Competitive Intelligence Newsletter: Double Your Money: Win Back Lost Sales…

In this week’s cover story, Mike Brose talks about the double benefit of winning back accounts that were never yours. And, don’t forget to download our recent webinar: Three Benefits of Win Loss You Can’t Ignore

Cover Story
Double Your Money: Win Back Lost Sales with Intelligence
By Mike Brose, Primary Intelligence
Too often, companies are willing to wave "goodbye" to lost prospects, hoping that, "Someday, they'll give us another shot." In essence, the effort that was put into selling is dismissed. Rare is the company that has a formal win back program. But these companies have learned very clearly just how profitable those programs can be... (For more, click here)

BlogCentral
Why is Competitive Intelligence Not Effective?
In short, does your company make changes to increase revenues and profitability based on your intelligence efforts? Based on our experience, if you are like most companies, the effect of your intelligence efforts are minimized and, often, substantially... (For more, click here)

The A-List
iLinc Wins Pfizer Contract with Mixture of Technology, Content and Customer Focus
Originally Published in December 2004.
Executives at Pfizer's Global Learning and Development Group wanted to upgrade its training and assessment tools for its pharmaceutical sales personnel. The three short-list vendors were required to submit proposals, which were evaluated by DeLosa and a team of Pfizer personnel from strategic services and healthcare systems training. Although the proposals were intended to be the main element of the evaluation process... (For more, click here)

Competitive Intelligence Webinar Wrap-up – Three Benefits of Win Loss

Last Thursday, Ron Sathoff and I co-hosted a webinar on the topic of Win Loss. Over the years, Primary Intelligence has conducted dozens of thousands of sales debriefs for our clients and some major benefits have bubbled to the surface. Yesterday, we took time to discuss each of the following topics:

1. Actionable Competitive Intelligence


2. Analytics to predict ROI


3. Win back programs

Of course, one of the prime benefits of Win Loss analysis is the fact that your sales teams can sell more effectively with intelligence. But, the benefits extend much deeper than that. When Win Loss is done properly, the competitive intelligence that it generates can improve marketing, product development and corporate strategy just while providing the competitive boost for sales.

You may also want to consider a test run of two free win loss reports, based on your own sales opportunities. If you are new to PI, you might qualify for a test drive. If you have some interested in this, send me an email and let me know (cdalley@primary-intel.com)

If you would like to download a copy of the presentation, please click HERE

Does Business Have the Right Structure to Use Competitive Intelligence?

In the last post, I talked about the military and the reason that their intelligence organization generally is able to provide effective intelligence. In brief, professional, trained intelligence personnel support officers and field personnel with a sophisticated intelligence system.

The attention to intelligence is driven by the fact that lives are on the line. Understanding strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats, centers of gravity, etc… are not just “nice to know.”

As mentioned in the last blog, the military places so much emphasis on intelligence that it has its own department, outside of field operations. There are field agents and intelligence officers. The different intelligence ranks have access to every rank of fighting personnel.

It’s not all rosy and perfect, but one would be hard pressed to find another organization that matches the emphasis and effectiveness of intelligence in the military.

How does your business compare?

If you are like most, your company has invested in intelligence, but has not made a commitment to intelligence-based decisions. Communication is not as organized as it might be and the flow of information is not consistent.

A significant problem in business competitive intelligence is the fact that the intelligence staff usually resides somewhere in company other than near the decision makers. Now, for the sake of honesty, I’ll say that I have been very impressed with some of the corporate strategy groups with whom I have been associated and I am encouraged by the access which they are granted to the executive level. But these cases are far too rare.

If your business structure buries analysts and competitive intelligence professionals deep in the world of marketing, the likelihood of necessary intelligence making a difference in the company is very low.


What do you do about this?

Do you have it in your power to start an organizational change? Does your direct report have the ability to start the process?

Can you boil your intelligence down to a summary with recommendations that might be appreciated by a higher-level manager? What are your potential means of moving information to different people?

Who is your internal client? Who request intelligence? Who funds the intelligence? What do they want to know? How often do they want to know? What tangible benefits has your company realized through the use of your intelligence?

Start to formulate answers to these questions. Do so with the goal of convincing the next people up the org chart to give more visibility to your company’s competitive intelligence efforts. Show them what CI has to offer and how much is being lost with the current amount of emphasis.

These are the same techniques that 3rd-party vendors have to use to stay in business and they will work to some degree for you.

Thoughts? Let me know. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Military Intelligence – A Template for Effective Competitive Intelligence

More than 95% of U.S. based businesses indicate that they have dedicated some amount of resources to the gathering of intelligence. This may include market, sales or competitive intelligence, but the goal is usually the same: be better at business than the next guy.

But, few companies would rate themselves as being very effective with the intelligence. And, the funny thing is the discrepancy of the perception between those that gather the intelligence and those that would use it. Executives usually rate themselves as “somewhat effective” or “very effective” as using intelligence while the intelligence professionals generally rate the executives as “not very effective.” Hmmmm. Why so many axes to grind?

Every organization should examine and reexamine its practices to create a continual improvement process. During this process, I would recommend that each organization take a little time to review other organizations that make intelligence a priority.

Now, it would be difficult to peek into other businesses and discover their secrets. You wouldn’t open your doors to this kind of review. Why would anyone else?

But, you can look at an institution that, overall, leads the world in the gathering, analysis and use of intelligence – The military. In fact, you can make the case that the military has the longest running and most successful intelligence system in history. (We won’t talk about policy makers and their use or misuse of intelligence. That’s another story for another day…

Where else are the stakes higher than on the battlefield? In a situation where lives and equipment are constantly at risk, we can learn some very critical things about how the military values its “competitive intelligence”, from gathering through strategic use.

“Most militaries maintain a military intelligence corps with specialized intelligence units for collecting information in specific ways. Militaries also typically have intelligence staff personnel at each echelon down to battalion level. Intelligence officers and enlisted soldiers assigned to military intelligence may be selected for their analytical abilities or scores on intelligence tests. They usually receive formal training in these disciplines.”

“Critical vulnerabilities are…indexed in a way that makes them easily available to advisors and line intelligence personnel who package this information for policy-makers and war-fighters. Vulnerabilities are usually indexed by the nation and military unit, with a list of possible attack methods.”

“Critical threats are usually maintained in a prioritized file, with important enemy capabilities analyzed on a schedule set by an estimate of the enemy's preparation time. For example, nuclear threats between the USSR and the US were analyzed in real time by continuously on-duty staffs. In contrast, analysis of tank or army deployments are usually triggered by accumulations of fuel and munitions, which are monitored on slower, every-few-days cycles. In some cases, automated analysis is performed in real time on automated data traffic.”

“Packaging threats and vulnerabilities for decision makers is a crucial part of military intelligence. A good intelligence officer will stay very close to the policy-maker or war fighter, to anticipate their information requirements, and tailor the information needed. A good intelligence officer will ask a fairly large number of questions in order to help anticipate needs, perhaps even to the point of annoying the principal. For an important policy-maker, the intelligence officer will have a staff to which research projects can be assigned.”

“Developing a plan of attack is not the responsibility of intelligence, though it helps an analyst to know the capabilities of common types of military units. Generally, policy-makers are presented with a list of threats, and opportunities. They approve some basic action, and then professional military personnel plan the detailed act and carry it out. Once hostilities begin, target selection often moves into the upper end of the military chain of command. Once ready stocks of weapons and fuel are depleted, logistic concerns are often exported to civilian policy-makers.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_intelligence)

The points that catch my attention are:

1. Intelligence professionals are present at each level of the military
2. They receive formal training in intelligence practices
3. Good intelligence officers stay very close to the policy-maker or war-fighter
4. Good intelligence officers ask lots of questions to make sure that the intelligence program is on the right track and can anticipate the leaders’ needs
5. Good intelligence officers package the intelligence in ways that the users can easily consume while still getting the intended “nutritional value”
6. While competitive intelligence personnel are not responsible for policy, direction or decisions, they should try to understand how these decisions are made. This will provide a deeper context to make future intelligence efforts more valuable.

In the next post, we’ll look at the usual structure of intelligence in today’s business.

And, if you have any thoughts, leave me a comment. I dare you.

Competitive Intelligence Newsletter – CI for Sales, No exceptions

In this issue, you’ll find out how hunters and farmers can both use competitive intelligence to increase market share. Additionally, you can sign up for next week’s webinar (Three Benefits of Win Loss You Can’t Ignore) and take our “3 Second Survey by clicking the picture below.



Click on any of the titles below to read the story.

Cover Story
ORDER MAKERS V.S. ORDER TAKERS-Competitive Intelligence for All!
By Tony Randall, Primary Intelligence

Let me cut to the chase right up front. Yes, there is value created by both order makers and order takers. There, I've said it. Every organization which has something of value to offer to the consumer or business world via the sales process has either a sales team of order makers (outside sales usually), order takers...(For more, click here)

BlogCentral
How Can You Tell if Competitive Intelligence is Effective?
Your competitive intelligence is very similar to the electricity in your wires. You can produce as much sales, market or competitive intelligence as you like, but until someone uses it to power change in your organization, it really isn't effective at all...(For more, click here)

The A-List New!
AboveNet Sees the Future in Ciena's Long-Haul Communications Equipment
AboveNet, Inc, a competitor to AT&T, Level3 and Verizon evaluated a number of vendors before choosing Ciena Corporation to upgrade its legacy Lucent equipment. The decision was strongly based on Ciena's willingness to play the part of partner to AboveNet, helping AboveNet anticipate future needs, coordinate technology tools and maximize the value offered by Ciena's products. Additionally, Ciena was able to show AboveNet a compelling vision of future technology needs...(For more, click here)

Effective Competitive Intelligence - Problem 5 - Acceptance

In my last post, I started talking again about effective competitive intelligence. Again, my definition of effectiveness is:

– Strengthen your company’s position
• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?
– Discover new markets
• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?
– Develop new products/services/solutions
• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

So, you (the intelligence professional) have figured out how to develop an intelligence program that provides the right information at the right time. You have listened to intelligence needs, adapted your techniques to generate information that has been requested and you have time on everyone’s calendar to present findings.

So, you have done everything right. Personal and professional success are yours, right? Hopefully so, but, no guarantees.

In a recent poll, Primary Intelligence found that 51% of sales, market or competitive intelligence people said that their executives were either mediocre or poor at using intelligence. At best, they listened to intelligence briefs but rarely incorporated the intelligence into their decision-making processes.

This same topic was addressed in our recent webinar which can be downloaded HERE.

The truth of the matter is that executives may or may not rely on intelligence to make strategic decisions. Very few executives receive formal training on the use of information and too few know how to accurately assess the value of different information sources.

To be clear, I’m not questioning the intelligence of corporate leaders. And, I am also happy to acknowledge the fact that a large percentage of executives are intelligence driven. But, the reality of the situation is that a great number of intelligence professionals work in companies where the value of their efforts will not be fully realized.

So, assess your situation. Figure out where you are. And remember, if nobody will listen, it doesn’t matter how loudly you shout.


If your goal is to make a difference in your company with your efforts, you need to be honest with yourself about your (or your department’s) ability to engage the executive level. If you can’t see that happening in the near future, either find a situation that will allow you to accomplish your goals or readjust your expectations. Anything else is fooling yourself, or drawing a paycheck. (No disgrace in feeding the family). Make sure you learn as much as you can in order to improve the résumé while you’re there.

I am personally associated with a gentleman that moved through three different companies in a 12 month period until he found a situation where he had potential to provide guidance at the executive level. When he was hired at the last company, he was brought on to provide competitive intelligence. Now, he is part of regular strategy meetings. He found a company that was receptive to his efforts and proved the worth of his skills and experience. He went for his goal.

As a last thought, answer this question about your company’s commitment to intelligence: ““If we find intelligence to answer our most pressing questions, are we willing to change?”

Let me know what you think. If you are in a great situation (or otherwise), I would enjoy hearing from you. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Webinar Invitation - Three Benefits of Win Loss You Can't Ignore

In the last five years, Win Loss analysis has gone from a little known niche project to a recognized best practice. In the most progressive companies, executives demand that sales, marketing, and product development listen to Win Loss feedback and work together to become more competitive.

The opportunity to increase your sales and marketing success sits right at your doorstep. But, do you have everything you need to achieve the greatest potential? Can you make simple changes that will result in gargantuan increases?

Primary Intelligence would like to invite you to a presentation that will show:
• How to increase market share with predictive analytics
• Competitive Intelligence with insight rarely seen
• Win back programs that really work

Date:
Thursday, October 25, 2007

Time:
2:00 PM - 3:00 PM EDT
1:00 PM - 2:00 CDT
12:00 PM - 1:00 PM MDT
11:00 AM - 12:00 PM PDT

REGISTER HERE

Those that will benefit include:
• Marketing leaders
• Market research managers
• Market and Industry analysts
• Product development managers
• Sales leaders
• Corporate leadership positions (CEO, CMO, CSO)

Space is limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now

https://www.gotomeeting.com/register/913347113

Effective Competitive Intelligence - Problem 4: Communication

In my last post, I started talking again about effective competitive intelligence. Again, my definition of effectiveness is:

– Strengthen your company’s position
• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?
– Discover new markets
• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?
– Develop new products/services/solutions
• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

One of the biggest complaints of Competitive Intelligence generators and users alike is the fact that intelligence, information and knowledge in general is lost in the shuffle. In fact, according to an Accenture study:

53% of obtained information is worthless

31% say that it Competitive Intelligence is hard to get at

57% have to go to numerous sources to compile necessary intelligence

45% can’t find information on other departments’ activities

42% accidentally use the wrong information once per week

40% say other parts of the company won’t share information

59% say there is poor distribution of information

Many of these problems are the result of poor corporate communication.


In summary, we find that intelligence suffers from the fact that organized distribution channels don’t exist (If a tree falls in the woods…).

If you have created a quality library of information, its value is compromised by the fact that people:

Don’t know it exists

Can’t read it

Don’t like the way it is distributed

This same topic was addressed in our recent webinar which can be downloaded HERE.

How do you solve this problem?

1. Start with intelligence that means something to others.
2. Speak with a loud voice and be available to others in decision-making posts
3. Find internal champions
4. Determine that the intelligence will be received and reviewed

You’ll note that I haven’t mentioned anything about content management systems or other technologies. Before you can install software to distribute intelligence, you have to create a hunger for it and establish communication channels that work. Otherwise, you’re likely to spend quite a bit of money on software that will lie dormant most of the time.

If you have a success story with overcoming the communication barrier, drop me a note. I’m always interested in examples of success, no matter how small they may seem (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Effective Competitive Intelligence – Misunderstanding of Your Efforts

In my last post, I started talking again about effective competitive intelligence. Again, my definition of effectiveness is:

– Strengthen your company’s position
• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?
– Discover new markets
• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?
– Develop new products/services/solutions
• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

Do you know what is frustrating?

Lots of things.

That wasn’t very enlightening. In fact, it was fairly useless. But, to salvage the moment, I’ll let you know something that I see much too often.

Over time, a very common frustration in business has always been, “Why doesn’t so-and-so appreciate my efforts?” This thought is not limited to any one department, but has certainly be uttered its share in the intelligence world.

Mostly, the thought is, “I did really great work on this intelligence brief. Why won’t the executives look at it? Why won’t my manager show this off? Why is everyone ignoring my stuff?”

If you have had a similar moment, you’re not alone. In fact, in the intelligence world, this is a very common feeling. I’ll offer a suggestion and you may not like it, but I’m going to place some of the responsibility on your own shoulders.

The primary cause of your problem is that you are not taking the time to understand the world of your target recipients. Your hope is that people will appreciate your work on its own merits. If you build it, they will come. But Shoeless Joe hasn’t wandered through the cornfield to find your ballpark of a brief.

Let’s not take anything away from your work quality. I’m sure that your results were prepared from thorough research and the presentation is first-rate. Unfortunately, that only matters so much. In brief, if nobody can understand your work, the benefit and value are going to be marginalized, at best.

This very topic was the subject of a recent Primary Intelligence webinar. If you want the full scoop, download the recorded webinar presentation HERE.


The most effective thing you can do is start to look outside the needs of the people with whom you are most closely associated. Otherwise, you probably have a view of your company needs that is way too myopic.

If you want product management to understand and appreciate your work, take time to appreciate their specific problems and intelligence needs.

Then, discuss your ability to fill their needs and sell them on the idea of creating an intelligence flow process that appeals to them.

Of course, the final step of the process is to deliver at least according to their expectations. Over-deliver if possible. But that term is so passé. Valuable, but passé.

After you have won a champion or two in your target departments, you can start the process of sharing your pet projects and specialties. Once you have their attention, you’ll start to earn their respect. That’s the time to show what you have done.

Need a little help with the process? Let’s chat. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Effective Competitive Intelligence – Timeliness is Key

In my last post, I started talking again about effective competitive intelligence. Again, my definition of effectiveness is:

– Strengthen your company’s position
• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?
– Discover new markets
• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?
– Develop new products/services/solutions
• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

One of the biggest obstacles to creating effective competitive intelligence is the timeliness of the data. If intelligence is not available at the moment of need, it does little good. And the value deteriorates quickly after the decision for which it was generated has been made. In other words, intelligence should be present before decisions are made as often as possible.

To judge your situation, ask yourself:

How much time passes between question and answer?

How out of date is the intelligence after it is finally collected?

Can spontaneous requests for intelligence be fulfilled in a timely manner?

In my experience, the timeliness issue is magnified in two scenarios: First, if your company has a reactive approach to intelligence and second, if your company has not yet developed a consistent intelligence plan to feed its strategic decision-making process.

The first example is characterized by companies that do not typically rely on intelligence. The reactive approach goes something like this: “We just lost [major account] to who? Find out why!” Or, “When did [company] start [entering our space/offering new features/pricing us out of the market]?” There isn’t anything wrong with being surprised by a market event. But, if surprising market events are the driving force for your intelligence, timeliness is going to be an issue. Unfortunately, it probably isn’t your biggest issue.

The second example may be the result of a company that has not yet consistently incorporated intelligence at the highest levels. In this case, you or your department has some selling to do. You are going to have to make a case for the benefits of your intelligence, ability to deliver and willingness to produce and analyze the information that is most applicable to the current ideas in the boardroom. You have to find the channels that will eventually grant you access to those people.

If you review the definition above, you’ll see that effective intelligence often has to be placed in the hands of senior management, at the least. Otherwise, how will the most productive changes be made?

Effective Competitive Intelligence – Don’t Let Indecision Derail You

No matter how you practice competitive intelligence, you have to be concerned with the fact that your CI program must be effective in your business. Much emphasis has been put on various programs in the company and their “effectiveness.” To me “effective” is a relative term. There are so many levels of effectiveness that almost anything can be graded as effective. The real talent and wisdom are manifest in one’s ability to differentiate between lower and higher levels.

So, what are the effectiveness qualifiers for competitive intelligence? I’ll stick with a definition put forth earlier in this same blog (which was also a topic in our recent webinar which can be downloaded HERE). The mission of effective Competitive Intelligence should be to:

– Strengthen your company’s position
• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?
– Discover new markets
• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?
– Develop new products/services/solutions
• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

Indecision
There are so many obstacles to producing effective intelligence. The first of these obstacles is indecision. This indecision devalues intelligence efforts and, in some cases, leads to the dissolution of the actual intelligence efforts.

What is the real problem with indecision? It’s the fact that nobody can agree on what should be studied or what results should come of the efforts. Often, executives will request specific bits of information while other departments create laundry lists of potential topics.



In way too many cases, a strategic plan for intelligence is lacking. Evidence of this environment usually rears its head with the philosophy of “Let’s grab everything we can” and “Once we have the intelligence, we’ll know what to do with it.” The most dangerous symptom is a company that is very reactive in its intelligence efforts. “What just happened?!?! Go find out what [competitor x] is doing!”

The truth of the matter is that this lack of system usually leads to way too much information which can not be prioritized. The abundance of information leads to overload and blindness. The end result is that the intelligence is used less and less until the prevailing feeling is that the intelligence is not useful after all. From this point on, corporate decisions will not be based on the intelligence efforts, but on experience and such.

Without a competitive intelligence strategy that makes effectiveness a strong characteristic of success, the intelligence group is likely to marginalize its own value.

Recommendation
So, the recommendation is that you have to make your company be decisive about its intelligence efforts. Develop a set of effectiveness criteria or use those that I included above. Measure your strategy against its ability to be effective. And, be enough of a salesperson to sell this idea to your management and on up the chain.

Create a habit of decisiveness around your intelligence efforts, strategies and plans. Otherwise, indecision will trivialize your best efforts.

Thoughts? Leave me a comment or we can chat. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801.838.9600 x5050)

Webinar Wrap-up: Effective Competitive Intelligence

Last Thursday, Mike Brose and I hosted a webinar called, “The Sad Story of Intelligence that Didn’t Make a Difference.” That is a fairly lengthy title and I’ll work on being more concise in the future.

But I digress…

Over time, we have seen many organizations that spend money on intelligence initiatives. Those initiatives might be market, sales or competitive intelligence. Most every company conducts some form of intelligence gathering. Whether primary or secondary, the intelligence is deemed important enough to have an effect on the success of the business.

However, we have also observed that many companies spend resources on the gathering of intelligence but have very little commitment to the use of that information. Rarely will a business spend so much money with so little regard for the potential return on investment. I take that back. Advertising seems to often fall into that category. But, that’s not the topic…

The topic of the webinar was based on helping companies make more effective use of the intelligence at hand. We expressed that we were not so concerned with the source or topic of the intelligence. Instead, we suggested how any type of intelligence might display more potential simply by making sure that it would be acted upon.

If you would like to download a copy of the presentation, please click HERE


And, if you would like a summary, delivered in person, or would like to subscribe to our webinar notifications, send me an email and I’ll make sure to keep you in the loop. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Competitive Intelligence Newsletter – Make Intelligence Relevant

In this edition, Adam Dunford makes the case for intelligence that makes a difference. The blog entry backs up the idea by showing a case of intelligence that wasn’t effective, and wasn’t going to be from the start.

If you would like to subscribe to this free newsletter, simply send a request to newsletter@primaryintelligence.com with your name and email address. You can also register for the same subscription online in the margin of any of the stories below.

Cover Story
Justifying Your Existence (and CI's too!)
By Adam Dunford, Primary IntelligenceSo you've spent the last several weeks and months gathering your CI data. In your presentation, you nail every important point on each of your 40 slides and can answer every question you get asked. As you finish, you hear it's the "best CI presentation ever". A few days later, fresh off your triumph, you ask for the budget to expand your CI program, only to be told, "It's interesting stuff, but we got what we needed." Ouch.(For more, click here)

BlogCentral
You Couldn't Make Competitive Intelligence So Irrelevant if you Tried
If your idea of effective competitive intelligence is gathering a bit of information, consolidating that information into a brief doc (perhaps on an attractive company letterhead) and sending that doc off to a distribution list, please stop reading. Go back to your cube, surf some more web sites and live a happy life...(For more, click here)
The A-List Archive

Sun Microsystems Decides that Two Companies are Better than One
Originally Published in February 2005.
Sun Microsystems, which was already outsourcing many of its HR business processes, including its 401(k) plan, payroll, and benefits administration, wanted to explore the idea of outsourcing additional HR functions...(For more, click here)

Competitive Intelligence – The Difference Between “Interesting” and “Effective”

I always think that it is critical to make your competitive intelligence efforts as effective as possible. Over time, we at Primary Intelligence have seen so many initiatives, either in play or proposed, that seek to know just about anything you can imagine. Many requests have been merely puzzling while others have been, at best, illegal.

These questionable requests include things like: (Skip to the bottom of the list to resume the idea of the thread)

How is LaborFree’s sales organization structured (numbers; roles; management structure; span of control; by product)? Is there a sales organization chart that presents this structure? In a more general sense, is there a detailed, company wide org. chart? If so, please provide.

To whom does sales report, both regionally, and at the corporate level?

How are the sales offices geographically dispersed?

What is the role, and extent of, inside sales?

What is the typical, daily experience of a LaborFree sales associate (number of prospect/client contacts; “roll-calling” requirements; prospecting vs. account maintenance/growth; interaction with accountants and existing clients to acquire referrals; support from other LaborFree’s organizations and management, etc.)?

How extensively do LaborFree sales associate make use of product demos in the sales process? Describe the typical sales call.

Describe LaborFree’s discounting practices, at the time of initial sale.

How does LaborFree calculate its customer retention rate (by client, or by revenues)? What has that rate been over the last five years?

Does LaborFree use its LaborFree Agency commission revenue to support discounting to customers who use the pay-as-you-go insurance products? If so, to what extent?

Number of orders submitted / % errors

Number of payrolls setup / % perfect

Number of first payrolls processed /% perfect

Number of hot-start orders submitted / % actual starts

Average cycle times

How does LaborFree categorize its expenses? Provide specifics.

As compared to SOFTTIME-ES, are similarly-labeled expenses actually alike, or are there definition differences? What are these differences?

As compared to SOFTTIME-ES, does LaborFree match us expense-for-expense, or are there whole categories of expense not present in the LaborFree business model?

Where LaborFree and SOFTTIME-ES expenses are similarly defined, where are their expenses materially less or more (proportionately) than SOFTTIME’s expenses?
Per the above question, why are their expenses proportionately less or more than ours, for similar activities?

Of course, those RFPs always included the instructions, “No illegal methods may be undertaken to gather this information.”

When I see such requests, I have to ask the question, “How will this help a company sell more? I can see why the information is interesting. In fact, I have a definition of “interesting information.” Basically, anything that a company doesn’t know is easy to categorize as “interesting.”

But, “interesting” doesn’t often generate revenue. “Interesting” doesn’t make more sales happen. “Interesting” might not even make the company stronger. Interesting might only be interesting to one person; not to an entire company.

So, how does one sort out the difference between “interesting” and “effective”?

Start by defining those things that your company defines as effective. How do you make choices about services in other industries? How does your company define ROI? Certainly, healthy companies do not make a habit out of wasting dollars.

If you need some ideas, let me share some of ours. What makes intelligence effective? In order to be effective, the intelligence should:

1 Strengthens your company’s position

• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?

2 Discovers new markets

• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?

3 Develops new products/services/solutions

• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

Apply this litmus test to your current efforts. Compare the day-to-day requests against these standards. If the comparison leaves you wanting, you have to figure out how to put changes and such in place to stop the cycle of “interesting, but worthless” information.

If you have a different set of “ effective” definitions that work for your company, let’s chat. I would appreciate your input. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801.838.9600 x5050)