Upload
channelinsight
View
325
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
How do channel partners view their vendors? How do vendors view their partners? Is it a duel or a dance? How far can manufacturers see down the channel? Which incentives motivate partners and which don't? Based on a survey conducted by an independent research firm, the Silicon Valley Research Group, this eBook offers information and insights on all these questions, and more. The book provides foundational information to help with channel partner management and offers best practices for channel data management that can help you strengthen and improve your partnerships – resulting in channel sales growth.
Citation preview
Channelinsight
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
TABLE OF CONTENTS2
INTRODUCTION 3
SURVEY METHODOLOGY 5
HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE? 7
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE? 14
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END? 33
SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS 47
Channelinsight© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
3
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
INTRODUCTION
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
INTRODUCTION4
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Standing out from the crowd is a challenge for any business No less so for a manufacturer wanting to
distinguish itself among its many channel partners Fanciful marketing programs with little substance no longer cut the mustard For a manufacturer to stand as “hero” in a complex distribution channel, the first step is knowledge What works, and what doesn’t?
How do channel partners view their vendors? How far can manufacturers see down the channel to the end- customer? Which incentives motivate partners, producing revenue for both parties?This insight comes from a probing look into manufacturer/partner relationships A survey conducted by an independent
research firm, Silicon Valley Research Group, asked these questions and many more The questions were put to CEOs, officers, directors and managers of Fortune 500 and mid-size firms in the IT space, whose business depends on channel partners The results are telling
In this eBook we’ll explore what vendors and partners say about the complex dance between channel participants Some of what we learn is conventional wisdom But we also draw an unconventional conclusion—that fresh, accurate channel data can be the differentiator between a mediocre program or relationship and one that is highly profitable and mutually beneficial
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
5
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
SURVEY METHODOLOGY6
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
The survey from which our conclusions are drawn included a total of 295 Fortune 500 manufacturing companies,
and 195 of their U S channel partners All the companies were in the high tech industry, with average annual revenue of $848M and staffs averaging 5,859 people Companies included an even mix of large and mid-size business-to-business firms, with sales, marketing, and channel operations throughout the Americas, Europe/Africa/Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region Over half the companies derived more than 60% of their revenue from channel partners Channel partners included a mix of Value Added Resellers (VARs), distributors, and direct marketing retailers These firms averaged $125M in revenue and 75 employees They sold systems, sub-systems, software, and components, and their vendors included companies such as HP, Cisco, Microsoft, IBM, Dell, and Apple
The survey was conducted among owners, presidents, CEOs, vice presidents, directors, and managers, and included both qualitative and quantitative methods Qualitative, in-depth interviews provided insight and commentary, while the quantitative methodology provided results that can be projected to the larger population The margin of error is +/- 9 7% at the 95% confidence level and +/- 8 1% at the 90% confidence level
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE?
7
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE?8
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
I s the relationship a duel? A dance? Or worse yet, is the manufacturer getting the cold shoulder?
As noted in the survey methodology section, more than half the companies surveyed realize more than 60% of their revenue from their channel partners That’s a nice chunk of change So it behooves manufacturers to court those partners who put forth the greatest effort and generate the best results
But which ones are they?
HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE?9
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
That’s the essential question that an effective channel data management program can answer First, however, let’s look at what the survey says about the expectations that manufacturers and channel partners have regarding each other
There are certain characteristics that manufacturers expect from channel partners as a given:
• Technical Expertise
• Customer Relationships
• Local Market Knowledge
Likewise, partners have their own set of expectations from manufacturers:
• Sales Leads and Best Practices
• Sales/Marketing Support
• Technical and Sales Training
• Market Research
“Manufacturers need be upfront, provide a timeline and then deliver on what is promised” – VAR Manager
HOW TO CONTRIBUTE TO PARTNER SUCCESS10
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
The survey data took a deeper dive into the traits that partners consider important and effective to be successful These traits are listed in Table 1 below
WHAT IS IMPORTANT?
High Quality Products
Vendor Reputation in Marketplace
Competitive Pricing
Sales/Incentive Tracking/Reporting
Good Marketing Support Sales Training and/or Sales
Materials Good Incentive Programs
Technical Training
Competitive Benchmarking Reports
Breadth of Product Line
Face Time with Vendor Personnel
Sales Leads
Social Media
WHAT IS EFFECTIVE?
High Quality Products
Vendor Reputation in Marketplace
Competitive Pricing
Sales/Incentive Tracking/Reporting
Face Time with Vendor Personnel
Breadth of Product Line
Technical Training
Sales Training and/or Sales Materials
Good Marketing Support
Sales Leads
Good Incentive Programs
Social Media
Competitive Benchmarking Reports
Table 1
HOW WELL DO MANUFACTURERS SUPPORT THEIR PARTNERS?11
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
When asked how well manufacturers support their partners (see Fig 1), some activities and traits scored highly both in importance and ability to motivate, including:
• High Quality Products
• Vendor Reputation in Marketplace
• Competitive Pricing
Good tracking/reporting ability held the middle ground, followed by:
• Sales Training
• Marketing Support
• Good Incentive Programs
Social media was the outlier, ranking near the bottom in both importance and performance However social media is on the rise with savvy B2B buyers who are turning to search and social media for business recommendations
HOW WELL DO MANUFACTURERS SUPPORT THEIR PARTNERS?12
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
7,80
7,90
8,00
8,10
8,20
8,30
8,40
8,50
7,70 7,80 7,90 8,00 8,10 8,20 8,30 8,40 8,50 8,60
PERF
ORM
AN
CE
IMPORTANCE
CompetitiveBenchmarking
High/Quality Products
Vendor Reputation
CompetitivePricing
Good IncentivePrograms
Face Time
Social Media
Tracking/Reporting
Marketing Support
Product LineBreadth
Leads
Sales Training
Tech Training
Figure 1
HOW WELL DO MANUFACTURERS SUPPORT THEIR PARTNERS?13
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
For a manufacturer, traits such as product quality, company reputation, and competitive pricing are what it takes to get into and stay in the game Going beyond these traits, best practice in creating an effective manufacturer/partner relationship involves setting clear expectations, aligning goals, and setting up rules for communicating regularly
As Debra Delaney, President and CEO at CCI, states in her post “What Makes a Partnership Work?” from her blog Channel
Marketing Strategies for Success, “What does matter is that you have mutual respect, and that you support each other’s goals and values… Best practice is to establish simple rules around how often you communicate to make sure you are staying on track and not drifting apart …Equally important is establishing how each partner will be rewarded ”
And that brings us to the issue of sales incentive programs
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?
14
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?15
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
“The most effective sales incentive program helps support a good product and vendor, and as a result, increases sales ” – Executive Director, Distributor
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?16
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
When was the last time a channel partner drooled over your incentive program?
The sad fact is that many sales incentive programs are largely ineffective The survey probed both manufacturers and partners to determine what works and what doesn’t when it comes to sales incentives Table 2 describes which incentive programs rank most important among partners
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?17
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Which Incentive Programs Are Important to Partners?
WHAT IS MOTIVATING?
Big deal discounts
Performance based
MDF
Short-term price-based
SPIF
Volume rebates
Non-payment incentive
WHAT IS EFFECTIVE?
Performance based
Big deal discount
Volume rebates
Short-term price-based
SPIF
Non-payment incentive
MDF
Table 2
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?18
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
In the qualitative research, partners had a mouthful to say to manufacturers about sales incentive programs Here are some dos and don’ts gleaned from these interviews:
What To Do:
We love it when you provide cash incentives Cash is king The more cash the better
• Create progressive incentives
• Make goals realistic and attainable
• Pay consistently and quickly
• Communicate program details and success tips clearly and simply
• Respond in a timely way to calls and short shipping times
What NOT To Do:
• Don’t make incentives too small
• Don’t overlook the need to market the program
• Don’t create confusion with complexity
• Don’t rely on prizes They are not universally appealing and present tax complications
• Don’t ignore outstanding partner successes Doing so will hamper participation in future programs
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?19
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Do Sales incentive Programs Really Increase Sales? When done properly, the answer is yes You can change partner behavior with a well-designed program that incorporates the dos and don’ts noted above, especially these:
• Use cash, not prizes
• KISS (Keep It Super Simple)
• Clearly communicate program details and success tips
• Automate to ensure fast and accurate payments
Which Incentive Programs Work Best?The survey probed respondents about program effectiveness by type (see Figure 2) Channel partners rated the following types of programs as most effective:
• Performance Based
• Big Deal Discounts
• Volume Rebates
The programs most likely to motivate partners included the following:
• Big Deal Discounts
• Performance Based
• Market Development Funds (MDF)
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?20
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
7,70
7,80
7,90
8,00
8,10
8,20
8,30
8,40
7,60 7,70 7,80 7,90 8,00 8,10 8,20 8,30 8,40
MO
ST E
FFEC
TIV
E
LIKELY TO MOTIVATE
MDF
SPIF
Volume Rebates
Non-payment programs
PerformanceBased
Big DealDiscounts
Figure 2 What kind of incentive programs are effective?
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?21
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
“We want MDF funds that we can use for custom programs ” – Manager, Retailer
SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?22
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Manufacturers were also asked to rank their rebate programs on the basis of four criteria (see Figure 3) 93% of manufacturers rebate programs are performance driven
Manufacturers favored performance based programs, for example, those using metrics such as year-over-year growth or sales quotas An example of an objective based program is one using new customer acquisition as a metric Programs that allocate MDFs are an example of activity-based programs, while a ranking system such as Platinum/Gold/Silver describes a program based plan
93%89% 89%
86%
80%
85%
90%
95%Figure 3
Perfo
rmance
Objectiv
e
Activity
Progra
m
PERFORMANCE METRICS23
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
When manufacturers were asked how many of their incentive programs met or exceeded their revenue performance goals, 86% said that “All, Most, or Some” of their programs did so (Fig 4) However, Only 28% could answer “All or Most ”
Figure 4 86% of incentive programs meet or exceed incentive goals.
4%
24%
58%
9%6%
How many of your incentive programsmeet or exceed revenue performance goals?
All
Most
Some
Few
None
SALES INCENTIVES MEAN REVENUE AND PROFIT24
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
The survey indicates that sales incentives programs contribute significantly to channel partners’ sales and profits Incentives can boost both these metrics as high as 40 percent (see Figure 5) In fact, channel partners depend on various types of incentive programs for revenue (see Figure 6)
Figure 5
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Part
ne
rs
Incremental Sales
Incentives Can Boost Sales By 40%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Part
ne
rs
Incremental Pro�t
Incentives Can Add 40% To Partner Pro�ts
SALES INCENTIVES MEAN REVENUE AND PROFIT25
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Channel partners rely significantly on incentive programs from the manufacturer for revenue
* Average Impact on Revenue
Back-end Rebates 18.4%
Revenue Rebates 17.3%
MDF 16.6%
Deal Reg 14.8%
Co-Op 14.0%
Figure 6
LATE PAYMENTS CAN DAMAGE THE RELATIONSHIP26
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Partners want prompt and accurate payment for fulfilling their end of the bargain in an incentive program Yet only 7% of manufacturers pay incentives in less than 14 days (see Figure 7) Additionally, only 40% of manufacturers calculate and process incentive payments automatically all or most of the time
Figure 7
8%
32%
27%
16%
17%
What percent of incentive payments are calculated
and processed automatically?
All
Most
Some
Few
None0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100110120
# R
esp
on
de
nts
# of Days to Pay
How many days does it take to process and pay partner incentives?
7% of manufacturers pay incentives in under 14 Days
LATE PAYMENTS CAN DAMAGE THE RELATIONSHIP27
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Resellers are likely to remember late payments And they may perceive “late” differently than the vendor because of the time difference between claim submission and payment For example, if it takes 45 days to get a claim submitted and processed, and another 45 days before that claim is paid, that’s 90 days In the reseller’s mind, that’s a late payment, which may feel like a burr under the saddle of the relationship
AVOIDING INCENTIVE OVERPAYMENT28
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
The survey found that respondents run an average of 21 channel incentive programs annually, costing on average 11% of their annual channel revenue (see Figure 8) Among survey respondents, this figure amounts to $31,800,000 The survey also found that 6% of channel incentives were believed to be overpayments (see Figure 8), costing vendors approximately $2 1M
Figure 8 Average Incentive overpayment is 6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
0 - 9
10 -
19
20 -
29
30 -
39
40 -
49
50 -
59
60 -
69
70 -
79
80+
0 - 4
5 - 9
10 -
14
15 -
19
20 -
24
25 -
29
30 -
34
35 -
40
% R
esp
on
de
nts
% of channel incentives believed to be overpayments
Average 6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
% R
esp
on
de
nts
Incentives spend as % of channel revenue
Average 11%
AVOIDING INCENTIVE OVERPAYMENT29
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
These survey results indicate that an otherwise successful incentive program could be overshadowed by a number of administrative problems, such as:
• Slow manual processes
• Late program analysis
• Calculation inaccuracies
The results further emphasize the need for a fully automated system to gather timely, accurate, and reliable data to manage incentive programs effectively
• Program abuses
• Duplicate claims
• Partner frustration due to slow payments
IMPORTANCE OF INCENTIVE PROGRAMS30
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
How do manufacturers know what they are getting out of their incentive programs? The survey indicates that 38% of manufacturers calculate ROI on their incentive spend (see Figure 9)
38%
52%
72% 73%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Calculate ROI onincentive spend
Test programsbefore launch
Pay on NET Revenue
Required to submit claims
Are You Getting the Most Out of Your Channel Incentive Programs?
Figure 9 38% of manufacturers calculate ROI on Incentive Spend
IMPORTANCE OF INCENTIVE PROGRAMS31
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
When asked about the importance of various criteria relating to their incentive programs, respondents rated the following as somewhat or very important (see Figure 10):
• Testing and modeling of incentive programs before launching (64 7%)
• Real-time visibility into the performance of incentive programs (81 4%)
• Ability to compare performance against pre-set program goals (85 3%)
• Identification of over/under performing incentive programs (78 4%)
• Speed of incentive payment (64 7%)
IMPORTANCE OF INCENTIVE PROGRAMS32
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
However, only 34% of respondents on average were somewhat or very satisfied with their ability to meet these criteria This discrepancy between importance and satisfaction spells opportunity for manufacturers who can put automated information systems into place to improve satisfaction levels
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
4,5
5,0
1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0
Importance
Satisfaction
Testing and modelingof incentive programsbefore launching.
Real-‐time visibility into incentive performance
Compare performanceagainst program goals
Identify over/underperforming programs
Rapid incentivepayment
Figure 10 Incentive Programs - All Respondents
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?
33
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?34
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Preposterous! That’s how the idea of a tunnel under the English Channel was first received It’s also the way some manufacturers may think about their ability to see down the sales funnel to the ultimate end-customer
Survey respondents were asked about their ability to identify the end-customer in their indirect sales channel, as well as market segmentation data concerning that end-use customer (see Figure 11)
Figure 11 Only 34% of Manufacturers have actionable-end customer data
39%
28%
22%
6%
4%
Can you identify the end-customer in your indirect sales?
Always
Usually
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Always
Usually
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
18%
33%34%
10%
5%
Can you identify the end-customer market segmentation in your indirect sales?
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?35
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
From the 67% of respondents who reported that they can “Usually or Always” identify the end-customer, 51% of those can usually or always identify the end-customer market segment (see Figure 11)
This means only 34% of manufacturers have actionable end-customer data, meaning the ability to know not only who made the purchase, but also what was purchased and where
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?36
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Among respondents, 87% were confident in their ability to identify their channel revenue by partner type However, 54% could not segment their channel partners by the market segments they serve (see Figure 12)
54%33%
8%2%
4%
Can you segment your indirect sales revenue by channel partner type?
Always
Usually
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Always
Usually
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Can you organize your channel partners by the segments they serve?
Companysize
Vertical market
Figure 12 54% of Manufacturers know where their partners are, but do not know who they serve.
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?37
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
As to the source of their information, manufacturers rely heavily on self-reporting or their own internal research to identify end-customers (See Figure 13)
57% 54%
28%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Internal team research End-customer self-description
3rd party service
What is your source for end-customer segmentation information?
Figure 13 54% of manufacturers rely heavily on self-reporting & 57% on costly internal research to identify end-customers
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?38
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Given the variety and complex nature of today’s sales incentive and rebate programs, and the millions of dollars being paid out to channel partners, manufacturers cannot afford to rely on partial or inaccurate data Nor can they afford the cost of manually processing data, which leads to problems such as the following:
• Calculation inaccuracies
• Resource intensive claims processing
• Incentive program fraud and abuses
• Inability to adjust course while a program is underway
• Inability to guarantee accuracy when paying earned rebates or MDFs to partners
• Inability to ensure timely payments to partners
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?39
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Best practice dictates an automated data gathering system that ensures accuracy, timeliness, and transparency for both vendor and partner
74%
61%
43%
24%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Channel partner self-description
Internal teamresearch
POS transaction 3rd party service
What is your source for channel partner segmentation information?
Figure 14 43% rely on POS from the partner & 24% from a 3rd party
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?40
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
For channel partner segmentation data, 74% of manufacturers rely on self-description by channel partners
Also, 43% of manufacturers depend on channel partners for point-of-sale (POS) transaction data (see figure 14)
Traditionally, the manual processing of claims and rebates has placed a huge burden on the partner To claim benefits, the partner must track sales and submit claims with proof of performance
The manufacturer must then manually verify these claims This often leads to requests for more information and delays before claims are finally paid out
THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?41
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Best practice in gathering POS data to support incentive programs calls for an automated approach that can accomplish the following:
• Automatically evaluate POS data to determine which transactions meet eligibility requirements for each rebate program
• Automatically calculate rebates across all programs
• Automatically process claims without the need for partners to submit paperwork
• Automatically eliminate errors that are inherent in manual processing
• Eliminate the need for “shadow” accounting by channel partners, leading to improved relations
Automation ultimately leads to reduced costs by eliminating overpayments and mistakes, and by reducing administrative costs The result: more dollars available for programs
PARTNER SEGMENTATION AND TIERING42
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
What do manufacturers think about the value of tiering or classifying channel partners? On average, 66% considered end-customer and partner segmentation issues as “Important or Very Important” (Figure 15)
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0
Importance
Satisfaction
Compare end-customersegment growth toindustry benchmarks
Target incentive programs to speci�c end-customer segments
Determine optimal partner coverage by market segment
Prioritze channel partners to drop
Figure 15 Partner Tiering – All Respondents
PARTNER SEGMENTATION AND TIERING43
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Following are the reasons that manufacturers value tiering:
• Prioritize channel partners to invest in (47%)
• Prioritize channel partners to retain (46%)
• Prioritize channel partners to drop (40%)
• Determine optimal partner coverage by market segment (42%)
• Target incentive programs to reach specific end-customer segments (31%)
• Compare end-customer segment growth to industry benchmarks (29%)
However, only 39% of respondents on average were somewhat or very satisfied with their ability to do so
PARTNER SEGMENTATION AND TIERING44
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Craig DeWolf also notes: “Assuming you have a means for measuring performance at the partner level, you have the basis for your partner scorecards ”
In other words, once criteria are established, measurement is the key Here again, best practice calls for an automated system to gather the needed data reliably, accurately, and in a timely fashion
PARTNER SCORECARDS45
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Setting up a partner scorecard is a best practice that can address many if not all the reasons noted above
What goes onto the scorecard depends entirely on the nature of the manufacturer’s business and that of the channel partners
According to CCI Global Channel Management, below are the top ten scorecard metrics:
1 Total Sales Revenue
2 Technology Expertise
3 Operational Efficiency
4 Mindshare
5 Sales Metrics
1 Current Revenue Model
2 Vertical Expertise
3 Company Health
4 Business Plan
5 End-User Satisfaction
For more information on Scorecarding, please see: Key Scorecarding Practices for Channel Success | Top 10 Scorecarding Metrics”
PARTNER SCORECARDS46
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Some basic information to consider is provided in a post by Craig DeWolf entitled “Creating Partner Scorecards” from the CCI blog, Channel Marketing Strategies for Success His list includes the following criteria:
• Minimum number of new deals registered per year (per sales rep)
• Utilization rate for Co-op/MDF spending
• Close/Win ratio of all deals registered
• Average time to close for all deals
• Close/Win ratio for all leads distributed to the partner
• Minimum attachment rates for specific products or service packs
• Year-over-year revenue growth
• Support calls received, or received without escalation
• Average gross margin per sale
• Average deal size/value
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
47
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO
ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP
SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS48
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
Following is a summary of highlights from the research regarding channel partner and end-customer segmentation:
• Only 34% have actionable end-customer data
• 54% rely on self-reporting for identification of partners and end-customers
• 87% can always or usually segment their channel revenue by partner type
• 54% cannot identify partner market segments
• 66% believe it is important, or very important, to use partner and end-customer data in planning and decision-making
• Only 39% are somewhat or very satisfied with the data available
Regarding incentive programs, these highlights emerge:
• 93% of Rebate Programs are performance-based
• 38% calculate ROI on incentive spend
• Fewer than 7% pay rebates in less than 14 days
• 6% of incentives are overpaid
• 75% consider incentive program Best Practices to be important or very important
• 33% are somewhat or very satisfied with incentive program Best Practices implementation
BEST PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS49
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
For Partner Tiering
• Develop reliable end-customer segmentation data
• Segment resellers based on POS transaction data
• Use segmentation to prioritize partners to invest in
• Compare end-customer sales to industry benchmark
• Target incentive programs to specific end-customer segments
• Determine optimal partner coverage by market segment
• Prioritize channel partners to drop
• Prioritize channel partners to retain
For Incentive Programs
• Calculate ROI on incentive spend
• Speed incentive payments
• Validate accuracy of incentive payments
• Gain real-time visibility into incentive program performance
• Identify over/under performing programs
• Compare performance against program goals
• Test and model incentive programs before launch
For Both
• Rate your importance and satisfaction for each practice on a scale from 1 – 5:
• Importance Scale: 1 Very Unimportant; 5 Very Important
• Satisfaction Scale: 1 Very Dissatisfied; 5 Very Satisfied
MOVING FORWARD50
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
This independent survey sheds invaluable light on the current state of affairs between manufacturers and their channel partners in the high-tech arena One might reasonably assume that similar results could be derived from vendors and resellers in other industry segments
One insight gleaned from the survey is that respondents seem aware of best practices regarding sales incentives and partner segmentation, but don’t always have the means to practice them! Satisfaction levels lag behind performance on a number of criteria The antidote: fast, accurate, timely, reliable channel data to help manufacturers better manage and enhance their partner relationships
CLOSING NOTES51
© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential
The content presented in this eBook is intended to provide foundational information to help with channel partner management, as well as provide best practices for channel data management
To assist your effort further, this information can be supplemented by other best practice white papers offered by Channelinsight including:
1 Best Practices in Channel Partner Data Collection
2 Best Practices for Using Data To Drive Channel Sales Growth
3 Best Practice in Channel Point-of-Sale for Timely Incentive Rebates
Additional reference materials may be found at www.channelinsight.com
About Channelinsight
Channelinsight the industry leader and pioneer in channel data management, delivering a cloud-based application and enablement services provides manufacturers with visibility into every partner and every end-customer in every transaction, in real time – allowing them to gain the insight necessary to drive sales and optimize inventory Channelinsight collects “raw” POS and inventory data from tens of thousands of channel partners globally, and processes over $120 billion in channel sales transactions annually Customers benefiting from this 7x24x365 solution include: HP, TE Connectivity, AMD, Sharp Electronics, Microsoft, Smart Technologies and more Channelinsight is backed by Rho Ventures, Sequel Venture Partners and Vedanta Capital, and is headquartered in Denver, CO with offices in Palo Alto, CA, as well as globally
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
1875 Lawrence Street, Suite 1200Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303-293-0212 855-5-Ci-DataFax: 303-293-0213
Email: [email protected]: www channelinsight.com
Channelinsight