I’ve been thinking about this concept and started realizing how many of my friends, business partners, clients, and relationships in general have come through some form of introduction. This is something that many are either uncomfortable doing or simply don’t think about as part of their daily activity. The reality is that anyone you’re speaking with most likely knows someone else you SHOULD meet. And they are usually fairly willing and able to make the introduction as well. What ends up happening when you internalize this way of thinking is that doors start opening left and right.

I figured I’d try to put together a few rules that would help people get better at this skill in order to unlock the network you don’t even realize you currently have.

Rule #1 – Don’t be scared. When you start to realize that the worst possible thing that could happen is that the person you are asking will simply say “no sorry I don’t know anyone there,” it will make things easier. Fear of rejection is another topic and we’ll save that for another time.

Rule #2 – Think about all the angles as they say in pool. I was recently on my way to a city for a business trip and was speaking with a client at an agency. The normal way of thinking would prompt me to ask him who at his agency we should meet while in town. Instead of that I figured I’ll try something different and asked him if he knows anyone at OTHER agencies of brands in his city we should meet while there. Low and behold he connected me with one amazing agency and one of the largest brands in the country (two friends he grew up with) but he never in a million years would have thought about those two connections if I hadn’t come out and asked.

Rule #3 – Be clear in your value proposition. Whether its in a friend capacity such as “do you know anyone who loves to golf,” where you clearly are interested in that sport, to business where you’re an expert in a space and want to share your knowledge. The key to referrals is making sure the person you’re asking believes you have some value that you can offer to their connection otherwise you’re just wasting their time. For example if someone asked me, “Do you know anyone who needs a great graphic designer who has expertise in front end design?” I may see the clear value they offer and be able to properly direct them to someone they could be a value to.

Rule #4 – Be confident but no one likes a nudge. The trick is here believing you have some value to offer and that you won’t “make them look bad” if they so oblige with an intro. The balance is you never want to come off as annoying or a hassle so finding the balance between politely asking and reading the signals when someone is not interested in helping.

Rule #5 – Follow up is key. You may leave a meeting and have someone say “yeah I’m happy to introduce you to Scott” and then you go back to your office and never hear from them again. Many people take this as a sign the person didn’t “really” want to make the introduction when it’s more likely due to the fact they got busy and have a million more important things to do. It’s your job to delicately follow up with them and make it easy for the hand off. If they don’t come through after that then you may assume they’re not actually interested in helping.

Make this way of thinking part of your daily life and you’ll start to be amazed at the doors that open up for you.

Another great read on this topic from HBR.com: 5 Steps to Building Your Network

COMPANY SIZE:

Some people value this more then others but I think this is one of the most important things to consider when looking for a new company. I’ve had a chance to experience both ends of the spectrum from my time at AOL when I worked on TMZ.com the AOL/WB joint venture (thousands of employees) to my recent experience at a tech incubator K2 Media Labs where I was the 2^nd employee on a brand new ecommerce site and saw building a business from the ground up. I’ve noticed that this distinction in company size is very important to where one is in their career and can make a big difference in achieving your personal goals. While at the larger companies I was able to learn a great deal about how a massive organization is run, managed, structured, and with that all the positives and negatives that come with it. I did however learn that for me personally I wanted more of a challenge and the ability to be more involved in the higher level conversations. For some the ability to progress in a larger organization may be better for them. I then learned that a smaller company with little funding and starting from the ground up (where I relied on others for the key decisions still) was a great experience but once again not the right fit for me. Ultimately you want to decide if you're at a stage where you value networking with a large number of employees and learning from those above you or if you're ready to be at a smaller organization where you will have more control but less senior management from which to learn from.

CULTURE

This is something that’s becoming increasingly more important nowadays and specifically in the start up and tech world. It’s begun spreading to traditional media as well but I still see it most progressive in the tech world. While this is important in itself I believe that it still must be combined with the other factors. When recently searching for where I’d find myself next (ultimately here at Crowdtap of course) I met with an extremely broad set of businesses. Some had AMAZING culture and the folks I met seemed like people I was excited to work with but then after putting all the other factors together culture alone wasn’t enough. For example I had met with Gilty City and the larger Gilt Group organization and they had what I felt was a phenomenal culture and amazing business. Where they fell short for me was on the other two factors. The company size as I previously reviewed was simply too big for my current goals and the product or market they address wasn’t quite perfect either. I’ll get to product and market next. Overall the takeaway is that culture is important and should be a top consideration but don’t let yourself forget about the other two factors at the promise of a sexy cool culture. The reverse is also true if the size and product feel right but the culture just raises red flags. I experienced that when I met with a company who was perceived to be a hot new start up. The company size was perfect the product seemed genius but after meeting some of the team and seeing the personalities I simply knew it wasn’t the culture for me.

PRODUCT/MARKET:

When looking at your experience and where you want to be in 5 years I think product/market is the last key piece of the puzzle here. I’ve had the luxury of moving through many areas of media ranging from entertainment to e-commerce to the network space to branded content to outdoor and even social. While I value each and every one of these experiences they all also taught me how important finding the right product or market you want to be focused on is. Each area will take you down a path that brings you farther away from the others. For example if you decide you’re going to take that job at Zocdoc in sales because they are a sexy venture backed start up with a ton of press and could be the next major success story, just keep in mind that you may be spending the next few years of your life getting to know every doctors office in your territory and moving back into a digital media sales role will be increasingly more challenging with those contacts/relationships. For someone who is more concerned with the world of sales then media or advertising this could be a great opportunity however. It’s not about whats right and whats wrong its about finding whats right for you and where you want to take your career.

Overall I’d recommend to anyone on the search for his or her next role to take your decision seriously. Consider all three of these factors and come up with a desired perfect mix that you feel will get you closer to your personal goals and where you want to be in 5-10 years.

Originally posted on www.30thousandft.com

Your sitting at your desk, minding your own business, when you hear a deafening, "Ah-choo!" spring forth from somewhere deep in the bowels of the other side of the office. Based on the time of year it is, your mind instantly goes into worst case scenario mode: the flu is upon us. The flu is no laughing matter, with nearly 40 million Americans being hospitalized every year. The best thing you can do for yourself — and your wallet — is to take a preventative measure and get a flu shot. The average cost is $35 per person, and is typically covered by most health insurance plans.

When your at work, make sure to avoid certain office surfaces that are teeming with bacteria. The main culprits are: sink faucet handles, microwave door handles, keyboards, refrigerator door handles, water fountain buttons, and vending machine buttons.

via: CouponCabin

In May 2012, Facebook engaged in one of the most hyped and sought-after initial public offerings, or IPOs, in recent history. Since then, shares have dipped dramatically from the opening price of $42 per share, and hundreds of millions have been lost because of computer trading glitches. The fallout from what was hoped to be a boost to the economy has left many financial professionals running for cover.

Both traditional business schools and MBA programs online could use this cautionary tale to teach their students about better trading practices. Learning about IPOs is something almost every business student will do, although new laws may soon set extra restrictions and guidelines for them to know. It is highly likely that the Facebook IPO is going to be information they are responsible for knowing on during tests and will eventually be used to navigate their careers.

The Facebook IPO became problematic early on May 18, the first day of trading for the company’s stock. Software delays from Nasdaq market makers caused trading of Facebook shares to delay for 30 minutes, which was all it took for investors to lose more than $100 million from lost orders and unconfirmed sales. CNBC reports that the total amount lost through these technological gaffes could amount to almost $200 million, a sizeable chunk of Facebook’s $16 billion IPO.

It’s a basic principle of business that you want to compensate a customer if your company sells a faulty good or otherwise costs them more money than necessary. Nasdaq plans to satisfy investor losses with a $40 million compensation plan were however met with accusations by industry professionals that the plan was illegal. The Nasdaq plans include $13.7 million in cash compensation and much of the difference is made up of trading discounts. Some, including Bill O’Brien, CEO of the American equities exchange Direct Edge, plan on challenging the plan in court on the grounds that it affects competition for other exchanges.

The excitement of Facebook’s entrance into the public market has also been marred by poorly performing stock prices. Shares began dipping on the first day of trading, with prices reaching as low as $38 per share after the initial valuation priced at $42 per share. Stock prices for Facebook closed at $27 per share on June 11, 2012, which was an improvement over a low of $25.87 per share the previous week.

Facebook still stands to make billions of dollars for its IPO, meaning that the company is in a much better situation than either its investors or the exchanges on which its stock is traded. Effectively managing an initial public offering can earn a company a lot of money, making it an important aspect of any business education. For example, Northeastern University covers IPO management in Entrepreneurial Finance for High Tech Companies, a course available through the university’s online MBA program. This course also looks at financial needs specific to high tech companies as well as related topics in mergers and acquisitions.

The world of public trading can often resemble a gambling house rather than the regulated market that it actually is. Investors have to be wary when a company might overprice its stock in order to drive up the value or the revenues they receive. MBA students should learn how to price initial public offerings correctly so that investors are left with liquid stock and not some overpriced slip of paper that they couldn’t sell for half price.

Now, researchers at Washington State University have proven that employee satisfaction correlates strongly with guest satisfaction in the hospitality industry. In other words, guest satisfaction translates into dollar signs for hotels and restaurants. How, then, do hotels and restaurants keep employees happy while managing the bottom line? The key, according to a Dakota County Technical College blog, is investing in talent development.

Talent Assessment

Talent assessment begins with the hiring process. Individual hotels and restaurants should make sure that they are hiring people who have the potential to move up in the company. Often, this will mean interviewing candidates when applications come in, not necessarily when open positions are available. Creating a bench of potential applicants will ensure that, when positions are available, talented people can be brought into the organization.

Also, managers need to assess the talent of employees who already work for the company. Brand identity is an important consideration in addition to competency. At Denihen’s James hotel, for example, managers look for aspiring artists or employees who are more trendy or cutting edge. With Hilton, on the other hand, the best employees may be more traditional and buttoned-up. The fit with company culture, in addition to competency ratings, should be evaluated when identifying candidates for development.

Talent Development

Developing talent requires managers to get into the heads of their employees. Managers should know what employees want to do with the company and what they want to learn. Managers should also adapt their leadership styles to individual employees and their development levels. A new wait staff member, for example, will require more intense supervision and direct instruction than someone who has been on the job for a number of years.

Some managers tend to hoard talented employees instead of sharing them with other locations across the company. Hilton Worldwide has solved this problem by making company-wide talent development a metric for manager evaluation. Managers have to track their talent and inform their district managers of talented individuals that they are developing for higher positions. In fact, manager bonuses are partially dependent on how they perform in terms of assessing and developing talent.

Employees need to feel as though they are invested in the goals of their particular location as well as in company-wide goals. In addition, employees need to see evidence that their employers are invested in them. The three hotels who made Fortune’s “100 Best Companies to Work For” feature generous 401ks, plenty of opportunities for internal promotions and location changes, and employee affinity groups that help to promote connectedness. In short, happy employees create happy guests. And those happy guests tend to spend more money.

Image via Wikipedia

The good news is that CMO tenure continues to rise. Spencer Stuart, the executive search consulting firm, in their study released early last year reported that average tenure rose to 42 months. Up from 35 months two years ago and up from 27 months in 2007. The bad news is that the CMO position still churns and remains one of the riskiest positions in corporate business. Additional bad news is that the rise is largely due to economic instability and CEO’s desire to stay the course during uncertain times according to Spencer Stuart. Not the best reason for a rise but nevertheless it presents opportunities for CMO’s to succeed in longer tenures.

Economic instability and uncertainty will remain constant variables I believe for the next two years. Compounding the complexity for CMO’s is the state of the buyer. Or, a better expression may be - the ever changing and unsettled state of the buyer. CMO’s can and should play an instrumental role in leading organizations out of economic instability and providing a clear picture of the state of their company’s buyers. There are several guiding ideas that CMO’s can consider to ensure not only a longer tenure but solidifying a leadership role:

Caught In A Spider Web

The CMO role is first and foremost one of leadership. Their role defined by the challenge of leading their respective organization and the company as a whole into the future of marketing to the new hyper-connected and hyper-networked buyer. The cautionary tale here is to avoid getting caught in the spider web of hype and tactics. The state of the new buyer has sprouted new buzz words, touted tactics, and channels all promising the chance to lift marketing up to higher levels. When uncertainty reigns, the temptation can be as alluring as rich chocolate to bite into these new tactical measures. Good CMO’s today will focus on setting the entire course as opposed to thinking about the dessert.

Spinning Wheel

CMO’s today must figure out how to keep the marketing wheel turning. Looking at what relevant spokes in the wheel will result in the right balance. Some of these spokes will come from internal while others may come from external. Sound assessments are needed to determine where it makes sense to bring in outside expertise to keep the wheel balanced and spinning. External spokes can come in the form of customers, partners, and consultants – all being brought together to help them navigate the risky and uncertain road ahead. Balancing expertise in new forms of marketing and direction providing is a skill that CMO’s can develop to ensure less churn.

The Vision Thing

For most organizations, CMO’s can shape the role of not only being the eyes and ears of customers and buyers today but also help to give vision of where they are likely to be in the future. CMO’s today can cause fundamental shifts in buyer understanding through the balance of quantitative predictive analytics and qualitative predictive buyer modeling. When combined, helping CMO’s to offer a vision of the future buyer and how their company can best respond.

Using A Periscope

CMO’s will need to rely on the use of customer and buyer insight to guide strategy planning and gain foresight. Taking care to realize insight gathering should be ongoing and not a static moment in time. Repeating the refrain of balance, endeavors must include balancing quantitative insight and analysis with that of qualitative insight and analysis. CMO’s will need to use these twin periscopes to look out above the turbulent waters and gain deep understanding about buyers that informs them where to find land where buyers reside.

Time For Good Behavior

In significant fashion, buyer behavior continues to be metamorphic as the heat of change rises each year. CMO’s can influence how their company connects with buyers with deep analysis and portrayals of buyers that extend beyond demographics and firmographics. Instead, focusing their sights on a more penetrating view of Business Buyergraphics aimed at understanding the purchasing behaviors of buyers as well as what tangible and intangible drivers are influencing these behaviors.

Getting All Techie

Understanding new technologies today, especially those related to digital, social, and Enterprise 2.0, remain an important function of the modern CMO. New technology can either be your best friend or your worst enemy. Some CMO’s, at least gleamed anecdotally, have had their tenure cut short by placing a big bet on implementing a new technology that turned into a sinkhole with little to show for it. Careful assessment can result in good choices whereby new enabling technology moves the needle forward. More profoundly, CMO’s of this era need to engage in the role of determining how introductions of external new technologies change buyer behaviors and what impact they have on their organization.

Don’t Forget Your Best Friend

It might be a good idea to get your office next door to that of the CSO and become fast friends. Neither can exist without the other in today’s complex world where there is elusive understanding of not only buyers but how to create synergy in go-to-market strategies. The marketing and sales alignment issue over the years has revolved too much around tactical concepts as opposed to strategic common sense about buyers. It’s like two assistant coaches arguing about how to get a first down versus how to score points. Get on the same team and worry about scoring points with buyers.

Going To School

On the job learning is critical to keep up with new understandings about markets and buyers. This should not be confused with trying to learn all about the intricate details of social media, content marketing, and etc. The focus on learning should be on understanding buyer behaviors and making sound assessments of what means help organizations best respond to these new behaviors and win over customers. My sense is that the Spencer Stuart tenure numbers will fluctuate downward each time new technologies are introduced and new economic environments arise – caused primarily by skill gaps.

Can any of these guiding ideas ensure longevity beyond 42 months? No, that would be a bet worth not making in these complex times. What I do believe is that it increases the probability and that CMO’s will be better off than when they first started their tenure. Regardless of how long the tenure, it will also enhance preparedness for the next assignment. There is a ying and yang that comes with churn – if you are on the exit side you can always be sure that there will be an entry side somewhere waiting.

Follow @TonyZambito

Related articles

• The Single Buyer Model: A Dangerous Road Towards Competitive B2B Marketing (buyerology.com)
• The Single Buyer Model: A Dangerous Road Towards Competitive B2B Marketing (blogs.imediaconnection.com)
• Buyerology Trend: Think BIG Insights vs. BIG Data (blogs.imediaconnection.com)

5 Ways B2B Marketers Are Affected

New buyer behaviors means B2B organizations have to rethink many of their existing ways of engaging B2b buyers today. This is certainly problematic when rethinking often entails looking at such building blocks as strategy, tactics, systems, and infrastructure. Let’s take a look at new buyer behaviors and how they are affecting B2B Marketers (note – when using the term B2B Marketers, I am referencing both marketing and sales):

Buyers Expanding Their Decision-Making Networks

The advent of social technologies is allowing B2B buyers today to expand not only their social network but their collaborating network. While we have been conditioned over decades to focus on a single target buyer, or as I have written about often, a target buyer persona, we are beginning to see that this will no longer be adequate for B2B Marketers. The expansion of these buyer ecosystems and networks is changing who is included in new buyer decision models. Buyers are less and less representing themselves or behaving as individual buyers but more and more as a buyer network. B2B Marketers will need to get grounded in figuring out what buyer ecosystems and buyer networks exist for their respective industries.

Buyers Are Seeking Intelligence, Not Content

I’ve covered this recently in several articles. In qualitative efforts I’ve been involved with recently that included conducting buyer interviews, I can tell you that the overwhelming amount of content that buyers are dealing with is an issue. Buyers are essentially being forced to be more selective and to “junk” perceived non-relevant content. I use the word perceive here because it is very much like Malcom Gladwell’s theory of Blink. They are making the perception of non-relevance in a blink of an eye. B2B Marketers then must focus on standing out and offering intelligence that buyers seek and not mere push messaging content.

Buyers Want Humanized Buyer Experiences

Let’s face it, many B2B buying experiences still feel, look, and are acted out in very transactional ways. Buyers today are basically saying: why should I settle for less! I still stand solidly behind Paul Greenburg’s mantra that “buyers want to be a subject of an experience, and not an object of a sale.” B2B Marketers will need to focus on how to make humanized buyer experiences happen. The margin of difference between products and services is narrow so the playing field of experience is gaining in prominence.

Risks Continues to Play Big Role in Buyer Decisions

Risk aversion and risk avoidance continue to affect B2B buying decisions. The uncertainty created by a tumultuous global economy and uncertainty about the future means B2B buyers give extra attention to driving down costs and putting more pressure on reducing price whenever they can. The affects of buyer perceived risks is enormous. It is resulting in more problem solving research, longer sales cycles, and the expansion of buyer networks in decision-making as mentioned above. B2B Marketers then must not only determine what these perceived risks are, but address them early on in buying cycles and buyer decision models.

Buyers Adopting New Self-Enabling Technologies

If we think back ten to fifteen years ago, it was very common to think that mid-level managers to senior executives probably would privately break down and cry if the administrative assistant called in sick. Fast forward today, new technologies have caused a major mind shift. B2B buyers from mid-level managers to senior executives are efficient at using newer technologies to be self-enabling. Meaning they want more self-enabling technologies and services from B2B Marketers. With 60% to 70% of purchase decisions being made before there is direct sales involvement, this is the new frontier in B2B Marketing and Sales. B2B Marketers then will need a mind shift themselves. In the past three years, we’ve seen a considerable increase in marketing technology investing with some producing measurable success while some are questionable at best. The shift needs to be towards investing in buyer enabling technologies. Meaning B2B Marketers will have to think more about how they can create self-enabling buying experiences that buyers customize on their own. Experiences that don’t necessarily follow what we think are normal buying processes or stages.

Investing In The Two Sides of Buyer Insight 2.0

Enriching insights on existing customers and prospective buyers is rising to the top of the agenda for C-Suites in B2B organizations. The above mentioned buyer behaviors and their impact on B2B Marketers mean that making assumptions about existing customers and potential buyers is risky business. While investments in BIG data surged in the past two years, investing in BIG insights will gain more attention as B2B Marketers continue to struggle making sense out of data and analytics. In 2012, B2B Marketers will begin to incorporate the two sides of buyer research and analysis into Buyer Insight 2.0 – data and context. There is a symbiotic relationship between the two and B2B Marketers will discover in 2012 that to understand buyer decision-making behaviors - data or analytics cannot exist without context and that context cannot exist without data or analytics.

Without question, there is a lot to think about in 2012. One thing B2B Marketers can think about consistently is that new buyer behaviors will affect them and it will not be the other way around. Those days are long gone indeed.

Follow @TonyZambito

As we’ve entered into a new decade with new web and social technologies continuing to advance at warp speed, new buyer behaviors continue to emerge.  Some new buyer behaviors, such as informational search, are no longer emerging but have crossed over into accepted reality.  With other new buyer behaviors, such as those related to social influence, we are only getting a glimpse of at this moment in time.  The given in the current state of B2B marketing and sales is that buyer behavior and complex buying processes have changed.

One of the toughest challenges in the past few years has been to figure out how to respond to these changes.  One place to start is for executives to ask a bold question: are we still selling like it’s 1999?  An especially valid question for companies that have traditionally been sales driven and the dominance of a sales culture has reigned for several decades.  Companies have changed and responded - but have the changes been more cosmetically enhancing or truly systemic in nature?  I think there is a big difference and let’s look at a few important areas:

Budgeting

Let’s start with the money trail.  Has the proportion of budgets devoted to sales and marketing changed?  Or are you still having the same ratio as far back as 1999?  I am mentioning this first because companies and people will tend to behave and adapt to how much budget they have and how they are paid.  If the ratio is still the same or the needle has moved marginally – might be good to think about changing.

Technology

Companies are implementing new marketing and sales automation technologies.  The real question is: are new technologies automating new systemic adaptations to changing buyer behaviors or are they simply automating existing sales processes that haven’t changed much since 1999?

Inbound versus Outbound

The inbound versus outbound reflection is fraught with real cultural issues.  Let’s not pretend that there has not been for several decades a kind of power play and power struggle between inside and outside.  For years, most prominently in sales driven cultures, the inside sales teams and inbound marketers have been relegated to the second tier in terms of budget, talent, perception, and support.  If your culture is still a reflection of 1999 where there is top heavy dominance for outbound activities and strategies, then you might want to get past the idea that you have new web site as being your big change.  Inbound marketing and the support of highly skilled inside sales teams are here to stay.

Talent and Hiring Criteria

Are your hiring criteria’s the same as 1999?  If you haven’t worked with human resources for several years to examine new talent requirements for true systemic changes, then this could be a good starting point.  Does the majority of your sales teams still look like and possess the same talent like it’s 1999?  If so, the attribute and skill levels may prove to be a mismatch to new changing buyer behaviors and having buyers heading towards competitors.  Buyers will want to work with advisors good at orienteering versus sellers good at presenting.

Sales Training and Processes

When was the last time you examined sales training and sales processes?  Are sales people still going through the same or similar sales training that sales teams went through in 1999?  Do your sales processes, despite the addition of new technologies, represent the same 4, 5, 6, or however many stages you had in 1999?  To adapt to new changing buyer behaviors calls for systemic changes to training and sales processes.  Not doing so in today’s evolving buyer driven world will alienate your company from buyers.

The world of buyers and sellers has literally been turned upside down since 1999.  If your organization hasn’t made transformational changes yet, it’s not too late.  The first step to doing so is to take a hard look in your boardroom mirror and ask perhaps one of the most profound question you can ask: are we still selling like it’s 1999?

Follow @TonyZambito

The notion that perceived risks influences purchasing behavior has been around for quite some time.  As we have seen an increase in the complexity of the buying process, we are seeing a correlating increase in Buyer Perceived Risks (BPR)© associated with purchase decisions.  Compounding perceived risks is the increase in choices as mentioned in my previous article as well as new social channels to explore.  This new mishmash of complexity, choices, and new channels causes a much higher degree of uncertainty on the part of buyers.

What does understanding choice have to do with Buyer Perceived Risks (BPR)©?  It comes down to two general areas:

Buyers are dealing with the uncertainty and the risks of making a bad choice

Buyers are dealing with the unknown consequences resulting from a bad choice

These two general areas of perceived risks are not necessarily new however the degree of impact has expanded significantly as a result of the convergence of the Internet and Social Technologies.

Variables that are affecting the degree of impact include speed, awareness, chance, and reputation.  Put more simply:

The impact of a bad choice is happening much faster, more people as well as organizations are aware when they happen, there are fewer chances to recover, and more damage to individual as well as company reputation.  The end result being that buyers are perceiving risks to be greater than ever and making the right choice more challenging than ever.

Previously, I had written about Buyer Perceived Values (BPV)© and the need to understand how buyers prioritize values.  The other side of the coin is to understand Buyer Perceived Risks (BPR)© and to understand how buyers see the degrees of consequences that can result from a bad choice.  This calls for senior executives and strategists to increase their understanding through what I call Buyerology© -  which represents a deeper qualitative level of buyer intelligence.  Gaining deep understanding of complex perceived values and risks provides a window into the mind of the buyer as well as the business culture of an organization.

What research with C-Suite executives has borne out is that this understanding arrives too late when it comes to new services, products, and strategies.  Oftentimes, learning the hard way why a new product launch, a new service capability, or a much hyped strategy implemented fell flat on its’ face – and both seller and buyer reputation bruised and battered.  To prevent their own consequences, selling organizations will need to improve their early-stage buyer intelligence capabilities and make the investment upfront as opposed to investing in post-failure debriefings.

Improving buyer intelligence in Buyer Perceived Risks (BPR)© can lead to being informed on important decisions related to:

Pre-Sales Content: Providing knowledge and information that instills confidence in choice and reducing perceived risks.

Sales Interaction: Enabling sales to engage in conversations and interactions that authentically confront perceived risks and brings them to the forefront of the sales process as opposed to last minute barriers.

Post-Sale Implementation: Content, implementation services, and interaction can all be used to enhance a buyer’s perception that adverse risk has been avoided and value gained.

There is a given in all this.  The given is that a selling organization truly has the quality and the confidence that it can deliver for the buyer and that it has assurances in place that they can reduce Buyer Perceived Risks (BPR)© significantly.  No amount of content, smooth talking, and excuses will make up for poor quality and capability of a product or service.

Understanding perceived risks today through deeper qualitative buyer intelligence (Buyerology©) can go a long way towards organizations standing out from the pack of options that can exists.  Insightful understanding leading to helping buyers to make choices that are made with more ease, confidence, authenticity, and affirmation that ultimately results in hard sought loyalty.

Follow @TonyZambito

Over the course of the past two years, we’ve seen a marked shift in buyer behavior and buying choices.  So much so that the degree of uncertainty of why and how both individual buyers and organizational buyers make buying decisions has also markedly increased.  There is a direct correlation occurring whereby as buyers continue to increase their share of self-directing the buying decision without any direct interactions from sellers, the degree of uncertainty grows.  While quantitatively as well as statistically we have a sense of what buyers are doing, as survey reports by Baseone and DemandGen indicate, we still lack in-depth qualitative awareness on why and how certain buying choices are made.

This is awakening a renewed reality among business today that understanding shifts in buying behavior is becoming paramount to planning marketing and selling strategies that will succeed.  Buyer behavior understanding began to surface more prominently in the mid-1970’s but remained on the fringes of planning and strategies as product-centricity was entrenched in much of business as we knew it through the ‘80’s and ‘90’s.  During the past three decades we have seen a growth in customer and buyer-centric thinking however buyer behavior analysis remained somewhat a small component of marketing and sales thinking as well as planning.  Fast forward to the last five years and the explosive convergence of the Internet and the Social Age; we are seeing recognition that buyer behavior understanding is moving towards being the centerpiece linchpin of planning and strategy.  Companies today are attempting to make themselves relevant to buyers who are radically evolving their buying behaviors and have more buying choices than they ever dreamed of in just a few short years.  The relevancy mystery can only be solved by understanding buyer behaviors and the shifts in buying choices that are occurring.

We are witnessing another awakening as a result of new and rapidly evolving buyer behaviors; organizations today needing to approach marketing and selling interactions as more science and less art.  These monumental awakenings call for a new approach and concept I call Buyerology©.  Buyerology© is a means to introduce more science into understanding, both quantitatively and qualitatively, buyer behaviors and buying choices.  The convergence of the Internet and the Social Age requires new approaches to tools that are used to reach in-depth understanding as well as to monitor rapid shifts in buyer behaviors.  Buyerology must offer approaches and tools that help to translate buyer behavior understanding and insights into meaningful strategies that accomplish the relevancy that remains elusive for many companies today.

My own shift in thinking about buyer behavior began with a series of articles on Social Buyerology©.  The articles tapped into the recognition and movement towards more science and less art in the spheres of marketing and sales as well as in overall social strategy.  Reflecting back on ten years since originating buyer persona development, much of the analysis performed via buyer persona development was in essence about buyer behavior.  Recently, I have written about how buyer persona development must indeed undergo its own transformation at this juncture in modern business history.

This article marks a turning point for me personally and professionally.  I have been thinking about something – in fact a lot - Tom Peters use to bellow loudly in many of his presentations years ago – that if you’ve been doing the same thing or staying with the same company for ten years or more you’ve become institutionalized.  In similar ways, buyer personas as an idea has become institutionalized in various circles; defined rightly and wrongly, and indeed no longer can suffice on its own.  Adapting to the new social world and taking a leap of faith, I will be devoting the next twelve weeks to elaborating on the new science of understanding buyer behaviors I call Buyerology©.  I will be sharing new approaches and tools that address the many challenges faced by organizations in marketing, sales, social business, and content strategy planning.

My hope over the next twelve weeks is to accomplish two things.  First, to avoid becoming institutionalized as Tom Peters ingrained in me many years ago.  Whether he meant mentally or physically, I am not sure but it has felt like a few times, like many of us, I was losing my mind while I attempted to understand the many changes occurring!  The second is to make a contribution towards advancing buyer behavior understanding through the social science of Buyerology.

Follow @TonyZambito

In my previous article, Enhance the Buyer Experience with Intelligent Engagement, I referenced a trend I called Experiential Buying.  Buyer behaviors in B2B marketplaces are shifting tremendously towards more holistic experiential expectations that defy the conventional straight re-buy, modified re-buy, and new buy behaviors of the past.  Buyer expectations have increased with regards to the experiences they undergo as well as desire.

In simplistic generalities, we can take a view of two experience categories that B2B buyers may seek:

Self-Enabled Buying

In this situation, a buyer may want to experience a re-buy that reaffirms his or her decision to continue a relationship.  Even in modified re-buy situations, the buyer may be looking for an experience where they can perform the modifications themselves.  The difference in the modern social age is that buyer expectations have changed.  If companies have not adapted their businesses to enhanced online and social capabilities, they may very well be placing artificial barriers in front of their buyers who are seeking an entirely different straight re-buy or modified re-buy experience than in the past.  As consumer-like experiences become more desired in business marketplaces, companies will need to rethink many aspects of their sales and service capabilities as well as interactions.  This includes taking a hard look at barriers they may be putting up in front of their buyers unintentionally.

Assist-Enabled Buying

In those situations where buyers are actively seeking assistance, the cumulative experiences of the assistance they receive are becoming important factors in their decisions.  In situations of modified re-buy and new buy, organizations today must look not only towards Intelligent Engagement as mention in my previous article, but they must examine and establish a balance between assistance and empowerment.  Plainly speaking, what companies have to be careful about is how long-ago established internal processes may not be fulfilling buyer expectations for an experience.  It seems to me, as observed in recent qualitative research, that buyers wanting assistance also want to feel empowered to act on their own on different levels without the excessive "hand-holding" companies feel they've gain permission to exercise.

What is becoming more apparent is that companies in the near future will need to build adaptive capabilities for enabling experiential buying.  In such a way that it allows for buyers themselves to create their own adaptive differentiated experiences.  Buyers enabled to create their experiences of finding the right knowledge at the right time at the right place at the right interaction level and at the right solution.  Companies that can figure out how to get this experiential buying formula right – will have the competitive advantage going forward.

Follow @TonyZambito

One particular trend I have noticed this year, in participant observations with B2B buyers, is the movement towards what I would label Intelligent Engagement.  I referenced this in my previous article whereby I questioned the phrase Reach and Engage in contrast to Listen and Engage.  Simply stated, B2B buyers are learning at an increasing rate how to decipher meaningful, relevant, intelligent, and engaging content from the fire hose that is now marketed to them.  What we are seeing is a shift in buyer behavior from that of trying to drink from the fire hose to that of selectively choosing Intelligent Engagement.  Closely correlated to social media fatigue, B2B buyers are looking for a garden hose and not a fire hose.

The field of content strategy and content marketing is still relatively new.  However, it faces significant challenges just as it begins to solidify into a publisher mode of practice.  The challenge is that B2B buyer behavior may already be moving beyond the publishing context to a new expectation of Intelligent Engagement.  This is presenting an enormous challenge for strategists and marketers to learn how to establish “built-in” engagement that is intelligent as opposed to being the mere presence of a document which can be printed.  Also, this movement compels content strategists and marketers to think well beyond content alone.

Moving beyond content alone is becoming the prerequisite to enhancing the buyer experience.  Intelligent Engagement begins to define the buyer’s real-time and social experience with what a company has to offer.  By the term “offer”, I do not mean just a service or product they are marketing and selling.  The buyer experience has wrapped up in it all the components of what constitutes a rewarding, intelligent, social, and engaging experience.  Also, content strategists and marketers will need to see how what they produce contributes to the totality of the buyer experience as well as how it rewards buyers with Intelligent Engagement.

The social age is ushering a new era of what I would call Experiential Buying.  Buyer behavior and expectations are changing indeed.  No longer is it a straight buy or re-buy that a B2B buyer may be seeking.  The demand for Intelligent Engagement and Experiential Buying, in my opinion, will become essential components of a post-social media frenzy that seems to be showing signs of fatigue. I recently touched upon this concept whereby social buyers were establishing their own Social Buyer Engagement Index that assessed a company's engagement capabiltities.

Companies today though can begin to re-examine their current buyer experience and content strategy efforts by looking at two questions in particular:

1. How much built-in Intelligent Engagement do they have in their content strategy as well as overall touch strategies with buyers?
2. Do their current content marketing, sales interactions, and service interactions contribute to enhancing the overall buyer experience?

These are good starting point questions that may cause reflections on existing efforts.  They offer a chance to take a deep breath amidst the social media and content marketing frenzy that has taken place in the last couple of years.  I am willing to bet there will be a few pauses like: “did we really do that?"

Follow @TonyZambito

I have been thinking about this question for some time.  I have been thinking that there is something wrong with all the titles I see that begin with Reach and Engage for numerous articles and blog posts.  To me at least, it seems that in the social age the terms Reach and Engage cancel each other out.  One can make an educated argument that reach belongs in the push column of marketing.  Whereby engage can be placed in the pull column.

Therein lays, perhaps, the problem with this expression of reach and engage.  Organizations and marketers have been wired for decades in reach and push strategies.  The structure of businesses has remained surprisingly constant despite significant transformative changes occurring during the past two decades.  There is a built-in inertia and interwoven into corporate DNA is the push mentality.  It has always been about pushing, reaching, and “going to” a segment or a market.  In several recent articles, I have discussed this notion of buyer behaviors that reject reach and push and how organizations today must become listening organizations that foster engagement.

Brian Solis published an article entitled The End of Social Media 1.0.  While the focus is on social media and consumers, some points apply to buyer behavior and this question.  Brian notes that organizations today must learn to listen with social media and consumers want to be heard.  He further states that social media must become an extension of active listening and engagement.  Currently social media is in the grips of marketing which has always been, along with sales, the beholders of reach and push.  Brian makes a case for social media belonging to an active listening social enterprise.   We are dealing with a century of organizations that are built on the silos that support the reach, push, and got-to pillars.  Redesigning organizations to become a social enterprise is definitely going to be no small feat.

A funny thing happened on the way to the social media forum.  It is no longer about tweets, likes, and constancy of social media which is resulting in social media fatigue.  We may be seeing the beginnings of the next evolution in the social age - the evolution becoming about buyer behavior orienting towards wanting to be heard and wanting intelligent engagement.   If so, this has some serious ramifications for organizations and their relationships with buyers.  It flips the enterprise upside down, flattens it, and forces the enterprise to listen.  The competitive advantage may very well come from those organizations willing to stomach such a transformation earlier than most.

Companies today will need to examine what is meant by reach and engage and whether it fits new buyer behaviors that want listen and engage.  Do their efforts in content marketing and sales, for example, mirror conventional reach and push through the different channels of social networks?  Are their efforts just about maintaining a presence?  Is their presence merely an extension of reach and push – or – are they truly listening and engaging?  It looks like organizations today are faced with some profound questions.  To answer such questions, organizations and their leaders will need to undergo the deepest self-examination they’ve had to do in quite some time.

What do you think?  Engage.

Follow @TonyZambito

In my recent article, The Ascent of the Social Buyer, I made mention that social buyers today were exhibiting an internalized Social Engagement Index.  The mention of a Social Engagement Index is not new.  The people at Alterian have talked about a Social Engagement Index (SEI) as well as a Social Sentiment Engagement Index (SSEI).  Recently, Brent Leary and John Hernandez offered a perspective for The Social Customer in a report called The Social Customer Engagement Index 2011.  The report focused primarily on how companies are leveraging social tools and technologies to reach and engage customers in customer service interactions.  It also pays note to how satisfied customers are with these interactions.

My mention of a Social Buyer Engagement Index is coming from a different direction.  In my anthropological inspired studies, the interest has been on the value buyers today are placing on the ability of companies to provide social engagement capabilities.  It is asking the question: are buyers today evaluating a company’s social engagement capabilities as part of the overall buying experience as well as social experience?  Although in an embryo stage with further research warranted, I think we are beginning to see the emergence of this new expectation. There are three areas that buyers today may be looking at as they evaluate a company’s social engagement capability:

Service:  Socially adept buyers today may be placing a premium on the instantaneous service capabilities that social networking and technology tools offer.  Does not having social engagement capabilities in service – whereby a socially adept buyer sees only conventional email and toll-free numbers – affect a buyer’s receptivity to this company?

Knowledge: Social buyers today are knowledge seekers.  One of the profound shifts in the social age is how buyers today can avail themselves of knowledge that may have been hard to come by in the past.  As the social age evolves and advances, so does the social buyer’s savvy discrimination for real knowledge versus content in general.  There has been much attention paid to content marketing and content strategy recently as a form of new media marketing.  Social buyers today are becoming savvier at distinguishing between push marketing messaging and real knowledge.

Self-Direction: In attempt to avoid the now cliché expression and perhaps to elaborate on the “buyers are in control” adage, social buyers are oriented towards self-directed means of interactions.  When evaluating the overall buying experience, social buyers may be looking at what we may refer to as the avenues of self-direction that a company may offer.  Are there several avenues by which a social buyer can choose to engage and interact with an organization’s sales and service capabilities?

These are three of what are sure to be more factors associated with how buyers are internalizing their own form of a Social Engagement Index.  This emerging trend ups the ante’ for companies today to begin looking seriously at their social engagement capabilities.  Without doing so, they may become oblivious to a new expectation buyers are considering in their overall buying as well as social experience.

Follow @TonyZambito

In the B2B world, the emergence of the Social Buyer is causing organizations to search for better ways to reach its’ base of buyers.  What we do know is that B2B buyers are demanding more social experiences in their buying processes.   To date, it appears that many of the efforts to reach buyers remain tactical in nature.  Companies are looking to social media and other means such as content marketing to fit into their existing structure and business operations.  This approach, if wedded to existing structures, may in fact be impeding the evolution of B2B organizations to not only adapt to changes in buyer behaviors but also align their organizations to the emerging Social Buyer.

What we continue to witness is how compartmentalized efforts are being aligned with existing departments.  Certain tactical initiatives related to social networking, content strategy, demand generation, and more continue to have a very provincial nature to them and the debate related to proverbial “who owns this” continues to be avoided.  Business leaders, especially those in B2B, must take heed to what is happening in the under layers of their business industry and what influence the Social Buyer is having in their marketplace.  Here are just three that are not visible until they are unearthed through discovery:

Ecosystems Are Shifting

Dependencies and interdependencies are ever so rapidly changing for the social buyer.  Ecosystems relied on, perhaps for decades, are shifting with some members of the ecosystem being left behind and new members cropping up and fitting into the new social ecosystem.  Social technology and platforms are changing the way companies co-evolve and co-exist.  B2B business leaders will need to stop seeing themselves as just suppliers or distributors.  In the emerging social ecosystems of today, businesses will need to become integral members with their role in the social ecosystem being redefined by the social buyers they interact with.  A key understanding is that not only are B2B buyers becoming more social but the very ecosystem they live within is becoming more social.

New Business Models

The emergence of social technologies and social buyers means new business models are rising and old ones are being discarded at a fast pace.  If not careful, B2B leaders can be caught in some sort of a slumber when it comes to reexamining their business models while new competitive forces arise with far more attractive business models to the social buyer.  One only has to look at the newspaper and print media industries to understand that digital media is drastically affecting business models in these industries.  Both changes in reader technologies and reader behaviors are altering previous business models significantly.  How businesses price and execute business models, whether they be fixed pricing or variable pricing based, are being drastically affected by changes in social buying behaviors, social technologies, and social ecosystems.

Social Buyer Cycle

There has been plenty of reference to the buyer’s journey, including from myself, over the past couple of years.  The more we witness the emergence of the social buyer as well as social ecosystems, the more inappropriate the use of the term “journey” becomes.  The buyer’s journey as a description implies that there is a defined end destination, stages, and a period of time.  This is no longer true in the social business world.  Many processes made “social”, including buying, are beginning to take on a perpetual cyclical nature whereby where one starts and one ends is a blurred vision.  The "buyer’s journey" continues to be viewed through the lenses of existing structures and systems.  This presumes that social buyers continue to advance through neatly defined stages.  That view may not be a truism anymore in the social business world.  Learning about the various Social Buyer Cycles that are in perpetual motion, whether it be related to purchase, service, co-development, and the like, will become an increasingly important mandate for B2B business leaders.

By learning more deeply about new and emerging social ecosystems, social business models, and social buyer cycles, B2B business leaders can be better informed on the future direction of their organization.  Without these, leaders will not have the requisite compass to guide them into uncharted territories.  Territories that includes creating new social interaction models, new roles as members of a social ecosystem, and advancing social business models that may very well alter the structure and business operations they have been wedded to for decades – in ways they could not have dreamed of just a few short years ago.

Follow @TonyZambito

Either way, the recent announcement that web analytics industry pioneer Rand Schulman is joining the Board of Directors at the Direct Marketing Educational Foundation represents a watershed moment in that organization’s forty-six year history. And Terrie L. Bartlett, President of the DMEF, seems to agree. Recently she said that while the DMEF board has a number of illustrious figures, Rand would represent what amounts to a “very new set of eyes for the DMEF”.

The similarities between what Direct Marketing has been, and what Digital Marketing is today, go more than skin-deep. Ms. Bartlett says Direct Marketing can be defined as “marketing that’s measurable”—and it used to mean postcards in the mail (for example) that had certain identifying characteristics that could be tied to response. To a digital marketer, those sound like very familiar descriptions of what they expect out of their on line marketing efforts. In fact, there is no shortage of evidence to suggest that some of the seismic shifts in ad spend taking place today—mostly moving mountains of marketing dollars away from print and into digital—are due in large part to the fact that digital marketing is the most measurable of available media.

So one of the most senior members of the web analytics community now joins the board of one of the foundational organizations in direct marketing. Are we to expect our physical mailboxes stuffed full of postcards with digital memory chips? Not any time soon. But what we know is that the DMEF (affiliated with the perhaps better known Direct Marketing Association) is committed to attracting, educating and placing the next generation of marketing leaders into key marketing positions. And if you did not know, I can tell you now that Mr. Schulman is deeply committed as well to educating a new breed of marketers who understand both business and interactive technology.

Can Mr. Schulman’s “new eyes” and Ms. Bartlett’s organization make marketing music together? In all likelihood it will take some time to get the orchestra playing a new song tuned to digital. But the rehearsals will be shortened because we are now seeing a generational confluence. Schulman is actually an ex-direct marketing guy. He knows what Pantone colors are; and knows too the value of a “clean list” of prospects. And yet he also brings to bear a deep understanding of web analytics, which has been called “the art and science of measuring web user behavior to inform marketing decisions”. In quantifying that understanding, let’s briefly note that Schulman is ex-CMO at not one but two major web analytics tool vendors, WebTrends and WebSideStory (now part of the Adobe Omniture suite).

With the rapid changes taking place in media generally and marketing in specific, it only makes sense to seek a blend of time-tested “measurable marketing”, and the exploding universe of digital marketing—which has always been inherently much more measurable than any other form of the art.

Marketers everywhere stand to benefit. For as groups like The DMA and the DMEF work to aid the direct marketing industry, they will be able to work even more effectively when their efforts are tuned more finely to the opportunities and needs proposed by their digital constituents.

Some day the last direct marketing mailers may drop at the last distribution point; and from that point on, there may only be one kind of direct marketing—the kind that shows up in your browser. And with the timely changes taking place at a longtime player like the DMEF, it will be good to know that the marketers working to keep content free because of measurable advertising will have a source for academic research, location and nurturing of great young marketers, and no small amount of much-needed advocacy.

Disclaimer: Mr. Schulman is a member of the Board of Advisors to Technology Leaders.

B2B marketing and sales has lived in a neat framework centered on the purchase transaction.  In some industries and marketplaces, this purchase transaction has been fairly straight forward.  In others, there has been a mix of complex buying and selling cycles put into play to ultimately reach a purchase transaction.  That is, until now.  These days are certainly the best of times and could be the worst of times.  The key lies in how well you and your organization are responding to the most transformative changes in B2B buying we’ve seen in several decades at least.

B2B buyers are increasingly thinking less in terms of a transaction and more about the experience.  In essence, this transformation is creating a mandate for B2B companies to adjust their approach to marketing and sales accordingly.  It requires evaluating what approaches align with today’s social buyer personas and what spend should be devoted to providing a social experience.  A key to aligning with today’s B2B buyers is to learn as much as you can about the buyer journey that is unique to your segments, marketplaces, and buyer personas.  By doing so, a B2B organization can learn about the potential interactions social buyers desire that make up the entire social experience.

A funny thing is also happening along the way to this transformation in B2B Buying.  It is very easy in today’s multi-media blast we receive daily on social media to think of the word social in terms of just the social technology platforms.  It turns out, that these technologies are only one of many components making up the social experience.  What we may be heading towards is thinking in terms of social engagement.  Social technologies, in effect, are enabling bringing “social” into the B2B domain like never before.  Enhancing not only technology enabled engagements that can be found through such platforms as Twitter and Linked-In as well as company or industry specific platforms, but radically changing the notion of what personal engagements actually means.  Just a few short years ago we were trying to figure out how to get more “personal” with email.  How fast things change – there are now more social networking users than email users (Morgan Stanley, 2010).

What is going on today is B2B buyers are expecting more social experiences.  "Social" meaning what enhances the relationship beyond the old perfunctory step-by-step transaction orientation that traditionally defined B2B buying and selling.  The social experience is a new way of bringing the 1-to-1 customized approach to each potential opportunity and lead nurturing situation.  B2B buyers today quickly discerning whether they are experiencing the traditional lock step approach to engaging or getting the social experience they are expecting.  When you step back and take a hard look at what this transformation is all about (which I am gathering via qualitative interviews with buyers) you come to realize one of those moments where you exclaim – holy cow!  B2B buyers, via the social experience, do actually want more personal engagement with an organization – not less!  What we are learning is that personal engagement does not mean just in the context of "with a sales representative" but with the multi-dimensional make up of the entire organization.    It is a reflection of the personal investment they are willing to make with you and your organization.

What exactly are B2B buyers coming to expect when it comes to social experiences?  Several areas are beginning to become readily apparent:

1. Transparency:  buyers expect your organization to be an open book
2. Collaboration: buyers want to participate in several aspects related to research and development, product development, knowledge sharing, customized servicing, and an ongoing dialogue
3. Building: traditional transactions, simple to complex, involved a lot of presenting and receiving until the buyer basically says – I’ll take it.  Today, a more intelligent and social approach means buyers and sellers working through issues simultaneously to map directly to the goals of the buying organization.
4. Recommendations: this is becoming a two-way exchange.  Buyers are expecting insightful recommendations and then the ability to share these recommendations with others socially.

B2B buyers are responding to social experiences with more personal engagement in mind.  That is, they are making a personal investment in your organization socially with expected rewards.  This is a profound transformation for many B2B organizations to get their heads around.  This is especially true when personal engagement or personal relationship has usually been discussed in the limited framework of just the sales representative and the buyer.

One overall approach B2B companies can begin to take is to focus on how to enhance the overall buyer experience.  They can begin to ponder the question of how to turn the overall buying experience into a more social experience.  Doing so without confining their thinking to social technology platforms but what truly fosters more personal engagement on the part of buyers.

Follow @TonyZambito

To say things are changing is an understatement.  Morgan Stanley (2010) recently reported in a study that there are now more social network users than email users.  An even more profound and sobering fact is that 80% of business buyers today say that they found their vendors as opposed to vendors finding them.  If you are a Chief Sales Officer, when was the last time you checked how often your sales teams are making contact with potential buyers?  You might be surprise that most often, outbound calls are going directly into voice mail.  Don’t worry, you are in good company as 85% of business phone calls go into voice mail and are never returned.

What is happening?  For starters, businesses using Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and other social networking platforms are expected to grow at a rate of 20%-30% this year and even at a greater rate next year (CIO Insight, 2010).  The Fortune 500 is jumping on board with nearly 70% actively pursuing social networking as a business benefit for their buyers (McKinsey, 2009).  Marketing, as we know it today, will see its’ percent of activities devoted to social marketing increase past 50% over the next two years.  What we are seeing is the rising importance of social marketing and social selling.  The definitions as well as trajectory of social marketing and social selling are still in a progressive state however to ignore them can put your company in peril.

While the Fortune 500 may have started actively pursuing social networking technologies, we are still left to wonder how actively the Fortune 500 and other businesses are adjusting their views of buyers.  These views of buyers ultimately affect the ability to plan.  If your views of buyers have gone unchanged over the past few years and are still in the framework of buyers in companies making decisions via meetings internally with sales representatives, then most certainly this needs adjusting.  More than likely, these views put your marketing and selling strategies in the framework of being highly dependent upon outbound activities that are intent on finding buyers.  And almost by default, leadership’s role is left to constantly exhorting the troops to try harder, to push harder, and to find ways to make contact.

In terms of how an organization conducts strategic planning, it may be time for some revisions on how to plan for acquiring and retaining buyers.  If your planning is not taking into account changing behaviors of buyers, then the organization will be in misstep with its buyers.  Planning today should include a significant component devoted to understanding your social buyer persona and understanding the implications they may have on your business strategy and structure.  There should also be a healthy realization that knowledge of buyers may be not up to date.  Insight into the social buyer persona is even more important if your targeted segment happens to be one of those adopting social technologies at a fast rate.

An organization also must take care to putting themselves in a contradictory position.  What do I mean?  For many organizations, they rely on the sales force’s knowledge of buyers and then plan around that knowledge gleamed from call reports and sales automation systems.  However, trending information clearly points to the fact that sales reps are having a hard time making contact with buyers and don’t get involved until much later in the buying cycle.  Therefore, if planning is done solely on the input of sales knowledge, then this knowledge is certainly limited for there is a significant non-involvement factor in the buying cycle.  I find it a contradiction when I hear an organization claim to know its buyers yet has a heavy reliance on field sales and little inbound and social marketing tactics in place.

In today’s social age, organizations that will put themselves on an evolutionary path that puts them in alignment with their new social buyer persona will have the best chance of succeeding in the future.  I’m afraid that the “future” is much nearer then we think at the moment.  This will require a shift in how a company goes about planning around its buyers.  It starts with a dedicated commitment to understand exactly who their social buyer personas are and devoting strategy planning to this understanding.

For many companies today, it requires a shift in thinking of social networking technologies in terms of something that social buyers do to accepting the realization that it know defines who they are.  If an organization doesn’t begin to put planning into place for their defined social buyer personas soon, when they eventually do – it may be too late.

One of the major outcomes of the recent advances in the social age is the resurgence of contextually-based persona development and its’ role in helping to inform as well as shape strategy.  This is especially true when you consider there are several important strategic areas evolving at a rapid pace. These strategy areas include content strategy, social marketing, marketing automation, social selling, demand generation, and buyer experience marketing.  Obtaining contextual understanding of the new social buyer persona will be a key element of formulating strategies that are successful and embraced by buyers.

What is Context?

Context is essential to understanding but what does it really mean?  I like these two definitions from businessdictionary.com for starters:

1. Background, environment, framework, setting, or situation surrounding an event or occurrence
2. Circumstances under which a document was created, including its function, purpose, use, time, the creator, and the recipient.

The first definition points to reaching an understanding of the behavioral framework that surrounds the new social buyer persona.  The second indicates that content strategy and content marketing, to be successful, will need a robust understanding of “circumstances” contextually in order to affect buyer interaction.

Since the mid-1990’s, the meaning of context was extended to focus on the understanding of user interactions in design settings which led to personas being a means for communicating contextually-based user behaviors.  This has been the case most prominently in the area of user-centered design.  Context also serves as the foundation of ethnographic and anthropological research often associated with the design of products or services as well as experience design.

Why is Context Important Now?

In the world of marketing and sales, we are seeing the need for contextual understanding due to a very relevant fact: the context we understood for many years about buyer behavior has drastically changed due to social technologies.  Older non-contextual methods of research will no longer suffice in today's social and buyer-driven marketplace.  If we stick to definitions, the buyer world respective to background, frameworks, interactions, environments, settings, situations, events, occurrence, and etc. has undergone significant changes and evolutions in the past 5 years.

These significant changes affecting beliefs we’ve held and causing a degree of uncertainty as well as a number of unknowns.  These include the following 6 B’s where contextual understanding is essential:

Buyer Behavior: the behaviors exhibited by buyers are directly affected by the changes related to context such as their environments, current situation, frameworks, goals, and the introduction of new social technology.

Buyer Patterns: patterns related to how and why buyers buy have undergone significant changes and most notably in B2B these patterns are undergoing constant change and evolution.

Buyer Journeys: we’ve seen a major shift here in what I have referred to as self-directed buyer journeys.  Buyers are self-directing and taking non-linear journeys based on situations and goals.

Buyer Characteristics: as we see more and more social technology advancements, the character of the buyer is changing.  Organizations are requiring new skills sets and attributes for their own advancing.  The buyers of today and tomorrow will look vastly different than the buyers of yesteryears.

Buyer Knowledge: content strategy has become important not only because of the Internet and social technology drastically altering the buying cycles but because the knowledge gathering requirements of buyers continue to evolve.  We are interacting with buyers who are becoming more knowledgeable and sophisticated with each cycle of new technologies introduced.

Buyer Interactions: context is critical to understanding the types of interactions which need to be designed to meet the needs, wants, and goals of buyers as they self-direct their own buyer journeys.  Self-directing buyers will radically change the concepts of messaging as we know it and call into question the relevance of existing messaging tactics with buyers - who are more knowledgeable than ever before.

What is evident is that buyer insight and analysis void of context will not have the value or level needed to help inform and shape the strategies of the future.  Contextually based insights that go through the interpretation and translations to produce personas – and the new social buyer persona – will help organizations to chart a new course that allows them to connect with buyers with refreshed deep understanding.