Are Shorter Sales Cycles a Wake-up Call for Marketers?

Marketing Sherpa's chart of the week shows the answer to this question.

Q. Please select the time period closest to the length of your organization's entire sales cycle, from first lead inquiry to purchase.

In the commentary, Jen Doyle states that these results showing shorter sales cycles correlate to the lower deal prices Marketing Sherpa's annual benchmark survey also discovered.

But I think there's more at stake here than lower prices. Everyone has been talking about how much time buyers spend self-educating and researching prior to identifying themselves to vendors. Buyers have even said that they may not request contact with a vendor until they have selected their short lists. Some estimates gauge the time buyers spend outside of vendor-defined sales cycles to include up to or beyond half of the buying process for a B2B complex purchase.

So, could this chart actually be reflecting that the period of time that buyers spend with a vendor is shorter, but not truly reflect the length of the actual buy cycle? I think it's very possible.

And, if so, then it validates the imperative for marketers to get their content found by the right audience, rather than waiting for them to enter their databases so they can nurture them formally. If your company's ideas and expertise aren't helping them decide how to solve the problem, then why would you think your company would make their short list when the time comes?

What do you think?

Comments

[Kyle Porter]

I think that is all the above. Most importantly, I believe it's all driven by the seller. Sellers want shorter sales cycles even if deal size is lower so that their business is more predictable and less risky. So they invented stuff like content marketing, nurture/drip, digital signatures, etc.

Great perspective & I look forward to reading more!

[Jeff mason]

Buying happens differently now, but I'm not sure the process is any shorter. Instead, I think less of the active process is visible to the seller. That's why sellers need passive content available in the marketplace to serve the needs of buyers they do not yet know, but who are already considering them.

A good post.

[Hans]

Great insight, Ardath. Thanks!

[Nicole Gamble]

What a great read! I appreciate that you taking the time to write this article , it has valuable information.

[StephanieTilton]

Ardath, I completely agree with your angle on these findings. It's probably no surprise to you that UMB TechWeb found that 70% of tech purchases are at the RFP stage by the time the vendor knows about the opportunity.

http://createyournextcustomer.techweb.com/2011/11/15/new-ubm-techweb-report-finds-technology-marketers-missing-critical-opportunity-to-impact-enterprise-b-to-b-purchase-process/

[trish bertuzzi]

Great question Ardath - is it that sales cycles are shorter or do the vendors just think they are? Saw some follow-on research that average order sizes have dropped significantly. That may play a role as well.

One final thought. I know inbound and passive content are critical components of a go to market strategy but if I was a vendor, and oh wait I am, I would encourage my sales team to get out there and talk to buyers before they get to 70%. He who gets their first often gets to set the agenda right?

Thanks for listening.

[Deborah Gibbs]

Ardath, Does this data support the importance of ungated content? (Content that doesn't require a name or email to be acquired.)

If prospects are waiting till later in the buy cycle to interact directly with vendors, could this mean they'll avoid gated content during the early stages of their vendor research? I wonder if this data indicates the need for tactical changes in the early-stage "nurture" activities by vendors.

[Ardath Albee]

Thanks to all for the comments! Really appreciate your ideas and thoughts.

@Stephanie - That 70% statistic should really be the wake-up call! I hadn't see it documented. Thanks for sharing the link.

@Trish - I agree with you. This is why the ability to monitor and identify anonymous website traffic is becoming so important. If you can identify the companies viewing your content, you can prioritize follow-up. Although I will take issue with "passive" content. Why does it have to be passive? If it helps people take action/next steps, shouldn't that make it "active" content? :)

@Deborah - Yes, I'd say it does support the need for ungated content. However, I'd also argue that if your gated content is written to appeal to their priorities and needs, and your form is stupidly simple and short, prospects can be enticed to complete it earlier in the process. Especially if your ungated content has proven valuable. Just think about how much effort it takes to find truly valuable content that you can trust.

[Fred Baldwin]

Your point is good, however, the survey question itself makes me a little suspicious of the results. The phrase "from first lead inquiry" could easily be interpreted by responders as "contacted sales". If answered from this point of view responders were essentially instructed to ignore the segment of the sales cycle predating

[Fred Baldwin]

Huh. The end of my comment was cut off.

...the time before sales was contacted.