Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

Highlighted

Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

We've been depuping our data and have realised a scenario, which I am keen to hear from other on which philosophical side they stand.

We are B2B.

If you generate a lead from Event A, then a year later generate a lead for the same person, who is now at a different account at event B, you merge and de-dupe the lead (as they are the same person, but with a new email address), but do you update lead source and attribution to Event B?

How do you all think and handle this scenario?

10 REPLIES 10
Highlighted
Level 7

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

(as they are the same person, but with a new email address)

Would not merge if it's a new email address. Both events should get credit for generating a lead each. The person has changed jobs, the old contact should be marked "inactive" and marketing suspended or if you're brave, deleted.

Event B has legitimately generated a lead, so it should get credit. Event A had also generated a lead, be it a year ago, so it should have gotten credit.

Highlighted

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

Hi Jay

I agree with your thinking. That said, here is another thought.

Imagine an account manager is on the phone to a customer and they find out some person is no longer there. Do they update the record to a holding company "whereabouts unknown" OR to the new account if they know what it is, or do they mark the old contact inactive and create a new record under the account they moved?

We have traditionally moved contacts to "Whereabout's Unknown" which triggers a process to strip their email and append it to their description.

Are you saying that for every movement of a person from one company to another, regardless of circumstance that you would create a new record?

Thanks mate!

Sean

Highlighted

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

Or are you saying, only if the new information came from a marketing campaign? So dependent on source, take a different action.

I am sure a solution like bizible would want to preserve the old inactive record, like you mention.

Highlighted

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

Here is another one:

A new event generates a new email address for the same person, at the existing company. The old email has bounced as invalid, the new one is good. Do you merge and keep the new email, or mark the old lead as invalid and keep the new dupe, attributed to the new event?

Highlighted
Level 10 - Community Moderator

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

A new event generates a new email address for the same person, at the existing company. The old email has bounced as invalid, the new one is good. Do you merge and keep the new email, or mark the old lead as invalid and keep the new dupe, attributed to the new event?

I think it's absurd to tombstone the old lead in this case. It's just a change of email address. Happens during mergers and acquisitions.

Highlighted
Level 7

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

Attribution question:

Both events should be getting credit

Data management/hygiene question:

Dependent on your business and sales cycles... or personal preference. I can see pros and cons in both.

Continuously updating to have 1 true contact

pro: tidier database, all history in one place

con: consider old opportunities on the account tied to contact - do you reassign? if so to who? if reassigned, not a true reflection of who influenced the opty and make your opty reporting inaccurate

and vice versa

Highlighted

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

Yeah I think that the dream of a single record for each person on the planet is flawed. You need to snapshot records and create new records if they move to a new account.

Highlighted
Level 10 - Community Moderator

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

If there's value in certain fields (person notes and things that aren't firm-related but travel with the person such as regulatory licenses + registrations) then those can be copied to the new lead, but that doesn't necessarily mean a full merge.

Related data like purchase history may or may not be relevant depending on your industry. You must talk to sales about this -- it's ultimately not marketing's call. Ideally the person's purchase history at a former firm(s) and current firm are both kept around but easily distinguished. Task and event history, too. You should not assume sales wants to delete data and start cold.

As far as the source you don't want to deprive Event B of credit, like Jay says, so you should end up with one lead with Lead Source = Event B.

Highlighted

Re: Where to attribute new leads, when they are kind of not new?

I think this has really helped. Thanks guys.

We're adding an "Inactive" field.

As we grow and we inevitably integrate our back office ERP with CRM, I have to consider that you have a record of a person at a customer account, linked to sales orders.

Well it then becomes obvious, you can't update their record to a new account, change their email etc.

You need to snapshot that record and start a new record at their new account. The question around lead scores etc, I would say forget it and start new with the new record. They would more than likely be in a totally new buying cycle anyway.

This makes attribution sense, thanks Jay.

Appreciate the input team!