Expertise Marketplace - Professional Service Firm Marketing Blog

Integration improves internal productivity

Silos between marketing and sales continue to be a challenge for professional service and B2B companies. Marketers find it hard to make the case that integration will bring more than reputational advantages. And because a short-term mindset prevails in many firms, it’s a significant challenge to track an integrated pull-push initiative through the sales funnel to actual booked revenues. Too much work! Too many moving parts!  

 

But marketers can make the case that integration will improve internal productivity. Using actual or modeled salary and/or time expenditures for discreet marketing campaigns, marketers can show how a “before” effort takes longer time and more effort than an integrated campaign. This kind of demonstration might be compelling for senior managers who are looking for measurement tools that have real meaning for their companies.

Too many professional service and B2B marketers are either less than savvy on financial measurements or are actually not exposed to finance inside their companies. But measuring internal productivity offers a way for marketers to build the kind of financial acumen that demonstrates an understanding of their companies’ business. This activity would also enable marketers to integrate with their HR or finance colleagues, internally, using either real data or representative data. (“A non-integrated email campaign took our managers and marketing staff ‘x’ hours to produce. A similar integrated email campaign took 25% fewer hours!”)

.

Follow Suzanne Lowe on:

Google+: https://www.google.com/+SuzanneCampbellLowe

Twitter: https://twitter.com/SuzanneLowe

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/suzannecampbelllowe

http://www.expertisemarketing.com/index.html

http://www.expertisemarketing.com/suzanne-lowe.html

Avoid marketing department churn

In this video, I describe my view that marketing departmental structures in professional service firms can be categorized along a continuum.

  

On one end of the structural continuum is the never-changing, very hierarchical organizational model. In this framework, marketers are stove-piped into narrow functional responsibilities. They become stuck in roles that don’t afford new opportunities for learning or avenues for leadership advancement. These marketers will have to leave their firms in order to grow. The professional service firm using this model risks the possibility of falling behind more nimble competitors.

On the other end of the continuum is the highly fluid, shared leadership model. Here, marketers change roles every few years, as leaders pursue the potential benefits of collaboration and decentralization. Also in this model, marketers are typically reassigned to new reporting relationships as the firm selects new leaders. These reorganizations can feel to marketers like unnecessary churn. In these cases, professional service firms also risk taking their eye off the marketplace.

A better model is the one in the middle. Give marketers several years to gain a solid competency in a well-framed area of expertise. Marketers, staring from their base of knowledge, can be asked to shadow other functional areas to capture insights and build creative new solutions. The firm might also offer outside professional development avenues where marketers can gain new skills through exposure to other professional firms’ -- and other sectors’ -- best practices. @SmithSchool.

Follow me on:

Google+: https://www.google.com/+SuzanneCampbellLowe

Twitter: https://twitter.com/SuzanneLowe

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/suzannecampbelllowe

http://www.expertisemarketing.com/index.html

http://www.expertisemarketing.com/suzanne-lowe.html

Professional Service Firms' Chain of Command

The phrase "Chain of Command" has been in the news a lot lately, mostly related to war. But a few days ago, I watched an interview with the former CEO of Shell Oil, in which he used "Chain of Command" to discuss the breakdown of communication in the BP Gulf Coast oil well blow-out.

It's the first time I've heard "Chain of Command" -- including the implied militaristic respect for hierarchy and obedience -- described in corporate terms. The interview suggested that if BP's employees had followed a "Chain of Command" model, the blow-out disaster could have been prevented.

Professional service firms don't operate like armies. Most are actively trying to encourage more, not less, distribution of leadership. Of course, with patchwork-quilt organizational structures featuring heads of regions, lines-of-business, industries, and more, occasional disasters do occur (remember Arthur Andersen and Enron; Modern Continental Construction Company and Boston's Big Dig). 

But while I have not heard calls for professional service firms to adopt a "chain of command" model, I do think the notion of "shared accountability" offers enormous benefits to a professional firm. From avoiding disasters to participating in the firm's marketplace growth, we can make a compelling argument that shared accountability makes sense.

Does your firm believe in the idea of shared accountability? What does it look like? How is it being led? Implemented?

PSFs are breaking barriers

I just blogged about how I hope PSFs are using this downturn to address their marketing-to-selling barriers. 

Hurrah - I found one already! It's a Wall Street Journal article about an engineering firm using social networking analysis to break down organization silos.

The upside of layoffs

Layoffs have come to professional service firms. It's painful to see PSFs encounter the inevitable downsides of the economy. 

But there can be an upside: to reconfigure the enterprise's go-to-market approaches so the firm can compete more effectively in the future. (You can bet most PSFs have been marketing and selling under numerous organizational barriers that have impeded their processes, skill sets and administrative supports. That's the subject of my next book.) 

A "good" layoff should include a hard look at the way the firm markets and sells, and should feature new structural frameworks and cultural principles the firm will implement going forward. Things like a reconfiguration of everyone's shared accountabilities for marketing and selling. Things like retooled job descriptions that make marketing and selling expectations more explicit, and re-framing performance expectations. Things like a more modern functional scope for marketing and selling, or a formal professional development pathway to grow tomorrow's marketing and selling competencies. 

In this economic downturn, has your firm begun addressing its marketing and selling silos, its ineffective go-to-market practices? Please, please tell me your firms are taking this layoffs season as an opportunity to retool for the next up cycle! 

I'm Processing - Part 4

I just talked to a company about a potential speaking engagement for a large group of professional service firm managing partners and marketing directors. Their hoped-for topic is "professional services' consumer behavior in challenging economic times." Basically, their question is: what do professional- and B2B service firms need to understand about the way their consumers behave in a downturned economy?

Now it's no surprise that professional service buyers are increasingly sophisticated. It's certainly no surprise they are even more so in challenging economic times. Money is tight for everyone.

Don't you think, then, professional service buyers would be favorably influenced if their first encounter with a potential service provider -- being engaged in that firm's marketing and selling process -- demonstrated an extremely effective go-to-market machine? Isn't it important for a professional service firm to show evidence of its own business process acumen to its potential clients?

I'd wager the answer is a resounding yes.

Imagine the reaction of a potential buyer of management consulting services, or engineering, or executive search, or any other professional service. How many times have these decision makers received 17 copies of the same white paper, but from different practitioners within the firm? How many times have they encountered a practitioner, trying to develop business with them, who expresses surprise that someone else might have also been in contact with them? Or who spammed them with mass e-mails, even though they opted out months ago? These are tactical examples (there are a host of strategic examples too!), but you get the idea. 

If a potential professional service provider can't even manage its own marketing and business development processes optimally, it speaks volumes to decision-makers about that firm's ultimate ability to deliver excellent services. And in downturned economies, this issue is even more critical than ever. Their perception of value is -- and always has been -- of paramount importance.

Share your stories about how your firm is working to address its go-to-market processes. What's not working the way it should? How is your firm working to overcome its marketing and selling silos? How has this influenced your buyers, especially in challenging economic times?

I'm Processing - Part 3

This post is my third in a series on the topic of marketing and selling process improvement in the professional services arena. I've made points about how critical it is for PSFs and B2Bs, especially in challenging economic times, to become more effective in marketing and business development. In my research, writing and consulting, I see a multitude of ways professional service firms could improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their go-to-market processes, and how they could eliminate their organizational barriers to better collaborating and sharing accountabilities on marketing and selling.

I guess I'm not the only one thinking about this issue! I just read some news that the United States' president-elect Obama has created a new position in his administration, a "chief performance officer." His pick, a McKinsey consultant, will be tasked with eliminating wasteful processes and improving the efficiency of governmental programs. The "chief performance officer" will be a first-time position in U.S. government.

Is the idea of a "chief performance officer" (even one who is only focused on marketing and selling) too far-fetched for PSF and B2Bs?

Please write me, or comment here, about how your PSF or B2B service firm is working to improve its go-to-market processes. (Or if it's not working on this  issue, tell me why you think this has yet to happen.) What are your lessons learned?

I'm Processing - Part 2

I'm on a bit of a rant about marketing and business development process improvements in the professional services arena. My previous post was about the efforts many PSF and B2Bs are making to improve their marketing, business development and client service processes. If you have any good examples, post your comments to this blog post or send a separate e-mail at slowe@expertisemarketing.com.

Even though there are some good examples emerging about PSFs increasing their go-to-market process effectiveness, there are also some very negative process examples too. For example, I heard the other day about a 250-person professional firm (I'll cloak its industry, but it could be any professional service enterprise) whose managing partner feels compelled to have his firm respond to 100 percent of all the RFPs it receives.

Yes. 100 percent.

His business development and marketing staff people run themselves ragged trying to meet this demand, even when it's clear (even to the managing partner!) that some of the RFPs represent poor fits for their firm. The managing partner holds a philosophy of "quantity," believing that the firm must respond to every single RFP in order to maintain its revenue stream.

This firm's business developers and marketers feel strongly that their process is broken; they are overworked and under resourced, but they keep going, knowing how important it is to maintain quality in the proposals on which they work. Instead, they wish the managing partner would let them review the firm's business development process, and provide input on how to better prioritize the company's response to RFPs. They want to institute a better targeting process that features "Go/No Go" guidelines.

Is your firm's marketing and business development process broken? How? What would you do to fix it?

I'm Processing - Part 1

I'm married to a hospital administration professor, so I hear a lot about process and quality improvement in hospitals. It's an entire field, focused on the critical aspects of delivering high-quality health care services. Of course, it's easy to see why a hospital's focus on improving processes has a direct effect on saving lives and keeping people safe. It's critical!

As I've watched the way hospitals focus on improving their processes, it's gratifying to see professional- and business-to-business service companies beginning to focus on their own process improvements. PSFs' and B2Bs' focus on go-to-market process improvements can be every bit as important to their own survival.

You might say it's easier to institute new effectiveness and efficiencies in hospitals, especially if the services being delivered can be repeatable. You might say the services of many professions are simply too customized to be mapped and therefore streamlined.

I think, instead, the functions of marketing, business development and even client service delivery are ripe for a good long look at the principles of process improvement. Although I'm not saying we need to squeeze out the creativity or flexibility of marketing, business development and client service, it's clear that these functions labor under numerous preventable organizational silos.

I offer two pieces of evidence about the state of the PSF and B2B industry's thinking on these functions' process improvements. First, now that I'm putting the finishing touches on the manuscript for my upcoming book, The Integration Imperative, I can say unequivocally that there are numerous examples now emerging of professional service firms that are making strong strides toward improving their go-to-market process effectiveness. Of the book's 11 case studies about how PSFs and B2Bs are integrating marketing and business development, five cases are about process.

As a second example, take a look at this article showing the work of the Legal Sales and Services Organization (LSSO). LSSO has created a certification program for process improvement in law firms and legal departments. The article gives you a sense of the scope of the process issues that any professional or B2B service firm could work on.

Especially now, with marketplace effectiveness such a critical issue, ask yourself how well your professional firm is doing at implementing its marketing and selling processes. Could your firm be more efficient, more effective?

I'll bet it could.

Share your process improvement successes -- and failures -- with me, either here as a blog post comment, or as a separate e-mail to slowe@expertisemarketing.com.

PSF Marketing/Business Development Integration – Does it Benefit Clients?

I’m hoping you can help with the fourth and final one-minute survey for my upcoming book The Integration Imperative™: Erasing Marketing and Business Development Silos - Once and for All - in Professional Service Firms. The title of this survey is "PSF Marketing/Business Development Integration – Does it Benefit Clients?"

Our study findings, and those from others’ research, indicate that erasing the functional silos between Marketing and Business Development improves professional service firms’ (PSFs’) go-to-market effectiveness. 

But does erasing Marketing and Business Development functional silos make a positive difference for the clients? 

Take our one-minute survey to find out if other PSFs think the effort to break down Marketing and Business Development functional silos will benefit their clients – and how. 

The questionnaire will be open until May 6.  Once we have the results, we'll post them on this blog and my Marketplace Master™ newsletter.  If you have a blog of your own, you're welcome to post the results.

Take our short survey

P.S. Did you see the results of our first three surveys? Here are the links:

"Hiring fee-earners who WANT to Market and Sell" PDF report   blog post with analysis
“Are PSF Marketing and Business Development Functions Stuck in a Rut?"  PDF report   blog post with analysis
“How well do Marketing and Business Development work with other operations, like Finance, IT, HR, Legal and more?” PDF report  blog post with analysis