Analytics Strategy

Multidimensional Lead Scoring in 8 Minutes

Talk about milking a topic in multiple channels! The Marketing News Radio interview I did on multidimensional lead scoring is now available. And…we’ve now added a “video white paper” to the mix, which you can view on the Bulldog Solutions web site [Update: since the redesign of the Bulldog Solutions web site, and, presumably, due to my departure from the company, the video no longer seems to be available.]

The story behind how this 8-minute video came to be is kinda interesting. At Bulldog Solutions, we’re constantly (too constantly, at times) looking for ways to put new Internet-based technologies to work for our clients. Generally, we like to put them to work for ourselves first. First, that lets us suffer through the hiccups and snags that come the first time you do anything new. And, second, it gives us something that we can use as an example of what it is our clients would get.

The truth is, this video white paper was driven more by the fact that we were starting to talk to prospects where the medium seemed like a fit than it was part of a glorious, fully-baked, multi-channel strategy for marketing multidimensional lead scoring.

In the case of the radio interview, our Field Marketing Manager pinged me months ahead of time about doing the show. She then wrote up an abstract for the interview. We had a timeline that we worked to, and the preparation included a pre-call with the interviewer the week before the show to get everyone on the same page and lay out the overall flow for the interview. And, the show itself was on my calendar for months.

Contrast that with the video white paper experience. I was in Austin for a week a couple of months ago. I flew in on Monday morning. On Tuesday, the same Field Marketing Manager said, “Tim, we’re going to be shooting a video of you talking about multidimensional lead scoring for 5-10 minutes on Thursday. It’s no big deal — just you talking through the concept. But, we’ve got a prospect who is interested in having us do some of these for them, and we need an example.” On Thursday morning, at the hotel, I realized that I’d brought all of one collared shirts on the trip (it’s Austin, we’re a startup — casual attire is the norm). The shirt was dark blue with some plaid-like stripes. I wore it to the office, and our video guru took one look and said, “We’re shooting you on a green screen — that’s a risky shirt to wear, as you may wind up with holes in your body on the final video.” At lunch, I headed to Stein Mart to pick up something that was solid (I clothes shop voluntarily approximately once every 3 years — this was not “voluntary”). I then spent an hour in one of our conference rooms with the A/C turned off (to eliminate background noise) doing three takes on the video.

The project then actually languished for a while (the urgent opportunity died or evolved to be something else — I’m not sure which). But, our video guru jumped back on it last week…and the end result turned out much better than I imagined it would, given the material he had to work with!

Analytics Strategy

Lead Scoring Revisited…or at Least Reiterated

One of the areas that I’ve spent a lot of time focusing over the past six months is lead scoring. Specifically, multidimensional lead scoring. I’ve written about it here before. We shot a 10-minute video white paper a few weeks ago, which should be available soon. The slides I talk to in that are available below courtesy of slideshare.net.

SlideShare | View | Upload your own

And, just yesterday, Laura Ramos posted a topic diving into lead scoring over on the Forrester Interactive Marketing blog.

All this is to say that the topic remains very much on the top of my mind. And, as is no great surprise, I’ve got additional thoughts that I’m still working out on the subject — mostly driven by our experiences putting multidimensional lead scoring into practice at Bulldog Solutions. I expect I’ll be working through some of these over on the Bulldog blog in the coming weeks. But, I thought I’d start here to at least get a little bit of a list going.

To start with, we haven’t uncovered anything that invalidates any of the concepts in the white paper. Quite the contrary, actually. It has been very well received by everyone to whom it has been presented and has sparked some interesting conversations. And, as we’ve put it into practice, it’s holding up to be as viable an approach as we expected.

The two areas that I’m most looking to flesh out my thinking are as follows:

  • The Buying Cycle Dimension — Partly because the paper itself was getting to be darn long, and partly because we were not yet in the process of implementing a third dimension, the paper only briefly speaks to the “buying cycle position” dimension of lead scoring. The paper was initially titled “2-D” lead scoring rather than “Multidimensional” lead scoring, and our CMO pointed out that this was overly limiting — we were only implementing two dimensions at the time, but we knew there were others that we would be moving on to. Specifically, he was referring to the buying cycle position. This is a bit dicey to work out, but it’s a straightforward concept: a lead who is checking out detailed product specifications and pricing on your web site is likely much closer to making a purchase decisions than a lead who is simply reading white papers or analyst articles on a topic.
  • Multiple Offering Types — this was flat out an oversight on my part, largely due to the fact that I’m at a startup that does not yet have a wildly extensive set of offerings. But, in my prior life, this issue very much was at the fore, so missing it was definitely a whiff. The issue is that one lead may be highly qualified for one type of offer but very much not qualified for another offer. In our case, we have offerings where the economic buyer is a marketing executive. We have other offerings where the economic buyer is a marketing manager. The marketing executive is actually not a qualified lead when it comes to some offerings. And vice versa. So, how does this get handled with the lead scoring? I think that this situation is an indication that you may have multiple profile scores — one for each broad offer type. I don’t think the engagement score changes from offer to offer — this is a measure of engagement with the company / the brand and is offering-independent. And, I don’t think the buying cycle position will differ, either. But, I’m still working this out. We’re testing it out manually with some upcoming activities.

One of the benefits of multidimensional lead scoring is that it does make it manageable to add additional nuances and complexity over time. And, while the lead scoring is primarily a lead qualification mechanism, it serves other purposes: it’s one factor in segmenting your database for different nurturing programs (or content within the nurturing programs) — based on what quadrant in the multidimensional matrix the lead falls in; and, it can be used for lead routing — again, based on what quadrant in the lead matrix the lead is in may dictate whether the lead is routed to an inside sales organization or directly to another organization within Sales.

As always, let me know if you disagree or can add color from your own experiences.