Three Ways to Make Your Case Studies More Persuasive

Customer case studies have been a staple of the B2B marketing content mix for decades. According to 2018 research by the Content Marketing Institute and MarketingProfs, 73% of B2B marketers are using case studies for content marketing purposes.

Recent research on the effectiveness of customer case studies has produced mixed results. For example, in the 2019 Content Preferences Survey by Demand Gen Report, customer case studies were classified as "influencer content." Ninety-five percent of the survey respondents said they prefer credible content from industry influencers, and case studies were the most-preferred type of such content (cited by 47% of respondents).

On the other hand, the 2019 B2B buying disconnect research by TrustRadius indicates that customer case studies have lost some of their effectiveness with buyers. In that research, just over 20% of the surveyed B2B technology buyers said they used vendor-produced case studies to inform their purchase decisions, and they ranked case studies 11th (out of 15 options) in trustworthiness. Two quotations from survey respondents capture a perspective that is becoming more prevalent among B2B buyers:

• "Vendor provided case studies - these are hand picked success stories / [we] preferred independent reviews."
• "Whitepapers and case studies are geared towards selling you the product so I don't put a whole lot of weight on these."

The growing buyer skepticism of customer case studies mirrors a decline of buyer trust in most forms of vendor-provided information. Therefore, one of the major challenges facing B2B marketers is to increase the credibility of their marketing content of all types.

When it comes to case studies, there are three concrete steps B2B marketers can take to bolster credibility and effectiveness.

Make the Customer the Hero

I'm often asked by clients to review and comment on their customer case studies, and unfortunately, what I read all too often is self-promotional "brochureware" disguised as a case study.

The mistake that many companies make is to cast themselves, rather than their customers, as the heroes of their case studies. The story line of many case studies resembles an old silent movie where the villain ties a helpless damsel (the customer) to railroad tracks, and the hero (the selling company) rides in at the last minute to rescue the damsel in distress from an oncoming train.

A good case study will lead readers to identify with the customer. You want readers to vicariously experience the "pain" the customer was feeling and the success the customer achieved. In essence, you want readers to finish the case study believing they can achieve the same success. When you make your company the hero of your case studies, you are asking readers to identify with your company, not the customer.

So, when you're preparing a case study, you can give your company a strong supporting role, but always let your customer be the star.

Include Enough Detail to Make It Engaging

When I began developing content for clients more than a decade ago, the conventional wisdom was that customer case studies should be short, usually no more than 1-2 pages. But most buyers want to use case studies to help validate their purchase decision. And this means that a case study needs to include enough detail to describe the customer's business situation and experience with your product or service in a meaningful way.

So, B2B marketers should forget the old rules about case study length. Each case study should be as long as it needs to be to tell the customer's story in a compelling way.

Make Your Customer Case Studies Realistic

This is likely to be the single most difficult change for most B2B marketers to accept and implement. Most marketers are conditioned by culture and training to emphasize the positives and minimize the limitations of their product or service. But this is the very tendency that causes many buyers to view vendor-provided content with a healthy dose of skepticism.

A lack of transparency about product limitations causes one of the most significant disconnects between buyers and sellers. In the TrustRadius research described earlier, 71% of the buyer respondents said it was very important to understand product limitations before buying, but only 42% of the marketing/sales respondents expressed this view. And while 84% of the marketing/sales respondents said they aim to be clear about the limitations of their product, only 36% of the buyer respondents felt the vendor they selected had been forthcoming about product limitations.

No product or service is perfect. And it's likely that many of your most satisfied customers can identify something about your product they wish was different. These customer perspectives should be included in your case studies because they will make your case studies more credible and persuasive.

A Final Thought

Many companies find it valuable to work with an external content developer to create their customer case studies. An independent content developer can provide the objectivity that's essential for creating case studies that are credible and trustworthy. Just be sure that you work with a content developer who (a) has experience creating evidence-based, non-promotional content, and (b) understands what makes a customer case study effective with today's skeptical buyers.

Image courtesy of Animated Heaven via Flickr.

Share:

B2B Buyers Remain Skeptical About Vendor Content

Last month, TrustRadius published the findings of its third annual B2B buying disconnect research. The 2019 B2B Buying Disconnect report is based on a survey of 712 individuals who were involved in a significant purchase of business technology during the preceding year, and on a survey of 229 individuals who worked for technology vendors in a marketing or sales capacity.

In my last post, I described some of the characteristics of the technology buying process, as revealed by the TrustRadius research. In this post, I'll discuss what the TrustRadius surveys discovered about how technology buyers research potential purchases, and where there are still significant disconnects between technology buyers and sellers.

Information Used to Support Buying Decisions

A primary objective of the TrustRadius surveys has been to identify what sources of information technology buyers use to support purchase decisions, and which sources they view as influential and trustworthy. The 2019 survey found that buyers used an average of 5.2 sources of information when they research potential purchases, up slightly from 4.9 in 2018 and 2017.

The most widely-used sources of information have changed little over the past three years. In the 2017, 2018, and 2019 surveys, the five most widely-used sources of information identified by buyers were:

• Product Demos
• Vendor/Product Website
• User Reviews
• Free Trial/Account
• Vendor Representatives

Information Trust

TrustRadius also asked buyers to rate the trustworthiness of each source of information. (Note:  TrustRadius presented buyers with fifteen sources of information in 2019 and 2018, and twelve sources of information in 2017.) It turns out that buyers' perceptions of trustworthiness haven't changed much over the past three years.

The following table shows the five most trustworthy and the five least trustworthy sources of information identified by buyers in the 2019 survey. The table also shows how buyers ranked the trustworthiness of these information sources in the 2018 and 2017 surveys.

At first glance, these survey findings would seem to paint a fairly bleak picture for B2B marketers, given that vendor-provided sources of information were ranked as the least trustworthy by buyers. However, there are reasons to believe that the situation isn't quite as bad as these survey results seem to indicate. The 2019 survey report contains several quotes from buyers that provide context for the survey results. Here are a few examples:

"Vendor collateral valuable for initial research but from there, really a matter of needing to actually see the functionality work as opposed to pretty pictures & glowing case studies."

"Providers are known for their platitudes, and less for the substance of their claims, so I took their marketing materials with a grain of salt."

"Any vendor can put up collateral and a good website, but trying the service for ourselves was crucial in understanding if the product was a fit for our team."

I contend that what these quotations really indicate is that most business buyers are unwilling to trust vendor-provided information completely, or rely solely on such information when making purchase decisions.

In many cases, buyers view vendor-provided information as inherently biased (although not necessarily deceitful), and in some cases, vendor-provided information doesn't adequately address some of the specific issues that a particular buyer may be concerned about. The quotations and the survey results also show that most buyers want direct experience with a produce via demos and free trials whenever possible.

A Major Disconnect Between Sellers and Buyers

One of the most significant disconnects between buyers and sellers revealed by the TrustRadius research relates to transparency about product limitations. Eighty-four percent of the vendor respondents in the 2019 survey said they aim to be clear about the capabilities and limitations of their product. However, only 36% of the buyers in the 2019 survey felt the vendor they selected was forthcoming about product limitations.

It appears that many vendors simply don't recognize how important this issue is for buyers. Seventy-one percent of the buyer respondents in the 2019 survey said it is very important to understand product limitations before buying, but only 42% of the vendor respondents expressed this view.

Marketing content and sales communications rarely address product limitations directly. It's not that B2B marketers and sales reps are intentionally dishonest, but they are conditioned by culture and training to emphasize the positives (and minimize the limitations) of their solutions. Unfortunately, this tendency causes buyers to view most vendor-provided information with a heavy dose of skepticism.

In my next post, I'll discuss one way that B2B marketers can address the trust gap.

Top image courtesy of Terry Johnston via Flickr CC.

Share:

The Key Characteristics of Business Technology Buying

TrustRadius recently published The 2019 B2B Buying Disconnect report, which provides several important insights regarding the sale and purchase of B2B technology solutions. The report is based on a survey of 712 individuals who played a key role in a significant business technology purchase during the preceding year, and on a survey of 229 individuals who worked for technology vendors in a sales or marketing capacity.

This research covers a broad range of topics. The buyer survey includes findings about the general characteristics of technology purchases and the technology buying process, how technology buyers research potential purchases, and how they view technology vendors. The vendor survey explores how technology vendors seek to engage potential buyers and how the perceive their effectiveness with those prospects.

The TrustRadius surveys focused exclusively on the attributes of technology sales and purchases and on the attitudes and behaviors of technology buyers and sellers. While the results of this research may not be directly applicable to all types of B2B purchases and sales, it's likely that they would be similar in other cases involving complex B2B products or services.

Major Attributes of the Buying Process

The findings of the TrustRadius buyer survey describe the types of technologies purchased, the cost of the technology, and several important attributes of the buying process.

Types of Technologies Purchased - TrustRadius asked buyers to think about the most significant technology purchase they were involved in during the preceding year. The largest cohort of survey respondents (24%) said they bought an IT solution. The second and third most frequently purchased types of technology were marketing technology (13% of respondents) and business intelligence solutions (10%).

Purchase Size - Thirty percent of the respondents said the annual cost of their most significant technology purchase was between $11,000 and $51,000. Another 27% of the surveyed buyers said they spent between $51,000 and $500,000 on their most significant purchase.

The Buying Group - Almost two-thirds of the surveyed buyers (64%) said they were part of a buying group that included between two and five influencers and decision makers. Almost a third of the buyers said their buying team included six or more people.

Length of the Buying Cycle - Forty-two percent of the respondents said it took their company between one and three months to complete a significant technology purchase. Forty-six percent of the buyers said that a major technology purchase typically required three or more months to make.

The Shortlist - Forty-four percent of the respondents said they usually evaluate a shortlist of three or more products when making a significant technology purchase. Another 41% of buyers said their shortlist typically includes two potential solutions.

How Buyers Determine the Winner

The authors of the TrustRadius report say that pragmatic factors - such as features/functionality, price, and ease of integration - are important to buyers in making the final purchase decision. They write:  "If your budget is non-negotiable, or if certain missing features or integrations are a deal-breaker, boom! These factors sometimes help buyers narrow things down to a single option."

However, the report authors also identified two other common reasons given by surveyed buyers for making the final decision.

1. How easily the buyers can visualize using the product in their particular circumstances; and
2. The buyers' level of trust in the vendor.

The report states:  "There were a number of different ways buyers seemed to gauge trust in their use case and the future of their relationship with the vendor, from the tenor of sales communications to feedback from existing customers."

In my next post, I'll discuss what the TrustRadius research reveals about how buyers research technology purchases, what sources of information they trust, and why TrustRadius contends there are still disconnects between buyers and sellers.

Image source:  TrustRadius

Share:

[Research] The State of Marketing Automation - Adoption, Usage, Benefits, Challenges

Recent research by CleverTouch Marketing, a marketing technology consultancy and service provider based in the UK, provides an interesting snapshot of the state of marketing automation adoption and usage.

Expectations vs. Reality:  The State of Marketing Automation Adoption and Usage is based on a survey of 200 CMOs, Marketing Directors, and Heads of Marketing at companies having more than 250 employees. Fifty of the survey respondents were based in the UK, 50 in the US, and 100 in EMEA.

Although this survey involved a fairly small sample, the findings provide several interesting insights about the attitudes and practices of marketing leaders relating to marketing automation. Here's a description of some of the major survey findings.

Adoption - Eighty percent of the survey respondents said they already have a marketing automation solution in place, and those respondents indicated they were using at least one of these marketing automation solutions - HubSpot, Marketo, Eloqua, Pardot, SharpSpring, or Act-On.

Reasons for Implementing - The survey found that marketers had a variety of reasons for implementing marketing automation, with no single reason being dominant. Among survey respondents who are using marketing automation ("user respondents"), the top three reasons identified were:

• To drive new insights and intelligence (28%)
• For content management and customer journey mapping (28%)
• For change management and the re-invention of marketing (28%)

Twenty-seven percent of the user respondents said they implemented marketing automation for information management and intelligent routing, or for increased business efficiency.

Major Benefits - CleverTouch also asked user respondents what benefits they had realized by implementing marketing automation. The top five benefits identified were:

• We can now prove the ROI of marketing (31%)
• Marketing has generated more sales leads (31%)
• Improved data quality and compliance (31%)
• Marketing has generated better quality sales leads (29%)
• Faster lead conversion and sales cycles (29%)

Primary Uses - According to user respondents, the top three current uses of marketing automation are:

• For lead generation (44%)
• For lead nurturing campaigns (42%)
• For account-based marketing (41%)

Biggest Challenges - Nineteen percent of the user respondents in the CleverTouch survey said that lack of good quality content is their biggest challenge to marketing automation success. Seventeen percent of the user respondents cited the complexity of the marketing automation platform, and 16% said changing market dynamics.

Other Findings - Some of the other interesting findings in the CleverTouch survey are:

• 48% of the user respondents said they are able to show campaign ROI as a result of their marketing automation investment.
• When asked where they will be investing most of their marketing budget over the next 12 months, 33% of respondents said content marketing, 30% said predictive analytics, 28% said artificial intelligence, and 28% said marketing automation optimization.
• 48% of the survey respondents said their investment in marketing technology services would likely increase somewhat over the next 12 months, and another 11% said their investment would likely increase significantly.

My Take - The CleverTouch survey results indicate that most large and mid-size companies have implemented a marketing automation solution as part of their marketing technology stack, although I suspect that the adoption rate is less than 80% if all companies are considered. The findings also indicate that many companies are deriving important benefits from their use of marketing automation. Lastly, the CleverTouch survey confirms what other studies have found - that investment in marketing technologies is continuing to grow.

Image Source:  Rick B via Flickr (Public Domain)

Share:

The Growing Influence of Compelling Thought Leadership

Business buyers broadly agree that thought leadership content impacts their purchase decisions at every stage of the buying process. And recent research by Edelman and LinkedIn shows that the influence of thought leadership is growing. The research also shows, however, that thought leadership is a double-edged sword.

In November of last year, Edelman and LinkedIn conducted a survey (the "2018 survey") of U.S. business decision makers and purchase influencers to measure the impact of thought leadership content on B2B purchase decisions. The survey produced 1,201 responses from individuals representing a wide range of industries and company sizes. In this research, Edelman and LinkedIn asked survey participants several questions about how they use thought leadership content and how it affects their purchase decisions.

Edelman and LinkedIn conducted a survey in October and November of 2017 (the "2017 survey") that addressed many of the same issues. This type of "longitudinal" research can be particularly valuable because it reveals the degree and direction of change that has occurred from one survey to the next.

Several findings of the Edelman/LinkedIn research clearly demonstrate that the influence of thought leadership in the B2B purchasing process is growing. The following table shows how respondents in the 2018 survey and the 2017 survey described their consumption of thought leadership content and its impact on how they make purchase decisions.

These findings clearly show that B2B decision makers are spending more time engaging with thought leadership content and that the impact of such content is growing across the entire B2B buying journey.

The 2018 survey also revealed that thought leadership is a classic double-edged sword. For example:

• 75% of survey respondents said they will start following a writer or organization based on their thought leadership, and 60% said they will stop following a writer or organization because of poor thought leadership.
• 92% of respondents said thought leadership has increased their respect for an organization, and 46% said that poor thought leadership has decreased their respect for a company.
• 58% of respondents said they have decided to award business to a company because of its thought leadership, and 29% said they have decided not to award business to a company because of poor thought leadership.

These findings are particularly important given how business decision makers evaluate the quality of the thought leadership content they encounter. The following table shows how respondents in the 2018 survey and the 2017 survey rated the overall quality of thought leadership:

As the table shows, B2B decision makers don't believe the quality of thought leadership has improved since 2017. While the percentage of excellent or very good thought leadership increased (18% in 2018 vs. 14% in 2017), the percentage of good content decreased (53% in 2018 vs. 60% in 2017), and the percentage of mediocre to very poor content increased (30% in 2018 vs. 26% in 2017).

The most important lesson for B2B marketers in the Edelman/LinkedIn research is this:  There is no safe middle ground when it comes to thought leadership. Great thought leadership makes a positive impact on buyers at every stage of the buying process, but poor thought leadership results in lost business opportunities.

Image courtesy of Affen Ajlfe (www.modup.net) via Flickr CC.

Share:

The Benefits and Limitations of Look-Alike Modeling

Demand Gen Report recently published a white paper describing the benefits of using look-alike modeling powered by artificial intelligence (AI) to improve lead generation performance. The white paper argues that B2B marketers can use "AI-fueled" look-alike modeling to get more qualified leads that convert at higher rates.

The principles underlying look-alike modeling aren't new. For years, astute B2B marketers have been identifying important attributes of their best existing customers and using those attributes to create a profile of their "ideal prospect." Then, they would use this ideal prospect profile to identify target audiences for outbound lead generation programs and otherwise guide lead generation efforts.

The current incarnation of look-alike modeling does essentially the same thing, but in a more sophisticated way using AI-powered data analytics.

Several technology providers now offer solutions that include or support look-alike modeling, and most of these solutions take similar approaches to the look-alike modeling process.

• They extract data regarding a company's existing customers from the company's internal technology systems including, but not necessarily limited to, the CRM and marketing automation solutions.
• Most solution providers have developed or obtained access to extensive databases regarding business organizations. The modeling solution will combine the company's internal customer data with any additional data regarding these customers in the provider's database. This enables the solution to create a more detailed picture of the attributes of the company's existing customers.
• The modeling solution then uses an algorithm to analyze the combination of internal and external customer data to identify the attributes that the company's existing customers have in common. The result of this analysis is usually called a customer data model.
• The solution then runs the company's customer data model against the provider's database of businesses to identify companies that resemble the model.

The major advantage of AI-powered look-alike modeling is that it incorporates far more data points than humans can realistically use when the process is done manually. Therefore, AI-powered modeling enables marketers to build a richer and deeper customer data model, and it does a better job of identifying companies that are likely to be good prospects.

Look-alike modeling can be an effective tool for improving B2B demand generation performance, but like any business tool or methodology, it has some limitations.

First, for look-alike modeling to be effective, a company needs to have enough existing customers to build a customer data model that's reliably predictive. One provider of look-alike modeling has indicated that a company needs at least 500 existing customers to build a reliable model. While 500 may not the the absolute minimum, effective look-alike modeling does require a company to have a substantial number of existing customers, and a start-up or young business may not be able to meet this requirement.

Second, look-alike modeling can be less effective when a company is marketing new products or services. If a new product or service appeals to a different type of customer than the company's other products or services, a customer data model based on the company's existing customers may not identify the right prospects for the new product or service.

The important point here is that look-alike modeling is a powerful tool for improving demand generation performance, particularly when it's enhanced with artificial intelligence. But B2B marketers should also remember that like any business methodology, look-alike modeling has a few important limitations.

Image Source:  Flickr.com

Share:

B2B Highlights From the Latest CMO Survey

The findings of the latest CMO Survey by Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, the American Marketing Association, and Deloitte were published a few days ago. The latest results are based on responses from 323 marketing leaders at U.S. B2B and B2C companies. Sixty-eight percent of the respondents were affiliated with B2B companies, and 97% were at VP-level or above.

The CMO Survey is conducted semi-annually, and it's a valuable resource for capturing the views of U.S. marketing leaders regarding the overall economic and competitive environment, and major trends in marketing. In addition to overall results, survey findings are reported by four economic sectors - B2B product companies, B2B services companies, B2C product companies, and B2C services companies.

In this post, I'll discuss some of the major findings in the February 2019 edition of survey. Unless otherwise indicated, the results discussed in this post are based exclusively on the responses of B2B marketers.

Driving Growth is the #1 Challenge

Driving business growth has become the top challenge for marketing leaders in all types of businesses. The CMO Survey asked participants to rank their three biggest challenges in order of importance. The following table shows the top four challenges identified by the entire survey panel and by B2B respondents. The table shows the percentage of respondents who ranked each challenge first in importance.

Measuring Marketing Impact Remains Challenging

Demonstrating the financial impact of marketing activities remains a significant challenge for many marketers. As the above table shows, surveyed marketing leaders identified proving ROI of marketing activities as their fourth highest rated challenge.

The CMO Survey also asked marketing leaders how they demonstrate the long-term impact of marketing spending, and the following table shows how B2B marketers responded.

As this table shows, only 35.4% of respondents from B2B services companies, and 24.0% of respondents from B2B product companies say they can prove the long-term impact of marketing quantitatively.

Given these findings, it shouldn't be surprising that B2B marketers ranked marketing impact as their top C-suite communication challenge. Seventy-three percent of respondents from B2B services companies, and 67.3% of respondents from B2B product companies said demonstrating the impact of marketing actions on financial outcomes is challenging when they are communicating with other C-level executives.

Mixed Signals on Marketing Analytics and AI

Analytics, artificial intelligence, and machine learning have been hot topics in B2B marketing circles for the past few years. The findings of The CMO Survey provide important insights about several aspects of these topics.

B2B marketers expect to increase their spending on marketing analytics over the next few years. Respondents from B2B product companies said they are currently spending 6.6% of their marketing budget on analytics, and they expect the percentage to increase to 11.6% over the next three years. Respondents from B2B services companies currently devote 7.3% of their budget to analytics, and they expect the percentage to grow to 13.3% by 2022.

The CMO Survey findings also show that despite their commitment to analytics, B2B marketers don't believe that analytics currently have a big impact on company performance. On a 7-point scale (where 1 = no impact, and 7 = a high impact), respondents from B2B product companies gave analytics a rating of 3.7, and respondents from B2B services companies rated the impact of analytics at 3.8.

The survey also found that the use of artificial intelligence in B2B companies is still relatively limited. The survey asked B2B marketers how they are using AI in their marketing activities. The following table shows the top six activities identified by B2B survey respondents.

As the table shows, a majority of B2B marketers report using artificial intelligence for content personalization, and about half say they are using AI to gain customer insights. Less than 40% of marketers are using AI for most of the remaining activities.

Top image source:  The CMO Survey (www.cmosurvey.org).

Share: