How Raab Associates Converted to ZohoCRM In One Weekend: a B2B CRM Success Story

Raab Associates is really two businesses: the technology consulting practice run by Yours Truly, and a marketing agency specializing in children’s books run by my beautiful and brilliant wife Susan. We keep them largely separate, but I am inevitably involved in her technology decisions. So when her ancient Goldmine CRM system finally crashed last week, we both scrambled to pick a replacement.

From my usual lofty perch in enterprise software world, Susan's requirements seem stick-figure simple: accounts, contacts, opportunities, lists, and mass emails. So our first thought was to find a system that offered those plus some cool new things like social media profiling. But a quick scan of the market showed that none of the neat new systems also offered the basic functions with with enough refinement and flexibility to meet Susan's needs.

This pushed us back to the more standard CRM options.  To my dismay, we found ourselves ruling out one after another for various. I even briefly suggested we reconsider Goldmine, an thought that was quickly rejected.  Eventually we took an unhopeful look at ZohoCRM, which I know as a popular small business system but had never considered particularly advanced. Happily, the system has a very thorough online user manual, so I was able to check it out in detail.

Even more happily, the answers all came back positive as I imagined working through Susan’s basic business processes in Zoho. Build contact lists, check. Mass emails, check. Opportunities linked to campaigns, check. Pull-down status list and callback date on opportunities, check. Custom filters across all field types, check. End-user report writer, check. Multi-field search, check. A bunch of other details that I no longer recall, check check check. Reasonable cost, double check: we would have grudgingly paid a couple hundred dollars a month for a solution, but Zoho’s mid-tier Professional edition costs all of $20 per month with no limits on database size (Susan has about 14,000 contact records – well above the minimum for many small business systems). We may even splurge for $35 per month enterprise edition, which provides some advanced automation features but is probably overkill for most small businesses.  Just call me Diamond Jim.

At this point, we were ready to sign up for the free trial account, which was a simple process and didn’t ask for a credit card. Let me point out that I purposely hadn’t signed up sooner because I didn’t want to waste time exploring a system that I wasn’t pretty confident would meet my needs. Diving in too soon is a classic mistake among software buyers – and, in this instance at least, I actually followed my own advice.  (While I'm patting myself on the back, I'll also point out that we evaluated the software against our actual business process, not an arbitrary feature checklist.  That's another best practice that too few buyers follow.)

We now pulled a small set of test records from Goldmine to test the import function. The online manual guided me through the exact steps necessary, complete with a handy checklist of preparatory tasks.  When I went to load the file itself, I got the first of many delightful surprises: Zoho took a guess at mapping the input fields, based on their names, and got about half right. That’s a pretty sophisticated function and a big time-saver. It’s the sort of refinement you don’t see in a new system because it’s not essential to get the product into market, but gets added after enough users request it and the developers have some breathing room. Zoho has actually been around since 1996 (although CRM came later), so they’ve had time to add a lot of those little helpers.

In any event, the test import worked perfectly the first time out, which was a great feeling of accomplishment. Susan and I played with the system a bit more now that we had some real data in it, and found all sorts of nice little options, like being able to rename objects (she calls an opportunity a “pending record”), rearrange the fields on each screen, change the order of sections, and move fields from one section to another.  Again, none of these is cutting edge, but they’re not always available and make a big difference in making the system more usable.  The interface itself was also highly intuitive – lots of nice dragging to move the fields around, for example. There were plenty of other unexpected goodies that I would have otherwise needed to configure or live without, like automatically listing the associated contacts when you view an account record, and listing the associated opportunities – I mean, pending records – when you look at a contact. And, oh yes, you can control which fields are displayed on those related records.

At this point we were feeling pretty good about actually pulling off the conversion, so I spent all day Sunday manually cleansing those 14,000 contact records to ensure the critical data was populated. Even Zoho couldn’t help with that one. I finished around midnight and had a moment of panic when I saw that Zoho would only import 5,000 records at a time.  But it turned out to accept all three batches without waiting for the first batch to finish, so I was able to submit them and get some sleep.

I woke up bright and early (well, actually, late and cranky), feeling pleased that Susan could start using the system without missing a business day.  Alas, we found that somehow there were twice as many account records as expected. A quick call to Zoho support pointed us to a rollback function that should have cleaned up the problem in a few seconds. Sadly, it rolled back one set of records but not the other (remember, there had only been one import).  I spoke again with Zoho support, who promised to look into it but hadn’t accomplished anything several hours later.  At that point, I realized – duh – that it would take about two minutes to delete the records manually (you can only delete 100 at a time, but it’s three keystrokes for each batch, so you can probably do about 50 batches per minute). Once I figured that out, I cleaned out the old records and reimported everything, and we had a clean set of data.

Susan has been working with the system for the past two days, and I’ve been peeking over her shoulder and poking around a bit myself.  ZohoCRM is certainly not perfect – there are bunch of little things she would like to do, such as preview a template-based email with the variables populated. There are also some oddities like two unrelated sets of email templates, a vestige of Zoho's earlier separate systems for CRM and mass mailings. Those quirks take a bit of getting used to but are far from show-stoppers. There are some other tasks that cumbersome at the moment, but I suspect we’ll be able to automate once we have time to explore those functions. And, yes, there are some things it doesn’t do that Susan would like, such as associating multiple email addresses with the same contact. I wouldn’t exactly say they’re trivial – certainly not to Susan – but she can live with them.

We're generally satisfied with customer support: phone calls aren’t always answered immediately, but after about a minute on hold, a very nice lady picks up the line and offers to take a message. I appreciate the human touch, and, more important, the opportunity to get immediate help if something is truly urgent. We do get callbacks in an hour or two and the agents have been pleasant and helpful, which is about all I can ask. There’s a “how’d we do?” email after each interaction, which is a good sign that Zoho is trying to do a good job.

Bottom line: We’re still in the honeymoon period, so I may find Zoho isn’t really as great as I think.  On the other hand, I proposed to Susan almost immediately after meeting her and that's worked out just fine.  So I'd say ZohoCRM is worth a close look for small business CRM, even for people who think it may be too simple for their needs.

Read More

Infusionsoft Bags $54 Million for Small Business Marketing Automation, Spends a Bunch on GroSocial

Infusionsoft today announced it has acquired social lead generation vendor GroSocial. This comes two weeks after Infusionsoft raised $54 million in new funding.

GroSocial is an interesting acquisition: about it three years old, it has about 20 employees and more than 25,000 customers.  Starting price is $30 per month after a 30 day free trial.  The system makes it easy for small business to generate leads through social marketing campaigns and track results.  It will continue to operate independently. The deal makes sense and will help Infusionsoft expand its social media capabilities, which have been limited. (TechCrunch reported rumors that the company paid $25-$30 million for GroSocial alone, but that seems high to me.)

Still, the $54 million investment is the more interesting story.  The sheer amount is impressive; previous funding for Infusionsoft totaled just $17 million. According to CEO Clate Mask, most of the money will be used for acquisitions, product development, and accelerated customer acquisition. He said that the new funds will let Infusionsoft grow at about the same 53% pace as last year, compared with the 45% or so they had planned to grow otherwise.

The investment can be read as validation of Infusionsoft’s strategy of offering unified marketing automation, CRM, and ecommerce exclusively for very small businesses. But that isn’t necessary: the strategy is already validated by Infusionsoft's continued growth, with 2012 revenues of $39 million and plans to triple its employee base to 1,000 in the next three years.

I think it's more useful to learn from Infusionsoft’s experiments with deployment models. The company has alternated between charging an implementation fee and not charging for it – and determined that a paid fee, and the more extensive hand-holding this permits, is more effective at building a long-term business. Implementation services go beyond training to actually setting up initial marketing programs. Naturally, Infusionsoft still strives to make its system as easy as possible to use, but its experience shows that new clients still need extensive help.

This conclusion may strike you as obvious. But there is, at least implicitly, a continued debate within the marketing automation industry between vendors who believe that they can make systems smart enough for new users to run without help, and those who believe human support remains essential. The “smart systems” group aims to build sophisticated technology that can automatically gather information, identify the best response, create the appropriate programs, and present them to marketer for approval. The “human support” group believes this level of automation isn’t practical or desirable, and instead focuses on building service organizations to train marketers and, when necessary, do the work for them. Both groups are rejecting the belief that marketing automation systems can be made simple enough for marketers to do the work themselves with either automated or human help.

That third theory – let’s call it the “ease of use” school – has been the dominant approach of the B2B marketing automation industry for the past few years. I’m tempted to say it has failed, and to cite the well-known statistics showing how few marketers use their systems fully.* But “failure” seems a harsh term for an industry growing at 50% per year. Still, there’s a shared sense among industry vendors that there’s a critical shortage of marketers able to use marketing automation tools effectively and that this is limiting industry growth. I increasingly see companies following the other two theories – smarter systems or greater human support – as a way to overcome this. Infusionsoft’s approach is part of this trend.

I myself have always been partial to the "smart systems" approach.  But that may be just because I like technology.  It's certainly true that more companies are following the human services strategy and reporting good success.  Of course, the services strategy is easier to execute: you just hire some sort people, who are admittedly rare but still easier to find the magical marketing robots.  This makes the strategy more appropriate for small marketing automation vendors who can't afford huge technology investments.  Bigger companies are attracted to the technology-based approach because it lets them limit their services staff, which makes them more attractive to investors.  The big companies can also hedge their bets by building up partner networks to provide services.

So the jury is still out on which approach will prevail -- but I do think that "ease of use" by itself is no longer in contention.


______________________________________________________________________________

*Actually, I have trouble laying my hands on the actual statistics. Only study I can find is from Loopfuse in 2011, which found just under 30% of marketing automation users do lead scoring. But I’m pretty sure there are others.

Read More

Raab Report: OfficeAutoPilot, Infusionsoft and HubSpot Rate Highest in Marketing Automation for Very Small Business

One of the most important features of our VEST report on B2B marketing automation systems is that it divides marketing automation users into distinct segments, each having a different set of needs. This matters because the systems all do roughly the same things, making it hard for inexperienced buyers to tell them apart. Many vendors – especially those who target the middle sector – also try to serve all types of companies, adding to the confusion. Where the vendors differ is in the details of how they implement the common features, applying approaches that are generally best suited to one type of marketing organization.

The VEST segmentation is based on company size, as measured by revenue. I'm painfully aware that this isn’t the ideal way to group users, since companies of the same size can still vary greatly in their needs and marketing sophistication. But revenue is objectively measureable and most marketing automation vendors can provide reasonably accurate client counts by revenue group. So we use it as a proxy for the other client differences.

The primary way we report on the different segments is by applying different weights to the same feature in our vendor scoring for each segment. This lets us rank vendors based on how their features and company strengths match against each sector’s needs. A key part of the approach is to penalize vendors with negative weights for features that are too advanced for a particular customer group. So far as I know, no other analysts do this in their scoring.  It avoids a common problem with scoring systems, that systems with the most features always win.

The chart above shows our ratings for the micro business sector, defined as companies with under $5 million in revenue. These are very small companies, typically run personally by an owner. They rarely have a full-time professional marketer on staff. Primary marketing interests are group emails, landing pages, and simple lead nurturing through email auto-responders. Before marketing automation, they typically use an email system (which also provides landing pages and simple nurture campaigns) or sales automation product for their marketing. They often do not integrate marketing automation with a separate sales automation system, either because they don’t use one at all or because they rely on CRM features within marketing automation itself. As of July 2012, marketing automation vendors reported more than 17,000 micro-business installations, just over 60% of the industry total. But, because prices are lower than other segments, the segment generates only an estimated 18% of industry revenue, or $65 million for full-year 2012.

Companies in this sector have very limited marketing and technical resources. As a result, their overriding needs are ease of use and a broad range of features within a single product. What they don’t need are very complex campaigns, extensive planning and budgeting, and custom database  designs. Our scoring reflects those priorities.

As the chart shows, the leaders in this segment are OfficeAutoPilot, Infusionsoft, and HubSpot. The first two are micro-business specialists; in particular, they have built-in CRM and order processing. HubSpot isn’t quite as highly tailored to this segment, which is why it is a little further from the top than the other two. (The vertical dimension is product fit, which basically means features.) But HubSpot has a very large number of clients in this segment, so it is still quite far to the right. (The horizontal dimension is vendor fit, a combination of customer count, segment concentration, and vendor resources.) Act-On and Marketo also have strong positions in this sector, even though their features – especially in Marketo’s case – are not necessarily the best fit. Again, bear in mind that revenue is a very crude segmentation, so many Act-On and Marketo clients in this group probably have requirements closer to those I’ve assigned to the middle tier.

The other important set of vendors are those at the upper left of the chart: companies with a strong feature fit even though they are smaller than the leaders. SalesFUSION and MakesBridge stand out especially in this group for micro-business users. Oracle’s presence is, frankly, pretty odd: it’s due to a low per seat price and the vendor’s position that it has a built-in CRM module. In fact, nine of the 22 vendors say they provide a CRM option, which may be technically correct but in most cases probably isn’t realistic. This is even more proof – as if it were needed – that buyers need to explore the products in detail before making a purchase.

Read More

Intuit Buys Small Business Local Marketing Vendor Demandforce: There's a New Gorilla in Town

Intuit  last week announced an agreement to acquire local business marketing vendor Demandforce  for $423.5 million. That’s a hefty sum for a company with a reported revenue of $37.5 million, although it has been growing at a blistering pace – more than doubling last year – and now has over 35,000 customers. Still, the move makes perfect strategic sense, giving Intuit a stronger foothold in the marketing side of its small business customer base. (Intuit dominates the market for small business accounting with five million Quickbooks users.)

Demandforce focuses on local service businesses like dentists and auto body shops. It’s not a typical marketing automation vendor, since it provides appointment management, referrals, reviews, social campaigns, local advertising, post cards, and search marketing in addition to email. Its most direct competitors in the marketing automation world would be Infusionsoft and HubSpot, although neither has the same depth of appointment-related features. The price point of $200 to $300 per month is also similar to those systems.

Because the micro-business segment is pretty distinct from the rest of marketing automation, the impact of the Demandforce acquisition will initially be limited to its direct competitors. Within that group, Intuit’s penetration and clout should make it an immediate superpower – with the caveat that the accountants who are Intuit’s primary connection with its customers are not likely to sell them marketing services. Still, Intuit should be able to expand its network of channel partners fairly quickly. The local marketing business is a huge opportunity that hasn’t had a dominant player. I can claim some bragging rights for having suggested nearly two years ago that Intuit might take this role.


The more interesting question for the rest of the marketing automation industry is whether Intuit will move beyond Demandforce’s current target customers. In the short term, probably not: the opportunity is large enough to keep them busy for quite some time. But local marketing involves more than small businesses, so Demandforce has a natural growth path in that direction. A modest functional expansion could also make Demandforce competitive at the lower end of the standard B2B marketing automation world, where products like Act-On, Marketo Spark, and Genius contend. From there, it could creep upwards. Again, that’s down the road but it does put a ceiling on the pricing and growth prospects of companies currently serving those segments.

It's also worth considering the financial aspects of the deal. On the one hand, the $400+ million price – more than 10x revenue – has to be heartening for other marketing automation vendors contemplating an exit. But Demandforce is far from typical. It is already larger than all but a handful of marketing automation companies, is growing faster than anyone of similar size, and has made all this progress on a mere $11.8 million of investment. It also offers benefits that are more clearly defined and easier to deliver than marketing automation provides to larger companies. And the very fact that Intuit is now playing in the industry will make it harder for others to grow – especially if Demandforce moves quickly. Given all these advantages, it’s not clear other vendors will come close to duplicating the terms that Demandforce received.

Read More

Infusionsoft Revamps Its Interface, Adds New Campaign Builder, Web Analytics and Lead Scoring

Infusionsoft introduced its latest release earlier this month. This included a full revamp of its customer interface, a new campaign builder and shopping cart, and new capabilities for Web analytics, lead scoring, and lead source reporting.

Stated so plainly, this doesn’t sound like much. But Infusionsoft says it’s the biggest release in company history and I've no reason to doubt.  A new interface and campaign builder are big projects.

Both represent significant improvements over previous Infusionsoft editions. The interface is cleaner, organized around tasks rather than data objects, and lets users customize their menu of top-level functions. The campaign builder now supports branching flows, timers, and multi-step sequences with a smooth drag-and-drop interface. The shopping cart is also significantly more powerful. Lead scoring (nicely executed), Web analytics, and lead source reporting all fill major gaps in the product.

That said, this is still an evolutionary release for Infusionsoft. In part, this is because the company is careful not to overwhelm clients with too many changes. More fundamentally, it reflects Infusionsoft's steady focus on solving the same problem for the same customers: helping businesses with under 25 employees run their marketing, sales and e-commerce more efficiently.  This lets Infusionsoft understand its customers' needs deeply and build systems that meet them.  The company conducted more than 500 interviews in preparing the new release.        

Infusionsoft still has a ways to go.  The new release adds some missing marketing features but doesn’t incorporate social media, blogging, or Web site management. These are common needs for small businesses, so I’d consider them gaps in the product. The system also lacks dynamic content, custom data tables, and sophisticated user rights management – but those are more relevant to larger firms than Infusionsoft’s target customers.  Split testing is also missing – and even though few small businesses do it, I'd argue it belongs in the product, because they should.

Infusionsoft also reported that it continues to grow nicely.  The company now has 8,500 customers, 30,000 users, and expected revenue of $40 million in 2012, up 50% over $26 million in 2011. It is expanding its service offerings, app marketplace, and network of consulting partners – a critical resource for small businesses that often have little in-house marketing talent.  Pricing on the new release remains unchanged, with full-featured versions starting at $299 per month. 

Read More

Marketo Spark Targets Small Business Marketing Automation

Marketo today announced the launch of Spark, a new brand aimed at small and mid-size business. Functionally, Spark is pretty much identical to the standard Marketo system. Exceptions are advanced features including revenue cycle reporting, email deliverability assistance, API access, fine-grained user rights management, and the Sales Insight salesperson application. Most of these aren’t of interest to small business, and several involve additional charges even for Marketo’s regular packages.

So the news here is price. Spark starts at $750 per month with no annual contract, compared with Marketo’s $2,000 per month minimum and annual contract for its full-featured Professional Edition. Marketo has discontinued its $1,200 per month Small Business Edition, which lacked some features now included with Spark.

In other words, this is a price cut. To me, it looks like a reaction to the success of other low cost small business systems, including HubSpot, Act-On Software, and Pardot. (HubSpot and Act-On have similar pricing to Spark, while Pardot runs a bit higher.)  Some of those firms are actually growing at a faster rate than Marketo, although on a smaller base.  Spark should help to blunt their momentum while increasing Marketo's own client total -- a closely watched metric, regardless of the associated revenue per client.

Whether Marketo actually makes any money at Spark's price is questionable. It really depends on the sales and support costs, and Marketo doesn’t appear to have changed how those are delivered to keep them down. Other small business specialists have designed sales and support models that are not as staff-intensive as traditional approaches. By contrast, Marketo is stressing that Spark includes services to help clients take advantage of their systems.

Of course, Marketo could have lowered its entry price without creating a new brand.  So why bother to launch Spark?

One reason may be to avoid cannibalizing sales of its other, higher-priced editions.  But, let’s face it, any sentient buyer will notice that Spark is out there. I think the more important reason is that Spark lets Marketo address small businesses separately from larger companies.  The two groups do have different needs and neither wants a system designed for the other.  Spark lets Marketo position itself as a small business specialist when selling to small businesses, without alienating big-business marketers who would consider a small business system an unsuitable toy. 


This is a delicate game.  For one thing, "small business" means different things to different people.  Small business specialists like Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot actually serve a different market -- one that I label "microbusiness" and put at under $5 million revenue.  Those products have a different configuration from Spark, HubSpot, Pardot, or Act-On.  Specifically, Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot have starting prices around $300 per month and offer built-in shopping carts and CRM.  (Other micro-business specialists like Genoo and MakesBridge also have a sub-$500 monthly price, but no CRM or shopping.)  Although Spark is not aimed at the micro-business market, some people may not recognize the distinction.


Nor it is clear that the Spark brand will be enough let Marketo play in both the small and mid-size business segments ($5 to $500 million revenue, by my definition) and the big business segment (more than $500 million revenue.)   Nearly every other marketing automation vendor focuses on one or the other.  The main exception is HubSpot, which is also trying to add larger clients without losing its small business base -- and facing some positioning challenges of its own.  

Spark also poses a financial challenge.  Marketo has said it will earn around $30 million revenue in 2011, and will have an average of around 1,100 clients.  That comes to about $2,500 per client per month, a figure Marketo has been striving to increase.  A large number of Spark clients at $750 per month would dramatically reduce its average.  The profit margins, if any, will surely be lower as well, again dragging down the corporate average.

Now, this is all interesting stuff, but does it matter to anyone who isn't a Marketo investor?  Probably not.  Spark may push prices a little lower and may put a small crimp in some competitors' growth rates.  It may also give small business marketers another fine set of resource materials to complement those from HubSpot and others.  But the bottom line is that similar capabilities were already available at a similar price point from Marketo and others. Spark just doesn't change much.

 

Read More

HubSpot's Strategy for Winning the Marketing Automation Horserace

Back on September 20, I posted various tips from the Inbound Marketing Summit and HubSpot User Group. Naturally, the conference also included public and private discussions of HubSpot itself, but I thought those were best shared in a separate post. Here goes.

The conference yielded a clear picture of HubSpot’s business strategy for the coming year. This strategy has two main elements, which were set out by CEO Brian Halligan in his keynote:

- expansion to “middle of funnel” marketing. HubSpot originally focused on “top of funnel” or “inbound” marketing, which boils down to helping marketers to attract Web traffic. In concrete terms, it involves blogging, search engine optimization of Websites, and social media messages. The company is now doing more to help marketers nurture the leads its attracts.  This involves strengthening its “middle of the funnel” tools for more powerful email, better segmentation and content selection, and enhancing lead profiles with data from social media.

“Mid funnel" is the territory of standard B2B marketing automation, although HubSpot largely avoids the term. Indeed, CTO Dharmesh Shah said their goal is to “leapfrog” current marketing automation vendors by replacing their focus on email marketing with a focus on social media. HubSpot also plans to automate functions that are simply too hard for most marketers to do manually. These include segmentation, building lead scoring models, and content selection. To be clear, this isn't about building a simpler interface.  It's about having the system perform tasks without any user effort.

- allowing other companies to offer functions and services to HubSpot customers. This lets HubSpot extend its scope without developing all the features or delivering all the services itself. The key initiatives here are a “platform” program and app store that allow HubSpot partners to sell products that integrate directly with HubSpot’s data and user interface, and a “services marketplace” that makes it easy to find vendors for marketing tasks such as program design and content creation. Shah said the marketplace will rate vendor performance by looking at results captured within HubSpot.  For example, it might report how much traffic is generated by content from different providers. That’s an intriguing concept, although I’m not sure how vendors will feel about that sort of measurement.

Benchmarking in general is another aspect of HubSpot’s strategy. Like automation and use of external resources, benchmarking is aimed at helping marketers become more effective without consuming HubSpot resources. The company already provides benchmark reports that compare a client’s key metrics with averages for all HubSpot clients, for top 10% clients, and for similar companies. Shah said it is working on additional programs to help marketers measure their progress, such as comparisons among companies who start using the system at the same time.

- Halligan’s keynote also listed a third theme for the coming year: application maturity. He gave current HubSpot applications a C+ on his report card for the previous year and said blogging and Web content management are targeted for improvement. He also cited previous enhancements including custom fields in list imports, custom lists and segments, increased email limit from 5,000 to 50,000 messages, better email templates, optimized email for mobile and social platforms, and improved Salesforce.com integration. HubSpot's purchase of Performable  will also improve its Web analytics, event tracking, and email campaign capabilities. Performable is still largely separate from the main HubSpot application but is expected to be fully integrated by the end of this year.

Maybe it’s just me, but I see application maturity as table stakes, not a major strategy. HubSpot is quite clear that it isn’t aiming to serve the most demanding users, but remains focused on small businesses who want a single, simple solution to their basic marketing needs. (Well, they do sometimes admit they plan to creep upmarket over time.)  I appreciate the company’s candor in admitting that its applications could use improvement and hasten to point out that I haven’t heard  more complaints about HubSpot than anyone else. But it’s clear their goal will continue to be making simple things easy, not complex things possible.

What Does It Mean? As I’ve written before, HubSpot is one of those very well-run start-ups that define a sound, long-term strategy and execute intelligently and relentlessly. The top of the funnel, where there was less competition, was a good place to start.  Extending from there to mid-funnel makes perfect sense as a way to add value and to preempt or displace other marketing systems. Adding the platform and services marketplace both enable further growth with minimal investment, and (perhaps more important) make it easier to recruit allies in the sales process.

But, smart as those strategies are, they’re fairly standard. Much more intriguing are HubSpot’s bets that it can radically simplify marketing tasks through automation and that the primary marketing channel will be social media instead of email.

Although I’m a great fan of automation, it’s not at all clear to me that it can be more than a productivity enhancement tool for skilled marketers, as opposed to actually making skills unnecessary. Okay, I can already hear the rebuttal: “We’re not saying skill isn’t needed but that we can reduce the level of training and effort required.” Well, sure. But the question remains: can automation reduce those requirements enough to matter? For what it’s worth, the amount of work remaining for users was also my original criticism  of HubSpot’s SEO tools. Those do seem have pleased many users, so I’ll certainly entertain the possibility that HubSpot is on the right track.

Similarly, HubSpot would surely point out that they’re not abandoning email, but simply adding social media as an increasingly important alternative. Again, granted. But all other marketing automation vendors are also adding social media capabilities. So I think it’s legitimate to ask whether there is anything fundamentally different about HubSpot’s approach, or, setting a slightly lower bar, whether a mindset that sees social media as primary actually leads in a different direction. I haven’t seen anything so far to suggest either is true*, and think there’s a pretty compelling counter-argument that it’s more important to take an integrated view than try to treat any channel as primary. But the jury’s out on this one too – we’ll see where HubSpot goes with it.

Bottom line: like every marketing automation vendor, HubSpot is wrestling with the fundamental challenge of enabling marketers to do all the new things their system makes possible.  Expanding the product scope and its surrounding ecosystem will help, but others are doing the same.  HubSpot's hope that automation can close the skills gap is a fundamentally different approach -- and while the company isn't betting everything on that one horse, it will certainly win big if it's right.

_______________________________________________________________
*For a good overview of HubSpot’s social media features and an explanation of why they bought social media marketing software company oneforty in August, see their blog post announcing the oneforty acquisition.

Read More

Intuit / Salesforce.com Alliance Is No April Fool's Joke

Am I the only one who missed the April 1 announcement of a strategic alliance between Salesforce.com and Intuit? Given our industry's endless nattering about whether Salesforce.com will move into marketing automation, this should have attracted more attention (or, at least, enough attention that I would hear about it sooner than I did).

In case you too missed the news, it comes down to this: Salesforce.com will be available on Intuit’s App Center and be deployed so that the Intuit and Salesforce.com databases are synchronized. For those of us used to thinking of Salesforce.com as the 900 pound gorilla, it’s disorienting to see Salesforce on the Intuit App Center, rather than the other way around.

But it does make sense. Intuit has more than 4 million customers, compared with 90,000 for Salesforce.com. The revenue differential isn’t as large ($3.5 billion for Intuit vs. $1.7 billion for Salesforce) and Salesforce.com actually has a slightly higher market cap ($17.5 billion for Salesforce.com vs. $16.5 billion for Intuit). But Intuit represents a gateway to the small business market for Salesforce.com, so it’s clear who needs whom.

What has this to do with marketing automation? Pretty much everything, I’d argue, at least for companies like Infusionsoft, OfficeAutoPilot, and Genoo, who target “micro-businesses” at the lowest end of the market. Those vendors base much of their appeal on the convenience of using one system for marketing, Web pages, CRM, and even order processing. The one thing they don’t offer is accounting, in good part because Intuit’s QuickBooks has such a dominant position.

The lack of accounting data is an important gap, because the accounting system is the ultimate source for information on customer identities and transactions. That data is important for effective marketing. Having it automatically available to Salesforce.com makes Salesforce a much more attractive marketing option for small businesses.

I suppose I should backtrack a bit here and acknowledge that I’m talking about marketing to customers – that is, people who have already made a purchase – rather than marketing to prospects or leads. Business-to-consumer marketing automation systems manage relationships with both groups, while B2B marketing automation is concerned primarily with just prospects and leads. The “micro-business” marketing automation vendors are more like B2C systemsbecause they do deal with customers as well as leads and prospects.

In other words, the Intuit / Salesforce.com alliance poses a very large threat to the “micro-business” marketing automation vendors but doesn’t have much impact on the rest of the B2B marketing automation industry, which sells to larger companies. Indeed, those larger firms are typically not QuickBooks clients at all.

But here’s the thing: let’s say that Salesforce.com does succeed in selling to a lot of Intuit clients, and in the process adds marketing automation features to serve them better. Those marketing automation features will be available to all sizes of Salesforce.com clients, including the larger ones who currently purchase marketing automation systems. Even if those firms continue to use marketing automation just to target leads and prospects, they’ll suddenly have a stronger reason to adopt Salesforce.com as their marketing platform. So marketing automation vendors who thought the Salesforce.com / Intuit deal didn’t apply to them, might want to think again.

Read More

MakesBridge Offers Powerful Features to Small Business Marketers

Summary: MakesBridge offers a full set of marketing automation features with some special strengths that will appeal especially to small companies.

I’ve written quite a bit recently about marketing systems for very small businesses – a category I’ve tentatively labeled “micro-business” and pegged at under $5 million revenue. This group of marketers has different needs from even slightly larger companies. In particular, they want a highly-integrated combination of standard marketing automation (email, landing pages and individual-level Website behavior tracking) with customer relationship management (tracking personal and telephone contacts with individuals). Leaders in the space are Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot, which both also provide integrated shopping carts for e-commerce. HubSpot also has many micro-business clients but is not focused on them exclusively and – probably as a result – has a slightly different feature set: more Web traffic generation and no built-in contact management or shopping cart.

There are plenty of other vendors serving micro-businesses. I’ve previously reviewed Genoo, which supplements the standard marketing automation features with Web hosting and built-in CRM but no shopping cart. Canterris , NurtureHQ , and mKubed all provide email, Web visitor tracking, nurture campaigns, lead scoring, and CRM integration ((Salesforce.com for Canterris and NurtureHQ; its own CRM for mKubed) for under $500 per month. Canterris and mKubed also host Web forms and landing pages but NurtureHQ apparently does not. See my List of Demand Generation Vendors for other options.

MakesBridge is another contender. The company started in 2001 as an email service provider and still offers a $29.95 per month email product. It greatly expanded its features in 2010 and now offers a marketing automation system starting at $500 per month. This includes the full rig: outbound email, multi-step nurture campaigns, landing pages and forms, lead scoring, Web visitor tracking (licensed from VisiStat and quite impressive), and a sales automation module that can work as a stand-alone CRM system or integrate with Salesforce.com, NetSuite, Google Apps, or Capsule CRM, a $12 per month per user system also aimed at small business. There’s no shopping cart or Web site hosting but I don’t yet consider those standard features, even for micro-business systems.

MakesBridge does a particularly good job of taming the mass of Web pages that are critical to reacting to lead behaviors. It does this by letting users write rules that reference sets of Web pages rather than individual pages. This can be done by either assigning a shared label to several pages or by assigning page attributes and selecting on those. This is a helpful middle ground between rules that treat all pages the same (e.g. “visited any Web page”) and those that require users to list a specific page or several individual pages. These rules can be used in segmentation, lead scoring, and sales alerts.

The system also has a solid campaign engine, which breaks campaigns into steps and allows multiple options within each step. Each option has a filter that determines which leads are eligible, in addition to actions and an execution schedule that apply to those leads. Users can view reports on performance for each step and for each option within the step. A “circuit breaker” enforces limits on the total number of emails sent during any time period, alerting the user and limiting the damage from what MakesBridge calls "automation run wild".

MakesBridge also supports automated direct mail production, another feature favored by micro-business marketers. For this, the company has integrated with Cloud2You, a Salesforce.com App Exchange partner that loads selected records directly into templates to produce personalized mailing pieces. Cloud2You handles the actual printing and mailing without any additional effort by the user. Mailings can be triggered by steps within a MakesBridge campaign,

The sales automation module gives salespeople access to detailed information about their leads, including their current campaigns. Salespeople can remove a lead from a campaign, suspend the campaign, or skip a particular message. Although MakesBridge is designed to integrate with external CRM products, some clients use its sales automation module as their primary CRM system.

Pricing of MakesBridge is based on the modules used, number of users, email volume, and number of leads in the database. The system currently has more than 150 clients. Most are small businesses but some are large corporations.

Read More

eTrigue Puts a New Interface on Mature Marketing Automation Features

Summary: eTrigue's new product is aimed at small-to-mid size businesses who want an easier alternative to leading marketing automation systems. With mature features and a $1,000 per month starting price, the system is worth a look.

eTrigue officially announced its new DemandCenter marketing automation system on Tuesday, replacing an earlier product dating back more than five years.

The system is positioned as “marketing automation for the rest of us”, meaning that eTrigue considers it much easier to use than leading marketing automation products. If that sounds familiar, it’s because I recently mentioned similar claims from Net-Results , Act-On Software, and tMarketbright. All believe that the complexity of standard marketing systems is the major reason they have not been more widely adopted and that they can offer a simpler alternative.

Bear in mind that’s a two-part proposition. Even if these vendors are right that complexity is the key barrier to adoption, there’s no business opportunity unless their systems are simpler. Otherwise, they’ve simply explained why marketing automation can never succeed, or at least won’t succeed until a critical mass of marketers have been trained to handle a new level of complexity.

So let’s cut to the critical question: is DemandCenter easier to use than systems like Pardot, Marketo, and Genius? The answer is a definite…maybe. DemandCenter has a campaign flow interface that does seem easier to use than standard products. But the rest of it, while nicely done, doesn’t strike me as materially different.

What makes the campaign builder different? Well, most systems use some variation of two basic approaches. One is to create a classic branching flow diagram, like a Visio chart. Here’s a state-of-the-art version from Eloqua:


This has the advantage of displaying the exact flow of leads, including branches that split apart and come together. It allows complex flows and is pretty much the way that most people diagram a campaign when they're planning it. But flow diagrams get confusing once you move beyond a handful of branches.

The other option is to build a list of steps without any branching. Rules within each step can still deliver different treatments to different segments, but everyone moves to the same next step at the same time. This is easier to follow but it lacks flexibility and you must look inside each step to see the details. Here is Marketo’s version:


DemandCenter lies somewhere in between. It lays out the steps within a single sequence on a row – similar to the list of steps but sideways. But it also allows distinct branches, showing each branch as its own row. This isn't perfect – you can’t draw lines to connect different boxes across branches, as in a flow diagram – but it’s probably more intuitive than the other approaches for moderately complex flows. Users can also collapse an entire, multi-branch campaign onto a single row and show multiple campaigns on the screen.


(Of course, nothing is truly unique. DemandCenter’s approach is conceptually similar to the interface introduced by Silverpop last year, which also showed branches as horizontal tracks. I liked that one too.)


So let's grant that eTrigue has built a somewhat better mousetrap. How much does it really matter? The campaign interface is just one of many components within a marketing automation system. A better campaign interface by itself is not enough to radically change the complexity of marketing automation as a whole.

Now, if all DemandCenter features were easier than the competition, that might change things. But while the rest of DemandCenter is well designed, nothing struck me as different enough to make a substantial difference in usability. So if superior ease of use is the only way for eTrigue to distinguish itself, it will have a very hard time.

But marketing automation systems actually compete on more than ease of use. eTrigue’s original product was originally developed in 2004/2005 by Silicon Valley marketing agency 3marketeers, which couldn’t find a system that met its own needs. The system has since been sold to about 150 clients. This long experience has led eTrigue to include capabilities that are missing in most low-to-mid-tier marketing automation products. These include:

- anonymous visitor look-up, based on IP address, with automatic exclusion of ISP addresses
- reporting on anonymous visitors as individuals (not companies) and indefinite retention of anonymous visitor histories (most systems erase the related cookies after a few months)
- real-time sales alerts triggered by lead behaviors
- ability to send leads directly from one campaign to another
- statistics for each campaign step visible in the campaign flow diagram
- a cube-based data mart for time-series analysis and other advanced reporting
- automated execution of reports on user-defined schedules
- precise user- and group-level security, including options to limit specific campaigns to specific users
- ability for Salesforce.com users to send emails through eTrigue
- tailored dashboards for each user

These are in addition to the usual marketing automation functions: email campaigns, landing pages and forms, lead scoring, and bi-directional integration with both Salesforce.com and Microsoft Dynamics.

That's a richer feature set than most marketing automation systems targeted towards the small and mid-size business. But pricing of DemandCenter is actually lower than most vendors in that segment, starting at $1,000 per month for a 10,000 name database. This includes implementation and training. The combination of mature features, a new interface, and low pricing makes eTrigue an attractive alternative even if it doesn’t break any major barriers for ease of use.

eTrigue also has a product aimed at salespeople, called SalesPro. This works directly from a Salesforce.com database, using the Salesforce.com email engine but applying eTrigue email authoring, campaign structures, Web tracking, and lead scores. The system doesn't include landing pages. It's priced at $500 per month for 10 users.

Read More

Constant Contact Adds Social CRM: Should Marketing Automation Vendors Be Worried?

Small-business email provider Constant Contact yesterday announced the acquisition of "social CRM"* vendor Bantam Live. This is a major expansion for Constant Contact, placing it more squarely into competition with CRM and marketing automation vendors. As I've noted previously, small businesses are particularly likely to adopt a single platform for all of their marketing and customer management needs because the inefficiencies of multiple platforms are so obvious and painful in a small organization.

Email vendors like Constant Contact are especially well positioned to grab this business because they are one of first technologies that businesses adopt. (Other entry points: accounting software like Intuit Quickbooks, email clients like Microsoft Outlook, personal productivity suites like Microsoft Office, Web hosting companies like GoDaddy, and of course CRM like Salesforce.com.) As a point of reference, Constant Contact says it is used by more than 400,000 organizations, compared with maybe 10,000 for all marketing automation systems combined. The company expects more than $200 million in revenue in 2011, which about equals my estimate for 2010 revenues for all B2B marketing automation. And Constant Contact is just one of many small business email providers.

I've been meaning for some time to write a post about the small business sector of the marketing automation industry, because I really see it as very distinct from marketing automation for mid-size and large businesses. But this Constant Contact announcement underscores one the major points I had in mind: that the low number of current marketing automation installations in this field doesn't mean it's a wide open market. Rather, it means that there are plenty of other partial solutions in place at most firms. Expanding the solutions to offer reasonably complete marketing automation just isn't that hard, technically. And any vendor who does this has a major advantage because they can sell marketing automation as a product extension to their existing clients.

Finding a way to displace these existing vendors is the real challenge for small business marketing automation systems, since small businesses are not likely to add a new system without getting rid of an old one. The other big issue is that the existing solutions often cost only a few dollars per month (for example, Constant Contact averages under $50 per month per client). This means the $300 per month of even the cheapest marketing automation systems is a big increase that many small businesses will not be willing to pay.

____________________________________________________________
* I put "social CRM" in quotation marks because I personally am not quite sure what it really means. According to their Web site, Bantam Live offers the usual sales automation functions (contact management, profile management, pipeline management, sales analytics, calendar sharing, file sharing, workgroups) plus a bucket of social media capabilities including social search, network feeds, messaging, discussions and collaborative workflow.

Read More

ClickDimensions Offers Marketing Automation as a Microsoft CRM Add-on

Now that I’m more or less finished launching the B2B Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Tool (VEST), I can start catching up on the other topics.

Let’s start with ClickDimensions, a system I explored last September but never wrote about. ClickDimensions does pretty much the standard marketing automation activities: email, landing pages, Web visitor tracking, drip marketing campaigns, and lead scoring.

What’s missing from the list is CRM integration. That's no accident: ClickDimensions doesn’t integrate with CRM in the regular sense of synchronizing data. Rather, it works directly from Microsoft Dynamics CRM files. In other words, ClickDimensions is a Microsoft CRM add-on.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. In fact, I (and many others) have long argued that marketing automation makes more sense as an integrated component of a CRM system than a stand-alone product. After all, separate systems must synchronize databases, campaigns, users, content libraries, activity histories, and other things, adding cost and complexity. Small business systems like Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot solve this problem by bundling their own CRM features. This isn't an option at bigger companies, where one or more CRM systems are often deeply embedded. So it makes more sense to extend CRM to include marketing automation than the other way around.

This potential expansion has always been the biggest cloud hovering over B2B marketing automation, which has arguably been allowed to develop only because the business remained too small for the major CRM vendors to care about. Of course, another way to look at this is that the CRM vendors already do marketing automation – certainly Oracle/Siebel does, and plenty of folks would argue that Salesforce.com has adequate marketing automation capabilities for most purposes, although most experts (and I) would disagree. Still, a slow incremental expansion of CRM vendors’ marketing automation features is all it would take to squeeze the dedicated marketing automation vendors into an ever-smaller corner of the market, leaving them to serve only companies with specialized needs.

But I digress. ClickDimensions illustrates the advantages of a combined CRM/marketing automation platform. It works off the Dynamics CRM database, so sales and marketing have access to the same, complete data without synchronization. Perhaps more important, ClickDimensions use the Dynamics CRM platform to handle data management, campaign workflows, and user rights. This has freed ClickDimensions to concentrate on the building features that are absent (at least for now) in Dynamics and other CRM systems: advanced email campaigns and Web activity tracking.

ClickDimensions has its own email engine, replacing the product’s original reliance on ExactTarget. The engine supports dynamic content, which is unusual for lower-to-mid-tier marketing automation products. I did find the implementation rather basic: users must write rules in a scripting language and the content is embedded in the email templates rather than read from a shared library.

On the other hand, ClickDimensions has an advanced Outlook email integration that I’ve never seen anywhere else. An administrator can assign an email address to a mailing list; then, end-users send a personalized email to that address and the system delivers it to everyone on the list. ClickDimensions calls this “Outlookcasting.” The advantage is that salespeople can use their familiar Outlook email to send mass emails which are tracked through the marketing automation system.

The system's other major extension beyond standard CRM capabilities is Web activity tracking. This is pretty straightforward: users tag their Web pages with ClickDimensions tracking codes and the system stores activities in custom data objects within the Dynamics data structure. Like many marketing automation systems, ClickDimensions can use the IP address of anonymous visitors to identify their company (if they are using a corporate IP address). It also lets users manually label IP addresses that might belong to a generic ISP but the user knows are linked to a specific company. The system tracks the usual Web information: visits, page views, posted forms, posted fields, and so on.

Email and Web activity data, as well as any activities captured by Dynamics itself, are available for lead scoring and event triggers. Multi-step campaign flows are built using the Dynamics workflow engine. I haven't examined the Dynamics workflow in detail but it seems comparable to most marketing automation campaign engines.

ClickDimensions pricing ranges from $4,000 to $12,000 per year based on email volume. That’s considerably cheaper than standard mid-tier marketing automation products, although some small business systems are cheaper. The initial version of ClickDimensions was released in September 2010, although the company’s own email engine wasn’t added until December. The vendor reports more than 50 current clients, including a few big companies. It sells the product directly in the U.S. and through resellers in Europe. ClickDimensions is also part of Microsoft’s BizSpark program, an initiative to form close relationships with high-potential start-ups.

Read More

B2B Marketing Automation Report Is Now Available Online. Thanks, OfficeAutoPilot

Thanks to the heroic efforts of my friends at OfficeAutoPilot, the new B2B Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Tool (VEST) is finally available for online sales. You can click here to access the new landing page and order forms.

There's a long story behind this, with many lessons that reinforce and illuminate the basic premise behind marketing automation: that is, marketers need a system that makes it easy to do their jobs. I don't have the energy to write that at the moment, however. But I will point you to the animated video on the OfficeAutoPilot home page, which is laugh-out-loud funny (to me, at least) and makes the fundamental case quite clearly.

I'll qualify this a bit by pointing out that OfficeAutoPilot is one of the systems aimed at small businesses, which means it includes the CRM and e-commerce components you don't find in products aimed at larger organizations. This is what made it perfect for Raab Associates' own needs, since the specific roadblock to selling the VEST on the existing Raab Guide Web site was that the e-commerce bit wasn't working.

Even more important, OfficeAutoPilot (again like other small business specialists) has recognized that its clients need a great deal of help in setting up their systems and has organized accordingly. The OfficeAutoPilot staff spent nearly two full days working to get me running, drawing on best practices to create a much more sophisticated process than I would have started with by myself. More to the point, they did this without charging a penny -- which I'm pretty sure is what they do for all their clients, not just industry analysts like me. In fact, although OfficeAutoPilot owner Landon Ray did give me a free subscription to the system (full disclosure), the staff who worked on my project didn't seem to have any particular sense of what I do.

This gets to the heart of the marketing automation deployment challenge, which is helping marketers get real value from their systems from the start. Industry gurus, myself included, rant about this endlessly. So I wasn't particularly surprised to find myself living it, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that OfficeAutoPilot really works to solve it in the most direct way possible: by just doing the stuff for clients who need help. I fully recognize that life isn't so simple at bigger organizations, but it's still an important example to hold up as one type of ideal.

Ok, I guess I wrote a little more about this than I had planned--it's my way of winding down after an intense several weeks of first getting the VEST created and then finally putting it into the market. The job isn't really done: I need to toss the old Joomla-based Raab Guide site and create a new one in WordPress that I can maintain personally. And at some point I still need to do a more detailed review of OfficeAutoPilot itself, which I'll say in general I'm finding quite satisfactory. But for now the real story is just to say thanks to the folks at OfficeAutoPilot who took such good care of me, and I am quite certain will continue to do so in the future.

Read More

HubSpot Expands Its Services But Stays Focused on Small Business

Summary: HubSpot has continued to grow its customer base and expand its product. It's looking more like a conventional small-business marketing automation system every day.

You have to admire a company that defines a clear strategy and methodically executes it. HubSpot has always aimed to provide small businesses with one easy-to-use system for all their marketing needs. The company began with search engine optimization to attract traffic, and added landing pages, blogging, Web hosting, lead scoring, and Salesforce.com integration. Since my July 2009 review, HubSpot has further extended the system to include social media monitoring and sharing, limited list segmentation and simple drip marketing campaigns. It is now working on more robust outbound email, support for mobile Web pages, and APIs for outside developers to create add-on applications.

The extension into email is a particularly significant step for HubSpot, placing it in more direct competition with other small business marketing systems like Infusionsoft, OfficeAutoPilot and Genoo. Of course, this competition was always implicit – few small businesses would have purchased HubSpot plus one of those products. But HubSpot’s “inbound marketing” message was different enough that most buyers would have decided based on their marketing priorities (Web site or email?). As both sets of systems expand their scope, their features will overlap more and marketers will compare them directly.

Choices will be based on individual features and supporting services. In terms of features, HubSpot still offers unmatched search engine optimization and only Genoo shares its ability to host a complete Web site (as opposed to just landing pages and microsites). On the other hand, HubSpot’s lead scoring, email and nurture campaigns are quite limited compared with its competitors. Web analytics, social media and CRM integration seem roughly equivalent.

One distinct disadvantage is that most small business marketing automation systems offer their own low-cost alternative to Salesforce.com, while HubSpot does not. HubSpot’s Kirsten Knipp told me the company has no plans to add this, relying instead on easy integration with systems like SugarCRM and Zoho. But I wouldn’t be surprised if they changed their minds.

In general, though, HubSpot’s growth strategy seems to rely more on expanding services than features. This makes sense: like everyone else, they've recognized that most small businesses (and many not-so-small businesses) don’t know how to make good use of a marketing automation program. This makes support essential for both selling and retaining them as customers.

One aspect of service is consulting support. HubSpot offers three pricing tiers that add service as well as features at the levels increase. The highest tier, still a relatively modest $18,000 per year, includes a weekly telephone consultation.

The company has also set up new programs to help recruit and train marketing experts who can resell the product and/or use it to support their own clients. These programs include sales training, product training, and certification. They should both expand HubSpot’s sales and provide experts to help buyers that HubSpot sells directly.

So far, HubSpot’s strategy has been working quite nicely. The company has been growing at a steady pace, reaching 3,500 customers in October with 98% monthly retention. A couple hundred of these are at the highest pricing tier, with the others split about evenly between the $3,000 and $9,000 levels. This is still fewer clients than Infusionsoft, which had more than 6,000 clients as of late September. But it's probably more than any other marketing automation vendor and impressive by any standard.

Read More

Do Small Businesses Need Marketing Automation?

Summary: Vendors who target small businesses include provide functions beyond traditional marketing automation. This helps business owners who need to generate revenue as efficiently as possible. But larger firms need to be efficient too: so expect all marketing automation systems to eventually expand in similar ways.

The replies are rolling in from the survey of vendor features that I mentioned last week. (Reminder: you can upload the 150+ questions for your own RFP from www.raabguide.com.)

One interesting reaction has come from vendors serving the smallest companies (I’m talking really small here -- under 10 employees). These include Genoo, Hubspot, Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot. A couple have noted that my questions only cover standard marketing automation functions (email, landing pages, nurture campaigns, lead scoring, CRM integration and reporting), while their products offer additional functions. The most common added function is sales force automation, but some also offer different combinations of e-commerce, order processing, customer support, blogging, Web site optimization and paid search.

On one level, this broader scope makes perfect sense. Small companies don’t have the money to pay for multiple systems and, probably more important, lack the technical resources to integrate them. In addition, most small firms have pretty basic needs, so even the “light” editions of full-featured products like Salesforce.com can be overkill.

But if small companies really want a single system, why hasn’t one grown to dominate the marketplace? Vendors like NetSuite do offer such products, but they’re not targeted at very small businesses. Rather, the most successful small business systems tend to do one thing: think accounting (Intuit Quickbooks), Web hosting (Godaddy), email services (Constant Contact) or CRM (Salesforce.com).

Some of these vendors have tried to poach on other territories, but without much success. I think that’s because there is relatively little interaction between the different systems. As a result, small businesses haven’t felt much pain from keeping them separate.

Marketing among very small businesses is often limited to a bit of local advertising and a Web site. Among those who use actual marketing systems, the most common are simple outbound email. More aggressive businesses might add auto-responders such as Aweber, with pricing as low as $19 per month for 500 subscribers. From there, it's a logical progression to the small business marketing automation vendors I mentioned earlier, although the big jump in prices poses a hurdle: costs start upwards of $200 per month.

The progression from outbound email to auto-responder to nurture campaigns and the rest of marketing automation makes perfect sense, corresponding to new marketing efforts as a business grows more sophisticated. But broader scope inevitably encroaches on other existing systems.

In the case of marketing automation, landing pages encroach on Web hosting and search engine optimization vendors while marketing databases encroach on CRM and social media management. As the elephants in those fields begin to notice flea bites from marketing automation systems, they’ll eventually consider extending their own systems in return. We’ve already seen this with Oracle’s purchase of Market2Lead (now apparently embedded in the Oracle OnDemand CRM system) and, depending on how you look at it, in IBM’s purchase of Unica. We’ve also seen various Web content management vendors (Marqui, SiteCore) add marketing functionality.

Generally speaking, nipping the ankles of elephants is more likely to get you crushed than make you rich. But the case may be different for marketing automation vendors. This will depend on showing that they’re replacing a cost center (e.g. Web hosting, customer service) with a revenue generator, or that their integrated approach yields more revenue than the current isolated systems (e.g. sales automation, search engine marketing, outbound email).

This means that the small business vendors who feel my survey is too narrow are right. Their buyers need more than traditional marketing automation features. I expect vendors in that space will continue to expand their scope accordingly, even as vendors in other spaces add marketing automation features for the same reason. And I expect this broader scope will eventually percolate upwards to larger companies, although this will happen more slowly because of organizational barriers to cooperation.

Read More

Net-Results Simplifies Demand Generation for Small Business

Summary: Net-Results is simpler to use than comparable demand generation systems because it applies the same features to many tasks. The system is aimed at small business but offers an interesting design lesson for everyone.

When Net-Results’ showed me their marketing automation system, the demonstration ended so quickly that I wondered what was missing. But on reflection I realized that Net-Results offers a full set of demand generation functions. The demonstration was short because the system uses only a few features to deliver them. In an industry where every competitor is striving for grater ease of use, stand-out simplicity is an impressive achievement.

The key to Net-Results’ approach is to build everything around segments. Email campaigns are targeted at segments; Web visitors are classified into segments; behavior alerts are triggered by segments; lead scores are assigned to segments; leads are sent to the sales system based on segments; reports are run against segments. This simplifies the system in two ways: marketers have fewer features to learn, and they can reuse their work across many functions.

Let’s run through the standard demand generation process to see how this works in practice. This process has five functions: send emails to prospects; capture responses on landing pages; score leads; send qualified leads to sales; and nurture non-qualified leads with multi-step campaigns.

Prospects enter Net-Results from external Web forms (more about that later), file imports, manual data entry, or Salesforce.com synchronization. They’re assigned to campaigns by defining entry conditions for campaign steps, which the system calls “actions”. These conditions are not themselves segments but can be copied from existing segment definitions or built with the standard segment-creation interface.

Campaigns can have multiple actions, each with its own entry conditions. Actions can be arranged hierarchically with several "children" attached to the same "parent". Each lead is assigned to the first "child" action whose entry conditions it meets. This allows leads to follow different paths within the same campaign.

The approach imposes some limits, since different branches cannot be reunited. But it will meet the needs for most marketers. Net-Results plans to remove the limits by allowing actions to send leads directly to other actions, within or across campaigns.

Users can also specify a waiting period between actions, and whether to send alerts when a lead qualifies for an action. The actions themselves can send an email, adjust a lead score, or send the lead to Salesforce.com. Since entry conditions can also accept leads into nurture campaigns, the Net-Results actions by themselves account for four of the five core demand generation functions.

The fifth core function, capturing Web response, is Net-Results’ main deviation from standard demand generation techniques. Nearly all demand generation systems let marketers create and deploy landing pages outside of the company Web site. Net-Results does not. Rather, it copies data captured on existing Web forms and posts it to the Net-Results database. This requires users to add a bit of Javascript to company Web pages.

Loading data from existing Web forms requires mapping the original form fields into the Net-Results databases. Net-Results makes this as simple as possible by reading field names on the existing form and suggesting Net-Results fields that are likely to match. Such mapping may sound a scary to serious technophobes, but it’s less work than building a form from scratch.

Net-Results argues that its approach avoids the “vendor lock-in” that comes from using forms hosted by the demand generation vendor. I guess that’s true, but doubt it’s important to most marketers. On the other hand, the Net-Results approach means marketers cannot create new forms without help from whoever runs the company Web site. This strikes me as a significant drawback, which other demand generation systems are expressly designed to avoid.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Net-Results add a form builder fairly soon, although they didn’t say they were planning to. The system already has an email authoring tool, which includes a graphical editor and works from user-defined templates. Extending this to build Web forms should be pretty simple.

The Javascript tracking code also allows Net-Results to capture the behavior of Web visitors. This is another standard feature for demand generation systems. Here’s where segments reappear, since Web behavior can be used in segment definitions and system reports are run against segments.

Running reports against segments may not sound too exciting, but it greatly simplifies marketing analysis. Practical applications include reports to salespeople about their own accounts and reports on campaign results. Each report can run and emailed to specified users on a user-specified schedule. Reports include graphs as well as tabular data. The system's main reports all relate to Web behavior: visitors, traffic source, search terms, and pages viewed.

The Web visitor report is particularly impressive: it's almost a separate application, similar to the tools that other demand generation vendors use to give salespeople a view of Web activity. Users start with a list of visitors (within a segment, of course) showing key information including source, name, email address, telephone, company, most recent visit date, pages viewed, and visit duration. They can then select a lead and drill into the details of current and previous visits. They can also take actions including sending the lead to Salesforce.com and issuing an alert. Marketers could easily extend direct access to salespeople, since system security could restrict the salesperson to her own leads. An incremental user costs just $25 per month.

Net-Results can also issue automatic alerts, again based on entrance into a segment. Alerts can be directed to one or more email addresses and are summarized in a periodic report.

So what about building the segments themselves? There’s no truly easy way to define complex selections, but Net-Results does a reasonable job of balancing simplicity with power. Segments can have general attributes including security (specifying which user groups can access the segment), automatic exclusion of known Internet Service Providers (so reports can only show visitors from identifiable companies), automatic inclusion of only known contacts (to report only on previously-identified individuals), and parsing of “get” variables from the incoming Web address (to capture information passed within the URL). Treating these selections as attributes reduces the complexity of the segmentation statement itself.

Users build the segmentation statements by selecting data categories (visit activities, contact attributes, campaigns, lists, Web forms, traffic source) and then choosing attributes relevant to each category. For example, attributes for Web visits include pages visited and duration, while attributes for contacts include name, company and job title. Many vendors use a similar approach, which I consider the best method for helping non-technical users to create complex segmentations.

Users can group multiple criteria into blocks. All conditions within a block must be met for a lead to qualify; a lead must qualify for at least one block to qualify for the segment. (In more technical terms: the system uses "and" conditions within each block, and "or" conditions between blocks.) Although some subtle queries can’t be created with this approach, it should meet the vast majority of marketers’ needs. Few demand generation systems offer more power, and many offer less.

Once a segment is defined, users can view the records it selects to check that it works as intended. They can then save the segment and assign it to alerts or reports.

Is Net-Results really simpler than other demand generation systems? To some extent it depends on your definition. Net-Results supports many marketing functions with relatively few features. This is one type of simplicity. But different features tailored to different functions could, at least in theory, make other systems more efficient at each task. This is another kind of simplicity. In practice, I felt that Net-Results’ shared features were just as efficient as specialized features used in other systems. So, yes, I ultimately think Net-Results will be simpler for most users.

Net-Results’ drive for simplicity is based on its target market of small businesses. Many of its clients have just one marketer on staff. These people don’t have the time or resources to use a complicated system, and may not need the refinements, such as rule-driven dynamic content within emails, that Net-Results doesn't provide.

Pricing is also aimed at small businesses. [Note: the following is revised price information provided by the vendor as of December 2009.] Fees are based on a combination of page views, email volume, support hours and length of commitment. A client with 60,000 page views, 20,000 emails, and 5 hours of support would pay about $700 per month on a month-to-month basis and just over $600 for an annual agreement. Half of those numbers (30,000, 10,000, 2 hours) would run $400/$350 based on agreement length. The company reports its average billing per client is around $500 per month. No contract is required and Net-Results offers a 14 day free trial.

The Net-Results system was launched in April 2009 and the vendor says it now has “hundreds” of clients. Some have converted from a simpler predecessor product that was launched in 2006.

Read More

Infusionsoft Pushes the Right Buttons for Small Business Marketing

Summary: Infusionsoft knows exactly how to sell marketing automation to small business: promise more revenue, less work, strong support and a low price. The system is designed for entrepreneurs, not full-time marketers.

Since marketing automation for small business was on my mind last week, I checked in with the good folks at Infusionsoft, whose 15,000 customers make them leaders in the field. I ended up chatting with Scott Martineau, company founder and VP Product Management. It was a helpful conversation for a few reasons.

It solidified my understanding that Infusionsoft is aimed at REALLY small companies – typically four or five employees, and very rarely more than 25. Typical clients are selling business services such as training or consumer services such as landscaping, dry cleaning, legal help and niche publishing. Those companies have no dedicated marketing staff and often no specialized sales person. This makes them significantly smaller than buyers of most of the systems I write about – which is something to bear in mind when looking at how Infusionsoft does things.

It showed that Infusionsoft has mastered the art of a clear, simple value proposition: “Fix Your Follow-up, Double Your Sales. Guaranteed.” Um, any questions? That particular headline is inside their site, but the one on the main page (“One ‘Killer App’ to Grow Your Business Fast”) makes a similar promise about growth.

(As to the guarantee itself, the company Web site says “When you use Infusionsoft to fix your follow-up with prospects and customers, you will double your sales. If after 12 months you have not doubled your sales and you’re not confident with the progress you’re making, you can cancel the software and we’ll refund half of your first year’s subscription fees.” Although there were originally some conditions on the guarantee, the company removed them all last month.)

As Infusionsoft’s main headline reinforces, small businesses want as few systems as possible. Martineau said that Infusionsoft typically replaces separate CRM, email, shopping cart and possibly affiliate tracking systems. But this is where it’s worth remembering that Infusionsoft is working with very small businesses: larger firms might have greater need for separate systems.

Even Infusionsoft doesn’t attempt to do everything. It doesn’t run the company Web site (which most small businesses have someone else do for them) or provide accounting (a market dominated by Intuit QuickBooks).

Nor, more surprisingly, does Infusionsoft provide inbound marketing (search engine optimization, paid search tracking, Web analytics, detailed activity tracking, blogging, etc.) features to help generate initial Web leads. I can think of a few possible explanations: Infusionsoft clients don’t do much inbound marketing, or they let their Webmasters do it for them, or they are happy with free tools like Google Analytics. Marketers at larger companies may be more demanding. Martineau said his main priorities are elsewhere, in better email and general ease of use.

Small businesses need marketing support. Infusionsoft’s original solution was personal set-up assistance funded by a $2,500 to $5,000 implementation fee. But of course the fee itself was a barrier to sales. Infusionsoft has therefore invested heavily in making its system even easier to use and in providing extensive self-help features such as video tutorials. With those in place, it last month stopped charging the set-up fees.

The capstone of Infusionsoft’s self-help is the Campaign Launchpad, which is worth a look no matter where you work. Launchpad leads users from general questions about their marketing goals to specific instructions and materials for predesigned Infusionsoft campaigns. It won't replace a real marketing consultant, since it can’t analyze whether you’ve made sound decisions. But it’s an excellent resource for people who need help in getting started. The Launchpad is open to everyone, not just Infusionsoft users.

Many small businesses will pay for help when the value is clear. For them, Infusionsoft has developed an array of small-ticket service options, such as a $299 “data transition service” to import existing customer lists. This lets business owners purchase exactly what they feel they need. Martineau said he expects about half of Infusionsoft’s new customers will eventually purchase some sort of paid service.

Read More

Hubspot Offers Small Business Marketers a Big Bundle of Features

Summary: Hubspot offers a bundle of Web traffic generation and lead management features in one low-cost package. Small businesses willing to invest some effort should be pleased with the results.

Yesterday’s post described one strategy to sell marketing automation to small businesses: provide a specific, turnkey service that requires virtually no skill or effort from the user. But I don’t think that can scale: companies require many different services and will not want to buy and run each one separately. So I believe the future lies with integrated marketing automation systems that combine many different functions while sharing data and processes whenever possible.

Of course, these multi-function systems must still be suited to users with little time and expertise. Marketing automation vendors entering this market are essentially betting that they can make their systems powerful enough to be useful and easy enough for a small business to run. If the vendors fail, the business will go to consultants, ad agencies, and other service firms that do the clients’ marketing for them. That would greatly limit the marketing automation vendors' business.

Hubspot has accepted this challenge. Although Hubspot positions itself as an “inbound marketing system,” it actually does more than the search engine optimization, blogging, social media interactions and related analytics needed to generate Web traffic. The current version also hosts landing pages and Web sites, manages a lead database with profiles and Web activity history, generates lead scores, sends alerts to sales people, and synchronizes data with Salesforce.com.

All that’s missing to be full-blown demand generation system is outbound email and lead nurturing campaigns—which the company has announced it will add.

Implementations of these features are intentionally simple, since ease of use is more important than sophisticated options for small business marketers. But Hubspot also applies automation to improve results without making the user work harder. For example, the blogging system automatically connects the blog to social media sites that help to redistribute content. It also checks posts to ensure they are optimized for search engine rankings. Hubspot provides similar graders for the Web site and individual pages, each generating reports and recommendations for improvement.

(Free versions of these and other graders are available from Hubspot at Grader.com. Most seemed fairly useful when I played with them a bit, although the Web “personality grader” managed to be both inaccurate [“your Internet use primarily consists of emailing family pictures and checking your teenager’s Facebook”] and insulting [“engaging in more meaningful conversations and sharing less about your personal life may improve this grade”]. I'm not sure what to make of that, except to suspect that someone left the programmers unsupervised. [I've since been informed that Personality Grader was an April Fool's joke.])

The scope of Hubspot makes it somewhat difficult to assess. The system’s heart is clearly search engine optimization and the supporting features to generate content (blogs and Web sites), receive the resulting traffic (landing pages) and analyze the results. These components seem well designed, tightly integrated and, at least for the graders, innovative.

The one major missing inbound marketing feature is paid search management, such as Google AdWords integration. Hubspot Marketing VP Mike Volpe said that paid search can be tracked as a source, and that clients have not requested deeper integration – apparently because they’re already happy with the AdWords interface. But I still find this a curious gap, since it leaves the system blind to a major marketing expense. It's part of a general lack in Hubspot of the “campaign” orientation found in most marketing automation systems. Maybe small businesses don't think in campaign terms -- or maybe it's just that search engine optimization isn't organized that way.

Hubspot looks more like a conventional marketing system in its ability to manage a lead database. Leads can be captured on landing pages, imported from lists or added through Salesforce.com synchronization. The system can also create profiles of anonymous visitors, using their IP address to infer geographic location and company. The database can include answers to survey questions and fields imported from Salesforce.com. It also stores Web activity history, captured by the usual methods: tracking scripts on the Web pages (created automatically on Hubspot-built sites) and cookies on the visitor’s PC.

Hubspot originally used its lead database largely for analytics. But it added Salesforce.com integration in 2008, which also meant the leads and their activity history could be shared with sales people. It extended this in 2009 email alerts triggered when user-selected leads visit the Web site. It also now uses Salesforce.com opportunity records to measure the close rates of leads from different sources. Users can also flag the closed leads manually.

Closed leads are also used to build a ranking system that assigns each lead a value between 1 and 100 based on its likelihood to close. This is a good example of the Hubspot philosophy at work: the grading system is simple (just one score), simplistic (formulas can look at the number of page visits, but not particular pages) and fully automated (it develops a custom scoring formula for each client and adjusts it over time without any manual input). Volpe acknowledged it takes a long time to gather enough data to build a reliable formula. But he argued (and I agree) that few small business marketers could build a better formula on their own.

Once Hubspot adds outbound email and nurturing campaigns – which Volpe said should be “relatively soon” -- its lead management features will about match other small business demand generation systems. That’s good enough, though not as impressive as its search optimization capabilities. (Actually, most small business demand generation products also offer a lightweight CRM module for companies that don’t have a separate CRM system. But I consider that optional.)

Hubspot also includes some functions that extend beyond traditional demand generation. These draw from its roots in Web traffic analysis. One is an automated analysis of competitive Web sites, based on Website Grader. This shows traffic from major keywords plus several types of rankings. Other features include automated Web scans to identify changes in keyword rankings and relevant social media articles. The social media features also make it easy to comment on the articles and to measure the reach of the company’s own blogs, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube posts. Although none of these is itself a major innovation, they’re useful tools to assemble in one place.

So now that we’ve taken a look at some of the mechanics of Hubspot, let’s circle back to the original question: is Hubspot powerful enough and easy enough for small businesses marketers?

The system clearly succeeds on the power front: although most of its features are fairly basic, they should be more than adequate for most companies. Even though Hubspot is not quite a complete marketing solution (lacking the paid search management and integrated CRM), it does enough different things to replace many other systems.

I have more doubts about user effort. Hubspot isn't hard to use, but it does seem to require a lot of work from its users. In particular, the Web site and keyword reports all seem to issue alerts and recommendations that the user has to execute separately. Whether it’s adding new keywords to page metadata, changing a bid on a paid search ad, or rewriting copy to be more search engine friendly, Hubspot looks more like a demanding boss than a helpful assistant.

In a small business where people are already stretched to the limit, a system that adds rather than reducing work is not very appealing. Even knowing that the added work is valuable doesn't necessarily solve the problem: the time has to come from some other work that has value of its own.

But maybe that’s just me. Volpe said that users’ biggest problem is finding time to write new content, not making the other changes like tweaking page tags. This is because most of the system’s automated recommendations are specific enough that they’re pretty easy to execute.

Of course, the customers are the ultimate judges of success. Volpe said that 98% of Hubspot users renew each month. That sounds pretty impressive, although it does equate to losing nearly 25% over one year. A less ambiguous statistic is the current customer count of 1,400, which is higher than any other small business demand generation system I’ve seen (though still dwarfed by Infusionsoft’s 15,000 clients).

Even small businesses shouldn't have a problem with Hubspot pricing: a version without Salesforce.com integration costs $250 per month, while one with Salesforce.com integration costs $500 per month. There’s a $500 setup fee for both products, which covers four hours of consulting. There are no additional costs related to volume or anything else, although that might change when email campaigns are added. The smaller system is sold on a month-to-month basis, while the larger version requires an annual contract. The company also offers a seven day free trial.

Read More