Lead attribution can be a significant challenge, especially for high-consideration purchases made by large enterprises. There typically isn’t one lead source for these more complex buying cycles. Instead, a series of interactions occur over time until the prospect is ready to engage with a sales representative, and the opportunity is called a marketing-qualified lead (MQL). Attributing the lead to just one of those many different interactions, such as the first or the last touch, is somewhat arbitrary. There are multi-touch attribution models that distribute the credit for the lead across the various channels, but the formulas used to determine the weightings are problematic.
Understanding Enterprise Deals
Buying Committees for High-Consideration Purchases
Big deals are typically led by committees of buyers rather than a single decision-maker. Buying committees might include 5, 10, 15, or even 20 different individuals within the customer. For example, a buying committee selecting a new CRM application might have representation from the sales, partnerships, marketing, revenue operations, IT, security, procurement, legal, and finance departments. Some are on the committee as stakeholders whose success will be directly dependent on the technology purchased. Others are not stakeholders, but representatives of different functions that need to ensure corporate policies and standards are adhered to.
Research Levels Vary by Stakeholder
Each individual on the buying committee will invest a different level of effort in the vendor evaluation process. Stakeholders, who will use the system after purchase, may conduct extensive research to understand the features and capabilities of different SaaS vendors on the market. Others might not do any research at all. For example, in the CRM purchase, buyers from sales, marketing, and revenue operations will likely conduct more research than those in procurement, security, or IT, who are not direct users of the system.
Different Buyers Use Different Channels
Buyers doing research will each use a different mix of channels – some digital and others analog. Most stakeholders will use a mix of both.
Digital channels include research using AI chatbots (Perplexity, OpenAI, Google Gemini, etc.), search engines (Google, Bing), video search engines (YouTube), social media platforms (Reddit, LinkedIn), and online review sites (Capterra, G2). Think of these types of researchers as digital buyers.
Analog channels include research conducted by talking to people offline, such as analysts (Gartner, Forrester), consultants (EY, McKinsey), or peers at executive roundtables. Think of this group as analog buyers.
If the marketing team is doing a good job, there will be buyer interactions across 5, 10, or even more channels during the period leading up to the first discovery call with a sales representative.
Lead Attribution
Lead Attribution Models
Which of the marketing interactions prior to the initial sales call should the lead be attributed to? A few of the more common models for lead attribution include:
- The first touch or interaction the prospect had
- The last touch or interaction the prospect had
- A weighted distribution of the different interactions the prospect had between the first and last touch
For high-consideration purchases with multiple buyers over extended periods, none of these three lead attribution models is a good approach. The weighted attribution model is the best of the three. However, there is no consistent way to assign credit to different marketing channels as the level of importance each plays will vary by customer.
The Benefit of Lead Attribution
The idea behind lead attribution is to provide the marketing leadership with an understanding of which channels are producing the best results. For example, in Q1 of this year, leads were attributed to the following channels:
- SEO – 40%
- Outbound BDR – 20%
- Paid Search – 10%
- Paid Social – 10%
- Affiliate Programs – 10%
- In-Person Events – 5%
- Webinars and Virtual Events – 5%
Armed with the lead attribution data, the demand generation team can then make more informed decisions about how to allocate their budget across different channels to maximize success.
The True Source of the Lead is Often Unknown
The true source of the lead is often unknown. It cannot be captured by marketing technologies, because the first time that the buyer learns about a SaaS vendor:
- Occurs in a historical context that cannot be traced
- Occurs in an offline environment that cannot be measured
- Occurs in a private conversation that cannot be monitored
No Attribution Scenario
Many buyers are heavily influenced by past experience implementing SaaS applications at other companies. For example, consider the CRM example shared earlier. Suppose the Chief Revenue Officer on the buying committee has used Salesforce at their past three companies. As a result, the CRO may type ‘Salesforce pricing’ into a search engine, click on the link to the website, and fill out a form to request a meeting.
Marketing attribution tools would identify the source of the lead as organic SEO. However, the true source of the lead has nothing to do with SEO or any marketing campaign. Prior customer relationship is the true lead source.
Attribution is not irrelevant in these scenarios. It is still important to determine the best way to capture leads from buyers actively in the market. However, the attribution does not identify the true source of the lead.
Lead Capture versus Lead Generation Attribution
Although the term demand generation is frequently used to describe the activities B2B SaaS marketing teams perform. However, demand “generation” is a misnomer in many cases, because the campaigns are not actually generating demand. Instead, campaigns are simply capturing leads from buyers who are already in the market for a purchase.
Various studies have shown that buyers conduct between 60% and 80% of the research needed to make a purchasing decision before they are willing to engage with a sales representative at a SaaS vendor. As a result, many activities in the early stages of a purchasing cycle are not visible or measurable by a lead attribution system.
Peer Recommendations are the Most Influential
As mentioned above, most buyers are hybrid researchers who search on both digital and analog channels. However, buyers don’t treat the information gathered from digital and analog sources equally. A greater weight is often placed on analog channels. Such as recommendations buyers receive from peers. These recommendations happen in offline or private conversations in channels such as:
- Executive roundtables at industry forums
- Private Slack channel Q&A discussions
- Private Community Coffee Talk sessions on weekly Zoom calls
Digital Channels are Less Trustworthy
Most buyers do conduct research on digital channels, but they don’t necessarily trust the information they find. Experienced buyers know how vendors game the system to make their products look much more appealing than they actually are
- Search engines – Experienced buyers know that SaaS vendors hire SEO agencies to help them manipulate their content to show up at the top of the rankings.
- Online reviews – Experienced buyers have filled out reviews for other vendors. They know that vendors only ask happy customers to write reviews. They also know that the customer is awarded a financial incentive, such as a gift card, for writing it.
- Influencer marketing – Experienced buyers know that vendors recommended by Substack authors, podcast hosts, and LinkedIn influencers are often being compensated for their endorsements. The payment is often indirect. Influencers may not be paid to give recommendations, but they receive fees for running advertisements, writing content, or speaking on webinars.
Trusted Advisor Recommendations are Highly Influential
In addition to peer recommendations, insights from other trusted advisors are also highly influential. Vendor recommendations are often solicited from trusted advisors such as:
- Independent board members who share experiences from other companies they
- Analysts at Gartner, Forrester, or IDC
- Value creation teams at private equity or venture capital firms
- Managing Directors at Big Four and management consulting firms
Lead Attribution cannot Private Recommendations
You cannot track or measure these recommendations from peers or trusted advisors. They occur in private, closed channels that cannot be monitored by marketing technologies. As a result, these highly influential referrals do not show up in attribution reporting. For example:
Tradeshow – The $1M deal that is attributed to a tradeshow booth scan may actually have been the result of a referral from a Gartner analyst. The SaaS vendor was recommended by the analyst a few weeks before the event, and the tradeshow booth just happened to be the first measurable engagement point.
Online Review – The G2 referral that resulted in a $500K deal was actually a recommendation from a peer at an executive roundtable a few weeks before. The buyer heard the company’s name and decided to check out the customer reviews on G2 before visiting the website.
Branded Keywords – The $1.5M deal that was sourced from an ad click was not really net new demand generated from a paid search campaign. The buyer was already aware of the vendor’s name, but didn’t know the URL of the company’s website. They typed the company’s name into Google and clicked on the ad at the top of the page.
The marketing dollars invested in the trade show booth, online review site, and branded keyword ad campaign were money well spent. It is important to make it easy for buyers to engage when they are ready to start discussions. However, don’t fool yourself into thinking that these campaigns “generated” demand. They simply captured it.
