Highly Competitive - software industry insights

That Pesky Qualitative Side of Digital Customer Engagement

 

With the growth of digital and interactive marketing efforts, a great deal of focus is on customer experience and engagement – and how to measure customer engagement on digital properties. Some marketing practitioners seem to think that understanding more about "customer engagement" means that they can control the customer experience. Always remember: only the customer owns the customer experience, which is the customer's personal takeaway from interactions with your company, whether digital or in person. It is this fact that brings in the qualitative side when trying to assess customer engagement on digital properties.

Engagement - like influence - is at heart an abstract.

For purposes of customer engagement on the web, engagement can be thought of as the measurement of attention to something -- which takes us to another ambiguity: what constitutes customer attention to a company's web presence? For each company, what comprises indicators of engagement can be fairly unique, generally derived from a matrix of attributes, in turn leading to a matrix of metrics. As web presence becomes more far-flung and sophisticated, the metrics, tools, data, and analyses become more complex – and in some ways, more subjective.

Not only is the level of engagement unique to each customer, it can be unique to each web property. Selection of the right metrics for each digital property becomes fluid, not easy or black-and-white. For the quantitative side, it's best to think in terms of customer interaction categories and what it takes to understand customer behavior. The overall picture comes from quantitative analytics results that are tempered by the understanding that customer engagement has a distinct and elusive qualitative side.

The qualitative side of digital engagement takes us into the messier world of sentiment analysis, which is still a work-in-process, as well as semantic/content analysis. Demarcations are likely to start blurring between what matters for customer engagement on the corporate website and what matters on social sites, also along qualitative lines.

In the category of not everything that counts can be measured: listening, understanding, acting on what customers/buyers have to say are among the most important corporate 'to-dos' regarding real engagement. Responding to actual customer behavior and interactions is a much better route, than trying to "control" customers.

If you really want to touch the customer in a positive way, keep authenticity in your marketing efforts. It's not a matter of trying to make customers do what you want (which won't ever really succeed) – it's about digitally providing worthwhile content, offers, and interactions that merit customer attention.

 

Source: performanceconnections.com

 

 

This post was written as part of the IBM for Midsize Business program, which provides midsize businesses with the tools, expertise and solutions they need to become engines of a smarter planet. I've been compensated to contribute to this program, but the opinions expressed in this post are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions.

 

 

About the author: Julie Hunt understands the overlap and convergence of many business processes and software solutions that once were thought of as "separate" – and how this impacts software Vendors and Buyers, as well as the strategies that enterprises implement for how technology supports the business and its customers. Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Strategies for B2B Software Solutions: Working from the Customer Perspective

 

Goals and Metrics – Measuring Customer Engagement on the Web

 

The notions of web presence and customer engagement aren’t new -- but are gaining in interest as web presence expands beyond the corporate website and as companies must know more about effective means of connecting to customers. Many questions swirl around understanding what engagement is, what defining characteristics should be measured and why, how to align metrics to goals, and which metrics matter the most. Context – or even hierarchies of context – plays a major role for selecting metrics, analyzing the data returned by metrics, and understanding what to do with the data. 

Engagement - like influence - is at heart an abstract. For purposes of customer engagement on the web, engagement can be thought of as the measurement of attention to something, which takes us to the ‘can of worms’ of what constitutes customer attention to a company’s web presence. For each company, what comprises engagement can be fairly unique, generally derived from a matrix of attributes, in turn leading to a matrix of metrics. As web presence becomes more far-flung and sophisticated, the metrics, tools, data, and analyses become more complex.

Which are the right attributes and metrics? For each company, they are the ones that measure actions and events that relate to key business context and goals. Many different domain experts offer many different kinds of metrics from which to choose, any of which could be relevant to individual companies. Once a matrix of metrics has been selected, it’s likely that each organization will need to constantly assess that set of metrics for validity and effectiveness – and that the change of metrics selection will be continuous, hopefully to reflect: actions taken in response to analysis, new markets explored and company innovations.

Jumping into an assessment of customer engagement is not a simple undertaking and will take a lot of work. Monitoring web presence on sites other than the corporate website is still a new undertaking, with the tech tools still evolving. Also in continuing evolution is the understanding of how to interpret data collected and how to use that data to make decisions for solution offerings, customer connections and communication, and business strategy. A company will need to define both the current status and the desired status for what constitutes an ‘engaged customer’, yet another definition set that should continuously evolve.

 

Why Understanding Engagement Matters

Most organizations have moved well beyond clocking the number of hits on a web page. Not only do these organizations have a tall order to provide personalized experiences as well as high quality content on the corporate website, but visitors to the site must be sufficiently engaged to take action. What sort of action is taken depends on the company’s strategy for web presence and customer engagement, further in support of overall business strategies and goals.

Forrester analyst Stephen Powers covers web content management solutions, and to a certain extent, web engagement.  In The Online Customer Engagement Software Ecosystem, 2010 Powers discusses engagement:

Customer Engagement Remains Top Of Mind For Companies

The uncertain economy has increased pressure on companies to engage customers more efficiently, especially via online channels that offer lower-cost ways to interact with customers, enable better lead generation, and increase customer retention rates. This is likely why investments in software to manage customer experiences has held up relatively well in the current economy. 

Our most recent data suggests this trend will continue into the next year. Consider that in 2010, 51% of organizations plan content management implementations, more than one-third will implement or upgrade customer relationship management tools, and one in four is planning marketing automation software investments. 

 

An article in Forbes brings up the tough part of measuring engagement – the highly qualitative nature of engagement, no matter the context:

For the past year or so, the conversation around how to "engage" consumers online has spiked among publishers, media companies, advertisers and agencies. As Michael Mendenhall, CMO of Hewlett-Packard said, "Marketers monitor the front end and the back end so they see click-streams and commerce. ... The difficult part is the qualitative part in between, which is the level of engagement."

The qualitative aspect of web engagement takes us into the messier world of sentiment analysis, which is still a work-in-process, and that of semantic/content analysis. Demarcations are likely to start blurring between what matters for customer engagement on the corporate website and what matters on social sites, also along qualitative lines.

Web analytics domain expert Avinash Kaushik wrote a blog post in 2007 entitled “Engagement" Is Not A Metric, It's An Excuse providing this view on qualitative versus quantitative aspects of engagement:

At the heart of it, engagement tries to measure something deeply qualitative.
Yet most efforts to measure it in our world tend to be hard core quantitative (translate that as: "we have clickstream, let's take our interpretations of what could possibly be happening, now find clicks that can carry the burden of our personal impositions, voila! here's engagement").

The reason engagement has not caught on like wild fire (except in white papers and analyst reports and pundit posts) is that it is a "heart" metric we are trying to measure with "head" data, and engagement is such a utterly unique feeling for each website that it will almost always have a unique definition for each and every website.

 

Since 2007, quite a bit more progress has been made in the how and why of web engagement metrics, but some of the problems remain. Distributed web presence outside the corporate website has added another dimension to the qualitative elusiveness of web/customer engagement. User-generated content in forums, blogs, microblogs, communities must be found, assessed for sentiment and key content. Processes for engaging the author of the UGC must be designed to try to open more communication channels for customers. And then we have to figure out how to measure all of this in meaningful ways.

 

 Choosing Effective Metrics

Not everything that counts can be measured. Not everything that can be measured counts.

-- Albert Einstein

 

So…there are an overwhelming number of individual metrics that relate to customer / web engagement, the customer experience on a particular website, both in qualitative and quantitative terms. Web engagement not only pertains to company-owned web assets but to the many social sites that continue to proliferate on the Internet. Companies must decide where and how they wish to monitor engagement, using metrics and the tools to do so. Before choosing metrics, a clear understanding of the company’s hierarchy of strategies, programs and objectives must be in place.

Not only do high level business strategies impact the selection of attributes to monitor and measure, but other levels of strategies and objectives matter too. Individual initiatives designed by product marketing, marketing and sales groups have specific achievable components and objectives. Web engagement metrics will align to levels of program objectives as well as to the company’s ‘big picture’, essentially a hierarchy of metrics building toward overall business strategies, and toward building future direction. Metrics only have meaning if proper analysis is conducted, results examined against objectives, and if processes for taking action are in place, with decisions and next steps activated. (And then repeat….)

I’m not going to provide an overview of the vast array of tech tools available to assist in monitoring and measuring web/customer engagement. The solution space is in early stages, so there is much still to do to ‘master’ the world of engagement metrics. Suffice it to say, that there is a lot of work going on to develop and refine tech offerings.

In the category of ‘not everything that counts can be measured”: Listening, understanding, acting on  what engaged customers/buyers have to say are among the most important corporate ‘to-dos’ regarding real engagement. Companies must also heed the contextual relevance of any customer-generated content, for real understanding; content cannot be yanked from its context and analyzed in a vacuum.

  

Different Strokes for Different Folks – The Many Faces of Engagement Metrics

I’m going to run through a number of metric matrices proposed by several sources to illustrate different approaches and ways of organizing engagement measurement.

  

>> Web Properties Owned by Organizations

In the Forrester report Marketing’s New Key Metric: Engagement, 2007, four main components are identified as attributes for customer engagement:

Involvement – Measurable aspects of an individual connection to an organization or brand

Interaction – Depth/breadth of an individual connection

Intimacy – Sentiment of an individual towards organization / brand

Influence – Indicators that an individual will encourage someone else to visit, consider, buy

 

 
 
Forrester: Marketing’s New Key Metric: Engagement, 2007

 

Eric Peterson, of Web Analytics Demystified and well-known in this field, published a multi-part blog series in 2006 on engagement (I recommend reading the entire series). Here are a couple of his notions regarding the selection of metrics:

Engagement goals:

(Example) - Based on my knowledge of my site visitors and their long-term usage patterns, my engagement goals are as follows:

• I would like that visitors would view and interact with certain content on my site;
• I would like visitors to subscribe to this weblog to stay connected;
• I would like visitors to maintain a low recency with my content, regardless of whether they’re reading blog posts or viewing pages on my site;
• When visitors are on my web site, I would like them to spend a reasonable amount of time interacting with my content;
• When visitors return to my site, I prefer they remember my domain name and return to my site directly, either via a bookmark or by directly entering my URL into their browser.

Key areas for metrics:

…we had been talking about how to measure engagement on their web site. We’d gone round-and-round on ideas about what constitutes an “engaged” visitor and narrowed it down to a few key areas:

• The visitor views “critical” content on the web site
• The visitor has returned to the web site recently
• The visitor returns directly to the web site some of the time
• Some high percentage of the visitor’s sessions are “long” sessions
• If available, the visitor is subscribed to at least one available site feed

  

More recently, Chris Meares, senior data analyst at philly.com, home of the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News, applied his understanding of Eric Peterson’s work in engagement by adapting a white paper called “Measuring the Unmeasurable: Visitor Engagement” by Peterson and Joseph Carrabis.  Meares collaborated with Ryan Davis, the president of Philly.com, and Wendy Warren, the vice president for content, on their formula for measuring visitor engagement. The result so far is:

 

C_i — Click Index: visits must have at least 6 pageviews, not counting photo galleries

D_i — Duration Index: visits must have spend a minimum of 5 minutes on the site

R_i — Recency Index: visits that return daily

L_i — Loyalty Index: visits that either are registered at the site or visit it at least three times a week

B_i — Brand Index: visits that come directly to the site by either bookmark or directly typing www.philly.com or come through search engines with keywords like “philly.com” or “inquirer”

I_i — Interaction Index: visits that interact with the site via commenting, forums, etc.

P_i — Participation Index: visits that participate on the site via sharing, uploading pics, stories, videos, etc.

 

Tracking site visits with this level of specificity is time-consuming - Meares says he devotes about a third of his full-time job to analysis of the engagement equation — but it has produced some interesting information. For instance: “We’re definitely seeing the impact of social media and how it provides engaged visitors.” While Google and Yahoo provide a lot of traffic, the visits that they send to Philly.com don’t tend to be engaged. Only 20.34 percent of visits that come through Google are engaged visits. In comparison, 33.64 percent of visits that come via Facebook are engaged.

 

  

>> Customer Engagement on Other Sites

Over in that other world of web presence and engagement, social media sites, many domain experts and proponents have been working through definitions and metrics for customer/visitor engagement as well. The discussion of attributes and metrics for engagement on social sites has great relevance to those monitoring engagement on corporate websites, since many companies have set up their own social sites for forums, communities, blogging and so on. And of course, these companies pursue monitoring the many sites that do not belong to them.

 

Jeremiah Owyang has written numerous posts in his blog on the topic of what constitutes engagement and what metrics are useful for participants in social media sites. Here’s one version from 2007:

My working definition:

“Engagement indicates the level of authentic involvement, intensity, contribution, and ownership”

 

It’s possible for me to shorten it to:

“Apparent Interest” (and later whittled down to “Interest”)

 

Engagement Formula: 

“Attention + Interaction + Velocity + Authority + Relevant Attributes (variable)”

 

 

  


http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/category/social-media-measurement/

 

 

Social / Customer Engagement – another view

 

 
 
http://emediavitals.com/article/37/emerging-web-metrics-focus-engagement-audience-quality

 

 

 

Related Links

Goodbye Corporate Website – Hello Web Presence Management Framework?

Moving beyond WCM - Web Experience Management software solutions & markets

Time Travel Required: Finding #WEM in the 2010 Gartner Magic Quadrant for Web Content Management

SMB / Mid-Market B2B Software vendors - Findability + web presence + social: attracting the “customer as buyer”

B2B WEM / WCM Software Vendors Targeting Mid-Market customers: stay where you are!  

B2B Social CRM for Software Vendors and the Lifecycle of Customer Experience

Content Marketing Strategy for B2B Software Vendors: Starring the ‘New’ White Paper

The Ever-Expanding Importance of Analytics–True Intelligence for Business

 

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished software industry analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Strategic Product & Market Intelligence Services

A Review of “The New Small”

 

 

 

The subtitle for “The New Small” is: how a new breed of small businesses is harnessing the power of emerging technologies. So first it is important to understand which sorts of companies have become “The New Small” – to be able to appreciate the lessons and guidance provided by Phil Simon in his new book. The New Small are forward-moving, interested in varying degrees of business innovation, reasonably tech savvy, deeply interested in customer success with their services or products, and take the life of their businesses very personally since they are usually doing something they love.

 

The New Small companies do a better job of understanding needs and goals of their businesses – and their customers – before bringing in technology. These New Small-ers want to use tech when it makes sense for their businesses but want to find tech that can provide what they need on an out-of-the-box basis. Then the New Small spend their extra time on customizations – not for the technology – but for the experiences that their customers have with their products and services.

And so in defining the characteristics of companies that adhere to the New Small, Phil also has had the smarts to let the customer stories educate his readers on how the New Small works. Extensive detail is provided in each story to show the business context, how each company embodies the New Small, as well as what worked, what didn’t work – and very importantly, why for each. These real world examples serve to inspire other potential New Small-ers while providing the how-tos.

Phil presents in each story all the salient points to consider when looking at technology as an enabler of the “business of the business”. Risks, rewards, trade-offs are considered, and the questions to ask for decision-making.  “One size does not fit all” when it comes to tech and the New Small – Phil very wisely shows possibilities without proselytizing a sole path to success.

In some ways The New Small is also a very useful compendium of recent publications that cover biz + tech since Phil makes rich use of material from these publications, in context with the different sections of the book. The structure of the book lends itself to a workbook use – in fact I’d love to see Phil add a companion workbook to The New Small, to further aid business innovation through the smart use of tech.

 

Phil Simon’s third book has a special place in my world since I helped bring it into “being”, along with many of Phil’s friends and colleagues. Phil chose to completely own the publishing process and started that process by raising money on Kickstarter to help fund the publication. Phil also had a direct role in the design of the book, and is now busy promoting, which undoubtedly has presented many adventures in further exploring the potential of companies that want to embrace New Small-ism.

 

Related Links:

Achieving the Social Business, Inside and Out

Selling Software Solutions to SMB Markets – Who and How To Target

SMB / Mid-Market B2B Software vendors - Findability + web presence + social: attracting the “customer as buyer”

  

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished software industry analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Strategic Product & Market Intelligence Services

 

Levels of Social – and Integration – Cut Across Enterprises

When I started writing articles for my blog Highly Competitive, I had in the back of my mind the “classic” advice for professional blogging: pick one main area to cover and as such, show my SME-ness for that area. So I should have selected a particular software solution space and stuck to it.

 

Well that doesn’t really work for me and isn’t even realistic for anyone analyzing today’s software infrastructures in most companies. As such, I find myself covering multiple software topics, largely due to my diverse software tech background, and it all makes sense as we see more and more overt overlap and interconnection between the different applications of any-size enterprises, and between the activities and processes of how enterprises do business. As enterprises become more customer-focused (outside-in), what has become especially interesting is the evolution of change that eventually will produce Social businesses.

 

Starting with systems infrastructure, many enterprises have multiple points of integration and interoperability. It is this interrelatedness of systems that increases the business value to the enterprise. Integrations and interconnections are happening at multiple levels in businesses: their IT/application infrastructures, the applications themselves, how teams function in the enterprise interacting with systems and people, and how companies are evolving for doing business and engaging buyers. To become an effective Social Business, enterprises will have to nurture integrated internal systems and processes, as well as social strategies and practices for external and internal collaboration and communication.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enterprises Can’t be Built on Silos – First, a Look at Internal Interoperability

It has become more and more clear that enterprises work better with overtly interconnected systems and business processes. Silos within enterprises both for systems and internal processes have caused a lot of problems. Enterprises, no matter the size, cannot have teams, or systems, operating in vacuums. Where too many silos persist, businesses are doomed, whether the silos are technology or human based.

 

Understanding how to reduce duplication in systems infrastructure, business processes, team activities, and strategy implementation does much to improve the health of the enterprise. Enterprises want to achieve efficiencies of operation and want to do more with fewer resources, so the elimination of duplications in systems and teams, and the increase of integration (systems) and collaboration (people) is essential.

 

Since we’re talking about the integrated enterprise, I see enterprise data integration as an illustrative “metaphor”. In most cases data integration endeavors to cut through almost everything in systems infrastructure and involves multiple teams, both IT and Business. Building really good DI processes requires the involvement and collaboration of many teams. Data integration solutions cannot be built in a vacuum to be effective; DI initiatives embody a metaphoric sense of interrelationships and interoperability: process, collaboration, disparate data feeds (information sources) coming together, business rules, business needs. People, business process and technology have worked together to achieve the right results. 

 

 

Social Capabilities and Strategies Appearing in Many Enterprise Software Solutions

Increasingly, enterprises are introducing and integrating social media for internal and external applications.  And now many “traditional” enterprise solutions are adding / integrating social capabilities, to enhance the usability and relevance of these solutions.

 

Business cases for social media include: internal implementations for enhanced collaboration and communication purposes for employees; external initiatives for better engagement and support of customers/buyers. Many social media guidelines rightly advise that introducing social practices and technology into an enterprise should come after a thorough understanding of what is to be accomplished, and then after an articulation of the strategy. Additionally, businesses have to figure out what cultural changes need to take place internally, for social to make a big difference. Business social process is something that people have to do authentically. Technology and tools do matter as a means of enacting and managing social business processes, but they are no substitute for strategic planning, best practices, real goals, and serious consideration for the human participants.

 

Beyond the social media technology that is being adopted by enterprises, many “traditional” enterprise applications are becoming more “social”. This is reasonable considering that software solutions are for use by people, whether employees, customers/buyers, or partners. Most software solutions are components of people-oriented processes. These “socializing” solutions include: BPM, BI, CRM, ERP, internal collaboration / intranet, and content management.

 

Recently Forrester’s Connie Moore - @cmooreforrester - commented on Twitter: “social computing has become the tipping point for businesses and vendors finally marrying collaboration and process” and then “Collaboration between business and business and business and IT is core to any successful #bpm effort.” Connie Moore has extended her coverage of BPM to include social capabilities that will transform BPM solutions.

 

For many software industry analysts and writers, there are no longer clear demarcations between software solution spaces.  The “classic” approach of separate software solution categories being covered by SME writers is giving way to analysis that acknowledges the interdependencies of different kinds of software solutions.  We are seeing more collaborative work across solutions, with social computing as a common thread of discussion.  Analyst firms like Altimeter Group and Forrester are working with more collaborative efforts from their staff analysts across formerly separate software solution spaces to reflect the realities of how enterprises operate.

 

 

And People Complete the Integrated Social Business

My tech background has a markedly strong emphasis on people since software companies are very people-intensive enterprises.  Many teams need to collaborate to accomplish company goals and customer needs, with the result that most teams are customer-oriented. If you have a career in software technology, it is essential to recognize the value of people, especially customers. Not surprisingly, many customers of software technology are driving the change to Social Business where the focus is more on people and less on tech.

 

It’s not just about why people buy or make technology decisions but about respecting people who are trying to accomplish business tasks and solve real problems, and who just want their software to work as advertised without a lot of pain to get there. Software technology ultimately is a product to be sold, so the focus must be on the purpose and real value the technology provides customers.  

 

On the software vendor side, people collaboration should be a top priority: collaborations to sell solutions, collaborations to contribute to customer/buyer success, collaboration with partners and customers for success. Businesses can be very successful if they encourage and engender internal cross-team collaborations focused on customer needs. The growing interest in Social CRM addresses how businesses develop customer relationships to contribute to customer success.

 

Social is partly about tapping into the connectedness that people are building with the web as a platform.  Social Business adoption by software vendors must be based on the fact that people and relationships are what really drive success and longevity. The lesson to enterprise management: Social media adoption has been driven by the people who want to use it to communicate and work efficiently, no matter the purpose.  Social media invaded enterprises because people really want to use it – because it is effective for what they are tasked to accomplish. 

 

 

“Social Business” practices have been around for years  

The essentials of Social Business have been around for years in many software enterprises – frequently as a “shadow” culture. A lot of employees in the software industry have intuitively understood and practiced aspects of the “social business”, recognizing the importance of the customer and of collaboration.  The process of selling software solutions to enterprises involves a lot of people working with many other people, for internal and external purposes, no matter the sales model.

 

Ironically employees, customers, partners have been open to adopting social capabilities as part of doing business; the executive level, however, is the laggard for authentic adoption of social collaboration culture and processes. Upper management often has impeded real efforts for social business and has also contributed to creating silos within the company and chasms between teams. Many software companies have been poorly structured for many years to be able to nurture “social business”. Usually not enough people and not enough budget have been allocated for fully supporting strong customer-centric processes and initiatives. 

 

It’s very important that executive and other management levels formalize strategies for Social Business and better empower the many employees who already intuitively know how to find and keep customers/buyers through social relationships and support for customer success.

 

Fully empowered collaboration with customers and partners will improve sales, product offerings, long-lasting relationships, and will lead to fewer problems. Enterprise teams will be better connected to customers, and to one another. And upper management may finally get real perspective on employee motivations as well as customer desires.

 

 

 

Profile of a Software Aficionado

Indeed, my software technology background contributes to my SME “schizophrenia”: Extensive stints as enterprise and small business developer, SE, solutions consultant, market and competitive intelligence analyst. Plus time served in multiple software spaces:

· developer and systems analyst for materials management systems in semiconductor manufacturing; also small business software solutions developer

· very deep dive in data integration solutions, for many years

· whirlwind couple of years providing strategic analysis for WCM/web experience management, social collaboration, presentation portal, web 2.0 apps, and transactional content management

· continuous auditing and analysis of SaaS, OSS, cloud computing, Agile -- impacts on software industry and on vendor business goals

 

 

 

  

Related articles:

 

Social collaboration in enterprise:The heart–and goal–of Community is “collaborating people”, not collaboration tools

 

B2B Social CRM for Software Vendors and the Lifecycle of Customer Experience

 

The incongruous worlds of “data integration” – Making data accessible for any-size companies

 

 

 

 

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished market intelligence analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights for the software industry. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side  to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Market & Competitive Intelligence Services  

 

 

SMB / Mid-Market B2B Software vendors - Findability + web presence + social: attracting the “customer as buyer”

 

For anyone selling software solutions, a strong and well-crafted web presence is de rigueur for connecting with potential customers or with the “customer as Buyer”. More and more purchasing of various software solutions is becoming an online event, fueled by the growing success of SaaS, cloud, and open source options. SMB / Mid-Market buyers, who don’t have a lot of time for purchase cycles, want to do business with vendors who make it much easier to reach a decision.

 

 

According to Forrester’s Megan Burns, Web Sites That Don't Support Customers' Goals Waste Millions:

 

“Results show that the vast majority of people switch to more expensive channels…Others give up and go to a competitor, while still others abandon their goals entirely. …for an average retailer the result is millions of dollars in lost revenue and unnecessary costs. Firms should use the data and models in this report to understand their own exposure to these failures and make a strong case for fixing usability problems that drive consumers away from the site.”

    (Forrester 2010)

 

While the Forrester study focuses on online retail, the implications are highly relevant to software vendors targeting SMB and Mid-Market companies, since these B2B buyers primarily use the internet as the gateway to software purchases.  These buyers also encounter similar difficulties trying to navigate software vendor websites to find relevant content and support to help them make buying decisions.  

 

With buyers focused on the web as a purchasing gateway, B2B software vendors are no longer the sole owners of influencing brand perception – many online venues now play significant roles for influencing buyers, and many of these online venues are not controlled by the vendor.  However, the vendor still has control of providing a high quality web presence through its corporate website and the power to increase findability for the right “customers as buyers”.  While buyers reference other influencer sites, software vendors can contribute greatly to attracting and persuading buyers if buyers can easily find well-crafted and useful content on the vendor website. 

 

Vendors should exercise all necessary resources to exceed the buyer expectations and needs when visiting the vendor website. Not being highly findable as a web presence for the right buyer content will put into motion the potential for buyers to turn to other sites, many of which lead to competitors.

 

 

Website Findablity, Usability, User Experience – They Really Matter

If buyers can’t find, via the internet, what a vendor has to offer, then the vendor is plain old losing real prospects and sales every day.  Findability addresses the importance of websites being quickly found, easily accessed and distinctly identifiable with the B2B software vendor’s offerings.  With the mercurial nature of the internet and individual vendor web presence, findability requires constant attention and fine-tuning.

 

Unfortunately many B2B software vendor websites are built from the vendor’s perspective to support its own processes for marketing and sales – instead of from the perspective of the “customer as buyer”.  And most of these vendor websites have failed to provide easy access to high quality content that helps buyers make purchase decisions about the vendor offerings. B2B software vendors have a great opportunity to establish a more integrated and interactive web presence that pulls together people, tools, services and content.

 

There are lots of methods and tools to increase website findability: SEO optimization, recommendations / social search, Google marketing offerings, Web Standards, and so on.  But the right kind of content, including social media, is key to attracting and keeping buyers on the software vendor website because these buyers have a list of items (and expectations) deemed necessary for deciding if the vendor’s software solutions are what they need.  As the quality and diversity of content on the vendor website increases, so does the findability – as well as potential buyer interest.

 

Social media venues (communities, forums, blogs, wikis, Twitter, Facebook, etc.), both on the vendor’s website and other well-visited sites, can be used with dual purpose:  first to provide quality content, user interaction, and collaboration experiences that draw buyers to the vendor; and then, to provide dynamic research sources for better understanding the SMB / Mid-Market buyers that the vendor is targeting. Ongoing vendor participation should take place on the vendor’s social sites and on external social sites that are strategic to connecting with target customers.

 

This post from Jeremiah Owyang (Altimeter Group) provides timely insight into creating a buyer/customer-centric web presence that integrates with social media and why this matters. There are two very useful charts: one covers feature/benefits of integrating social networking sites, and the other details the integrations available from popular social networking sites.

Roadmap: Make Your Corporate Websites Relevant: Integrate Social Network Features

 

 

OK – Buyers have found the software vendor’s website…  

Now -- are there content and user experience worth finding? – How easily can buyers tap into what the website offers?  Buyers come to a software vendor’s website with expectations. Creating and structuring the website from the usability perspective of the buyer (or buyers if targeting multiple buyer types) will greatly support ease of finding relevant content and will generate positive user experiences.

 

SMB / Mid-Market buyers of B2B software generally want a wide variety of information about the products and solutions, input from communities and forums, clear pricing, and other information that will guide them to making a buying decision.  They would like this content in easy-to-download formats - without having to answer lots of questions to enable the download. There is an increasing buyer sentiment that vendor websites should not require any information from the buyer for any content downloads.  After all, the sales engagement is buyer-driven, with the buyer deciding when and if next steps will be taken.

 

 

Content Sought Out by Software Solution Buyers

Anything provided on the vendor website should be authentic, high quality content that answers real buyer questions. “Real” content engages buyers, so invest in subject matter experts who can write relevant, sharp and interesting documents, articles and posts. Vendors should provide links to industry writers, influencer blogs and communities, and to analysts who contribute insight regarding the vendor’s solution space and the competitive landscape. When significant negative content is published about the vendor, it’s smart to deal with it head-on through a vendor blog, as well as through any external social sites that are relevant – be honest and focused, always responding with the buyer’s POV in mind.

 

Content that buyers would like to see on the vendor website:

 

à  Products and solutions information

· White papers providing orientations for both technical and business problems

· Product and solution datasheets  

· Technical specifications

· Best practices / company approach to solving problems with the vendor solutions (lots of details)

· Case studies with real meat

 

à  Social media

Incorporating social media in the vendor website further provides the opportunity to create a more personalized customer experience. The website should provide vendor-sponsored social media sites and links to external social sites. Buyer-friendly social media include: communities, blogs, wikis, forums, RSS, self-serve webcasts and podcasts, video sharing sites, social networking sites. As with findability and usability, social media requires real commitment, constant nurturing and responsiveness to anyone participating in the vendor’s social sites. Social media offers a fantastic venue for building relationships with “customers as buyers”, for collaborating with them on the future direction of the vendor’s offerings, and to respond quickly to questions and issues.   

 

à  External Content from Influencers – which include current customers

· Communities, forums, blogs – the ones external to vendor website

· Coverage, reviews by industry writers and influencer blogs

· Analyst coverage – especially from analysts that specialize in software for SMB / Mid-Market

 

à  Pricing

For SMB / Mid-Market buyers, pricing should be published on the website, should be straight-forward, and always up-to-date.  These buyers are not interested in drawn out sales cycles – they will simply move on to another vendor if the clock has been ticking too long.  Many buyers would like to make most software purchases via the website, whenever possible.  SaaS, cloud, OSS software options are changing how SMB / Mid-Market buyers expect to purchase software, or software services.

 

à  RFP Q&A – standardized answers

The more likely initiators of RFP requests are the upper tiers of the Mid-Market, rather than “classic SMB”. Most RFP/RFI documents follow a basic format widely used in software industry, with a large majority of questions repeating from buyer to buyer.  So it might be a good idea to build out an engaging presentation of RFP Q&A on the website, utilizing newer media including podcasts and video. If done well (findable-usable-engaging), buyers could find answers on their own, satisfying buyer desire for self-service. Also providing online RFP Q&A could eliminate the time-wasting situation of the vendor being used as “column fodder”.  Online publication of RFP Q&A demands constant updating and refinement to be useful to customers.

 

There are potential hazards for publishing online RFP’s:

· Relevance to buyer needs is not always supported by the usual RFP structure unless multiple RFPs are mapped to various buyer solution scenarios

· Validity of vendor strengths and weaknesses depends on how those strengths and weaknesses map to the most important requirements of each buyer project – generic RFP content may not be able to make a clear assessment and could have negative effect

· Competitors will now know more about how the vendor responds to certain questions while not providing corresponding data on their own websites

So it might be best to provide higher level, but meaty, content for unrestricted access, and then require buyer registration and validation before sharing access to deeper content, especially if a mutual NDA is necessary for more ‘sensitive” information.

 

à  Competitor Comparisons

Software solution buyers often list “competitor comparisons” as a content type that they’d like to find on a vendor website.  However, there are real issues that a vendor must consider before attempting competitor comparisons:

· Mainly, legal constraints related to claims made about what a competitor does or doesn’t do, as compared to the vendor – lawsuits could arise from buyers or competitors regarding claims made

· Even if an “objective” third-party is engaged to create competitor comparisons, such comparisons are frequently tedious and expensive to execute

· Relevance – points in competitor comparisons may not be of importance to all buyers or relate well to their needs

· Commoditization – software offerings in same solution space generally have many of the same feature/functions so competitor comparisons have reduced impact

 

 

Aligning “Findable Web Presence” with Social Selling and Social CRM

Focusing on the buyer-centricity of a vendor’s web presence by improving the findability and usability of the website and by building out proper social media connections to potential buyers also brings alignment with initiatives for social customer relationship management (the strategic practice, not just the technology) and with programs for social selling. This is especially important for SMB / Mid-Market software vendors who need to maximize existing resources for these important initiatives.

 

These three inter-related initiatives nurture quality buyer experiences. And these initiatives are dependent on the vendor being willing to continuously engage in real bi-directional “conversations” with buyers and to act on buyer feedback. Vendors will greatly enhance long-term loyalty, buyer success, and the ability to continuously understand what buyers need by building a composite of excellent web presence / findability / quality content, combined with lively support of social media and true buyer support through social CRM.

 

Social selling taps into social culture and makes use of social media to build relationships and hold conversations with potential buyers. Listening well, presenting compelling content, meeting buyer needs are important aspects of social selling. Likewise, social CRM strives to provide support for buyer success with the vendor’s software offerings, aligned with the “lifecycle of the customer support” (pre- and post-sale).  (More on social CRM for B2B vendors)

 

For social selling, social networking and collaborative sites help sales to connect with buyers on buyer terms:  in venues where buyers are looking for solutions to problems, asking about specific kinds of software solutions, exploring competitor solutions. Sales teams can tap into what matters to potential buyers in order to connect on a real basis. Monitoring social media sites can also help sales teams identify the key influencers for target buyers.

 

 

And Finally, Always Make Sure There’s a Software Solution Worth Buying

Software vendors sometimes forget that it is equally important to deliver quality solutions that are: relatively easy to implement, do the job they’re supposed to do, perform well, and provide clear benefits to the buyer. Quality solutions should be the main objective of any software vendor.

 

 

Related posts:   

B2B Social CRM for Software Vendors and the Lifecycle of Customer Experience

 

Social collaboration in the enterprise: The heart – and goal – of Community is “collaborating people”, not collaboration tools

 

Selling Software Solutions to SMB Markets – Who and How To Target

 

Moving beyond WCM - Web Experience Management software solutions and markets

 

 

 

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished market intelligence analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights for the software industry. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side  to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Market & Competitive Intelligence Services