If you have trouble reading or printing AdVerb, please click here!

AdVerb (a monthly newsletter from Ballistix)

Welcome

AdVerb: Edition 13


Good afternoon

I estimate that it will take you at least 40 minutes to read this edition of AdVerb.  (Yup, it's another big one!)

Right up front, I must warn you that, in around 40-minutes, there's a chance you'll regard me as the antichrist (at least, in a marketing sense)!

In AdVerb 12, I took a pot-shot at the concept of branding.  Well, in this issue, I take aim for a serious assault — and, I've got to tell you, I'm surprised just how much damage my little offensive manages to inflict!

On a gentler note, the feature story in this edition is a examination of the sales process of one of our long-term clients, the Hudson Institute.  If you're in the process of implementing our Relationship-centric Marketing methodology, this case study provides a revealing and compelling insight into just what's possible.

Tickets are selling briskly for our third annual round of one-day workshops: Reengineering the Sales Process .  These workshops will be conducted in Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney (Oct 24, Oct 30 and Nov 1).  They will be our last events for the year.

Please enjoy ...

Justin Roff-Marsh
Editor

 


Justin Roff-Marsh (Founder and Managing Director)

 

Contents

How the Hudson Institute turned its hyper-efficient sales process into a sustainable competitive advantage
Hudson's financial advisors are at least 250% more productive than those of its competitors'.  What's more, its service quality is clearly superior.  Hudson's sales process is the source of this advantage.

The myth of branding
Let's not kid ourselves, brand equity is a temporary phenomenon, due more to market inefficiencies than to our promotional prowess.

Feedback: AdVerb 12
Feedback on last edition's feature: How to turn sales opportunities into sales.  As well as on my attack on marketing mystics.

Event update: Reengineering the Sales Process 
one-day workshops

Tickets still available for our annual one-day workshops.

A brief introduction to Ballistix
Ballistix is a management consultancy specialising in what we call sales process engineering.

 

 

Why not refer a friend to AdVerb?


How the Hudson Institute turned its hyper-efficient sales process into a sustainable competitive advantage

"Incredulous.

"Yep, that’s the best word for it", concedes Phil McGann.

Phil is struggling to describe the reaction of fellow financial planners when he explains how things work at the Hudson Institute.

"When they find out that our financial planners perform 8-9 consultations a day … that these consultations are all conducted over the telephone … that our small team in Brisbane services 8,000 members all over Australia … and that almost all of these members have paid upwards of $1,500 just to access this service … well, they just don’t believe it!

Phil goes on to explain why this doesn’t make sense to a traditional financial planner.

"Even the busiest of traditional financial planners has time to conduct only one or two consultations a day. The rest of his day is consumed with clients’ portfolio planning, research and administrative activities.

"Even if this financial planner had time to conduct more consultations than this, he’d have no one to talk to. The fact is, when practice growth is dependent upon word of mouth, it takes years for a planner to build a decent clientele."

Phil concludes by ruefully admitting that if convincing a traditional financial planner that it’s possible to perform 160 appointments a month isn’t hard enough, his next challenge is all but impossible.

"Financial planners assume that, at these volumes, customer service suffers. But, I’ve seen both environments, and the Hudson quality of service is far superior!

"The fact is, our low cost structure enables us to provide a level of service that a traditional financial planner simply couldn’t afford."

Phil’s dilemma provides a tremendous introduction to the Hudson Institute — a truly incredible business.

In turn, the Hudson Institute provides a great case study of the successful application of our Relationship-centric Marketing methodology.

From publishing company to full-service financial planner

It’s generally accepted that paradigm shifts emerge from the fringes of particular industries — and not from the well-established incumbents.

The Hudson Institute may well be evidence of this phenomenon.

Hudson started life ten years ago, not as a traditional financial planning firm, but as a publishing company.

Its First Class Ticket program was a budgeting and do-it-yourself investment toolkit.

To add value to its original paper and ink products, Hudson allowed members to access a telephone support service, as well as regular capital city investment workshops.

Over time, Hudson realised that members were placing more value in these services than they were in their printed publications. As a result, Hudson increased the frequency and the quality of its events, and replaced its unqualified budgeting coaches with a team of fully qualified financial advisors.

To fund the cost of these additional services, Hudson gradually increased the price of its First Class Ticket program from an initial $395 to $3,995. It acquired members by selling tickets to introductory seminars.

In its first eight years, over 100,000 people attended these seminars. Eight thousand subsequently become First Class Ticket members.

Three years ago, Hudson’s sales process began to suffer from rapidly diminishing returns. A number of other financial services providers had begun promoting public seminars (many inspired by Hudson’s very obvious success).

Hudson realised that it could no longer regard the sale of First Class Ticket memberships as its core business. It had to find an alternative source of primary revenue.

The transition to a full-service financial planning firm was the obvious direction to take. Although Hudson had initially felt that independence was its key point of difference, many members actually resented the fact that they had to visit other providers to purchase financial services.

To make the transition, Hudson suspended its public seminar program and set about compiling a suite of financial services. Today, these services include managed funds, finance, direct property and personal insurance (general insurance is outsourced).

Hudson’s marketing manager, Noeline Packham, explains that sales of these new services came thick and fast. "When we mentioned in our newsletter that we could now provide financial services, our phones started ringing off the hook.

"We never had time to consider selling via face-to-face appointments. Members were asking for our financial services in their telephone consultations — and they were quite happy to purchase by remote control.

"The interesting thing is that, from our advisors’ perspectives, nothing much changed. Now, instead of referring members to outside service providers, they simply transfer them to our in-house specialists."

It’s taken Hudson just over two years to make the transition from publishing company to one of Australia’s most productive financial planning firms. In the process, they’ve built a sales process that we hold up as best practice in Relationship-centric Marketing.

Relationships precede sales opportunities

If you ask any financial planner where his sales opportunities come from, he’ll explain that relationships are by far the most lucrative source.

In this respect, Hudson does not differ from any other financial planning firm.

Where Hudson stands apart from its peers is in its scientific approach to the acquisition and management of relationships.

It’s Noeline Packham’s job to generate around 448 sales opportunities a month. These sales opportunities will translate into 1,120 appointments (2.5 per sales opportunity) — enough to keep Hudson’s team of seven financial advisors fully utilised.

Noeline sources every one of these 448 sales opportunities from one location — Hudson’s database of 8,000 First Class Ticket members.

The greater majority of these sales opportunities are inbound — stimulated by Hudson’s automated communication program. The balance are outbound opportunities — customer service appointments, set by one of Hudson’s two member services staff — Aimee and Matt.

Hudson’s communication program consists of a weekly e-mail newsletter The Hudson Report and a program of specialist investment seminars (quarterly evening seminars in capital cities, and twice-yearly, one-day workshops in regional areas).

The communication program also includes occasional special promotions, consisting of offers relating to specific investment opportunities.

Cause and effect

Unlike many organisations, Hudson knows what the key drivers of inbound sales opportunities are. The first is the content of its weekly newsletter. The second is changes in the financial environment.

Tanya Nicholson is the editor of The Hudson Report. It’s her responsibility to monitor the relationship between the content of this newsletter and the volume (and type) of inbound sales opportunities.

When pressed to disclose what content is most likely to make the phone ring, she reveals that, "Specificity sells."

"It’s not so much the subject of an article," she explains. "It’s more how it’s articulated.

"If we present facts and figures and practical guidance, the phone rings.

"Our members do love case studies," she admits. "They love to hear what other members are doing. And currently insurance and property stories are working well."

Right now, Hudson is stimulating readership of The Hudson Report (and accordingly, sales opportunities) with The Hudson Challenge — a competition that asks members to answer questions relating to each issue of their newsletter, for a chance to win a $5,000 managed fund portfolio.

Acquiring relationships

Hudson is not currently running any relationship-acquisition campaigns. It’s having no trouble generating the sales opportunities it needs from its existing member base.

However, it does realise that its continuing growth will require the recommencement of these activities at some stage in the future.

Hudson has two classes of relationship: subscribers and members.

Subscribers are individuals who have subscribed to The Hudson Report (and possibly attended events) but have not purchased a First Class Ticket membership.

First Class Ticket members have unrestricted access to events and, more importantly, to Hudson’s team of advisors.

When Hudson does recommence its relationship-acquisition activities, its first objective will be to convert existing subscribers into members. (Each month, a number of subscribers already discover the benefits of membership from the Hudson Website and become members of their own volition.)

Its next objective will be to acquire subscribers to The Hudson Report. It’s likely to do this via strategic alliances and the re-release of its popular book, How to start with no savings and get rich safely.

In the meantime, Noeline is about to launch an associate membership program. This will enable existing members to add family and friends to their memberships at a steeply discounted rate.

Converting sales opportunities into sales

It’s 8:00am and Scott Adams is reading the Financial Review and sipping a cup of fresh coffee.

His six colleagues are doing the same. Their relaxed demeanour and good-natured banter convey a sense of the calm before the storm.

At exactly 8:45 am, Scott and his colleagues will plug in their headsets and telephone those members who have been scheduled for the day’s first appointments.

At least by way of age, education and character, Scott is representative of a typical Hudson advisor.

He’s 31 years of age. He’s intelligent and well educated. (His qualifications include a Bachelor of Commerce, a Bachelor of Arts, a Graduate Diploma in Applied Finance and Investment, and a Graduate Diploma in Financial Planning.)

And, as is the case with all Hudson advisors, Scott is a member of the Securities Institute of Australia.

Scott is passionate about wealth creation. Like his colleagues, he reads, thinks and talks about little else. And he derives an obvious satisfaction from counselling Hudson members on the formation and execution of their wealth creation strategies.

Prior to these calls, each advisor will have spent 15-minutes engaged in what Hudson calls pre-call planning. Pre-call planning is a rigidly structured planning session that precedes each appointment. Advisors review members’ investment strategies, their histories, and their current financial situations, looking to identify problem areas or opportunities for improvement.

This planning process is streamlined by Hudson’s custom-designed computer system — which presents this information in easy-to-interpret reports — and by Megan Armour.

Megan is a para-planner. It’s her job to maximise the productivity of Hudson’s team of advisors. She does this by confirming that members’ financial information is updated (if necessary) prior to their appointments. Megan also takes responsibility for the routine paperwork, literature fulfilment requests and follow-up generated by advisors’ appointments — as well as for the project-management of the transactions specified by advisors.

At 9:30, Scott saves his contact notes and completes his first appointment for the day. His next appointment is scheduled for 9:45, allowing him the 15 minutes he needs for pre-call planning. With the exception of lunch and occasional stretch breaks, Scott and his colleagues have appointments scheduled back-to-back for the rest of the day.

Operate the process constraint at 100% capacity

"Our constraint is our team of advisors," explains David. "My first priority is to provide our people with the resources they need to keep our advisors 100% utilised. If our advisors are not on the phones, we’re not making money."

David Heffernan is Hudson’s financial controller. But he doesn’t talk like a normal financial controller!

That’s because David manages Hudson’s accounts using throughput- (as opposed to conventional cost-accounting) principles. (Throughput accounting is a derivative of Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints.)

"Fortunately, I studied throughput accounting at university," continues David. "When I got here I recognised that there was no way I could apply traditional cost-accounting thinking.

"If I attempted to manage this business for local efficiencies, I could save money by cutting the excess capacity from the functions that support our team of advisors. But I soon realised that this would be a Pyrrhic victory. Without this spare capacity, any unexpected incident would result in unfilled appointment slots in our advisors’ diaries. And the opportunity cost of these unfilled slots is far greater than the possible savings from these local efficiency improvements.

David devotes much of his time to looking for ways to increase the capacity of the team of advisors (or to elevate the constraint, to use TOC terminology).

"On average, each appointment is worth $255 to us in gross profit," David explains. "The key to making this business more profitable is simply to conduct more appointments.

"We can do that by recruiting more advisors — and we’re doing that now — but there are many other opportunities to increase throughput."

David explains that the appointment of Megan (Hudson’s para-planner) and of Aimee and Matt (their member services staff) were two such initiatives.

He also details a recent discovery that has added another $355,000 a year to the bottom-line.

"We always knew that the advisors had occasional no-shows. Just four a week, on average. We never worried about these lost appointments, until we calculated their opportunity cost. We realised that four no-shows per advisor is actually 28 lost appointments a week, at a total cost of $355,000 a year!

"We now maintain a safety buffer of members who have agreed to go on stand-by (just like the airlines do). These members benefit, because they have the opportunity to speak to an advisor sooner — and we benefit because we no longer have empty appointment slots."

Lessons from Hudson’s sales process

We can all learn a number of lessons from Hudson’s sales process.

Process means process!

The most obvious one is that Hudson has a formal sales process, as opposed to a loose assortment of ad hoc and unsynchronised marketing activities.

As a result, Hudson can measure the cause and effect relationship between the deployment of organisational resources (money and time), and the resulting impact on bottom-line profitability.

This unusual level of accountability is reflected in Hudson’s culture. Without exception, every person I interviewed at Hudson understood the organisation’s key profit driver (their team of advisors). And, everyone understood the direct contribution that his or her activities made to this team’s throughput.

Create an environment that fosters consultative selling

In considering the relevance of Hudson’s sales process to that of a typical organisation, it’s helpful to substitute the word advisor for salesperson.

Even though Hudson’s advisors would no doubt bristle at such a comparison, they provide a fine example of the types of individuals that are well suited to a relationship-centric sales process.

Hudson’s advisors’ key competencies are their product knowledge and their communication skills. They are consultative in their approach — and comfortable to see each point of contact as an investment in a developing (and profitable) relationship.

While they are certainly ambitious, they are not the kind of opportunistic, short-term thinkers that are attracted to a typical sales environment.

Of course, Hudson’s relationship-centric sales process provides the kind of environment where such an individual can flourish.

Advisors do not have to prospect relentlessly. (All of their appointments are provided for them.)

They do not have to be opportunistic, self-starters. (The constancy of their work volume, coupled with salary-based compensation packages, provides the perception of job security that all employees expect.)

It’s also worth mentioning that Hudson goes to some effort to provide all staff with a rewarding work environment. Any job-related education is fully funded by Hudson, and some benefits that are not specifically job related are 50% funded. The latter includes gym memberships and fortnightly massages!

Subordinate all management decisions to the constraint

You don’t have to spend long at Hudson to realise that every individual views himself or herself as part of the advisors’ support team. It conjures up images of a Formula One team, where everyone is fixated on assisting the driver to win the big race.

Marketing personnel see it as their responsibility to maintain what they call the opportunity buffer. The opportunity buffer is an inventory of sales opportunities, established to ensure that advisors never have an empty appointment slot.

Operational personnel see it as their responsibility to maximise the efficiency of the advisors. They do this by setting their appointments, ensuring all members’ financial information is current prior to appointments, preparing all necessary paperwork and project-managing all transactions.

Contrast this with a typical sales process, where salespeople are left to fend for themselves — operating, as a result, at a fraction of their possible productivity. When you consider that a salesperson is almost certainly a sales process’s most expensive and highest-leverage resource, it’s a lunacy to allow salespeople to operate at anything other than 100% of their possible productivity.

To use Theory of Constraints terminology, your salespeople should most likely be your process constraint. This means that everyone else in your sales process should focus on keeping your salespeople fully (and productively) utilised. It also means that all management decisions should be made with respect to their impact on your salespeople’s throughput — and not with respect to local efficiency measures.

Recognise the true source of sales opportunities

In most organisations, sales process output is constrained by a scarcity of sales opportunities, rather than by salespeople’s capacity.

Most organisations’ attempts at generating sales opportunities are hampered by a failure to recognise their optimal source.

Hudson understands that it is counter productive to expect salespeople to generate sales opportunities (their time is better invested selling). It also understands that it is restrictive to rely solely upon clients as a source of sales opportunities (this results in a self-limiting system — where future sales are dependent upon past sales).

As discussed, Hudson appreciates that relationships under management are its most lucrative source of sales opportunities. As a result, Hudson manages relationships with the sole intent of generating sales opportunities (now and in the future). It also understands that its future growth will ultimately be driven by the acquisition of new relationships.

More than an effective sales process: a sustainable competitive advantage

Hudson’s sales process provides more than just an efficient source of revenue. It’s at the heart of a business model that provides Hudson with a competitive advantage over traditional financial planning firms.

The incredulous response of typical financial planners to this business model provides a clue as to the sustainability of Hudson’s competitive advantage.

Another clue is the reaction of Hudson’s members.

Even though the Hudson model doesn’t enable members to have face-to-face contact with advisors, it does provide far more frequent access than is provided by traditional firms. Hudson advisors talk to members a minimum of two times a year — although, more active members consult with their advisors, on average, six times annually. This accessibility is the service attribute most praised by members in Hudson’s annual member satisfaction survey.

I’m sure you’ll agree that it’s likely that your sales process could benefit from the emulation of some of these relationship-centric principles.

But this case study raises the possibility that this approach could provide you with more than just a more efficient sales process. The relationship-centric methodology, when implemented in its entirety, might well contribute to your organisation’s sustainable competitive advantage — just as it has Hudson’s.

[Feedback on this article? Please drop me a line.]

[contents]

 



Phil McGann
General Manager

"Our low cost structure enables us to provide a level of service that a traditional financial planner just couldn't afford"


Peter Dale and
Joanne King
 Insurance and Finance Division Managers

Unlike most financial planning firms, Hudson has internal insurance and finance divisions.


Noeline Packham
Marketing Manager

It’s Noeline’s job to generate around 560 sales opportunities a month!


Tanya Nicholson
Editor: Hudson Report

"Our members love case studies.  They love to hear what other members are doing."


Scott Adams (front), Manjinder Aujla and
 Juanita Gilmour
Financial Advisors

Scott and his colleagues each perform between eight and twelve telephone appointments 
a day.


Megan Armour
Para-planner

It's Megan's job to maximise the productivity of Hudson's team of advisors.


David Heffernan
Financial Controller

David devotes much of his time to looking for ways to increase the capacity of Hudson's team of advisors.


Matt Paul
Client Services

Matt and Aimee are responsible for keeping advisor's diaries fully booked.

Visit our Website for more articles like this.


The myth of branding

At best ‘brand’ is a useful word. At worst, it’s a dangerously misleading management tool.

It’s hard to talk about marketing without using the word brand (or one of its derivations). Believe me, I’ve tried!

But in spite of (or, perhaps, because of) its useful nature, the word brand is functionally bankrupt.

More often than not, its use hides sloppy thinking and, worse still, the wastage of frightening quantities of valuable corporate resources.

Everything and nothing

Over time, marketers have extended the meaning of the word brand to mean so many things that it is now basically meaningless (you may recall that I’ve levelled the same criticism at the word marketing).

The word brand used to refer to the trademark or distinctive name identifying a product (or manufacturer).

This definition makes sense. Its relation to branding’s genesis — involving the use of a hot iron to provide evidence of ownership on the hide of an animal — is obvious.

Today, the word brand refers to the product or organisation itself (and not just its mark). It also refers to the goodwill associated with that product.

The word brand is commonly used as a verb. Branding refers both to the application of a name (or mark) to a product, and to every activity that impacts in any way on the development of goodwill (or brand equity, as it’s commonly called).

Answer me this: what do all of the following have in common?

  1. Designing a logo.

  2. Running an advertisement.

  3. Creating a new product.

  4. Answering the telephone.

That’s right. According to branding experts these are all branding initiatives.

Of course this liberal approach to the definition of the word brand may be in the best interests of branding consultants — at least in the short term. (For the uninitiated, branding consultant is the title assumed today by opportunistic graphic designers.)

But, unfortunately, it has some unintended (negative) consequences for the rest of us.

Are we really this silly?

For a start, it makes marketers look sillier than we really are.

In her best-selling, anti-corporate rant, No Logo, Naomi Klein quotes marketing executives, who should know better, saying things like the following:

"The product is nothing but the most important marketing 
tool.":
Nike

"We made the fatal marketing mistake of thinking we were a camera [when] really, we are a social lubricant.": Polaroid

"Products are made in the factory, but brands are made in the mind.": Senior advertising executive

As you’d expect, Klein uses these delusional utterings as evidence in her nonsensical argument that brands are responsible for social ills ranging from the exploitation of children in sweatshops, to the murder of a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and a crime she refers to as ‘brain stealing’!

Unrelated cause and effect

A critical reader of Klein’s book will rapidly draw the conclusion that that she has grossly overestimated the potency of this thing she calls the brand.

The sad thing is that marketers (as evidenced by the comments above) are suffering under exactly the same misapprehension.

The exaltation of the word brand (almost to the point of a religion) is based upon a widely-held premise that brands create sales. This thinking is an example of what is perhaps the most common logical fallacy: the fallacy of causation.

The fallacy of causation (also referred to as unrelated cause and effect) is committed when we either mistake correlation for causation or, more seriously, when we actually assume that the effect of an action is its cause.

The assumption of the marketing executive above is that Nike sells lots of shoes because it has a great brand.

When you consider that the sale of shoes preceded the development of the Nike brand (goodwill), you would have to conclude that a great product is the cause and brand equity is the effect.

The real cost of irrationality

It’s bad enough that this sloppy thinking is used against us by the anti-business activists in our midst.

But what’s worse is the economic cost of the erroneous management decisions underpinned by this lapse of reason.

The basic problem is that the premise that brand equity drives sales gives marketers permission to engage in an expensive and elaborate ritual that is totally quarantined from the objective of the organisations writing the cheques: to make money, now and in the future.

The ritual looks something like this:

  1. A marketer runs a promotional campaign with the intent of building a brand.

  2. He detects a resulting increase in brand equity (typically by measuring the change in market awareness of the brand).

  3. He concludes that this campaign was a success, and goes to work planning the next.

  4. He wonders occasionally why he needs such complex formulas to attempt to model the correlation between brand equity and sales revenues.

If this marketer realised that branding is a by-product of sales (and not an antecedent), he would apply himself to those activities that drive sales — and ignore brand equity altogether. His objective would be a derivative of his company’s objective: to make sales, now and in the future.

He would measure his success by observing the correlation between the money he invests in promotional campaigns and the resulting change in sales revenues.

Accounting for delayed promotional returns

But (I can hear you thinking), what about the fact that a promotional dollar invested today may not produce a return until some point in the future? Isn’t that why we need to measure brand equity?

Well if (and only if) you know for sure that your promotional expenditure does deliver delayed returns, it may make sense to establish a proxy for these future revenues.

The problem with using brand equity as a proxy is that (as I'll explain in a moment) it's almost impossible to measure.  Accordingly, you will need to find a metric that does reflect the correlation between promotional expenditure and future revenues. In our experience, the best proxy for future sales is current ones. In other words, the best indicator of the long-term effectiveness of a promotional campaign is its short-term results.

So, is a brand actually worth anything?

If we take the word brand at its original meaning (the trademark or distinctive name identifying a product) it seems fair to assume that brands can acquire some intrinsic value. Let’s see how this assumption holds up to logical scrutiny.

The logical way to measure the value of a brand (brand equity) would be to observe the premium that the market is prepared to pay in order to purchase a product bearing a particular brand, in preference to a competitive product, that is identical in every other way.

Because every product has a brand of some kind, this is only a relative measure. This means that you can only value one brand relative to another. It also means that when products are not identical in every way, brand value is likely to be incalculable.  (If products are not identical in every way, it is impossible to determine what percentage of the premium the market is prepared to pay should be allocated to brand equity — as opposed to product value.)

Let’s imagine what would happen in case of true product parity. If two products were in fact identical in every way, what is the theoretical value of each brand? That’s right, nothing!

In an efficient (fully informed) market, customers will obviously not be prepared to pay a premium for a product when there’s a truly identical alternative.

In other words, if customers are currently paying a premium for a product when there’s an identical alternative, that brand equity is a temporary phenomenon, reflective only of market inefficiency. As share traders know, this kind of arbitrage opportunity tends not to last long.

This line of reasoning illustrates that a brand itself has no long-term intrinsic value.

It also highlights that the premium a customer is prepared to pay for one product over another is (in the long-term) directly proportional to the degree of differentiation of that product.

In summary:

  1. Brand equity results from the creation (and sale) of a great (differentiated) product.

  2. Brand equity is proportional to the degree of (meaningful) product differentiation.

  3. In the absence of product differentiation, any residual brand equity will rapidly dissipate.

It’s time us marketers faced up to reality. If we are operating in the best interests of our organisations, we are not building brands, we are making sales.

We also need to recognise that our ability to drive sales amounts to little more than an arbitrage play. In the long run, the most successful products will always be the better products (those that provide customers with the greatest value).

The fact is, business growth has precious little to do with brand equity today. And, if anything, its significance will reduce as time passes and markets become more efficient.

The example most often raised to challenge my position on brands is Coca Cola. ‘Why then,’ the question typically goes, ‘does Coca Cola still outsell Pepsi, even though the two colas are all but identical?’

The answer is quite simple. Coca Cola outsells Pepsi because of its vastly superior distribution. (Statistically the distance between you right now and the nearest Coca Cola, is likely to be significantly less than the distance between you and the nearest Pepsi.)

So, even though the sugared waters are very similar, the products, in their broader context, aren’t. (Availability is certainly a product attribute.)

To observe the effects of an efficient market on brand equity, note the variance in the prices charged for standard unleaded petrol at competing, (neighbouring) petrol stations.

[Agree? Disagree? Please drop me a line and let me know.]

[contents]

 


 A great product is the cause.  Brand equity is the effect.

 The best indicator of the long-term effectiveness of a promotional campaign is its short-term results.

Brand equity is a temporary phenomenon, reflective primarily of market inefficiency.

A brand itself has no long-term intrinsic value!


Feedback: AdVerb 12

Well, AdVerb 12 generated an deluge of e-mails.  Our overview of the optimal design of the Opportunity Management process was well received.

Justin

I agree with a lot of points in your article.

I would like clarification on one point however. You mention that the salespeople should have 3-5 appointments per day, five days a week.

How does size of sale and decision time for the sale to occur effect this rate?

I assume you are talking about a shorter process for smaller products?

Regards 

Gerard Barwell
Sales Manager: NSW/ACT
Frontier Software


Gerard

The only real difference between selling large and complex products and small ones is the number of steps in the opportunity management process.

Each step is a minor sale ... it sells up to the next step. (Of course, because we're talking about a chain of dependent events, project management of the opportunity management process is absolutely critical.)

The number of appointments your salespeople can perform a day will be determined solely by the average length of an appointment.

I can see no reason why your salespeople won't be able to average 3-5 appointments a day (if they have the available sales opportunities and the appropriate support.)

The only difference is that your salespeople will perform more appointments per sales opportunity than they would if the opportunities were of a lower dollar value. 

Justin

 

Justin

You have totally changed my way of thinking. For years I've been focusing on 'selling' and not the Sales Process. By focussing on the inputs of Promotion Expenditure and Relationship Acquisition I'm already starting to see great sales results.

And based on AdVerb 12, I've decided to hire a marketing coordinator. A superb piece of thinking and writing. I'm singing Ballistix's praises wherever I can and hope to provide you with a stream of potential relationships.

Paul Mitchell
The Human Enterprise

 

Justin

Very good article. Have passed it on to several.

Trust all is going well.

Kind regards

John Lyons
[Founder: Marketshare]

As you'd expect, the article that compared marketing today with the medical profession in the 1700s received mixed responses!

Justin

‘Sales build brands, and not the other way around’.

Not true!

Sales build brands AND brands build sales.

Check out this case study (see attached).

Thanks for the sales process article though.  Very interesting.

Tim Parsons
Sugar Space


Tim

Your case study doesn't prove your point.

It demonstrates that your promotional campaigns drove sales.  (Your numbers illustrate that clearly.)  But the impact of your campaigns on brand equity is only an assumption — and an unnecessary one!

The inclusion of an in-between step (promotion -> brand equity -> sale) serves no useful diagnostic purpose.

Of course, there's merit in your argument that 'sales build brands AND brands build sales'. But if brand equity is next to impossible to measure (see this month's story), why not just say 'sales build sales'?

Wouldn't it make sense to simply calculate the correlation between initial and follow-on sales and then increment your allowable cost per sale accordingly?

Justin

 

Justin

Just got around to reading Edition 12 of AdVerb and, as usual, enjoyed your fluent writing style and your marketing thoughts.

However I couldn’t help but respond to your article on Marketing Mysticism (probably because I’m an opinionated marketer who loves a good debate!)

I totally agree with your thoughts that the application of process thinking in the marketing arena is essential, but I have to object to the way you put rational thinkers ('the fortunate few') on a pedestal! I happen to subscribe to the theory that the best marketers certainly apply rational thinking, but with an underlying gut feel (or creative instinct) about what works and what doesn’t. 

Karleen Harris


Karleen

If my exaltation of 'rational thinking' gave you the impression that I believe 'rational' and 'creative' thinking to be mutually exclusive, I apologise. My belief is that all productive thinking (as opposed to idle daydreaming) employs creativity (instinct or gut feel) within a rational framework.

Scientific method (the ultimate practice of productive thinking) begins with creativity. A scientist uses creative thinking to frame a hypotheses. She then uses experiment and observation to test the validity of that hypotheses.

If I were to substitute the word 'productive' for the word 'rational' in my assertion that 'rational thinkers are the fortunate few', I suspect that you might now be tempted to agree with me.

After all, both your love of a 'good debate' and the fact that you are 'opinionated' suggest that you yourself are one of those fortunate few!

Justin

 

Justin

This issue is your best by far. 

Thank you for setting straight the 'marketing mystics' who rave on about 'brand equity' in place of tangible results. 

It's about time people admit your undeniable fact: 'sales build brands, not the other way round'.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you are a genius.

Amanda Stevens
SPLASHgroup

 

Justin

I said it after AdVerb 11 and I’ll say it again — your material keeps getting better and better.

It is SO damn refreshing to read sensible, scalable stuff, rather than falsehoods that we’ve been living with for so many years.

And, living in France, I loved your example about the French hospitals of 1700.

Again, tremendous (and tremendously important!) stuff.

Paul Dunn
[Founder: Results Accountants' Systems]

contents]

 


Event update: Reengineering the sales process one-day workshops

Learn from the practitioners

You may have read about Relationship-centric Marketing. You may even have attended one of Justin’s popular breakfast seminars. But this workshop is more than just a theoretical introduction to our sales process design methodology.

This is an opportunity for you to spend nine hours being coached by the practitioners of this revolutionary approach to sales process design and management.

Justin and his team will help you to customise their methodology for your organisation. They’ll show you how to map-out a sensible and readily applicable implementation plan. And they’ll relate numerous enlightening case studies from the field.

This event is guaranteed to provide you with everything you need to multiply the efficiency of your sales process — and to fast track the growth of your organisation.

You will learn:

  • How to develop a basis for communication with your marketplace, that will enable you to maintain enduring relationships — even when prospects are outside of their buying cycle.
  • How to automate both the management of relationships and the generation of sales opportunities — enabling salespeople to focus on selling.
  • How to produce relationship-acquisition campaigns — campaigns that will provide you with a constant stream of relationship-focussed prospects.
  • How to utilise e-mail and your Website to multiply the efficiency of your sales process.
  • How to manage your sales process with the same scientific precision that you would apply to the management of your other critical business processes.

Reengineering the sales process will be presented by Justin Roff-Marsh (Ballistix’s founder and managing director), Benn Walker (who heads our consulting team), Hamish Elton (our resident marketing technology guru, and Rebecca Stokes (who heads our Marketing Logistics division).

Book now!

We will present this workshop in Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney in late October. (Oct 24, Oct 30 and Nov 1.)

If you are interested in attending one of these events, it’s worth making your decision sooner, rather than later. We have just 100 tickets available for each event, and demand is likely to be strong.

Click here to read more about this event, or to purchase your tickets now. Alternatively, telephone Mica on (07) 30 100 800.

[contents]

 

Listen to a breakfast seminar online!


Ballistix: a brief introduction

Our focus at Ballistix is what we call sales process engineering.

Our key service is our sales process reengineering project.

This is (typically) a six-month project.  It involves us rolling up our sleeves and working in our clients' businesses — implementing our Relationship-centric Marketing methodology.

The primary objective of our reengineering project is to provide our clients with a manageable and highly scalable sales process.

This project begins with the preparation of a Business Case.  This document contains a detailed set of specifications for the process end-state — as well as a project plan and a return-on-investment guarantee.

Follow the links below to read more about this project.

  • Our services

[contents]

 

Refer a friend

Do you know someone who may enjoy a subscription to AdVerb?
Please ... let him or her know about it!

You

Name:

E-mail:

Your Friend

Name:

E-mail:

Suite 5, 14 Merivale St
PO Box 3338
South Brisbane Q 4101
tel: (07) 30 100 800
fax: (07) 30 100 801

You are subscribed to AdVerb as: [email].  To unsubscribe, either click here and hit 'send', or reply to this e-mail with the word 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
If you have trouble printing this newsletter from your e-mail client, simply click here to view a copy on our Website.
You are welcome to re-publish these articles (or others on our Website) as long as you credit such articles to Ballistix, and provide our Web address (or a link to our home page).
Privacy pledge: we will neither rent nor sell your contact details to any party for any reason.