The book includes a good overview of references and has many interesting examples of “thinking through” an innovation process. One of interesting points is discussing “intropreneurs” as “entrepreneurs” functioning within an established organization.
A good point on managing innovation: the innovators should be evaluated based on the approaches they take (methodology, mitigation of risk, etc.) rather than on a result. Sometimes an unreasonably risky endeavor might succeed and sometimes a reasonable approach may not produce much of a result result.
A couple more recommended books I would like to read:
It seems that the topic of the innovation question in the books I read is changing from understanding a need for innovation (it seem to be understood), to fostering innovation in organizations (it also seem to be accepted as necessity), to how to do it most efficiently… Innovation is an interesting aspect of business that can not be managed based on the results in small scale, but has to be started in small scale to be useful. Interesting…
Typically, I read a book, type notes, and give the book away to somebody who might find it interesting too. Ha! I am keeping this one – Manufacturing Demand by David Lewis – it has a quality of dictionary a modern marketer might need to use for reference once in a while 😉 Very good resource!
Additional resources and case studies are conveniently can be found at the Demand Gen web site.
Notes from the book:
- Two more “Ps” for a modern marketer – Process (mapping the entire buying process) and Programming (using marketing automation – not an IT term)
- Principles (and the order)
- Demand funnel
- Lead scoring
- Lead nurturing
- Lead score is not a forecast who will buy; it is a prioritized to-do list for sales.
- Three “Cs” of marketing analytics
- What you can Count
- What Counts
- What you can Count on
- Example of personal tone. Instead of “Don’t miss our webinar on how our [product name] helps with regulatory compliance” use ” We are holding a webinar for mortgage brokers on regulatory issues plaguing our industry. Can you join…”
- Sirius Decisions taxonomy:
- Suspect – unidentified potential buyer
- Inquiry – a raw response
- MQL – an inquiry that meets minimum fit criteria (qualification and interest) as jointly defined by sales and marketing
- Sales-accepted Lead – formally accepted by sales
- SQL – sales confirmed that viable opportunity exists
- Content strategy is about the buyer!
- A good example of proper approach: “We believe that managing you diabetes should be painless and easier. We want to help you to live a long, healthy life without the hassles of testing your blood sugars manually. So, we created Dialife for you. It’s an automated way to monitor your blood sugars 24 hours a day without ever pricking your finger. Want to see how?”
- A bad example of product-centric approach: “Get Dialife. It’s a continuous glucose monitor that you place on your arm that uses laser beams to check your blood sugar level instead of traditional blood testing. It’s about the size of your thumb and is covered by most insurance companies. Watch this demo to learn more.”
- A nurture project brief – page 97 (good!)
- Companies that excel at lead nurturing generate 50% more sales-ready leads at 33% lower cost per lead (Forrester)
- Nurtured leads produce a 20% increase in sales opportunities over non-nurtured leads (Demand gen report)
- 84% of qualified leads are not ready to buy (Aberdeen Research)
- Typical content is designed to tell about the products. Today’s b-to-b buyers are looking for helpful educational content that makes them more knowledgeable.
Finding a recommendation to read The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli as part of understanding of corporate structure was rather unexpected 😉 Listening to the book (OK, now I have an excuse to enjoy a historic treatise) right after the book Future of Management was very enjoyable.
To some degree, the issues are very similar – we, humans, tend to be unprepared for change (as Machiavelli laments about territories lost by hapless rulers) and smart alliances are needed for both keeping power in 16 century Europe and encouraging innovation in the Big Blue.
There was also an interesting difference. To “keep” their territorial possessions, the 16th century price just needed to keep his ground. Just to “keep” its markets, a 21st century company has to change constantly.
Ah… good old times… but, thankfully, we don’t need to worry about loosing our heads if our companies did not succeed 🙂
As the technology and our world is changing, the practice of management did not experience anything comparable. The book is arguing that the change of management practice is needed as the models that we are using now supported completely different world of work.
The interesting point: it was possible in the past centuries to transform masses of independent artisans and farmers into employees who “sells” their time to the employer, it should be possible to more the employees to the next level. To succeed modern companies need passion and enthusiasm of their employees – the management needs to change to allow this passion flourish.
Book mentions a site Hack Management where we can find contributions of different “hacks” of management approaches. Very interesting!
In about 20 years we will know exactly what was important at this moment, but it is a pleasure to see books that are trying to understand demands of our time as it is happening.
Interesting: the purpose of the company beyond making money for shareholders becoming more important. The company’s obligation to the employees is vital to inspire the employees to do their best work… because organizational success now demands inspired work… rather than just an honest day of work…
Would unusual management organization such as W L Gore “lettuce” structure be common in the future? Unlikely from my perspective… but it is clear that some degree change can benefit many companies.
Many interesting questions to ponder 🙂
As usual an enlightening event. However, this event had a different undertone – it was “in-depth” to the point that some concepts were significantly beyond my knowledge. It is a totally new feeling to hear a question from a marketer on stage, have no idea what it meant, and watch how your company’s agency nodded in response… and thinking “good – they know…”
“Th0u shalt Not Do Search in House” was my conclusion from the session. 🙂 Ward laughed… He understood it much earlier. I did too and acted based on this understanding…. but there was an idea that maybe it was still possible; maybe for SEO only… Oh, no. The industry is becoming so complex that a business with just a few marketers should rely on specialists.
Marty mentioned an interesting aspect of search – as a first step of identifying remarketing targets. It makes perfect sense.