Optimizing the Lead: A Data Driven Optimization Process - Brian Carroll

A data-driven optimization process that goes beyond lead capture

Optimizing the Lead

Brian CarrollExecutive Director, Revenue OptimizationMECLABS

2

Session SpeakerBrian CarrollExecutive Director of Revenue OptimizationMECLABS

Brian Carroll is Executive Director of Applied Research at MECLABS and CEO of InTouch, part of the MECLABS Group. Author of the bestseller, Lead Generation for the Complex Sale, Carroll is a leading expert in lead generation and he's profiled and regularly quoted in numerous publications.

Carroll also speaks to 20,000 people a year on improving sales effectiveness and lead generation strategies. He has been profiled and regularly quoted in numerous publications such as BtoB magazine, Selling Power, The Wall Street Journal, Entrepreneur, Target Marketing, Inc., Marketing News, DM News, MarketingProfs, MarketingSherpa, Software CEO and CMO Magazine.

@brianjcarroll

3

MECLABS: A science lab with a consultancy

• More than 10 years of research•1,300+ major experiments•Over 1 billion emails•10,000 sales-paths tested

• Hundreds of publications and conferences

4

We build custom micro research labs within companies around the world

Optimizing the Lead

Identify the right companies and people

Segment, score and prioritize

Initiate a memorable conversation

Nurture regardless of time to buy

1

2

3

4




2

3

4

Optimizing the Lead

Identify the right companies and people1

Case StudyTesting quality data and teleprospecting - How a telecom firm reduced prospecting costs by over 60%

8

Response-to-Sales-Accepted-Lead Conversion Rate 10% Lead-to-Sale

Conversion Rate 20%8

Tele-Prospecting

Funnel

Inside Sales

Funnel

Dial

Connection

Conversation

Buyer Conversation

Qualified Account

Acknowledged Need

Sales-Ready Lead

Sales-Validated Leads

Dial

Connection

Conversation

Buyer Conversation

Valid Lead

Forecast

Verbal Commitment

Deal

1

9

Case Study

Background: A telecom organization engaged MECLABS for lead generation

Objective: To determine if higher-cost/higher-quality data can drive down overall cost-per-lead, so we can focus on the most efficient list source.

Primary research question: Which campaign data source will drive the most efficient value?

Test Design: Four multi-source lists, a user-generated list, and a single-source list were tested under consistent experiment conditions, with 300 accounts and 80 hours of teleprospecting hours.

Experiment ID: Networking equipment company funnel optimization testLocation: MECLABS Primary Research LibraryTest Protocol: CS31556

Research Notes:

1

10

Case Study: Test design

Per segment: 300 accounts, 80 hours of calling*

Segments Record cost Validated

Multi-source 1 $24.00 Phone – role-based

Multi-source 2 $14.50 Phone – title-based

Multi-source 3 $6.00 Phone – validated

Multi-source 4 $3.00 Email – validated

User-generated $1.00 Business cards

Single-source $0.49 No validation

1

11

Case Study: Per record cost

Multi 1 Multi 2 Multi 3 Multi 4 User-gen Single$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$24

$1

1

12

Case Study: Results

Segments Record cost

No longer with company

Dials to disqualify

Dials to sales-ready lead

Multi-source 1 $24.00 1% 90 77

Multi-source 2 $14.50 .06% 53 110

Multi-source 3 $6.00 14% 27 127

Multi-source 4 $3.00 23% 26 135

User-generated $1.00 67% 11 240

Single-source $0.49 13.3% 7 210

1

13

Case Study: Results and ROI


Call-per-lead

List count Leads Cost-per-

lead List cost

Multi-source 1 $24.00 77 1000 312 $373.45 $24,000

Multi-source 2 $14.50 110 1560 312 $496.00 $22,620

Multi-source 3 $6.00 127 2475 312 $536.58 $14,850

Multi-source 4 $3.00 135 2810 312 $546.75 $8,430

User-generated $1.00 240 9350 312 $954.00 $9,350

Single-source $0.49 210 13100 312 $828.95 $6,380

1

14

Case Study: Cost per lead


$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$954

$373

1

15

Case Study: Results and ROI


Call-per-lead

List count Leads Cost-

per-lead List cost Call cost

Multi-source 1 $24.00 77 1000 312 $373.45 $24,000 $92,400

Multi-source 2 $14.50 110 1560 312 $496.00 $22,620 $132,132

Multi-source 3 $6.00 127 2475 312 $536.58 $14,850 $152,460

Multi-source 4 $3.00 135 2810 312 $546.75 $8,430 $162,278

User-generated $1.00 240 9350 312 $954.00 $9,350 $287,980

Single-source $0.49 210 13100 312 $828.95 $6,380 $252,175

1

16

Case Study: Cost of calling


$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$288k

$92k

1

17

Case Study: Results

Segments Record cost Cost-per-lead List cost Call cost Total cost

Multi 1 $24 $373 $24,000 $92,400 $116,400

User-gen $1 $954 $9,350 $287,980 $297,330

Difference ($14,650) $195,580 $180,930

60.85% Decrease in campaign costs

The $26/record list requires over 60% more list and teleprospecting investment than the $1/record list

1

18

Case Study: Results

What you need to understand: The ‘best deal’ list results in a campaign that is 2.5 more costly than the most efficient list.*

60.85% Decrease in campaign costs

The $26/record list requires over 60% more list and teleprospecting investment than the $1/record list

1

Identify the right companies and peopleKey Takeaways

• “Cheap” data is really expensive.• The less you spend on data, the more you will spend

on teleprospecting.• We must see list acquisition as strategic, not simply

transactional.

1




1

3

4

Optimizing the Lead

Segment, score and prioritize2

21

Sample Marketing and Sales Process

Lead Capture

Segment and Score Leads

Qualify and Nurture

Sales Engagement

Analyze Results

Capture leads

Normalize data

Enrich data

Merge de-dupe

Segment leads by potential

Apply lead score:

lead data lead behavior

ULD

Qualify phone-ready leads

Distribute sales- ready leads

Analyze data

Close the loop

Leads converted

Sales pipeline

Sales closed

Overview deck

Opportunity

Approach deck

Proposal and LOA

Close

2

22

Step 1. Lead Capture

Web inquiries

Sales generated

Subscribers

Social mediaInquiries

Event registrants and attendees

Webinar registrants / inquiries

Enrich data

Unusabledatastore

Merge and de-dupe

Normalize data

External firmographic

data

2

23

Step 2. Segment & Score Leads

Segment forNext Action

Sales Qualification & Discovery

Human Interpretation (qualitative)

Segmentation based on potential

(quantitative)Lead Scoring

Phone Qualification & Discovery

Touch points(e.g., what content have they engaged?)

Match Function and DM Role : Champion/influencer or DMkr?

FIT? Meets minimum ICP :> $Xmillion Rev. and industry fit

Candidate-Supplied Data(e.g., Registration Forms)

Lead Capture

Segment & Score

Qualify & Nurture

Sales Engagement

Analyze Results

OpportunityScoring

2

Case StudyHow an technology reduced cost per lead by 75%

Background: A B2B eDiscovery technology and services provider had 25 list sources available. Data was assigned to sales reps as new list sources were attained without regard for list source performance.

Goal: To drive most efficient pipeline and revenue through teleprospecting

Primary research question: Which list will drive the most efficient lead generation?

Approach: Prioritize calling based on the quality and efficiency of the list sources. Each source was called for 80 to 100 hours.

Experiment ID: (Protected)Location: MECLABS Leads Group LibraryTest Protocol Number: TP1226

Research Notes:

�

25

Experiment: Background2

26

Experiment #2: The client request

• Marketing campaign and media source driven lists

• Lists were prioritized chronologically

• Focus on testing a new media source

Other possible reasons:• A lot of money was spent on

list/sponsorship• Client liked X event• Gut feel

2

27

Experiment #2: ResultsList Source Leads Calls DM

ContactsWebcast 1/18/11 Registered 7 58 10Show-6/16/2011 7 151 25Webcast 1/18/11 Registered & Attended 3 85 172010 Los Angeles 2 67 10Lead List 7.2 42 1550 163Document Review 1 43 6List 4/12/2011 2 87 8Prospects_Bay Area_CA 4 185 142011 New York 8 372 48Phase 2 list 5 245 28Event list 5.5.2011 2 112 15Google campaign 5-4-2011 1 62 32010 – Booth 9/23/10 3 267 18Show - 5/20/2010 1 89 4Phase 1 list 4 416 24Notes list 2010-05-24 7 753 62Expo and Conference 2010 5 570 53Annual meeting 2010-11-15 8 968 105Exchange list 2010-05-24 3 404 282010: webcast 7 972 94Webcast - 2/10/11 3 454 44Sponsorship summer 2010 1 162 10One Master Append 2010-06-15 11 2259 132List 5-5-2011 1 278 31Final List 2010-06-24 1 578 40Total 139 11187 992

2

28

List Source Leads Calls DM Contacts Contact % Calls/Lead Contact/

LeadWebcast 1/18/11 Registered 7 58 10 17% 8 1Show-6/16/2011 7 151 25 17% 22 4Webcast 1/18/11 Registered & Attended 3 85 17 20% 28 62010 Los Angeles 2 67 10 15% 34 5Lead List 7.2 42 1550 163 11% 37 4Document Review 1 43 6 14% 43 6List 4/12/2011 2 87 8 9% 44 4Prospects_Bay Area_CA 4 185 14 8% 46 42011 New York 8 372 48 13% 47 6Phase 2 list 5 245 28 11% 49 6Event list 5.5.2011 2 112 15 13% 56 8Google campaign 5-4-2011 1 62 3 5% 62 32010 – Booth 9/23/10 3 267 18 7% 89 6Show - 5/20/2010 1 89 4 4% 89 4Phase 1 list 4 416 24 6% 104 6Notes list 2010-05-24 7 753 62 8% 108 9Expo and Conference 2010 5 570 53 9% 114 11Annual meeting 2010-11-15 8 968 105 11% 121 13Exchange list 2010-05-24 3 404 28 7% 135 92010: webcast 7 972 94 10% 139 13Webcast - 2/10/11 3 454 44 10% 151 15Sponsorship summer 2010 1 162 10 6% 162 10One Master Append 2010-06-15 11 2259 132 6% 205 12List 5-5-2011 1 278 31 11% 278 31Final List 2010-06-24 1 578 40 7% 578 40Total 139 11187 992 9% 80 7

Experiment #2: Results 2

29


Lead Hours Calling Cost Cost/Lead

Webcast 1/18/11 Registered 7 58 10 17% 8 1 6 $ 348 $ 50 Show-6/16/2011 7 151 25 17% 22 4 15 $ 906 $ 129 Webcast 1/18/11 Registered & Attended 3 85 17 20% 28 6 9 $ 510 $ 170 2010 Los Angeles 2 67 10 15% 34 5 7 $ 402 $ 201 Lead List 7.2 42 1550 163 11% 37 4 155 $ 9,300 $ 221 Document Review 1 43 6 14% 43 6 4 $ 258 $ 258 List 4/12/2011 2 87 8 9% 44 4 9 $ 522 $ 261 Prospects_Bay Area_CA 4 185 14 8% 46 4 19 $ 1,110 $ 278 2011 New York 8 372 48 13% 47 6 37 $ 2,232 $ 279 Phase 2 list 5 245 28 11% 49 6 25 $ 1,470 $ 294 Event list 5.5.2011 2 112 15 13% 56 8 11 $ 672 $ 336 Google campaign 5-4-2011 1 62 3 5% 62 3 6 $ 372 $ 372 2010 – Booth 9/23/10 3 267 18 7% 89 6 27 $ 1,602 $ 534 Show - 5/20/2010 1 89 4 4% 89 4 9 $ 534 $ 534 Phase 1 list 4 416 24 6% 104 6 42 $ 2,496 $ 624 Notes list 2010-05-24 7 753 62 8% 108 9 75 $ 4,518 $ 645 Expo and Conference 2010 5 570 53 9% 114 11 57 $ 3,420 $ 684 Annual meeting 2010-11-15 8 968 105 11% 121 13 97 $ 5,808 $ 726 Exchange list 2010-05-24 3 404 28 7% 135 9 40 $ 2,424 $ 808 2010: webcast 7 972 94 10% 139 13 97 $ 5,832 $ 833 Webcast - 2/10/11 3 454 44 10% 151 15 45 $ 2,724 $ 908 Sponsorship summer 2010 1 162 10 6% 162 10 16 $ 972 $ 972 One Master Append 2010-06-15 11 2259 132 6% 205 12 226 $ 13,554 $ 1,232 List 5-5-2011 1 278 31 11% 278 31 28 $ 1,668 $ 1,668 Final List 2010-06-24 1 578 40 7% 578 40 58 $ 3,468 $ 3,468 Total 139 11187 992 9% 80 7 1119 $ 67,122 $ 483

Experiment #2: Results 2

30

Experiment #2: Results (not prioritized)



2010 – Booth 9/23/10 3 267 18 7% 89 6 27 $ 1,602 $ 534 Show - 5/20/2010 1 89 4 4% 89 4 9 $ 534 $ 534 Phase 1 list 4 416 24 6% 104 6 42 $ 2,496 $ 624 Notes list 2010-05-24 7 753 62 8% 108 9 75 $ 4,518 $ 645 Expo and Conference 2010 5 570 53 9% 114 11 57 $ 3,420 $ 684 Annual meeting 2010-11-15 8 968 105 11% 121 13 97 $ 5,808 $ 726 Exchange list 2010-05-24 3 404 28 7% 135 9 40 $ 2,424 $ 808 2010: webcast 7 972 94 10% 139 13 97 $ 5,832 $ 833 Webcast - 2/10/11 3 454 44 10% 151 15 45 $ 2,724 $ 908 Sponsorship summer 2010 1 162 10 6% 162 10 16 $ 972 $ 972 One Master Append 2010-06-15 11 2259 132 6% 205 12 226 $ 13,554 $ 1,232 List 5-5-2011 1 278 31 11% 278 31 28 $ 1,668 $ 1,668 Final List 2010-06-24 1 578 40 7% 578 40 58 $ 3,468 $ 3,468 Total 55 8170 645 8% 149 12 817 $ 49,020 $ 891

2

31



Webcast 1/18/11 Registered 7 58 10 17% 8 1 6 $ 348 $ 50 Show-6/16/2011 7 151 25 17% 22 4 15 $ 906 $ 129 Webcast 1/18/11 Registered & Attended 3 85 17 20% 28 6 9 $ 510 $ 170 2010 Los Angeles 2 67 10 15% 34 5 7 $ 402 $ 201 Lead List 7.2 42 1550 163 11% 37 4 155 $ 9,300 $ 221 Document Review 1 43 6 14% 43 6 4 $ 258 $ 258 List 4/12/2011 2 87 8 9% 44 4 9 $ 522 $ 261 Prospects_Bay Area_CA 4 185 14 8% 46 4 19 $ 1,110 $ 278 2011 New York 8 372 48 13% 47 6 37 $ 2,232 $ 279 Phase 2 list 5 245 28 11% 49 6 25 $ 1,470 $ 294 Event list 5.5.2011 2 112 15 13% 56 8 11 $ 672 $ 336 Google campaign 5-4-2011 1 62 3 5% 62 3 6 $ 372 $ 372 Total 84 3017 347 12% 36 4 301.7 $ 18,102 $ 216

Experiment #2: Results (prioritized) 2

Approach Calls/Lead Cost/Lead

Worst Case 149 $891Average 80 $483Optimized 36 $216Difference 113 $675

What you need to understand: The overall calling cost per lead would decrease by 76% if the calling team focused on the client’s most efficient lists.

32

Results

!

75% Decrease in calling cost per lead

2

Segment, score and prioritize: takeaways

• You don't always need to start with a new list. You can optimize the ROI from your current lists by testing and prioritizing.

• Testing lists gives you the ability to guide your present and future marketing initiatives.

• Over time, testing will reveal patterns customer behavior.

• However, in your testing, don’t neglect qualitative analysis (e.g., conversations, questions, objections)

2

34

List Quality Guidelines

Bad: A disqualified lead for every 25 calls

Average: A disqualified lead for every 50 calls

Better: A disqualified lead for every 100 calls

Bad: A sales lead for every 100 calls

Average: A sales lead for every 50 calls

Better: A sales lead for every 25 calls

Dials to Sale: LOWER is better

Dials to Disqualifications: HIGHER is better

2




1

2

4

Optimizing the Lead

Initiate a memorable conversation3

36

Timing+

Relevance

Memorable

3

37

Timing+

Relevance

Memorable

TIME YOUR TOUCHES

3

38

Lead Generation Model

INQUIRY CUSTOMER

Identify Need

Make Decision

3

39


INQUIRY CUSTOMERLEAD

Research Solutions

Identify Need

Make Decision

3

40


INQUIRY CUSTOMERLEAD SALES-READY LEAD

Research Solutions

Develop Short List

Identify Need

Make Decision

3

41


INQUIRY CUSTOMERQUALIFIED PROSPECT

LEAD SALES-READY LEAD

Research Solutions

Develop Short List

Identify Need

Review Proposals

Make Decision

3

42




Research Solutions

Develop Short List

Identify Need

Review Proposals

Make Decision

BrandingAdvertising

PR

SEOWebsite

Direct Mail

Events Tradeshows

Webinars

Outbound calls

Inbound 800#

Lead Nurture

Opt-in Email

Conference Calls

Face to Face

Follow-up

3

43




Research Solutions

Develop Short List

Identify Need

Review Proposals

Make Decision

BrandingAdvertising

PR

SEOWebsite

Direct Mail

Outbound calls

Inbound 800#

Lead Nurture

Opt-in Email

Conference Calls

Face to Face

Follow-up

Broadly TargetedLess InteractiveLess Measurable

Narrowly TargetedHighly Interactive

Highly Measurable

3

Events Tradeshows

Webinars

44

Multi-modal Lead Generation3




1

2

3

Optimizing the Lead

Nurture regardless of time to buy4

46

Case Study

Background: An IT management firm engaged MECLABS for lead generation

$80 million annual revenue100 channel partners27 sales people, 10 marketers

Objective: To determine if basic lead management can improve pipeline

Test Design: Creation of a ULD, lead qualification, lead nurturing, clear lead handoff and feedback process.

Experiment ID: IT desktop management firmLocation: MECLABS Leads Group Research LibraryTest Protocol: LG4028

Research Notes:

4

Case Study: Challenges

• < 2% lead-to-sale pipeline conversion• Marketing felt leads were going into a “black hole”• No closed-loop feedback process• Unable to measure ROI

More activity but the same results*

4

48

Case Study: The approach

Closed Loop Feedback

Marketing Pipeline

Sales Pipeline

Customers

Returned Prospects

Events, Events, Summits, Guides, Subscribers, Website, Teleprospecting

Sales Ready Leads

Not a Fit

Sales Generated

Leads

Existing Clients

CRM

Measure ROI

HANDOFF

Level 3,4,5 Leads

Inquiries (Level 1)

Nurturing (Level 2)

4

49

Case Study: Results

375% Increase in sales-ready leads

200% Improved lead-to-sales opportunity

$4.9 M Additional sales pipeline in 8 months

4

50

Case Study: Results

375% Increase in sales-ready leads

200% Improved lead-to-sales opportunity

$4.9M Additional sales pipeline in 8 months

What you need to understand: By actively nurturing and closing the loop, improved lead to sales opportunity and pipeline increases are achieved*

4

51

Understand Audience

Organize Content

Track Results and

Engagement

Execute Tracks

Messaging Strategy

A relevant, consistent conversation with viable potential customers, regardless of their timing to buy.

• Touch• Track• Follow-

Up1


Up2


Up3


Up4

Progressive Lead Movement Across Buying Stages

What is lead nurturing?4

52

Align messaging to roles and needs

Connect with your personas:• Project Leader• CIO• Contact Center• Field Service Center• Executive Sponsor• Stakeholders

CIO Q1

Month 1 Free executive report via direct mail with follow-up call

Month 2 Invitation to executive roundtable via email with follow-up call

Month 3 Link to relevant Podcast via email with follow-up voicemail

IT Director Q1

Month 1 3rd party article via email and voicemail

Month 2 3rd party article via email with follow-up

Month 3 Link to relevant webinar via email with follow-up call

IT Manager Q1

Month 1 Relevant white paper via email with voicemail

Month 2 Direct mail piece

Month 3 Invitation to webcast via email with follow-up call

Multi-track lead nurturing timeline

Client Plan for Q1 Audience: 3 Contacts Deep

4

53

Align messaging to roles and needs

Connect with your personas:• Project Leader• CIO• Contact Center• Field Service Center• Executive Sponsor• Stakeholders

CIO Q1

Month 1 Free executive report via direct mail with follow-up call

Month 2 Invitation to executive roundtable via e-mail with follow-up call

Month 3 Link to relevant Podcast via e-mail with follow-up voicemail

IT Director Q1

Month 1 3rd party article via e-mail and voice mail

Month 2 3rd party article via e-mail with follow-up

Month 3 Link to relevant webinar via e-mail with follow-up call

IT Manager Q1

Month 1 Relevant white paper via e-mail with voice mail

Month 2 Direct mail piece

Month 3 Invitation to webcast via e-mail with follow-up call

Multi-track lead nurturing timeline

Client Plan for Q1 Audience: 3 Contacts Deep

BUILD YOURTRACKS

4

54

Repurpose quality content

Research chart

4

55

Repurpose quality content

Tactical tool download

Blog post

Video clipWebinar

Email

Research chart

4

56

Measure and refine

Tactical tool download

Blog post

Video clipWebinar

Email

Research chart

RegistrantsAttendees

Replays

ViewsLikes/DislikesSocial Shares

Page viewsComments

Social Shares

OpensClickthroughs

Shares

DownloadsSocial SharesLead Capture

4

Optimizing the Lead





1

2

3

4

58

Takeaways: Identify

Collaborate with your sales team to determine and do list testing

1

59

Takeaways: Prioritize

Set up a process that allows your team to increase pipeline velocity

2

60

Takeaways: Initiate

Match your conversation timing and relevance with your customer’s stage

3



Research Solutions

Develop Short List

Identify Need

Review Proposals

Make Decision

61

Takeaways: Nurture

Nurture leads, regardless of time to buy4

62

Submit your Research Application:MECLABS.com/contact

Questions?

A data-driven optimization process that goes beyond lead capture

Optimizing the Lead

Brian CarrollExecutive Director, Revenue OptimizationMECLABS