http://generationomarketing.com/resources//blog1.php?disp=comments en-US http://backend.userland.com/rss 60 Wed, 06 May 2009 18:59:08 +0000 Jeff Holmes [Visitor] c19@http://generationomarketing.com/resources// You make some great points in your criteria for scoring leads. Over the past 23 yrs, our team has seen some additional parameters you may also wish to consider. Based on the size of the sales team (either growing or consolidating in a dynamic economy), you may want to ensure the scoring system is very dynamic as well. <br /> <br /> We have found that in an ideal situation, the company will want to "test" multiple scoring scenarios, including ongoing. One challenge with a combined "single score" based on demographics, and activity based scoring, leaves much room for same scores that dont necessarily mean the same quality of lead. Ie, if an IT Director is a perfect 50, who looked at one piece of qualified content, = 51. When a college intern only scored 1 for demographic, but 50 for content as he/she was looking at everything under the sun = 51. <br /> <br /> We have also found that all sales folks dont drink the company koolaide the same way. Some may value demographic, and activity, while others value "time degradation" as a factor, or "buy time" scoring. Thus they may only care about acitivities within the last 90 days, but are also interested in the life of the prospect too.<br /> <br /> In the eTrigue platform, we have been careful to implement the ability to score multiple ways, and enable the marketing team to decide what is visible to the sales team. This also includes the ability to have "custom" scores that are based on time, relationship, cumulative, individual activities, interaction with campaigns, as well as negative scores for other actions (like visiting a careers section of a site might degrade a score).<br /> <br /> To see how eTrigue handles the various options for scoring, check out a quick overview at www.etrigue.com/demo
We have found that in an ideal situation, the company will want to "test" multiple scoring scenarios, including ongoing. One challenge with a combined "single score" based on demographics, and activity based scoring, leaves much room for same scores that dont necessarily mean the same quality of lead. Ie, if an IT Director is a perfect 50, who looked at one piece of qualified content, = 51. When a college intern only scored 1 for demographic, but 50 for content as he/she was looking at everything under the sun = 51.

We have also found that all sales folks dont drink the company koolaide the same way. Some may value demographic, and activity, while others value "time degradation" as a factor, or "buy time" scoring. Thus they may only care about acitivities within the last 90 days, but are also interested in the life of the prospect too.

In the eTrigue platform, we have been careful to implement the ability to score multiple ways, and enable the marketing team to decide what is visible to the sales team. This also includes the ability to have "custom" scores that are based on time, relationship, cumulative, individual activities, interaction with campaigns, as well as negative scores for other actions (like visiting a careers section of a site might degrade a score).

To see how eTrigue handles the various options for scoring, check out a quick overview at www.etrigue.com/demo]]> http://generationomarketing.com/resources//blog1.php/2009/05/04/lead-scoring-at-its-best#c19