I agree that it does not make sense to drop outbound as a tactic. And that a passive approach to B2B Marketing will leave opportunities on the table.

But I am also a big fan of Stan Woods/Velocity’s thinking. What you have to say is as important as where and how you say it.

Outbound has often optimized the volume (call to action/offer) rather than the relevance (content) of the message in an effort to target the 10% who are ready for an immediate transaction.

Like Ardath, I suggest trying to understand what your buyer “wants to know”.

We recommend looking at what a buyer “wants to know” at each decision-stage and then testing content that truly tries to provide the prospect with useful information related to what they want to know in both outbound and inbound and online and offline marketing programs.

We have a working framework on how to identify high value content for each decision-stage. I have posted it here on our blog ( http://blog.brainrider.com/2010/03/decision-stages-content-map/ ) in the spirit of the discussion (and a full blog post on its way). I think it maps closely to the questions/unknowns shared by Robert but would love your comments.

This approach requires marketers to segment their communications, share more of their knowledge and expertise, and develop more content assets. But in the end Ardath is right “the higher the relevance, the smarter they’ll think you are” and the more they are likely to keep you in their decision set until the end.

Scott
http://www.brainrider.com

Whether or not they use search to investigate options or social media to participate in relevant conversations with third-party experts as part of their evaluations, buyers are certainly much more in the box seat today. Outbound marketing that shouts ‘me, me, me” probably won’t get their attention in sufficient numbers. Listening to how they frame their problems -even if they are unsure or inarticulate about that – and responding with outbound marketing that demonstates you’ve heard is a much more fruitful avenue.

Good points, all. One thing I’d like to point out is that buyers being right doesn’t have a lot to do with them being smart. As Chris points out above, the need for outbound marketing will not go away. The problem is that many buyers charged to solve problems outside their core area of expertise don’t know what they don’t know. Things change fast and innovation is hard to keep up with in theory, let alone in practice.

Outbound marketing designed to educate buyers will help them build the confidence to be right because they’re being smart. The higher the relevance, the smarter they’ll think you are – then they’re really right. Right?

Just my 02.
Ardath

Another great post, and you’re right – “As much as everyone would like interruption marketing to go away, the irrational buyer needs to be stimulated to consider alternative options.” It does an organization no good to completely forego outbound marketing options such as appointment setting and sales opportunity development. I’m a firm believer that there are some prospects that will never be reached via inbound marketing efforts (though not many), and the only way to reach them is through outbound attempts. Should an organization pass on those prospects? I can tell you one thing, my clients certainly don’t want to pass on ANY prospects.

Thanks for the post!