by William Walsh | Aug 1, 2023 | 2023
By Scott Gillum
Estimated read time: 5 Minutes
Insight from buyer and employee research from 20 companies with 70+ NPS scores
Are customers just buying your products?
Yes, as you will see, it is true a good product will sell itself but there is more to that decision than what is on the surface.
Recently, we were able to conduct research on close to 20 companies that have net promoter scores (NPS) above 70, with a handful at 90+. To put that into perspective, scores 10 to 60 are typically detractors, 70 to 80 are passives, and above 90 are active promoters.
While an average of 70 or above might not sound all that impressive, it’s higher than the Top 7 industries ranked (see below). And, it is extremely rare to find an organization that reaches a score of 90 or above.
The companies included in our research span industries from Aerospace, Hi-Tech, GovCon and Manufacturing, to Cannabis and Agriculture, with services as complex as cybersecurity, to as simple as producing labels for food items. Buyers ranged from Engineers and Chief Security Officers, to Procurement and small business owners.
What also made this opportunity unique is that we were able to interview over 100 customers, and survey more than a 1000, who represented the areas listed above allowing us to gain insight into what was driving the scores.
The top 3 purchase drivers are listed below, and this is what we learned:
- A great product makes for a great score – without question, the quality of your product is the biggest driver of purchase satisfaction (93%). In addition to quality, reliability was critical.
- Usability is second. This includes ease of use, integration, configuration, works as designed, etc.
- And third is Value, including affordability, value for the money, price competitiveness, etc.
Now for the key question… What is interesting about the key purchase drivers, and how we sell?
None of the three purchase drivers are realized during the sales process. It’s only once they have purchased the product that they truly experience the quality and value.
So, this tells us we are selling something else during the buying process. In fact, we found that there are four things you are selling before you close the deal.
- Hope – Customers, especially newly acquired ones haven’t experienced your product, service, and support so they are buying a promise. The most motivating thing you can sell early in the process is hope. Give prospects the hope that their work lives can be better, that your solution can solve their problems or pain. But, you can only do that if you find the pain. In today’s economic environment, if there is no pain, reps will have no hope of making a sale.
- Credibility – we had a chance to survey Chief Information and Security Officers (CISO) during this period on what they looked for in a sales rep. CISO stated that they preferred a representative to be highly knowledgeable of both products and services, (three times more likely than a relationship.) In some industries, like Cybersecurity, there is nothing more important than your credibility. Why? Buyer’s top 4 information sources are all people channels (Peers, Colleagues, Influencers, Analysts). Your reputation is everything. Every word written or spoken is critical. Opinions don’t matter, and reps have to do their homework.
- Trust – trust and credibility are a one two punch. If you’re not credible, you probably don’t have a shot at being trusted. There is no undervaluing the importance of trust in the purchasing process. When we asked customers to rank brand attributes, Trustworthiness tied for first along with Reliability. Not only is it important to the acquisition, it is critical for retaining customers. And, trust is the most broadly defined attribute – the brand, product performance, availability, service, pricing, staff, shipping, etc.
- The Business Argument – did you notice that I didn’t write ROI, or business case? In reality, few companies can deliver on the ROI used to close the deal. Additionally, few businesses produce (or can prove) the outcomes predicted, and buyers know it. In fact, researchers have tested upside gains versus downside risk reduction with buyers. Buyers, interestingly, discount upside predictions and are more likely to believe risk projections. It’s why a solid, logical business argument is the most believable and compelling reason for making a purchase decision…e.g. “You’ve invested XXX dollars into this solution, why wouldn’t you want to optimize by enabling this functionality…”
One of the most interesting discoveries in our research came through one on one interviews. The discovery was Ben, a senior sales representative who worked for a PE owned company that had several brands selling into complex manufacturing companies.
Ben was an eye opener. He was a multidimensional product expert, sales and service machine. In our interviews with customers, they offered up his name but never for the same thing twice. In one conversation with a buyer, they highlighted how Ben was just talking with their engineers about a new product design and in another one with procurement, talked about him being able to create one invoice with products from multiple manufacturers.
One of the goals of the work we were doing was to uncover opportunities for more cross selling of products…Ben was already doing it! But, one of the most important statements about Ben that stuck with me was “Ben answers his phone.”
Ben had their trust because he was credible with the internal buyers – the engineers. He solved procurement problems, but most importantly gave them hope. Most of their orders were urgent or hard to find products. Ben knew this, he answered his phone because he also knew that they relied on him to find a way to get them what they needed.
Ultimately what we learned was companies that perform the highest with customers also scored the highest on employee satisfaction. We surveyed over 1000 employees across companies and found that what drove their satisfaction in their role was the connection to their customers.
Here’s the reason, when asked the question;
“Beyond the products we offer, why do you think customers choose to shop with the brand(s) you work with?”
The number 1 answer, mentioned by 80% of the employees, was Trust. It connects customers to you, and you to your customers.
NPS scores are notoriously difficult to move. In fact, some companies abandon using them because of it. Maybe it isn’t that difficult to improve after all. Perhaps it just comes down to focusing on building trust – companies trusting employees, sales building trust with customers, and service and product maintaining that trust through delivery.
And of course, a quality product.
by William Walsh | Jul 11, 2023 | 2023
As previously published on 6/28/23 in MarTech
By Scott Gillum
Estimated read time: 5 Minutes
What if they are wrong?
When responding to questions about AI replacing humans in certain roles, most ‘experts’ claim that AI will replace some jobs, but will be a much more valuable tool for augmenting human intelligence and ability.
In all of the hype associated with this latest technology wave, an important trend is occurring across industries that could significantly change the impact of AI – the retirement of the knowledge worker.
We need to look no further than the last wave of intelligent technology – the “internet of things” (IoT) to see the impact.
The term ‘Internet of Things’ was coined in 1999 by computer scientist, Kevin Ashton. While working at Procter & Gamble, Ashton proposed putting radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips on products to track them through a supply chain.
“Machines talking to machines” started rolling out in early/ mid 2010 making their way into manufacturing, precision agriculture, complex information networks, and for consumers in a new wave of wearables.
Now, having about a decade of experience of how IoT has impacted certain industries and markets, perhaps it can give us some interesting insights on the future of AI.
In 2010, Cisco launched the “Tomorrow Starts Here” IoT campaign at the time when communication networks were transitioning from hardware “stacks” to software development networks (SDN).
The change meant that in order for carriers to expand their bandwidth, they no longer needed to “rip and replace ” hardware. They only needed to upgrade the software. This transition began the era of machines monitoring their performance and communicating with each other, with the promise of one day producing self healing networks.
Over this same period, network engineers who ushered in the transition from an analog to digital began retiring. These experienced knowledge workers are often being replaced by technicians who understand the monitoring tools, but not necessarily, how the network works.
Over the last dozen years networks have grown in complexity to include cellular, and the number of connections has grown exponentially. To help manage this complexity, numerous monitoring tools have been developed and implemented.
The people on the other end reading the alerts see the obvious, but have a difficult time interpreting the issue, or what to prioritize. The reason is, the tool knows there is an issue but is not smart enough yet to know how to fix it or if it will take care of itself. Technicians end up chasing “ghost tickets,” alerts that have resolved themselves, resulting in lost productivity.
The same thing is repeating itself in marketing today. As one CMO told me; “I can find people who know the technologies all day long, but what I can’t find is someone who thinks strategically. Ask a marketing manager to set up the tools and run a campaign and they have no problem, but ask them to write a compelling value proposition or offer for the campaign, and they will struggle.”
It’s easy to get sucked into the tools. AI generators are really intriguing and can do some amazing things. But based on what we have seen, the tools are not smart enough to fully deliver on their promise…yet.
Here’s the warning from IoT – as tools become more knowledgeable, the workforce operating them is becoming less. It is leaving a knowledge gap. As that knowledge is transferred from worker to machine, we need to ask ourselves what we’ll be left with. Will there be enough experience and expertise in our workers to know if what comes out of the machine is accurate, factitious, or even dangerous.
In a recent WSJ article, Melissa Beebe, an oncology nurse, commented on how she relies on her observation skills to make life-or-death decisions. When an alert said her patient in the oncology unit of UC Davis Medical Center had sepsis, she was sure the AI tool monitoring the patient was wrong.
“I’ve been working with cancer patients for 15 years so I know a septic patient when I see one,” she said. “I knew this patient wasn’t septic.”
The alert correlates elevated white blood cell count with septic infection. It didn’t take into account that this particular patient had leukemia, which can cause similar blood counts. The algorithm, which was based on artificial intelligence, triggers the alert when it detects patterns that match previous patients with sepsis.
Unfortunately, hospital rules require nurses to follow protocols when a patient is flagged for sepsis. Beebe could override the AI model, if she gets doctor approval, but faces disciplinary action if she’s wrong. It’s easy to see the danger of removing human intelligence in this case, it also illustrates the risk associated with over relying on artificial intelligence.
AI will free us from low value tasks, and that is a good thing, but we need to redistribute that time to better developing our people, and our teams. The greatest benefit from these game changing technologies in the business to business environment will be realized when we combine equal amounts of human intelligence with machine intelligence.
by scott.gillum | Mar 30, 2015 | 2015, Tech Trends
Last week I had the opportunity to attend two conferences that spanned the horizon of marketing. I went from “hoodies” at SXSW to “blue blazers” at the Institute for the Study of Business Markets (ISBM) Winter Member Meeting
Attendees at SXSW Interactive were young digital marketers, at the early stage of their careers. The ISBM crowd was comprised of mostly senior-level executives with 20 to 30 years of experience working for established companies.
Below are some insights from both of the events:
- Marketing is a tech wonderland. I had the chance to wander the event floor at SXSW, marvel at all of the new technologies, play with new apps, as well as attend a couple ofsessions by new tech vendors. The theme of the ISBM event was Analytics & Analysis, and I got more than my fair share of data analytics, business intelligence, econometric modeling … you name it. If you still think that half of your marketing budget is wasting away, but you don’t know which half, you’re behind the times.
- Analytics and dashboards are foundational. I saw a great presentation by Dell, which showed how the company has now mapped buyers across the buying process, complete with understanding their needs, time spent at each stage and how to optimize the experience. Likewise, Wesco and Teradata shared a wonderful journey of how Wesco put into place the tools needed to become a data-driven marketing group, enabling the company to tie its activities to business outcomes, or in this case, revenue. From what I heard and saw, companies have built the foundation to pull, analyze and report marketing performance data. Some have even made the leap into forecasting and predictive modeling.
- Investment is still a challenge. A thread ran through the ISBM event concerning the challenge of securing the funding to buy new marketing tools and/or staffing teams. Despite several speakers presenting solid case studies with clear ROIs, they were still challenged with getting the support and funding needed to continue making progress.
After having time to digest the week’s sessions, I still had a few lingering questions in my mind concerning what I heard and saw. For example:
- Is there a lack of organizational acceptance and/or appreciation of marketing insight and activities? The question that popped into my head regarding the funding challenge was, “Are marketers able to make the business case in a way that makes executives want to fund their request?” The other issue was marketing’s ability to communicate effectively across the organization based on it
s culture. One speaker, Bill Rozier from Ciena, provided insight into how to do it effectively. Bill created a lead generation report in an easy to understand PowerPoint slide. As Bill said, “The sales team has to be able to get all the information they need in 30 seconds or less, or we’ve lost them.” Since Bill’s new report launched less than two months ago, lead reconciliation rates have gone from 13 percent to over 70 percent.
- Is there, or will there be, a communication gap between the “Hoodies” and “Blue Blazers”? It’s not necessarily a generational one, although there is that. Rather, it’s one based on what they view to be important and valuable. I saw some great social media tools at SXSW that provided deep insights into audience engagement and buyer intent. But close to half the marketing executives at the ISBM meeting had revenue targets, and almost all had lead targets. It made me think that there may be, or may soon be, a potential communication issue between the digital-savvy “engagement and intent” crowd and the “lead and revenue” veterans. From what I saw, there is still work to be done to close the gap between social media results and the connection to key performance metrics valued by marketing executives.
- Will marketing overplay analytics? Perhaps my biggest concern reflecting on the week is twofold. In business-to-business companies with strong product (and engineering) cultures that are empirically driven, will the utilization and reliance on new marketing tools and data limit an organization’s creativity, and/or innovation? The second concern has to do with organizations where marketing feels like they are under attack. Will marketers use their new reporting capabilities as a defense mechanism, hiding behind the data, instead of using it proactively to provide the organization with new insights and opportunities?
Despite these and other questions still weighing heavily on my mind, I did reach two solid conclusions. The first, Austin is by far the best food-truck town in the United States, and the second is that Tampa’s weather is the salve for the burn of the harsh Northeast winter — a point brought home to me as I returned from Tampa just in time for our first-day-of-spring snowstorm.
