54: What an Agile Sales Team Looks Like at IBM w/ Ewing Gillaspy

August 21, 2019 00:16:26
54: What an Agile Sales Team Looks Like at IBM w/ Ewing Gillaspy
B2B Revenue Acceleration
54: What an Agile Sales Team Looks Like at IBM w/ Ewing Gillaspy

Aug 21 2019 | 00:16:26

/

Show Notes

An agile sales team is really, uh, agile. But there’s got to be more to it than that.What’s the secret sauce that allows reps to handle 400+ accounts?

I sat down with Ewing Gillaspy, Outbound Sales Enablement Leader at IBM, to talk about what an agile sales team really is.

“It has a relentless focus on the most value added activity on that given day,” Ewing explained.

The more diverse skillset you have within your team, the more likely you have the right person executing each task. Therefore, your outputs become better.

 

View Full Transcript

Episode Transcript

WEBVTT 1 00:00:02.560 --> 00:00:07.549 You're listening to be to be revenue acceleration, a podcast dedicated to helping software 2 00:00:07.589 --> 00:00:11.789 executive stay on the cutting edge of sales and marketing in their industry. Let's 3 00:00:11.789 --> 00:00:17.789 get into the show. Welcome to be tob revenue acceleration. My name is 4 00:00:17.910 --> 00:00:22.339 Dan Seberk and I'm here today with you and Gillaspy, outbound sales enablement leader 5 00:00:22.460 --> 00:00:26.539 at IBM Watson talent. You in. How are you doing today? I'm 6 00:00:26.620 --> 00:00:29.579 doing great. Thanks for having me. I thank you for coming on the 7 00:00:29.620 --> 00:00:32.659 show. It's great to have you on, so I'll top it for today 8 00:00:32.939 --> 00:00:36.890 is around what an agile sales team looks like at IBM. But before we 9 00:00:36.969 --> 00:00:41.130 go into that conversation doing, could you please introduce yourself to the audience and 10 00:00:41.289 --> 00:00:44.890 tell us a little bit more about yourself and also what you're doing at IBM. 11 00:00:44.969 --> 00:00:48.530 What's in talent, the company, of course, representing, you're sure, 12 00:00:48.929 --> 00:00:53.240 I'm a failed software developer that studied, you know, computer science as 13 00:00:53.240 --> 00:00:57.320 a background. was always in love with technology. Somehow, after going to 14 00:00:57.439 --> 00:01:00.280 business school, wandered my way into software procurement. So I started my career 15 00:01:00.359 --> 00:01:06.670 buying software for, you know, a fiftyzero person organization eighty deals later, 16 00:01:06.790 --> 00:01:11.989 I transitioned into six sigma and process design and measurement systems and I ended up 17 00:01:11.989 --> 00:01:17.189 running recruiting for Asia and somewhere along the way in that journey we rebuilt the 18 00:01:17.269 --> 00:01:22.219 entire recruiting organization, the leaders, the model, the partners, the technology. 19 00:01:22.620 --> 00:01:26.019 Really loved that work and the work I'm doing now feels very similar to 20 00:01:26.420 --> 00:01:30.620 to that work back from two thousand and twelve. So that takes me here. 21 00:01:30.700 --> 00:01:33.810 And I've been a headhunter in between and had a couple of roles in 22 00:01:33.930 --> 00:01:38.890 startups and working with different customers like sears and Expedia and tea mobile and on 23 00:01:38.969 --> 00:01:44.170 their different recruiting models. So very talent acquisition focused. I always tell people 24 00:01:44.489 --> 00:01:48.480 if you sit down at a conference room table to buy a piece of software, 25 00:01:48.719 --> 00:01:51.120 you know and you look at both sides of the table, the vendor 26 00:01:51.280 --> 00:01:55.680 and the client. I've done every job except legal in that table. So 27 00:01:56.040 --> 00:02:00.510 my experience is very limited from a domain perspective that very deep within that particular 28 00:02:00.750 --> 00:02:06.189 domain. Yeah, that makes sense, okay, good and earing. I 29 00:02:06.349 --> 00:02:09.189 understand the is that you're of course a strong advocate of using the agile framework 30 00:02:09.229 --> 00:02:13.030 for sales teams to be great, if you could share with us and our 31 00:02:13.030 --> 00:02:16.860 audience why you think the framework is so effective and how you're applying it or 32 00:02:16.939 --> 00:02:21.580 planning to apply it within your team at IBM here? Are Sure? Well, 33 00:02:21.900 --> 00:02:24.580 you know, this is something I just walked into. IBM is all 34 00:02:24.659 --> 00:02:30.129 in on Agile and industry benchmarks would tell you that roughly eighty five to ninety 35 00:02:30.169 --> 00:02:36.689 percent of most agile projects are successful. Drive it, drive a measurable improvement. 36 00:02:36.889 --> 00:02:39.849 Of course it came from Software Engineering, from the S and what I 37 00:02:39.930 --> 00:02:46.000 love about it is it has a relentless focus on the most value added activity 38 00:02:46.240 --> 00:02:53.039 on that given day. So that's the concept. Now our HR organization embrace 39 00:02:53.199 --> 00:02:57.879 this on very impressed by their work and we are a fast follower of HR 40 00:02:58.080 --> 00:03:01.789 so HR. Traditionally, in talent acquisition we had a recruiter that owned a 41 00:03:01.830 --> 00:03:07.229 job and hiring manager relationship. They drive the whole thing there. Think of 42 00:03:07.310 --> 00:03:09.310 about as a sales rep you know they have closed deals. They call them 43 00:03:09.389 --> 00:03:14.860 filled jobs. Having been in both worlds, the similarities are endless. But 44 00:03:15.099 --> 00:03:20.699 our talent acquisition team has reinvented itself with the agile methodology. They are twice 45 00:03:20.699 --> 00:03:27.020 as good as their former self in every meaningful KPI that talent leaders care about. 46 00:03:27.289 --> 00:03:30.729 And none of them own any jobs anymore. They're in pots, they're 47 00:03:30.770 --> 00:03:35.449 in teams, they're in sprints, and so if you can take a recruiting 48 00:03:35.490 --> 00:03:39.530 organization and break down the siload accountability, where I own an account, I 49 00:03:39.689 --> 00:03:43.479 own a job or a client, so to speak, in sales or I 50 00:03:43.560 --> 00:03:46.719 own I own the wreck. It's all up to me then and they can 51 00:03:46.800 --> 00:03:53.120 become massively more efficient and I think the same opportunity exists in sales. And 52 00:03:53.599 --> 00:03:57.710 just to finish the point on why, it's really because of skills. The 53 00:03:57.870 --> 00:04:01.310 skills needed to be successful in any job is changing at a rate that we 54 00:04:01.349 --> 00:04:06.310 can't really keep up with. So the more diverse the skill set in within 55 00:04:06.389 --> 00:04:10.780 your team or your pot of your sprint, the more likely you have the 56 00:04:10.819 --> 00:04:16.540 right person executing each task within a continuous sprint or framework and therefore your outputs 57 00:04:16.980 --> 00:04:21.220 become better. Yeah, that's interesting. And as when you both know, 58 00:04:21.860 --> 00:04:29.490 you mentioned about you're generally following hw it within ideam and and it. And 59 00:04:29.610 --> 00:04:32.930 there are occasions, of course, right hl can be very much compliance driven. 60 00:04:32.970 --> 00:04:36.290 So as a result of that, often they can be resistant to change. 61 00:04:36.569 --> 00:04:40.399 Without in mind, and if you bring that across to your sales team. 62 00:04:40.839 --> 00:04:44.040 What, if any, resistance have you seen from your team to actually 63 00:04:44.040 --> 00:04:46.240 implement that agile methodology and, if so, why do you think people are 64 00:04:46.319 --> 00:04:49.959 resistant to and how do you think you can help them to see the value 65 00:04:50.040 --> 00:04:54.269 that that you, of course, all right experiencing? Well, I think 66 00:04:54.269 --> 00:04:59.910 it's the right question. I think that we're experiencing tool overload like never before. 67 00:04:59.949 --> 00:05:02.350 So we view the tool. So if we want to talk about technology 68 00:05:02.350 --> 00:05:05.670 for a second, there's only two kinds of technology. There is technology that 69 00:05:05.709 --> 00:05:10.540 I have to click to do something with and there's technology that does all the 70 00:05:10.620 --> 00:05:14.740 clicks for me and delivers me an outcome. So I am ridiculously focused on 71 00:05:14.819 --> 00:05:20.569 the second category, and this second category has almost no naysayers. You're not 72 00:05:20.610 --> 00:05:26.170 going to find a sales room. It gets upset when something like outbound workscom 73 00:05:26.329 --> 00:05:28.970 books an appointment on your counter and your show up and it's a great meeting. 74 00:05:29.250 --> 00:05:31.250 Give you no change management, like what are you going to change? 75 00:05:31.569 --> 00:05:35.199 A little bit of territory rules and some contact strategy and maybe you know don't 76 00:05:35.240 --> 00:05:39.040 touch a certain account number of times, all on the back end, all 77 00:05:39.120 --> 00:05:43.519 manage by sales ops. No change plan meetings fall from a sky. So 78 00:05:44.199 --> 00:05:48.639 it's embracing that kind of a stack and really pursuing aggressively there. I'm out 79 00:05:48.680 --> 00:05:51.910 talking to sales enablement leaders all across the country right now. I'm calling a 80 00:05:51.990 --> 00:05:56.269 lot of IBM alumni now that I'm in this role. Not New to sales, 81 00:05:56.310 --> 00:06:00.550 but I'm new to enablement, and what I'm teasing out from these conversations 82 00:06:00.629 --> 00:06:06.139 is that they're very tool overloaded, but they, like me, have not 83 00:06:06.259 --> 00:06:12.620 unlimited budget but unlimited appetite for the second category. So your right, that 84 00:06:12.660 --> 00:06:17.420 change is hard because so many of these sellers and recruiters, to use the 85 00:06:17.459 --> 00:06:25.129 same analogy, have embraced and tried to use these interfaces that, quite frankly, 86 00:06:26.209 --> 00:06:30.009 most of which are just not intuitive, and so it requires a lot 87 00:06:30.050 --> 00:06:33.839 of failure to get to efficiency if it's the kind that I have to click 88 00:06:33.920 --> 00:06:38.600 and do everything. Yeah, okay, that's an interesting point. Now you're 89 00:06:38.600 --> 00:06:42.959 rising there. And in terms of agile within a sales environment that they are 90 00:06:43.000 --> 00:06:46.120 putting together in the context of IBM, is that something that's being rolled out 91 00:06:46.120 --> 00:06:49.750 as a as a company wide strategy? Is that something that's more of a 92 00:06:49.910 --> 00:06:54.069 pilot within within the watch and talent division? That you, of course. 93 00:06:54.149 --> 00:06:57.910 What within what? What's the sort of strategy overall at Idam around that? 94 00:06:58.230 --> 00:07:02.420 Yeah, so agile has beaten us to the punch in marketing, right, 95 00:07:02.579 --> 00:07:06.699 so you're going to find it in many different marketing organizations. It's new to 96 00:07:06.779 --> 00:07:12.379 sales and and this is a pilot. So we're embracing this idea that if 97 00:07:12.459 --> 00:07:16.250 talent acquisition can do better work in teams, then let's let's see if we 98 00:07:16.329 --> 00:07:20.209 get the same result in sales and then go back and consider how to roll 99 00:07:20.290 --> 00:07:25.209 out further. So the first team goes live in in August. Okay, 100 00:07:25.490 --> 00:07:28.689 all right, that makes sense. Now actually going off topic again. Really 101 00:07:29.089 --> 00:07:30.759 I'm sure audience would love to hear more about your thoughts and this, so 102 00:07:31.279 --> 00:07:35.480 I'll be in. Watson talent is a recruitment platform that's using AI to predict 103 00:07:35.560 --> 00:07:40.399 who is best suit, what is the best candidate for your organization. Now 104 00:07:40.720 --> 00:07:43.399 there's a lot to be set around automation and, to your point, there 105 00:07:43.399 --> 00:07:48.069 around the second type of technology, which involves no clicking. Ai Automation and 106 00:07:48.189 --> 00:07:54.949 making the lives easier humans is is right at the top of many organization priorities. 107 00:07:55.389 --> 00:07:58.350 But it's still a lot to be said for that human to human interaction 108 00:07:58.430 --> 00:08:03.500 in both sales and recruitment and hiring processes. So, in terms of using 109 00:08:03.579 --> 00:08:07.259 your solution, how how do you think businesses can be sure that they're not 110 00:08:07.459 --> 00:08:11.139 missing less obvious aspects such as a person's attitude and work ethic, when a 111 00:08:11.220 --> 00:08:16.170 CV maybe can't give you that that that thought, sort of picture or impression 112 00:08:16.209 --> 00:08:22.290 of of each candidate? Excellent question. So multiple answers here are. I'll 113 00:08:22.329 --> 00:08:26.050 give you the one that I think is most applicable to cross industries, and 114 00:08:26.199 --> 00:08:31.120 that is that we've as an industry, we focused on making the Canon experience 115 00:08:31.240 --> 00:08:37.759 so simple that it's easier to apply than ever before. There are entire companies 116 00:08:37.159 --> 00:08:41.990 who sold focus is to reduce the number of clicks to apply. So we've 117 00:08:43.029 --> 00:08:46.590 actually gone so far the other way that I would say to any organization not 118 00:08:46.830 --> 00:08:52.509 using our technology, you are definitely missing hundreds and thousands of great personalities that 119 00:08:52.629 --> 00:08:58.100 don't even get a look and and so when you compare that to looking at 120 00:08:58.299 --> 00:09:03.100 the people in your populations then have the best skill fit for the job. 121 00:09:03.779 --> 00:09:07.980 You still run a human process from there and assess personality and all kinds of 122 00:09:09.059 --> 00:09:11.570 culture fit. But when you lay out the math which we do. We 123 00:09:11.690 --> 00:09:15.769 have these lunch of Lemans and things that we do from time to time and 124 00:09:15.970 --> 00:09:20.809 we take participants through the math. If I've if I'm working twenty eight jobs 125 00:09:20.889 --> 00:09:24.600 with an average advocant volume of a hundred twenty five, we do seven interviews 126 00:09:24.639 --> 00:09:30.279 per job and you just do the time based activity analysis. Half of the 127 00:09:30.320 --> 00:09:35.799 candidate population is never getting a look at all, and so how much buried 128 00:09:35.840 --> 00:09:39.429 treasure is in that group? So the human model doesn't even have time to 129 00:09:39.509 --> 00:09:43.429 inspect everything in front of you. The machine model gives you a start that 130 00:09:43.590 --> 00:09:50.470 is statistically significantly more likely to be a positive outcome and let you pick personalities 131 00:09:50.509 --> 00:09:54.100 and run your normal process from that point. That makes sense absolutely. Now 132 00:09:54.179 --> 00:09:58.419 that that completely makes seven sense. And again, I think across industries, 133 00:09:58.580 --> 00:10:03.220 when you look at tools like automation and that allpa world, there's always at 134 00:10:03.259 --> 00:10:09.210 concern around how much is that going to enable a human or how much is 135 00:10:09.289 --> 00:10:11.250 that taking away from a humans day to day job? And I also think 136 00:10:11.250 --> 00:10:16.049 that carries over into things by AI. How much can you gather using technology 137 00:10:16.210 --> 00:10:20.799 from a person's profile versus what a human can get it? I guess it's 138 00:10:20.879 --> 00:10:24.440 just the way that the world's moving. It's also, to your point, 139 00:10:24.600 --> 00:10:28.600 not about taking away from a humans job but improving their their abilities to make 140 00:10:28.919 --> 00:10:33.200 to make accurate judgment really, and also making those individuals more efficient. So 141 00:10:33.279 --> 00:10:37.429 that completely makes sense to me. Out of interest, is that something that 142 00:10:37.590 --> 00:10:41.870 you're using as a solution yourself intern the IBM, or what's your, I 143 00:10:41.950 --> 00:10:46.230 guess, your sort of recommended recruitment process from from that perspective is it's at 144 00:10:46.230 --> 00:10:50.220 a similar sort of combination to what you just described. Yes, we use 145 00:10:50.259 --> 00:10:54.419 all of the Watson solutions within our team and we really rely on them for 146 00:10:54.460 --> 00:10:58.700 innovation. They are way out ahead of the market in many areas and if 147 00:10:58.740 --> 00:11:01.460 you look at the war going on in cloud and you look at a little 148 00:11:01.460 --> 00:11:03.690 bit of leaked in data, it won't take you very long to realize that 149 00:11:05.169 --> 00:11:09.490 many other organizations that you've heard of, the usual suspects, the high margin 150 00:11:09.610 --> 00:11:13.370 companies, are hunting from us. So we've had to reinvent ourselves and we've 151 00:11:13.409 --> 00:11:18.370 actually been able to do it in a cost efficient manner because of the combination 152 00:11:18.720 --> 00:11:24.080 of agile practices and framework and high automation technologies like Watson. Yeah, that 153 00:11:24.200 --> 00:11:30.000 makes it and in terms of moving forwards, this is, as you said, 154 00:11:30.080 --> 00:11:33.509 very much a pilot within within your division at the moment. That IBM, 155 00:11:33.549 --> 00:11:37.909 and it's impossible to forecast what the results will be and and if this 156 00:11:37.029 --> 00:11:41.350 becomes a wider strategy. But of course, based on what we see in 157 00:11:41.549 --> 00:11:46.909 technology functions and what your colleague sounds if they're having success in the marketing department, 158 00:11:46.139 --> 00:11:50.820 I'm sure it will be a success in your team. That that idea 159 00:11:50.899 --> 00:11:56.580 of having pods and that Agile framework from a sales perspective at IBM. Is 160 00:11:56.620 --> 00:11:58.259 that so only? How much of a concept do you think that is, 161 00:11:58.940 --> 00:12:03.330 as a concept, going to translate across to to other organizations, or do 162 00:12:03.330 --> 00:12:05.769 you still think, as it from a sales perspective, that's still will this 163 00:12:05.929 --> 00:12:11.289 sort of rigid model which isn't necessarily evolving, or other organizations maybe aren't looking 164 00:12:11.330 --> 00:12:15.610 at this pot methodology, if you like. I think the primary way to 165 00:12:15.690 --> 00:12:20.399 split in your mind is do you have a model where reps have four accounts 166 00:12:20.759 --> 00:12:24.799 or four hundred? The closer you get to four hundred, the more that 167 00:12:24.159 --> 00:12:31.389 the the addual framework is going to make a immediate and significant impact. The 168 00:12:31.950 --> 00:12:35.870 closer you are to four accounts each, the economies of scale won't be there. 169 00:12:37.350 --> 00:12:41.429 And while you know so, moving a cloth, you know, it's 170 00:12:41.509 --> 00:12:45.740 just a different problem. It's a different set of problems, and so it's 171 00:12:45.820 --> 00:12:48.860 organizations that really need to scale. And we've got it. We've got a 172 00:12:48.580 --> 00:12:52.019 certain parts of IBM better like that. So we have everything right. We 173 00:12:52.139 --> 00:12:56.899 have the model where some people have one account and you know we've got we've 174 00:12:56.940 --> 00:13:01.450 got software groups where people have over a hundred so and in digital was sometimes 175 00:13:01.490 --> 00:13:03.529 it can be even higher than that. So it's where it's where you have 176 00:13:03.809 --> 00:13:09.809 that opportunity to scale into more accounts and an efficient manner, where you're going 177 00:13:09.809 --> 00:13:15.519 to get the synergies. Okay, interesting. So really, if you're looking 178 00:13:15.519 --> 00:13:18.840 at it that that real top of them pay amid large enterprise account sales rep 179 00:13:18.960 --> 00:13:24.799 that maybe is handling ten accounts. The traditional model would still still makes sense. 180 00:13:24.279 --> 00:13:28.789 As you move to more of a a transactional, high volume approach, 181 00:13:28.870 --> 00:13:33.350 that's when when the real value of agile sales as a methodology starts to come 182 00:13:33.389 --> 00:13:37.509 into play. I think I would say it slightly nuance from that. What 183 00:13:37.629 --> 00:13:41.700 you said is is dead on. We look at it more in terms of 184 00:13:41.779 --> 00:13:46.059 the skills. So what it's really about is what's the skill mix of the 185 00:13:46.139 --> 00:13:50.100 team in the pot? And you know, when you think about building the 186 00:13:50.179 --> 00:13:54.659 perfect seller, the the creative writer, the strategic thinker, the visionary can 187 00:13:54.700 --> 00:13:58.690 do their own demos rights really well, follows up meticulously. The CRMS beautiful. 188 00:13:58.809 --> 00:14:01.370 You know, everything's just perfect. There's just not that many that you 189 00:14:01.409 --> 00:14:05.169 can hire and they're really expensive and they know who they are. They tend 190 00:14:05.169 --> 00:14:09.440 to be lone wolf's for obvious reasons. So even if you had four accounts, 191 00:14:09.879 --> 00:14:13.360 you know, like some an oracle or sap or others. Even if 192 00:14:13.440 --> 00:14:16.519 you have, you know, four accounts, but there's there's three or four 193 00:14:16.559 --> 00:14:20.200 or five stake quarders that you're working with on every deal. The principles of 194 00:14:20.279 --> 00:14:24.710 the skills based approach would apply to them as well. You're not going to 195 00:14:24.789 --> 00:14:26.870 get as much synergy from the tech side of the equation. So there's the 196 00:14:26.990 --> 00:14:31.629 text side of the equation and the skill side of the equation. They really 197 00:14:31.669 --> 00:14:35.269 go hand in hand. Okay, that make sense. That's been really you 198 00:14:35.509 --> 00:14:39.019 for insights hearing. So I'm pretty share that. So you. So if 199 00:14:39.019 --> 00:14:41.100 it's taken time to share your thoughts with our audience, which is which must 200 00:14:41.100 --> 00:14:45.139 be much appreciate it from our side. If anyone wants to connect with you 201 00:14:45.220 --> 00:14:48.700 to learn more about I be on watching talent or continue this conversation off flying 202 00:14:48.779 --> 00:14:52.700 with you directly. What's the best way to get in touch with you? 203 00:14:52.049 --> 00:14:56.289 Yeah, traditional email. My emails right on my linked in page. It's 204 00:14:56.370 --> 00:15:01.529 first out last that I be AMCOM and I'm looking to engage. I've written 205 00:15:01.529 --> 00:15:07.519 several notes myself outbound to ibum alumni that were in sales enablement here and now 206 00:15:07.679 --> 00:15:11.039 moved on to maybe a start up, and so I'm I'm aggressively seeking these 207 00:15:11.080 --> 00:15:16.279 conversations, looking for others that are disrupting their own sales model in some capacity. 208 00:15:16.600 --> 00:15:20.000 So I've had a bunch of very good conversations. Can Trading notes, 209 00:15:22.070 --> 00:15:24.909 so I'm game for that. Why Open for that? I'm actually doing a 210 00:15:24.950 --> 00:15:28.269 lot of that right now. So it's good timing. Okay, wonderful. 211 00:15:28.350 --> 00:15:33.029 Well, we'll of course circulate this and give you the platform to hopefully have 212 00:15:33.149 --> 00:15:37.100 more of those conversations. But again, many thanks for your time today. 213 00:15:37.139 --> 00:15:39.620 You and it's been great on you on the show. Awesome, thanks for 214 00:15:39.659 --> 00:15:46.419 having me. operatics has redefined the meaning of revenue generation for technology companies. 215 00:15:46.620 --> 00:15:52.570 Worldwide. While the traditional concepts of building and managing inside sales teams inhouse has 216 00:15:52.610 --> 00:15:56.210 existed for many years, companies are struggling with a lack of focus, agility 217 00:15:56.409 --> 00:16:03.009 and scale required in today's fast and complex world of enterprise technology sales. See 218 00:16:03.049 --> 00:16:10.840 How operatics can help your company accelerate pipeline at operatics dotnet. You've been listening 219 00:16:10.879 --> 00:16:15.080 to be to be revenue acceleration. To ensure that you never miss an episode, 220 00:16:15.360 --> 00:16:18.029 subscribe to the show in your favorite podcast player. Thank you so much 221 00:16:18.070 --> 00:16:19.669 for listening. Until next time,

Other Episodes

Episode

October 22, 2020 00:24:27
Episode Cover

89: How to Win at International Expansion & Outbound Sales w/ Alfie Marsh

When it comes to international expansion,outbound sales is the quickest way to generate pipeline and revenue. In this episode of B2B Revenue Acceleration, our...

Listen

Episode

November 14, 2018 00:17:21
Episode Cover

20: The Power of Business Communities w/ Sangram Vajre

Does building a community actually generate business? Sangram Vajre, co-founder and Chief Evangelist for Terminus and host of the daily #FlipMyFunnel podcast,  came on...

Listen

Episode

October 22, 2019 00:16:27
Episode Cover

62: How Sales & Marketing Teams Can Use Persona-Based Marketing w/ Sri Sundaralingam

Often, messaging is focused on a product and its features — but it shouldn’t be. Messaging should be focused on a persona, and how...

Listen