One of the few dependable rules in the software industry is that Suites Win. When a market first develops, it is filled with “point solutions” that do one function – say, send emails or analyze Web traffic. Over time, products emerge that combine these functions and displace the individual point solutions. Even though the point solutions may be better at their particular task than the corresponding suite components, the time, cost, and risk savings of preintegrated products are irresistible to most buyers.* This is especially true when IT departments, rather than end-users, control the purchase process.
The only reason that companies haven’t already ended up with a single mega-system is that new applications appear constantly. It takes time before the existing suites can expand to assimilate the new features. This is especially true in customer management, where new touchpoints – Web, mobile, social, etc. – appear at a dizzying pace. In the real world, nearly all companies run multiple customer contact systems and probably always will.
What this means in practical terms is that companies wishing to coordinate customer treatments across channels need to knit together their separate touchpoints. A class of systems to do this has long existed, loosely labeled as “interaction managers” or “decision engines”. These systems manage outbound campaigns and real-time interactions using a combination of business rules and predictive models. Examples include Infor Interaction Advisor, IBM Unica Interact, Pegasystems Recommendation Advisor, SAS Real-Time Decision Manager, eponymous thinkAnalytics, and Oracle Real-Time Decisions.
These systems are all broadly similar in that they connect to external systems for customer data, marketing content, and message delivery. This contrasts with standard marketing automation and customer relationship management systems, which maintain their own customer databases, store content internally, and deliver messages themselves. Interaction managers and other types of customer management systems do share decision management capabilities including multi-step process flows, logical rules, and predictive models.
Interaction management vendors compete on the power of their rules, automated model generation, user interface, scalability, and analytics. To some degree they also compete their ability to connect with data sources and touchpoint systems. But every vendor I've spoken with says this integration is easy, so it doesn’t seem to be a major point of differentiation.
I caught up last week with the Oracle Real-Time Decisions (RTD) team, who released their latest version earlier this month. RTD is based on the SigmaDynamics product, originally built in 2002 and purchased by Oracle in 2006. Oracle now sells it as a general purchase decision platform, positioned as one of its business intelligence and middleware products. But although some clients do use it for customer service, sales, and operations management, 90% of implementations are still for marketing decisions, primarily to select offers for Web sites and call centers.
RTD’s particular strengths are automated learning and sophisticated decision rules. Users set up process flows, define decision points within each flow, and connect to touchpoint systems to capture events at those decision points. The system then automatically correlates event outcomes with creative, channels, offers, customer attributes and other factors. This happens without users specifying which factors to track -- a significant labor saving. The scope of data lets the system predict behaviors based on the full context of a situation, not just the customer’s identity. The data also provides the foundation for in-depth reports on the factors driving results, in addition to standard campaign reporting.
Decision rules can incorporate multiple goals, each assigned a relative weight, and multiple choices, each assigned a value towards reaching each goal. The system scores each choice by adding up the value it contributes to each goal, adjusted for the probability that the customer will accept that choice if offered. Users can also weigh goals differently for different customer segments: for example, retention might be more important for high-value customers, while cost reduction could be a priority for customers who are less profitable. The same goal definitions can apply to multiple decisions, reducing work and ensuring consistency.
Although RTD has always been powerful, its user interface was designed for technical users. The latest release changes this, introducing role-based security that allows different business users throughout an organization to control different functions. This means offers could be controlled by one person, campaigns designed by someone else, and touchpoint placements by a third party. Different users can also be presented with different views of the underlying objects, so they can see information organized in ways that make the most sense for their own purposes.
The new version of RTD is still aimed at large enterprises. Pricing depends on the type of deployment but it's a safe bet you won't get started for less than a couple hundred thousand dollars.
__________________________________________________________________________________
*True believers might argue that Software as a Service upends this rule by making integration very simple. I’ll grant that SaaS makes it easier to add new components on top of a standard platform such as Salesforce.com’s Force.com. But I'd argue that the platform itself is the functional equivalent of the suite, so the rule still stands.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Friday, May 20, 2011
Pirates, Train Wrecks, and Marketing Automation
Summary: Selecting a marketing automation system is an adventure. Here's the screenplay. Ready when you are, CB.
I spent most of this week at the inaugural DemandCon conference in San Francisco. My presentation, How to Avoid a Marketing Automation Train Wreck, was based largely on the Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Workbook I released last month (available for free on the RaabGuide Web site). But the heart of the Workbook is a series of checklists like the one below, whereas DemandCon asked presenters to avoid long lists of bullet points. So I had to rethink the format.
After some pondering, I decided it would be more memorable to structure the presentation as a story. This made sense: deploying a marketing automation system is literally a quest, and one that can end in either triumph or the train wreck of my title. Although my actual delivery was marred by a few technical hiccups, I liked the result enough to offer a version of it here.
Prologue
A good adventure begins with a map. This one starts with our hero, a young prince, accidentally uncovering a box containing a map of the marketing technology landscape, showing where B2B marketing automation fits among other types of customer management systems. Since any story is better if you add pirates, this is a treasure map, where X marks the spot. (Sadly, one of the technical hiccups meant the DemandCon audience never saw this image, but I personally find it hilarious. Note the pirate-style headline.):
The box also holds a chart that lists the features of different types of marketing automation systems. I didn't have time to reformat it, but in the story these are presented as clues to identifying the treasure.
He also finds a set of puzzle pieces that, when assembled, present a flow chart of standard B2B marketing tasks: program setup, lead generation, nurturing, scoring, transfer to sales, and reporting. This teaches him that marketing automation is a process, not a technology.
Our Story Begins...
The young prince is intrigued by his discovery, but reluctant to take on the quest. He is moved to action by a village of marketers and salespeople crying out for more leads and better nurturing. Specific benefits include replacing point solutions with an integrated system; running larger numbers and more types of marketing programs; less reliance on non-marketing resources to manage Web content and process data; and closer integration with sales. Who could resist?
After the hero announces his decision, he is warned about the perils ahead by a wise old consultant. These include:
- buying without concrete objectives
- choosing systems based on who has the most, best, or coolest features
- only considering industry leaders
- not using scenarios to test systems against your needs
- ignoring the information you can gather from references
- not investing in training, planning, program design, content, and other resources for successful deployment
Thus forewarned, our hero starts his quest. He starts by making a plan, which means he identifies the business benefits expected from this project. These should be quantified and linked to marketing programs that will deliver them. Then he defines the requirements implied by these programs, by listing the tasks to be completed for each project and the system features needed to execute these tasks. I represented requirements as a kitten who “requires” a bowl of milk – except that now it’s a pirate kitten (my second-favorite slide in the deck. Yes, I am easily amused.)
Planning complete, the hero sets out on his search. Along the way, he meets several companions with different traits. Recognizing that he can't succeed alone, he knows he must choose one of them to help him find the treasure. His task at this stage is choosing the right one. (We somehow seem to have lost the pirates. Pity.)
These companions represent the different marketing automation systems. To choose wisely, the hero must understand the type of product he needs. I divide the B2B marketing automation world into three segments: systems serving “micro-businesses” (very small firms where marketing is a part-time job, often for the owner); small to mid-size business (a separate marketing department but typically in one location and serving one product line); and enterprises (huge companies with dozens of marketers serving multiple markets and products). Each type of business has different requirements and is served by different vendors: I won’t list the details here but they’re in the Workbook.
The Journey
Our band of travelers now faces a series of challenges, escaping from traps, crossing rivers, and beating off attacks by wild animals. At each stage a different member demonstrates his special skills. In concrete terms, this means defining scenarios based on the goals you have set for your marketing automation system. What matters is seeing how well the systems perform the tasks you need, not the ones the vendor likes to demonstrate. This means the real challenge is understanding your requirements – our hero must learn about himself before he can complete his quest. It’s a cliché but how else can I sell this to Disney?
Now the scene switches: it’s the tavern after a day of adventures, and our little group are warily eating together, trying to decide who they can trust. In other words, they’re checking references. You’ll remember that skipping references is one of the dangers I warned against. It’s true that the company will hand-pick happy customers, but you can still learn a lot if you ask the right questions:
- why did they pick the system (maybe the cared about something that’s not important to you);
- what do they see as strengths and weaknesses;
- are they using the system the same way you expect to;
- are their skills and resources similar to yours.
If a vendor can’t connect you with a reference whose situation matches your own, be very cautious.
And while we’re on the subject – don’t think social media queries replace reference checking. What comes back is typically a “yes, we love it” from highly motivated fans. Apart from dedicated grudge-holders, few businesspeople will volunteer negative feedback in social media: they can only get in trouble and there’s nothing in it for them. If you do rely on the social media, contact the people who respond and have an in-depth conversation asking the same questions you would ask the vendor’s own references.
Back to our story. The hero still hasn’t chosen on a single companion, and now the group faces the final test: it must cross the desert, storm the castle, and find the treasure. Who will stay and who will run away? Who will is a good long-term partner? The only way to find out is to move ahead.
In marketing automation terms, this means setting up a trial so you can understand the day-to-day details of working with a system. Most vendors will give you a trial license if they know you’re seriously considering their product. The trick to an effective trial is to test the system thoroughly: this means setting up programs are as demanding as those you’ll actually run once you own it and then running them from start to finish.
Here’s where all that early planning and goal-setting comes in handy, since you’ll have defined those programs already. If that sounds like too much work, bear in mind that you’ll need those programs after deployment anyway. So you might as well do the work a bit sooner and have the programs available to help make the right selection.
Triumph and Return
The group now wins the final battle and finds the treasure, only to meet a new crisis: there’s only enough water for two people to recross the desert. The hero must finally choose. In our story, this is easy because everyone else has failed or died nobly – oh, and it turns out that the remaining companion is really a disguised princess, with whom the hero has fallen in love. Didn’t see that coming, did you? Even better, she’s a pirate princess. Disney’s gonna love it.
But the real world isn’t a fairy tale. You may actually find several qualified vendors. Do what you can to make a rational choice – the Workbook provides a list of criteria to consider. But even if there is no clear winner, make a choice and get on with it. Remember your real goal is to get value from using the system, not to run the world’s finest selection project.
Epilogue
The story doesn’t end with the hero’s triumphant return. Treasure is only valuable if you spend it wisely; relationships don’t end with the wedding. It’s hard work to live happily ever after. So we have an epilogue showing how the happy couple used their riches to improve the lives of the villagers for years to come.
In marketing automation terms, this means avoiding the final mistake of underinvesting in deployment. Be prepared to spend money training your staff, developing content, cleansing data, and measuring results. Expect to spend time on organizational changes and coordinating with sales, finance, and IT departments. Hire consultants and agencies if you don’t have the necessary skills in-house – which few firms do when they start. And don’t get stuck in a rut: make a long-term plan to steadily expand use of your system after your initial deployment.
The End
I have to admit this isn’t exactly what I presented at DemandCon, although I wish it had been. The one thing I’d still want to change is to give more emphasis to the section on deployment. It’s problems with process, content, data quality and staffing that cause most marketing automation train wrecks, not the technology.
Do I smell a sequel?
I spent most of this week at the inaugural DemandCon conference in San Francisco. My presentation, How to Avoid a Marketing Automation Train Wreck, was based largely on the Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Workbook I released last month (available for free on the RaabGuide Web site). But the heart of the Workbook is a series of checklists like the one below, whereas DemandCon asked presenters to avoid long lists of bullet points. So I had to rethink the format.
After some pondering, I decided it would be more memorable to structure the presentation as a story. This made sense: deploying a marketing automation system is literally a quest, and one that can end in either triumph or the train wreck of my title. Although my actual delivery was marred by a few technical hiccups, I liked the result enough to offer a version of it here.
Prologue
A good adventure begins with a map. This one starts with our hero, a young prince, accidentally uncovering a box containing a map of the marketing technology landscape, showing where B2B marketing automation fits among other types of customer management systems. Since any story is better if you add pirates, this is a treasure map, where X marks the spot. (Sadly, one of the technical hiccups meant the DemandCon audience never saw this image, but I personally find it hilarious. Note the pirate-style headline.):
The box also holds a chart that lists the features of different types of marketing automation systems. I didn't have time to reformat it, but in the story these are presented as clues to identifying the treasure.
He also finds a set of puzzle pieces that, when assembled, present a flow chart of standard B2B marketing tasks: program setup, lead generation, nurturing, scoring, transfer to sales, and reporting. This teaches him that marketing automation is a process, not a technology.
Our Story Begins...
The young prince is intrigued by his discovery, but reluctant to take on the quest. He is moved to action by a village of marketers and salespeople crying out for more leads and better nurturing. Specific benefits include replacing point solutions with an integrated system; running larger numbers and more types of marketing programs; less reliance on non-marketing resources to manage Web content and process data; and closer integration with sales. Who could resist?
After the hero announces his decision, he is warned about the perils ahead by a wise old consultant. These include:
- buying without concrete objectives
- choosing systems based on who has the most, best, or coolest features
- only considering industry leaders
- not using scenarios to test systems against your needs
- ignoring the information you can gather from references
- not investing in training, planning, program design, content, and other resources for successful deployment
Thus forewarned, our hero starts his quest. He starts by making a plan, which means he identifies the business benefits expected from this project. These should be quantified and linked to marketing programs that will deliver them. Then he defines the requirements implied by these programs, by listing the tasks to be completed for each project and the system features needed to execute these tasks. I represented requirements as a kitten who “requires” a bowl of milk – except that now it’s a pirate kitten (my second-favorite slide in the deck. Yes, I am easily amused.)
Planning complete, the hero sets out on his search. Along the way, he meets several companions with different traits. Recognizing that he can't succeed alone, he knows he must choose one of them to help him find the treasure. His task at this stage is choosing the right one. (We somehow seem to have lost the pirates. Pity.)
These companions represent the different marketing automation systems. To choose wisely, the hero must understand the type of product he needs. I divide the B2B marketing automation world into three segments: systems serving “micro-businesses” (very small firms where marketing is a part-time job, often for the owner); small to mid-size business (a separate marketing department but typically in one location and serving one product line); and enterprises (huge companies with dozens of marketers serving multiple markets and products). Each type of business has different requirements and is served by different vendors: I won’t list the details here but they’re in the Workbook.
The Journey
Our band of travelers now faces a series of challenges, escaping from traps, crossing rivers, and beating off attacks by wild animals. At each stage a different member demonstrates his special skills. In concrete terms, this means defining scenarios based on the goals you have set for your marketing automation system. What matters is seeing how well the systems perform the tasks you need, not the ones the vendor likes to demonstrate. This means the real challenge is understanding your requirements – our hero must learn about himself before he can complete his quest. It’s a cliché but how else can I sell this to Disney?
Now the scene switches: it’s the tavern after a day of adventures, and our little group are warily eating together, trying to decide who they can trust. In other words, they’re checking references. You’ll remember that skipping references is one of the dangers I warned against. It’s true that the company will hand-pick happy customers, but you can still learn a lot if you ask the right questions:
- why did they pick the system (maybe the cared about something that’s not important to you);
- what do they see as strengths and weaknesses;
- are they using the system the same way you expect to;
- are their skills and resources similar to yours.
If a vendor can’t connect you with a reference whose situation matches your own, be very cautious.
And while we’re on the subject – don’t think social media queries replace reference checking. What comes back is typically a “yes, we love it” from highly motivated fans. Apart from dedicated grudge-holders, few businesspeople will volunteer negative feedback in social media: they can only get in trouble and there’s nothing in it for them. If you do rely on the social media, contact the people who respond and have an in-depth conversation asking the same questions you would ask the vendor’s own references.
Back to our story. The hero still hasn’t chosen on a single companion, and now the group faces the final test: it must cross the desert, storm the castle, and find the treasure. Who will stay and who will run away? Who will is a good long-term partner? The only way to find out is to move ahead.
In marketing automation terms, this means setting up a trial so you can understand the day-to-day details of working with a system. Most vendors will give you a trial license if they know you’re seriously considering their product. The trick to an effective trial is to test the system thoroughly: this means setting up programs are as demanding as those you’ll actually run once you own it and then running them from start to finish.
Here’s where all that early planning and goal-setting comes in handy, since you’ll have defined those programs already. If that sounds like too much work, bear in mind that you’ll need those programs after deployment anyway. So you might as well do the work a bit sooner and have the programs available to help make the right selection.
Triumph and Return
The group now wins the final battle and finds the treasure, only to meet a new crisis: there’s only enough water for two people to recross the desert. The hero must finally choose. In our story, this is easy because everyone else has failed or died nobly – oh, and it turns out that the remaining companion is really a disguised princess, with whom the hero has fallen in love. Didn’t see that coming, did you? Even better, she’s a pirate princess. Disney’s gonna love it.
But the real world isn’t a fairy tale. You may actually find several qualified vendors. Do what you can to make a rational choice – the Workbook provides a list of criteria to consider. But even if there is no clear winner, make a choice and get on with it. Remember your real goal is to get value from using the system, not to run the world’s finest selection project.
Epilogue
The story doesn’t end with the hero’s triumphant return. Treasure is only valuable if you spend it wisely; relationships don’t end with the wedding. It’s hard work to live happily ever after. So we have an epilogue showing how the happy couple used their riches to improve the lives of the villagers for years to come.
In marketing automation terms, this means avoiding the final mistake of underinvesting in deployment. Be prepared to spend money training your staff, developing content, cleansing data, and measuring results. Expect to spend time on organizational changes and coordinating with sales, finance, and IT departments. Hire consultants and agencies if you don’t have the necessary skills in-house – which few firms do when they start. And don’t get stuck in a rut: make a long-term plan to steadily expand use of your system after your initial deployment.
The End
I have to admit this isn’t exactly what I presented at DemandCon, although I wish it had been. The one thing I’d still want to change is to give more emphasis to the section on deployment. It’s problems with process, content, data quality and staffing that cause most marketing automation train wrecks, not the technology.
Do I smell a sequel?
Sunday, May 15, 2011
DIGIDAY:TARGET, or, Yogi Berra Meets Data in the Online World.
I was scheduled to attend the DIGIDAY:TARGET conference on May 4 but wasn't able to be there. (Download the conference agenda and presentations.) Happily, my colleague and big-data guru Matt Doering was able to take my place. Here are Matt's thoughts:
Yogi Berra meets data in the online world.
At the recent Digiday:Target conference (Park Central Hotel, NYC, May 4 2011) a moderator posed the question “Which is better: More Data, Consistent Data or Data Expertise”. Not surprisingly there was a wide variety of opinions both from the panel as well as from many attendees I talked to later in the day. Many I listened to were really intrigued and conflicted by this question. To understand the real answer let us first review the pros and cons of the three possible answers.
Background
More Data – Large volumes of data from varied sources.
Pros:
• Richer data content from any given data source.
• Data sources tend to enrich each other, if properly managed.
• More likely to find the outliers that many times can be the real profit makers.
Cons:
• Many companies don’t have the resources to handle very large volumes of data.
• Lack of Metadata about data sources.
• No real experience with merging multiple data sources with different element codes and timeframes.
• Data hygiene can be an issue if you are working with a data set that is new to your organization.
Consistent Data – All data conforms to some industry standard. Any data not conforming to the model is discarded or reduced.
Pros:
• All data is easily understood and documented in a Metadata stack.
• Data hygiene is easy to define and enforce.
• Data processing performance profiles are well understood. This makes it very easy to scope a system or project.
Cons:
• Let’s admit it; all homogenized milk tastes the same. Where is the differentiation potential?
• In the process of conforming to a standard more detailed data is lost. For example if the industry standard requires that age elements be bucketed into 10 year breaks what happens if for your product offering you need 6.5 year breaks?
Data Expertise – Deep experience with very large data sets.
Pros:
• Small data, large data, inconsistent data are not a problem. Expertise can handle all these issues.
• These resources understand the role that standardized data plays in data analysis (like a good coat of primer on a wall) but also know that the real value is in what is different.
• Most data experts love to teach so the entire data IQ of you organization increases.
• Able to distinguish between dirty data and gold nuggets.
Cons:
• These resources can be hard to find. It’s not a matter of having the right degree its more of who they are. Just as simply having a degree in fine arts doesn’t make you an artist a degree in stats doesn’t make you a good data scientist. In fact one of the best data scientists I know never took a stats course.
“Its déjà vu all over again”
Yogi had it right. If, as I strongly believe, data expertise is of critical importance for the media world it’s not the first industry where this is true. A number of industries over the past 25 years have had to deal with the “big data” problem. Early examples of this are the classic CPG scanner data, pharmaceutical detailing data and financial services direct marketing data sets. All these industries faced large and diverse data issues and they all succeeded in overcoming the problem with technique not CPU.
Now it might be tempting to claim that our space generates significantly higher volumes of data or more diverse data, but is that really true? At first this appears to be true, but when you factor in the computing power available at the times it is not that far fetched to say the adjusted data volumes are actually very similar. Keep in mind that the data scientists of those days were working with computers with less horse power and memory then the average iPad used by the majority of attendees at Digiday:Target.
So where do you find this expertise? Look to the industries named above. Membership of the Direct Marketing Association and those who attended the NCDM (National Center for Database Marketing) is a good place to start. Look for people from the telecommunications industry who helped build systems to analyze Call Detail Records (CDRs). Experience in genome sequencing and pairing should grab your attention. Do these people know clicks from conversions? Probably not, but on the other hand for them more data is the breath of life. We need to recruit the talent that is out there into the industry and avoid having to reinvent it “all over again”.
Yogi Berra meets data in the online world.
At the recent Digiday:Target conference (Park Central Hotel, NYC, May 4 2011) a moderator posed the question “Which is better: More Data, Consistent Data or Data Expertise”. Not surprisingly there was a wide variety of opinions both from the panel as well as from many attendees I talked to later in the day. Many I listened to were really intrigued and conflicted by this question. To understand the real answer let us first review the pros and cons of the three possible answers.
BackgroundMore Data – Large volumes of data from varied sources.
Pros:
• Richer data content from any given data source.
• Data sources tend to enrich each other, if properly managed.
• More likely to find the outliers that many times can be the real profit makers.
Cons:
• Many companies don’t have the resources to handle very large volumes of data.
• Lack of Metadata about data sources.
• No real experience with merging multiple data sources with different element codes and timeframes.
• Data hygiene can be an issue if you are working with a data set that is new to your organization.
Consistent Data – All data conforms to some industry standard. Any data not conforming to the model is discarded or reduced.
Pros:
• All data is easily understood and documented in a Metadata stack.
• Data hygiene is easy to define and enforce.
• Data processing performance profiles are well understood. This makes it very easy to scope a system or project.
Cons:
• Let’s admit it; all homogenized milk tastes the same. Where is the differentiation potential?
• In the process of conforming to a standard more detailed data is lost. For example if the industry standard requires that age elements be bucketed into 10 year breaks what happens if for your product offering you need 6.5 year breaks?
Data Expertise – Deep experience with very large data sets.
Pros:
• Small data, large data, inconsistent data are not a problem. Expertise can handle all these issues.
• These resources understand the role that standardized data plays in data analysis (like a good coat of primer on a wall) but also know that the real value is in what is different.
• Most data experts love to teach so the entire data IQ of you organization increases.
• Able to distinguish between dirty data and gold nuggets.
Cons:
• These resources can be hard to find. It’s not a matter of having the right degree its more of who they are. Just as simply having a degree in fine arts doesn’t make you an artist a degree in stats doesn’t make you a good data scientist. In fact one of the best data scientists I know never took a stats course.
“Its déjà vu all over again”
Yogi had it right. If, as I strongly believe, data expertise is of critical importance for the media world it’s not the first industry where this is true. A number of industries over the past 25 years have had to deal with the “big data” problem. Early examples of this are the classic CPG scanner data, pharmaceutical detailing data and financial services direct marketing data sets. All these industries faced large and diverse data issues and they all succeeded in overcoming the problem with technique not CPU.
Now it might be tempting to claim that our space generates significantly higher volumes of data or more diverse data, but is that really true? At first this appears to be true, but when you factor in the computing power available at the times it is not that far fetched to say the adjusted data volumes are actually very similar. Keep in mind that the data scientists of those days were working with computers with less horse power and memory then the average iPad used by the majority of attendees at Digiday:Target.
So where do you find this expertise? Look to the industries named above. Membership of the Direct Marketing Association and those who attended the NCDM (National Center for Database Marketing) is a good place to start. Look for people from the telecommunications industry who helped build systems to analyze Call Detail Records (CDRs). Experience in genome sequencing and pairing should grab your attention. Do these people know clicks from conversions? Probably not, but on the other hand for them more data is the breath of life. We need to recruit the talent that is out there into the industry and avoid having to reinvent it “all over again”.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Silverpop's Latest Release Targets Sophisticated Marketing Automation Buyers
Summary: Silverpop has continued to extend the marketing automation capabilities of its Engage platform. The latest release adds features that are most important to enterprise marketers.
More than a year has passed since Silverpop merged its email and marketing automation systems into a single product, Engage 8. The combined product offered advanced email but was missing some capabilities available in the previous marketing automation product. These included revenue reporting, anonymous visitor lookups, marketing calendars, and advanced scoring features such as caps on points from one event type. Clients who needed those features had to remain on the previous system (Engage B2B). Prospects who wanted them had to look elsewhere.
Silverpop has been steadily enhancing its new product since that time. The latest version, Engage 8.3, was released last month. It still doesn’t offer all the features of the oldl B2B product because Silverpop decided that some were not worth duplicating. But it does offer other capabilities that are improvements. Here are some highlights from the latest set of additions:
- multiple scores per lead. This is important in large companies that need to score leads against multiple products. It also allows different scoring rules for different customer segments. Scoring models can now include data values, such as a score that was calculated externally and imported.
- progressive profiling. Online forms can automatically remove questions a visitor has already answered and replace them with new questions in a user-specified sequence. Silverpop's form builder handles this quite elegantly, without requiring the user to embed rules or a scripting language.
- social sharing. The system can publish directly to Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn accounts. Content can include sharing buttons for a wide range of other systems. The system can track the number of shares and reshares for each message and identify traffic from those shares. It also captures the identity of the original sharer although this is not currently exposed.
- revenue tracking. Engage still relies on Salesforce.com to produce revenue reports. But it now feeds Salesforce all campaigns that touched the lead and flags both the original source and the campaign that generated contact information. This will allow advanced attribution analysis.
- Salesforce.com integration. Users can now embed campaign codes within a URL link, making them easier to capture. They can have the system create Salesforce.com tasks when a new lead is created, use Salesforce.com opportunity stages within campaign rules, and add leads to a Salesforce.com campaign at any step in a marketing automation program.
- enhanced security. Silverpop suffered a widely-publicized security breach in December 2010. The new release tightens access in several ways, including user-specific IP restrictions, challenges to log-ins from new IP addresses, two-factor authentication, and narrower restrictions on administrative rights. Given subsequent breaches at other firms, most recently Epsilon and Sony, it's possible that vendors and marketers will start paying more attention to security issues.
- email controls. Merging the email and marketing automation systems does have the advantage of giving B2B marketers access to features developed for Silverpop’s advanced email business. These include send-time optimization, which automatically sends campaign emails at the most effective time of day, and a “snooze” option that lets recipients halt email messages for a specified time period instead of opting out completely.
These are all valuable additions to Silverpop’s B2B capabilities. But Silverpop faces an uphill battle in regaining lost momentum and competing with the advanced analytics now touted by several competitors. Silverpop may be positioning itself to serve the upper end of the market, where companies with multiple products and world-wide organizations need advanced features like multiple scores, dynamic content, enhanced security, and high scalability. That’s a plausible strategy, although it means competing against both high-end B2B marketing automation vendors and B2C products like Neolane and Teradata/Aprimo. Given the costs of product development, it would be tough to remain a first-tier system by selling to large enterprises alone.
More than a year has passed since Silverpop merged its email and marketing automation systems into a single product, Engage 8. The combined product offered advanced email but was missing some capabilities available in the previous marketing automation product. These included revenue reporting, anonymous visitor lookups, marketing calendars, and advanced scoring features such as caps on points from one event type. Clients who needed those features had to remain on the previous system (Engage B2B). Prospects who wanted them had to look elsewhere.
Silverpop has been steadily enhancing its new product since that time. The latest version, Engage 8.3, was released last month. It still doesn’t offer all the features of the oldl B2B product because Silverpop decided that some were not worth duplicating. But it does offer other capabilities that are improvements. Here are some highlights from the latest set of additions:
- multiple scores per lead. This is important in large companies that need to score leads against multiple products. It also allows different scoring rules for different customer segments. Scoring models can now include data values, such as a score that was calculated externally and imported.
- progressive profiling. Online forms can automatically remove questions a visitor has already answered and replace them with new questions in a user-specified sequence. Silverpop's form builder handles this quite elegantly, without requiring the user to embed rules or a scripting language.
- social sharing. The system can publish directly to Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn accounts. Content can include sharing buttons for a wide range of other systems. The system can track the number of shares and reshares for each message and identify traffic from those shares. It also captures the identity of the original sharer although this is not currently exposed.
- revenue tracking. Engage still relies on Salesforce.com to produce revenue reports. But it now feeds Salesforce all campaigns that touched the lead and flags both the original source and the campaign that generated contact information. This will allow advanced attribution analysis.
- Salesforce.com integration. Users can now embed campaign codes within a URL link, making them easier to capture. They can have the system create Salesforce.com tasks when a new lead is created, use Salesforce.com opportunity stages within campaign rules, and add leads to a Salesforce.com campaign at any step in a marketing automation program.
- enhanced security. Silverpop suffered a widely-publicized security breach in December 2010. The new release tightens access in several ways, including user-specific IP restrictions, challenges to log-ins from new IP addresses, two-factor authentication, and narrower restrictions on administrative rights. Given subsequent breaches at other firms, most recently Epsilon and Sony, it's possible that vendors and marketers will start paying more attention to security issues.
- email controls. Merging the email and marketing automation systems does have the advantage of giving B2B marketers access to features developed for Silverpop’s advanced email business. These include send-time optimization, which automatically sends campaign emails at the most effective time of day, and a “snooze” option that lets recipients halt email messages for a specified time period instead of opting out completely.
These are all valuable additions to Silverpop’s B2B capabilities. But Silverpop faces an uphill battle in regaining lost momentum and competing with the advanced analytics now touted by several competitors. Silverpop may be positioning itself to serve the upper end of the market, where companies with multiple products and world-wide organizations need advanced features like multiple scores, dynamic content, enhanced security, and high scalability. That’s a plausible strategy, although it means competing against both high-end B2B marketing automation vendors and B2C products like Neolane and Teradata/Aprimo. Given the costs of product development, it would be tough to remain a first-tier system by selling to large enterprises alone.
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
Intuit / Salesforce.com Alliance Is No April Fool's Joke
Am I the only one who missed the April 1 announcement of a strategic alliance between Salesforce.com and Intuit? Given our industry's endless nattering about whether Salesforce.com will move into marketing automation, this should have attracted more attention (or, at least, enough attention that I would hear about it sooner than I did).
In case you too missed the news, it comes down to this: Salesforce.com will be available on Intuit’s App Center and be deployed so that the Intuit and Salesforce.com databases are synchronized. For those of us used to thinking of Salesforce.com as the 900 pound gorilla, it’s disorienting to see Salesforce on the Intuit App Center, rather than the other way around.
But it does make sense. Intuit has more than 4 million customers, compared with 90,000 for Salesforce.com. The revenue differential isn’t as large ($3.5 billion for Intuit vs. $1.7 billion for Salesforce) and Salesforce.com actually has a slightly higher market cap ($17.5 billion for Salesforce.com vs. $16.5 billion for Intuit). But Intuit represents a gateway to the small business market for Salesforce.com, so it’s clear who needs whom.
What has this to do with marketing automation? Pretty much everything, I’d argue, at least for companies like Infusionsoft, OfficeAutoPilot, and Genoo, who target “micro-businesses” at the lowest end of the market. Those vendors base much of their appeal on the convenience of using one system for marketing, Web pages, CRM, and even order processing. The one thing they don’t offer is accounting, in good part because Intuit’s QuickBooks has such a dominant position.
The lack of accounting data is an important gap, because the accounting system is the ultimate source for information on customer identities and transactions. That data is important for effective marketing. Having it automatically available to Salesforce.com makes Salesforce a much more attractive marketing option for small businesses.
I suppose I should backtrack a bit here and acknowledge that I’m talking about marketing to customers – that is, people who have already made a purchase – rather than marketing to prospects or leads. Business-to-consumer marketing automation systems manage relationships with both groups, while B2B marketing automation is concerned primarily with just prospects and leads. The “micro-business” marketing automation vendors are more like B2C systemsbecause they do deal with customers as well as leads and prospects.
In other words, the Intuit / Salesforce.com alliance poses a very large threat to the “micro-business” marketing automation vendors but doesn’t have much impact on the rest of the B2B marketing automation industry, which sells to larger companies. Indeed, those larger firms are typically not QuickBooks clients at all.
But here’s the thing: let’s say that Salesforce.com does succeed in selling to a lot of Intuit clients, and in the process adds marketing automation features to serve them better. Those marketing automation features will be available to all sizes of Salesforce.com clients, including the larger ones who currently purchase marketing automation systems. Even if those firms continue to use marketing automation just to target leads and prospects, they’ll suddenly have a stronger reason to adopt Salesforce.com as their marketing platform. So marketing automation vendors who thought the Salesforce.com / Intuit deal didn’t apply to them, might want to think again.
In case you too missed the news, it comes down to this: Salesforce.com will be available on Intuit’s App Center and be deployed so that the Intuit and Salesforce.com databases are synchronized. For those of us used to thinking of Salesforce.com as the 900 pound gorilla, it’s disorienting to see Salesforce on the Intuit App Center, rather than the other way around.
But it does make sense. Intuit has more than 4 million customers, compared with 90,000 for Salesforce.com. The revenue differential isn’t as large ($3.5 billion for Intuit vs. $1.7 billion for Salesforce) and Salesforce.com actually has a slightly higher market cap ($17.5 billion for Salesforce.com vs. $16.5 billion for Intuit). But Intuit represents a gateway to the small business market for Salesforce.com, so it’s clear who needs whom.
What has this to do with marketing automation? Pretty much everything, I’d argue, at least for companies like Infusionsoft, OfficeAutoPilot, and Genoo, who target “micro-businesses” at the lowest end of the market. Those vendors base much of their appeal on the convenience of using one system for marketing, Web pages, CRM, and even order processing. The one thing they don’t offer is accounting, in good part because Intuit’s QuickBooks has such a dominant position.
The lack of accounting data is an important gap, because the accounting system is the ultimate source for information on customer identities and transactions. That data is important for effective marketing. Having it automatically available to Salesforce.com makes Salesforce a much more attractive marketing option for small businesses.
I suppose I should backtrack a bit here and acknowledge that I’m talking about marketing to customers – that is, people who have already made a purchase – rather than marketing to prospects or leads. Business-to-consumer marketing automation systems manage relationships with both groups, while B2B marketing automation is concerned primarily with just prospects and leads. The “micro-business” marketing automation vendors are more like B2C systemsbecause they do deal with customers as well as leads and prospects.
In other words, the Intuit / Salesforce.com alliance poses a very large threat to the “micro-business” marketing automation vendors but doesn’t have much impact on the rest of the B2B marketing automation industry, which sells to larger companies. Indeed, those larger firms are typically not QuickBooks clients at all.
But here’s the thing: let’s say that Salesforce.com does succeed in selling to a lot of Intuit clients, and in the process adds marketing automation features to serve them better. Those marketing automation features will be available to all sizes of Salesforce.com clients, including the larger ones who currently purchase marketing automation systems. Even if those firms continue to use marketing automation just to target leads and prospects, they’ll suddenly have a stronger reason to adopt Salesforce.com as their marketing platform. So marketing automation vendors who thought the Salesforce.com / Intuit deal didn’t apply to them, might want to think again.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
MakesBridge Offers Powerful Features to Small Business Marketers
Summary: MakesBridge offers a full set of marketing automation features with some special strengths that will appeal especially to small companies.
I’ve written quite a bit recently about marketing systems for very small businesses – a category I’ve tentatively labeled “micro-business” and pegged at under $5 million revenue. This group of marketers has different needs from even slightly larger companies. In particular, they want a highly-integrated combination of standard marketing automation (email, landing pages and individual-level Website behavior tracking) with customer relationship management (tracking personal and telephone contacts with individuals). Leaders in the space are Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot, which both also provide integrated shopping carts for e-commerce. HubSpot also has many micro-business clients but is not focused on them exclusively and – probably as a result – has a slightly different feature set: more Web traffic generation and no built-in contact management or shopping cart.
There are plenty of other vendors serving micro-businesses. I’ve previously reviewed Genoo, which supplements the standard marketing automation features with Web hosting and built-in CRM but no shopping cart. Canterris , NurtureHQ , and mKubed all provide email, Web visitor tracking, nurture campaigns, lead scoring, and CRM integration ((Salesforce.com for Canterris and NurtureHQ; its own CRM for mKubed) for under $500 per month. Canterris and mKubed also host Web forms and landing pages but NurtureHQ apparently does not. See my List of Demand Generation Vendors for other options.
MakesBridge is another contender. The company started in 2001 as an email service provider and still offers a $29.95 per month email product. It greatly expanded its features in 2010 and now offers a marketing automation system starting at $500 per month. This includes the full rig: outbound email, multi-step nurture campaigns, landing pages and forms, lead scoring, Web visitor tracking (licensed from VisiStat and quite impressive), and a sales automation module that can work as a stand-alone CRM system or integrate with Salesforce.com, NetSuite, Google Apps, or Capsule CRM, a $12 per month per user system also aimed at small business. There’s no shopping cart or Web site hosting but I don’t yet consider those standard features, even for micro-business systems.
MakesBridge does a particularly good job of taming the mass of Web pages that are critical to reacting to lead behaviors. It does this by letting users write rules that reference sets of Web pages rather than individual pages. This can be done by either assigning a shared label to several pages or by assigning page attributes and selecting on those. This is a helpful middle ground between rules that treat all pages the same (e.g. “visited any Web page”) and those that require users to list a specific page or several individual pages. These rules can be used in segmentation, lead scoring, and sales alerts.
The system also has a solid campaign engine, which breaks campaigns into steps and allows multiple options within each step. Each option has a filter that determines which leads are eligible, in addition to actions and an execution schedule that apply to those leads. Users can view reports on performance for each step and for each option within the step. A “circuit breaker” enforces limits on the total number of emails sent during any time period, alerting the user and limiting the damage from what MakesBridge calls "automation run wild".
MakesBridge also supports automated direct mail production, another feature favored by micro-business marketers. For this, the company has integrated with Cloud2You, a Salesforce.com App Exchange partner that loads selected records directly into templates to produce personalized mailing pieces. Cloud2You handles the actual printing and mailing without any additional effort by the user. Mailings can be triggered by steps within a MakesBridge campaign,
The sales automation module gives salespeople access to detailed information about their leads, including their current campaigns. Salespeople can remove a lead from a campaign, suspend the campaign, or skip a particular message. Although MakesBridge is designed to integrate with external CRM products, some clients use its sales automation module as their primary CRM system.
Pricing of MakesBridge is based on the modules used, number of users, email volume, and number of leads in the database. The system currently has more than 150 clients. Most are small businesses but some are large corporations.
I’ve written quite a bit recently about marketing systems for very small businesses – a category I’ve tentatively labeled “micro-business” and pegged at under $5 million revenue. This group of marketers has different needs from even slightly larger companies. In particular, they want a highly-integrated combination of standard marketing automation (email, landing pages and individual-level Website behavior tracking) with customer relationship management (tracking personal and telephone contacts with individuals). Leaders in the space are Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot, which both also provide integrated shopping carts for e-commerce. HubSpot also has many micro-business clients but is not focused on them exclusively and – probably as a result – has a slightly different feature set: more Web traffic generation and no built-in contact management or shopping cart.
There are plenty of other vendors serving micro-businesses. I’ve previously reviewed Genoo, which supplements the standard marketing automation features with Web hosting and built-in CRM but no shopping cart. Canterris , NurtureHQ , and mKubed all provide email, Web visitor tracking, nurture campaigns, lead scoring, and CRM integration ((Salesforce.com for Canterris and NurtureHQ; its own CRM for mKubed) for under $500 per month. Canterris and mKubed also host Web forms and landing pages but NurtureHQ apparently does not. See my List of Demand Generation Vendors for other options.
MakesBridge is another contender. The company started in 2001 as an email service provider and still offers a $29.95 per month email product. It greatly expanded its features in 2010 and now offers a marketing automation system starting at $500 per month. This includes the full rig: outbound email, multi-step nurture campaigns, landing pages and forms, lead scoring, Web visitor tracking (licensed from VisiStat and quite impressive), and a sales automation module that can work as a stand-alone CRM system or integrate with Salesforce.com, NetSuite, Google Apps, or Capsule CRM, a $12 per month per user system also aimed at small business. There’s no shopping cart or Web site hosting but I don’t yet consider those standard features, even for micro-business systems.
MakesBridge does a particularly good job of taming the mass of Web pages that are critical to reacting to lead behaviors. It does this by letting users write rules that reference sets of Web pages rather than individual pages. This can be done by either assigning a shared label to several pages or by assigning page attributes and selecting on those. This is a helpful middle ground between rules that treat all pages the same (e.g. “visited any Web page”) and those that require users to list a specific page or several individual pages. These rules can be used in segmentation, lead scoring, and sales alerts.
The system also has a solid campaign engine, which breaks campaigns into steps and allows multiple options within each step. Each option has a filter that determines which leads are eligible, in addition to actions and an execution schedule that apply to those leads. Users can view reports on performance for each step and for each option within the step. A “circuit breaker” enforces limits on the total number of emails sent during any time period, alerting the user and limiting the damage from what MakesBridge calls "automation run wild".
MakesBridge also supports automated direct mail production, another feature favored by micro-business marketers. For this, the company has integrated with Cloud2You, a Salesforce.com App Exchange partner that loads selected records directly into templates to produce personalized mailing pieces. Cloud2You handles the actual printing and mailing without any additional effort by the user. Mailings can be triggered by steps within a MakesBridge campaign,
The sales automation module gives salespeople access to detailed information about their leads, including their current campaigns. Salespeople can remove a lead from a campaign, suspend the campaign, or skip a particular message. Although MakesBridge is designed to integrate with external CRM products, some clients use its sales automation module as their primary CRM system.
Pricing of MakesBridge is based on the modules used, number of users, email volume, and number of leads in the database. The system currently has more than 150 clients. Most are small businesses but some are large corporations.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Argyle Social Helps to Track Social Media Results
Summary: Argyle Social offers social media marketing with above-average features for tracking results.
I’ve had a couple of conversations in recent months with Argyle Social, one of the zillions* of companies offering social media marketing tools. Argyle’s particular focus is making social media measurable. It does this in two ways:
- embedding trackable URLs in social messages. The system provides a social media publishing tool that automatically creates links with embedded Google-Analytics-compatible identifiers for campaign, content, and source. This overcomes the fact that social media traffic often can’t be tied to a referring Web site. The identifiers can also include custom parameters for other Web analytics packages. The URLs are sent to an Argyle-controlled destination which logs the traffic before redirecting the Web visitor to the original target page.
- adding cookies to visitors’ computers when they view Argyle-generated social media content, and checking for those cookies when visitors reach a “conversion” page (i.e., make a purchase or take some other targeted action). The conversion pages can be created outside of Argyle but must contain Argyle tags. Results are used to identify visitors who are "influenced" by social media.
Argyle uses its tracking features to generate reports on direct responses to social media campaigns (i.e., clicks on Argyle-generated messages) and on influenced responses (i.e., conversions of visitors whose cookie shows they previously saw social content). Although this is far from the ideal of measuring the true incremental impact of a campaign, it's a step in the right direction. It also provides data that could be the foundation of a more sophisticated analysis.
These features are not technically difficult, so it's quite possible they're available in some other social media systems. But that matters less than knowing they're available in Argyle if you need them.
Argyle's tracking features are combined with a publishing interface that lets users set up accounts, create posts, and deliver them immediately or on schedule. It can currently post to Facebook, Twitter and Linked In. It can also scan for social messages containing specified keywords and store these messages for future reference. The publishing features don’t yet include enterprise-level capabilities such as response templates, approval work flows, case management, or relationship tracking, although these are on the horizon. A rules-based inbox filtering feature will launch tomorrow.
Argyle launched its product at the end of last year and is nearing 100 customers. A basic edition (three users, ten social properties, one conversion goal, one inbox filtering rule) is priced at $149 per month and the advanced edition (five users, unlimited social properties, five goals, ten advanced rules) costs $499 per month.
__________________________________________________________________________________
*at last count. Here are the first three lists I found via a Google search, plus others whose authors were SEO-savvy enough to find a nice, round 100, and one with a cool infographic:
[INFOGRAPHIC] What Are The Best Social Media Monitoring Tools?
22 Social Media Marketing Management Tools (Lee Odden)
42+ Social Media Marketing Tools (Joe Pulizzi)
List of Social Media Management Systems (SMMS) (Jeremiah Owyang)
100+ Social Media Monitoring Tools (Pam Dyer)
Top 100 social media monitoring tools (juanmarketing)
I’ve had a couple of conversations in recent months with Argyle Social, one of the zillions* of companies offering social media marketing tools. Argyle’s particular focus is making social media measurable. It does this in two ways:
- embedding trackable URLs in social messages. The system provides a social media publishing tool that automatically creates links with embedded Google-Analytics-compatible identifiers for campaign, content, and source. This overcomes the fact that social media traffic often can’t be tied to a referring Web site. The identifiers can also include custom parameters for other Web analytics packages. The URLs are sent to an Argyle-controlled destination which logs the traffic before redirecting the Web visitor to the original target page.
- adding cookies to visitors’ computers when they view Argyle-generated social media content, and checking for those cookies when visitors reach a “conversion” page (i.e., make a purchase or take some other targeted action). The conversion pages can be created outside of Argyle but must contain Argyle tags. Results are used to identify visitors who are "influenced" by social media.
Argyle uses its tracking features to generate reports on direct responses to social media campaigns (i.e., clicks on Argyle-generated messages) and on influenced responses (i.e., conversions of visitors whose cookie shows they previously saw social content). Although this is far from the ideal of measuring the true incremental impact of a campaign, it's a step in the right direction. It also provides data that could be the foundation of a more sophisticated analysis.
These features are not technically difficult, so it's quite possible they're available in some other social media systems. But that matters less than knowing they're available in Argyle if you need them.
Argyle's tracking features are combined with a publishing interface that lets users set up accounts, create posts, and deliver them immediately or on schedule. It can currently post to Facebook, Twitter and Linked In. It can also scan for social messages containing specified keywords and store these messages for future reference. The publishing features don’t yet include enterprise-level capabilities such as response templates, approval work flows, case management, or relationship tracking, although these are on the horizon. A rules-based inbox filtering feature will launch tomorrow.
Argyle launched its product at the end of last year and is nearing 100 customers. A basic edition (three users, ten social properties, one conversion goal, one inbox filtering rule) is priced at $149 per month and the advanced edition (five users, unlimited social properties, five goals, ten advanced rules) costs $499 per month.
__________________________________________________________________________________
*at last count. Here are the first three lists I found via a Google search, plus others whose authors were SEO-savvy enough to find a nice, round 100, and one with a cool infographic:
[INFOGRAPHIC] What Are The Best Social Media Monitoring Tools?
22 Social Media Marketing Management Tools (Lee Odden)
42+ Social Media Marketing Tools (Joe Pulizzi)
List of Social Media Management Systems (SMMS) (Jeremiah Owyang)
100+ Social Media Monitoring Tools (Pam Dyer)
Top 100 social media monitoring tools (juanmarketing)
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Step-by-Step Guide to Selecting the Right Marketing Automation System - Part 2
Yesterday' post described the first three steps in Raab Associates' vendor selection process: defining requirements, researching options, and testing vendors against scenarios. This post lists the four steps needed to complete the task. As before, there's a worksheet for each step that can be a model for your own, more detailed version. And remember, the complete set is available for free in our Vendor Selection Workbook in the Resource Library at the Raab Guide Web site.
4. Talk To References
This is an often-overlooked source of insight. The question isn’t whether the references are happy, but whether your situations are similar enough that you’re likely to be happy as well. Find out whether the reference is using the system functions you care about, how long they took to get started, the amount of training and process change required, what problems they had, and how the vendor responded.
5. Consider A Trial
Nearly all marketing automation vendors will let you try their system for a limited period. Trials are a great way to learn what it’s really like to use a system, but only if they are managed effectively. This means you need to invest in training and then set up and execute actual projects. As with scenario demonstrations, you may still rely on the vendor to handle some of the more demanding aspects of the project, but, again, make sure you see how hard it will eventually be to do them for yourself.
6. Make A Decision
Don’t let the selection process drag on. Selection is a means to an end, not a goal in itself. Unless you have very specialized needs, there are probably several marketing automation systems that will meet your requirements. Look at your key criteria and assess how well each vendor matches them – bearing in mind that a system can be too powerful as well as too simple. Once you’ve found one that you are confident will be sufficient, go ahead and buy it. Then you can start on what’s really important: better marketing results.
7. Invest In Deployment
Marketing automation systems allow major improvements in marketing results. But those improvements require more than just a new system. If you don’t already have a formal description of the stages that prospects move through to become buyers, build one and instrument your systems to measure it. Use the stages as a framework to plan, design and develop a balanced set of marketing programs. Invest in the staff training and content to execute those programs successfully. Document and improve internal marketing processes. Work closely with sales to define lead scoring rules, hand-off mechanisms and service levels, and ways to capture results. Build measurement systems and use them to hold marketers at every level of the department responsible for results they control. Bring in outside resources, such as agencies and consultants, when you lack the internal expertise or time to do the work in-house.
4. Talk To References
This is an often-overlooked source of insight. The question isn’t whether the references are happy, but whether your situations are similar enough that you’re likely to be happy as well. Find out whether the reference is using the system functions you care about, how long they took to get started, the amount of training and process change required, what problems they had, and how the vendor responded.
| Issue | Questions to ask |
| System fit vs. my needs | What kinds of programs do you run with the system? |
| How many programs do you run each month? | |
| How many people at your company use the system? | |
| System reliability | How often has the system been unavailable? |
| What kinds of bugs have you run into? | |
| Ease of use | How much training did you need to use the system? |
| What kinds of tasks need outside help to accomplish? | |
| How long does it take to set up different kinds of programs? | |
| Vendor support | How well does the vendor respond when you ask for help? |
| How quickly do problems get solved? | |
| Does the vendor ever offer assistance before you ask? | |
| What help does the vendor provide with email deliverability? | |
| Cost | Did you negotiate any special pricing? |
| Did you pay extra for implementation and on-going support? | |
| Were there any unexpected costs after you started? |
5. Consider A Trial
Nearly all marketing automation vendors will let you try their system for a limited period. Trials are a great way to learn what it’s really like to use a system, but only if they are managed effectively. This means you need to invest in training and then set up and execute actual projects. As with scenario demonstrations, you may still rely on the vendor to handle some of the more demanding aspects of the project, but, again, make sure you see how hard it will eventually be to do them for yourself.
| What you can learn from a trial | How hard it is to install the system |
| How hard it is to set up a campaign | |
| How hard it is to make changes and reuse materials | |
| What features are available or missing (if you test them) | |
| Quality of training classes and materials (if you try them) | |
| What you can’t learn from a trial | How the system handles large volumes of data, users, etc. |
| Results from complex or long-running campaigns | |
| Accuracy of scoring and reports | |
| Quality of customer service and support | |
| Quality of vendor partners (agencies, integrators, etc.) |
6. Make A Decision
Don’t let the selection process drag on. Selection is a means to an end, not a goal in itself. Unless you have very specialized needs, there are probably several marketing automation systems that will meet your requirements. Look at your key criteria and assess how well each vendor matches them – bearing in mind that a system can be too powerful as well as too simple. Once you’ve found one that you are confident will be sufficient, go ahead and buy it. Then you can start on what’s really important: better marketing results.
| Selection criteria | Key factors | Vendor Fit | ||
| Too Little | Appropriate | Too Much | ||
| Functions | Outbound email | |||
| Landing page and forms | ||||
| Web behavior tracking | ||||
| Lead scoring | ||||
| Multi-step campaigns | ||||
| Sales integration | ||||
| Reporting and analysis | ||||
| Usability | Easy to learn | |||
| Efficient to use | ||||
| Technology | Easy installation | |||
| Flexibility | ||||
| Cost | Direct (software and support) | |||
| Indirect (staff, training, services) | ||||
| Predictable | ||||
| Expansion costs | ||||
| Vendor | Staff resources | |||
| Product plans | ||||
| Financial stability | ||||
7. Invest In Deployment
Marketing automation systems allow major improvements in marketing results. But those improvements require more than just a new system. If you don’t already have a formal description of the stages that prospects move through to become buyers, build one and instrument your systems to measure it. Use the stages as a framework to plan, design and develop a balanced set of marketing programs. Invest in the staff training and content to execute those programs successfully. Document and improve internal marketing processes. Work closely with sales to define lead scoring rules, hand-off mechanisms and service levels, and ways to capture results. Build measurement systems and use them to hold marketers at every level of the department responsible for results they control. Bring in outside resources, such as agencies and consultants, when you lack the internal expertise or time to do the work in-house.
| Goal | Tasks |
| Balanced set of marketing programs | Define lead lifecycle (buying process and buyer roles) |
| Map existing programs to process stages and identify gaps | |
| Prioritize new programs to close gaps | |
| Execute programs and measure results | |
| Refine programs with versions for different segments | |
| Measurement | Track leads through stages in the buying process |
| Import revenue from sales systems | |
| Link revenue to lead source (acquisition programs) | |
| Measure incremental impact (nurture programs) | |
| Project future revenue from current lead inventory | |
| Process management | Define processes to execute marketing programs |
| Identify tasks and responsibilities within each process | |
| Define measures to capture task performance | |
| Assess existing processes and possible improvements | |
| Monitor execution, test improvements, check results, repeat | |
| Sales alignment | Identify key contacts between sales and marketing |
| Agree on process for lead qualification, transfer to sales | |
| Agree on measures for lead quality, revenue attribution | |
| Deploy agreed processes, monitor results, review regularly | |
| Staff training | Define skills needed to deploy new system |
| Assess existing staff skills and identify gaps | |
| Plan initial training to close gaps | |
| Plan on-going training to maintain and expand skills |
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Step-by-Step Guide to Selecting the Right Marketing Automation System - Part 1
Choosing a marketing automation system is a major decision. A disciplined selection process is essential to make a sound selection. This series of posts presents the seven-step methodology we use at Raab Associates, along with related worksheets. The first three are below.
For a complete list of the steps, worksheets, and background materials, visit the Raab Guide Website and download the Vendor Selection Workbook from the Resource Library (registration required).
1. Define Requirements
Create a list of your goals in buying the system. Relate these to financial values when possible. Then define how you’ll use the system to meet these goals, being as specific as you can about the actual processes involved. Be sure to include processes beyond what you do already: one of the reasons you’re looking at marketing automation is to expand what your department can accomplish. Your requirements are based on the tasks you must perform to meet your goals.
2. Research Your Options
Raab Associates’ B2B Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Tool (VEST) provides a good starting point for matching possible vendors to your requirements. In particular, match the scale and sophistication of your marketing operations to the different buyer segments used in the report. Bear in mind that company size alone doesn’t necessary predict the depth of your requirements: small businesses can run complex marketing programs, and large business programs may be simple.
3. Test Vendors Against Scenarios
Develop scenarios that describe actual marketing projects you expect to run through the system, and have the most promising vendors demonstrate how they would execute them. Scenarios based on your own needs are critical for understanding how well each system would function in your own environment. Be sure that some scenarios describe your more complicated processes, since these are most likely to highlight differences among systems. If vendor staff executes the scenarios for you, be sure to understand how much the vendor built in advance. This ensures that you get an accurate sense of the total work effort involved.
The next post in this series will present additional steps in our process.
For a complete list of the steps, worksheets, and background materials, visit the Raab Guide Website and download the Vendor Selection Workbook from the Resource Library (registration required).
1. Define Requirements
Create a list of your goals in buying the system. Relate these to financial values when possible. Then define how you’ll use the system to meet these goals, being as specific as you can about the actual processes involved. Be sure to include processes beyond what you do already: one of the reasons you’re looking at marketing automation is to expand what your department can accomplish. Your requirements are based on the tasks you must perform to meet your goals.
| Goals | Related Requirements |
| Generate more leads | Manage online and offline advertising campaigns |
| Import email address lists and send personalized emails | |
| Monitor and publish to social media | |
| Build and deploy landing pages to capture responses | |
| Use IP address to identify the company of Web site visitors | |
| More effective nurturing | Capture the source and Web site activities of each visitor |
| Create Web forms to gather information about visitors | |
| Score visitors based on form responses and Web behaviors | |
| Execute multi-step campaigns tailored to different groups | |
| Use visitor behavior to trigger campaigns and other actions | |
| Better sales integration | Synchronize data between sales and marketing systems |
| Send leads to sales based on lead score and actions | |
| Send alerts to sales based on Web site behaviors | |
| Report on revenue generated by leads from marketing | |
| More efficient marketing operations | Store marketing materials and share across programs |
| Track planned and actual costs of marketing programs | |
| Manage tasks and approvals during program development |
2. Research Your Options
Raab Associates’ B2B Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Tool (VEST) provides a good starting point for matching possible vendors to your requirements. In particular, match the scale and sophistication of your marketing operations to the different buyer segments used in the report. Bear in mind that company size alone doesn’t necessary predict the depth of your requirements: small businesses can run complex marketing programs, and large business programs may be simple.
| Company Type | Key System Features |
| Micro-business | Outbound email and multi-step nurture campaigns |
| Landing pages and forms | |
| Built-in sales and service features | |
| Built-in or integrate with third party ecommerce and shopping cart | |
| Small to mid-size business | Outbound email and multi-step nurture campaigns |
| Landing pages and forms | |
| Web site visitor tracking | |
| Lead scoring (one score per lead) | |
| Integrate with external sales automation system | |
| Large business | Outbound email and multi-step nurture campaigns |
| Landing pages and forms | |
| Web site visitor tracking | |
| Lead scoring (multiple scores per lead) | |
| Integrate with external sales automation system | |
| Manage marketing budgets, program tasks and approvals | |
| Add custom tables with data from many sources | |
| Limit different users to different tasks and programs |
3. Test Vendors Against Scenarios
Develop scenarios that describe actual marketing projects you expect to run through the system, and have the most promising vendors demonstrate how they would execute them. Scenarios based on your own needs are critical for understanding how well each system would function in your own environment. Be sure that some scenarios describe your more complicated processes, since these are most likely to highlight differences among systems. If vendor staff executes the scenarios for you, be sure to understand how much the vendor built in advance. This ensures that you get an accurate sense of the total work effort involved.
| Scenario | Steps |
| Outbound email campaign | Import list from CSV file, from Excel |
| Compose personalized emails with embedded graphics | |
| Create landing page with data entry form | |
| Set automated email response to form submissions | |
| Set rules to score leads and send qualified leads to sales | |
| Report on results: sent, opened, clicked, completed form | |
| Nurture campaign | Set start and end date for campaign |
| Set rules to select leads, based on attributes and behaviors | |
| Set priority of campaign vs. other campaigns | |
| Define multi-step flow with wait periods between steps | |
| Set rules for different treatments for segments within steps | |
| Set rules to score leads and send qualified leads to sales | |
| Create emails, landing pages, and forms | |
| Report on results including leads to sales and revenue | |
| Revenue reporting | Define stages in lead lifecycle |
| Define rules to assign leads to lifecycle stages | |
| Report on movement of leads through lifecycle stages | |
| Set up process to import revenue from sales system | |
| Define rules to link revenue to campaigns | |
| Define rules to estimate incremental revenue per campaign | |
| Report on revenue generated per campaign | |
| Capture campaign costs | |
| Report on campaign revenue vs. campaign cost |
The next post in this series will present additional steps in our process.
Monday, April 11, 2011
[x+1] NexTargeting Conference: Cross-Channel Attribution and Online Ad Scalability Remain Hot Topics
Continuing my adventures in online ad measurement, I attended [x+1]’s NexTargeting Summit last week. This reinforced and refined my conclusions from last month’s OMMA Metrics conference, which identified the burning industry issues as:
- better understanding of the interactions between online and offline events (both advertising and results), and
- better scalability for successful online advertising programs.
The online / offline connection was covered by MarketShare CEO Jon Vein, who presented studies that showed including the “indirect impact” of online display ads can dramatically improve their reported return on investment. He also said his firm has found that marketing mix models with complete data can explain as much as 98% of the variance in revenue, while optimization based on mix models can typically improve marketing effectiveness by 10% to 15%. Although I don’t recall Vein mentioning it during his actual presentation, he did tell me in a side conversation that his firm purchased JovianData last year in order to expand its ability to work with individual-level data. MarketShare and [x+1] announced an alliance last month to combine MarketShare’s cross-channel analytics with [x+1]’s digital targeting.
Scalability was covered [x+1] itself, which announced extension of its Media+1 audience targeting platform to combine information from direct media buys and ad exchanges. The relationship between that extension and scalability is a bit complicated, but it boils down to this: combined information lets marketers control the number of ads served to individual consumers across both types of media buys, which segment-level purchases do not. This means that marketers can expand their budgets by targeting ads to new individuals (=effective scaling) rather than bombarding the same people with more messages (=ineffective scaling). That this mimics the reach and frequency measures used in traditional mass marketing (i.e., television) is a happy bonus.
I’ve skipped some of the subtleties of the Media+1 product. These include tracking the degree of overlap between the audiences of different direct-buy Web purchases; identifying optimal message frequency by customer segment; using direct-buy Web sites to establish a base of impressions and then supplementing these on a customer-by-customer basis through real time bidding on ad exchanges; and using scorecards to track performance after initial customer acquisition. The bottom line on Media+1’s beta client was reallocating 40% of the online ad budget to achieve a 20% improvement in results.
[x+1] also used the conference to announce an even broader product, called [x+1] Origin, scheduled for release this summer. This will build a customer-level data hub that combines data and sends targeted messages across display ads, Web site, email, and mobile. I asked [x+1] CEO John Nardone whether it’s actually possible to identify the same customer across all those channels, and he said it’s not an issue in many cases, since you can often give the customer a reason to log in or otherwise identify herself.
Of course, the big exception is acquisition, which seems like a pretty big exception indeed. (“Other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?”) But tracking mechanisms do get better all the time and there’s plenty of value in better treatment within existing customer relationships. So it’s definitely a good start.
- better understanding of the interactions between online and offline events (both advertising and results), and
- better scalability for successful online advertising programs.
The online / offline connection was covered by MarketShare CEO Jon Vein, who presented studies that showed including the “indirect impact” of online display ads can dramatically improve their reported return on investment. He also said his firm has found that marketing mix models with complete data can explain as much as 98% of the variance in revenue, while optimization based on mix models can typically improve marketing effectiveness by 10% to 15%. Although I don’t recall Vein mentioning it during his actual presentation, he did tell me in a side conversation that his firm purchased JovianData last year in order to expand its ability to work with individual-level data. MarketShare and [x+1] announced an alliance last month to combine MarketShare’s cross-channel analytics with [x+1]’s digital targeting.
Scalability was covered [x+1] itself, which announced extension of its Media+1 audience targeting platform to combine information from direct media buys and ad exchanges. The relationship between that extension and scalability is a bit complicated, but it boils down to this: combined information lets marketers control the number of ads served to individual consumers across both types of media buys, which segment-level purchases do not. This means that marketers can expand their budgets by targeting ads to new individuals (=effective scaling) rather than bombarding the same people with more messages (=ineffective scaling). That this mimics the reach and frequency measures used in traditional mass marketing (i.e., television) is a happy bonus.
I’ve skipped some of the subtleties of the Media+1 product. These include tracking the degree of overlap between the audiences of different direct-buy Web purchases; identifying optimal message frequency by customer segment; using direct-buy Web sites to establish a base of impressions and then supplementing these on a customer-by-customer basis through real time bidding on ad exchanges; and using scorecards to track performance after initial customer acquisition. The bottom line on Media+1’s beta client was reallocating 40% of the online ad budget to achieve a 20% improvement in results.
[x+1] also used the conference to announce an even broader product, called [x+1] Origin, scheduled for release this summer. This will build a customer-level data hub that combines data and sends targeted messages across display ads, Web site, email, and mobile. I asked [x+1] CEO John Nardone whether it’s actually possible to identify the same customer across all those channels, and he said it’s not an issue in many cases, since you can often give the customer a reason to log in or otherwise identify herself.
Of course, the big exception is acquisition, which seems like a pretty big exception indeed. (“Other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?”) But tracking mechanisms do get better all the time and there’s plenty of value in better treatment within existing customer relationships. So it’s definitely a good start.
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Whatsnexx Manages Customer States, Not Campaigns
Whatsnexx offers itself as a radically easier way to manage customer and prospect interactions than conventional marketing automation. I agree that it's radically different: it works without a central marketing database and tracks customer states rather than assigning them to campaigns. Whether it’s radically simpler is another question.
Some perspective is in order. Although Whatsnexx was launched just last year, state-based systems have been used in marketing before. Previous products include Verbind (later purchased by SAS), Elity (eventually owned by Unica), and Harte-Hanks Allink Agent (still around in some form). The concept is intriguing: instead of creating campaigns that predefine paths a lead can follow, you define the actions to take when customers are in a particular situation. The advantage is you can think in terms of new customers, loyal customers, disgruntled customers, etc., and specify how to treat each group after common events such as placing an order. Most marketers find this easier to conceptualize than a massive campaign with separate branches for each contingency.
Anyway, that’s the theory. In practice, defining customer treatments in Whatsnexx didn’t look much easier to me than defining them in other systems. (You can judge for yourself by viewing several how to videos on the company's Web site.) The process is this: users first define “scenarios”, which are customer processes such as acquisition, retention or complaints, and "states", which are customer types such as new, high value, or disgruntled. They then define the flow of events within each scenario, with the possible responses for each event for each customer state. Terminology aside, I don't find this much different from assigning customers to segments, assigning the segments to multi-step campaign flows, and assigning treatment rules to each step.
But maybe I’m missing the point. Whatsnexx’s Jacques Spilka says he finds huge time savings in the analysis stage that precedes the campaign set-up: instead of taking a week to understand client needs and processes, he can do it in a few hours using the state-based technique. Most of the time setting up any system is spent on analysis, not the mechanics of the campaign design. So savings of that magnitude would be significant. On the other hand, you still have to create the actual content, which is probably the biggest expense of all.
The other main difference between Whatsnexx and conventional marketing systems is that Whatsnexx doesn’t rely on an independent marketing database. This isn’t an inherent feature of state-based systems: other products do work with a database of their own. Indeed, even Whatsnexx maintains a central database of customers and their states. But Whatsnexx doesn’t import all the events that occur in other systems and it doesn’t send messages by itself. Rather, users configure "Infogates" that let existing systems send alerts to Whatsnexx when specified events occur. These alerts (technically, XML messages via a SOAP protocol) include whatever contextual information is needed for Whatsnexx decisions. Whatsnexx receives the alert, applies its logic, and returns a message telling the external system how to respond. The company has existing Infogates for Salesforce.com, Constant Contact, Deliva and CakeMail. It will add new Infogates as required by customers.
It seems to me that this approach is actually a more important differentiator for Whatsnexx than its state-based logic. As the company points out, it lets marketers continue to do their work in their existing systems. This saves the effort of learning a new tool and potentially needing to rewire their current infrastructure. It also lets them avoid building a central marketing database – although I suspect that many will need one anyway for data consolidation and analysis. Still, even deferring that need could remove a barrier to immediate adoption. This is especially true as marketers add data sources that are not built into standard marketing automation products, which are often limited to Salesforce.com and perhaps a tagged Web site.
Whatsnexx was developed by Montreal-based email company Komunik over several years. It was formally launched in late 2010 and has four current customers. Pricing is based on the client’s activity level and starts at $500 per month for up to 100,000 transactions.
Some perspective is in order. Although Whatsnexx was launched just last year, state-based systems have been used in marketing before. Previous products include Verbind (later purchased by SAS), Elity (eventually owned by Unica), and Harte-Hanks Allink Agent (still around in some form). The concept is intriguing: instead of creating campaigns that predefine paths a lead can follow, you define the actions to take when customers are in a particular situation. The advantage is you can think in terms of new customers, loyal customers, disgruntled customers, etc., and specify how to treat each group after common events such as placing an order. Most marketers find this easier to conceptualize than a massive campaign with separate branches for each contingency.
Anyway, that’s the theory. In practice, defining customer treatments in Whatsnexx didn’t look much easier to me than defining them in other systems. (You can judge for yourself by viewing several how to videos on the company's Web site.) The process is this: users first define “scenarios”, which are customer processes such as acquisition, retention or complaints, and "states", which are customer types such as new, high value, or disgruntled. They then define the flow of events within each scenario, with the possible responses for each event for each customer state. Terminology aside, I don't find this much different from assigning customers to segments, assigning the segments to multi-step campaign flows, and assigning treatment rules to each step.
But maybe I’m missing the point. Whatsnexx’s Jacques Spilka says he finds huge time savings in the analysis stage that precedes the campaign set-up: instead of taking a week to understand client needs and processes, he can do it in a few hours using the state-based technique. Most of the time setting up any system is spent on analysis, not the mechanics of the campaign design. So savings of that magnitude would be significant. On the other hand, you still have to create the actual content, which is probably the biggest expense of all.
The other main difference between Whatsnexx and conventional marketing systems is that Whatsnexx doesn’t rely on an independent marketing database. This isn’t an inherent feature of state-based systems: other products do work with a database of their own. Indeed, even Whatsnexx maintains a central database of customers and their states. But Whatsnexx doesn’t import all the events that occur in other systems and it doesn’t send messages by itself. Rather, users configure "Infogates" that let existing systems send alerts to Whatsnexx when specified events occur. These alerts (technically, XML messages via a SOAP protocol) include whatever contextual information is needed for Whatsnexx decisions. Whatsnexx receives the alert, applies its logic, and returns a message telling the external system how to respond. The company has existing Infogates for Salesforce.com, Constant Contact, Deliva and CakeMail. It will add new Infogates as required by customers.
It seems to me that this approach is actually a more important differentiator for Whatsnexx than its state-based logic. As the company points out, it lets marketers continue to do their work in their existing systems. This saves the effort of learning a new tool and potentially needing to rewire their current infrastructure. It also lets them avoid building a central marketing database – although I suspect that many will need one anyway for data consolidation and analysis. Still, even deferring that need could remove a barrier to immediate adoption. This is especially true as marketers add data sources that are not built into standard marketing automation products, which are often limited to Salesforce.com and perhaps a tagged Web site.
Whatsnexx was developed by Montreal-based email company Komunik over several years. It was formally launched in late 2010 and has four current customers. Pricing is based on the client’s activity level and starts at $500 per month for up to 100,000 transactions.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
eBay Offers $2.4 Billion for GSI Commerce: More Support for Marketing Automation
eBay’s $2.4 billion offer for e-commerce services giant GSI Commerce has been described largely in terms of helping eBay to compete with Amazon in servicing retailers – or, as eBay President John Donahoe put it somewhat more diplomatically in the press release, “GSI will enhance our position as the leading strategic global commerce partner of choice for retailers and brands of all sizes.”
I suppose that’s legitimately the main point of the story. But what I really want to know is what it means for marketing automation. Not that I’m obsessed or anything.
What makes the connection worth pondering is the approach to marketing automation taken by IBM, most recently in the Smarter Commerce initiative announced earlier this month. IBM defines marketing automation as digital analytics, and puts digital analytics at the center of the business universe. The broad argument is that online activities, including both paid advertising and social messages, drive consumer behavior and can therefore be used to improve both supply chain operations (creating and stocking the right products) and demand chain operations (creating sales and managing brand attributes).
This desire to merge marketing into the larger stream of business activities is shared by GSI Commerce (and now eBay) in their approach of offering marketing within a suite of ecommerce operations. It’s been intriguing over the past few years to watch GSI supplement its core operational services (order processing, fulfillment and call center) with marketing services including email (e-Dialog), agency (Silverlign), mobile (M3), affiliate (Pepperjam), retargeting (Fetchback), database (MBS), and attribution (ClearSaleing).
I fully realize that eBay/GSI’s focus is limited to retail while IBM’s scope is literally the entire world. But both are pushing the fundamental idea of marketing as a node within the larger organizational collective. This is quite different from marketing, and marketing automation, as a largely self-contained activity that only connects with the rest of the organization comes when it drives customers to make a purchase. It also suggests that the notion of “integrated marketing management” is fundamentally flawed – if you take “integrated marketing management” as referring to a system to tightly integrate activities within the marketing department..
There, I said it. It feels so good I’ll say it again: integrated marketing management is bad. Bad bad bad. Companies need to integrate their customer treatments across all functions. The role of marketing, and marketing automation, is to guide those treatments. To do that efficiently, marketing automation must be built into the operational systems, not sit outside them. The only thing that can be handled separately is marketing analytics, just like other types of specialized analytics. But the results of those analytics must be communicated to operational systems for execution. Those operational systems must themselves be tightly integrated with each other to ensure the treatments are coordinated.
You could argue that this coordination across operational systems is also a role for “marketing automation”. I agree it is, but don't think it's not the primary meaning of the term. Traditional marketing automation is about campaign planning, execution, and analysis.
Now, don’t take this to mean that I’ve swallowed the Smarter Commerce Kool-Aid. I still think it’s presented in ways that ignore the fact that most activity is still non-digital. (I also recognize that the folks are IBM are plenty smart enough to realize this, and expect that they’ll merrily include non-digital activities in their projects. Or they’ll argue that even non-digital activities are captured digitally and therefore included in their definition. The latter is true, but if "digital" encompasses everything, why use the term at all?)
Okay, that's just quibbling about words. I see a more important difference between whether you start with an operational platform and add analytics (the GSI approach, if I oversimplify a bit), or you start with analytics and tie it into operational systems (the IBM approach, for sure). In an ideal world, the operational systems would all have great customer management features and the operational approach would win. But here on Planet Earth, most companies have several customer-unfriendly operational systems that won’t go away any time soon. Connecting them into an external analytics system – even if the connections are a bit superficial – is probably the best bet for most organizations. (I could explain this with a wonderful analogy about running extension cords vs. rewiring the walls. But I won’t. You’re welcome.)
Bottom line: whether eBay intends to or not, their GSI purchase supports the broad view of marketing automation as an enterprise-wide utility, not a tool for intra-marketing efficiency. (Ha – and you thought I couldn’t write a concise sentence.)
I suppose that’s legitimately the main point of the story. But what I really want to know is what it means for marketing automation. Not that I’m obsessed or anything.
What makes the connection worth pondering is the approach to marketing automation taken by IBM, most recently in the Smarter Commerce initiative announced earlier this month. IBM defines marketing automation as digital analytics, and puts digital analytics at the center of the business universe. The broad argument is that online activities, including both paid advertising and social messages, drive consumer behavior and can therefore be used to improve both supply chain operations (creating and stocking the right products) and demand chain operations (creating sales and managing brand attributes).
This desire to merge marketing into the larger stream of business activities is shared by GSI Commerce (and now eBay) in their approach of offering marketing within a suite of ecommerce operations. It’s been intriguing over the past few years to watch GSI supplement its core operational services (order processing, fulfillment and call center) with marketing services including email (e-Dialog), agency (Silverlign), mobile (M3), affiliate (Pepperjam), retargeting (Fetchback), database (MBS), and attribution (ClearSaleing).
I fully realize that eBay/GSI’s focus is limited to retail while IBM’s scope is literally the entire world. But both are pushing the fundamental idea of marketing as a node within the larger organizational collective. This is quite different from marketing, and marketing automation, as a largely self-contained activity that only connects with the rest of the organization comes when it drives customers to make a purchase. It also suggests that the notion of “integrated marketing management” is fundamentally flawed – if you take “integrated marketing management” as referring to a system to tightly integrate activities within the marketing department..
There, I said it. It feels so good I’ll say it again: integrated marketing management is bad. Bad bad bad. Companies need to integrate their customer treatments across all functions. The role of marketing, and marketing automation, is to guide those treatments. To do that efficiently, marketing automation must be built into the operational systems, not sit outside them. The only thing that can be handled separately is marketing analytics, just like other types of specialized analytics. But the results of those analytics must be communicated to operational systems for execution. Those operational systems must themselves be tightly integrated with each other to ensure the treatments are coordinated.
You could argue that this coordination across operational systems is also a role for “marketing automation”. I agree it is, but don't think it's not the primary meaning of the term. Traditional marketing automation is about campaign planning, execution, and analysis.
Now, don’t take this to mean that I’ve swallowed the Smarter Commerce Kool-Aid. I still think it’s presented in ways that ignore the fact that most activity is still non-digital. (I also recognize that the folks are IBM are plenty smart enough to realize this, and expect that they’ll merrily include non-digital activities in their projects. Or they’ll argue that even non-digital activities are captured digitally and therefore included in their definition. The latter is true, but if "digital" encompasses everything, why use the term at all?)
Okay, that's just quibbling about words. I see a more important difference between whether you start with an operational platform and add analytics (the GSI approach, if I oversimplify a bit), or you start with analytics and tie it into operational systems (the IBM approach, for sure). In an ideal world, the operational systems would all have great customer management features and the operational approach would win. But here on Planet Earth, most companies have several customer-unfriendly operational systems that won’t go away any time soon. Connecting them into an external analytics system – even if the connections are a bit superficial – is probably the best bet for most organizations. (I could explain this with a wonderful analogy about running extension cords vs. rewiring the walls. But I won’t. You’re welcome.)
Bottom line: whether eBay intends to or not, their GSI purchase supports the broad view of marketing automation as an enterprise-wide utility, not a tool for intra-marketing efficiency. (Ha – and you thought I couldn’t write a concise sentence.)
Thursday, March 24, 2011
OMMA Metrics Conference: Online Ads Must Prove Real Value To Succeed
I took a break from my usual obsessions yesterday to attend the New York edition of MediaPost’s OMMA Metrics and Measurement conference. It was a good chance to dive into this particular sector of the marketing analytics universe. (Another version of the program will be presented in San Francisco in July; the company also live streams a free Webcast. You can also download selected presentations from yesterday.)
If there was an overriding theme to the event, it was frustration that online advertising isn’t attracting as much money as it should. There was more than a little ”TV-envy”: the feeling that TV gets more advertising because buying is based on simple, widely-accepted audience measures. Some speakers argued for duplicating this situation, by removing some middlemen and creating standard online audience measures.
Others pointed to a deeper issue: that online marketers can’t measure the value of their efforts in terms of revenue or brand metrics like awareness and preference. In this view, TV buyers accept simple measures like Gross Rating Points because these measures have proven over time to correlate with real business results. Media mix modeling has more recently confirmed this. But except for direct response, online media can’t show the same relationship. This forces online marketers to report endless (but never complete) data about who saw what and how they acted, in the hopes that piling on enough details will somehow make advertisers happy. It never does.
This is the online version of the old joke about the drunk who loses his keys in the alley but looks for them under the streetlamp “because the light is better”. Moral of story: no volume of irrelevant data can substitute for the information you really need.
In the case of online advertising, the dark alley is the connections between ad placements and final business results. Several speakers touched on parts of this. IBM’s Yuchun Lee gave an opening keynote that highlighted the pervasive influence of online information over all customer activities, not just online purchases. Adometry’s Steve O’Brien explicitly stated that attribution must measure the incremental impact of each marketing effort on final results (although I think he limited this to online results). ForeSee Results’ Larry Freed stressed the need to trace all online and offline behaviors to understand their true role in final outcomes. Others cited studies where careful measurement found that indirect results showed online to be much more powerful than direct attribution alone.
Yesterday’s speakers also raised the problem of scalability: that is, being able to duplicate and expand on success. This is one area where TV envy makes sense, because it’s easy to add more Gross Rating Points and be reasonably sure of getting the expected results. Online ad buying is more like buying print ads or mailing lists: you may have some sense of the audience demographics, but the only way to really know how it will perform is to run a test. But this isn't a measurement problem: simple, standard measures that hide true audience differences are only going to be unreliable predictors of actual results. What’s really needed are better testing methods to predict as quickly and cheaply as possible how each new audience will perform. The trick is you’re not just looking at immediate response, but all of those indirect effects that are so tricky to capture in the first place. Now you have to predict them in advance as well as measure them after the fact.
Nobody said it would be easy.
If there was an overriding theme to the event, it was frustration that online advertising isn’t attracting as much money as it should. There was more than a little ”TV-envy”: the feeling that TV gets more advertising because buying is based on simple, widely-accepted audience measures. Some speakers argued for duplicating this situation, by removing some middlemen and creating standard online audience measures.
Others pointed to a deeper issue: that online marketers can’t measure the value of their efforts in terms of revenue or brand metrics like awareness and preference. In this view, TV buyers accept simple measures like Gross Rating Points because these measures have proven over time to correlate with real business results. Media mix modeling has more recently confirmed this. But except for direct response, online media can’t show the same relationship. This forces online marketers to report endless (but never complete) data about who saw what and how they acted, in the hopes that piling on enough details will somehow make advertisers happy. It never does.
This is the online version of the old joke about the drunk who loses his keys in the alley but looks for them under the streetlamp “because the light is better”. Moral of story: no volume of irrelevant data can substitute for the information you really need.
In the case of online advertising, the dark alley is the connections between ad placements and final business results. Several speakers touched on parts of this. IBM’s Yuchun Lee gave an opening keynote that highlighted the pervasive influence of online information over all customer activities, not just online purchases. Adometry’s Steve O’Brien explicitly stated that attribution must measure the incremental impact of each marketing effort on final results (although I think he limited this to online results). ForeSee Results’ Larry Freed stressed the need to trace all online and offline behaviors to understand their true role in final outcomes. Others cited studies where careful measurement found that indirect results showed online to be much more powerful than direct attribution alone.
Yesterday’s speakers also raised the problem of scalability: that is, being able to duplicate and expand on success. This is one area where TV envy makes sense, because it’s easy to add more Gross Rating Points and be reasonably sure of getting the expected results. Online ad buying is more like buying print ads or mailing lists: you may have some sense of the audience demographics, but the only way to really know how it will perform is to run a test. But this isn't a measurement problem: simple, standard measures that hide true audience differences are only going to be unreliable predictors of actual results. What’s really needed are better testing methods to predict as quickly and cheaply as possible how each new audience will perform. The trick is you’re not just looking at immediate response, but all of those indirect effects that are so tricky to capture in the first place. Now you have to predict them in advance as well as measure them after the fact.
Nobody said it would be easy.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Infusionsoft Helps Clients Map Their Marketing Strategy
Summary: Infusionsoft is making it easier to build campaigns and taken a new approach to helping clients plan their marketing programs. Both are needed for marketing automation to reach to a wider audience.
Infusionsoft this week staged the official coming out party for its latest release at its annual Infusioncon users conference. The big news was a one-step “web lead campaign” generator that automatically creates a Web landing page and three cross-linked email flows: a set of follow-up messages after the initial Web form; a “hot lead” track for people who click on a link in any follow-up message; and a “nurture” track for people who complete the follow-up sequence without clicking on anything. Users still need to build the initial Web form and put copy into all the blank emails. But Infusionsoft said that the automated set-up itself saves six to eight hours of work and even more time puzzling out the underlying concepts.
This may seem underwhelming: Infusionsoft has simply added campaign templates, which higher-end marketing automation systems have offered for years. Indeed, you could sniff that Infusionsoft is only now adding campaigns, in the sense of a container to link separate process flows. As if to drive the point home, the company was also previewing early designs for its next release, which will apparently center on a visual flow chart to build campaign diagrams: Dude, welcome to 2003!
Okay, that was totally unfair. First of all, some of these features are pretty impressive. For example, the system-generated forms and emails automatically include campaign-specific tracking codes, which most systems require users to add manually. And true branching campaigns – as opposed to sequential campaigns with splits inside each step – still aren’t found in most marketing automation systems (although those vendors argue they’re not needed. See last week’s post on eTrigue for details).
More important, the significance of Infusionsoft’s new features isn’t that they’re playing catch-up with systems built for larger companies. It’s that Infusionsoft has been tremendously successful – more than 6,000 clients and 20,000 individual users – without them.
In fact, the company’s research has found that nearly half its clients do almost no email, using the system instead primarily for sales automation and service. Others have used its sequential processes either separately, to automate a variety of annoying manual tasks, or by painstakingly stringing them together by themselves or with professional help.
Another to look at it is this: campaign management is just one application for Infusionsoft, and to date it hasn’t been the dominant one. Rather, Infusionsoft clients have valued labor savings they gain from having one integrated system for marketing, sales, e-commerce, and service. Some of those savings are inherent in the integration itself – that is, files don’t need to be moved from one place to another. Other savings come from running simple automated processes against that integrated data. Only a few Infusionsoft users have added value by running more complex processes, although the crowd at Infusioncom was clearly eager to join them.
The other big announcement at Infusioncom wasn’t about technology at all. It was a new planning methodology called the “Perfect Customer Lifecycle”. It made immediate sense to me, in good part because it somewhat resembles the Customer Experience Matrix that long ago gave this blog its name.
Like the Matrix, the Perfect Customer Lifecycle is organized around the stages in a customer’s relationship with the company, from Attract Traffic through Collect Cash to Get Referrals. Infusionsoft developed it after realizing that few clients could see how the pieces of their marketing programs fit together, which made it difficult to prioritize and maintain focused.
The Perfect Customer Lifecycle replaces a previous Infusionsoft methodology that based on standard marketing programs shared by Infusionsoft’s most successful clients. Although Infusionsoft doesn’t put it this way, the critical difference I see is that one methodology is built around the customer while the other is built around the company. As with the Customer Experience Matrix – still used by my friend and the concept’s original developer, Michael Hoffman of ClientXClient – the customer-oriented approach makes it easy to track every step in the customer relationship and pinpoint opportunities for improvement.
The Perfect Customer Lifecycle illustrates how much effort Infusionsoft puts into helping its customers succeed. I don’t want to make too much of this, since many vendors – and surely all the good ones – care deeply about their customers’ success. But there's an extra passion at Infusionsoft that I think comes from serving small business people. (The company and its clients prefer the term “entrepreneur”; I’ve been toying with “micro-business” as a label. From a practical standpoint, I draw the line at $5 million in revenue and having a professional marketer on staff). The micro-business owner's life is tied to the company’s success in the way that even the most loyal employee's or corporate manager's life is not. I see the same passion for helping customers at other firms serving this market, notably OfficeAutoPilot.
(It doesn’t hurt that micro-business owners often see themselves as self-created Ayn Randian heroes and are more than little susceptible to flattery along those lines. But they're also passionately loyal to anyone who genuinely seems to care about helping them.)
That brings me to my central observation. Marketing automation for micro-businesses is fundamentally different from marketing automation for larger firms.
The technical difference is that micro-business systems expand beyond marketing to integrate marketing, sales, and service. Of course, this is the same scope as traditional CRM, but the micro-business systems add stronger process automation than most CRM products.
The integration and the process automation share the same root cause: small businesses lack the resources to build custom integration or tolerate process inefficiency. Larger firms are organized into departments where the costs of separation are less obvious, intra-departmental efficiency is often hidden from top management, and, probably most important, department heads want separate systems they control directly. Those departmental fiefdoms don’t exist at a micro-business because the owner makes all important decisions personally,
Micro-businesses also need more vendor services because they lack internal marketing expertise. Remember, pretty much by definition, these companies have no professional marketers on staff. The exceptions are small marketing agencies and business coaches, who form a major segment of successful micro-business marketing automation users. This makes sense: they’re the one group of micro-business owners equipped to figure out how to use the systems for themselves, or at least to ask vendors for the right kinds of help. Other micro-businesses nearly all rely heavily on the vendors for both technical and marketing assistance.
By contrast, the pioneering users of larger-company marketing automation systems have largely been technology firms. I think the driving force with this group has been comfort with technology – almost verging on blind faith – even when specific applications were unclear.
If micro-business marketing automation (which obviously shouldn’t be called “marketing automation”) is distinct from the rest of the industry, the next question is whether the adjacent segment is one group of firms from $5 million to $500 million in revenue, or that segment must be divided. My first instinct to look for a division, but when I think about the systems used by companies in that range, their functionality is not very different. You may I recently pointed out that Eloqua, Marketo and Pardot all have about half of their clients with under $20 million revenue (but I suspect very few under $5 million). So even the more powerful marketing automation systems have a lot of small(er) clients.
I do suspect that some mid-tier vendors skew towards the smaller end of the scale and others skew towards the higher end. But that has more to do with pricing and sales models than the products themselves. So maybe one big segment from $5 million to $500 million makes sense after all.
Regardless of how you split the market, it’s clear that both the micro-business and other (regular? corporate? grande?) segments are moving beyond pioneers towards mass adoption. Furthermore, both groups face exactly the same challenge: to make marketing automation easy enough for non-pioneers to adopt it.
Infusionsoft’s move towards campaign templates and visual flows is a big step in this direction. But those features alone won’t solve the problem: if they could, other products that already have them would be more widely adopted. The need to supplement simplicity with marketing training is why Infusionsoft is simultaneously moving ahead with the “Perfect Customer Lifecycle” and related programs.
Vendors selling to larger companies have also been stressing education. So far, though, their focus has seemed more tactical (“how to run a Webinar”) than strategic (“optimize the customer lifecycle”). Maybe that’s because their clients are professional marketers who already have the big picture or rely on marketing agencies and other service partners to provide it. Or – and this is my bet – the marketing automation vendors just haven’t yet recognized that they need to offer strategic frameworks. This is a delicate task since you don't want to insult your prospective buyers. Perhaps the frameworks will be disguised as deployment methodologies and best practices. If I’m right, it doesn’t bode well for vendors who believe that greater ease of use by itself can greatly expand adoption.
This line of thought (plus lack of sleep and coffee – most of this was written on a late night plane ride) leads a final question. If micro- and non-micro-marketing automation vendors are converging on features and strategy training, will the micro-business focus on process automation also be duplicated at larger companies? I can’t point to any evidence yet, but it wouldn't surprise me. Certainly all marketers are subject to the same pressure to operate more efficiently. If process automation does become more important, it will further increase the pressure for process optimization as part of successful deployments. Not to beat a dead horse.
Infusionsoft this week staged the official coming out party for its latest release at its annual Infusioncon users conference. The big news was a one-step “web lead campaign” generator that automatically creates a Web landing page and three cross-linked email flows: a set of follow-up messages after the initial Web form; a “hot lead” track for people who click on a link in any follow-up message; and a “nurture” track for people who complete the follow-up sequence without clicking on anything. Users still need to build the initial Web form and put copy into all the blank emails. But Infusionsoft said that the automated set-up itself saves six to eight hours of work and even more time puzzling out the underlying concepts.
This may seem underwhelming: Infusionsoft has simply added campaign templates, which higher-end marketing automation systems have offered for years. Indeed, you could sniff that Infusionsoft is only now adding campaigns, in the sense of a container to link separate process flows. As if to drive the point home, the company was also previewing early designs for its next release, which will apparently center on a visual flow chart to build campaign diagrams: Dude, welcome to 2003!
Okay, that was totally unfair. First of all, some of these features are pretty impressive. For example, the system-generated forms and emails automatically include campaign-specific tracking codes, which most systems require users to add manually. And true branching campaigns – as opposed to sequential campaigns with splits inside each step – still aren’t found in most marketing automation systems (although those vendors argue they’re not needed. See last week’s post on eTrigue for details).
More important, the significance of Infusionsoft’s new features isn’t that they’re playing catch-up with systems built for larger companies. It’s that Infusionsoft has been tremendously successful – more than 6,000 clients and 20,000 individual users – without them.
In fact, the company’s research has found that nearly half its clients do almost no email, using the system instead primarily for sales automation and service. Others have used its sequential processes either separately, to automate a variety of annoying manual tasks, or by painstakingly stringing them together by themselves or with professional help.
Another to look at it is this: campaign management is just one application for Infusionsoft, and to date it hasn’t been the dominant one. Rather, Infusionsoft clients have valued labor savings they gain from having one integrated system for marketing, sales, e-commerce, and service. Some of those savings are inherent in the integration itself – that is, files don’t need to be moved from one place to another. Other savings come from running simple automated processes against that integrated data. Only a few Infusionsoft users have added value by running more complex processes, although the crowd at Infusioncom was clearly eager to join them.
The other big announcement at Infusioncom wasn’t about technology at all. It was a new planning methodology called the “Perfect Customer Lifecycle”. It made immediate sense to me, in good part because it somewhat resembles the Customer Experience Matrix that long ago gave this blog its name.
Like the Matrix, the Perfect Customer Lifecycle is organized around the stages in a customer’s relationship with the company, from Attract Traffic through Collect Cash to Get Referrals. Infusionsoft developed it after realizing that few clients could see how the pieces of their marketing programs fit together, which made it difficult to prioritize and maintain focused.
The Perfect Customer Lifecycle replaces a previous Infusionsoft methodology that based on standard marketing programs shared by Infusionsoft’s most successful clients. Although Infusionsoft doesn’t put it this way, the critical difference I see is that one methodology is built around the customer while the other is built around the company. As with the Customer Experience Matrix – still used by my friend and the concept’s original developer, Michael Hoffman of ClientXClient – the customer-oriented approach makes it easy to track every step in the customer relationship and pinpoint opportunities for improvement.
The Perfect Customer Lifecycle illustrates how much effort Infusionsoft puts into helping its customers succeed. I don’t want to make too much of this, since many vendors – and surely all the good ones – care deeply about their customers’ success. But there's an extra passion at Infusionsoft that I think comes from serving small business people. (The company and its clients prefer the term “entrepreneur”; I’ve been toying with “micro-business” as a label. From a practical standpoint, I draw the line at $5 million in revenue and having a professional marketer on staff). The micro-business owner's life is tied to the company’s success in the way that even the most loyal employee's or corporate manager's life is not. I see the same passion for helping customers at other firms serving this market, notably OfficeAutoPilot.
(It doesn’t hurt that micro-business owners often see themselves as self-created Ayn Randian heroes and are more than little susceptible to flattery along those lines. But they're also passionately loyal to anyone who genuinely seems to care about helping them.)
That brings me to my central observation. Marketing automation for micro-businesses is fundamentally different from marketing automation for larger firms.
The technical difference is that micro-business systems expand beyond marketing to integrate marketing, sales, and service. Of course, this is the same scope as traditional CRM, but the micro-business systems add stronger process automation than most CRM products.
The integration and the process automation share the same root cause: small businesses lack the resources to build custom integration or tolerate process inefficiency. Larger firms are organized into departments where the costs of separation are less obvious, intra-departmental efficiency is often hidden from top management, and, probably most important, department heads want separate systems they control directly. Those departmental fiefdoms don’t exist at a micro-business because the owner makes all important decisions personally,
Micro-businesses also need more vendor services because they lack internal marketing expertise. Remember, pretty much by definition, these companies have no professional marketers on staff. The exceptions are small marketing agencies and business coaches, who form a major segment of successful micro-business marketing automation users. This makes sense: they’re the one group of micro-business owners equipped to figure out how to use the systems for themselves, or at least to ask vendors for the right kinds of help. Other micro-businesses nearly all rely heavily on the vendors for both technical and marketing assistance.
By contrast, the pioneering users of larger-company marketing automation systems have largely been technology firms. I think the driving force with this group has been comfort with technology – almost verging on blind faith – even when specific applications were unclear.
If micro-business marketing automation (which obviously shouldn’t be called “marketing automation”) is distinct from the rest of the industry, the next question is whether the adjacent segment is one group of firms from $5 million to $500 million in revenue, or that segment must be divided. My first instinct to look for a division, but when I think about the systems used by companies in that range, their functionality is not very different. You may I recently pointed out that Eloqua, Marketo and Pardot all have about half of their clients with under $20 million revenue (but I suspect very few under $5 million). So even the more powerful marketing automation systems have a lot of small(er) clients.
I do suspect that some mid-tier vendors skew towards the smaller end of the scale and others skew towards the higher end. But that has more to do with pricing and sales models than the products themselves. So maybe one big segment from $5 million to $500 million makes sense after all.
Regardless of how you split the market, it’s clear that both the micro-business and other (regular? corporate? grande?) segments are moving beyond pioneers towards mass adoption. Furthermore, both groups face exactly the same challenge: to make marketing automation easy enough for non-pioneers to adopt it.
Infusionsoft’s move towards campaign templates and visual flows is a big step in this direction. But those features alone won’t solve the problem: if they could, other products that already have them would be more widely adopted. The need to supplement simplicity with marketing training is why Infusionsoft is simultaneously moving ahead with the “Perfect Customer Lifecycle” and related programs.
Vendors selling to larger companies have also been stressing education. So far, though, their focus has seemed more tactical (“how to run a Webinar”) than strategic (“optimize the customer lifecycle”). Maybe that’s because their clients are professional marketers who already have the big picture or rely on marketing agencies and other service partners to provide it. Or – and this is my bet – the marketing automation vendors just haven’t yet recognized that they need to offer strategic frameworks. This is a delicate task since you don't want to insult your prospective buyers. Perhaps the frameworks will be disguised as deployment methodologies and best practices. If I’m right, it doesn’t bode well for vendors who believe that greater ease of use by itself can greatly expand adoption.
This line of thought (plus lack of sleep and coffee – most of this was written on a late night plane ride) leads a final question. If micro- and non-micro-marketing automation vendors are converging on features and strategy training, will the micro-business focus on process automation also be duplicated at larger companies? I can’t point to any evidence yet, but it wouldn't surprise me. Certainly all marketers are subject to the same pressure to operate more efficiently. If process automation does become more important, it will further increase the pressure for process optimization as part of successful deployments. Not to beat a dead horse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
