I was struck by a recent chart published by Marketing Sherpa regarding businesses acknowledgement of the value of inbound marketing compared to their usage of inbound marketing to generate business:
The question asked for the pie chart to the left was "Do you agree many organic search listings today are linked to social media content so the integration of social media and SEO tactics are essential?" As you can see, 76% of the businesses polled agreed with that premise.
The question asked for the pie chart to the right was "Are you practicing the integration of social media and search engine optimization (SEO) tactics to improve inbound marketing performance?" Only 47% of the businesses polled are actually practicing the tactics that 76% agreed were "essential". This begs the obvious question: Why the gap?
The article did not share any insight into the gap between the perception of value and implementation, but I will share with you why I think businesses that see value in an inbound marketing program are not implementing them:
The Economy
Let's face it, we have not yet seen any evidence that a robust recovery from the Great Recession of 2009 is underway. Businesses that have cash reserves are hesitant to invest in anything because of economic uncertainty, increasing expensive government regulation and uncertainty regarding the outcome of the upcoming elections. This economic uncertainty is something over which business owners and executives have precious little control. However, there is one outcome of the recession that makes inbound marketing even more important to the success of a business: businesses have cut expenses to the bone, the only way the can increase profits is to generate more revenue. Inbound marketing is an investment in revenue generation.
Misperception of the Cost of Inbound Marketing
Many businesses owners I have spoken to are under the impression that inbound marketing is an expensive proposition. The truth is actually the opposite: inbound leads cost 61% less than traditional outbound leads according to the 2012 Hubspot State of Inbound Marketing. The same report found that SEO leads have a 14.6% close rate while traditional outbound leads have a 1.7% close rate - in other words, SEO leads result in 8.6 times as many as sales as do tradtional outbound leads. To summarize, inbound marketing is not only cheaper than outbound marketing, it is more effective.
Inbound Marketing ROI Takes Time
A recent study conducted by MIT and Babson MBA candidates has shown that inbound marketing produces ROI. Companies that implement HubSpot's marketing automation software with between 200-499 employees at implementation (typical for a small business) see an increase of 6.1 times more traffic after 12 months of active use. The same group of companies generate 23.2 times more leads after 12 months of active use! The typical chart of leads over time is a "hockey-stick" graph with results beginning to increase in the 3d month of program implementation with a steep increase in months 10-12. That is the nature of the beast - it takes 12 months of keyword/search engine optimization, blogging and social media promotion to get the massive increases in leads business owners are looking for.
The Implications of Inaction
While 53% of the businesses surveyed in the Marketing Sherpa graph shown above are not using inbound marketing, 47% are. If your competitors are 6 months or more into an inbound marketing program, they have a jump on you which will be noticeable in another 6 months when their programs hit full stride. The results of the Marketing Sherpa poll indicate that the overwhelming majority of businesses agree that inbound lead generation works - not all of those businesses have implemented programs yet. I would submit that an investment in inbound marketing is a wise one and one that should be evaluated as soon as possible.
