chrisbrogan.com - Latest Comments in The B2B vs B2C Thing

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Kevin Waggoner — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 11:57:07 -0000

Cordini, just started up this year. I never thought marketing would be so tough. I'm the owner and inventor of Cordini. Anybody have wisdom on marketing my new product. Please visit my website www.Cordini.Biz tell me what you think. Thanks so much, -Kevin

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Louis Vuitton speedy 30 — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 04:20:36 -0000

The biggest discernible difference in business communications between b2b and b2c groups is the justification of purchases.

There. Am I wrong?

Yeah,you're right

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Zu_zhihong — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 03:26:03 -0000

retro jordan vibram five fingers vibram five fingers Bikila ugg 5833 ugg 5225 ugg 5879

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

b2cmother — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:29:15 -0000

The biggest discernible difference in business communications between b2b and b2c groups is the justification of purchases.

There. Am I wrong?

Yeah,you're right

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Nicky Jameson — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:37:24 -0000

@ John Varlaro
"As leaders in business, we should be salivating at the opportunity to empower each of our employees to be champions of the company and lead innovation - in sales or otherwise." Excellent point.
I believe empowering employees would be the making of companies. And not just B2B. 99 percent of the time employees know exactly what should be done and how to do it. They are on the front line with the customers. They are the ones often on the receiving end of customer complaints and, yes, praise. But they need support from the top down. They cannot do it alone.
Can you imagine a company that empowers its employees to champion the company and lead innovation? It's a beautiful thought. Some might be in a much better place than many we are reading about daily.
Sadly, many companies would figuratively rather cut off their right arms before they empower their employees, (including those who pay lip-service to employee "empowerment") so all the innovative sparks will go out or get short shrift.

When it comes to Social Media, there are so many options that no one person can do it all, and no one department can do it justice. Every facet of a B2B company can benefit...but not w/o the employees. I like to look on the bright side. The opportunity for bright sparks who understand how it works inside and out to become Social Media consultants to their past employers. It wouldn't be the first time.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

John Varlaro (@jdvarlaro) — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:16:53 -0000

Lawrence Liu (Telligent), Craig Huffstetler, Nicky Jameson touch upon the B2E element as well:
In B2B the illusion still exists that you are selling to a company, not people. This illusion allows a company functioning in that capacity to overlook social media as a viable strategy, while relying on the safe, ROI-trackable methods of Mar Comm.
Where social media can be revolutionary when implemented, is it gives companies the ability to empower employees to be the faces of the company. First, however, companies need to be revolutionary in their approach to employee empowerment.
As leaders in business, we should be salivating at the opportunity to empower each of our employees to be champions of the company and lead innovation - in sales or otherwise.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Nicky Jameson — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:22:03 -0000

For those interested, here's a blog post I wrote recently to help B2B marketers get started. It's called 7 practical tips for B2B Social Media Marketing.
http://nickyjameson.com/200...

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Nicky Jameson — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:32:36 -0000

I have to ask myself - does it really matter? I wonder are B2B companies getting too hung up on "it's different for B2C and we can't do it because (insert excuse here)? The B2B sales cycle and buying process is indeed different. For one thing, the focus is on getting qualified leads for sales people to make the eventual sales. Yet everyone seems to forget about the sales people - a prime group companies can target using Social Media marketing - alongside existing marketing channels - to make their lives easier. No leads = No Sales. At the end of the day, regardless of sales process as Seth Godin so aptly put it on Amex Open Forum, having thousands of "friends" on Facebook or "followers" on Twitter are pretty useless to a B2B company if they don't somehow work towards signing that million dollar contract in good time for it to add to the bottom line.
However - if you are a B2B company or any company you want to do business. To do that you need customers. Many B2B customers may not be using Social Media - there's an opportunity for the B2b company to educate by leading the way. It goes back to this "What is the business problem the company needs to solve? Is it getting more clients? More people to know about you? Advocates? Innovation, market share? More qualified leads? Social Media can help B2B companies in doing all these and more. But, as I always say, it isn't about the tools. It's about the approach. And about how it's going to improve the bottom line. Every business person's job depends on that bottom line, no matter how fluffy we want to get about "conversations."

Here's a suggestion for B2B companies. Why not start from the inside out? Ask sales people what they need. Do they need info so they can bring in more qualified leads? Then why not start with an internal wiki? Or an internal blog? Does the company need to innovate/ (what a question) Why not establish a private community or forum to enable your customers to contribute new ideas, suggestions? I can guarantee they will have more than you ever will. Same goes for improvements to all your channels.

B2B companies need to listen to their markets, just as their B2C counterparts do. So why can't they set up Google Alerts to see and measure what is being said about the company - and not just by your customers? Why not use Twitter as a listening and learning post? Why not survey your customers? Most are usually very happy to be asked for their feedback most companies never bother, or never do anything with it if they do) if it means you're making it easier to do business with you. Encourage ratings of online content.
Do B2B companies need recommendations? Advocates? Influence? More customers? More leads? Referrals? Then B2B companies should be engaging their key audiences and social media provides a way to do it. They need to use Social Media for lead generation. Do B2B companies want to be aware of marketplace threats or do they want to discover them only when their customers of many years have switched to the savvier competition?
Oh, and one other thing... as with anything new, be prepared to fail at least at first. No one is exempt from that. But marketers can do small pilots to mitigate the risks.

Bottom line - It's a waste of time getting distracted by B2B vs B2C differences - so I agree "don't get hung up on the B2b/B2C thing." Companies are not personal entities so why pretend they are? Not all B2C efforts have been successful anyway. Regardless of the selling process and the diverse needs of B2B marketers they need to start where they are, change their approach to being two way, be strategic and start engaging their people. Look for what they can do, even if small, rather than what they can't.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Lindsay Willott — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 07:48:20 -0000

Chris, you couldn't be more right. I run a B2B marketing agency. We market enterprise software and services. Our clients' average sales cycle is often measured in years and not months. We invented our own process for taking such solutions to market and called it "continuous customer capture". Continuous (a word you've used in your post) is hugely meaningful in this context. This B2B marketing process is ALL about selling the "next step" - read this white paper, read that blog post, come to this event, learn more about the subject - and eventually the lead goes from nuture phase to a lead you can work on selling to. But timing it critical and so a process that gives you multiple bites of the cherry is the best type of B2B programme. In B2B you have to become a resource for the potential customer. Social tools are bang on for this.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Katherine Ventres Canipelli — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:14:45 -0000

To complement our marketing view, Dave Stein's blog post today cuts the issue from the B2B strategic selling perspective. Same hurdles, same opportunities, different angle, a different urgency. As Dave puts it: "If a salesperson’s buyers have really embraced social media as a way to establish and build relationship with those who would provide them with valuable products and services, great. Those companies do exist. But in general, and regretfully for some I’m sure, we’re just not there yet." Read the full post: http://davesteinsblog.wordp...

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Linda Forrest — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:17:01 -0000

As a fairly new reader of your site, I just wanted to comment that your posts always get me thinking. Thinking not only about where we sit on the marketing spectrum as public relations professionals in the B2B technology realm, but also as an individual consumer. There are differences in the sale to and in the execution of marketing to businesses versus consumers but in my opinion it's challenging to make generalizations as nuances always play in, whether it's the dimensions of the sale, the market size, the state of the economy, etc.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Craig Huffstetler — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:23:49 -0000

I like the B2E angle even if it isn't part of the post. ;-)

It helps engage employees for teamwork, ideas, and in so doing encourage innovation in these rough economic times (morale is a biggy). Social media can do a lot for companies looking to lift up their employees spirits, bridge international gaps, and just bring people together. It can also help to decrease costs in various areas such as telecommunication.

On a high level, it has the ability to increase an individual's productivity and thus allow corporations to monetize on this. Social media is not just for knowledge management anymore in the corporate environment. We've gone beyond that.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Lawrence Liu (Telligent) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:28:49 -0000

Chris, you forgot one: B2E. That's Business-to-Employee. :-) You're too focused on the marketing angle. What's much more important is a community mindset of openness and sharing. If a partner doesn't understand how you sell to customers, they won't be a partner for long. Want your employees to come up with better ideas for products and services? Get them out there engaging with customers and partners.

A community (and teamwork) mindset is what will transform organizations and entire industries (e.g. pharma is leading the way). What/how/where/when to use tools like social media is secondary.

- http://twitter.com/lliu

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Ken Kadet (@KadetComm) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:28:46 -0000

Great discussion here...I appreciate the direction that I believe, Tim was taking this ... that many B2B purchase decisions are based on a far different matrix than consumer purchases. This affects the kinds of social media where you can effectively be involved. In the tech world, if I'm selling an enterprise software system, for example, I'd avoid a venue as personal as Facebook -- IT and IS managers I've worked with brook little BS on tech. Would I blog about pertinent issues? Yes. Would you build a following on Twitter? Participate in TechTarget forums? Create a user/technology community around issues we're passionate about? Yes, yes, and yes. In a commodity/supply/distribution business, you take a different tack -- more local, for a start.

Commonalities? Seems to me that ever business could benefit from more engagement with the folks to who buy their products. As people, they can care about the things their customers care about -- whether it's the need to establish standard communications protocols between automation systems or the best way to make lasagna. The opportunity to bring organizations and people together is one of the cool things about social media -- and what makes it worth our while at work.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Kate Brodock — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:53:19 -0000

Chris -

We've been talking to our clients about this a lot lately (they're mostly B2B) and we say pretty much the same thing.

To add on to your point of "getting them before the sale," often times, B2B companies wonder how something like Facebook would benefit them. Another great thing about popular and niche social networks is you have like minds congregating somewhere online, talking about like interests etc. Some of them have access to decision-makers in their companies (or may be them!), or may be in a position to refer a colleague. You touch point in what may be considered a B2C community (but even that generalization is being challenged) still has many B2B consequences.

Great conversation,
kate

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Jeremy Epstein — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:59:06 -0000

I think Ron hit it on the head, "people buy from People."

Godin posted on this a while back. His conclusion was that "the only difference was in who signs the check."

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

TimWalker — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:26:59 -0000

@Scott Manley -- You make a very good point. Most of the jobs in the United States are created by small businesses (not even medium-sized), and the SMB sector represents a huge chunk of the economy. Of course, these companies also have different needs, and they can't afford the mondo-sized products / service packages that the big dogs can. In other words, selling to SMBs (which, by the by, has been a specialty of my employer for many years) can be un-sexy, but the value there can be huge.

Going back to my comment @24 above, the size of the client enterprise (expressed in # of employees, revenue, total IT budget, whatever) would be another important dimension to add to the grid.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Bill — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:19:14 -0000

@ Scott Manley - It's very interesting you bring this up - having been in the VAR/Solution Provider business in the past, one of the most under-served segments was the SMB market. These SMBs are generally looking to compete in highly competitive markets, save money and generally are more apt to embrace new technology much more readily than a larger business or corporation would. I think the SMB market would be key to jump into social media mixing to try and reach them, collaborate with them and find out who these SMBs truly are: their needs, desires, competitive atmosphere and pitfalls they face - in essence gain an understanding of the customer as never before through social media - then when they feel valued, you get your value back.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Scott Manley — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:28:48 -0000

It's interesting that most people still view B2B as selling to the huge corps. Granted, that's where the big money is but when you look at large corps as a percentage of all businesses out there, it probably is less then 30%. We see a majority of B2B being small businesses and entrepreneurs that are out there looking for a good web hosting site, accountant, IP lawyer, project management software, etc., and we beleive a majority of those professionals are touched and reached via social media just as in B2C. Anyone have a take on that?

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Fran Gaspari — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:31:18 -0000

Chris,
Great post! Early on, I decided to keep my blogging simple and universal...ALL business people are consumers...but ALL consumers are not business people...hence I concluded that if it's good for the consumer, it MUST be good for business...!!! Thanks, Fran

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Arthur Germain (@ArthurGermain — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:10:04 -0000

Chris,
Thoughtful post as always. Everyone here keeps using examples that are apples and oranges to represent B2C and B2B, and then applies some metrics for comparison. That makes some sense (toothpaste for consumers, oil tankers for companies), but I wonder what the maker of a product sold to BOTH consumers and businesses would have to say about their use of social media. For example, Ford sells cars to consumers and to Hertz, local Police Departments and other companies for their fleets. What does Scott Monty and Ford say about social media, PR and marketing outreach to these very different buyers? Do they see a difference between B2B and B2C that challenges the thinking here?
Thanks!
ahg3

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

David King — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:14:43 -0000

I think you have to market different to both and treat both of them differently.

It's to seperate organizations.

one is personal, one is business.

knowing the most effective way to market to them in those positions will be more efficient and bring your more money! that's the bottom line! (in my opinion... that is)

Thanks...

DBK

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

TimWalker — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:16:33 -0000

Good stuff, Chris. Last week I was talking with someone about this very thing, and broached my idea that there's at least one slot between B2B and B2C, which we might call B-to-mass-B. In other words, there are B2B markets that act *more* like B2C markets because of the size of the audience, the complexity of the sales cycle, etc.

Having read the comments here -- especially Kathy @5 and Jodi @20 -- I want to nuance that some more. It's not like a lightswitch with a binary choice between B2B and B2C. (I know you know this, I'm just addressing the oversimplified terms we all sometimes use.) It's more like a polydimensional grid, with many factors including:

--size of purchase (major vs, minor, whether in relative or absolute dollars)
--complexity of options (chocolate bar vs. huge Oracle install)
--speed of delivery (a soda from the machine vs. a tailor-made suit)
--specialized knowledge of buyer (think high-end fly-fishermen, or CIOs)
--number of decision-makers (like Jodi said)
--how the purchase will be amortized in the buyer's budget (capital expenditure vs. operating budget, or one-time buy vs. installment/subscription plan)
-- . . .

Et cetera through many other dimensions I'm sure I'm forgetting.

What made me think of all this in the first place was GE's aircraft-engines business. How long is their list of *potential* clients -- dozens? scores? However many aircraft makers there are in the world who could buy from them, it's not as many steady customers as your average busy greasy-spoon diner has. For that GE business, social media in any outward-facing sense might not make sense, because the issues they face aren't related to awareness: every single potential customer of theirs *on earth* knows that they exist and knows how to get in touch with them.

So, the challenge -- in that case and every other case, based on where your business lives in this polydimensional grid I'm proposing -- is to parse it out: how will I use Technology X to build my business? Technology X could be a white-label social network. It could be geolocation sensors. It could be accounting software. It could (hypothetically) be pencil-and-paper (though I'll bet they've got that one nailed down by now). The list goes on and on, and the savvy business will regard social media tools in light of its own situation and the needs of its customers -- just like it should any other technology.

Wow, maybe I should have just put this on *my* blog and pointed back here. ;)

Have a great weekend, Chris.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Wendy Peters — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:12:18 -0000

Chris, I always love what you bring up because 9 times out of 10, it's a pretty accurate account of the protests I get from middle managers and senior managers in my company when I talk to them about social media. They deal more with B2B and think of it as a B2C. I think looking at any communications tool as merely a tool is a far more effective approach than categorizing it's use. I think it depends on its integration with other communication methods and departments to effectively handle the relationship with your customers whether they be the general public or other businesses.

Re: The B2B vs B2C Thing

Tony Santos — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:55:55 -0000

Jodi,
I would argue that your example ignores the consumer purchases of durable goods and real estate. While the numbers might not be as huge, $40K plus is an equivalent expenditure for a household to $17.5M would be to a large company. I do agree that the number of people involved is a key difference, esp. in big ticket capital purchases, like an oil tanker.