Why wouldn’t I want direct closers spending some portion of their time “trolling Discussion Groups on LinkedIn.” Isn’t that a great way to self-generate some highly targeted leads?

Keep up the great blog!

To answer your first question – No, advertising can’t be effective without being trusted. I can’t imagine anybody saying, “I don’t trust this (brand, company, product or service), but I’m going to give them my money anyway.”

Re Sales and Marketing being different beasts; I think it depends on the size of the business, and to some extent the industry. My clients are SMBs (which I define as between 20 and 100 employees). They are B2B companies, and many just didn’t do Marketing at all (or they thought they were doing Marketing when they had their logo printed on hats for the annual Chamber golf tournament). What I’m saying is that that’s wasteful. There are much better ways to spread your messages, with orders of magnitude better ROI.

We can and should eliminate the time wasted by Sales people cold calling and trying to influence with other intrusive and unwanted messaging (like advertising). They might as well take the money and set fire to it. I often see SMB CEOs knowingly blow money on advertising for vanity reasons.

I will grant you that the term ‘Sales 2.0′ may be used by sales and marketing vendors to sell h/w, s/w and services. I used it as a way to describe a paradigm shift that I see occurring in SMB Sales and Marketing departments.

Bob

I’m not sure that the survey you link to says that 95% of advertising is wasted. What they say is that people only trust 5% of advertising. Could it still be effective without being trusted? Because you’re worth it.
You draw some interesting conclusions on the convergence of sales and marketing. Not sure I would draw the same conclusions. It appears to me that sales and marketing are different beasts but they do need to greater alignment and cooperation. I summise that Sales 2.0 is a creation of Silicon Valley to try and sell us all more tin and code. I encourage my clients to work on their culture, language and people before they even consider throwing technology at sales and marketing.

Rod Sloane

Roma è il mio preferito luogo sulla terra. Mi farebbe piacere a venire vedere voi, e di insegnare a leggere.

Molte grazie,

Roberto

Thanks for sharing your expertise with us. I’m one of the old school, like Terry, and I’m working to evolve into 2.0 version. This info is like nourishment for me.
Thanks again.

Ciao!
Pierluigi

Thanks for the kind comments. You’re right, of course, re the artifice of ‘2.0′. Things are more complicated than that. I use it as a shorthand to signify a new way of effectively executing demand generation, lead nurturing and relationship building. No matter how the technology changes, we’re ultimately still dealing with people, and human nature is immutable. Social media helps to strip the artifice out of the interplay between vendors and buyers, and it lends transparency. It’s much easier to discern the wheat from the chaff (or the good guys from the A.H.s).

Bob

For various reasons, sellers and marketers find all sorts of reasons to create walls between the functions. In truth, the functions have always required close integration.

Since selling/marketing began, the whole point of doing it professionally is to engage the customer on their terms – where, when, and how they want to be engaged.

I worry about applying the labels Sales 2.0, Marketing 2.0 or whatever 2.0 label we want to put on it. I think these labels tend to distract us from the root issues. I think these labels also tend to discard past (1.0 and before) practices that have been very effective and continue to be very effective. Finally, I tend to view the 2.0 discussion as an artifice created by software/services vendors to get people to buy tools and services, masking the fundamentals. It kind of reminds me of many of the old CRM discussions, where the tool became the end, not a means.

You raise many important points. I look forward to the next installment!

Be aware that these are my thoughts. Others may not agree that Sales 2.0 equals the merger of Sales and Marketing. I think most will agree, though, that first the internet and now social media have significantly changed the way prospects research and buy. Therefore sales and marketing professionals need to significantly change how they engage with prospects and build relationships.

Thanks,

Bob

Thank you for sharing your marketing expertise. I am one of the old school sales and marketing guys, who is trying to learn all I can about the 2.0 world. This post has helped me to jump start my 2.0 education. Super job… I cannot wait to see what information you have “up-your-sleeve” to share in your next B2B Sales 2.0 post.

I checked out your website. It looks like you’re doing all the right things. Plenty of relevant and useful content on the site. You have a well-written blog that’s frequently updated and contains meaningful info.

Re your location dilemma. Here’s what I’d recommend… it’s going to take time and effort. First define your prime suspects. Develop a profile of the types of businesses (size, location, industry, etc.) that are your best targets. Use your most profitable customers as a guideline. Then use LinkedIn and Twitter (maybe Facebook and FourSquare) to find the companies and people who fit your prime suspect profile.

Once you’ve targeted them, see where they’re hanging out. It may be in groups that are geographically dispersed, but that’s OK. Follow the individuals, listen to what their issues are, and when it’s appropriate, when you can give value, join the conversations. There are a number of tools that can help. HootSuite is an excellent one to aggregate across social media platforms. And, as in the comment above from Scott, use a CRM to keep track of the people and conversations.

Let me know how it works out 4 u.

Bob