Product marketing managers in technology companies don’t see the forest from the trees.  I interact with lots of you on a weekly basis in my role as an instructor for Pragmatic Marketing.  What I’m referring to is the mistaken belief there is a magic set of deliverables you can produce for each new release of your product that would make all your problems go away.  With this set of magic cookie cutter templates you could produce everything your sales guys need to be successful in the market and you would be a hero.

Sales would get off your back because you’ve given them everything they possible could need.  Your time would be freed up to focus on more strategic issues.  Maybe you’d even get to have dinner with your family.

I wish it were that easy folks but it’s not.  What gets you the street credibility you crave with Sales and Marcom isn’t your expertise in the features of your product or your mastery of PowerPoint.  It’s your expertise in understanding your buyers, their problems, their buying criteria, the buying process (notice I didn’t say sales process) and how to influence each buyer through the buying process.

When you are the expert on your buyers your interaction with Marcom and Sales will become considerably smoother, less combative and with greater results for everyone.

Like many other people, I have given the Chief Marketing Officer Council permission to send me their newsletter and typically enjoy getting emails from them.  Usually I find the information relevant and useful in my line of business.  However, I recently received a promotional email for a new report from the CMO Council and based on the copy I thought it was a free report (I skim mostly).  In fairness to the CMO Council the copy didn’t say “free” anywhere but it didn’t say there was a cost associated with the report either (see for yourself).

Dear David,
Companies, on a global level, are struggling to integrate critical demand generation functions, often fueling a harmful rift between sales and marketing groups. This is one of the revelations in Closing the Gap: The Sales and Marketing Alignment Imperative, a new global survey of more than 500 sales and marketing professionals from the Chief Marketing Officer (CMOC) Council. The report goes on to emphasize that  companies still lag in their ability to integrate and align sales goals with marketing activities, thus reducing the overall business performance of their organizations.
The Sales and Marketing Integration Audit reached out to a wide cross-section of marketing, sales and channel management professions worldwide. Key findings showed that: 

• Less than 20 percent of respondents see their sales and marketing organizations as extremely collaborative; most felt the two groups had intermittent relations and interactions.
  
• In looking at ways sales could add value to marketing messaging and communications, survey participants felt engaging strategically with customers to better understand issues and needs was the most valuable contribution.
  
• In contrast, two of the most important roles marketing could play in optimizing sales performance were fielding campaigns that generated and nurtured leads and opportunities, as well as providing customized value-selling content and presentation materials.
  
• Among those who have Customer Relationship Management (CRM) applications, only 13 percent view the application as highly valued and widely deployed, while 42 percent see growing acceptance and adoption.
  
• While 50 percent of those surveyed said they had pretty good or extensive visibility in to customer accounts and business activity, the other 50 percent said they had trouble finding customer account data, did not have enough information, or none at all.

The 50-page report delivers detailed findings with accompanying graphs, pictograms and charts, along with insight into what value each of these critical functions is looking to reap from their partners. As more executives are being held accountable for process and sales optimization, bridging the gap and aligning sales with marketing is a critical imperative versus a luxury of company culture.

To download the full report, please click here.

Best,

Donovan Neale-May
Executive Director
CMO Council

So I clicked on the link and was sent to a CMO Council Promotional Landing Page where I was asked for too much information (for a first date).  If I provided my contact information (which required a telephone number), I could get a summary of the report for free or I could pay to get the full report.  The form even asked for my email.  Didn’t they already have it?

I don’t begrudge the CMO Council for trying to make money, but this approach is shameful, particularly coming from a group calling itself the CMO Council.  I might have expected this from the “Selling Council” but from the CMO Council I expect a more innovative approach.  This in the old school category.  It takes longer for some to catch on.

Here are my thoughts…

1. The copy should have been absolutely clear about what was free and what would require a fee (and much shorter copy)

2. The landing page should have provided a teaser excerpt of the report summary

3. If the teaser caught my interest, there should have been a way to download the report summary with minimal registration information (ideally an email address only - since they already have that).

4. If I found the report summary to be compelling, give me a link to buy the full report.

Since the registration form required a telephone number you know what was going to happen next - a sales call.  There is no other reason why it was required.  And if I downloaded the free report summary, the call would have been to sell me on the full report.  I wasn’t ready for all that yet.  It’s too much like speed dating.

So how many people are clicking through from the email and then bailing when they see what’s required in the registration form?  Only the CMO Council webmaster knows for sure (assuming she reads the site analytics).

Three guys I know just completed a great new book - "Tuned In". It’s already on Amazon’s and Barnes & Noble’s best seller page.  I recommend you add to your reading list. 

Why is it that some organizations just "get it" and have successful products/services that their customers love and others deliver one lackluster offering after another?  It’s because they’re Tuned In to their buyers.

"Tuned In" is an exploration of this paradox and a framework for getting Tuned In so your organization can identify problems that are urgent, pervasive and customers are will to pay to solve.

Does your organization dream up new product ideas, build it and then find it flops?  If you answered yes to this question you need to make reading "Tuned In" a priority.

Click on this link to request a complimentary copy of "Tuned In" (while supplies last).

Review
This well-reasoned and useful guide argues that successful innovators can develop products that "resonate" by connecting deeply with consumers. This simple idea is delivered in a conversational tone and illustrated in well-structured chapters laying out a six-step "Tuned in Process" and examples that span borders and industries. From anecdotes about countryside hotels that sprouted up to provide respite for Japanese salarymen to Nalgene plastic bottles, which escaped the laboratory to achieve cult status and ultimately mass market consumer appeal, fascinating case studies abound. However, as appealing as the concept and the many examples are, the enthusiastic presentation begins to grate; the repeated invocation of the "Tuned in Process" may tire readers looking for more subtlety and fewer sound bites. Still, there is sufficient fodder for anyone who wants to shake the sleep out of an organization and renew a focus on creating the kind of value that customers are willing to pay for. (June)  (Publishers Weekly, April 7, 2008)

компютри

I recently received an invitation to become a member of CLOSE - Coalition to Leverage and Optimize Sales Effectiveness. It looked interesting enough so I joined. After the registration process was complete I was presented with a page on the site and noticed a “True or False” item in the Daily Digest. The title was “Myth: Marketing Focus”. So I clicked. What the heck.

The True of False statement was “Marketing should focus on brochures, web site communication, and tradeshow management”. The myth was presented by Paul DiModica of DigitalHatch.

Paul’s answer? False. Good, I agree, continue reading…

Revenue is revenue. Marketing’s primary business responsibility should be creating qualified sales leads for Sales.

I took a look at the link provided to one of Paul’s articles and I agree with a lot of what Paul is saying in his article, but he’s dead wrong on this myth. Stating that Marketing’s primary business responsibility is creating qualified leads for Sales is the typical “I don’t really understand the role of marketing” response that I see from Sales.

Selling is a tactical activity. Always has, always will. Marketing is strategic. People who have the misfortunate title of VP of Sales and Marketing cannot possibly being doing both activities very well. More often than not the focus is on selling (naturally) and marketing becomes a sales support function, reacting to the whim of the sales force.

Marketing is strategic. Marketing’s primary business responsibility is to identify problems in the market and drive the development of products and services that solve those problems. Generating leads is just one of the myriad of tactical activities Marketing performs.

Oh, and by the way, does Sales ever agree that the leads are any good?

According to recent research from Forrester and Enquiro’s 2007 B2B Survey, business buyers use search engines most frequently at the beginning of the buying process, during the awareness and research phases. Buyers actually use search engines less frequently when they are ready to negotiate and purchase a high-consideration product or service.

Excerpt from B2B Marketers Should Embrace “Tire Kickers” in SearchEngineLand.

If you’ve done your homework, surveyed the market and have the data to prove your position, skip this post. If you believe you understand the market and don’t need to talk to the market to validate your opinions read on. Maybe it’s your ego or your arrogance that prevents you from talking to the market. Maybe it’s fear. Either way, statistically, you’re a train wreck waiting to happen.

Let me walk you through it. You worked in an industry for a number of years. That experience gives you a sense of intuitive understanding of the industry and what makes it tick. More than likely you were in a mid-level position where you had the benefit of seeing life in the trenches. During this time you saw a set of recurring problems and maybe even formulated some technical solutions to address them. You presented your ideas to management, who didn’t embrace your enthusiasm for the problem. You’re frustrated, hurt and maybe angry. You develop an “I’ll show them” attitude and strike off on your own.

In your spare time you develop a prototype and begin to show it to your peers. Your peers give you glowing feedback and reinforce your sense of importance. You are on your way to being rich.

You get introduced to angel investors who are struck by your enthusiasm and command of the problem. They give you the seed capital you need to take your idea to the next level. You hire a few developers with the goal of moving from prototype to commercial ready.

You spend the next 6 months heads-down developing the solution. You know what features need to go into the product. After all, you lived the problem and know how to fix it. There’s no time to survey the market and talk to decision makers. You know the problem and you have the answer.

Three months into the project you begin to get feedback from the team about specific features that might be missing. They’re smart guys so they’ve started poking around to identify competitive alternatives and what they’re offering. You’re annoyed by the distraction. The competitors don’t get it. You have the answer.

Your team delivers the product in 6 months on budget as planned. Investors are happy with your project management skills and assure you they can help raise more money when needed. It’s now reckoning time. The product is ready and you’re ready to launch.

You start your product launch carefully. Since you don’t have a big budget you prefer to do a soft launch and to get the product into the hands of a few customers. You reach out to the peers in your network, get a few meetings and demos. You are encouraged by the glowing feedback.

Then nothing happens. No sales. No interest. Nothing.

You panic. It must be the price. We must have the wrong sales guys. Marketing is a waste of money. The prospects don’t “get it”.

Money is running out and your team is demoralized by the lack of sales. They doubt your expertise in the problem and the market. Did they just spend 6 months of their lives building a product that no one wants to buy? How could this happen? They feel betrayed.

It’s happening everyday to startups and big companies. And it can be easily addressed by setting aside some of the arrogance and getting out to talk to the market before it’s too late. What is the problem (in their words)? What are they doing to fix it now (in their words)? How important is this problem in the grand scheme (in their words)?

Technorati Tags: product launch

The PDMA New Product Development Glossary supplies the following definition for New Product Introduction:

New Product Introduction (NPI): The launch or commercialization of a new product into the marketplace. Takes place at the end of a successful product development project.

Since this definition uses three more terms (new product, launch and commercialization) we need to dig further.

New Product: A term of many opinions and practices, but most generally defined as a product (either a good or service) new to the firm marketing it. Excludes products that are only changed in promotion.

Launch: The process by which a new product is introduced into the market for initial sale.

Commercialization: The process of taking a new product from development to market. It generally includes production launch and ramp-up, marketing materials and program development, supply chain development, sales channel development, training development, training, and service and support development.

Putting them together we arrive at

New Product Introduction (NPI): The process by which a new product is introduced into the marketplace. Takes place at the end of a successful product development project.

While the guys at PDMA have done a fairly good attempt of defining NPI, it is fundamentally flawed. The flaw lies in the orientation. It’s an inside out definition from a product development perspective.

Product launch is not the end of the development process it’s the beginning of the sales process.

What if there was no development process? Every day organizations introduce new products to market that are sourced from other parties. Every day established products are launched (or relaunched).

I use a business-oriented definition of product launch that is more encompassing and more accurately describes the desired outcome:

Product Launch is the process of introducing a product to a market in such a way it generates momentum.

That’s what we want to do right? Whether the product is new, a new version or sourced from another supplier our goal is to generate momentum.

Technorati Tags: New Product Introduction, Product Launch

In the old days when a software product reached a state where it could be sold, we referred to it as General Availability (GA).  You might still be using some of these terms in your shop: Beta, Release to Manufacturing (RTM), Release Candidate (RC) and GA.  These are states to help us understand where the product is in the development process.

We used the term "launch" to represent something big.  It meant more than a press release and a Powerpoint presentation.  But over time the marketing guys have hijacked "launch" and have overused it.  A new website is "launched".  Translation: a new design of our website has been uploaded to our server.  The get-rich-quick internet marketers have diluted "launch" to something quick and tactical.  Very smart on their part, I have to admit.  We still have a psychological connection to "launch" as being something big.  We launch ad campaigns, cars, drugs, beverages, airlines, ideas, programs, and all sorts of things.  Maybe "launch" should now be added to the gobbledygood of overused terms like scalable, enterprise class, robust, state-of-the-art, extensible, open architecture, cutting edge, and mission critical.

We borrowed the term "launch" from NASA.  NASA use "launch" in two ways.  One to refer to launching a mission (the big idea) and another to refer to launching a vehicle (the event).  When the rocket leaves the launch pad, the mission isn’t over, it’s just starting.

What are you launching?

We will be delivering "Product Launches on a Bootstrap Budget" starting on Tuesday April 8.  As the title suggests this webinar is targeted toward organizations with limited launch budgets but still need to maximize results.

Product Launches on a Bootstrap Budget is a 1.5 hour webinar with a live instructor. The webinar will focus mainly on tactics and readiness, with an emphasis on what needs to happen in order to build momentum. Of course, it’s all about how to launch with the least amount of resources.  We’ll cover different tactics you can use "out of the box" that can turn your launch from ho-hum to high-impact.

The techniques you will learn from this webinar have been proven in years of product launches.  While the technologies we use behind the tactics evolve over time, the fundamentals stay the same.  Your messaging needs to resonate with your prospect’s problem, your prospects need to find your solution, the product needs to work, your sale teams needs to know how to sell the value of the solution and your customer support team needs to be able to address any problems along the way.

To learn more about this webinar, follow this link.

Every software product that ships has bugs.  Some more than others.  We’re always under pressure to ship as quickly as possible.  Afterall, generating a profit is the goal and the sooner the better.  Sales, as the saying goes, can solve any problem.  But if your product doesn’t meet an acceptable threshold of quality you are fooling yourself if you ship before it’s ready.

Here’s how the story goes.  The development of the product has taken longer than expected due to some technical hurdles beyond your control.  This has had a negative impact on the (overly optimistic) financial projections for the year.  You’ve been testing the product in-house and it’s been going well.  You know there are a few areas of the product which can crash the application.  You need time to identify the causes of the crashes and fix them. Management is under pressure and wants you to ship.  You present the facts of how many bugs remain, how they’re being addressed, etc. 

Management presses you on the bugs.  How often would someone really use that feature?  So what if a few crash?  Can’t we ship a patch right away?  It doesn’t seem so bad to me, they say.  They begin to convince you that it’s not so bad.  You rationalize that these are smart guys with experience.  They’ve probably seen this before.  A few customers are using the product and they understand the problem areas and seem to be OK with it.  Maybe it is OK to ship.  I guess we could fix things as they crop up.  How bad could it really be?

So you agree to ship.  Because of the extended development process you haven’t run a beta.  The product ships and the problem reports start flying in.  Customers get on blogs and forums and rant about your buggy product.  When prospects start to investigate your product they discover the posts (which will hang around for a long time) and pass you by.  Sales will come to a screeching halt.  It will result in months of lost revenue and lost opportunity.  Possible lawn dart.

Don’t pretend your product works when it doesn’t.  If it’s not ready, it’s not ready.  It doesn’t have to be perfect, but it should meet your markets expectation for quality.