lead definitions are fluid. Sometimes sales cares more about "activity" and other times more about "opportunity".
"Activity" based lead definitions often occur when you have just introduced a new product and need to talk to anyone and everyone. Or, when you have a significant number of new sales reps and need to get them out there talking to prospects as quickly as possible.
"Opportunity" based lead definitions often occur when you have a mature and stable product and sales organization that want well qualified leads that have true potential.
I agree with Brian Carroll when he talks about the need for sales and marketing to have consistent huddles to discuss this topic because the requirements of sales are often fluid and they need to communicate that effectively to and with marketing.
So, what do you think and how do you address lead definition in your organization?
Posted by Gail Milton on Tue, Feb 24, 2009 @ 06:32 AM
There is a very common, often overlooked challenge facing many Inside Sales Teams: is supporting individual requests from the Field hindering my goals, objectives & process?
Very often Inside Sales Rep will get the following request from one of their Field partners:
| I'm going to be in Toledo for three days next month. Can you get me some appointments? Just get me in the door! |
This poses a dilemma.
Does the Inside Rep put their calling strategy and process on the shelf in order to get the Field Rep appointments when/where they are traveling?
The reality is a no win situation.
In many cases, the Inside Rep won't even get paid for setting a meeting unless they are deemed qualified. This is in direct conflict with the notion of "get me in the door".
Furthermore, instead of spreading their prospecting net wide, Reps will narrow their focus and call the same 10 prospects repeatedly for the next 3 weeks. But at what cost?
-
If they support multiple Field Reps, these requests begin to eat away at their prime objective which is to fill the pipeline with qualified opportunities or close business.
-
Instead of adding value and solving problems for potential prospects, they become an annoyance as their number displays repeatedly on the caller ID.
Inside sales requires a consistent, repeatable process and messaging that delivers a strong value proposition and educates the prospect. Using Inside Sales to create "activity" for the Field is in reality a waste of the resource.
A solution for some is to consider outsourcing appointment setting to a 3rd party.
The company Green Leads has a very interesting model. They offer a "self service" model: no minimums, pay after the meeting occurs and oh yeah, no lists to provide. They also have an integration with Salesforce.com available so your Field Reps can upload an Account record to them with the click of a button. Amazing!
Taking the outsourced approach, your Field Reps get what they need from an "activity" perspective AND your Inside team stays focused on having conversations with prospects that result in qualified leads.
If, on the other hand, Inside Sales will be setting "when/where" appointments, here are a few suggestions:
- Try to set one qualified meeting as an anchor and then set introductory appointments to fill the calendar.
- Set proper expectations with the field - only 10% of the prospects targeted will agree to a meeting and only a few of those will actually convert to a real opportunity.
- Create a consistent process for appointment setting. Document the number of attempts you will make within a pre-determined number of business days. Use a combination of contact methods; dials, voice messaging, social networking and email.
A documented call process will allow you to tweak for success and, most importantly will force the Reps to let go and move on to greener pastures.
How do you / your team work with & support the Field?
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Tue, Nov 04, 2008 @ 08:52 AM
I think we have reached a milestone in the challenge of "who has responsibility for the pipeline?".
The Olden Days: Sales was Responsible
Back in the olden days, sales was responsible for the pipeline. They knocked on doors, they cold called, they networked at trade shows, they did whatever it took to find prospects and get them into the pipeline. Then that changed.....
The Not-so Distant Past: Marketing was Responsible
This change made Marketing not only responsible for getting the prospects to self identify but also for nurturing them till they are ready to buy.
So how did that happen? The availability of marketing automation certainly played a part in the shift. There are a number of vendors in the market with the message "if you build it they will come". And hopefully they are correct, the prospects will come. But turning those prospects into customers is where the rubber meets the road. Who owns that piece of the puzzle?
Pete Caputa wrote a great post on How Your Sales Team Can Support Your Online Marketing. (Note: Pete is a rabid inbound marketing guy who happens to be in sales so his perspective is interesting.) Here is an excerpt:
|
So, now that marketing is accountable. Sales has to be accountable. Sales doesn't have any more excuses.
- Sales can't complain about lack of leads to call when each salesperson has 100 untouched leads. OR 1,000 that haven't been "closed lost" or "unqualified".
- Sales can't really complain that these prospects aren't engaged or interested enough. They've opted-in to a sales process. If their interest can't be piqued, how the heck did your salespeople close anything from cold calling?
- Sales can't complain that these prospects aren't really ready to buy yet. Sales should be nurturing them, identifying urgency and presenting appropriate solutions at the appropriate time.
- Sales can't complain that these prospects just don't fit our typical customer profile. There's 100 untouched ones. Sales should call the next lead. Even better. Maybe sales can help develop additional profiles that need the company's expertise and/or help product management come up with products and services that serve another segment of the market.
|
Ok. So, now that marketing is kicking butt - generating leads - literally "taking names" and sales has no more excuses. What's next? Today and Future: Sales & Marketing Share Responsibility
So, what is Pete trying to communicate? That Sales + Marketing = Pipeline. No one group owns responsibility. You have to work as a team, building a plan that integrates marketing messaging with sales relationship building.
Here are a few quick tips on how to do that:
- Work together to develop your Ideal Customer Profile. What do high probability accounts look like? Get specific - if you say Fortune 500 feel free to shoot yourself in the foot! This will allow marketing to very specifically target only those prospects you want to end up in your pipeline.
- Build outbound campaigns that integrate marketing touches with sales interaction. The ball should be passed back and forth like in basketball and not just run down the field by the quarterback like in football. (Please note I stink at sports analogies!)
- Communicate to both organizations that they are each responsible for the pipeline. You have to stop pointing fingers and start joining hands!
Would love to hear from you! How are your sales & marketing organizations working together to build pipeline and generate revenue?
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Thu, Jul 24, 2008 @ 12:43 PM
We all know that we only have one chance to make a first impression and that is especially true in a sales situation. If you are lucky enough to receive an inbound lead...don't blow it.
I recently read a great posting by Keith Rosen on the Sales and Sales Management Blog. Here are 3 excerpts that got me thinking:
Many salespeople spend much of their time during a sales call attempting to educate the prospect about their product, service and industry. They think it will stimulate interest and increase the odds of earning a new client. In many cases, this is the same strategy that compromises their opportunity to create a relationship with that prospect.
A sales call is not the time prove how much you know. It's the time to find out what you don't know about the prospect and what the prospect doesn't know about you. It is not your knowledge that sells, but how effectively you customize your knowledge to meet each of your prospects' specific needs.
And finally:
Start your conversation by asking certain questions. Questions will enable you to uncover the relevant information to provide and identify the prospect's objective and expectation of the meeting. Begin your meeting with the following questions. "What are your expectations of our meeting today?" Just so I don't sound repetitive, what do you already know about ...?" Then, based on the information you receive, you can craft your presentation.
|
Wow....great stuff. We spend a lot of time with Inside Sales teams at technology companies and the "show up and throw up" syndrome is just as bad over the phone as it is in person. Companies spend hours crafting the right outbound message and process but do they take the same care with their inbound process? Not always.
Here are 3 quick tips that will ensure you maximize your inbound inquiry conversion.
- Collect information about each inbound inquiry so you know whether or not they fit your Ideal Customer Profile. This will give you a leg up on your pre-call planning and also create a sense for their probability to purchase.
- Your 1st question should be "Was there a compelling event that caused you to visit our site...download our white paper?" Wouldn't it be great if right off the bat you know whether or not they were looking for a solution or just collecting information?
- Taking Keith's advice, your 2nd question should be "What do you already know about us and what information are you most interested in?" This sets the direction for the rest of the call.
In summary, an inbound lead is a blessing. Bring your "A" game to the qualification table. What other great questions do you use to get a prospect talking?
Posted by Trish Bertuzzi on Wed, Jun 04, 2008 @ 01:30 PM
All of our clients are interested in learning how they can make their sales and marketing initiatives more effective by reaching more decision makers. Well, it all starts with the list. You can't target who you can't see.
Good lists with decision maker data is hard to find. Over the years it has gotten easier with many great online resources becoming available and Jigsaw has recently become a favorite of mine. For those of you that don't know, Jigsaw is a sales portal where you can buy or trade business contacts.
Well, Jigsaw has just done the unthinkable! Through their Open Data Initiative, they are now offering their data for FREE. What??? Yes folks, you can now search for, select and download thousands of records at no cost. You can use this data to analyze territories, verticals or whatever else you always wanted to analyze but couldn't afford to.
|
This is going to turn the data business upside down! Check them out, download a list and go to town. |
 |
PS - While you are there, check out their blog Garth's World. Garth's view on the world is hysterically funny and will make you LOL!
UPDATE: The company data is free. When you download the company data Jigsaw will tell you how many contacts they have available for purchase. They are smart but they ain't crazy folks... they still have to pay the bills!
All Posts | Next Page
Error sending email
Email sent successfully
|