The dangerous confusion of sales and content marketing

Share

sales and content marketing

By Tom Webster, {grow} Community Member

Recently, I had the pleasure of attending a keynote speech by Daniel Pink, author of To Sell Is Human: The Surprising Truth About Moving Others, at the Inbound conference in Boston. In his speech, he asked an audience of roughly 14,000 marketers “How many of you sell?” Nearly every hand went up–it seems like a reasonable thing to agree with these days, right?

Pink went on to talk about how sales used to be in the days prior to the Internet by giving the example of the used car salesperson. Twenty years ago, if you walked into a dealership, the salesperson had ALL the information—what the invoice price was, how much the options really cost, how much your car was worth, and so on. The buyer, however, had little information. In short, it was a time of information asymmetry, which resulted in a profitable situation for the seller.

Today, however, a car buyer walks into a dealership with near total information—sometimes more than the salesperson! So how can the seller succeed? Pink argues that salespeople need to become “servant sellers,” providing helpful information, answering questions, and generally providing a good experience—before any sale is made.

Sounds a lot like content marketing, doesn’t it?

Why you should be worried about content marketing

In fact, that’s exactly what content marketing does, and Pink left that audience of 14,000 marketers fired up with the charge to become helpful, servant sellers by creating content that is helpful and useful, so that the well-equipped buyer will inexorably come to the right decision—to buy our products and services.

Think about what actually happened after that speech, however: 14,000 marketers left the room fired up to take what a good salesperson is supposed to say to a customer, and…uh…write it down.

Are we sure that’s marketing?  Because it sounds like what sales has become, only without a commission.

Frankly, I’m worried about content marketers. The field has taken Google’s Zero Moment of Truth stat, that online buyers consult 10.4 pieces of information prior to a sale, a little bit too close to heart.  Try this: Google “how to create a content calendar” and tell me how many answers you get. Look also at the authors of those articles—the first 10 pages are all companies that want to sell you something related to building a content calendar, right?

Sometimes all you want is a burger, hold the content

Now think of an electric car you want to buy (if you do.) Dollars to donuts you WANT to buy a Tesla, and you didn’t read 10.4 pieces of jack squat to get there.

You want a Tesla, because you WANT a Tesla.

We are irrational actors, and we certainly don’t need 10 pieces of data to decide to buy. We do, however, consult 10 pieces of data AFTER our irrational brain comes to this decision, in order to justify a purchase decision that we’ve likely already made.

Don’t believe me? Consider that the year before Google’s 10.4 stat, in 2010, that number was a little over 5. Did our brains change? Did our cognitive processes really require twice as much information as they did the year before? Patently absurd. Yet someone is out there, writing article number 577,000,001.

Does content really contribute to sales?

The proliferation of nearly identical content has reduced the value of that content to something approaching zero, which leaves the odds against that content actually contributing to a sale in a meaningful way as quite slim, indeed.

Think about this: what would cause you to lose your job? What would have to go down? You very likely had one of two answers: Sales, and Leads.

Consider the former. If Sales are down, and marketers get fired, doesn’t that seem a little perverse? Shouldn’t the sales team get the blame here? These metrics do not help you—and only serve to confuse the sales and marketing functions in ways that don’t help you, help your organization, or help you with the goal of ANY business: to create a customer.

That leaves leads—which seems more reasonable, right? If we are providing more leads, but the sales team doesn’t close those leads, we’re safe, aren’t we?

Am I really a lead?

Well, consider this: have you ever signed up for a webinar or white paper, and then gotten an absolutely cringeworthy, ham-handed sales call as a result? I sure have. For a long time I blamed the sales team—their training, hiring, and (frankly) ability to interact with humans. But I’ve come to a different realization.

If I watch a webinar to learn something, am I really a lead for that company?

Overwhelmingly, those of us who sign up for these content pillars have NO interest in buying from the company. We just want the content. But marketing dutifully delivers our contact info into the hands of the sales team regardless, to give us a one-degree-warmer than cold call.

Who’s really to blame when those leads don’t convert?

The quantity and quality of leads is a trailing variable, and not the end itself. Our goal as marketers is to understand the consumer, speak with their voice at the highest levels of your company, and create a marketing-led product that people (and not your product team) WANT. It’s not to serve as a bullhorn for the company, pointed out into the ether—it’s to be a bullhorn for the customer, pointed at the CEO, the product team, and yes—the sales team.

The dangerous confusion of sales and marketing has turned many content marketers into Smarketalsers: salespeople without the upside. And what gets lost here is what the central goal of Marketing-With-A-Capital-M really is: uncovering or creating demand. It’s not to “sell” a product created by a passionate founder or product team in a vacuum, but rather to ensure that every product we create is so imbued with the needs, wants, and desires of our customers that a sale is inevitable.

I leave you with this: “A good deal of what is called ‘marketing’ today is at best organized, systematic selling,” a quote that perfectly sums up my argument. Those words were written by Peter Drucker — more than 50 years ago. Drucker also wrote that “Marketing is the distinguishing, unique function of the business.”

Unique and distinguishing. It’s a high bar, but it’s the right bar—and the key to fighting the dangerous creep of Smarketalesing.

tom websterTom Webster is a Vice President of Edison Research and co-host of amazing The Marketing Companion podcast.

Illustration courtest Flickr CC and Jim Linwood

Book link is affiliate link.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
{grow}

Share

Non-Facebook Causes Site May Cause Confusion

Share

Causes650It seems like everybody is getting active these days — well, socially active, at least. So it follows that depending on your political viewpoint or social leanings, you might be supporting a lot of different causes from social sites like Facebook. And if you aren’t supporting any causes on Facebook yet, you’ll likely be surprised to know that you have more than one option to do so, and it’s kind of confusing to sort out, so I’ve done the work for you.

With Facebook, it’s pretty darn easy to go online and search for the issue you’re interested in. Can’t find it? Well, just go ahead and create your own cause:

FacebookCreateAPage

You COULD do that, but there’s another way to go about it, a BETTER way — and one that works with Facebook, but is also separate from it.

San Francisco-based Causes created its own social media platform — one that hooks in quite nicely with Facebook, but allows for a bit more functionality and freedom than what you’ll find going through that whole page-creation route.

With Causes, you start off by picking stickers that show what you care about:

CausesStickers

After that, you find people who support like-minded causes and then work to bring in more friends to join the movement. And then they invite friends, and then THEY invite … you get the idea. It can grow quickly.

One of the main differences between Causes and Facebook causes is that Causes offers the ability to let followers make pledges. Those might be pledges of time, money or materials, but as long as the cause you are interested in meets with Cause’s criteria, you can set up your own campaign, communicate with followers, invite new ones and crowd-source solutions.

Just got a nice pledge or a big donation? Post about it to your group, but then also share it on Facebook, AND Twitter and LinkedIn. So Causes offers more social consciousness capabilities for your buck (both are actually free, though).

The ease of fundraising and pledging figures prominently in a cause, so although a Facebook cause page is great for raising awareness about your issue (on Facebook only), highlighting upcoming events or even pulling in new volunteers for the cause, it’s sorely lacking when it comes to financials, and that can make or break many causes.

When it comes time to create a cause, you’ll likely have limited time to sort out the particulars, so know that if you want expanded reach or if you want to raise money, your time is best spent using the external Causes (and leaving the native Facebook cause creations to those who haven’t read this post!).

Murray Newlands is an entrepreneur, business advisor, and online-marketing professional. In 2013, he founded TheMail.com. He is a columnist for Entrepreneur.

AllFacebook

Share