Marketing Credibility: 2015 and beyond

by Jon Russo

Marketing Credibility: 2015 and beyond

by Jon Russo

by Jon Russo

credibility

Here is a valuable blog today from what appears to be a US head of sales in how he views marketing in his business in a tech company contrasting to a non-tech company – it can be inferred from the post that marketing’s compensation is getting tied to revenue performance, that’s where we also see the puck headed for all companies and where true marketing credibility comes into play – it isn’t just in the gymnastics or theory of SLAs, scoring, definitions, or dashboards – it’s in the output of where he (and others) can depend on marketing’s annual growth, lead contribution, and bookings for the business overall and where marketing can belly up to the bar with their own revenue contribution.

The most salient excerpt:

We are fanatical about complete sales and marketing team alignment.  In addition to corporate and product marketing, our marketing department is responsible for directly contributing to 50% of our annual pipeline growth and 50% of our new business bookings every year.  Marketing has SLA’s (service level agreements) with sales for qualified lead definitions and we have specific target goals for those numbers as well as the top stages of our single, shared lead/opportunity funnel or pipeline.  We track, measure and report on our performance at each of those stages in terms of both the actual number and the conversion ratios for lead movement from stage to stage.  We also benchmark our performance for all of that against an industry standard for comparably sized SaaS technology companies.

We see these trends in enterprises as well – though sometimes it is easy to lose sight of the forest through the trees when a company needs to embark on transformational change.  They get bogged down in tactics (predictive analytics, scoring, SLAs) – which are all fundamentals – but lose sight of the overall goal.

Excellent article.  What are you seeing?

One Comment

  1. From a CRE friend who had a countering viewpoint:

    We don’t have much of a proactive marketing department; each broker markets his/her own buildings the way they want, to the people they want, using the tools they want. Our marketing folks have a ton of graphics and other tools, and they can come up with great ideas, but they certainly don’t generate *any* leads; that is definitely not part of their job description. Corporate marketing in XYZ city works on brand recognition, but with 200+ brokers and probably 500 (or more) listings, all of which are aimed at different types of tenants, buyers, etc., it’s a very different sale from technology. In CRE, not only are there different prospects/buyers, but the product sold to them is different.

    To simply say, as he intimates, that space is more or less a commodity isn’t correct; every building/space is different, so it’s very hard for a marketing department to drive leads, other than macro leads to the firm or perhaps more micro leads to a particular team (the latter of which that team would have to pay for personally, if it was even possible).

    And, interestingly, one of the start-ups he mentions at the end – 42Floors – is learning they can’t make it by simply showing cool space on their website and hoping people will call them and avoid brokers. They’re hiring brokers themselves, and becoming the competition, so they’ll get squashed soon…or remain a very tiny boutique player.

Comments are closed.