Posted by
Jason Hekl on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 @ 10:01 AM
In a previous post, I argued that empowered buyers and new technology are forcing today’s B2B teleprospectors to take on new personalities to meet the growing demands of the role. I showcased three teleprospecting ‘personalities’. The ‘First Responder’ is all about speed, recognizing the long understood advantage that comes with being first. The "[Social] Networker" still works the room, but in the digital realm. And the "Field Nurse" practices triage through inbound inquiry channels. Each represents a viable teleprospecting role, requiring very different skill sets. Today, we look at four more emerging teleprospecting personalities.
On their own, these new personalities seem like a logical evolution from traditional teleprospecting responsibilities, but when taken on in ad hoc fashion without the benefit of clear definition and supporting org structure, are they a harbinger of disorders to come? You be the judge.
- The Chatter. Hard to believe, but quite a few people are reluctant to speak with a salesperson. On the other hand, I love speaking with teleprospectors! (So much so that I invite you to call me at 415-754-3557 to participate in primary research I’m conducting for this year’s Summit). Some buyers find comfort in the relative anonymity of a click-to-chat session. More and more, companies are exposing a chat channel to prospective customers conducting research on their Web sites. Teleprospecting reps are answering those inquiries, leveraging both original and templated content to manage the conversations, often handling multiple threads at once.
- The Plumber. Some tech-savvy teleprospectors generate new demand by identifying and stopping leads from “falling through the cracks.” The value they provide (besides leads) is to identify and diagnose the leakage from the demand waterfall so that his/her counterparts in field marketing can adjust the scoring and routing mechanisms to plug the leaks wherever they may occur. The more expert teleprospectors become at interpreting activity, identifying missed opportunities for followup and feeding that insight back to field marketing, the more productive the integrated demand creation machine will become.
- The Lead Whisperer. This rep is expert at cultivating demand over time – a (pre-MQL) nurturing type who recognizes that each buyer has his or her own process to follow. The rep whispers encouragement as the buyer moves through the education phase and into the solution phase of the buyer’s journey. The rep understands that getting in early creates an opportunity to shape prospect thinking; when prospects are ready to move forward, they’ll turn first to the rep they already know.
- The Recycler. There’s at least one in every crowd. That special kind of rep who refuses to throw away what was once a good lead. This rep loves when leads are disqualified or reassigned back to the queue because too much time has lapsed without any movement. He/she knows that what may be an undesirable lead now could be very attractive by tomorrow, given the right conditions. The rep then utilizes the sales and marketing tools at his disposal to monitor for those conditions and re-engage when the time is right.
What do you think? Are these personality traits an early indicator of teleprospecting role specialization, or an omen of problems to come? Will disorders develop when reps take on too many personalities at once? Join the conversation and leave your comments below.
Posted by
Jason Hekl on Tue, Jan 31, 2012 @ 01:04 PM
When I began my career in B2B sales and marketing, I was hired by a Canadian company to sell software to insurance companies based in the United States. They set me up in a remote office and provided me with everything I needed to sell a lot of licenses: Solution Selling training, a Goldmine CD, a thick binder of product brochures and datasheets, and an experienced sales manager who used to sell paper forms to insurance companies (before computers made that business obsolete).
What I did not have, and cannot imagine selling without today, was the support of a teleprospecting organization to qualify leads before I called on them. I was hard-rock mining, cold calling from sunup to sundown. The only marketing leads I had came from the few industry events we sponsored each year.
We’ve come a long way. Today, teleprospecting is an essential part of B2B demand creation strategies. Teleprospecting professionals are an impressive group, constantly adapting to changes in how companies buy, and utilizing new technology to be smarter about what they do. They’ve taken on new personalities in an ongoing effort to meet the growing demands of the role.
Let’s look at three personalities that are a modern take on traditional teleprospecting roles, including:
- The First Responder. Field marketing teams promote several high-value offers at any given time through inbound channels like search marketing or content syndication. Any response to these offers (e.g. free trials, implementation best practices ebook targeting buyers in the later stages of the buying cycle) triggers a route around normal lead scoring and routing and is delivered directly to the inbound teleprospecting queue for immediate followup. The teleprospector knows that an inbound response to one of these offers is a great indicator of need or propensity to buy. More importantly, following up quickly, often within minutes, is the best way to establish a positive perception in the mind of a buyer, who may be in exploratory mode figuring out what to do next.
- The (Social) Networker. When I started my B2B sales and marketing career as a quota-carrying software sales rep nearly 15 years ago, I was handed a thick A.M. Best directory of all the insurance companies operating in North America, complete with a list of top executives. The prospecting tools available to sales reps today are a little more advanced. Teleprospecting reps in particular are very savvy at mining social networks to uncover new leads. The best ones are all over LinkedIn and other professional networks, keeping tabs on who moves where. They join special interest groups, monitor conversations in these communities and reach out through networking tools to make first contact with targeted prospects. It's a learned skill, and many teleprospecting reps are now quite expert at leveraging social channels to generate new demand.
- The Field Nurse. The field nurse excels in the high-stress environment of an inbound call center, where there’s no time to prepare and no two calls are alike. It’s fast-paced, and it’s reactive. All inbound calls, email requests and click-to-chat sessions are routed to inbound teleprospecting in real time and immediately prioritized over other prospecting activities. As might be expected, teleprospectors with exceptional verbal and written communication skills and the ability to think and act quickly will excel here. Each inbound conversation is different, so teleprospectors require broad knowledge and customer-service-like training to triage each request.
The practical question now is to see if companies start to formalize these personalities into distinct roles, giving even greater focus to the teleprospecting function. In another post, I’ll explore four more emerging teleprospecting personalities, and ask the question: ”are these teleprospecting personality traits the harbinger of role specialization, or an omen of problems to come?”
Posted by
Jay Famico on Wed, Jan 18, 2012 @ 11:42 AM
A signature-driven email is a mass email that looks like an email sent directly to the recipient from an individual. This is accomplished by using an individual’s email address, sender name and signature details, and avoiding generic values (e.g. marketing@company.com). Signature-driven emails include the following elements:
Sender: An individual
Subject line: Not a “marketing” subject line
Body copy: Formatted in text and addressed to the recipient. No HTML.
And here's an example of such an email:
Now, let’s discuss the benefits of these emails:
- Improved conversion rates. Signature-driven emails can heighten a recipient’s perception of the email’s relevance and increase the email’s conversion rate (compared to sending out the same message via a company-branded email).
- Workload reduction. Employee workload can be reduced as some personal outreach can be automated so that less effort is required.
- Contact insight. Contacts will often reply and share information when they receive a signature-driven email. This provides the company with additional information about the contact’s interests.
- Deeper relationships. The use of signature-driven emails, especially within prospecting activities, can help establish a relationship between the contact and an individual within the company.
Unfortunately, the potential value of these missives is frequently muted due to their misuse. When using a signature-driven email, do not commit any of the 10 deadly sins of signature-driven emails:
- Frequent use. The more frequently this tactic is used, the less effective it becomes. Avoid using this tactic for marketing emails; if you must, use it sparingly, interjected between corporate-branded emails.
- Multiple sends. When a contact receives the same message a second time, this indicates that the email is not sent from an individual. To ensure this does not occur, hard-code exclusion rules into signature-driven email programs and distributions.
- HTML. When a signature-driven email is in HTML, it’s apparent that an individual did not send it or that the individual used an email template. Send the email in plain text for maximum effectiveness.
- One company, many contacts. As the number of people in a company sent the same signature-driven missive increases, the more likely they will discuss receiving it – highlighting the fact that the email was not sent by an individual. To prevent this predicament, limit the mailing to one person per company.
- No message variations. When two or more of the recipients from the same organization or user group discuss receiving the email, creating several versions of the message helps to foster the illusion that the emails were sent directly from individuals.
- Incorrect relationship. Make sure that it’s believable that the sender would actually email the contact the message in question. For example, an email invitation to a breakfast seminar from a sales rep or marketing manager would be much more believable than the same invite coming from a CEO.
- No sender knowledge. Ensure that the resource ostensibly sending the email has prior knowledge of the email distribution and access to see who received it. Email recipients will reply and call the resource; if the resource is not knowledgeable, the effectiveness of the signature-driven email will be significantly curtailed.
- Bad data. When dynamic inserts of contact information are used, poor data quality can quickly derail the tactic’s effectiveness. Ensure that all fields used for personalization and segmentation are correct and properly formatted (e.g. “Frank” not “FRANK” or “Franky [I think]”).
- Off-hour sending. When emails are sent during non-working hours or always at the same day/time, email recipients come to realize the messages are automated. Ensure that emails are sent out during normal working hours. Also, to help signature-driven emails appear more realistic, vary their distributions by day and time. For example, make sure that these emails are not always sent at 8:30 a.m. on Mondays.
- Opt-out process. To be legally compliant, the emails must contain an opt-out process. Unfortunately, this decreases a contact’s perception that the email was sent by an individual. Several clients have addressed this by including the opt-out link as part of a legal disclaimer, or inserting it within the email’s body content but not allowing the opt-out form or preference management page to pre-populate with the recipient’s email address (this would highlight the fact that the message was not sent by an individual).
While these guidelines can help increase the value that signature-driven emails provide, they do not address the email’s relevance. As with all marketing outreach efforts, if the message/offer does not focus on the recipient’s specific needs or interests, it will generate little value. If your message isn’t pertinent to the contact, don’t send it.
The most prominent factor we see being used to prioritize a feature or version upgrade is ROI; namely, which enhancements will make the most money for the company? However, best-in-class product strategy and management leaders do much more than just the math calculation involved to design their future product or service roadmaps. Here are some tips and best practices to consider when choosing which enhancements to fund for the future roadmap of your offering:
- Look at the enhancement’s potential impact on customer satisfaction and retention, not just potential revenue.
- Assess the impact on the most strategic customers; enhancements that will forge stronger relationships with market leaders and the most sizable accounts should be prioritized higher.
- Prioritize investment by how scalable the capabilities are across the widest set of customers, and whether multiple products or solutions can leverage the enhancement.
- Gauge the urgency and severity of customer needs as part of the prioritization process, as well as the cause (e.g. restricted from performing a function, cannot obtain the right information).
- Assess how the current offering is matching up against the competition and determine the unique differentiators (e.g. features, functionality, service) in the minds of customers.
- Examine the potential impact of technology trends and determine if the enhancement might become obsolete or unnecessary down the road, or might be easier to deploy at a later date on your roadmap.
- Keep a pulse on industry trends and anticipate enhancements based on changes in the marketplace; enhancements that serve to meet new regulations or prevent risk should receive higher prioritization on the roadmap.
- Align to core competencies; the upgrade should be assessed not only on its financial merits but also on its strategic fit (e.g. align to the company’s strategic imperatives).
- Pay special attention to the risks of cannibalizing other offerings, or confusing the positioning or value proposition of other products/services in customer’s minds.
- Estimate how long it will take to get an enhancement to market. The goal of release upgrades is to drive growth; the faster to market, the higher the revenue potential.
- Understand the level of effort it will take for marketing, sales and support services to be poised to articulate/promote this new feature to customers. Do not underestimate this factor – the go-to-market execution is the difference between success and failure.
A common mistake we see organizations make every day is churning customer requirements into future releases like an assembly line, without first considering the business rationale behind each investment. Think through these choices using a fact-based standard set of decision criteria for all investment decisions.
Note that SiriusDecisions has developed an enhancement prioritization framework for products or solutions — it’s a best-in-class decision support tool when building the future roadmap for an offering. Let us know if you'd like more information about getting access to our research brief covering this topic.
Many B2B organizations are taking stock of their 2012 planning process. And many sales and sales operations leaders complain about why the top-down planning process does not work and results in targets that are not aligned with the market’s potential. There are several reasons that I continue to hear (and even once believed) that purport to explain why top-down budgets have no value. I now believe much of what’s stated as fact is really myth. If all B2B companies that made it through the recession or have found ways to show growth are retaining their sales reps, it means someone must be setting revenue targets correctly, right? So I decided to compile a list of myths about top-down planning in an effort to get to the truth. Here goes:
- Myth 1: Senior executives lack market intelligence. The majority of B2B CEOs got to where they are today by spending a successful career in the market that many insinuate they know nothing about. The fact is that CEOs have more access to the best networks and information than any role in a company. Their entire day is filled with meetings and conversations focused on gathering market intelligence via customer interactions, internal meetings and data analysis. The truth is that these leaders are in the best position to understand the market. Period.
- Myth 2: Sales input is never considered in top-down planning. Best practice B2B companies hold business reviews at least every quarter, and many also have two or three off-site leadership meetings throughout the fiscal year. Are we to believe that all that input does not go into the process? Just because sales leadership may not be physically represented at every meeting throughout the planning process, this does not mean that their insights and input have been forgotten.
- Myth 3: Growth targets are designed to satisfy shareholder expectations. There is no such thing as a B2B organization that would be satisfied with flat revenues every year. Growth is what all companies are driven by, and that includes the sales organization. Sales leaders sometimes make this comment because they have not proactively prepared for the planning process by performing an in-depth bottom-up review. Knowing what’s in the pipeline, the capacity of the sales organization, planning for enablement activities to drive productivity, and real-time data are essential to understand what are obtainable targets.
- Myth 4: It’s always about doing more with less. This is a myth to the extent that “doing more with less” is considered an arbitrary or unrealistic component of goal setting. I believe the correct statement is about finding ways to get more out of the resources that the organization has today. Best practice sales organizations are always looking at ways to create greater efficiencies to drive higher productivity. This is not about headcount, but rather about optimizing the skills and knowledge of the people currently in the organization. Next, sales leaders must assess what processes and tools are needed to increase capacity. These discussions should happen before any consideration of increasing headcount.
- Myth 5: Top-down planning is always internally focused, forgetting about the customer. Senior executives know that if they do not retain existing customers and gain new customers they will never be successful. They may not do a great job of communicating this internally, but they are 100 percent focused on the customer every day. Many times their line of sight is clearer, as they move outside the sales process and can focus more on the buying cycle, which is directly tied to the customer.
There are always exceptions to the rule, or in this case companies where one or more of these myths are actually true to some extent, but these are hardly the majority. In the end, debunking these myths does not make the planning process any easier; however, it can adjust the way sales organizations think about the process so they can focus on driving productivity. When I was able to change my view, I saw opportunities to proactively participate instead of feeling the impulse to react defensively to what senior executives might envision for the company. Sales leaders need to understand that both top-down and bottom-up planning are essential to define sales goals and strategies for achieving them.
Just as with purchasing a stock or mutual fund, investments in marketing have an expected return and associated risk. These investments can range from launching a new product to acquiring new marketing software, organizing a major user conference or buying media time. While business managers regularly make marketing investments and often have some form of ROI calculation to justify them, they rarely quantify how likely it is for this return to materialize. For example, many companies use vendor-provided case studies to decide whether to invest in a vendor’s solutions. But these sources focus only on the success stories and do not provide an objective view into how typical the advertised results are. Taking a calculated risk is the key to good decisionmaking because it provides transparency and manages expectations about the rate of return.
As a first step, determine your organization’s risk aversion profile. How comfortable are your management and employees with taking risk? Think of the risk aversion profile as the internal risk boundaries that should not be crossed. A more risk-averse company tends to stick with tried-and-true investments that leave little room for error; less risk-averse companies are willing to experiment with new approaches and tend to be early adopters (e.g. new technology, new product categories). Examining the historical background of your company’s previous marketing investments can be very helpful in determining the risk profile. A typical indicator of a risk-averse company is a high rate of rejection for proposed new types of investments. While this exploratory work might be time consuming, the findings can be applied to a number of investment projects. However, keep in mind that a company’s risk profile may change, especially if there are changes in the management team or if the company starts to take a different business direction.
Risk is an estimate of the uncertainty or deviation from the expected ROI. Some external factors to be considered for risk assessment include the economic climate and outlook, political stability (especially for investments in emerging markets) and market availability. Project-specific risk factors include historical performance of similar investments within your company or as reported by others, vendor viability, residual value (in case an exit is required), cost volatility for ongoing investments and internal investment experience. To aggregate all of these factors, a scoring system can be used with assigned weights for each factor. The rolled-up project-specific risk should be compared to the company’s risk tolerance.
Best practice decision models used to estimate the financial and operational consequences of significant marketing investments have a risk assessment component built in. This approach is not very different from that used by professional investment analysts and includes cost/benefit calculations, probability calculations, sensitivity analysis and qualitative commentary in the form of assumptions. Rate of return and expected risk often correlate directly to each other; if an investment promises a high return, it may also have high risk. Also, a wise investment for one company may be too risky to justify for another. Marketing managers should be aware of these risk/reward tradeoffs and adopt a decisionmaking approach that evaluates project-specific risk not only against the company’s attitude toward risk but also against the risks associated with other potential or ongoing initiatives.
Let's face it, many organizations have multiple Twitter, Facebook and other social accounts that have very little connection with one another. Integrating these and other types of corporate social sites helps to build a more complete network, encourages the consumption and sharing of content, and increases the value of corporate social sites by driving interest and, eventually, demand. Content is the glue that forms these connections, not only in terms of spreading reach but also exposing individuals to the existence of other social properties. Leveraging social content ensures that as many social sites as possible are addressed without expending unfocused efforts.
For example, an organization sponsors a webcast with a third-party analyst. In most cases, the organization would promote the event by leveraging traditional tactics such as email and perhaps banner ads. If the organization uses social channels, it’s often in broadcast mode such as tweeting “Join us with industry analyst X for thought-provoking content laser-focused on giving you greater ROI.” This message is then repurposed on the company’s Facebook page and LinkedIn group, with the same tweet copied and pasted or retweeted by multiple employees. In some cases, organizations automate such tweets, then forget to suspend the automatic posts after the event date. Such activities are labeled as the “social media program,” but response rates are not measured or analyzed to determine the impact of social tactics.
A better approach would be to promote the event as a thought leadership opportunity rather than a thinly veiled demand creation vehicle. This approach should highlight the value of the organization’s social properties as well as driving more attendees. Use quotes from the analyst as a teaser for the event — shorter bursts through Twitter and more in-depth content through other social outlets. Longer content that dives deeper into the subject matter of the webcast can be pushed through a series of blog posts, podcasts and posts on Facebook and LinkedIn. This content should be published steadily over a series of weeks but should not dominate any particular social site. Once the event has been held, post the presentation on SlideShare and use other social properties to drive downloads on a media sharing site.
The key is to use all of the organization’s social sites to constitute an integrated social experience, recognizing the realities and restrictions of each site (e.g. Twitter’s 140-character limit). Instead of following every post with a link to register to the event, link to other social sites. A short post in Twitter can link to a longer post in the blog or a podcast series. This way, as much content as possible can reach as many individuals as possible across multiple social sites. Many organizations object that they don’t want to repeat similar content across multiple sites — even though they have no problem repeating the exact same content for weeks on end within the same site (e.g. tweeting the same post through the same accounts). Refreshing and rotating content with an optimized social content publishing schedule will ensure that even users who read all of the organization’s social sites will rarely see excessive duplication of content.
Sales enablement leaders often ask us how they can better measure whether their efforts are truly making an impact. While there are a number of ways to measure sales enablement, certifying reps is a great way to do it. Based on the increasing number of inquiries we receive on this subject, our clients seem to agree. Here are some key points to keep in mind when putting together a certification program for your sales team.
Certify at Three Levels
The first step is to determine what should be certified (e.g. company knowledge, product knowledge, selling approach). You should then develop a program that will certify reps at three levels:
- Level one: content mastery. At this level, we’re looking to answer the question: “Did they get it?” This is typically done through simple testing. For example, a rep completes a multiple-choice test on the features and functionality of a new product, or on the components of a value-oriented sales call. You determine what constitutes a passing grade; reps who pass are level-one certified.
- Level two: application. It’s one thing to know what to do, and another to actually do it. At level two, you are assessing reps’ ability to apply what they’ve learned in a simulated sales environment – for example, presenting to a group or role-playing a sales call. Here, we’re often looking at both mastery of content and skill usage (e.g. conducting an effective new product presentation), so it’s important that the people doing the assessing have the expertise to recognize effective execution. At level two, the judging criteria must be crystal clear. An assessment guide should be provided to the judges (typically sales leaders, sales managers, enablement leaders or sales trainers) and shared with reps in advance so they know how they’ll be judged (e.g. opening a call using the company’s four-step call opening process) and prepare accordingly (e.g. watching a video that models a perfect presentation or call). This is not American Idol, where the feedback for why one contestant makes it and another doesn’t can seem arbitrary. Feedback on why a rep passed or failed should be based on a combined score from the assessment guide, should be specific and, in cases where a rep does not pass, should be actionable for improvement. If conducting role-plays, where the rep will be selling to a buyer or groups of buyers, the people playing the roles of buyers must be well prepared and scripted (e.g. not to share a certain piece of information unless asked). Allowing the buyer in a role-play to just “wing it” and improvise can take an assessment off track and fail to elicit from the rep the skills and knowledge you’re looking to assess.
- Level three: field execution. Level-three certification involves witnessing reps demonstrate the ability to effectively execute (e.g. skills, knowledge, processes) in the field; this is typically certified by their sales managers. For example, reps might be certified on their ability to successfully navigate a sales call on a new product by demonstrating strong product knowledge, managing customer questions/concerns and executing a call using the company’s sales process. Again, an assessment guide should be used to score the rep to ensure that feedback is specific and constructive.
Some additional pointers
After explaining these three levels, SiriusDecisions is inevitably asked by harried sales managers: “Are we expected to certify all of our reps, on all of our products, at all three levels?” Unless you really want to, the answer is no. You can decide to assess them in certain key areas, such as depth of knowledge regarding a few key products, effectiveness in articulating the company elevator pitch, or ability to deliver your differentiated value message. What you ultimately want to assess is the rep’s “readiness” to sell your solutions to the appropriate buying audiences (what one client calls “customer ready”).
The certification process should not be punitive. We have seen cases where capable reps are crushed after being humiliated during a level-two assessment in front of peers. The rep should be set up for success, with clear expectations established in an assessment guide.
Lastly, we see clients beginning to segment their field force based on “certification gates.” For example, “bronze reps come out of new-hire boot camp fully level-one certified on all products; “silver” status goes to those closing their first deal and reaching level-two certification on specific offerings; while “gold” is reached when reps obtain a certain threshold of sustained revenue and have achieved level-three certification for presenting to a senior executive.
Many of our clients struggle with large opt-out lists that, while containing contacts they’ve identified as a good fit for their offers, are unable to be communicated with due to their current status. The good news: All is not lost.
The first step is to ensure you’re managing opt-outs effectively. This means having three things in place: an opt-out process, at least one person assigned to manage it, and an integrated technology framework to support it. Next, audit current processes to determine compliance with all communication rules in the geographies you communicate with, such as email (CAN-SPAM), telecommunication (do not call) and direct mail (do not mail). From a technology standpoint, all of your systems that enable opt-outs (e.g. sales force automation, services, support, marketing automation) must be integrated, so that when a person opts out of one system, they’re automatically opted out of all other systems. Follow this by segmenting opts-outs according to the types of communication involved, such as email (blanket email or specific communications opt-out, such as events, updates, newsletters), do not call, direct mail, or blanket opt-out of all communications.
Now you can begin focusing on convincing those opt-outs to come back. For contacts opting out of one form of communication, try an alternative form of communication to get them to opt in again. For instance, if a contact has opted out of email communication, you can still call them or send a direct mail, provided they’re not on your do-not-call or do-not-mail lists. To be successful, it’s critical to understand buyers’ needs based on their profiles — including explicit data (firmagraphic and demographic) and implicit activities (e.g. Web, social, response to call or direct mail) — to ensure that you’re providing targeted offers of interest and relevance. Based on their profile, to reduce cost and effort, focus only on contacts identified as having a propensity to buy.
If you receive a blanket opt-out, or over time a contact has opted out of all communications, you can still get them to opt in again by leveraging inbound marketing. The key is to provide relevant content via social media and other third-party channels such as content syndication, search engine marketing/pay per click (SEM/PPC), search engine optimization and association marketing, to provide them with the opportunity to opt in again. If they submit a form with the opt-in box checked or update their preference center profile’s opt-in status, you can legally communicate with them again in the United States. Note that in many countries a double opt-in (second communication confirming opt-in status) is still necessary, so carefully review the laws for all countries in which you communicate.
While working on getting contacts to opt in again, also focus on how to reduce your opt-outs. Do this by addressing the two key reasons people opt out: lack of relevance and frequency. To improve the relevance of content and offers, they must be linked to the individual buyer’s role and stage in the buying process. If you don’t already have a preference center, consider offering one instead of a blanket opt-out. Preference center users can “opt down” instead of opting out by choosing only communications and content types of particular interest; this not only reduces opt-outs, but also increases knowledge of buyer preferences so more relevant content can be offered. In terms of frequency, your preference center will also help segment your target audience more granularly, reducing the number communications required to each audience member and thus opt-outs as well.
One final thought on frequency: Avoid a one-size-fits-all approach. Instead, track buyer behavior in terms of the frequency, recency and value of interactions they have with you; these indicate their level of engagement, and engaged parties tend to have a higher frequency threshold due to their greater urgency to obtain information.
When someone mentions innovation we typically think of something brand new and, well, innovative. But innovation can also apply to using something old in a new, different and, hopefully, better way. This could be recycling plastic bottles to make carpet or as I'll outline in this post, a new use for a classic marketing tactic, direct mail.
The declining value of direct mail for B2B has been written about extensively so no need to rehash the argument here. But the death of direct mail has been greatly exaggerated as organizations have discovered its use as an effective way to reach the CXO suite through the use of packaged items such as a book or electronic gadget with a clear action item. Our research shows that such direct mail tactics are effective 22 percent of the time with CXOs. While an executive's assistant can toss a letter, a box will typically have to be delivered or at least opened.
Another innovative way to use direct mail is for internal marketing. I recently had an inquiry with a client that needed to better educate their sales team on how some key deals were won. This client had already done the typical internal case studies by creating short, informative videos and blasting these out via email and posts to the internal social community platform. But there was a very low response rate (below 10 percent) and views of the video as well as downloads of the case studies were virtually nonexistent.
To meet this challenge, I suggested they try informing sales of the content through direct mail sent to their offices as few employees will disregard an envelope that comes from corporate. Marketing created a short case study with a link for an online video and printed it up as a one-sided glossy, and then followed up with an email containing the link as well. The net is that the response rate jumped to close to 50 percent and the video was viewed by close to 40 percent of the sales force. For organizations that feel this is an inappropriate use of company letterhead, try finding some of those old interoffice memorandum envelopes — the ones with the string tie on the back — pop gloss one-sheet into it and have it delivered to their desks.
What are some the innovative ways you've seen direct mail being used by B2B companies?