Outline
- Why AI visibility does not fit one analyst quadrant
- The three layers: measurement, remediation, authority
- What each layer does well and where it stops
- The most common failure mode: diagnosis without action
- The honest capacity question: what your team can absorb
- Sequencing the first 90 days for visible momentum
- Building a shortlist: specialists versus rebranded SEO
Key Takeaways
AI visibility is not a single product. It is a three-layer operating model, and most organisations need a deliberate combination rather than one vendor solving everything. Understanding the layers makes selection clearer, reduces the risk of buying tools that diagnose but never fix, and gives you a sequencing logic that delivers early, visible results.
- AI visibility spans three layers, not one product category
- Layer one measures; it does not fix anything
- Layer two remediation changes whether pages get cited
- Layer three authority is the longer earned-media game
- The common failure is buying measurement and stopping there
- Map internal capacity honestly before deciding what to outsource
- Sequence the first 90 days for visible momentum
- Better questions separate specialists from rebranded SEO services
Introduction
You have made it through the business case. Budget is provisionally allocated. The mandate is to “fix AI visibility”, which on inspection turns out to be a category that does not behave like the categories you are used to buying. Some providers will tell you the answer is a monitoring platform. Others will tell you it is a content overhaul. Others will offer a strategic retainer. Each of them is partly right, which is precisely what makes the decision difficult.
The reality is that AI visibility is not a single product. It is an operating model with three distinct layers, and most organisations need a deliberate combination rather than a single vendor solving everything. The first layer is measurement: knowing where you appear, where you do not, and how you compare across the major AI platforms. The second is technical content remediation: the unglamorous, schema-heavy, AI-readability work that actually changes whether your pages get cited in a synthesised answer. The third is authority and earned media: the longer-game work of being mentioned in the third-party sources AI engines have learned to trust.
Confusing one layer for another is the single most common reason AI visibility programmes stall. Organisations buy a monitoring tool, get a clear diagnostic, and then discover they have no internal capacity to act on it. Or they commission content rewrites without the structural schema work that makes those rewrites AI-readable in the first place. This article maps the three layers, explains what each one can and cannot do, and gives you a framework for deciding which parts to insource, which to outsource, and how to sequence the work so early effort delivers visible results.
Why AI Visibility Does Not Fit on One Quadrant
The instinct in procurement is to find the category, find the quadrant, and shortlist the leaders. AI visibility frustrates that instinct because the work spans three different disciplines that happen to share a buzzword. A measurement platform and a content remediation engagement are about as comparable as a thermometer and a course of treatment. Both are useful. Neither is a substitute for the other.
This matters because the buying journey has already moved on without you. Forrester’s State of Business Buying 2026, drawn from nearly 18,000 buyers, places generative AI as the single most-cited meaningful interaction in B2B research. The Pedowitz Group’s analysis frames the consequence plainly: the independent research phase now covers most of the buying journey before a buyer ever speaks to a sales team. If your brand is missing from the answers those buyers read, no single tool purchase fixes that. The fix is a programme, and a programme has layers.
The Three Layers of an AI Visibility Programme
Layer 1: Measurement and Monitoring
The first layer answers a simple question: where do you appear, where do you not, and how do you compare. Good measurement tracks brand mentions, citations and Share of Voice across the platforms your buyers actually use, and it does so consistently enough to show a trend rather than a snapshot. This is the layer that turns suspicion into evidence, and it is the natural starting point because it tells you where to spend everything that follows.
What it does well: it diagnoses. What it does not do: it does not change a single page. A dashboard that tells you that you are absent from a high-intent query is valuable precisely once. After that, its value depends entirely on whether anyone acts on it.
Layer 2: Technical Content Remediation
The second layer is where visibility is actually won or lost. Remediation is the structural, AI-readability work that determines whether an AI engine can extract, interpret and cite your content. It rests on three concrete building blocks: answer-first passages that engines can lift cleanly into a synthesised response; machine-readable structured data built on schema.org vocabulary that gives those answers their context; and citation alignment that anchors your claims in sources engines already trust.
This is not cosmetic. The Princeton and Georgia Tech GEO research (Aggarwal et al., KDD 2024) found that content modifications such as adding statistics, quoting named sources and citing credible references can lift visibility in generative responses by up to 40 percent, with the largest gains for pages that were previously invisible. The same research is blunt about what does not work: keyword stuffing, the reflex of the old SEO world, often performs worse than doing nothing. Remediation is the layer most organisations underestimate, and it is usually the layer their internal team is least equipped to deliver at scale.
Layer 3: Authority and Earned Media
The third layer is the longest game. AI engines do not only read your site; they weigh how often and how credibly you are referenced elsewhere. A perfectly remediated page from a brand with no third-party presence has, in effect, nowhere to go. Building authority means earning mentions in the independent sources, industry publications and expert commentary that engines treat as trustworthy. It compounds slowly, it is hard to shortcut, and it is the difference between being technically citable and being routinely cited.
How the Layers Connect
The layers are sequential in logic but overlapping in practice. Measurement tells you where the gap is. Remediation closes the gap on the pages you control. Authority widens the surface of sources that point back to you. Skip measurement and you optimise blind. Skip remediation and your dashboards simply document a decline in higher resolution. Skip authority and your gains plateau the moment competitors with stronger earned media re-enter the answer set. A serious programme touches all three, in proportion to where your specific gap sits.
The Most Common Failure Mode
The failure pattern is depressingly consistent. An organisation buys a measurement platform because it is the easiest layer to purchase, the easiest to demo and the easiest to justify. The diagnostic arrives, it is genuinely insightful, and then it sits in a drawer because nobody owns the remediation work it implies. Six months later the only thing that has changed is that the decline is now better documented. Measurement without an action layer is not a programme. It is a very articulate way of watching the problem get worse.
The Honest Capacity Question
Before deciding what to outsource, map what your team can realistically absorb. Most in-house teams can run measurement and own the authority relationships, because both sit close to skills they already have. The skills gap almost always opens at layer two. Technical content remediation requires schema literacy, an understanding of passage-level extraction, and the discipline to validate work against multiple AI crawlers – a blend of editorial and technical skill that few content teams carry, and that competes for the same hours as the rest of the content calendar. The honest answer is usually that measurement and authority can be insourced, while remediation at scale is the layer where a specialist earns their fee.
Sequencing the First 90 Days
Sequencing decides whether a programme builds belief or burns it. A workable rhythm: in the first 30 days, establish a measurement baseline and identify the ten to twenty highest-intent queries where you are absent. In the next 30, remediate the pages that map to those queries, because remediation is the only layer that moves the metric quickly. In the final 30, validate the remediated pages against the major engines and begin the slower authority work. The principle is simple. Lead with the layer that produces visible movement, so the programme earns the credibility it needs to fund the patient work behind it.
Building a Shortlist
The remediation market is young, and the vocabulary is still settling, which makes it easy for an SEO agency to rebrand a service page and call it AI readiness. A few questions separate genuine specialists from the rest. Can they show you a before-and-after remediated page, not a case-study screenshot? Can they explain their schema and answer-extraction methodology without retreating into generalities? Do they validate every page against the actual AI engines, and can they show you that validation? Do their outcomes feed back into your measurement layer rather than living in a separate report? A provider who answers those crisply is working at layer two. A provider who changes the subject is selling layer one with a new label. For a deeper grounding in the underlying concept, our knowledge-hub explainer on Citation Authority is a useful companion, as is the methodology philosophy we describe on our About Us page.
Next Steps
If your assessment lands on technical content remediation as the layer your internal team cannot realistically absorb at scale, the next question is how to choose a specialist partner without buying marketing language by mistake. Our buyer’s checklist walks through the questions worth asking every shortlisted provider – on methodology, validation, integration and commercials – before you sign anything.
Your Best-Converting Channel Might Be Invisible in Your Dashboard
/in B2B, SEO /by Rebecca CaroeIf you asked most B2B marketing leaders which channel converts best, they’d say email, or paid search, or word of mouth. Almost none would say “AI search”, and that’s not because AI search isn’t converting. It’s because most GA4 setups can’t see it. TLDR: If you are in B2B marketing read the research cited below.
The numbers are hard to ignore
The most cited data point right now (July 2026) is from the Opollo 2026 AI Search Benchmark Report, which pulled GA4 referral data and CRM attribution from 312 B2B technology firms across North America, Australia and the UK. Visitors sourced from AI platforms converted to qualified leads at 14.2%, against 2.8% for standard Google organic traffic. That’s a 5x gap, and it held even among firms getting 100+ AI-referred sessions a month, which rules out small-sampl size noise.
Ahrefs published a steeper version of the same story from its own funnel: AI referrals made up just 0.5% of total sessions but drove 12.1% of all product signups, a 23x conversion differential. Of course, that’s a single company’s case study in a high-consideration SaaS category, not a cross-industry benchmark. I would treat it as a ceiling, not an average.
Platform-level data from Seer Interactive shows the spread isn’t uniform across AI search results. ChatGPT referrals convert around 15.9%, Perplexity around 10.5%, Claude around 5.0%, Gemini around 3.0%. Where your buyers are asking questions matters. [See image below.]
Compared with the rest of the B2B channel mix, AI referral performance is hard to argue with. Traditional B2B organic search sits around 2.4–2.9%. Paid search runs 1.2–1.5% (up to 5.1% for SaaS at the high end). Paid social averages 2.9%. Display is bottom of the table at 0.3%. Only email at 16.9–19.3% is in the same league as AI referral, and email has the advantage of an already opted-in, brand-familiar list. AI search is generating that conversion rate from net-new discovery. White space traffic from net-new logos is highly valuable.
Down-funnel, one case study (BeRelevant/MarketingStack) found AI-sourced B2B leads progressing from MQL to SQL at 61%, against 24% for SEO-sourced leads, and closing at 42% against 28%. That’s a genuinely striking gap but again, it’s one case study, and the caveat across all of this data is that the evidence for AI-referred leads producing better closed-won revenue at scale is still thin and heavily reliant on isolated vendor reporting. Directionally strong. Not yet fully proven across all B2B brands.
CiteCompass AEO results by AI platform
My hypothesis on why the gap exists: journey compression
The mechanism behind all of this is fairly intuitive. A buyer using Google runs a search, opens six tabs, and does the comparison work themselves, click by click. A buyer using an AI engine gets the comparison done for them inside the chat window: the AI has already read the specs, weighed the options and narrowed the shortlist before a single link gets clicked. By the time that buyer lands on your site, over half of AI-referred B2B sessions skip straight past your homepage and blog content entirely and go straight to pricing or solution pages aligned with the buyer journey stage which that prospect is at. They didn’t need the awareness content. The AI filtered past the awareness content.
That’s genuinely good news for anyone selling considered B2B services using content marketing. It’s also exactly why so many of us aren’t seeing it.
CiteCompass CBJ results by stage
The Digital Attic problem
Here’s the catch, and it’s the part that worries B2B marketers more than conversion stats: GA4 doesn’t have a native “AI search” channel. Out of the box, a visit from ChatGPT, Perplexity or Gemini gets bucketed into Direct, Referral, or Unassigned, depending on whether the AI tool bothered to pass a referrer string at all (many don’t, or didn’t until recently). ChatGPT only started reliably appending source tags to desktop links from mid-2025, and app-based clicks still often carry no referrer data.
Which means your highest-converting channel is very possibly sitting right now inside your “Direct” traffic bucket, quietly outperforming everything else in your funnel, completely unlabelled. This is the Digital Attic problem I keep coming back to: it’s not that the value isn’t there. It’s that it’s stored somewhere you never see.
If you’ve never built a custom channel grouping in GA4 for AI referral sources, there’s a real chance you’re making budget decisions on a dashboard that’s structurally blind to the thing that’s working best.
What this means for being cited, not just ranked
The other implication follows straight from “the AI does the shortlisting before the click”: if you’re not part of what the AI reads and cites when it does that shortlisting, none of this conversion data applies to you at all, because you never make the list. Most AI search results cite six links. So you need to be hitting around 14% of the total results in your niche in order to dominate.
That’s a big content marketing job. It may be editing / reposting – but you have to cover all the bases across the full customer buying journey in order to rank in AI search.
Ranking well on Google no longer guarantees you’re in the pool an AI engine draws from when a buyer asks it to compare vendors. Being found and being cited are becoming two different games, and the second one runs on different rules: clear entity naming, structured comparison content, third-party validation (review platforms, comparison articles, partner directories), and content genuinely built to answer the layered questions buyers are now asking an AI instead of a search box.
Two things worth doing this quarter
Fix the measurement blind spot. Build a custom GA4 channel group that captures known AI referral sources (chatgpt.com, perplexity.ai, gemini.google.com, and so on) so you can actually see this traffic rather than inferring it from an unexplained bump in Direct. You cannot make a channel investment case for something your own dashboard insists doesn’t exist.
Audit what an AI engine would actually find and cite if a buyer asked it to compare you against your competitors right now. Not what ranks. What gets read, understood and repeated. Those are no longer the same test. And yes, I use CiteCompass.com for this work – it costs US$10 to do a one-off scan of your site.
The conversion numbers above are the exciting part of this story. The GA4 gap is the part that decides whether you ever get to benefit from them.
No related posts.
How to Structure an AI Visibility Programme That Delivers an ROI
/in AI, B2B, Marketing, SEO /by Rebecca CaroeOutline
Key Takeaways
AI visibility is not a single product. It is a three-layer operating model, and most organisations need a deliberate combination rather than one vendor solving everything. Understanding the layers makes selection clearer, reduces the risk of buying tools that diagnose but never fix, and gives you a sequencing logic that delivers early, visible results.
Introduction
You have made it through the business case. Budget is provisionally allocated. The mandate is to “fix AI visibility”, which on inspection turns out to be a category that does not behave like the categories you are used to buying. Some providers will tell you the answer is a monitoring platform. Others will tell you it is a content overhaul. Others will offer a strategic retainer. Each of them is partly right, which is precisely what makes the decision difficult.
The reality is that AI visibility is not a single product. It is an operating model with three distinct layers, and most organisations need a deliberate combination rather than a single vendor solving everything. The first layer is measurement: knowing where you appear, where you do not, and how you compare across the major AI platforms. The second is technical content remediation: the unglamorous, schema-heavy, AI-readability work that actually changes whether your pages get cited in a synthesised answer. The third is authority and earned media: the longer-game work of being mentioned in the third-party sources AI engines have learned to trust.
Confusing one layer for another is the single most common reason AI visibility programmes stall. Organisations buy a monitoring tool, get a clear diagnostic, and then discover they have no internal capacity to act on it. Or they commission content rewrites without the structural schema work that makes those rewrites AI-readable in the first place. This article maps the three layers, explains what each one can and cannot do, and gives you a framework for deciding which parts to insource, which to outsource, and how to sequence the work so early effort delivers visible results.
Why AI Visibility Does Not Fit on One Quadrant
The instinct in procurement is to find the category, find the quadrant, and shortlist the leaders. AI visibility frustrates that instinct because the work spans three different disciplines that happen to share a buzzword. A measurement platform and a content remediation engagement are about as comparable as a thermometer and a course of treatment. Both are useful. Neither is a substitute for the other.
This matters because the buying journey has already moved on without you. Forrester’s State of Business Buying 2026, drawn from nearly 18,000 buyers, places generative AI as the single most-cited meaningful interaction in B2B research. The Pedowitz Group’s analysis frames the consequence plainly: the independent research phase now covers most of the buying journey before a buyer ever speaks to a sales team. If your brand is missing from the answers those buyers read, no single tool purchase fixes that. The fix is a programme, and a programme has layers.
Yeah, I like satchels. Photo by MChe Lee</a
The Three Layers of an AI Visibility Programme
Layer 1: Measurement and Monitoring
The first layer answers a simple question: where do you appear, where do you not, and how do you compare. Good measurement tracks brand mentions, citations and Share of Voice across the platforms your buyers actually use, and it does so consistently enough to show a trend rather than a snapshot. This is the layer that turns suspicion into evidence, and it is the natural starting point because it tells you where to spend everything that follows.
What it does well: it diagnoses. What it does not do: it does not change a single page. A dashboard that tells you that you are absent from a high-intent query is valuable precisely once. After that, its value depends entirely on whether anyone acts on it.
Layer 2: Technical Content Remediation
The second layer is where visibility is actually won or lost. Remediation is the structural, AI-readability work that determines whether an AI engine can extract, interpret and cite your content. It rests on three concrete building blocks: answer-first passages that engines can lift cleanly into a synthesised response; machine-readable structured data built on schema.org vocabulary that gives those answers their context; and citation alignment that anchors your claims in sources engines already trust.
This is not cosmetic. The Princeton and Georgia Tech GEO research (Aggarwal et al., KDD 2024) found that content modifications such as adding statistics, quoting named sources and citing credible references can lift visibility in generative responses by up to 40 percent, with the largest gains for pages that were previously invisible. The same research is blunt about what does not work: keyword stuffing, the reflex of the old SEO world, often performs worse than doing nothing. Remediation is the layer most organisations underestimate, and it is usually the layer their internal team is least equipped to deliver at scale.
Layer 3: Authority and Earned Media
The third layer is the longest game. AI engines do not only read your site; they weigh how often and how credibly you are referenced elsewhere. A perfectly remediated page from a brand with no third-party presence has, in effect, nowhere to go. Building authority means earning mentions in the independent sources, industry publications and expert commentary that engines treat as trustworthy. It compounds slowly, it is hard to shortcut, and it is the difference between being technically citable and being routinely cited.
How the Layers Connect
The layers are sequential in logic but overlapping in practice. Measurement tells you where the gap is. Remediation closes the gap on the pages you control. Authority widens the surface of sources that point back to you. Skip measurement and you optimise blind. Skip remediation and your dashboards simply document a decline in higher resolution. Skip authority and your gains plateau the moment competitors with stronger earned media re-enter the answer set. A serious programme touches all three, in proportion to where your specific gap sits.
The Most Common Failure Mode
The failure pattern is depressingly consistent. An organisation buys a measurement platform because it is the easiest layer to purchase, the easiest to demo and the easiest to justify. The diagnostic arrives, it is genuinely insightful, and then it sits in a drawer because nobody owns the remediation work it implies. Six months later the only thing that has changed is that the decline is now better documented. Measurement without an action layer is not a programme. It is a very articulate way of watching the problem get worse.
The Honest Capacity Question
Before deciding what to outsource, map what your team can realistically absorb. Most in-house teams can run measurement and own the authority relationships, because both sit close to skills they already have. The skills gap almost always opens at layer two. Technical content remediation requires schema literacy, an understanding of passage-level extraction, and the discipline to validate work against multiple AI crawlers – a blend of editorial and technical skill that few content teams carry, and that competes for the same hours as the rest of the content calendar. The honest answer is usually that measurement and authority can be insourced, while remediation at scale is the layer where a specialist earns their fee.
Sequencing the First 90 Days
Sequencing decides whether a programme builds belief or burns it. A workable rhythm: in the first 30 days, establish a measurement baseline and identify the ten to twenty highest-intent queries where you are absent. In the next 30, remediate the pages that map to those queries, because remediation is the only layer that moves the metric quickly. In the final 30, validate the remediated pages against the major engines and begin the slower authority work. The principle is simple. Lead with the layer that produces visible movement, so the programme earns the credibility it needs to fund the patient work behind it.
Building a Shortlist
The remediation market is young, and the vocabulary is still settling, which makes it easy for an SEO agency to rebrand a service page and call it AI readiness. A few questions separate genuine specialists from the rest. Can they show you a before-and-after remediated page, not a case-study screenshot? Can they explain their schema and answer-extraction methodology without retreating into generalities? Do they validate every page against the actual AI engines, and can they show you that validation? Do their outcomes feed back into your measurement layer rather than living in a separate report? A provider who answers those crisply is working at layer two. A provider who changes the subject is selling layer one with a new label. For a deeper grounding in the underlying concept, our knowledge-hub explainer on Citation Authority is a useful companion, as is the methodology philosophy we describe on our About Us page.
Next Steps
If your assessment lands on technical content remediation as the layer your internal team cannot realistically absorb at scale, the next question is how to choose a specialist partner without buying marketing language by mistake. Our buyer’s checklist walks through the questions worth asking every shortlisted provider – on methodology, validation, integration and commercials – before you sign anything.
No related posts.
AI Search: the measurement blindness angle
/in B2B, SEO /by Rebecca CaroeYour analytics dashboard is lying to you, and it isn’t its fault.
GA4 was built for a click economy. AI search is quietly dismantling that economy, and the measurement stack can’t see it happening.
Here’s the mechanism.
When a buyer reads about you inside ChatGPT or Perplexity and then types your name into a browser, that visit usually arrives with no referrer. GA4 files it under “direct” traffic. Industry estimates suggest only 30 to 40 percent of AI-driven visits show up correctly, with the rest misclassified as direct, organic or unassigned.
The consequence is more than a tracking annoyance. You end up under-crediting the content that actually shaped the decision and over-crediting “brand strength” you can’t explain. Worse, the buyers your competitors are winning inside AI conversations never appear in your data at all. Underperformance shows up with no visible cause, and your budget defence gets harder every quarter.
This is why “our numbers look fine” is no longer reassuring. The numbers were designed to miss exactly the shift that matters most.
If your direct traffic has climbed year on year with no campaign to explain it, that is not a quirk. It may be the clearest signal you have that AI is already mediating your buyers’ research.
What has your direct traffic done over the last twelve months?
Read the full article on my LinkedIn page.
No related posts.
Timing… sometimes it’s a gift
/in Marketing /by Rebecca CaroeTiming… sometimes it’s a gift.
I interviewed Matt Brittin CBE on my #rowing podcast last year about lessons for work he learned from rowing. Suddenly I got a spike in website visits as his name got in the frame for the top job at the BBC.
Only one journalist got in touch – William Turvill – and he quoted me as part of the “background colour” in his article. It’s a free link to read.
Rowers can be great executives because of the learned discipline, focus and attention to detail our sport demands when performed at a high level. More than anything, you learn time management when workouts take an hour or more, and the mental health benefits of leaving life behind when you’re on the water are legion.
Matt Brittin in 1988 Photo credit: The Times
No related posts.
Approaches for testing A/B campaigns
/in Copywriting, Marketing ideas /by Rebecca CaroeOlder Consumers Prefer Videos Without Subtitles
We were testing two video treatments for Faster Masters Rowing, a sports brand targeting older athletes (over age 45).
The A/B test difference was subtitling the dialogue.
We found that people vastly preferred to watch the video
Marketer Magazine
without the distraction of subtitles. AND then to have a static text screen in which the main message was summarized in bullet points.
Note we sent the two video treatments out in the newsletter so we got qualitative written responses about preferences (not just click tracking quantitative data).
Seems older consumers don’t like to multitask. Or they just prefer to focus on the video image first while listening, and later to read the same message.
As published in Marketer Magazine.
No related posts.
Is B2B advertising a vanity project
/in Advertising, B2B /by Rebecca CaroeI don’t think it’s anything to do with AI. But everything to do with ambitious people wanting to leave their mark on an organisation.
Here’s what my ‘vanity project’ would be if I ran a B2B advertising team. Scrap most of the bland clickbait adverts that most B2B brands use – and focus on excellent creative and brand building.
Don’t track the clicks, the metrics which are more likely to be bots than humans. Use your deep instinct and experience to design eye catching advertising that talks to brand values, what consumers want or need to know and get rid of the rest. You probably won’t miss it. And you may lose your job.
But in 5 years time, I bet your advert will still be remembered by the key B2B decision makers….. because only 5% of your target audience are in buying mode at any one time. Use your advertising to build a strong brand; rely on SEO and website pages to backfill their research needs before the RFP.
Inspiration for this post from the Uncensored CMO interview with Tom Goodwin
No related posts.
Email subject lines can make or break open rates
/in Email /by Rebecca CaroeI like to write to deliberately appeal to a small portion of the audience. The preview and subject line are the first, top-level filter available to email marketers.
I realised this after a client did an event which specified the age participants should be. It was a roaring success – because people knew immediately if it was right for them (or not).
Photo by Jacob Mitani on Unsplash
The downstream benefits
Remember, good email marketing software allows you to edit the preview text. This is a secondary audience filter and it does not have to be the same text as your opening sentences.
No related posts.
#1 B2B marketing skill for 2025
/in B2B, Email /by Rebecca CaroeBuilding your audience is THE key marketing skill which will help your marketing strategy in 2025.
The “gurus” say one thing..
Let me explain.
Not all online marketing ‘teachers’ are wrong. But their methods paid dividends to them because they were early adopters.
– Most people teaching blogging started blogging between 2004 and 2008.
– Most people teaching content marketing started between 2008 and 2012.
– Most people teaching podcasting started between 2010 and 2014.
My first blog was 2006; first content marketing website was 2009 and my podcast was 2013.
These methods worked then because they were early adopters and because we marketers (and Google/Meta) had not yet started to algorithmically enshittify the platforms we used for natural search advertising and social discovery.
Photo by Nicholas Green on Unsplash
What works now?
Audience building – and direct email marketing and direct response copywriting.
And yes, I can do that. And you should know how to do it too.
H/t to Brian Clark for the bullet lists.
No related posts.
Martech and process mapping
/in B2B, Strategy /by Rebecca CaroeMartech – it’s great as long as all the parts connect.
I’m assessing a couple of new options to inject into a client’s martech stack. And I have long been a fan of reverse IP lookup services.
Knowing who’s looking at your website is powerful.
The way to get the most from a new component involves re-mapping your sales and marketing processes so that you can ensure no dead ends and the “loop” for prospects is fully integrated across both marketing and sales.
What we’ve found is that there are new skills needed to work certain stages of the loop. Especially important as you bed down the tool and work out how your prospective clients uniquely flow around your sales funnel.
Losing sales leads
One of the benefits of checking your processes is that it’s too easy for sales leads to drop through a crack which came about when you added your new software into the sales and marketing team’s activities. I hate losing sales opportunities.
With one client, we found a critical sales outbound skill was needed to close one of these gaps and so training and upskilling had to happen before we got the full benefit of the new tech.
I have always loved designing and writing process maps. Tie that into a shiny new software tool and I’m in a happy place.
Image credit: Alvaro Reyes on Unsplash
No related posts.