Whose Reputation is Your Marketing Content Building?

B2B marketing departments are often pressed for resources. The increasing demand for content to drive eMarketing programs can create a "hamster on the wheel" type of pressure that's overwhelming when added to already filled plates of marketing responsibilities.

So marketers commission 3rd party content to fill the gap. They also count on the fact that the reputation of the 3rd party they hire will help them gain awareness, generate more leads and facilitate the desired buying behavior. 

But companies are selling themselves short. They're not becoming known as experts in their field, but as a resource people can count on for access to information they want by exchanging contact information instead of shelling out the big bucks these 3rd parties charge for their work.

The perception of the value of the report or white paper is higher than the cost of having to endure the likely sales call that will result. And usually it is.

However, what I find worrisome is the perception cost to the companies who rely on them for the bulk of the information they employ in their nurturing, newsletter and lead generation programs.

One of my clients has recently undertaken the creation and execution of a thought leadership nurturing program. Unfortunately they aren't perceived by their prospects as thought leaders. But they are noted for supplying relevant and useful 3rd party expertise.

The nurturing program isn't yet hitting the same engagement levels as the eNewsletter program that uses 3rd party content.

Why not? Because the company doesn't have any credibility for the provision of this type of content. Instead, their marketing programs have built credibility and trust for those experts they're paying to promote.

The problem is that they've only committed to a proof-of-concept program for one quarter. Three months isn't enough time to change market perception. It's a start. Progress is being made. But if they cease the program at the end of three months, they'll lose the traction they're building.

Becoming a thought leader is harder than it looks. It takes time, patience and perseverance. 

This doesn't mean they can't continue to use 3rd party expertise. What it does mean is that the combination of the two is a better approach. This way the company can keep providing what their database expects as they begin to set new expectations. As they build credibility for their own content, they can reduce their reliance on the 3rd party content.

In this world of online word of mouth, peer referrals and conversational exchanges, companies need to recognize the benefits of becoming relied-upon experts in their field. So the next time you plan your editorial calendar, pay attention to whose reputation you're building and make sure it's heavily weighted to your side. It may take some time, but it's an investment well worth making...and sticking with over the long term.

Prospects who only interact with you to get other people's expertise are not going to buy from you without a great deal of coaxing. Marketing programs are intended to help put salespeople into conversations with those who have demonstrated an interest in actually buying what your company sells.

Company authored, thought leadership content can play a critical role in shortening sales cycles by building your credibility, showcasing value delivery and helping your prospects see a clear path to success with your help.

So, why would you want to give those benefits to someone else?

Comments

[John]

This is a very interesting question. Just saw some newspapers writting about it in presstitles.com

[Michael Selissen]

When I think about how many times I’ve looked at the websites of companies that sponsor research reports that I download, the answer is - probably never. Like you say, I am usually more interested in the data and the publishing company than in sponsoring companies that are trying to get some exposure.

The same goes for companies that pay big-name analyst firms to write nice white papers about them, or to participate in webinars and conferences. Companies often don't take a close look at how much revenue actually results from the email addresses they get from such endeavors.

The sad thing is, for the (very high) cost of one analyst report, a company could produce a half-dozen decent white papers of their own.

[Mark]

Any client that thinks becoming a thought leader can be done in a few months probably doesn't want to know (1) it takes a long time to achieve, (2) requires consistent contributions over that time and (3) really requires a lot of um thought before saying anything.

No one becomes a thought leader with a few articles, especially if those are purchased too.

I agree with John that the cost of an analyst report would be better spent on letting your own people develop publish their thoughts. Several people working on it spreads out the workload, includes different perspectives, allows each team member to shine, and shows depth.

[Craig Badings]

Effective thought leadership means packaging and sharing your own insights and expertise, not that of others. The whole idea of thought leadership is to convey, using a host of communication tactics, your knowledge and your insights to your audience.
These should all aim to add value to your audience beyond merely selling them a product or service - that will follow as a result.
I agree with Mark, thought leadership doesn't happen overnight - it requires patience, persistence and courage.

[Henry Bruce]

Disagree with some of the comments here. I think you need to have your own AND 3rd party TL articles. Especially if you have not established your own voice of authority. A couple points to consider:
1. In the Supply Chain space, there are several TLs whose "voice" carries weight - Ann Grackin, Beth Enslow, Dr Steve Banker at an assortment of analyst firms. They bring credibility, but they bring OPT-IN names.
2. Build your own content around theirs and couple with client stories and webcasts.
3. Build a quarterly campaign strategy around each selected TL theme/topic using the 3rd party paper, web cast and your client stories to link your approach to how the problem you are addressing can be solved.
4. Once you have run 3-4 cycles (9-12 months) and have grown your house list accordingly, then you can stop the 3rd party sponsored papers and webcasts and then feature just your own.
5. Vendor written white papers tend towards talking about your solution and not enough about the TL theme/topic. It needs to be in the voice of the market and your target buyer.

I have followed the above approach for years with great results. I do agree it takes time, at least 6 months before you see tangible results, but you will build a following and sizable community. Patience is key and using marketing automation technology to track what your audience is reading, supplemented by a company blog that allows readers to participate only increases the effectiveness of the TL strategy and campaigns.