Getting Sales and Marketing on the Same Page

Even on a good day, getting sales and marketing on the same page is a seemingly impossible task.  For starters, by the nature of their work, Marketing and Sales focus on different tasks and priorities.  Consequently, they are often assigned goals that only serve to widen the alignment gap that already exists.

 

No wonder CEOs and COOs are frustrated!

 

There are, however, ways to narrow the gap considerably.  One of the more effective methods lies in creating joint goals for both functions.  

 

Here’s an example that is relevant to any start-up or firm entering new markets (geographic or vertical - both work).

 

The metric: time to first customer reference.  

 

Acquiring a new customer is one thing.  Cooperating to acquire one to which is willing to act as a reference has spin-off benefits for both functions.  Among them:

• Continuity:  Marketing’s focus doesn’t begin and end with supplying qualified leads to Sales.  A satisfied customer’s experience can be used in PR, featured on the firm’s website, or published as a use case - all fodder for a broader marketing campaign.
• Shared skin in the game:  The stake of a shared outcome brings shared focus, priority, effort, scheduling and - importantly - commitment and willingness to work through problems and glitches that are bound to arise.
• Having the wind at your back:  Establishing that all-important first “win” in a new market eases the path to market penetration, and lightens the load for future campaigns and sales.

 

Joint Goals Must be Relevant and Actionable

Not every goal you could think of is going to be appropriate.  Those that lend themselves well to establishing joint sales and marketing goals must:

• yield an outcome that is relevant and important to each
• produce short term results
• be measurable

 

Takeaway

Getting sales and marketing to work effectively together is a difficult, but not impossible task.  Assigning a joint goal will make difference.  Take a test drive with one goal first.  Add 1 - 2 others and you’ll likely have what you need to solidly align sales and marketing functions.

The Best Marketing Research

One of the best sources for marketing research is frequently overlooked: our own sales people.

 

By the nature of their jobs, sales people - whether in personal sales, telesales, or online sales - come into daily contact with buyers.  In doing so they quickly learn what the buying hot buttons are (i.e., attributes of an offering that resonate strongly and positively) as well as the red herrings (i.e., attributes of an offering to which buyers are indifferent or, worse, are outmuscled by the attributes of a competitive offering).

 

A Gold Mine in the Top 20%

The best sales people (i.e., those whose performance consistently ranks in the top, say, 20% of the sales organization) typically identify the hot buttons and red herrings quickly, adapting their sales engagements to take accentuate the former and stay clear of the latter.  The top 20%  can let you know what is working, with whom, under what conditions, how often, and why.  They can likewise apprise you of what doesn’t work, and why.

 

The top-performing 20% of a sales organization serves well as a proxy for understanding how customers respond to an offering.

 

These are the ones to talk with - ideally, all of them.  It’s easier to do in a small organization than it is in one with hundreds or thousands of sales personnel.  But, as large organizations tend to cover diverse markets, it’s important to determine if what applies in one market applies to others: New York and Tokyo; small businesses and enterprises; among discrete manufacturers and process manufacturers; among younger and older buyers.

 

The Discipline to Succeed

Consistently successful product marketing organizations - especially in B2B - regularly survey their sales organizations for feedback.  For example, some firms, following introduction of a new offering, will interview their the top 20% of sales performers at 60 days, 120 days, and 180 days post-introduction.  They gather observations, look for trends and similarities, and then compare the feedback from customer interactions to the value-benefit model that marketing developed for the offering for its day of introduction.

 

Doing this enables three important conclusions about the value-benefit model to be drawn:

• what is working as expected (this is what needs to be tuned and amplified)
• what is not working as expected (serves as the basis for adjusting tactics)
• what is working that was not anticipated (potential incremental revenue)

 

Getting the Sales Organization is On Board

Firms that tap into the collective wisdom of their sales organizations, do so in a way that is mindful of their time, and act on what they learn, find willing participants.  And why not?  Improvement that the firm makes in its offering and marketing tactics serve to assist the sales organization in being successful.

 

The key lies in acting on what is learned.  

How I Learned the Practice of Execution

When I became a new sales manager I learned from a master -  Mark Stevenson.  Mark rose within the ranks of Xerox during the 1960s and 1970s.  He was a taskmaster, a motivator, and brilliant with customers.  I consider him one of the finest sales and marketing executives I've known.  His long suit was execution.  In his own visceral and unrelenting way he taught his managers three lessons that have stayed with me.

1. Manage the activities that lead to outcomes.
2. Never confuse activities with outcomes.
3. You can't expect what you don't inspect.

He devised a management system that every sales person and manager at every level of the organization was required to use.  It gave you no choice but to learn how to execute on the revenue side.  I see those same principles embedded in today's CRM and SFA systems, and used by particularly effective managers and executives.  No sales or marketing manager can go wrong knowing them.

So, here is what Mark taught me.

Manage Activities, Not Outcomes: Sales pipeline may be a significant predictor of sales but, contrary to conventional wisdom, it is not what creates sales.  What truly drives sales are the activities that generate revenue opportunities and move them through the sales cycle - prospecting, calls, benchmarks, demos, proposals and similar sales-advancing activities.

Mark's view was that your pipeline - or funnel - was a reflection of how well you planned and executed.  He insisted that attempting to manage pipeline was like attempting to manage the bathroom scale to control one's weight.  (As an aside, Mark did not like the depiction of vertical funnels as he believed they created the mistaken impression that gravity would do some of the work.  As a result, they were always displayed horizontally.)

When his VP's reviewed their sales outlook with Mark he expected them to know the planned activities for every prospect in their pipeline, no matter where it was in the funnel - names, timelines, details - and codify it in writing.  He could not possibly review thousands of prospects, so he would pick several at random.  If you were not prepared he let you know in no uncertain terms.  To say that this kept everyone on their toes is an understatement.  His process cascaded down through each management level to every sales rep in the organization.  Tedious?  Yes.  But it engendered an enormous level of disciplined, concrete planning across the organization.  

Here's the surprise.  Most everyone not only liked his system; they loved it.  They loved it because it worked.  It kept them focused on the right things, and the right things led to results.

Never Confuse Activity with Outcomes: While Mark firmly believed that outcomes could only be achieved by managing the activities that spawn them, he took great pains to ensure that managers did not fall into the trap of doing activities for their own sake.  There had to be a predetermined payoff.

This was most evident when marketers reviewed their progress with him.  A manager might describe how a seminar series had resulted in a doubling of normal attendance, and offer details to prove that attendees fit the desired buyer profile.  Mark would congratulate the presenter and then ask, what did you accomplish?  After  a few moments of uncertain silence the presenter might begin to summarize what was just shown.  Mark would put up a hand and say, I know, you had over 300 attendees, but I want to know what happened following this.  How many sales calls have been made?  How much has pipeline increased?  How much revenue is forecasted this quarter from them?  How many competitors will we displace?

Mark cared about three outcomes: revenue, growth, and satisfied customers.  Everything you presented to him had to concretely demonstrate one or more of these payoffs.  He set the bar high for his organization: everything everyone did had to attain those outcomes, or had to achieve a concrete milestone towards achieving them.

People in his organization not only learned the distinction between activities and outcomes, but learned an important principle: every planned activity has to have a payoff beyond its own completion.

You Can't Expect What You Don't Inspect: If you haven't already gathered, Mark was not the kind of executive to put the organization on autopilot.  He believed in luck, but he didn't believe in counting on it.

Mark was not the kind of manager to let you treat your plans and forecast like a tax return, sending it in and keeping your fingers crossed that you weren't audited.  He wanted accountability.  Reviews occurred monthly.  They were focused, concrete, and specific.  Everyone entered those reviews knowing that they had to have a clear line of sight to their objectives, and had to describe an executable plan of tangible, time-lined, budget-constrained actions to increase the odds of achieving those outcomes.

Though his management system was like being dunked in ice water for new sales people and managers, most of them not only caught on within 90 or 120 days, but many would go on to perform at the top of their game.

... Such is the wisdom of Mark Stevenson - an executive who embedded the principles of good execution across his organization.