MQL set-up

[Anonymous]

Am searching for where our team set-up the rules about when and how MQL is triggered? Wonder if you can direct me to where I find this information?

Thanks,

Meilssa

[Aslihan_Ayan_Ha]

Hi Melissa,

It is a setup question that will depend on your team. It is a choice/decision that is made by each instance differently. The most common place will be with Lifecycle Smart Campaigns. Please feel free to contact me at ashley@demandspring.com if you need any assistance

[Justin_Norris1]

Melissa Kim​

Every organization talks about MQLs a bit different as Ashley mentioned.

Typically you see two paths to MQL:

• MQL via lead score -- when a lead reaches a scoring threshold, the status changes to MQL and the lead is either pushed to SFDC and assigned to a rep or a task is assigned to an existing rep or the lead pops up in a custom lead view that shows only MQLs
• MQL via fast track -- when a lead fills out a contact us form or some other kind of "hand raise" that says "talk to me now!"

In all cases you would want to have a lead lifecycle program controlling the flow from stage to stage which would be triggered off the lead's behavior (as reflected by lead score) as well as salesperson input (e.g., lead gets recycled to nurture further).

There is a basic template in the program library you can import and which will get you started.

For more on strategy, check out Sirius Decisions, although don't feel compelled to start out with this level of complexity:

Intelligent Growth through Better Leads

[Grégoire_Miche2]

Hi Justin and Melissa,

I usually find it preferable to have only a MQL via lead score approach and, for any type of "hand raise", give a sufficient number of score points so that the lead qualifies immediately to MQL.

One of the key rules for long term health of your Marketo instance is to separate the global lead management process in 4 interacting yet independent silos :

1. The Marketing campaigns, such as you content promotion, the webinars, seminars, newsletters, ... Although it can be tempting, you should never put any scoring not lead status or lead owner change here, for the sake of maintenance.
2. The Scoring campaigns, gathered in 1 program, that monitor the Marketing campaigns and react. Use tokens here, as recommended by Marketo, to make future changes easier. Some, such as filling out a contact form, may drive a huge number of score points so that the lead gets immediately above the MQL threshold (see below) ... Some of these campaigns will also decrease score for instance when a lead gets a new "recycled" status.
3. The lead lifecycle campaign, that monitor score changes and change the statuses accordingly. Typically, one of these will give a lead the MQL status when the score get higher than a threshold. What changes here are the thresholds (lower when sales complain they have too few leads, higher when you have too many).
4. The lead assignment rules, that react to status changes and assign leads to queues or owners. Typically, when a lead gets an MQL status, il will be assigned to a MQL lead queue or a specific sales or telemarketing user. These assignment rules change often, as your sales and telemarketing org change, their territories evolve, etc... IMHO, this fourth silo is better managed in SFDC.

Keeping these 4 silos separate is an absolute key to keep the whole manageable.

-Greg

[Justin_Norris1]

Grégoire Michel​

Great post. At a high level I agree with you 100%. Centralize functions into modular systems, where all logic for a particular function is kept in one spot to make it easy to update and control. Don't mix operational functions with marketing activities and outbound campaigns.

(Two other centralized systems I might consider to add to your schema would be #1 data management and #2 alert management.)

Now regarding the specific question,

Should"fast-tracked" MQLs have a separate flow in the lead lifecycle or be pushed over the threshold by a large points assignment?

I am really a bit on the fence. One of my colleagues is very much in agreement with your approach. However, I was working on an LLC build today and there are a few issues I have with it:

• You need to maintain logic in multiple places: If your lead score threshold changes, you need to update it in your MQL campaign AND update the score value assigned for your "fast-track form fill-out" action to ensure the lead goes over the threshold. Less modular.
  
  
• Additional logic to deal with sub-zero scores: If you allow scores to go below zero you need additional logic to ensure that your addition of points will increase the lead's score above your threshold 100%. More complexity, slightly greater risk.
  
  
• Success path reporting: I have not tested this but I am unsure how how this might interact with the Success Path Analyzer. I.e., let's say your first three stages are Known > Engaged (score = 0-99) > MQL (score >=100). If a lead is created via fast track form and you immediately give them 100 points to push to MQL, will they pass through the engaged stage as well to preserve conversion rates on your success path? Or appear directly as inflow in MQL stage? This may have undesirable effects on reporting.

The alternative approach is a single flow in your lifecycle where you maintain a list of fast-track forms/triggers and then can control the output very precisely. Still modular, still quite scalable in my view. Arguably more robust?

Interested in your thoughts/experiences with the above.

[Grégoire_Miche2]

Hi Justin,

Thanks for raising these points. This is how we deal with them :

• Need to maintain logic in multiple places, specifically because of threshold changes : when you change the thresholds, it is most of the time by a few points. Usually the equivalent of a few clicks or a standard form fill out. In fact, we always set a max value for behavior scores (and a smart campaign that caps it) That max value is about 3 times the threshold value. When a lead fills out a contact form, we immediately give that lead the max value (for instance =300), which far greater than the threshold. So changing the threshold has no impact
• Additional logic to deal with sub-zero scores : always set a minimum for scores, be it 0 or -20. You do not want a lead to end up with -300 points because he/she has been inactive for 3 years. We use capping Smart campaign to prevent the score to go below this minimum. But even though, since we set the contact form points with an "=" and not a "+", the previous value has no impact
• Success path reporting : This is a very important point. The campaign flow is set so that the lead is first moved from Known to Engaged, then a wait, then from Engaged to MQL. Drawback : it will slightly delay the move to MQL.

BtW, I do not like MQL as a terminology. Because it has a double meaning : does MQL means Qualified FOR Marketing or Qualified BY Marketing ? The Marketing tend to use the first signification, but the sales people tend to use the second (Sales called a qualified lead a lead that has been called and which project info have been qualified). We prefer "Call Ready".

-Greg

[Grégoire_Miche2]

HI again Justin,

On your other remark, I fully agree with you on centralizing data management / data hygiene, and also interesting moments BtW. But have a mitigated opinion with regards to centralizing alerts. These are often linked to a specific operational marketing activity. Furthermore, users are usually not at ease when it comes to using trigger tokens.

-Greg

[Justin_Norris1]

I think those are solid approaches Greg. I still see what I suggested as viable but what you have described addresses the concerns I raised.

Regarding alert management, yes I was also going to throw in a caveat about this one. I do not always centralize it but in some cases where the alerts are part of the critical path of the lifecycle, are less tied to specific marketing activities, and/or have some complex logic behind them, I have found it more sensible to centralize than to distribute.

Appreciate the sharing.

[Grégoire_Miche2]

Fully agreed on alerts.

And yes of course, I think your suggestions are viable.

-Greg

[Guy_Goldstein6]

Hey Gregoire and Justin,

I think you've both expressed some SUPER valuable tips in general for running a Marketo instance and they both cover the issue pretty concisely.

The one thing I would add is that when developing lifecycles, I often allow "either" a score of X, OR a particular interesting moment to drive an MQL specifically to avoid the "big score for the one event I want" method.

The reason for this is because it creates a situation where, when people look at score, the sum total of all of Marketing's activities not including the Key Event doesn't look as good as the one event on it's own (eg. either accumulate 50 points or fill out this form) and it devalues the perception of non-Key Event activities. In some extreme cases it can steer marketers down the rabbit whole of focusing too heavily on "triggering the key event" rather than providing the necessary value to leads to drive their success. A classic example I've encountered was a company who had "Contact Request" add 50 points, so the Marketing team tended to try to include a "contact us" call to action anywhere and everywhere possible. It did generate more MQLs but the average quality of all MQLs fell.

Having specific interesting moments as a trigger negates that entire issue and allows you to: An MQL is either a lead who does ONE SPECIFIC THING, or a lead who's aggregate engagement shows a level of interest that passes the threshold.

- Guy