A few months ago, I was talking about the state of online lead quality with the head of performance marketing for one of the top interactive agencies. I asked him to sum up his view on the type of relationship that lead sellers and buyers should have when it comes to lead quality. With little hesitation, he suggested that it should be “a two way street.”
He nailed it.
Yet so many seem to focus the blame for poor lead quality on the lead aggregators selling the leads, with little discussion on the responsibilities of those that are actually trying to convert the leads. Ideally, both sides should work in unison to set clear guidelines for what does and does not constitute a quality lead.
But as I referenced in my last article, there is the temptation for both sides to potentially cut corners and set their own standards for lead quality. As a result, neither side ever truly trusts the other.
So what can be done?
For starters, better upfront education and communication. It should come as no surprise, given the explosive growth of Internet advertising (IAB/PWC recently said there was a 33% jump in online ad revs since 3Q of 2005) that there are a number of new companies out there that want to use online lead generation to grow their businesses. The problem is that they do not all understand the various campaigns that actually drive leads — such as co-reg vs. incentivised, etc. As a result, first impressions are sometimes poorer than expected. As a solution, lead sellers should invest the time to educate their new potential clients about all the pros and cons of each type of campaign.
Regardless of how well versed a lead buyer might be in the different forms of leads that are available for purchase, there is always the need to set up clear expectations and communication when entering into a new relationship with a lead seller.
Better communication meaning a clearer understanding between both parties, as to what constitutes a good lead vs. a lead that should be refunded. Once both sides agree on the lead quality definitions, they then need to make it clear to one another the steps that they will each take to ensure that only quality leads are being bought and sold.
For the lead sellers, that may mean that a specific lead is only sold one time or it may not be any older than one day since consumer generation. They also might agree to screen all the leads through a third party data verification service prior to selling or to have an automated dialer verify which phone numbers are connected vs. disconnected.
For the lead buyers, it should mean that they keep and report accurate dispositions on the outcome of the leads. No lead seller should have to give any refunds if the best that a lead buyer can come up with is “your leads stink.” Ideally, the lead buyer would report back to the seller a specific reason why the lead was bad. For example, the provided phone number was disconnected or the person never filled out a lead form. All of these things need to be established from the outset — hence the two-way street.
The leaders of the online generation market that do the best job of establishing best practices in terms of market education and communication will ultimately be the ones best positioned for greater market dominance. As they will be spending less time on lead refund disputes and more time on creating new business opportunities
Digg 
