Earlier on this blog I referenced an article by Steve Woods from Eloqua on RPM, Revenue Performance Management. RPM is a relatively new term in the area of demand marketing optimization. Will it stick? As I was writing earlier, there seem to be so many terms already that describe B2B marketing automation. Why another one?
Lauren Carlson’s post on that topic is a good read.
So will it stick?
I like of course the idea of scientific, analytics driven, revenue optimization.
But I fear that the term is at risk because it is so broad.
Not marketing optimization
not customer optimization
but total revenue optimization.
So everybody is responsible for RPM, and if everybody is responsible the danger is that nobody takes responsibility.
Personally, I like the term Revenue Performance Management and think it’s the right idea to get marketing and sales to work together to drive revenue. The marketing/sales alignment problem is well known, and I applaud those promoting the idea.
I’m less sure about whether the term will catch on. Sadly, the terms that seem to stick are those that align with a particular class of technology. In this case, it is the CEO that should own the RPM problem. Although solutions from Eloqua, Marketo and other vendors can help by optimizing the lead-to-revenue process, the core issue is one of leadership (on the part of the CEO) and collaboration (by marketing and sales).
Still, my take is that it’s a good move by the marketing automation community to elevate the discussion beyond simple automation. Could help them gain access to CxOs in same way that some CRM vendors have positioned themselves in Customer Experience Management.
Now, it will be interesting to see if “Sales 2.0” proponents will try something similar, or will they support RPM? Otherwise, I think business executives may discount RPM as a marketing gimmick mainly promoted by MA vendors.
Akin, Bob,
Great points, and a fair question. I think that whichever term may eventually stick, the term must reflect the idea that growing revenue is a discipline that seamlessly involves both the broader, content-oriented efforts that currently fall under the “marketing” banner, and the narrower, question-and-answer efforts that currently fall under the “sales” banner.
Both RPM and Sales 2.0 have this seamless integration (and optimization of efforts) as a core, fundamental tenet, and it’s that approach that is causing the leaders to see such significant results. The question may be more whether the terms “marketing” and “sales” survive in the long term.
Steve