Brightfunnel Gives B2B Marketers Self-Service Revenue Attribution

Marketing without revenue attribution is like playing golf without keeping score: it might be fun but you can’t tell whether you’re doing a good job. But while keeping score in golf is simple, figuring out the impact of marketing programs is quite tough. In fact, B2B marketers face several challenges on the road to perfect attribution.  The simplest is just connecting marketing leads to closed sales, which is an issue because the data in sales systems is often incomplete.  A higher level ties specific marketing programs to individual leads, and through them to accounts and deals. The most advanced efforts estimate the relative impact of different marketing programs on the final result.  The problems must be solved in sequence: you must connect leads to revenue before you can connect marketing programs to revenue, and must connect all programs to revenue before you can start to allocate credit among them.

Brightfunnel compares results of different attribution methods

Most marketers struggle to get past the first level. There wouldn’t be a problem if sales people religiously associated every lead with the right account. But this doesn’t always happen for many reasons. So marketers must either accept that they’ll miss some connections, do laborious manual research to make the right matches, or rely on specialized software to do the work.

This is where Brightfunnel comes in. Brightfunnel reads lead, account, and opportunity data from Salesforce.com and supplies missing connections based on things like company name. Since Salesforce.com can also capture lead source (i.e., original marketing program), Brightfunnel can build a complete chain linking marketing programs to leads to accounts to opportunities. The system also has connectors to bring in data from Oracle Eloqua and Marketo, marketing automation, which will often include marketing programs and leads that never made it into Salesforce. But Brightfunnel says that most clients work with Salesforc data alone.

Making connections is certainly important, but Brightfunnel also provides tools to use the resulting information. Marketers can analyze results by marketing program, time period, customer segment, or other variables. They can compare performance over time, compare specific programs against an average, and see top campaigns by lead source. Because the imported opportunity data includes sales stage, reports can also track movement through the sales funnel, calculating conversion rates and velocity (time to move from one stage to the next). The system can use this to forecast the value and timing of future sales from deals currently in the pipeline.

What about that third level of attribution, splitting revenue from a single sale among different marketing programs? Brightfunnel offers two varieties of multitouch attribution: one where credit is shared evenly among all programs that touched a lead, and one where credit is split according to a fixed formula of 40% to the first touch, 20% to middle touches, and 40% to the final touch. Brightfunnel can also show first-touch and last-touch attribution, which attribute all revenue to the first or last touch, respectively.

Attribution aficionados will recognize that none of these is a fully satisfactory approach. The gold standard in attribution is advanced statistical methods that estimate the true incremental impact of each program on each lead. Brightfunnel is working on such a method but hasn’t released it yet. In the meantime, the simpler approaches give some useful insights – so long as you don’t forget they are not wholly accurate.

The value of Brightfunnel is less in advanced analytics than in the fact that it does the basic data assembly and lets marketers analyze data for themselves.  Without a tool like Brightfunnel, detailed analysis often requires technical skill and tools that few marketers have available.  .

Brightfunnel was introduced in 2014 and has something under 100 clients. Pricing runs from $35,000 to $80,000 per year based on system modules and number of users. The amount of data doesn’t matter. Clients are mostly mid-sized tech companies – the usual early adopters for this sort of thing. The company raised $6 million in Series A funding in October 2015.

The Big Willow Links Intent Data to Devices to Companies...Another Flavor of Account Based Marketing

With interest in account based marketing (ABM) skyrocketing past even hot topics like intent data and predictive marketing, it’s no surprise to find debates over the true meaning of the term. I recently had a discussion along those lines with Charlie Tarzian and Neil Passero of The Big Willow, who argued that account based marketing must extend beyond reaching target accounts to include messages based on location and intent. As you might suspect, that is exactly what The Big Willow does.

What The Big Willow does with intent data is interesting whether it’s the One True ABM or not. The company tracks which devices are consuming what content, associates the content with intent, and then associates the devices - as much as it can - to companies.

The Big Willow uses data from media it serves directly and from the nightly feeds that ad networks and publishers send to media buyers.  This tells it which devices saw which content.  The system relates the content to intent by parsing it for keywords and phrases related to The Big Willow clients' products and services.  Devices are associated with companies using reverse IP lookup for IP addresses registered directly to a specific business.  If the IP address belongs to a service provider like Verizon or Comcast, The Big Willow applies a proprietary method that finds the device location based on IP address and infers a match with businesses near that location. That’s far from perfect but can work if there is just one business in a particular industry near that location. What makes this worth the trouble is it can double the number of devices linked to target companies.

The location-based approach clearly has its limits.  But it’s important to put those aside and go back to the fact that The Big Willow is tracking consumption by devices, not cookies.  This matters because cookies are increasingly ineffective in an era of mobile devices and frequent cookie deletion.  It’s also important to bear in mind that The Big Willow is storing consumption of all content for all devices it sees, meaning it can analyze past behavior without advance preparation. This lets it immediately identify prospects who have shown interest in a new client’s industry.

The Big Willow uses this historical data to examine a client’s current marketing automation and CRM databases, distinguishing companies showing intent from those that are inactive, and also finding active companies that are not already in the corporate database. This analysis takes about two weeks to complete. The Big Willow can then target advertising at those audiences, including Web display ads to companies that have not yet visited the client’s own Web site. This extends beyond the usual ABM retargeting of site visitors. Of course, since The Big Willow is capturing intent, it can tailor the ads to the buying stage of each company.

As a final trick, The Big Willow can also track which devices have seen the client’s ads and then use a pixel on the client’s Web site to find which of those devices eventually make a visit. This captures many more connections than the traditional approach of tracking visitors who have clicked on a company ad – which the vast majority of visitors do not.

In short, The Big Willow provides an interesting option for business marketers who want to do intent-based account targeting. It probably won’t be the only tool anyone uses, but it is worth considering it as something to add to your mix. Pricing ranges from $10,000 to $20,000 per month based on specific deliverables and services. The company was founded in 2011 and has dozens of clients.

Useful Tips from Inbound Marketing Summit and Hubspot User Group

I spent three days last week at the Inbound Marketing Summit and Hubspot User Group in Boston.  These featured a flock of first-rate speakers who presented more useful information than I can jam into a single blog post.  That said, here are highlights from my notes.

Youngme Moon, Harvard Business School

- when all competitors address the same customer problems, their products all seem the same
- to differentiate, embrace your negatives and make them into positives
- her examples:
  - the Mini Cooper highlighted that it was a small car, rather than trying to convince people it wasn’t really that small
  - IKEA reduces selection, service and sturdiness, and convinces people these are simplifying their choice, encouraging self-reliance, and making it easier to refresh your furnishings.  (Sorry Youngme, but I still detest IKEA.  Let's face it: the reason most people buy there is price.)

Web Content Management panel with leaders from Bridgeline, Sitecore, Percussion, and Ektron

- content management systems have evolved to deliver personalized customer experiences across all channles
- I only mention this because it supports my own view that Web content systems are candidates to encompass the marketing automation industry. 


Michael Damphousse, Green Leads

- 30% higher response rate to 3 sentence text email than HTML email
- 10x more likely to reach a lead by telephone if call within first hour of submission
- 15% higher chance of answering a call from a local phone number
- leave a voicemail that says you are sending an email and ask for a reply
- peak answering times are 7:30 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m.; these yield 20-40% more connections than calling at 10 a.m.
- people are most likely to answer their phone between 5 minutes before the hour and 10 minutes after the hour
- 23% of appointments are rescheduled; try to reschedule if someone asks to cancel

Guy Kawasaki, author, Enchantment

- keys to creating an “enchanting” product are likeability, trustworthiness, and quality
- a product must be complete, meaning it includes service and creates an entire ecosystem
- when launching something new, don’t try to convince people who reject you; instead, find people who agree with you

Dan Zarella, Hubspot

- ideas spread because they’re good at spreading, not because they’re good ideas
- social media success comes when people share your content, not when they engage with comments
- negative comments are shared less often than positive comments
- reaching influential individuals is less important than reaching large numbers of people
- people are more likely to read and share social media content on weekends
- Tweets that include “Please Retweet” are shared three times more often than those that don’t

David Skok, Matrix Partners

- viral marketing growth depends more on cycle time (how quickly people share with others) than the number of shares per person
- to attract influential followers, identify what they write about and write about it yourself
- offer rewards to both the person who shares your content and whomever they share it with, so it doesn’t seem like people are exploiting their friends

Rick Burnes, Hubspot

- be systematic about creating content that attracts the traffic you want
- check your blog analytics daily and use data to drive content decisions
- create blog posts in a mix of categories: how-to (most important, preferably daily); thought leadership, research projects, fun, controversial statements
- posts need to be useful; they don’t need to be great literature
- reuse old content
- have a big message

Are We Making Marketing Automation Harder Than Necessary?

Summary: Is stressing the need for process change making marketing automation too complicated, or a recognition of what it really takes for success? Vendors take both sides of the argument. So did Aesop: see The Tortoise and the Hare.

Act-On Software officially relaunched its system earlier this week, offering a new interface and a new positioning. The interface is perfectly nice but the positioning is ultimately more important. The company’s press release puts the key claim succinctly: “The Act-On Integrated Marketing Platform disrupts the conventional wisdom that companies need marketing automation solutions that are expensive, complex, and require significant services engagements to get them up and running.”

I’m not sure that whoever speaks for “conventional wisdom” would agree that marketing automation solutions must be expensive and complex. My own position (loosely paraphrasing Einstein) is it should be as complicated and costly as necessary, but not more.

However, the real meat of that statement is the third item: “significant services engagements”. This refers to the idea that marketing automation must accompanied by comprehensive planning and process engineering, which often require external assistance. The oracles of conventional wisdom would probably agree. I know I do.

Act-On begs to differ. Their belief, outlined to me in January by Sales VP Shawn Naggiar and CMO David Applebaum, is that most marketers just want to get things done immediately with existing resources. Of course, no one could argue with that – we all want something for nothing. The real question is whether marketing automation can actually deliver value without marketers making a more substantial investment. Act-On is betting that they can, especially if aided by software that’s designed to make easy things simple. The company just received $4 million in funding from others willing to share the bet, on top of an initial $2.5 million.

It would be easy to dismiss Act-On’s proposition as something between wishful thinking and pandering, right up there with diet-free weight loss. But I’ve heard almost exactly the same argument recently from other vendors including Net-Results, Marketbright, and, to lesser extent, Genius.com. All cite the need for an intermediate step between the simplicity of email-only systems and the complexity of full-blown marketing automation. They see closing this gap as the critical requirement in spreading marketing automation to the masses, and as a great business opportunity for themselves. When so many smart people reach the same conclusion, it's worth serious consideration.

On the other hand, the vendors with the greatest success to date have stressed the importance of process. This is true not just at the high end of the market, but also at the low end, where Infusionsoft, OfficeAutoPilot and HubSpot all make huge efforts to educate and cajole their clients into using their systems fully.

Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot are selling to much smaller businesses than Act-On, Net-Results, and the new Marketbright. Still, it's interesting that vendors at both ends of the spectrum have found that process focus is essential. Maybe success requirements are really different in the middle – but I’d say the burden of proof is on those making that claim.

If I want to start a good argument, I should probably end this post here. Drawing clear battle lines between vendors who believe in process and those who don't should certainly prompt some response.

But that wouldn’t be fair to either side. The process-oriented vendors do strive to make it easy to get started, and the start-up-oriented vendors do expect their clients’ processes to mature over time. And, while Act-On, Net-Results, Marketbright, and Genius all argue that their systems are substantially easier to use than products like Pardot, Marketo and LoopFuse, those vendors surely disagree. My own (fair but wimpy) opinion is that there are significant differences among individual systems but neither group is generally easier or more powerful than the other. Users have to do the hard work of matching the system to their particular needs and style. Eat your spinach.

That said, the role of process is an important and worthwhile subject for debate. The greatest danger I see facing the B2B marketing automation industry is that it will develop a reputation for failure. This is exactly what happened to CRM systems when people started to think that simply purchasing one was a guarantee of success. It took a long time and much hard work for the industry to overcome the stigma of the resulting failures. They have now established that careful planning and disciplined deployment are essential for clients to receive real benefits.

Perhaps we're doomed to repeat this history. It's the "trough of despair" in the hype cycle. But we can at least try to avoid it. My position is this: marketers can start small with their automation systems, but they should still go into the project recognizing that real value requires substantial change. Ignoring this reality is bad for everyone.

True Influence's LeadPAC Offers Pay-Per-Click Email. Think About It.

Summary: LeadPAC lets marketers pay for email responses as easily as they pay for search responses. It’s a major improvement over traditional lead generation.

I can’t recall a vendor with the same business model as LeadPAC from marketing automation vendor True Influence. That's pretty rare in itself, but what really matters is that LeadPAC's model offers some powerful benefits. That's worth some excitement.

So what, exactly, makes LeadPAC so special?

LeadPAC lets marketers order prospect lists based on segmentation criteria such as title, industry and company size. Nothing new there. The system will also send emails to those names without the marketer loading them into a separate system: a little harder to find but still far from unique. But here's the new part: users only pay for responses.

I’ve seen marketing agencies and direct response media that work on a cost-per-lead basis. But I’ve never seen it baked into the email engine of a marketing automation system. If you're aware of a similar product, please let me know.

Of course, the classic pay-per-click medium is paid search, and above all Google AdWords. It's no accident that LeadPAC resembles AdWords in both function and appearance. True Influence CEO Brian Giese said the goal with LeadPAC is to give marketers a way to create real leads quickly, using AdWords as a model.

Like AdWords, LeadPAC lets clients set a target cost per name and a weekly budget for their spending. Again like AdWords, the system keeps sending promotions – in this case, emails – until the budget is reached. The system further resembles AdWords in having some automated intelligence: in the case of LeadPAC, this means spacing the emails, limiting any name to one contact per week, and taking into account different response rates based on time of day and day of week. One thing it doesn't do – yet – is build predictive models to select the most responsive names within the specified universe. Nor is pricing based on AdWords-style bidding: clients pay a fixed fee ranging from $10 to $30 per name depending on the level (senior executives cost more than department managers). Just to be clear, that's all they pay: there's no fee for the marketing automation system itself.

Setting up a campaign in LeadPAC involves three basic steps.

- Select the audience by choosing from personal and company attributes including title, department, level, location, company size and ownership. The prospects come through LeadPAC’s partnerships with major consumer and business list vendors.

- Define the email to send, starting either with vendor-provided templates or by uploading a client's own template. LeadPAC provides a typical editor and standard features such as previewing the email and sending test messages.

- Define the campaign start date and weekly spending limit. Once clients submit their campaign, LeadPAC reviews it for content, reasonableness and compliance with anti-spam regulations.

Clients receive lists of responders on a regular basis. They can load these into any marketing automation system or True Influence's own marketing automation product, which lets them run multi-step nurture campaigns, apply lead scores, and synchronize data with Salesforce.com.

The beauty of all this, as with AdWords, is simplicity. Clients still need to specify their audience and create their email offer. But the cost-per-response model saves them the effort of managing details such as importing and refreshing lists, spacing their mailings over time, and tracking which segments respond best. This takes usability beyond the interface, by actually eliminating tasks rather than just making them easier to do. It makes email lead generation possible for companies that lack even basic skills in managing such programs.

Indeed, clients paying only for responses have little incentive to optimize their list selections or their copy. The vendor alone bears the cost of low response rates. This is probably part of the reason that True Influence reviews the campaigns for reasonableness.

Interestingly, one cure for this problem is to have clients do even less. If TrueInfluence deployed automated response modeling, it could avoid having anyone define target segments and still improve its response rates. Add some automated copy testing and marketers would be about as close to push-button lead generation as I can imagine.

Of course, email is just one part of lead generation and an even smaller part of full-scale marketing automation. So marketers will have plenty of work whether or not they use LeadPAC. But as an example of ways to really make marketing easier, LeadPAC is food for thought.

Checklists for Selecting a Marketing Automation System

Summary: here are some checklists to help select a marketing automation system. For more details, attend my Focus Webinar on June 29.

On June 29, I'll be giving a Webinar on “Matching a Marketing Automation System to Your Needs”, part of a day-long set of all-star lead management presentations organized by the Focus online business community. (Click here to register; it’s free.) Here's a bit of a preview.

My message boils down to two words: "use case". That is, prepare detailed use cases for the tasks you need and then have each potential vendor demonstrate how their system would execute them. The point is to focus on your actual requirements and not a generic list of capabilities or vendor rankings.

Another way to put it is: eat your vegetables. Don’t try to avoid the hard work of figuring out what you need the system to do. You’ll have to do that anyway, during implementation. But if you wait until then, you may find out too late that you selected the wrong system.

Even buyers who assess their needs may need some help figuring out what features those needs imply. Here are five tables extracted from the Webinar with some useful details.

The first table shows a sample use case for a Webinar program. (Click on the image to enlarge it.) It illustrates the need for the use case to be specific, both in terms of describing a specific marketing program and of describing the steps to execute the program. Most marketers could put together the first two columns, Tasks and Steps, from their own knowledge. The remaining column, Items to Test, lists system features that may be unfamiliar to marketers who have not previously worked with a marketing automation system. You may need some help (say, from consultants like Raab Associates Inc.) with adding this column to your own use cases.


The second table looks at functions for different types of marketing programs. The premise is that you need different marketing programs for each step in the customer life cycle, starting with awareness generation and ending with retention. Ideally you’ll have programs in each category, but in practice some categories are more important than others. To help focus your selection process on those high-priority categories, the table describes when each category is likely to be important. It then lists the key system function for each category and the specific features related to those functions.


The third table helps to assess the complexity of your needs. The first column describes the media you'll use and the second lists business characteristics contributing to program complexity. Required media can be directly compared with the media supported by potential vendors. Program complexity is a little trickier, but I’d consider your needs complex if more than three or four of the factors are present.


The fourth table is aimed at companies with complex programs. It lists specific requirements you may have and the features needed to meet them. Marketers who don’t need these features may be able to save some time and money by purchasing a system that doesn’t have them built in. On the other hand, some (but not all!) systems do a good job of hiding their advanced features when they’re not being used. So don't automatically rule out an advanced system without looking at it more closely. And bear in mind that you may need the more advanced features in the future.


The fifth table applies to all companies regardless of complexity. It lists features that are present in nearly all systems, but vary widely in their details. For each one, you’ll have to think carefully about your specific needs and see how well each vendor can handle them.


These tables don't list all the features you might need in a marketing automation system. Nor do they address other important considerations such as ease of use, support, partners and stability. I'll talk about all those in the Webinar, so be sure to tune in.