If you’re a regular reader of my blog, then you know that I frequently write about a variety of topics related to outbound lead generation teams, including: email tactics, gatekeeper tactics, the lead generation-sales activity funnel, time to revenue, and others.
The reason for the frequency of those posts is because we (OpenView Labs, that is) believe that an outbound lead generation initiative, in many cases, is the cheapest and fastest way to build a pipeline and penetrate new market segments.
That being said, outbound lead generation teams are not always the best approach to building a pipeline. In fact, there are some situations (even at expansion-stage software companies) in which this model may not be the best one for your business.
My colleague Devon McDonald recently published a blog post in which she argued that if your Average Sales Cycle (ASC) is less than 30 days and your product can be sold over the phone, then you don’t really need an outbound lead generation team. While I agree with the core idea of her post, I actually think that ASC is only one component of a much larger factor you should consider: the complexity of the sale.
As with any business decision, the economics related to the complexity of the sale need to be taken into consideration. That is, can outbound lead generation actually produce the same number of equally qualified leads for the same or less money as marketing?
So, to decide if an outbound lead generation team really makes sense for your business, there are actually two important factors that you need to consider:
- Complexity of the sale
- Lead generation economics
Ultimately, how these two factors work together will help you determine if outbound lead generation is the right approach for your business. In my next two blog posts, I’ll explain each of these two factors in greater detail.
Recommended for YouWebcast: Relationship Marketing: How to Build a Relationship that Converts to Sales
photo by: Sarah Twitchell
Sign-up for our Free Weekly Newsletter to get the best new ideas for building technology companies.