Give-Get Framework: Balancing Lead Generation With the Expectations of Technology Buyers

Give-Get Framework: Balancing Lead Generation With the Expectations of Technology Buyers

• 1.
  THE GIVE-GET FRAMEWORK Balancing LeadGeneration With the Expectations of Technology Buyers Frank Jurden & Rebecca Sullivan 2013
• 2.
  2 “Technology decision-makers andconsumers are alike in a number of ways, particularly in how they use recommendations, search and peer opinions when buying technology. But technology decision-makers are less willing to share personal information until later in the decision journey and only when the exchange involves ‘real’ value.” In practical terms, exchanging “real value” means putting only the highest-quality assets like software downloads, exclusive product previews, expert consultations or custom quotes behind site registration. Lesser assets (for example, white papers, support documentation) lack attractiveness to compel users to surrender information. So-called registration walls are an effective lead-generation strategy, but the disparity in expectations of what brands require and what users expect is where most lead-generation programs fall down. Effective lead-generation strategy begins with the task of defining and managing user expectations. Offering clear information contact policies are equally important to increase opt-in.
• 3.
  3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BE EXPLICITABOUT THE VALUE EXCHANGE. Brands that provide clear descriptions of the benefits of registration enjoy higher opt-in rates. Amazon, for example, offers personalized product recommendations for users who choose to register. KNOW THE QUALITY OF SITE ASSETS. Leading brands develop quasi-empirical methods for scoring the perceived quality of site assets and use this information to define where in the click stream to introduce registration walls. REWARD DESIRED USER BEHAVIORS. Studies consistently find that buyers expect to be rewarded for sharing personally identifiable information, so discounts and/or quality content are almost requirements. But smaller rewards — and lower quality assets — can be useful to lead the customer toward a richer engagement. The New York Times site (nytimes.com) allows users to sample full articles but then requires registration after a threshold of pages (or visits). ADDRESS PRIVACY CONCERN IMMEDIATELY. Aside from the issue of perceived value, customers’ reluctance to share is driven in part by concerns over how PII (personally identifiable information) will be used. Buyers fear (a) PII will be given to third parties without consent and (b) PII will only add to the flood of vendor spam they already receive. Among all their concerns, these two top the charts of their fears. The obvious conclusion for vendors is to address security and privacy concerns directly in all interactions in which PII is an issue. Harris Interactive found that 77 percent of internet users in the U.S. believe that brands are materially responsible for protecting customers’ online privacy. Convincing users that the brand is in control is key to earning the trust needed for opt-in. GIVE USERS CONTROL OVER COMMUNICATIONS. A common error is for vendors to over- communicate with users. Sales and marketing teams are often anxious to move the user down the decision journey, and different business units often share the same lists without sharing contact strategies. Such enthusiasm can backfire. Enabling users to define the channels, content and frequency of brand communications is critical. Create internal “comms caps” so that users avoid being double-targeted by distinct business groups. In this way, wary technology buyers will be assured that sales teams won’t be hounding them as a result.
• 4.
  4 BEST PRACTICES INGIVE-GET EXPLAIN THE BENEFITS OF REGISTRATION Jacob Nielsen advises that when brands offer a link to registration, they must explain how creating an account would benefit the user. Amazon is a clear example here, offering users personalized recommendations in exchange for registration information. As Nielsen explains, “Users don’t come to sites to register, but they might do so if the reasons are compelling enough.” In ecommerce research, Forrester found that almost one-quarter of online shoppers in the U.S. leave the site without registering or purchasing, taking millions of dollars in potential revenue with them. This data makes technology clear that registration should be optional and that the business must explain the benefits customers will get if they do sign up. 23% 7% 70% REGISTERED AND COMPLETED PURCHASE LEFT SITE WITHOUT REGISTERING REGISTERED ­— NO PURCHASE BEST PRACTICES IN VALUE EXCHANGE
• 5.
  5 CONSIDER ADDITIONAL INCENTIVESFOR REGISTRATION Forrester also found that the right incentives can also be helpful — online shoppers are most likely to hand over personal data in exchange for discounts in the ecommerce context. Elsewhere, a Q4 2011 study from Aimia, found that over 40 percent of respondents said they want to be rewarded for sharing their personal data, which can be very useful for alleviating privacy concerns. ADDRESS SECURITY CONCERNS PROACTIVELY Consumers and technology buyers are increasingly concerned about privacy. Even as social media usage, shopping and other online activities become more commonplace, the American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research reported in November that a full 62 percent of consumers say they “do not trust” online companies with their personal information. Consumers Are Most Willing To Trade Personal Information For Greater Discounts Please indicate how willing you are to share personal information under the following conditions. [4 or 5 on a scale of 1 [not at all willing] to 5 [very willing]] To receive greater discounts To receive fewer ads To save time To receive free content To create a more personalized experience To receive more relevant ads Source: North American Technographics Consumer Experience, Marketing, and Technologt Online Survey, Q3 2007. 45179 Source: Forrester Research, Inc. Base: US online consumers 51 % 41 % 40 % 39 % 27% 14% Extent to Which U.S. Consumers Trust Online Companies with Their Personal Information November 2011 % of Respondents Note: Numbers may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding *like Google, Facebook and others. Source: American Consumer Ins Center for Citizen Research as cited in press release, Nov. 30, 2011. 134713 www.eMarker.com 2% Completely Trust 4% Don’t know | refused 33% Somewhat trust 63% Do not trust BEST PRACTICES IN VALUE EXCHANGE
• 6.
  6 The company doesn’tpass my data on to any third parties I know exactly how my data is going to be used That I can control exactly which pieces of information I share and don’t share The company website has a security certificate I have a clear understanding of how to giving up my data will benefit- me The company is well known The company’s privacy policy is easy to read and understand The company destroys its collected consumer information after 6 months The key to building trust online, according to numbers out from Harris Interactive, is ensuring that users feel like they’re aware of what data is being collected, and in control of how data is used. This is even truer for tech- savvy technology buyers, who report a higher level of distrust than other internet users. A global study conducted at the same time reported similar results. Note that including links to the privacy and security policies, in context, wherever personally identifiable information is collected is a Forrester recommendation. Most Important Aspects of Online Privacy and Security According to Consumer Worldwide, July 2011 % of Respondents Note: Respondents selected their top three aspects; Chile, Hong Kong, India, Japan, the UK and U.S. Source: McCann Woldgroup,” The Truth About Privacy”, Oct. 18, 2011. 134713 www.eMarker.com 55 % 51 % 50 % 43 % 31 % 29 % 26 % 20 % BALANCING LEAD GENERATION & THE TECHNOLOGY BUYER’S EXPECTATIONS A recent study of technology buyer habits from TechTarget found that readiness to buy, vendor familiarity and information quality are the top drivers for sharing contact information with vendors online. The same study asked technology buyers what they want the vendor to do after they download vendor content. Technology buyers only want the information they’re registering for but do expect some follow-up. Still, a full 18 percent say that they would be annoyed if a vendor followed up with them as a result of the download. The diversity of answers here only underscores the importance of setting expectations on your privacy and contact policies up front. BEST PRACTICES IN VALUE EXCHANGE
• 7.
  7 GIVE USERS CONTROLOF COMMUNICATIONS CHANNELS AND FREQUENCY Technology buyers have a greater need for control over communications. Recognize this need and merchandize the control features of your lead-generation program as part of its value. Most buyers want vendors to send relevant follow-up information but prefer to contact vendor when they are ready to take next step. Technology Buyers Consumers I only want the information that I am registering for I expect the vendor to send me more information but leave technology up to me to contact them when I am ready I do not expect anything else from the vendor and would be annoyed if they followed up with me I expect the vendor to send me more information and if I accept that information then this is a sign I want to be contacted by the vendor I expect the vendor to follow up with me as a result of the time I took to resister for its offer I expect the vendor to send me multiple follow-up offers that give me options to explore and will ultimately lead me to the website if I decide to go there 33% 30% 32% 29% 18% 16% 7% 10% 6% 7% 5% 9% Technology buyers readiness to buy, vendor familiarity and information quality are the top drivers for sharing contact information with vendors. When ready to make a purchase If technology is a company I am familiar with If I am receiving expert or editorial vendor information in return When evaluating or short-listing vendors If I am receiving expert or editorial, non-vendor information in return When identifying a problem and beginning my online research If I am reading product or vendor reviews If I am in an online social environment where relevant discussions are taking place If technology is with a company I am not familiar with 42% 27% 19% 19% 15% 10% 9% 8% 2% 43% 55% 53% 48% 44% 34% 34% 36% 18% 5% 5% 7% 9% 12% 20% 20% 20% 33% Very willing Somewhat willing Probably not willing Definitely not willing BEST PRACTICES IN VALUE EXCHANGE 10% 13% 21% 25% 30% 36% 37% 36% 47% TechTarget: When Worlds Converge, September, 2011 TechTarget: When Worlds Converge, September, 2011
• 8.
  8 Frank’s focus ison digital planning in the enterprise. His team designs digital and relationship-marketing initiatives, global demand-generation campaigns and customer-nurturing efforts, among other activities. His responsibilities span campaign architecture, goal refinement, audience insights, collaboration with creative teams, definition of contact strategies and media- mix allocations, campaign optimization and cross-agency collaboration. Frank Jurden Group Planning Director Frank’s background spans both the academic and agency worlds. He’s been with VML since 2005 and has served as Lecturer in Marketing at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Kansas since 2004. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Rebecca worked in online advertising and web strategy positions for Right Media, Yahoo! and the University of Oregon before rejoining VML in 2010. Along with her colleagues in the White Salmon, Wash., office, Rebecca provides research, analysis and reviews for the full stable of VML clients on topics ranging from competitive analysis to usability and strategy. Rebecca Sullivan Research Analyst