One of the reasons that I love being involved in PR right now is that the industry is changing so rapidly. PR can be the most powerful generator of sales leads if executives use PR effectively.
At the core of effective PR is a good understanding of the exciting changes in how people are consuming media. The printing press is dying, some people say quickly. Other people like Marc Andreessen say not fast enough. The model of a publisher as an omnipotent organization as portrayed in Citizen Kane is no longer valid in today's world of zero-cost, instant distribution. Sales leads will only come if executives understand how customers are finding their products. Embrace the change and thrive.
People are moving to online search engines to find products. They are using aggregation tools like Google News, specialized blog sites like Technorati, or social networks like Facebook to get the latest news and information. True, people still read the New York Times and their local newspaper. However, they may not read it everyday. People skim through dozens of media sources when they have time. This change in reading habits is great for the consumer since it gives them a wide range of perspectives. It's also great for companies that have a good understanding of how readers now find and distribute information.
My colleague Nadja Blagojevic recently wrote a blog posting on Public Relations Optimized for SEO. She also helped to organize a meeting with a Silicon Valley search engine marketing (SEM) firm that we're partnering with on several accounts. Coming from an entrepreneurial background, I find the process of closed loop marketing, lead generation and lead nurturing fascinating.
Many companies feel the economy is about to slow down and are taking a hard look at their marketing budgets. It's an excellent opportunity to assess what will generate sales leads over the next two years. Hopefully, the economic downturn will work as a forcing function to help executives build leaner and more efficient businesses.
Over the last five years, I've continually tried to integrate PR into the business processes of the Silicon Valley companies I've worked with. In my heart, I'm an entrepreneur and enjoy talking to other entrepreneurs about making new products and making money. In the last year, we've really seen companies open up their business processes to us.
Here are just some of the changes I'm seeing:
Google Analytics - The majority of our clients use Google Analytics. Many of them give us login access to directly view reports. We can now assess the effectiveness of PR campaigns in driving traffic to their web site and also see if there is a trend to increase traffic to product information sections or the contact section.
Google AdWords - As part of our messaging and positioning work, we now ask clients what keywords they are buying for Google AdWords. Most clients buy AdWords and know which words are directing traffic to their site. Using other tools, they can also drill down and see which keywords result in high quality sales leads. As part of their integrated marketing plan, PR often helps to push these keywords out to the public.
Web Site Interaction - In many integrated marketing campaigns, our clients are trying to achieve a higher level of interaction. They're trying to get a registered download of a whitepaper or free version of a product, registration in a online technical community, anonymous voting, or online button clicks.
Intentional Information Leaks - Some companies are starting to release information to the online community first and then issue a press release. Although the technique is still new and being developed, some technology executives are putting incomplete information out on blogs or Twitter before official announcements. Due to the speed requirements of online blogging, there are usually no delays with fact-checking or interviews. I've often seen a buzz cycle develop online in blogs, Twitter, and even Wikipedia in advance of a product launch and then really start to gain momentum when the full product specifications appear in a press release. Part of the reason for this strategy might be that the bloggers and people in the online community are the most passionate about the product and might be the best candidates for early product buys.
As an entrepreneur, I find all these changes exciting. It warms my heart to see companies leveraging new PR techniques to generate sales leads. This is one of the reasons Lonn Johnston and I left the entrepreneurial world and started a PR firm. The PR firms we were hiring five years ago were not integrated into the process of helping companies reach business objectives. After seeing the carnage of the dot-com bust, we knew that there was a better way to do PR, going beyond hype machines and working toward supporting the achievements of business goals. It seems that other people see the same thing too.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

9 comments:
Yes, I really believe that PR can boost your sales leads. However, you should depend on it alone. There are still a lot of things that you have to do in order to make sure that you can maximize your leads. Besides performing lead analytics, you also have to track and nurture them, perhaps through a process called drip marketing.
Perry, thanks for the comment. I completely agree with you that PR is just part of the process to boost sales leads. What I find exciting is that we're starting to get more involved in the process. The PR team can be helpful in creating the marketing assets used in drip marketing.
Do you work for a firm that specializes in lead analysis? I would like to hear more about what you do.
Great post, Craig. I'm enjoying the new dynamics of PR and learning more and more all the time!
Lead Gen is a good place to start the conversation, but I would agree that actual value/vision of what you are talking about here is much higher level.
“Sales lead generation" is, in the end, almost too general to even be useful as way to get at what an integrated search/PR strategy can do. This is because sales lead generation is the ENTIRE business function – and makes up the brand, the messaging, the differentiation and is backed up by ALL the processes that engender somebody paying your for something.
Differentiation and competitive advantage has historically been derived through OWNING language – and now the game has changed and you need to own not only advertising and media language, but SEARCH language. If you don’t own search language, you will not be first to market, you will not be first in your market, and you cannot sustain competitive advantage. This is true of any new company, or any company that needs to build market share in some new space.
So what types of companies historically have the capabilities to help other companies with language/communication? That’s right – PR agencies! So, imho, PR agencies that have traditionally been strong on the strategy side of their practice will do very well to add the search capability.
John thanks for your comment. It seems to me like PR agencies are in a good position to take advantage of the changes in marketing. At our core, we develop a messaging platform and bring it out through channels. These messages are often reused in SEO and ad campaigns.
Do you work for a PR firm? I clicked on your name and couldn't get access to your profile. It sounds like your ideas are similar to mine and I would like to exchange more opinions on how PR firms can adapt to the changing marketplace.
I think the concept of a "lead" is so multi-dimensional that it's often hard to boil down what to credit / blame when you do / don't get leads. Certainly the bread crumbs that lead a potential customer to a web site deserve a lot of respect - and I think that's PR's most obvious role in the lead-gen effort. But once the potential customer has arrived at the web site, if the intrigue and authenticity of the content / design are totally lacking, they are going to disappear back into the night. So whose fault is that? PR? Marketing? Sales? All three?
I've generally been baffled at how unimaginative most IT vendors' web sites are. Now that I'm trying to build a product and running around with my hair on fire I'm definitely more aware of how easy it is for something so important to slip through the cracks when time / money are so fleeting.
But seriously - look at the mismatch between consumer-oriented sites and B2B-oriented web sites. I have a buddy who has done a lot of design for record co's like OM Records (http://www.om-records.com/), a small label in San Francisco. They do a lot of cool design stuff with Flash and create these really unique, immersive experiences for their users. And whenever one of their artists comes out with something big they come up with a section on their site that really does it justice. Look and feel seems to be a starting point, rather than something that's just slapped on at the end.
By contrast, most tech vendors are running plain old HTML template web sites with one or two PHP sign up forms and some lame VIZIO product graphics. Where is the creativity? Why is it that in the consumer world cool sites are the price of admission, but in B2B IT, they are the exception? It's ESPECIALLY unforgivable considering how many of the IT vendors whose sites suck the worst are huffing and puffing about the frontiers of new technology.
I think the ad agency's notion of a creative director needs to be brought into integrated marketing / publicity campaigns. The starting point should be really understanding the target audience and creating an amazing experience at the landing page. And *then* the marketing and PR lead- gen efforts (and how audiences are driven to that page) should be the focus. Too many folks out there seem to think that web site traffic automatically equals leads. I think the opportunity cost of driving people to a crappy web site (which I myself am currently guilty of since I just have an awful placeholder up, by the way) needs to be weighed more in discussions about lead gen.
Travis, thank you for taking the time to read the blog and express your thoughts.
One of the really interesting things that I've learned from my research into SEO techniques is that PR firms can take responsibility for what type of traffic is being pushed to the web site for the product. Too many PR people have too much pride in tier-1 article placements in WSJ, NYT, or the Economist and ignore what the impact of this placement is on lead generation. We should be more focused on how the product is positioned in the article, what type of person reads the article and what action they take after reading the article. Obviously, a tier-1 placement is awesome, but I think we need to take a balanced view of the value. Sales leads, web site traffic, and article mentions are all good. I believe that the PR people need to work with the SEO, advertisement, and web site people. If we all feel responsibility for sales lead generation, then we'll force ourselves to work together and deliver a better service for our clients.
I agree with you that it is a shared responsibility with the organization that develops the web site. However, I think that PR people often take too much of a hands-off approach. We say, "sure we can bring'um to the web site, but then it's up to the web site to convert." While I agree with this to a large extent, I'm no longer in complete agreement.
I want to be the type of PR person that understands how the client gets leads and where the problems occur. I want to get access to their Google Analytics and tools like LoopFuse, Marketo, or Eloqua. I don't think I'll be able to affect everything. I don't think the client is going to turn their web site design over to a PR firm. However, I do think that an understanding of the sales lead process will make my PR better.
At the end of the day, I'm looking to provide a better service to our clients. I think that the current economy will be a great opportunity to improve PR services across the industry.
We agree on almost every point here. Too many PR efforts out there are just about nebulous "noise" goals ... and aren't concerned enough about getting the right kind of noise. If the publicity goal is simply to get *anyone* to visit a web page, then that suggests the marketing and PR folks aren't really taking the sales goals to heart. It's not about # of clips, spikes in web site traffic and Alexa rankings - it's about sales. There have been many, many IT vendors over the last ten years that had tremendous #'s of clips, web traffic and site visitation and then flamed out tremendously.
The fact that all these new methods of analysis are available is exciting. And tech PR folks should be spending almost as much time getting their hands dirty with these new technologies as they are publicizing their clients' technologies.
I agree that Compete.com is extremely misleading - I have very little respect for their stats. I also think that Alexa is extremely easy to manipulate, and that it has way too much perceived credibility. I tried Quantcast and didn't find it very helpful. Google Analytics I find extremely reliable and useful - I just wish they had a public version (that in the same way as Alexa lets you see stats for sites other than those you've been permissioned in).
I haven't used Meltwater, LoopFuse, Marketo or Eloqua ... but based on what I have seen so far a lot of the "share of voice" and "sentiment" types of coverage overlays I have found to be very vaporous and not very scientific. The idea that you can write algorithms that auto-generate sentiment maps on top of coverage is laughable - it implies a level of "semantic" / "AI" machine interpretation that currently is not very reliable. Reuters has been pushing these semantic notions with things like Open Calais (http://www.opencalais.com/), and supposedly we've been on the cusp of machine interpretation of text for quite some time. But these things are only as good as the ontologies / taxonomies that they run on top of. And based on what I've seen so far in the existing IT taxonomies / ontologies - there is nothing out there that can match the insight / intelligence of a human being with actual experience in the IT industry. Deep Blue couldn't beat Kasparov at first, and the chess board has only 64 boxes in it. The IT industry has hundreds of thousands of themes and technology pieces, and there is no system out there that can analyze huge blocks of content and accurately apply sentiments or significance. I think it's very exciting what these new semantic technologies are exploring WRT text mining ... I just wish they'd be a little more frank about what they are currently good at versus their vision for the future, because a lot of it really is just hot air.
The other thing that I've experienced with the publicity metrics tools I've seen so far is that they are missing huge volumes of publications and authors that matter. They don't tell you what your share of voice is - they tell you what your share of voice within THEIR universe of tracked authors and content. Quite a difference between those two notions. And again - there is some misrepresentation about the scope of service, and it's a disservice to clients who think they're getting some holistic catch-all when they're only seeing a partial view.
It will be interesting to see how things progress. I think a lot of these current approaches have some serious flaws (with the exception of Google Analytics, which I think is fantastic). But obviously I can't criticize those tools that I've never even seen, so I will continue to look out for your commentary to lead me in the right direction.
Sales lead generationSales lead generation services and outsourced telemarketing services provided by a specialist sales lead generation company and telemarketing agency offering sales lead generation telemarketing services.
Post a Comment