Article
How to manage SDR's
blossomstreetventures.com
Quoted on this wiki
Every place a page here uses this source, in the order the words come in it.
SDRs need to go after elephant accounts. “’Since inbound is worth twice as much as outbound, I say go after accounts twice as big when you go out-bound. Winning large customers is much more about causing a sale, not just catching one. That doesn’t mean calling each and every prospect under the sun. It means identifying the accounts that are the most profitable and targeting them with outbound activity.” “To address this issue, I recommend one of two approaches: territory-based (customized quotas) or round robin (uniform quotas).” Inbound SDR can handle nurturing 200 leads per month. “One inbound SDR can typically handle about two hundred to three hundred leads a month when fully ramped.”
I read Trish Bertuzzi’s book ‘The Sales Development Playbook’ and it was by far one of the best sales books I’ve read in a while. The book focuses heavily on building pipeline with SDR teams. This is the first post of a few I’m going to share about this book: there was so much good information that putting it all in one post would be too long. Below are some of the excerpts I found to be very insightful, through page 55 only. “There are two main models in play: setting introductory meetings and generating qualified opportunities.” Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.”
I read Trish Bertuzzi’s book ‘The Sales Development Playbook’ and it was by far one of the best sales books I’ve read in a while. The book focuses heavily on building pipeline with SDR teams. This is the first post of a few I’m going to share about this book: there was so much good information that putting it all in one post would be too long. Below are some of the excerpts I found to be very insightful, through page 55 only. “With introductory meetings, prospects have a sense of your overall value proposition but haven’t been qualified as to their readiness or ability to move forward.” Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.”
I read Trish Bertuzzi’s book ‘The Sales Development Playbook’ and it was by far one of the best sales books I’ve read in a while. The book focuses heavily on building pipeline with SDR teams. This is the first post of a few I’m going to share about this book: there was so much good information that putting it all in one post would be too long. Below are some of the excerpts I found to be very insightful, through page 55 only. “The rep is still closing on a meeting or call but has a) moved the prospect from curiosity into interest and b) vetted that the prospect meets or exceeds a minimum thresh hold.” Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.”
Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.” “You should deploy an introductory meeting model when the market for your product is immature and/or when your account executives need more at-bats.” Maturity of market is critical decider. “In an immature market, the number one challenge your SDRs face is to arouse curiosity around a business issue that potentially hasn’t even been recognized yet. Sales development should be teeing up introductory meetings so that the account executive can do the work of educating the prospect and developing that curiosity into interest. If you’re selling a disruptive solution, asking BANT (budget, authority, need and timing) types of questions make no sense. There isn’t going to be a budget set aside for problems that prospects don’t know they have.”
Intro meetings and Qualified Opps. “There are two main models in play: setting introductory meetings and generating qualified opportunities.” With introductory meetings, prospects have a sense of your overall value proposition but haven’t been qualified as to their readiness or ability to move forward. Qualified opportunities differ in that they are, well, qualified. The rep is still closing on a meeting or call but has a) moved the prospect from curiosity into interest and b) vetted that the prospect meets or exceeds a minimum thresh hold.” “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.” Which model is right? “You should deploy an introductory meeting model when the market for your product is immature and/or when your account executives need more at-bats. Let me give you an example. Today, customer relationship management software is a mature market. Most (if not all) technology enabled companies already have a solution in place. Those companies have existing contracts with future renewal dates, and the thought of changing providers sounds like a major hassle. In this instance, if your SDRs are setting introductory meetings for the AEs, you’re just wasting everyone’s time. “Compare that to the market for a predictive lead scoring solution. That market is still immature, as the concept itself is new. Vendors are faced with doing the work of educating the market on the problem they solve.”
I read Trish Bertuzzi’s book ‘The Sales Development Playbook’ and it was by far one of the best sales books I’ve read in a while. The book focuses heavily on building pipeline with SDR teams. This is the first post of a few I’m going to share about this book: there was so much good information that putting it all in one post would be too long. Below are some of the excerpts I found to be very insightful, through page 55 only. “There are two main models in play: setting introductory meetings and generating qualified opportunities.” Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.”
I read Trish Bertuzzi’s book ‘The Sales Development Playbook’ and it was by far one of the best sales books I’ve read in a while. The book focuses heavily on building pipeline with SDR teams. This is the first post of a few I’m going to share about this book: there was so much good information that putting it all in one post would be too long. Below are some of the excerpts I found to be very insightful, through page 55 only. “With introductory meetings, prospects have a sense of your overall value proposition but haven’t been qualified as to their readiness or ability to move forward.” Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.”
I read Trish Bertuzzi’s book ‘The Sales Development Playbook’ and it was by far one of the best sales books I’ve read in a while. The book focuses heavily on building pipeline with SDR teams. This is the first post of a few I’m going to share about this book: there was so much good information that putting it all in one post would be too long. Below are some of the excerpts I found to be very insightful, through page 55 only. “The rep is still closing on a meeting or call but has a) moved the prospect from curiosity into interest and b) vetted that the prospect meets or exceeds a minimum thresh hold.” Benchmark on one or the other, not both. “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.”
Intro meetings and Qualified Opps. “There are two main models in play: setting introductory meetings and generating qualified opportunities.” With introductory meetings, prospects have a sense of your overall value proposition but haven’t been qualified as to their readiness or ability to move forward. Qualified opportunities differ in that they are, well, qualified. The rep is still closing on a meeting or call but has a) moved the prospect from curiosity into interest and b) vetted that the prospect meets or exceeds a minimum thresh hold.” “One of the biggest mistakes I see companies make is setting internal expectations using introductory meeting metrics (quantity) and then requiring opportunity-level qualification (quality). This seemingly innocuous misstep often ends in total disaster.” Which model is right? “You should deploy an introductory meeting model when the market for your product is immature and/or when your account executives need more at-bats. Let me give you an example. Today, customer relationship management software is a mature market. Most (if not all) technology enabled companies already have a solution in place. Those companies have existing contracts with future renewal dates, and the thought of changing providers sounds like a major hassle. In this instance, if your SDRs are setting introductory meetings for the AEs, you’re just wasting everyone’s time. “Compare that to the market for a predictive lead scoring solution. That market is still immature, as the concept itself is new. Vendors are faced with doing the work of educating the market on the problem they solve.”