Sales & Marketing-Is a direct or indirect approach best? Part i

I've discussed many topics related to High Technology companies over the last several months. One fundamental subject I haven't explored in detail is the promotion of High Tech products.

This is a favorite topic of mine, since I tend to become heavily involved with promotional activities with clients, as part of my consulting practice. Many of my clients are at a stage where gaining (or regaining) market traction is crucial to moving the company forward. So finding successful, profitable promotional programs is quite often one of the key activities that we're concentrating on early in a consulting engagement.

Same old, same old doesn't work

So what's the best way to promote software and other technology products? If you're asking that question, thinking there's an actual answer, you are likely on a path to failure. One-size-fits-all promotional programs rarely work, and if they do, it's probably just lucky. The most important thing to remember about promotion (and marketing in general) is that each company and product line is a unique situation. Even with the exact same company and product line, a promotional program that worked 12 months ago has a high chance of failure today. Markets are not static, particularly fast moving, high growth technology markets. And there is a wide range of market types within the high technology business sector. The proper promotional approach for a $100,000 software package with 1000 potential customers is far different from the best approach for a $49 software package with 5 million potential targets. If you find yourself falling back on some tried and true formula, you're thinking "behind" the market, not "ahead" of it. I always chuckle a bit when I see ads for a new VP Marketing that is seeking candidates only from 10 specific software companies that have had recent success in a particular market. It's very likely that one of those candidates will bring along the "formula" that made "Giant Software Company C" a huge success. Unfortunately, the strategy may be terribly inappropriate for their new company, particularly at a new time/market stage. This is an example of "shooting behind the market"--and with promotional programs, thinking ahead of the market is required.

The reason is what usually works in promotions are novel new approaches (or new spins on old approaches, or approaches from other markets). Once something works, others in the market take notice, and the copy-cat campaigns flood the communication channels, and greatly reduce a successful program's effectiveness. Nothing works forever, so you need to constantly being trying to find the next new promotional program--again, out ahead of the market. It's similar to when the coach of a sports team installs a new system for his team--it throws the competition off balance for a time, but they eventually adjust, and match or counteract what is providing the advantage.

First Art

So how do you approach finding a successful promotional program for your company--do you just guess? Well, not quite. I always say that promotion is a combination of "Art" and "Science"--with unfortunately, the Art coming first. The thing is, you will NEVER know with any level of certainty whether a promotional approach will be successful, until you do it. So there is a bit of Art in formulating the initial "test programs". But of course you don't guess. The initial program is put together utilizing the experience of the marketer, their past experience with programs in similar market conditions, a snapshot reading of the market conditions and product position currently, the amount of budget available, and of course the goals of the company. So up front, the key is to make small, intelligent bets.

Then Science

The key word in the above paragraph is "test". This may be the most important concept in the whole topic of promotion--and unfortunately, one that is dramatically underutilized.

Marketing promotional programs are all too often put together haphazardly, without much analysis of the specific situation. Often they are designed in a certain way because the VP Marketing or CEO has always done it that way, or are comfortable with it. Executives without much marketing experience like to see print ads, because in their minds, that's marketing promotion. Of if the VP Sales is involved, Trade shows might be what he's used to. Or seminar promotions might be preferred, if the executive comes from a market with high price points. While all of these methods may be very applicable to an individual situation, they are, on average, some of the higher cost, lower return activities in the promotion bag of tricks. I see thousands (and sometimes millions) of dollars wasted on programs that have been given very little thought, prior to large execution expenditures. Worse yet, these programs are often approved and implemented with no ability to judge whether or not the chosen programs end up being a good investment for the company. This brings me to the measurement part of promotional marketing.

I've never been a big fan of marketing programs which aren't measurable. When measurement doesn't occur, it's often because program implementation just isn't thought through well enough, and accurate measures could have been put in place--but aren't. Some programs however, such as "Image Advertising", just don't lend itself to correlating the program results to the corporation's performance. While there is, again, a place for such programs, I recommend that they be left to those monster corporations who can afford ambiguous results within some segment of a very large budget. For the preponderance of companies out there for which every nickel counts, I highly recommend that you stubbornly stick to programs with results you can easily measure.

A question that often arises when my consulting practice engages with early stage companies is "How should we sell our product? Should we build a sales force, or sell through distributors, dealers or OEM partners?"

The answer, like most topics discussed in this forum, is rarely as simple or straightforward as the question itself. It depends--on a lot of different factors. First of all, if direct, does that mean building an expensive direct sales force, or a marketing driven model with direct sales from a website? If indirect, does it mean distribution through 11,000 mass retailers, or a select few, highly specialized, technical Systems Integrators? There are so many different options within the direct vs. indirect argument.

I will tell you upfront that I have a bias toward using multiple channels--direct and indirect--if at all possible. It's always been my opinion that this is usually the best way of achieving the highest total return, from the high product development investments that are typical in the technology industry. But that's a general rule, and one that won't always hold up in individual cases.

About The Author-- Phil Morettini is President of PJM Consulting, Management Consultants to Tech Companies PJM provides assistance in Management, Product Marketing and Biz Dev. More Articles at Tech Management Blog . Contact Phil at Software Management Consulting

Article Source: Articles island - Free article submission and free reprint articles