Lead Conversion win rates

Transcription

1 Lead Conversion win rates Introduction The Lead Conversion team has expressed concerns about the low number of wins from this project. Based on a comprehensive database of thousands of leads over 6 years, KMA One has a lot of information about win rate norms. This information on norms is of great value when trying to understand the performance of a specific project. Therefore, we wanted to ensure that you have this information as you analyze this specific project. The purpose of this document, therefore, is as follows: Provide information on win rate norms Compare the early results of Lead Conversion to those norms Examine some hypotheses that have been offered as explanations of the current Lead Conversion win rates Review suggestions to improve win rates The next page provides a one-page Executive Summary of the contents. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 1 of 12

2 Executive summary Here are the main conclusions from this report. The rest of the report provides the statistics and logic to support each conclusion in the same order as this summary. Therefore, if you want a more detailed understanding, you should just read the whole report. On the other hand, if you wish to understand one or two specific paragraphs without reading the whole report, you can click on these paragraphs to be taken to the section that develops this specific conclusion. Historical data from thousands of leads suggest that a stream of leads generated by KMA One HiQ telemarketing should result in win rates of 22% to 25%. Because of the selective rate at which non-wins and wins happen, it is several months until the overall win rate becomes apparent. The reporting lag further extends the time before real results are known. Based on established norms, we believe that the Lead Conversion leads are too young for the current win rates to be predictive of final success. Three hypotheses for low win rates have been suggested: A too many leads are being given to Business Partners; B Leads are being given to poor performing partners; C Economic conditions are reducing win rates. Our conclusions on these are as follows: Hypothesis A is not valid. We will not increase win rates by giving more leads to the IBM sales channels. The opposite may be true. Hypothesis B is not valid. Where possible, the Lead Conversion leads have been assigned to BPs with good track records. Hypothesis C is valid. The 2002 economy is going to have a significant impact on the win rate of Lead Conversion. Twelve months ago we would have expected 25% wins. Today a win rate of 15% to 20% is more realistic. The minor adjustments of 100% Customer Tracking and re-treading non-win leads will help to ensure that we squeeze as many wins as possible out of the current program. Meanwhile, continuing to develop and tune this lead generation machine will ensure that you are ideally positioned to benefit from the recovery as soon as it starts hopefully very soon. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 2 of 12

3 Normal win rates The Lead Conversion leads have been generated by the same process used by KMA One for many other projects. Therefore, there is every reason to believe that these leads are similar to the thousands of qualified leads generated by the KMA One HiQ process over the last six years. This section shows the historical performance of these leads to provide norms against whic h the Lead Conversion win performance can be compared. Final Disposition of Leads Generated by KMA One 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 65.67% 72.51% 69.92% 74.09% 50% Closed Loss Win 40% 30% 20% 4.20% 3.54% 5.14% 5.55% 10% 30.13% 23.95% 24.94% 20.36% 0% The chart shows that win rates on KMA One leads have been between around 25% for several years. Notes: We are still tracking open leads from As these leads close we expect the win rate for 2001 to climb to around 22% data is not shown because most of the leads were generated too recently for this data to be meaningful. Historical norms suggest that you should expect Lead Conversion win rates to be around 22% to 25%. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 3 of 12

4 Sell cycle effect on timing The typical time from receiving a lead to winning the business is between two and six months. In addition there is often a measurement lag of one to two months between the sale taking place and the win being recorded in the lead management systems. As a result, the total time from a lead being routed until a win is reported is three to eight months. On the other hand, the time taken to close out a lead as a non-win is usually much less. A sales channel can decide not to bid on a lead in a few days; prospects who change their mind (decide to buy nothing) are more likely to do it after the first sales call than after three months. Even adding on the measurement lag, reports of non-wins often come in after two to four months. So, the non-wins get reported faster than the wins. Therefore, the win rate tends to follow a predictable time profile. This is illustrated below. What actually happens in the sales process Imagine 100 leads are launched on one day at the start of this period Month % Lead rate as sales actually happen 20% 15% 10% 5% Month Wins in month Closed non-win in month Win rate project to date % 5.5% 10% 15% 19% 22% 25% 25% As the chart shows, leads take a long time to close: Non-wins happen quickly: o No bid, No solution and Customer changed mind tend to happen quickly. Wins happen more slowly requiring a sales process with multiple stages: o Call on customer to get extra details o Create a proposal (even if it is just a letter) Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 4 of 12

5 o Customer gets alternative proposals o Customer submits chosen proposal to internal approval process o Purchase Order issued So the bad news happens quickly and the good news takes months to catch up. Therefore, win rates start out low and slowly increase. It usually takes six or seven months before the wins have happened and the final win rate becomes apparent. But the real world decisions do not get recorded in the lead management system in real time. At best there is a delay of several days. Often, the sales organization has to be reminded by the lead management system before updates are entered many weeks after the real event took place. The following chart shows the effects of a (conservative) one-month reporting lag. What we see in the measurements system Imagine 100 leads are launched on one day at the start of this period Month % Lead rate as reported by measurement systems 20% 15% 10% 5% Month Wins in month Closed non-win in month Win rate project to date % 5.5% 10% 15% 19% 22% 25% 25% As the chart shows, the reporting lag makes the win rate look even worse in the early months. It now takes four months before any significant win rate is seen, and a full eight months before all leads have been closed and the final win rate is known. Because of the selective rate at which non-wins and wins happen, it is several months until the overall win rate becomes apparent. The reporting lag further extends the time before real results are known. The following simplified profile can be used as a guide to set expectations on win rate measurements in the early stages of a project. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 5 of 12

6 Current win rate 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% If you are in the blue you are probably going to get very good results The normal win rate profile In the green your results should be average to good In the red may indicate below average results Average age of leads in months Since the leads from a campaign are usually generated over an extended period, the chart is based on the average age of the leads in months. Applying the win rate rule-of-thumb to Lead Conversion At time of writing we had the following situation: Leads generated = 305 Average age of leads = between 2 and 3 months Number of leads closed as non-wins = 112 Number of wins = 5 Current win rate = 4.5% The chart suggests that with an average lead age of two to three months the normal range of win rates is 0% to 10%. In other words, it is too early to say that the lead rate is below average. Indeed, even if the average age of the leads was 4 months, a win rate of 4.5% would not be in the red zone. Based on established norms, we believe that the Lead Conversion leads are too young for the current win rates to be predictive of final success. Despite the fact that we are not in the red area, we are not as far away from it as we would like to be. Therefore, we have continued our analysis of the data we have in order to see: If there are any other indicators of the final level of success. If we can identify any other success factors and having identified them, take a proactive approach to increasing success in future stages of the project. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 6 of 12

7 Hypotheses for explaining Lead Conversion win rates In the discussion on win rates we have already heard the team propose several hypotheses to explain the low number of leads. As we said in the previous section, we believe it is too early to be pessimistic about the final win rate. However, it is worth looking at each of these hypotheses to see if they seem to have any validity. Hypothesis A: Win rates would improve if we give the leads to IBM reps instead of BP firms Opinions have been expressed that BP Firms are not as effective in winning business as IBM reps. This is counter to our experience as the following chart shows. Final Disposition of Leads Generated by KMA One 100% 90% 80% 70% 66.91% 60% 79.33% 50% Closed Loss Win 40% 30% 5.21% 20% 10% 27.88% 1.23% 19.44% 0% BP IBM The chart covers results from several thousand leads over four years. It shows why we favor giving most leads to BPs. In fact the reason we have an average win rate close to 25% is because we give three quarters of our leads to BPs. If we gave three quarters to IBM, the average would be nearer to 21%. What this result does not mean: It does not mean that BP reps are better than IBM reps. At least some of the difference is due to attention and specialization. Most of the leads we deal with are in SMB and are much closer to the center of attention of many BP firms rather than IBMers. It does not mean that all leads should be given to BP firms. Certain leads should definitely be assigned to IBM. Example 1: Very large leads should go to IBM; they will get plenty of attention and the IBM rep will be able to coordinate the involvement of BPs Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 7 of 12

8 if appropriate. Example 2: Leads for Integrated Accounts and some Aligned Accounts should go to the IBM account team for reasons of account control. Example 3: Most leads with a heavy services requirement should go to IBM; BP firms can even be competitive with IBM for certain services. What this result does mean: We certainly should not change our lead assignment strategy to favor the IBM sales channels. We should continue to favor the BP channels at least for SMB account leads. Currently in Lead Conversion we have given 75% of the leads to BPs, which exactly matches our norm. Hypothesis A is not valid. We will not increase win rates by giving more leads to the IBM sales channels. The opposite may be true. Hypothesis B: Leads are being given to poor performing BPs KMA One tracks the win performance of BP firms. The following chart shows the win rates of the top 40 firms as of the end of June. Final Dispositions for the 40 BPs with the Best Win Rates 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% DMD Data Systems, Inc. Precision Computer Systems Harry Rhode Management Systems Robinson Network Systems EDS Prelude Systems Link Consulting Champion Computer Corporation AMS Services Eastern Technology Associates, Factor BPS (Business Partner Solutions) Source One, Inc Support Net, Inc. Ranco Systems, Inc. Prophet 21 Software Resources, Inc. Account Data Systems Tribute, Inc. Cherbonnier, Mayer & Associates Computer Resource 6000 Scott Computer Resources, Inc. Comtech Group USA, Inc. Saturn Business Systems McBride & Associates CTS Incorporated Software Information Systems Levi Ray & Shoup, Inc. Ciber Mainline Information Systems IDX Corporation Nxtrend Technology Information Technology Solution Technology, Inc. Inter-American Data, Inc. AKTion Associates, Inc. Data Systems International Berbee Information Networks Pinnacle Business Systems Aspen Consulting Win Loss Closed Partners with at least 20 leads disposed - top to bottom by win rate Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 8 of 12

9 The names of the BP firms have been cutoff on purpose, since we consider this information to be confidential and distributed only on a need-to-know basis. Each horizontal stripe represents one firm, with the blue part representing the percentage of the leads assigned to them that have resulted in a win. As you can see, win rates for these top-40 firms vary from over 90% down to 32%. So, even the 40 th firm beats the average lead rate of 25% by seven percentage points. We only consider these results statistically significant if the firm has received and closed out at least 20 KMA One leads. Since KMA One leads are of a very consistent standard, this provides a reliable measure of the ability of a BP firm to execute against a good lead. Based on this standard we have results from over 100 additional firms who don t make the top 40 because their win rates range from 31% down to 0%! When KMA One is given the flexibility to choose the BP firm, we use a knowledge-based system that selects all firms that are eligible to take the lead (by contract and geography) and then chooses from the list of eligible partners based on past performance. You will not be surprised to learn that the win rates shown above are the major reason for selecting a specific partner. We do not always have complete flexibility to choose the firm. Often no top-40 firm is geographically close enough to the prospect. Sometimes there is an existing relationship that has to be honored. Sometimes the customer requests a particular firm. Sometimes the sponsor of the campaign insists that we use a particular list of firms. As a result, only around a quarter of our leads are assigned to firms with win rates in the top 40. In the case of Lead Conversion, very few restrictions have been placed on the algorithm for assigning leads, and an average number of leads have been assigned to the top-40 firms. Hypothesis B is not valid. Where possible, the Lead Conversion leads have been assigned to BPs with good track records. Hypothesis C: It s the economy stupid! It has been a decade since this phrase was used to explain the most important factor in the 1992 Presidential Election. It remains as insightful and accurate today in the world of win rates as it is in the world of political elections! It will not have escaped your attention that the general economic environment is worse today than at any time in the last decade. This is bound to affect the results of marketing campaigns. You will notice that so far we have used historical results to establish norms against which to compare Lead Conversion. But if the economy of 2002 is very different from previous years, the norms may not be applicable. We try to avoid hiding behind gross explanations like the economy without trying to drill done to more specific factors and understand the effects in more detail. You will not be surprised to know that we have been worrying about these factors quite a bit this year and trying to understand the impact on the results we can create for you. Here are some of the things we have found: Lead rates obtained by KMA One have been down for over a year. Even before 9/11 we started to see lower lead rates. The decline is significant, but not dramatic around 30%. In other words, if a similar Lead Conversion effort had been launched a year earlier, we Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 9 of 12

10 would have generated around 435 leads by now compared to the 305 actually generated in We are certain that this decline is based on economic conditions and business confidence. KMA One has been careful to maintain the quality of the leads we generate. (You can imagine, as lead rates decline it is very tempting to lower standards in an attempt to meet the expectations of the clients.) In the long term, we believe that our clients would rather maintain standards, even if this means having fewer leads. Even though there are fewer, if theleads are of the same quality, shouldn t the win rate be the same? Unfortunately, the answer is no. General economic conditions affect every stage of the sales process. The same conditions that lower the lead rate will also lower the win rate by affecting the part of the buying cycle between qualification and purchase. Therefore, when we see lead rates declining because of the general environment we expect a similar decline in win rates. As part of KMA One s standard lead management process we track 50% of our leads directly with the customer throughout the buying cycle. This Customer Tracking provides very valuable information for understanding why we win and why we don t. In the last six months we have been getting results from Customer Tracking that are very different from normal. Firstly, we have seen a decline in win rates based on these customer reports. Second, and more important, we have seen a massive increase in the number of customers who are delaying their decisions. Typical responses are like this. We still want to do it. We still need to do it. But it has been put off for at least a quarter. Such delays have always been common in the sales process. But this year they have become very common. In the past the delays were often a couple of months this year the delays are one or two quarters. Here is our summary of the effect of the 2002 economy on win rates: Win rates will probably decline from traditional levels (25%) to somewhere between 15% and 20%. Some wins will be delayed by customer budget pressures. Traditionally we have seen most of the wins happen between three and seven months after the lead is assigned. This year we expect to see the wins spread over a longer period. We have a concern about the staying power of the sales channels. Most sales organizations (IBM and BP) are being driven by short-term (quarterly or monthly) goals. This has been a long-term problem since the buying cycle for many of our leads has always been three to seven months. In 2002, as the average buying cycle is being further extended, we are afraid that more leads will be rejected or neglected because they fall outside of the attention span of the available sales channels. Hypothesis C is valid. The economy is going to have a significant impact on the win rate of Lead Conversion. Twelve months ago we would have expected 25% wins. Today we think 15% to 20% is more realistic. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 10 of 12

11 Proposals for improving Lead Conversion win rates Obviously, we shouldn t take the effects of an economic downturn without fighting back. So, what can we do? We have three suggestions, two minor ones and one fundamental. Two minor suggestions. We suggest that Customer Tracking should be deployed on 100% of your leads (instead of the normal 50% that is built into the project). Assuming that we generate a total of 800 leads this year, the additional cost of this tracking would be around $4,800. This is recommended for two reasons. o This is a defensive move to protect against the mismatch between the extended buying cycle and the attention span of the sales channels. One of the functions of Customer Tracking is to act as a safety net to find situations where the sales process is in danger of dying and apply emergency CPR. This CPR is in the form of assisting the currently assigned sales organization, or reassigning the lead to another organization. Extending Customer Tracking to 100% of the LC leads would extend the safety net to all leads. o The major justification for Customer Tracking is to obtain market intelligence on what is happening in the buying/sales process. In normal times, attempting a sample of 50% of the leads allows us to collect enough information to understand the process, spot any trends and apply corrections to the other tracking data that comes from the sales channels. In these less-than-normal times, it may be prudent to have additional intelligence in real time that will allow us to better understand and react to buying behavior. We recommend re-treading all of the leads that do not result in a win. Re-treading simply means putting the contacts back into the program so that they get a leadgeneration call a few weeks after the rep has given up on the original lead. Our experience is that this will generate more leads. Form the generation of the original lead we know that we have a valid contact who was thinking of spending money. The failure to sell may merely represent a delay or a temporary change of mind. Or there may be a change of priorities resulting in different opportunities. Or the sales channel may have just done a poor job. Or the prospect may have decided to buy a competitive solution and we might catch them while they are in the throes of buyer s remorse. In any case, this is an inexpensive way to make sure that we squeeze all of the opportunity out of the buyers we have found despite the effects of the economy. The total cost of re-treading all nonwin leads in 2002 should be around $10,000 (assuming 800 leads generated and 17% win rate). The fundamental reaction to an economic downturn Our fundamental suggestion is simple: keep generating high quality leads. Even though in this stage of the project the economy may reduce lead rates, extend sell cycles and reduce win rates, the expense to revenue ratio of this phase will still be favorable in the long term. The strategy for being a real winner in a downturn is to have a healthy pipeline of leads to take advantage of the recovery when it starts. The losing strategy is to wait until there are clear signs of recovery and then try to generate demand too late to take advantage of the surge of buying that results from the wave of pent-up demand. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 11 of 12

12 The minor adjustments of 100% Customer Tracking and re-treading non-win leads will help to ensure that we squeeze as many wins as possible out of the current program. Meanwhile, continuing to develop and tune this lead generation machine will ensure that you are ideally positioned to benefit from the recovery as soon as it starts hopefully very soon. Created on July 19, 2002 I:\Lead Conversion\Reports\Lead Conversion Win Rates.doc Page 12 of 12