Building teamwork between marketing and sales

It goes without saying (at least I hope it does) that to be effective, the relationship between marketing and sales demands close cooperation. Yet even as the most critical of a company’s interactions, marketing and sales are often at each other’s backs, placing blame, demanding action, and generally acting worse toward one another than they do to the competition.

The metaphor I like to use to describe a well-functioning sales and marketing organization isn’t a Kumbaya campfire, but a relay race. In this example, marketing hands off sales tools and campaign leads, with sales taking the hand-off and running toward the finish line – the completed sale. Yet as simple as this example is, anyone familiar with track knows that the hand-off is the most difficult part of the race.

Before taking the hand-off, the runner ahead (sales) must start getting up to speed. The runner behind (marketing) therefore, needs to share plans and metrics so sales knows what to expect and can begin to prepare their customers, prospects, and accurately complete their  forecasts. Efficiencies are lost when these racers aren’t fully aware of where the other is on the track; that is, salespeople are accidentally or purposefully unaware of what marketing objectives are, when campaigns are running, and what to expect in terms of number and quality of leads.

Further, in relay races, there is only a set amount of track space allowed to make the transfer – racers must understand the distance each racer will run. In my example, if sales expects marketing to qualify leads further or marketing expects sales to follow-up on leads in a certain timeframe, the baton can be passed too soon or too late, outside the zone, resulting in missed sales opportunities.

Even when the runners are up to speed and the transfer is made, disconnects between objectives, targets, and priorities can cause our metaphorical baton to be dropped and take an organization out of the race altogether. Marketing is in charge of evaluating the market and strategizing initiatives, but always with the input of sales so common targets, messages, objectives and timing can be established. This needs to be done quarterly to not only stay aligned, but to evaluate what is and isn’t working.

Relays are the most team-intensive sport in track, and therefore are won only when every participant is not only performing at their best, but makes certain that they’ve passed and received the baton smoothly between team members. To do well, marketing and sales need to do their best individually. But to win, marketing and sales need to cooperate as a team.

5 reasons to persevere through start-up obstacles

They said it was going to be hard. But you had no idea it would be this hard. Exhaustion, a poor diet, a parade of ‘no’s and disappointments. Plus mentors and advisers, including me, listing reasons to pack it in. It isn't easy to maintain your enthusiasm and energy in the face of all that.

So when should you not shutter your start-up?

The only thing I hate to see more than good people burning cycles on lost causes is to see good people giving up too early on good ideas when in reality the opportunity was far more promising than they could see from their trendy co-located office loft.

Persevere

So when are the discouraging obstacles not an apocalyptic sign, but simply short-term hurdles, perhaps requiring just a bit more effort and diligence? Here are just a few clues that it’s time to stick it out and renew the energy and resources to continue:

1.      Required capital was initially under-estimated (this is common) but doors are still open to you for additional resources, even if from friends and family.  You may be reticent to ask again, and that's a fair concern... and indicative that you are being wise with investors' trust and money. Still, it is your responsibility to manage your enterprise wisely and to sell your vision. But never confuse your very real fiscal responsibility with imagined guilt of the risk both you and investors are taking together.

2.      You’ve not yet introduced your MVP (minimally viable product)... but it is because you’ve made a valid pivot from the original plan. If the delay from these pivots are based on honest and useful customer feedback, the delays are valid and a good reason for asking for more runway. 

3.      Your reasons for delays and obstacles are not excuses. There’s a difference between a problem you cannot control and therefore must accept and overcome, versus a crisis you created or could have changed but chose to ignore.

4.      The market gap that your product/service is intended to fill is still not being adequately filled by established competitors. As long as it will fill a genuine need in the market (presuming you’ve done that diligence) then there is still an opportunity to be exploited.

5.      You can identify all the voices telling you that you cannot do it - because they all sound remarkably like you. They are all inside your own head. Take a step back and look at yourself in the third person. Is the negativity you are hearing from yourself the same you’d tell someone in your identical position? Or would you be kinder, more encouraging while still realistic? 

Like my earlier post giving you good reasons to shut the doors, there are no hard and fast rules, and of course, any one of these are not a guarantee of a successful start-up deserving your continued effort. But just as it is unwise to continue to pursue a start-up out of obligation, it is unwise to make a permanent decision about shuttering it without taking a moment to review the real reasons for your current discouragement.

Few if any start-up situations ever meet ideal expectations. But with a deep breath and a little introspection, you might find that the reality of the situation is far from desperate. 

5 reasons to shutter your start-up.

There's no lack of enthusiastic blogs, posters, and gurus out there encouraging you to follow your dreams and strike out on your own. So I am aware that my contrarian posts can be a real downer, as I’ve written several posts that discourage potential start-ups from, well, starting up, including the fallacy of expecting a ‘better’ product to succeed, or the idea that you should chase your dreams.

But there are great ideas that deserve your attention and enthusiasm. Yet once you’ve already sunk your heart and soul and 401K into your business, when is negative thinking just ‘nattering nabobs of negativity’, and when does it become a warning that something is wrong and you need to get out? After all, the sage tells us that ‘everything is temporary given enough time’, and we all know that even expected obstacles cost more and take longer to overcome than ever often predicted.

So when is enough enough? There are a few clues that it’s time to recognize that it’s time to close the doors:

1. You, yourself, are exhausted and cannot continue to infuse your discouraged team with requisite energy to soldier on through the current circumstances.
2. Resources are spent. This seems obvious, but resources are never really ‘gone’, just harder to raise - but if you are spending more time raising funds instead of selling an MVP (minimally viable product), you are on a slippery slope.
3. You’ve made little progress in overcoming objections from potential users either in fact or positioning.
4. You’ve missed initial, and extended, deadlines and milestones.
5. The market gap that the product/service needed to have filled is beginning to be adequately filled by established competitors.

There are no hard and fast rules, and any one of these are not indicative of a start-up needing to be shuttered. But any two or more create an uphill battle that takes the joy, enthusiasm, and health and finances of founders down with it.

Unless your start-up is a cruise line, there’s no glory in going down with the ship. 

I Will Not Be Ignored!

I'm your customer. But I’m a person first. And...

I feel ignored when you tell me that my call is important to you as I wait for you to answer my call.

I feel ignored when you tell me how friendly you are but no one greets me when I enter your store.

I feel ignored when you call me by my first name the first time we speak.

I feel ignored when you interrupt me at home and mispronounce my name.

I feel ignored when you ask me how I am and launch into the script before I've answered.

I feel ignored when I give you identifying information more than once in the same call.

I feel taken for granted if you say your name is 'Pat' but you sound more like a 'Vishalakshi'. Don't make your first statement to me a lie.

I feel ignored when you say you value me as a customer but you give the free offer to 'new customers only'.

I feel ignored if your 'convenient hours' don't include the one time I need you.

So now I’m right here, in front of you, in person, on the phone, in a chat queue.

I can’t be a more cooperative prospective customer. There is no bigger buying signal. You attracted me with your great strategy, compelling ads, responsive community, and attentive automated lead nurturing.

And so here I am! I did what you wanted.

Why are you ignoring me?

How much green is there in green?

In a recent price sensitivity analysis conducted by Rockbridge Research, it was discovered that most consumers would purchase a product indicated as 'green' (environmentally friendly) over a 'regular' product of the same type, but only if they were the same price. The study concluded that overall, "...as the green product’s price increases, consumers’ inclination towards it decreases."

Not surprisingly, specific audience categories offering unique attitudes toward the 'green movement' differ in the value they place on such products. Six distinct consumer groups within the overall adult consumer population were identified, with “Green Tech Leaders” willing to pay far more for a green certified product, while “Anti-Greens” are not willing to pay much more at all. That alone is interesting as it still indicates a willingness to perhaps consider the positive social implications of buying green even to those who do not value it themselves. This indicates that green product attributes are valuable, but not widespread enough to accommodate anything but a modest price adjustment.

From a share prospective, a green alternative may move the needle. From a margin perspective, this study indicates that their isn't yet much green in being green.

To learn more about Rockbridge’s Green Technology Segmentation, click here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Nearly all "Eco" Product Claims Are Misleading [Greenwashing] (consumerist.com)

Shackin' up

Quick Quiz: When asked why RadioShack decided to rebrand itself "The Shack", CMO Lee Applbaum stated it was because (choose just one!):

1. We think "shack" conjures up many positive store images.

2. Some customers and the investor community refers to us as "The Shack" already.

3. We can't afford the real Shaq as a spokesperson, and he's in Cleveland now anyhow.

4. Basic research could have told us that "The Shack" is actually a popular Christian novel regarding the anguish of a parent over the rape and murder of his daughter. Oh, well.

5. Because... "The (Love) Shack is a little ol' place where we can get together! (Don't forget your jukebox money!)"


The answer is #2, although any of the answers is equally bad, and equally plausible.

That's right. RadioShack's most avid customers and "the investor community" (really? that's their target with this campaign?) already refer to the company (despairingly, perhaps?) as The Shack, so they figured they'd just co-op the term as their own in a desperate grab to leverage, and therefore destroy, any credible independent brand affinity.

Besides, marketing theory aside, every middle school kid in America already knows that giving yourself a nickname is just lame.

Noisy launches

Here's something startling obvious that often gets lost in the noise of an exciting product launch:

The product is the thing.

The company is not the thing. (An exception perhaps is Apple - which uses its powerful corporate brand to great effect.)

The distribution channel is not the thing. (Your distributors may incorrectly argue the point, especially VARs.)

And most certainly, the ad is not the thing. (Your agency's creatives may disagree, especially if the ads are spotlighted in an article like this one in Advertising Age.

Once you go down the path of suggesting that a "creepy" and "unsettling" advertisement is "doing its job" because people are talking about the advertisement (and not the product per se) you can quickly find yourself sliding down a slippery slope trying to quantify 'mindshare' and 'visibility'.

To be certain, if the ads are effective, they'll be talked about... but more importantly, so will the product. A truly effective advertisement quickly steps back and allows the product to take the spotlight.

After all, no one wants to hear the announcer keep talking once the band takes the stage.

If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?

If your company or product were a fictional character, who would it be? It's one of the questions I ask when trying to determine the intended brand perception for a client. And I get more than my share of rolled eyes from the engineers in the room.

But consider your own response to this question: If you were thirsty, where would you likely find an ice-cold Obama? Next to the Dr. Pepper or nearer the energy drinks?

If you called your friend, would you expect to pick up and dial the McCain or are you more likely to just go online and 'poke' them on Obamabook? Maybe you'd discuss the McCain supertanker that is caught in a storm off the gulf coast, or the latest music player from iObama.

You can think about this when you pick up a snack of some organic dried fruit at Obama Foods for your flight to Chicago on McCain Airways.

Okay, the whole thing is silly. But now reverse that:

If you were thirsty, where would you likely find an ice-cold McCain? Next to the Dr. Pepper or nearer the energy drinks?

If you called your friend, would you expect to pick up and dial the Obama or are you more likely to just go online and 'poke' them on McCainbook? Maybe you'd discuss the Obama supertanker that is caught in a storm off the gulf coast, or the latest music player from iMcCain.

You can think about this when you pick up a snack of some organic dried fruit at McCain Foods for your flight to Chicago on Obama Airways.

Relatively speaking, the former made more sense, didn't it? And it proves out the power of branding on not only our perceptions of products, but perceptions of our leaders, our friends, and ourselves.

This important article was sent to me by a designer with whom I do much of Strategy180's branding work. It underscores the power of branding and how it may not only impact the can of soup we put in our grocery basket, but the future leadership of the world's last great superpower.

Perhaps now you might want to budget for that branding study, yes?

...dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria!

Along with this post's title, one of my favorite movie quips, offered in deadpan delivery by Howard Ramis in Ghostbusters, is "Sorry, Venkman, I'm terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought."

Yet this is a lot of what we've been hearing lately from colleagues and pundits. But this isn't the End Of Days brought about by the Sta-Puft marshmallow man, but rather it is a long overdue reminder to focus, work hard, live within our means, and reprioritize.

While things will change over the next days and weeks, and some of it may perhaps eventually change my tone in this post, right now I'm not seeing a lot of bad news so much as a lot of fear and uncertainty, and opportunity always arrives with uncertainty. Buy into the fear and sell into the optimism. It's Warren Buffett's approach for the markets and should be all marketers' as well. Our response to a difficult situation changes our ability to handle it.

No doubt, things are going to stink in the near term, because marketers have by and large never properly positioned themselves or the function for the key role it should assume during a market slowdown, opting instead to stammer defensively and nervously paint lambs blood above our office doors. Still, a ten trillion dollar debt should worry us. The potential for a nuclear Iran is disurbing. Climate change has me checking under the bed for the bogeyman and Al Gore.

But this? Nothing that a little ingenuity and informed strategic thinking can't overcome. Now is not the time for marketers to be running for the exits. Companies that spend this time looking for greater efficiencies and new approaches will maintain in a slowdown and position themselves for exceptional share growth when the money starts flowing again.

There are a number of studies to support this. Download a few. Discover specific ideas. Seek knowledgeable advice. Recalibrate.

Smile.

Supercomm Returns

Remember Supercomm?

'Back in the day', as I catch myself using phrases my father once did, Supercomm was the 'it' event of the telecom industry. It was the type of event where if you were in the business you had to launch something, or close a deal, or both, and then come back year after year with a bigger, better display - this show sucked the life out of many annual marketing budgets. And like car shows and builder shows, long before American Idol it was a haven for singer-dancers to take a break from waiting tables and be discovered in an exhibitors booth – by showcasing their unique talent of staying in key while rhyming "Motorola".

Sponsors TIA and USTelecom had split the event years ago, each claiming the mantle of Supercomm to fair to middlin' success, but in recent years their shows came together again as NXTcomm. Now, realizing that even years on from its heyday the name Supercomm has cachet, and with the June 09 Chicago event Supercomm is once again Supercomm.

According to the news release, TIA and USTelecom say the name change reflects recent developments in communications. That's a political statement in a political year. It's clear to me and other observers that the Supercomm cachet means a return to old style 'if you aren't here, you're not anywhere' power the organizers would like to regain. The demise of Supercomm was followed by confusion, weakness in both events, and general dissatisfaction with trade shows in telecom. I count myself among many irritated exhibitors who wanted TIA and USTelecom to reunite – which they did as NXTcom, then, now, properly, again as SuperComm.

Bring out the rented ficus and double padded orange carpet. I've clients to call.

The ying and the yang

I hear all the time that if the customer were simply a, well-informed, and b, rational, a sale would be easy. Well, I'm here to tell you that these represent the two ways to make the sale, and both can be leveraged through effective marketing communication.

If your offering is indeed the smart choice for your customer, then by all means, help your customer get smarter. Educative sales, or consultative sales are effective in this vein, where your marketing communications are targeted toward speaking opportunities, bylines, blogs, and high-profile media relations efforts. This appeals to the educated, rational value buyer. Yer all rational buuyers have a streak of irrationality, so...

If your offer requires a change in impression, assumption, habit; or if you need to compete not on utility and value but on fashion and emotion (irrational) then by all means appeal to the emotions of the buyer - even in a business to business space - to drive out considerations on a strictly formal qualitative form. "Nobody ever got fired by buying IBM" isn't a commonly understood mantra because itt is rational, it is the result of the emotion of fear on the part of the buyer. Tap into fear, lust, comfort, or any of the other 14 or so emotional triggers and fill a need - albeit an emotional one.

Embrace the rational and irrational buying signals as opportunities, not barriers.