Measurement is a hot topic for marketers today. Everyone
is under pressure to demonstrate results, deliver value to the firm—and
justify budgets.
Fortunately, we direct marketers have always been
measurement-oriented. Our philosophical roots are in metrics and ROI. We
set up all our campaigns to be measurable, and we test incessantly—at
least on the consumer side.
On the B-to-B side, direct marketers have more trouble
with measurement, due to the complexity of the sale and the length of the
sales cycle. Sales people don’t want to be bothered reporting back to
marketing about sales results. And when selling through channel partners,
resellers or retailers, sales figures are frequently unavailable
altogether.
Even more challenging to B-to-B marketers is the problem
of multiple touches. A campaign might involved 5 emails, 3 letters, a
webinar, an executive conference invitation, a golf outing and 4 sales
calls. How can you ever determine which touches were essential to the
sale? Or which were most impactful? It’s a rare firm that has the patience
and discipline to set up controlled experiments to test all the variables
involved.
Despite the difficulties, business marketers muddle
through with fortitude and enthusiasm, thanks to a focus on a few key
metrics that are fairly simple to gather and analyze. Well, not simple,
exactly. But at least straightforward. Let’s review the essential metrics
for B-to-B direct marketers.
Essential
Metrics for B-to-B Direct Marketers
Lead
Generation
Direct
Sales
E-commerce, Mail Order
Retention Marketing
Response rate
Response rate
Repurchase rate
Cost per lead
Cost per order
Lifetime value
Inquiry-to-lead conversion
rate
Average order size
Churn
Lead-to-sales conversion
rate
ROI
Expense-to-revenue ratio (E:R)
For business marketers who are using direct
marketing to sell directly, and to retain current customers, the metrics
are very similar to those used by consumer direct marketers: Cost per
order, average order size, lifetime value and so forth. The differences
appear most dramatically in the world of lead generation.
Response rate
For direct marketers, response rates are fairly easy to
capture through a variety of media, by using a key code, or a unique
landing page or 800 number.
The problem with response rate as a metric is that it
doesn’t tell you much about campaign effectiveness. There are simply too
many variables involved: the list, the offer, the creative—you know the
drill. So when your bosses focus excessively on response rate results, it
is your job to explain what a relatively meaningless variable it is, and
direct them on to more useful metrics, like cost per lead.
For the record, however, we now have useful industry
benchmarks on response rates, thanks to three years of tracking by The
DMA, which has published its Response Rate Study annually since
2003. Here are B-to-B response rates by medium:
Medium
2003
2004
2005
Direct mail
2.24
2.14
2.05
Dimensional mail
4.71
5.14
4.66
Catalog
1.43
1.04
4.39
Email
2.34
2.66
3.39
Inserts
.98
0.34
--
Telephone
6.98
5.53
5.95
Magazine
.27
.09
.07
Note: In 2005, The DMA expanded the number of media
reported, so the data reflects a small set of campaigns and may not be as
reliable as in the previous two years.
Cost per lead
Perhaps the most fundamental metric in business marketing
communications, cost per lead is calculated by dividing campaign cost by
the number of leads resulting from the campaign. Sounds simple, right? If
only. The conundrum with this metric is the denominator: Should you divide
by campaign inquiries or by qualified leads?
In B-to-B lead generation the true test of a marketing
campaign’s worth is its ability to provide the sales organization with
qualified leads. It’s these leads that improve sales force
productivity, reduce cold calling, and increase the amount of time sales
people can spend in front of prospects who are actually in the market. So
for some marketers, dividing by the number of qualified leads in the most
meaningful.
For others, however, it’s important to assess campaign
results on the "front end." To understand your ability to get prospects to
raise their hands and express initial interest in your product or service.
The bottom line? Either approach is valid. Just make sure
you are being consistent over time, so you can compare campaigns, keep and
eye on trends, and avoid the problem of apples and oranges. You can also
keep track of two metrics: cost per inquiry and cost per qualified lead.
Inquiry-to-lead conversion rate
The rate by which inquiries convert to qualified leads is
a function of two factors: 1) the quality of the initial inquiry and 2)
the precision of the qualification criteria. This latter factor is likely
to be fairly stable over time. Qualification criteria are developed in
concert with sales management, and define the characteristics of a
prospect that will allow the sales force to work the lead effectively.
But as a campaigner, your life is run by the first factor.
Are you working with a new list? Is the offer too generous? Any number of
variables can impact the quality of campaign inquiries. The conversion
rate becomes an early warning signal that refinements may be needed. Just
don’t forget that you may also need some tweaks in the qualification
criteria, especially as you shift among various products and audiences.
Lead-to-sales conversion rates
At this point, the sales force is on the hook to close
business and convert your leads to revenue. At what rates will they do so?
Here’s where the life of a B-to-B direct marketer becomes dicey. If the
lead-to-sales rate declines, who’s responsible? Is sales falling down on
the job? Or did marketing deliver inferior leads? This metric can shed
some light on this age-old debate.
Expense-to-revenue ratio (E:R)
To summarize campaign effectiveness, marketers need some
kind of conclusive metric, such as ROI. But in B-to-B environments, when
campaign revenues are often sizable compared to campaign expense, ROI is
problematic. The lead generation campaign is often a very small part of
the entire cost of sales. Campaign ROIs thus become so large as to be
difficult to work with—even laughable.
Consider this example, where you spend $30,000 on a
campaign that eventually generates $3.6 million in sales. The campaign ROI
comes out to be 11,900%, a ridiculous number. This apparent windfall
reflects the fact that the marketing expense is only a small part of the
total cost of sales. To understand the true ROI on a program, management
needs to take into account the direct costs of both sales and marketing.
For the marketing side alone, E:R proves to be a much more useful number,
allowing you to evaluate campaigns against each other and to serve as a
benchmark over time.
Comparing E:R with campaign ROI
Campaign
expense
$30,000
Qualified
leads generated
200
Cost per
qualified lead
($30k / 200)
$150
Lead-to-sales conversion rate
40%
Leads
converting to sales (200 x .40)
80
Average
order size (or average incremental revenue)
$100,000
Cost per
sale ($30,000 / 80)
$375
Sales
revenue (80 x $100k)
$8 million
Gross
margin rate
45%
Gross
margin on the campaign revenue ($8 million x .45)
$3.6
million
E:R ($30k
/ $8 million)
3.75%
ROI
([$3.6 million - $30k] / $30k)
11,900%
Sidebar: Lead metrics across the sales pipeline
Hugh McFarlane, author of The Leaky Funnel,
identifies additional metrics that marketing may consider tracking. These
kick in after the lead has been passed to sales, and provide more insight
into the lead’s ability to drive revenue.
Sales qualified leads (SQLs): The percent of the
leads the sales organization was willing to accept and work on. Despite
marketing’s best effort to ensure a lead is qualified before passing it on
to sales, some will be deemed unworthy of sales attention. A typical
reason for sales rejection: "We were already in that account."
First meetings: The percentage of SQLs that
resulted in a meeting, or a similar concrete action.
Proposals: Sales needs to make an offer that can
be accepted or rejected. What percent of your first meetings resulted in
some sort of proposal being made?
Closed deals: The percentage of sales offers that
were accepted, or closed.
Sidebar: Try proxy metrics
In many B-to-B environments, the revenue pay-off can take
months, even years. What if you need to assess campaign productivity
before the sales cycle has ended? Consider applying proxy metrics to your
campaign results. Robert Reneau of National Semiconductor assigns an
estimated dollar value to each interim campaign outcome, long before the
activity has resulted in a sale. When a customer downloads a piece of
collateral, for example, they credit the campaign with $1,000. A product
sample request? That’s $5,000. A lead entered into the sales force
automation system earns $50,000. These numbers may seem arbitrary, but
over time, National has found them to correlate with actual sales results.
For managers, the proxy metrics allow early comparison of campaign
productivity by product or by business unit, and mid-course corrections
where needed.
Ruth P. Stevens
consults on customer acquisition and retention, for both consumer
and business-to-business clients. Ruth began her direct marketing
career in 1986 at Time Warner, where she spent seven years in
marketing, new business development, and general management at
Book-of-the-Month Club and Time-Life Books. She then went to
Ziff-Davis as Vice President of Marketing for Computer Library, the
electronic publishing division. From 1996, she spent three years in
direct marketing management at IBM, and then worked in senior
marketing positions at two Internet startup companies in New York
City before starting her consulting company in 2000.
Ruth serves on the
board of directors of Edmund Optics, Inc. She is a trustee of
Princeton-In-Asia, past chair of the Business-to-Business Council of
the DMA, and now president of the Direct Marketing Club of New
York. Crain’s BtoB magazine named Ruth one of the 100 Most
Influential People in Business Marketing in 2002. She is the author
of 2 business books, The DMA Lead Generation Handbook,
published in 2002, and Trade Show and Event Marketing,
published by Thomson in 2005. She teaches marketing to graduate
students at Columbia Business School. She has studied marketing
management at Harvard Business School and holds an MBA from Columbia
University.