Consider Context When Scoring Leads

The premise behind lead scoring is that marketing can now automate their ability to know exactly when the leads in their nurturing programs are sales ready and then transition them to the sales force without delay.

I've been looking at a lot of suggested methods for scoring leads and the variations are extensive. In fact, each company will need to continuously tune and tweak their lead scoring processes as they gain more insights and unveil patterns of behavior and engagement that drive momentum through the pipeline.

Technology is a huge enabler, although it doesn’t replace personal interactions or human intellect. But, it can be immensely useful. Marketers need to tread softly and make sure they aren't relying too much on the tools at the expense of a buyers' reality in the process.

The following examples highlight some possibilities to consider and present opportunities to help marketing refine their lead scoring processes as they gather intelligence along the way:

Consider the context of content consumption:
One lead downloads a white paper - it's 7 pages long and a good, solid thought leadership piece. You've given it a point score of 5.

Another lead comes to your website and reads 5 different thought leadership articles - all on a related subject area about how to solve a problem you know your leads deal with. Those 5 articles are the equivalent of that white paper in the first example.

You've assigned a point score of 1 for each article.

Both these potential buyers now have a score of 5. But, which one is more valuable? Which one is more engaged?

Is it the one who downloaded the white paper? Or is it the one who read 5 related articles all on subject matter about the same problem?
Quite the dilemma, isn't it? The technology would treat both of them equally, based on score.

Would it make a difference if the article lead came back 5 separate times to view one article each time? Or if they spent fifteen minutes and read all five at once, should that be weighted more heavily?

Consider the context of roles:
Research shows that the purchase decisions for complex products and services are being evaluated by a growing number of participants. Ranges are touted from 7 up to 21 people in a consensus group. Undoubtedly, there are a lot of other influencers who don’t yet show up on radar—and may never be visible to marketers.

If a CFO visits your website and clicks around, flitting from page to page, your first thought may be that they are very interested in your products. The fact that they are there at all indicates they probably have a need. If your lead scoring is attributing points for page visits, but not equating attention span to point application, then you have a big hole in your process. The CFO’s inability to engage with any of your content for a reasonable period of time that shows they are actually reading it is a breakdown.

Compare that to a Line of Business Manager who has visited repeatedly, downloaded a white paper and spent adequate time on your web pages, validating engagement. Your content strategy is apparently addressing the needs of this role, but is missing out on engaging a variety of roles within the buying group.

Marketing content strategy needs to expand to embrace a variety of roles. It would be optimal if the content developed for a particular role could be monitored for engagement with a lead in that role. A customer story from a similar company that discusses ROI and total cost of ownership outcomes, read by a CFO would carry more relevance weight when matched with the participation of a line of business manager who’s reading more product-specific information.

Consider the context of frequency:
You’ve been nurturing a lead over four months and sent them 8 email communications. They’ve opened every one of them since the second send, but they don’t click through until this last one.

After they click through and read the article linked to in your email communication, they read a few other pages at the website, spending twenty-two minutes on your site. But a month goes by, they receive another email communication, but they don’t return.

If your lead scoring process records all activity as equal, this lead may have been sent to sales after that initial visit. But, would they have been sales ready? Were they merely curious or just starting to consider shifting status quo?

Over time, you’ll see patterns emerge that will help you identify buying behavior trends. These activity patterns will provide better insights to how engagement indicates a buyer’s momentum toward sales readiness.

There are a myriad of variations in how content is consumed that go beyond just accessing it. Activity is one thing, engagement is another. As the metrics and measurement for buyer engagement evolve marketers need to determine how all of these possibilities merge and what they indicate. Once marketers have the ability to harness the power of lead scoring, action can be taken smoothly without jolting buyers out of the process they're pursuing.

****

B2B marketing strategist Ardath Albee helps companies significantly increase their marketing momentum by generating more and better leads for their sales organizations. She helps them capture the attention of web site visitors, and strengthen engagement with high value content till they are "sales ready." Visit the Marketing Interactions website: www.marketinginteractions.com.