Leads should be the result, not the metric
As buckets of cash have got poured down marketing drains over the years, buyers have rightly asked for measurement. “Return on Investment” is the mantra (I know one very successful director who thought that meant “Republic of Ireland” for the first few years of his career. That proves a number of things, but those aren't for this email).
But it’s the “Return” bit that means everything and typically that means LEADS. That’s fine for commodities Lead Gen – phone up, pitch and you get “yes”, “later” or “never”, results that can be easily put into a table. When you’re selling complex technology it is much harder - if you get a "qualified" lead from a campaign you’re probably too late - your competitor set the agenda months ago and you’re making up the numbers. If you've decided to measure the ROI of your campaign on leads or meetings, then your agency is incentivised to label whatever the output is by those names. No wonder the quality is so poor!
Our campaigns produce leads but they typically rarely relate to identified projects with budgets assigned. They are leads to relationships with people who have interest in our client's proposition - the seed of a new sale.
We measure our campaigns on Market Penetration – how many accounts we have managed to pitch our client's proposition to. We report in detail and in real-time and we feedback transparently so that our clients know how their proposition is being received. This is how you start relationships and also, with all that feedback, adjust your proposition to meet the market’s needs.
What would you rather have – meaningless criteria or doors being edged open across your target market? If you’d like the latter, give us a call.