build a better service level agreement

© Copyright SiriusDecisions. All Rights Protected and Reserved. 1

C AT E G O R Y: M A R K E T I N G S T R AT E G Y, F I E L D M A R K E T I N G

Getting b-to-b sales and marketing to align

more closely has driven even the most capable

business leaders crazy for years. Team-building

exercises, sensitivity training, group therapy;

what hasn’t been tried? While artificially devel-

oping mutual understanding and trust is defi-

nitely one method of trying to improve the rela-

tionship between the two functions, we believe

a far better way is through shared process that

leads to results.

The creation of service-level agreements

(SLAs) within a broader lead management strat-

egy is a perfect example of such process. When

properly developed, they bind a number of func-

tions to one another around a common goal:

The creation and movement of better-qualified

prospects through the demand waterfall. In this

brief, we examine two types of SLAs that are

required for effective demand creation, and

identify key components and best practices for

each.

ONE: MARKETING TO TELEPROSPECTING

The first SLA should be aligned with the time

that marketing delivers a lead to a receiving

function, most commonly teleprospecting. The

components and specifics of the marketing/

teleprospecting SLA should include:

• Program description. An overview of the

demand creation program that includes

name, a brief executive summary and its

goals. To this, add the marketing target

(e.g. vertical, sub-vertical, company size,

job function), product/solution focus area,

marketing team/lead provider and the

receiving team(s).

• Lead definition. The characteristics or cri-

teria of a lead that will be passed from mar-

keting to teleprospecting. Leads can be

defined by identifying specific attributes

(e.g. demographics, firmagraphics or

answers to appropriate BANT-related ques-

tions) or the achievement of scoring thresh-

olds/numeric values through a marketing

automation platform (MAP).

• Responsibilities/timeframes. Marketing

should set boundaries for anticipated lead

delivery timeframes, and the expected vol-

ume of leads that will be delivered in order

for the teleprospecting function to be prop-

erly prepared. Establish how leads will be

delivered (through what technologies and

in what particular format, including the

components of a prospect’s record that will

be completed), and the amount of time a

teleprospector will have to begin working a

lead. Set guidelines for how marketing will

handle rejected leads, and rules for pulling

back leads from teleprospectors that are

not processed in a timely fashion.

• Other rules. SLAs also should include

three other sets of rules that must be

agreed to by lead providers and receivers.

First, establish the reasons why the receiv-

ing function can reject a lead and thus not

be bound to work it. Keep these reasons to

a reasonable minimum: good examples

include the delivery of an incomplete or

inaccurate prospect record; a lead that has

been delivered to the wrong rep or func-

tion; a deal that is already in progress, or a

lead that has previously been disqualified.

Next are the reasons the receiving function

can disqualify a lead after working it; these

also should be in well-defined categories

(e.g. the rep could not reach the prospect

after a certain number of attempts, lack of

budget). The third set of rules should be

established to determine when a prospect

might bypass the teleprospecting function

Build a Better Service-Level Agreement

AA kkeeyy ccoommppoonneenntt ooff eeffffeeccttiivvee

lleeaadd mmaannaaggeemmeenntt iiss aa sseerriieess

ooff sseerrvviiccee--lleevveell aaggrreeeemmeennttss

((SSLLAAss)) tthhaatt cclleeaarrllyy ddeeffiinnee

sshhaarreedd pprroocceesssseess aanndd

rreessppoonnssiibbiilliittiieess

SSLLAAss sshhoouulldd ffooccuuss oonn ttwwoo kkeeyy

lleeaadd ppaasssseess;; ffrroomm mmaarrkkeettiinngg

ttoo tteelleepprroossppeeccttiinngg,, aanndd ffrroomm

tteelleepprroossppeeccttiinngg ttoo

ffiieelldd//cchhaannnneell ssaalleess

IIff yyoouurr oorrggaanniizzaattiioonn bbuuiillddss aa

pprroocceessss ffoorr cceerrttaaiinn pprroossppeeccttss

ttoo bbyyppaassss tteelleepprroossppeeccttiinngg,,

sseeppaarraattee rruulleess wwiillll nneeeedd ttoo bbee

bbuuiilltt bbeettwweeeenn mmaarrkkeettiinngg aanndd

tthhee ffiieelldd//cchhaannnneell


and be delivered directly to the field or the channel. Often referred

to as “route-around” rules, this may include leads that demonstrate

extraordinarily high scores; prospects from named/strategic

accounts; or those that explicitly indicate the desire to speak with a

sales rep. If your organization does route leads around the first line

of qualification defense, there should be a separate SLA established

with the field or channel to ensure these leads are being processed

correctly and within a desired timeframe.

TWO: TELEPROSPECTING TO SALES

The second SLA should be aligned with the time that teleprospecting

delivers a lead to the ultimate receiver, that being either a field or chan-

nel sales resource. The components and specifics of the teleprospecting/

sales SLA should include:

• Program description. Since this is simply a later stage in the same

program, map this section to the description for the previous SLA.

One exception will be that different functions are involved, and

should therefore be defined differently.

• Lead definition. Much like the previous SLA, this section lays out

the criteria that trigger a second lead handoff. Whereas the market-

ing/teleprospecting definition is increasingly being defined by the

establishment of a lead score, the second handoff is typically dom-

inated by qualification components being identified and/or verified

by a human being through actual conversation. The definition of a

lead at this stage is also commonly accompanied by a committed

next step; for example, the setting of an appointment between

prospect and field rep or channel partner.

• Responsibilities/timeframes. Similar to the first SLA, set bound-

aries for anticipated lead delivery timeframes, and the expected vol-

ume of leads that will be delivered. Establish how these leads will

be delivered, ensuring specific components of a prospect’s record

will be completed in the SFA system so that field reps and channel

partners have all they need to take the baton and run with it. Set

guidelines for the amount of time a rep or partner will have to

begin working a lead, as well as the time that will be allotted to

either promote the lead to an opportunity with anticipated dollar

value and timeframe to close, or to disqualify the lead and place it

into a lead nurturing program. Create rules for pulling back leads

that have not been promoted or disqualified back into teleprospect-

ing (a process we refer to as “passive” recycling).

• Other rules. Two out of the three other rule families set forth in

the previous SLA apply here (route-around rules drop out because

the field/channel is the last line of defense). Define the reasons why

field sales can reject a lead – similar reasons to the first SLA will

apply – as well as the eventual rules that can be used to reject a lead

once it has been worked. The creation of a concise, intuitive set of

disqualification rules will set the foundation for the other type of

recycled lead nurturing (“active”), whereby leads are pushed back

into the MAP for nurturing until circumstances and behaviors

change enough for the prospect to be submitted once again into

teleprospecting for requalification.

SLA BEST PRACTICES

Effective SLAs are not only built on the components above; those func-

tions that create them must adhere to a number of strategic watch-

words, including:

• Focus. If you want an SLA followed, keep it as concise as possi-

ble. The more nuances and exceptions that are built in means that

the functions bound by them only wind up becoming confused,

and eventually resisting the entire process out of frustration. If the

SLA component isn’t judged to be critical by both sales and market-

ing, leave it out.

• Evolution. SLAs should be living documents that are adjusted over

time based on program performance metrics, data and feedback.

For example, after a program has begun, marketing may determine

that reaching the pre-defined score threshold for passing leads to

teleprospecting isn’t feasible. In these cases, the threshold should

be adjusted downward, with teleprospecting taking on additional

qualification responsibilities.

• Enforcement. SLAs are only effective if those that are bound by

them are held responsible for following them. This requires insight

via regular reporting of key performance metrics for each involved

function, as well as agreement between leaders – usually the chief

marketing officer and the chief sales officer – on how a lack of

adherence will be addressed. If field sales reps consistently take

longer than the defined timeframe to accept leads, clear steps to

manage the problem must be defined, including conversations with

reps, alerting sales leaders, adjustment of timeframes or disciplinary

action.

• Ownership. While a variety of sales and marketing roles must be

involved in creating SLAs, it’s usually marketing and sales operations

that take responsibility for their ongoing maintenance. Marketing

and sales leaders should sign SLAs and be responsible for commu-

nicating their contents and importance to their respective teams.



THE SIRIUS DECISION

Systematic, repeatable b-to-b demand creation is much like a marriage.

The creation of a series of SLAs acknowledges the relationship that must

be forged between the two functions to drive this success, and puts

defined boundaries around what each party must commit to in order to

keep the relationship strong. Should either get cold feet and not be will-

ing to commit, we’re pretty sure both will wind up in therapy – or worse

– down the road.


build a better service level agreement

Business