DIGITAL

BODY LANGUAGE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3 Introduction 16 Tools & Content

4 Executive Summary 19 Analyst Bottom Line

6 The Digital Buyer’s Journey 21 Acknowledgements

8 The Last Mile 22 About ion interactive

11 The State of DBL 23 About Demand Metric

14 The Opportunity: A Digital Dialogue 24 Appendix: Survey Background

INTRODUCTION
The modern marketing organization collects a lot of data from various encounters – touchpoints – that prospects and customers
have with that organization. With the right implementation of technology, marketers are aggregating data about website
visits, email opens, click-throughs, downloads, webinar registrations and any other existing form of digital interaction.

Collectively, this rich set of data represents the “digital body language” of a prospect, providing marketing with the raw data to
first detect and then predict a prospect’s level of interest in a solution and even when that prospect might buy. There is a
tremendous amount of potential energy stored in this digital body language (DBL) data that marketing collects, and
converting it to kinetic energy is a matter of passing it downstream, to the sales team, with high fidelity.

It seems intuitive that marketing and sales would have an efficient, effective process to ensure that the sales team can
fully exploit the DBL data that is available. In theory, collecting DBL data is an excellent practice for many reasons. This data
helps marketing refine it’s part of the sales funnel for which it is responsible. This data, at least in theory, also gives the sales
team a complete view of a prospects needs and readiness to buy, all before sales engages in dialogue with qualified prospects.

Demand Metric and ion interactive teamed up to determine how well digital body language is living up to its potential. What this
study discovered, and this report details, is that while digital body language is conceptually appealing, the sharing and
exploitation of this data is relatively poor. A strategy that relies on digital body language whose execution does not
produce a meaningful digital dialogue will disappoint.

3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The data for this digital body language study was collected through an online survey whose participants came largely from B-to-
B organizations across a range of industries, technology having the strongest representation. Over two-thirds of respondents
reported revenue growth in the most recently completed fiscal year, and these organizations range in size from less than $10
million to over $1 billion.

The analysis of this study’s data provides these key findings:

 For 52% of study participants, the buyer’s journey is mostly digital, providing ample opportunities for collecting
digital body language data. But less than 30% of marketers understand reasonably or extremely well a prospect’s content
needs during this journey.

 Personal selling plays a significant to very significant role in closing deals for 72% of respondents.

 Despite the heavy reliance on personal selling, the usage of DBL data by the sales team occurs often or always just 22%
of the time.

 The top reason why DBL data isn’t more useful to sales is because too many, different interpretations of it exist.

 A majority of organizations are not yet using the four most common types of interactive content. Previous Demand
Metric research confirms that this type of content is better at capturing prospect needs and interest, and creating dialogue.

4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 If the collection and sharing of DBL data were optimized, 62% of respondents report the sales close rate would improve
by more than 10%.

This report details the results and insights from the analysis of the study data. For more detail on the survey participants, please
refer to the Appendix.

5
THE DIGITAL BUYER’S JOURNEY
Figure 1: A majority of the buyer’s journey is digital for over half the typical buyers.
Digital body language data is a product of the digital nature
Digital Extent of Typical Buyer's Journey of the buyer’s journey. Marketers deploy a range of digital
assets, each of which becomes a potential “touchpoint” a
prospect may encounter during the journey. The prelude of
Most or all (75%+) 24%
this study was, therefore, to measure just how digital the
typical buyer’s journey currently is, and the results are
Much (50-74%) 29% shown in Figure 1.

Some (25-49%) 27% The study data confirms what most marketers assume is
true: the buyer’s journey is largely digital.
Little (1-24%) 11%
The digital nature of this journey provides opportunities for
None 3% marketing – the journey’s presumed architect and guide –
to collect a rich set of data as prospects interact with
marketing assets and content along their journey.
I don't know 6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Modern marketers understand the content marketing cycle
that forms the backbone of this journey: great content
attracts the ideal customer, who in turn consumes,
Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300
shares and engages more deeply with the company
that provided the great content.
6
THE DIGITAL BUYER’S JOURNEY
Figure 2: When it comes to understanding prospect content needs, more than two-thirds of the
respondents admit to no understanding or acknowledge significant to some gaps.
The success of the content marketing cycle is based
Marketing's Understanding of Content Needs on marketing having a deep understanding of
50% prospects’ content needs and purchase triggers. Figure
2 shares data revealing how well marketers understand
46% prospect needs and what it takes to convert them.
40%
While the distribution displayed in Figure 2 is normal from a
statistical perspective, from a marketing perspective it
30%
doesn’t show strong across the board understanding of
prospects by those who market to them. If marketing
24% 25% wishes to collect relevant data from touchpoints along the
20%
buyer’s journey, it must first understand that journey so it
can deploy content that prospects will eagerly consume,
10% leaving their digital tracks behind for marketing and sales to
3% study and interpret. This study suggests that just over
2%
one-fourth of participants are doing this well.
0%
Not at all Significant gaps Some gaps Reasonably well Extremely well
What is not in dispute is the role content continues to play
in the buyer’s journey: 63% of participants indicate
Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300
content plays a significant or very significant role in
nurturing prospects through the path of
discovery, consideration and purchase.
7
THE LAST MILE
There comes a point in the buyer’s journey where marketing makes a determination about each prospect it is shepherding
through the buyer’s journey: is a prospect qualified?

In the past decade, marketing has elevated the process of qualifying prospects to a science, analyzing the digital body language
data and applying specific criteria. When marketing determines that a prospect is qualified, the lead is passed to sales, where
personal selling efforts seek to engage customers in a dialogue that hopefully leads to a transaction. This transition comes
near the end of the buyer’s journey, where sales takes over to lead the prospect through the “last mile” of the journey.

In this last mile, personal selling plays a significant to very significant role in closing deals for 72% of study
participants. In B-to-B environments, this significance is even higher: 81%. Ideally, as marketing qualifies leads and
passes them to sales, two things occur:

1. The sales team has access to the DBL data that marketing has collected, which reliably helps them understand each
prospect’s interest level and specific needs.

2. The transition for the content-nurtured journey that marketing curates, to the personal selling experience sales
manages, is smooth and seamless for the prospect.

8
THE LAST MILE
Figure 3: A prospect’s transition from marketing’s nurturing to sales’ care isn’t always smooth.

Prospect's View of Marketing to Sales Transition

Figure 3 shows, from the prospect’s perspective, how
40% smooth the transition is from marketing to sales.

35% The “smoothness” of this transition has much to do with

30% how much the sales team understands about what the
prospect has already been through on their journey. During
26% this transition, prospects want to feel that they have
20% been “heard” – that the trail of digital clues they have
left behind on their journey was used well so that they
17% don’t have to repeat their story when engaged by the
15% sales team.
10%

This is where digital body language comes in, at least in

2%
5% theory. The treasure trove of data it represents contains the
0% information that could help sales know the posture of every
Don't know Very rough Rough Smooth Smooth Very smooth
w/rough spots prospect before engaging them in a sales dialogue. DBL
should, in theory, help sales engage prospects more
intelligently.
Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300

9
THE LAST MILE
Figure 4: Over one-third of study participants report sales rarely or never uses DBL.

Frequency of DBL Use by Sales

50% Figure 4 shows how often DBL sees use by sales.

Just 22% of sales organizations in this study are

40% 42% making regular use of DBL data, and it is important to
understand why usage isn’t higher. In theory, DBL
should provide sales with a comprehensive scouting report
30%
about a prospect. This type of intelligence, when available,
would seem very valuable as sales representatives engage
25% in personal selling discussions.
20%
20%
Sales teams are always eager to gain any advantage as
10% they engage with prospects. That DBL data doesn’t see
11% higher use suggests something is broken regarding its
2%
availability, usability or reliability. The simple fact that
0% marketing has DBL data does not automatically make
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always
it useful or accessible to sales, as the next section of this
report will explore.
Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300

10
THE STATE OF DBL
Figure 5: Over 30% of the sales team has no access to DBL data or finds it unhelpful.
The fact that DBL is not seeing greater use by sales is an
Usefulness of DBL to Sales indicator that something isn’t right. If marketing is diligently
collecting DBL data, the organization has the ingredients for
helping sales impressively engage in personal selling that
DBL data identifies interest & specific
needs 18% turns prospects into buyers. The DBL usage data in Figure
4 suggests this occurrence isn’t that common. Figure 5
DBL data identifies interest & hints at presents the usefulness of DBL data to sales.
needs 29%
Figure 5 provides some encouragement in that for 69%
DBL data only identifies interest 22% of respondents, DBL helps identify a prospect’s
interest or more. But prospect interest is a relatively
simple determination to make: the fact that a prospect
DBL data is not very helpful 10% opened an email is an indication of interest. It is the
richness of DBL data that should make it so helpful, and if
Sales has no access to DBL data 21% this richness isn’t conveyed to sales in a manner it can
understand and when it is needed, its usefulness is limited.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Companies that are only able to discern basic interest
from DBL data are missing an opportunity to know
Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300
much more from the data they could collect. As one
participant put it, “DBL data needs to be more
sensitive and profound.”
11
THE STATE OF DBL
Figure 6: Different interpretations of DBL data is the top reason it isn’t more useful to sales.

Reasons DBL Content Doesn't Work for Sales

Too many, different interpretations of DBL
data exist
DBL data is too "noisy"
DBL data generally is the same for most
propects
Marketing has difficulty sharing DBL data
Tools or interface to DBL data are poor
Other reasons
0%
This DBL research identified several reasons why DBL data
45% is not more useful to sales teams, and these findings are
summarized in Figure 6.
32%
As marketing deploys more types of content, resulting
29% in more touchpoints for prospects, the volume of data
collected about each prospect’s journey grows. More
data is usually better, but as volume increases the
23%
interpretation challenge grows.
22% It’s usually easy for marketing to interpret the data collected
because they created the assets: when a prospect opens
10% an email, downloads a white paper, attends a webinar
or interacts through any touchpoint, marketing is
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% intimately familiar with the content assets that
triggered that interaction.

Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300

12
THE STATE OF DBL
The challenge is passing this data downstream from marketing to sales with high fidelity, making sure that what gets
passed is understood and helpful. Some organizations have turned to lead scoring as a solution for helping sales understand
the relative qualification of prospects, but this study learned that 26% of organizations don’t use lead scoring at all. Furthermore,
the sales team, for 24% of the survey sample, give little to no weight to lead scores.

On top of the DBL interpretation problem, there is also the fact that this data is “noisy” – simply too many touchpoints
for which data is collected. For the sales team, trying to swallow and digest DBL data is often like drinking from a fire hose.

13
THE OPPORTUNITY: A DIGITAL DIALOGUE
Rather than collecting gigabytes of DBL data and throwing it over the transom to sales, marketing has an opportunity to
create interactive content assets that produce a real dialogue with prospects and yield the data sales really wants.

Interactive content assets engage prospects through things such as a self-assessment, a cost-benefit analysis with an
online calculator, a proposed implementation created with an online configurator and similar forms of content. Static
content must be gated to make prospects surrender what data they will before the content is released.

This approach stretches the patience of the prospect, and then doesn’t provide an indicator of whether that static content was
consumed. The amount of data that is collectible through static content is far more limited and less reliable.

Interactive content provides immediate gratification to prospects. They willingly step through an assessment, configurator
or calculator because they perceive a benefit, and the process of using an interactive content asset is a clever, unobtrusive way
to collect the data most helpful to sales. Figure 7, on the next page, shows what this study learned about the specific prospect
data sales would most like to receive about prospects.

14
THE OPPORTUNITY: A DIGITAL DIALOGUE
Figure 7: With the exception of contact and firmographic data, most sales teams are not getting the data they want about prospects.

Data Type Currently Receive Want to Receive Don’t Want to Receive

Contact information 81% 16% 3%

Firmographic data (e.g. industry segment) 44% 41% 15%

Role in purchase decision 37% 55% 8%

Potential ROI from solution purchase 19% 61% 20%

Budgeting for a solution 20% 66% 14%

Decision timeframe 23% 66% 11%

Specific pain points motivating purchase 20% 71% 9%

Readiness to buy 21% 72% 7%

Anticipated barriers to acquisition 14% 75% 11%

Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300

When you consider the type of data in Figure 7 that sales most wants, it is almost impossible to collect using forms in
front of static content. Overcoming this limitation is a key driver of interactive content deployments. More important than just
collecting the data, however, is establishing a dialogue, and interactive content is a great catalyst for doing this. Prospects who
engage with interactive content have by default entered into a digital dialogue, and it becomes much easier for sales to
transition that digital dialogue to personal dialogue: it is a very natural progression.
TOOLS & CONTENT
Establishing these digital dialogues with prospects requires a different kind of content and tools for creating and managing it.
Interactive content is not technically complex to develop or deploy, but it is different, requiring marketing
organizations to think about content differently.

With interactive content, marketing is still the owner, producer and manager of content, just as it has been for static content. The
deployment and full sharing of the most common types of interactive content is currently very low, as Figure 8 reveals.

Figure 8: Deployment of interactive content with full sharing of data is currently quite rare.

Deployed; No Deployed; Limited Deployed; Full

Interactive Content Type Not Deployed
Sharing Sharing Sharing

Prospect’s self-assessment of readiness for a solution: 55% 10% 30% 5%

Cost/benefit analysis created by prospect using an online calculator: 60% 13% 20% 7%

Hypothetical solution implementations planned by prospect via online configurator: 62% 13% 21% 4%

Results of online quizzes taken by prospect that reveal solution knowledge: 60% 13% 22% 5%

Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300

16
TOOLS & CONTENT
No type of interactive content is in the majority with respect to deployment, and this implies there is a great opportunity for the
companies that embrace this form of content. One of the reasons is differentiation: without a lot of interactive content
currently filling up Search Engine Results Pages, the opportunity to stand out through interactive content is currently
quite high. At some point in the future, as more companies move through the adoption cycle for interactive content, this will
change, but at present the opportunity to differentiate through this kind of content is very high.

The other opportunity is to still collect the DBL data we covet, but do it without friction, at a greater level of detail. It
can then be passed seamlessly to sales in real-time so that they can continue the digital dialogue the prospect starts when
interacting with this content.

Using interactive content is a different approach for engagement and DBL data collection than using static content. What hasn’t
changed is the need for a deep understanding of the audience – the prospects’ content needs – and collaboration
between sales and marketing when developing content.

As Figure 2 shares, just 28% of marketers in this study claim to understand reasonably or extremely well the prospects’ content
needs, particularly what it takes to convert prospects during their journey. Without a deep understanding, it is difficult to
deploy effective content, interactive or static.

17
TOOLS & CONTENT
Figure 9: Regardless of the type, content effectiveness is improved through collaboration.

Collaboration Around Prospect Content Needs

40%

37%
30% The other critical success factor for effective content is
collaboration between sales and marketing.

24% Figure 9 shows how well this is occurring relative to

20% 22%
prospect content needs.

These fundamentals of audience understanding and

10% collaboration remain the cornerstones of producing
9% 8% content that works.

0%
Very poorly Poorly Moderately Well Very well

Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300

18
ANALYST BOTTOM LINE
Figure 10: Optimizing the sharing of this data would have a significant impact on the sales team’s
ability to close deals.
DBL Data Sharing Impact on Close Rates
Close rate would improve 31% or more 11%
Close rate would improve 21-30%
Close rate would improve 11-20%
Close rate would improve 1-10%
Close rate would not improve 3%
Process already optimized 2%
I don't know
0%
Digital Body Language Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, June 2015, n=300
19
This study confirms what most marketers know: the
buyer’s journey is largely digital. Marketers are adept at
catching the digital crumbs buyers leave as they encounter
touchpoints marketing has engineered for them to find.
23% Collecting and curating this digital body language data
is a worthy marketing endeavor, but it cannot be the
29% end of a pursuit. Unless that data escapes marketing and
makes it downstream to sales with high fidelity, it’s potential
15% energy remains untapped.
This study also presents the real truth about DBL data: it
doesn’t see frequent use by sales (Figure 4), perhaps
because it is not perceived as useful (Figure 5).
17% What if it were? What if the process of collecting, sharing
10% 20% 30% and interpreting DBL data was optimized – what impact
would that have on sales conversions?
This study asked that question to all of its participants and
Figure 10 presents the verdict.
ANALYST BOTTOM LINE
The impact of optimizing how this data is shared is nothing short of astonishing. It’s important to state that the reason sharing
doesn’t occur better has little to do with the willingness of marketing or sales. While it’s true that some organizations have silos that
interfere with inter-departmental cooperation and communication, marketers understand that sale’s success is also marketing’s
success. It is far more likely that the barriers to sharing this DBL data are process related. When a process
underperforms, there are two options: re-engineer it or replace it.

The knee-jerk reaction to DBL data sharing and usage failures most probably is to put sales and marketing on a “forced march”
improvement plan to cooperate better, meet more often and cross-train: marketing teaches sales how to use its marketing
automation system and pull reports; sales does the same for marketing with CRM. In theory, this seems wise, but in practice
it’s been tried many times, by many organizations, most of which experience just partial success. This improvement approach is
not without merit, but in the end it doesn’t address the touchpoint itself, where the data is collected: the content. This report
comes firmly down on the side of replacing the process, not re-engineering it.

Replacing it implies addressing the issue at its core, the content itself, by leveraging interactive content developed from a deep
understanding of prospect content needs and collaboration around the data the sales team wants and how they prefer to get it.
The same DBL data, or more, is captured, but two great things happen: the delivery or sharing of the data is automated and
happens in real time, and the consumption of interactive content naturally triggers a dialogue. This dialogue is digital at
first, but easily and more naturally evolves into a personal sales-prospect dialogue.

As Figure 8 reveals, few companies are doing this now, creating an opportunity for those that do. And as Figure 10
implies, the return for doing so is strong.

20
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Demand Metric is grateful to ion interactive for sponsoring this benchmarking study.

Demand Metric also appreciates those participants that took the time to provide their input into this study.

21
ABOUT ION INTERACTIVE
ion interactive’s software replaces landing pages with app-like web, mobile and responsive experiences. Using ion’s simple drag-
and-drop interface, anyone can create and test amazing, app-like experiences—no technical or design skills required.

ion interactive’s experiences significantly improve lead generation and customer acquisition with research showing that 73% of
ion’s customers report at least doubling their digital marketing conversion rates. ion is based in Boca Raton, FL, with a second
office in Cambridge, MA. Customers include Dell, Iron Mountain, DHL and hundreds of other brands and agencies.

For more information, visit www.ioninteractive.com.

22
ABOUT DEMAND METRIC
Demand Metric is a marketing research and advisory firm serving a membership community of over 55,000 marketing
professionals and consultants in 75 countries.

Offering consulting methodologies, advisory services, and 500+ premium marketing tools and templates, Demand Metric
resources and expertise help the marketing community plan more efficiently and effectively, answer the difficult questions about
their work with authority and conviction and complete marketing projects more quickly and with greater confidence, boosting the
respect of the marketing team and making it easier to justify resources the team needs to succeed.

To learn more about Demand Metric, please visit: www.demandmetric.com.

23
APPENDIX: SURVEY BACKGROUND
This Digital Body Language Benchmark Study survey was administered online during the period of May 22, 2015 through June
9, 2015. During this period, 358 responses were collected, 300 of which were complete enough for inclusion in the analysis. The
data was analyzed to identify insightful relationships between variables in the study and to ensure the statistical validity of the
findings. The representativeness of these results depends on the similarity of the sample to environments in which this survey
data is used for comparison or guidance. Summarized below is the basic categorization data collected about respondents to
enable filtering and analysis of the data:

Annual Sales: Primary Role of Respondent:

 Less than $10 million (50%)  President, CEO or Owner (25%)

 $10 to $25 million (16%)  Marketing (54%)
 $25 to $99 million (12%)  Sales (11%)
 $100 to $499 million (13%)  Other (10%)
 $500 million to $999 million (1%)
 $1 billion or more (8%) Revenue Growth (Most Recent Fiscal Year):

Type of Organization:  Double-digit % increase (28%)

 Single-digit % increase (43%)
 Mostly or entirely B2B (65%)  Flat (16%)
 Mostly or entirely B2C (18%)  Single-digit % decline (6%)
 Blend of B2B/B2C (17%)  Double-digit % decline (7%)

24
 Benchmark Report

For more information, visit us at:

www.demandmetric.com

Demand Metric Research Corporation

584 Forest Creek Place
London, ON, Canada N5Y 5T7

© 2015 Demand Metric Research Corporation.

© 2013 DemandAll Rights
MetricReserved.
Research Corporation. All Rights Reserved.