Why aren't we better stewards of demand generation?

By Published on .

With all the talk these days of revenue, buyer centricity, content marketing and marketing automation, you would think b-to-b marketers would have the perfect mix of ingredients to build and manage modern demand-generation programs.

Yet, despite the best of intentions, modern b-to-b demand generation tends to fall apart in execution. It's been estimated that nearly 70% of our demand-generation efforts miss our ideal customer, and technology marketers report average opportunity pipeline contributions at an underwhelming 27%, according to Forrester Research.

Successful demand-generation execution requires bringing together people, process, content and technology, but it's more than a series of check boxes. The executional challenge is getting these elements to work together, enabling buyer education to work in tandem with lead-qualification stages, orchestrating the efforts of our marketing and sales team members and ensuring seamless tracking and handoffs between our technology systems.

We want a seamless and value-added buyer experience, and we want to optimize our lead-to-revenue conversion. This requires approaching b-to-b demand generation as a process and adopting a new design ethic I refer to as “demand process stewardship.”

So why are we not better stewards of demand generation?
In the words of American cartoonist Walt Kelly (paraphrasing Oliver Hazard Perry), “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

Three fundamental barriers—ones we have ourselves created as marketers—stand in the way of our ability to succeed:

How we're organized. The goal of b-to-b demand generation should be to drive a lead-to-revenue process. Yet we fail to organize around that goal. Instead of rationalizing marketing (and sales) roles in terms of our inputs into the process, we organize according to communication channels, such as email marketing or PR, or to the activities we manage, like events or campaigns.

We also focus on campaign structure that is promotional and short-term, and fail to consider the perpetual nature of buying processes. We must reformulate our marketing departments, consider their contributions to the progression of engagement, nurturing and conversion, and identify critical "block captains" to lead our perpetual demand process stewardship efforts.

How we're trained. Driving a process requires understanding and managing the operational dynamics of that process, and delivering leadership that is 100% goal-oriented. Yet b-to-b  marketers are not trained to do either. Most marketers' backgrounds are more creative and/or communication-tactic aligned, and often very much focused on messaging and sales enablement.

Also, our historical emphasis with marketing analytics has been on pricing, and we have failed to address the revenue performance and in-process metrics required to optimize demand-process flows.

How we're evaluated. The success of a managed process should be clear. Did we achieve the outcome or not? Ask any brand manager in the consumer arena what it means to succeed with marketing programs, and they are clear: “Make your numbers,” as Colleen Goggins, head of Johnson & Johnson's consumer business, once told me.

Yet on the b-to-b side of things, we continue to present activity based metrics to defend our worth, rarely delving into the elasticity of and correlation between our programs and their revenue outcomes. And most of the time we're unwilling to risk our compensation on the revenue performance of our efforts.

The time (and need) for b-to-b marketers to step up as effective stewards of demand generation is now. Before overinvesting in new technology and content, let's take a moment to examine ourselves, to remove these fundamental barriers, and to set ourselves up to succeed.

Most Popular
In this article: