If you’ve ever attempted a Pinterest project, you’ve likely seen this meme. In the same way, if you’ve ever patchworked multiple technology solutions, this is probably (and unfortunately) relatable.
With more and more marketing teams getting MQL and pipeline quotas, it’s tempting to fill your tech stack to the brim. When there is a point solution for every marketing challenge, it’s easy to get a little piece of everything. If your challenge is attribution, there’s a solution for that. Predictive? Check. Data, Intent, Advertising? Check, check, check!
What this also means is that the majority of our marketing spend is allocated to technology. When trying to fill all the gaps, marketers find themselves in a tricky situation with their budget. Is depth or breadth more important?
If marketers want breadth of coverage, we typically have to sacrifice quality in favor of price. We know it may not be the best, but maybe it’s “good enough.” Consequently though, we spend the majority of our time sewing these pieces together. We become patchwork quilters, piecing different tech solutions into a Frankenstein tech stack. It puts a whole new spin on marketing being the “arts & crafts” department.
On the flip side, investing with the Ferrari means that we may be leaving holes in our marketing strategy. If you go all in with a crème de la crème target account selection tool, do you have the budget left over to actually reach those buyers? You may have the depth of coverage in a particular area, but what good does it do if the rest of your strategy is left out in the cold?
It’s an impasse, right? And it’s one marketers are all too familiar with.
The case could be made for either direction. But I’d argue that it shouldn’t even be a conversation at all.
Remember all those challenges we listed earlier? Most companies work with 3-5 different vendors to address them. In a typical Saas model, that equates to a monthly subscription of $500-$1500/month. If you’re working with five solutions, you’re probably spending upwards of $90,000/year! And this cost doesn’t even begin to cover the time, energy and training that go into implementing all this technology.
As a craft-lover, I appreciate the pride in building something from the ground up. But when the Michael’s receipt is 2-feet long, perhaps it’s time to re-evaluate. If you can one-stop shop for your marketing needs and still save money each year, why wouldn’t you?
The same mentality applies for marketers evaluating ABM solutions. While it might seem like a good idea to patch together different ABM point solutions to execute your strategy, you’ll find yourself spending your time on implementation, integration, and securing your team’s buy in with each technology. Instead of executing and iterating your strategy, you’ll find yourself piecing technology together, only to untangle it when the next point solution is brought on.
You can avoid the patchwork quilting and skip right to the results by investing in a comprehensive technology while optimizing your marketing programs. While the initial investment may be higher, you can save money by cutting down your marketing program spend.
Here is an example of what this could look like:
If a marketing program can’t predictably and reliably reach your target account list, cut it out and don’t look back. You’ll find yourself with more budget to spend—perhaps that’s on new tactics, more headcount, or—you guessed it—more robust technology.
To learn more about how to cut your spend and increase your bottom line, check out our Budgeting for ABM ebook.
We’ll send you a monthly email rounding up our best blog articles.