inside the buyer’s brain static vs. interactive
Transcript of inside the buyer’s brain static vs. interactive
1INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
static vs.interactive
w h a t k i n d o f c o n t e n t c r e a t e s m o r e o p p o r t u n i t i e s ?
i n s i d e t h e b u y e r ’ s b r a i n
1INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
i s i n t e r a c t i v e
the answer?It’s hard to ignore the appeal of interactive content.
The idea is when a prospect engages with an interactive tool (like a calculator or an assessment), they’ll
have a more meaningful, exploratory, and self-directed experience. And, because people stay with your
content longer, they’re more likely to buy.
That could be what’s so enticing to marketers—your prospect sticks with your content longer to click
around, explore, and “engage” with all the interactive elements. All your timebound metrics go up, and if
those numbers increase, so do your conversions...at least in theory.
All that extra engagement means you can collect more data, too. With the proper tracking in place, you
can capture more information about your buyer and their preferences based on their choices, clicks, and
answers. As your prospect happily interacts with the content, you’re collecting data to use in a sales
conversation based on their inputs and tailored to fit their preferences.
Considering all these advertised benefits, it’s no wonder 83 percent of marketers and sellers told us they
believe digital content should be more interactive.
Why, then, do only 18 percent say they actually use interactive content over more traditional, static
content like e-books and infographics?
Maybe it’s the extra effort involved in creating interactive tools. If you put forth that extra effort, will you
get a better return? Beyond spending more time with your content, does adding interactivity spark more early-stage sales conversations?
That’s what we set out to learn in this field trial. In this report, you’ll see how an interactive assessment
performs against a static e-book in a sales development campaign. And you’ll discover how your choice
of content can change the entire outcome.
Frank Pinder General Manager,
B2B DecisionLabs
INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
2INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
a p p e a l i n g b u t
unprovenIn a recent B2B DecisionLabs survey of nearly 300 sellers and
marketers, 83 percent said they believe it’s important to make digital content more interactive.
As more analyst firms espouse the value of digital self-service
experiences, marketers are feeling pressure to incorporate
more interactive content into their own efforts. But despite
that pressure, most companies still prefer to use static formats like e-books and infographics.
Why? It might be that marketers are more familiar with static
formats. Even if it sounds more appealing, interactive content
takes more effort, and unless you can show that it pulls in
more qualified leads, decision-makers might hesitate to take a
chance and allocate budget.
Static e-books, on the other hand, have always been a
mainstay for demand gen and sales development programs.
You know static content generates leads. The question is,
could interactive tools do an even better job?
According to our B2B survey:
Our marketing and sales content is delivered in traditional, static formats (like infographics, e-books, case studies, etc.) versus interactive alternatives
Only 18 percent of companies prefer to use
interactive content over more traditional, static formats.
18%
Static only - 1.
2.
3.
4.
Interactive preferred - 5.
It’s important to make digital content more interactive to provide a self-determined experience
83 percent of companies believe it’s important
to make digital content more interactive.
83%
Not important - 1.
2.
3.
4.
Very important - 5.
4INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
Turns out, changing just one variable in a sales development
campaign—an interactive vs. static content asset—changes
the entire outcome.
sales conversationss p a r k m o r e
CHOOSE THE RIGHT CONTENT
BUILD A STRONG CADENCE
IGNITE MORE INTEREST
4INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
t h e ield trialThis field trial was set up as a “re-ignite” campaign to 947 qualified but
dormant leads.
The prospects on the list had previously signed up for a webinar about
customer retention and expansion, so they had some general familiarity
with the subject matter. But several months had passed since their initial
interest. During that time, they hadn’t taken any further action and had
not responded to a follow-on nurture cadence.
Researchers created two sales cadences for the test, which were carried
out by a team of sales development representatives (SDRs). The SDRs
running each cadence were randomly assigned and were not aware
of the study.
Out of 947 total leads, 473 received the e-book offer and 474 received the
interactive assessment offer. Then, the researchers tracked both cadences
for 90 days.
Mo
tio
n 1
:
dri
ve
en
ga
ge
me
nt
Analyze f indings & determine stat ist ical s ignif icance
Dormant leads
Cl ick #2
Cl ick #2
E-book cadenceInteract ive assessment
cadenceE-book landing page
Interact ive assessment
landing page
Reply ReplyCl ick Cl ickNo
act ion taken
E-book fol low-up cadence
Interact ive assessment fol low-up cadence
No act ion taken
Progress to opportunity
Progress to opportunity
Nurture cadence
Document
Mo
tio
n 2
:
ge
t th
e m
ee
tin
g
6INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
contentc h o o s e t h e r i g h t
s p a r k m o r e s a l e s c o n v e r s a t i o n s
6INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
s a m e c o n t e n t ,
two experiencesBoth content assets used in this field trial were based on the Corporate
Visions book, The Expansion Sale. Each asset included four sections,
and each section covered a key concept from the book. The text and
call to action were identical in both assets. The only difference was the format in which the information was presented.
The e-book was a 21-page PDF
document that prospects could
download and read at their own pace.
The interactive assessment was
a digital asset that asked prospects
a series of questions. Prospects were
required to score themselves on a
scale of 1–5 before receiving the next
piece of information.
View this asset
View this asset
8INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
cadenceb u i l d a s t r o n g
s p a r k m o r e s a l e s c o n v e r s a t i o n s
8INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
c a l i b r a t e y o u r c o n v e r s a t i o n s
Cadences are essentially conversations.
And like any other sales conversation, you
need the right combination of messages,
content, and skills to win.
But how do you know what works best?
In this field trial, researchers used SalesLoft analytics to see how every message performed. As a result, they could
closely track engagement and interest and knew
exactly how many meetings occurred from using
an e-book vs. an interactive assessment.
Using a multi-touch and multi-channel approach
also leads to more activity. Our customer
research indicates that when cadences include
three or more channels (like email, phone, and
social media), prospects are 3.2 times more
likely to engage.
Detailed analytics mean you can continually test,
refine, and validate your sellers’ conversations
across the cadence.
You can also pinpoint where your cadence falters
and isolate the precise variable that needs to
change to improve your results.
Jeremey DonovanSVP Revenue Strategy, SalesLoft
w h a t ’ s a
sales cadence?To get people engaged in a sales conversation, you need an active way to begin and
sustain that conversation. That's where sales cadences come in.
A sales cadence is a carefully planned series of touchpoints that sellers can use to reach prospects through emails, phone calls, and social media interactions. Unlike generic drip campaigns, sales cadences are designed to appear as if they come from
an individual SDR.
Each step within a cadence includes messages, content, and call scripts to guide the seller
on what conversation needs to happen and when. That means sellers can deliver more
touches in less time, without having to think about what message to use or how they
should deliver it.
Different situations also call for different cadences. A cadence designed to generate
interest from cold prospects, for example, looks very different from a cadence designed to
expand business within an existing account. You might also build several solution-focused
cadences for each of those audience groups.
When you’re running tens or even hundreds of different cadences at the same time, a
technology solution like SalesLoft can help manage and measure those conversations.
Of course, simply building a cadence won’t automatically generate more opportunities.
The messages you create make a difference, and, as the results from this field trial show,
the content you choose to reinforce those messages can completely change your results.
9INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
creating t h e c a d e n c e s
The sales cadences in this field trial contained two motions.
All the messaging in each step was identical. The only difference between the two cadences was that one offered a static PDF
e-book as the call to action in Motion 1, and the other offered an interactive assessment.
Motion 1: drive engagement
Step Day Step type
1 1 LinkedIn: connect
2 1 Email #1
3 3 Email #2
4 5 LinkedIn: like or comment
5 7 Email #3
6 9 LinkedIn: message or InMail
7 10 Email #4
8 12 Transfer lead to nurture or Motion 2
Motion 1 was a highly automated cadence designed
to drive the prospect to engage with the content
asset—either the e-book or the interactive assessment.
When a prospect responded, they moved to Motion 2.
Motion 2: get the meeting
Motion 2 was a more personalized cadence designed
to get a meeting with a prospect who engaged with the
content asset and qualify them as a pipeline opportunity.
Step Day Step type
1 1 Email #1
2 1 Call with voicemail
3 3 LinkedIn: message or InMail
4 5 Call without voicemail
5 5 Call without voicemail
6 7 Email #2
7 7 Call without voicemail
8 8 LinkedIn: like or comment
9 10 Email #3
10 10 Call with voicemail
So, which kind of content won? Read on.
11INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
interesti g n i t e m o r e
s p a r k m o r e s a l e s c o n v e r s a t i o n s
11INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
t h e r e s u l t s :e n g a g e m e n t a n d
activityThe initial engagement results showed a 19 percent
difference in click-through rate in favor of the e-book.
But the gap widened from there.
Prospects who reviewed the static e-book were significantly
more responsive than prospects who interacted with the
assessment. The e-book garnered 61 percent more email replies and 58 percent more answered calls.
Since the messaging was identical in both content assets,
it’s clear the interactive assessment experience didn’t create
the same level of motivation nor inspire as much interest to
meet with sales.
Click-throughs
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1 9 %
19 percent more
prospects clicked through
to the e-book vs. the
interactive assessment.
Email replies
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
6 1 %
The e-book cadence led
to 61 percent more
email replies than the
interactive assessment.
Answered calls
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
5 8 %The e-book led to
58 percent more
answered calls than the
interactive assessment.
13INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
w h a t ’ s m o r e
enjoyable?
EEG signals measured during previous brain study
Valence Arousal Attention Motivat ion Working memory
Fatigue
E-book Assessment
A previous B2B DecisionLabs EEG brain study of the e-book versus
assessment showed that the interactive assessment led to greater arousal
(or alertness), working memory, and motivation to act.
However, that brain study also showed that participants felt more
negatively (low valence) and experienced higher levels of fatigue while
taking the interactive assessment.
This field trial seems to corroborate prospects’ negative experience with
the interactive assessment, as indicated by the lower response rates.
The e-book was more enjoyable, which led to greater engagement. But
beyond initial activity, what kind of content won more meetings?
12INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
13INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
meetingsThe meeting results further confirm how much more
effective the e-book was than the interactive assessment.
Prospects who responded to the e-book were 77 percent more willing to schedule a meeting, and every
one of them showed up.
These results might surprise some people. Engagement
and activity are one thing, but if one of the most advertised
benefits of interactivity is that it leads to greater motivation,
this is where you’d expect the interactive assessment to pull
ahead and win.
It didn’t happen that way. The e-book might have sparked
just the right amount of interest and curiosity in the
prospects’ minds, so they saw more value in taking a
follow-up sales call.
Prospects who responded
to the e-book were 77 percent more willing to
set a meeting than those
who responded to the
interactive assessment.
100 percent of
the prospects who
responded to the e-book
took the meeting.
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
7 7 %
Meetings set
Meetings held
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2 X
t h e r e s u l t s :
14INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
Sales Accepted Leads
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 3 3 %
Sales Qualified Leads
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 0 0 %
opportunitiesThe ultimate test for any sales development program is
whether it generates Sales Accepted Leads (SALs), and
even more importantly, Sales Qualified Leads (SQLs). These
numbers indicate how many leads get added to the pipeline
with a level of confidence that they’ll convert to a won deal.
In this study, the same trend persisted from meetings
to pipeline. Meetings with prospects who read the e-book resulted in a significantly higher conversion rate to SAL and SQL pipeline opportunities.
From engagement and activity to meetings and pipeline,
the e-book consistently generated better results than the
interactive assessment.
Meetings with prospects
from the e-book
cadence resulted in a
significantly higher conversion rate to Sales
Accepted Leads.
Meetings with prospects
from the e-book
cadence resulted in a
significantly higher conversion rate to Sales
Qualified Leads.
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
Interact ive assessment
E-book
Pro
spe
cts
t h e r e s u l t s :
15INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
n o m o r e g u e s s i n g
t o o m u c h t o ask?Why did the interactive assessment perform so poorly against the static e-book?
There are a few possible explanations.
Traditionally, marketers have used interactive assessments as a self-service tool—either as
part of a social media campaign or on a website. The value of that kind of self-discovery
experience apparently doesn’t transfer to more of a “push” scenario.
When you send a lukewarm prospect an interactive assessment, you’re asking them to
put in more effort to get the insights you’re trying to share. That’s a very different (and
potentially negative) experience than seeking out and choosing to take an assessment on
your website.
As a result, prospects might have felt a level of resistance to engage in something that
seems invasive. They might have been skeptical about how we planned to use their
information. Or perhaps they felt like they had already experienced sales discovery in
the form of a self-administered assessment. What additional value would they get from a
sales conversation?
Tim RiestererChief Visionary, B2B DecisionLabs
These results hold a cautionary tale for
sales organizations.
Like most everyone else, your sellers and
marketers are being barraged by analysts and
“thought leaders” who spend all their time
pontificating about new ideas. And when your
well-meaning team wants to put an idea into
practice, most companies have no way to
measure whether it’s working (or not).
What can you do?
Field trials like this illustrate how you can test
and measure how your messages, content,
and even your sellers’ skills perform in a real-
world setting.
That means you don’t have to take your
best guess and hope it works. The next time
someone suggests something like changing
your early-stage cadence to include an
interactive asset, you won’t have to waste the
effort. You’ll already know that e-books are,
in fact, the most effective approach.
17INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
What kind of content creates more sales conversations? At the
top of the funnel, e-books generate more interest than interactive
assessments.
Considering how quickly companies “churn and burn” through new
leads after a campaign, this field trial shows that offering dormant
leads new insights in an e-book is an effective way to see if there’s
latent opportunity among your once-interested prospects.
When you choose the right content and build a strong cadence
to deliver it, you can test and refine your approach and get
significantly better results.
sales conversationss p a r k m o r e
CHOOSE THE RIGHT CONTENT
BUILD A STRONG CADENCE
IGNITE MORE INTEREST
18INSIDE THE BUYER’S BRAIN | S t a t i c v s . I n t e ra c t i v e F i e l d Tr i a l
a u t h o r
c o n t r i b u t o r s
Jeremey Donovan
SVP Revenue Strategy,
SalesLoft
As B2B DecisionLabs’ General Manager, Frank Pinder has created
a field testing methodology and framework that have improved
inside sales teams’ performance around the globe. Frank has
extensive experience working with small and large organizations
alike to provide top-notch testing environments directly linked to
business growth and overall success.
Frank PinderGeneral Manager, B2B DecisionLabs
a b o u t B 2 B D e c i s i o n L a b sB2B DecisionLabs is the only B2B research firm dedicated to studying how
decision-makers frame value and make choices. Unlike traditional market
research and advisory firms, B2B DecisionLabs conducts rigorous research
studies based in several Decision Science disciplines:
• Behavioral studies – understand why buyers behave the way they do.
• Neuroscience research – observe what’s going on inside their brains.
• Field trials – validate your approach in the real world.
CONTACT US TO LEARN MORE
in partnership with
© B2B DecisionLabs | 888.664.2660 | b2bdecisionlabs.com
Tim Riesterer
Chief Visionary,
B2B DecisionLabs