Posts tagged managing customer information
about transactional branding
Aug 27th
Ok.
I use this term ‘transactional branding’ a lot when I am talking about business and defending why we shouldn’t talk about branding (or at least stop until everyone can turn off the bullshit meters and maybe all agree on terms of usage).
The premise behind the phrase is that excellent marketing/communications/branding activity/whatever you want to call it and business results – transactions – can and should be inextricably linked.
I do believe a truly inspiring insight or idea will inspire positive brand value and inspire consumer action and I call it Transactional Branding.
Now.
Let me be clear.
I wasn’t the genius who came up with the phrase and idea (although the concept behind it has always resided in my pea like brain).
Some guy at an agency I worked at articulated this idea (probably scribbled on a napkin over cocktails) and came up with the phrase and wording in maybe the late 90’s.
I loved it.
My boss loved it (who was actually the president).
Pretty much everyone else hated it.
It’s that damn word transactions.
Marketing and advertising agencies feel like it diminishes their abilities (and their art) to suggest that they do anything transactional
(but … to come to their defense .. while this is a visceral response I have not run into one great marketing/advertising creative mind … EVER … who didn’t understand that ultimately whatever they created needed to generate a business result or their ‘creative idea’ just wasn’t worth a shit).
Anyway. All that said.
Recognizing a brand cannot exist without ongoing sales, revenue or retail traffic seems to be an overlooked topic in the branding world.
Okay. Someone is going to suggest that it is simply ‘understood.’
Well.
It’s not.
In fact there is an entire generation of young marketers entering into the ‘branding world’ thinking it is all about building value (or adding value).
Well geez … adding value on ‘what.’ Not a logo. Or not on some culture. The value has to be added to … well … some ‘thing.’
And, oh by the way, that ‘thing’ needs some sales, revenue or traffic or your ‘thing’ will become ‘no-thing.’ (let alone a brand).
So this transactional branding concept means building the ‘encourage consumer action’ into the branding effort. In other words, create business outcomes today so the brand lives tomorrow.
It’s kind of a simple concept.
Some people may call it ‘holistic’ or something (maybe not).
Anyway.
How it works:
One brand idea. One brand voice. One brand strategy. An integrated communications plan with multiple tactics (which can be changed constantly because the strategy remains the same).
- note: see my glocal article on my point of view on flexibility in execution.
It begins by identifying ‘the’ inspiring insight (typically the marriage between consumer and brand insight).
Of course you identify the desired business results.
You identify the best communications/marketing ideas to generate the best results.
You develop smart insightful creative messaging (within the organization as well as externally to insure some alignment).
Then you measure results and adjust tactics as appropriate.
Whew.
Sounds simple.
Bottom line.
Here is the tricky part (t least to me)
Everything emanates from the inner truth (the essence, the company value insight, the cultural & functional core of the organization, whatever you want to call it) of the company. THAT my friends is really the brand.
All you are doing with transactional branding is sharing your ‘brand’ with people and let them fall in love with you (hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … and really the only way they can fall in love with you is if they go out on an actual date … uh .. a transaction.)
So from that ‘inner thing’ you get to create some inspiring brand idea and incorporate it into tactics that create transactions.
THAT is Transactional Branding.
Oh.
And if you buy this thought/philosophy. It isn’t just about advertising or marketing.
Transactional Branding is about working on all aspects of a business – from traditional and non-traditional tactics to in-store to organizational attitudes and behaviors and … well … whatever. Because brand and transactions are so inextricably linked that it is about internal organization equal to, if not more important, than what is done externally wit customers.
Oh.
One last great thing about attaching transactional and brand.
It’s all about “selling ‘more’ of what they want to sell at a higher price.”
Whew.
Doesn’t get much better than that if you are running a business, does it?
an interesting company and idea
May 27th
the company is Telaffects
Ok. I don’t write about specific companies and products/services often because, well, I am not really in the endorsement business. But. every once in awhile you run into something you kind of just have to share because it is one of those smaller companies (that always seem to be very very good) and they just need a break and they have a really good idea (or product). This is one of those times (and I actually have another one coming up which is more tightly tied to my desire to build a global children education initiative).
Anyway. With this company idea think the ultimate in creating business through existing customer base. Think appointments, acquisition, acknowledge (with a focus on knowledge). All through an existing list. I would imagine direct marketers would call it list management. These guys aren’t just managing a list. They manage knowledge – one customer at a time (and accumulate, assimilate and develop action plans). Yeah. Someone is going to use the ‘telemarketing’ word. Well. Not so much here. But I am not gonna haggle over the word and focus on what they can do:
- Increased quantity and quality appointments between your sales team and your prospect (quality appointments translate to higher closure/more sales)
- Shortened sales cycles by allowing your sales team to focus on closing qualified business rather than prospecting for potential qualified candidates (although this company could do sales if an organization could suck it up and get over the psychological “they could never do it as well as our own people”)
Ultimately they have a nice system for the development and capture of account specific business intelligence designed to educate and prepare your sales personnel prior to engagement with the account decision maker (and this includes all that decision maker contact information that becomes handy in b2b sales and service) with the additional (if not more important) benefit of a centralized customer/prospect knowledge base.
So. While they could certainly build a business from scratch in their system the reality is they have turned the traditional funnel upside down (and I love ideas that turn the traditional upside down).
note: I did not create this funnel and I cannot remember who made it but I found it when writing this and it fit for visual purposes.

So. This company is called TelAffects. (www.telaffects.com)
The company describes themselves as bridging the gap between sales & marketing (although any CFO would salivate over the business management information he/she could use to manage the balance sheet). I expect they use this phrasing to protect their ass from fearful/insecure sales or marketing executives but the reality is that (when done correctly) this is the b2b customer relationship (management, acquisition, marketing, sales, whatever you want to call it) department of the future.
It is faster, less qualitative, just as human as, and more efficient than a typical existing sales & marketing siloed organization construct.
Before I forget.
Their specific competency statement (on their website): TelAffects combines a consultative selling discipline with operations engineering intelligence to build sales solutions that yield predictable results.
(note: it doesn’t say marketing in there anywhere but trust me it is in what they actually do)
Ultimately this business model (idea) is the hybrid marketing/sales group solution for an organization (which will send the “specialist” lovers in the world through the roof).
But. While this debate, sales & marketing specialists versus sales/marketing hybrid, has raged for years I kind of believe its time is now. Especially in the b2b business.
What I really like about this business concept (well. there are several things actually) is the business “flow” management.
I cannot tell you how many companies I run into with cyclical/seasonal sales cycles that constantly have angst driven discussions on ‘how can I even out my sales’ (which evens out production which evens out inventory which evens out expenses which … well .. you get it).
Well. This Telaffects system not only isolates the ‘truth’ behind the cycles (or maybe better said the pistons in the engine that drive the cycles) it uncovers some customer aspects that could possibly shift some customers in a different sales/decisionmaking cycle. Even better their system truly gathers the information that could possibly help you find new customers (and know what to say and refer to specific examples) to fill out downward portions of the typical annual sales cycle.
The real underlying benefit to this design (the true life blood of any organization) is innovation. Every company knows that their customers are probably the best innovation ideators they have access to. Yet, in a traditional marketing & sales construct the interface people (those most likely to be able to gather the innovation fodder) often aren’t the best people to recognize the best knowledge. So. Telaffects taps into a user-centered innovation design. (which most companies only dream of)
Look. The problem (or maybe better said … the risk) in traditional sales & marketing scenarios is that they have a product which they need to sell and market (regardless of whether it actually has true value or maybe, even worse, the value that is being sold is not the value the customer wants). In fact, in this Telaffects model it is close to the opposite – they understand the market knowledge in as close to a quantitative methodology as you can get and then the company has the opportunity to develop the product or service based on this understanding.
The sad news for marketing groups is that if it is done this way the actual marketing becomes a piece of cake, as products and services are conceived from end-user identified value. Oh. Why is this sad? A company will need less $’s spent on marketing. Uh oh. (hey. and I am a marketing guy)
Ok. So I pointed out all the underlying strategic and infrastructure benefits. And mostly because I believe the long term benefits of the business idea is the real value I have focused on that.
But in today’s short term mentality the idea looks so good it would have been really tempting to focus solely on the short term benefit (ok. because the short term burst of appointments and raw customer data is hard to ignore). Sure. Look at the short term (if you check them out) but the long term benefits if I were managing a company would like one of the best capital expenditures I could ever invest in.
Oh. They have proof. (as I mention short term burst).
They have a bunch of case studies but suffice it to say “Established 152 sales appointments from 2,400 potential accounts” in 1st 6 months. Yeah. That was 1st 6 months. Oh. In the same 6 months. Captured current situation, vendor and competitor intelligence from 400 contacts. Identified actual decision process and timing for 400 accounts (this one is kinda huge and any CFO would drool over this information if accurate).
Beyond the 6 months? Once data normalized you could have accurate (or as accurate as possible) sales forecasting, production forecasting and a slew of cost management ROI type information. These guys would pay out in so many ways I cannot think of a reason I wouldn’t do it if I were in the b2b business (and possibly some ‘to consumer’ segments that have b2b feel … like large private investment in the financial world as an example).
r
So. Why did I write about these guys?
- Immediate response. In today’s world I would have quick sales and quick market/customer information (so if I were in a new C level position this would have me rockin’ in 6 months)
- Addressing the budget. B2B has always been the battleground for marketing spending (i.e., why waste money on marketing versus sales). And direct marketing has always claimed it has eliminated the “I just don’t know which half of my advertising is working.” (yeah. right.)
But the TelAffects concept more closely addresses what Joe Kennedy supposedly said to his son (JFK) ‘Dear Jack: Don’t buy a single vote more than is necessary. I’ll help you win this election, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to pay for a landslide!’”
This model does about as good a job as you can find that matches up budget to results in a business model.
- The long long term. If it works why do you need a full marketing and sales department? Staffing becomes easier. You don’t need facilitators you need experts in responding to information. You already have the most efficient facilitator group (and you can actually know what they are doing) with these guys. So at the end of say 2 years you could minimize your direct marketing and advertising and limit sales to solely tactical usage (say whatever you need to do to support a specific trade show/event or any investor relations needs and specific meetings).
- Organization efficiency. One of the biggest struggles in organizational alignment (therefore costing efficiency) is the relationship, or the lack thereof, between sales and marketing. it just is not possible for every sales and marketing effort to be combined and in larger companies they call for regular meetings at higher level between sales and marketing heads where plans can be mapped out and then discarded as each function tries to meet their specific P&L goals.
TelAffects is a possible solution to the lack of camaraderie and spirit of ‘in it togetherness’ between the sales and marketing departments. They can facilitate the dialogue and interaction (if not eliminate most of sales vs. marketing at some point) and, at minimum, minimize internal competition.
So. One last thought. You have it in your head as you have read this. Telemarketing. (ouch. Hurts to even type it). yeah. Well. Overcome this thought lingering in the back of your head and give ‘em a call:
“Your one time experience 8 years ago with a telemarketing company is not meaningful.”
I think their biggest issue won’t be their business model but rather that people will want to throw them into the telemarketing garbage disposal. But they are different. Certainly worth a look if you are in the b2b business and want to increases sales (at minimum).
In the end I would guess their best fits are:
Financial organizations.
Business services organizations.
Technology support organizations.
But. I seriously cannot think of a b2b business they wouldn’t be good for. It’s a neat business idea.







