When it comes to generating leads, it seems like we’re in a transition period, moving away from outbound (“Push“) to incoming (“sweater“) lead generation. While it’s tempting to classify outbound as “traditional” media (print ads, TV ads, radio ads, direct mail, outdoor) versus inbound as “non-traditional” media (online marketing, such as online advertising, email, search, podcasts, webcasts, mobile advertising, and social media; alternative media, such as in-store marketing, buzz marketing, and event marketing), is more complex than that.
Outbound Lead Generation generally refers to a marketer’s efforts to “send” marketing messages to prospects using print advertising, direct mail, television ads, radio ads, outbound telemarketing, outdoor billboards, and the like. However, under this definition, even some electronic media, such as online advertisements and unsolicited email, could be classified as outbound.
Inbound Lead Generationon the other hand, it focuses on the means that “attract” prospects to the seller, including the use of web search engines, social networks (Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Twitter, etc.) and content marketing (blogs, podcasts, webcasts , articles, reports, e-books, etc.) Inbound also has a strong viral referral element, as prospects who like something can discuss and share it with others via email and social media.
There is a growing feeling that input methods are becoming more effective than output methods. Current industry statistics suggest that consumers are more receptive to inbound lead generation and that inbound leads are more profitable.
HubSpot, a marketing software company, recently released their “State of Inbound Marketing 2012” report. The company surveyed 972 business professionals, including salespeople, business owners, entrepreneurs, and executives from companies of various sizes. A wide range of industries was represented, with 72 percent of people working on a business-to-business basis. The survey found that companies dominated by inbound marketing had a 61 percent lower cost per lead than companies dominated by outbound marketing ($135 per lead vs. $346 per lead). This finding was consistent with surveys conducted in 2011 and 2010. Of those companies that used closed-loop analytics to measure lead conversion, leads generated through inbound methods were more likely to convert to customers than customers. potentials generated through output methods. For example, inbound links (or referrals) were nearly five times more likely to convert to customers than outbound leads (9% vs. 2%).
With the rise of a connected, mobile-enabled consumer, it makes sense that inbound marketing is becoming a more attractive alternative.
However, abandoning outbound marketing altogether may be premature. A small business is likely to benefit from using some combination of input and output, although the emphasis should be on input. For example, a B2B marketer may find that online banner ads offering valuable free information can be effective in driving traffic to a website or Facebook page, or that making calls to invite a select group of prospects to a Webinar results in higher overall attendance. . Note that these two examples are actually an effective Mix exit and entry techniques.
You need to determine the best methods for your product and service, based on your audience, offering, and creative elements. Understanding how your audience consumes information is a key part of the equation.
A smart strategy might be to establish a strong inbound lead generation program and overlay it with using outbound methods very selectively. You could even set up a test to compare the quality of leads generated from leads vs. incoming methods, provided you isolate them as much as possible for testing purposes.
You may find that outbound lead generation is appropriate in certain situations, but if market change is any indication, you’ll likely find that inbound methods are more profitable and productive, so ultimately, inbound leads will convert. at the core of your lead generation program. .