I recently received a great testimonial from a client (you can read it on my LinkedIn profile).

It ended with "Wish he was my full time business development director!".

Now, whilst this is a very flattering comment (thanks, John)... I think it's completely wrong. It's wrong in the sense that for most of our clients, a full-time Business Development Director is actually the last thing that they need.

Before I explain why, let me just clarify who our clients are (this may resonate with some of you).

Our clients are typically smaller consultancies and agencies with flat structures and a high level of delivery by the principals. Sure, they'll have office support staff and also delivery augmented by associates and/or juniors, but the key attribute that they all share is that a large amount of the work is delivered by the owners or Directors of the business.

So, if that sounds like you, why shouldn't you hire a full-time Business Development Director?

Here are 3 good reasons:

1) You can't outsource the pitch. The first trap to avoid is thinking that you can get someone else to pitch for your work, such as hiring a Business Development Director. If you're providing a service which involves your personal expertise and creative input then your clients are essentially buying you. Sure, they accept that you have a team behind you for delivery but that's no substitute for knowing who runs the business.

This fact is true for all propositions which fall into the "smart brains" or "grey hairs" categories. Unless you're in a commodity market then you can't escape the reality that you should never outsource the pitch.

2) You can't afford a good one. What I mean here is that, in many cases, your business probably isn't big enough (yet) to attract the right level of talent you need. I just flipped open a marketing magazine and there are agencies advertising for a full-time Business Development Director with a £60k package. If you're a consultancy in the IT or HR space then you'll need someone who can open doors and pitch at the highest levels... an win the business. That's going to cost at least the same package if not approaching six figures.

And let's not forget, that's just the salary. Fully loaded costs will double these figures.

Now, if you've got big plans and deep pockets then don't be put off by this. However, you need to be absolutely sure that they will bring in the business otherwise this type of hire is notoriously the most expensive mistake you can make.

I find that most clients with a "Business Development Director" have essentially agreed that the role is handled by one of the founders/partners.

Which brings us to the third reason....

3) You don't need a whole one. What you need are bits of a Business Development Director. If you think about it, what does a Business Development Director do? Well, they work out the strategy, help develop marketing plans, network with prospects, make calls and open doors, keep in touch and manage the pipeline and (hopefully) land the big accounts.

In our experience, clients are excellent face-to-face and, as I stated in point 1) they are the best people to put in-front of prospects. It's logical really, since we work with clients who are actually in business, so they must be doing something right.

The parts of the whole biz dev process that they struggle with are a) getting in front of prospects and b) keeping in touch. This latter part is particularly true of clients who are closely involved with delivery.

Be honest, it's not your strong point either, right?

And, truth be told, most Business Development Directors also struggle with the former part of actually getting in front of prospects, because once they're up and running they're usually focused on managing relationships rather than hunting new business.

So the solution is simple, don't try to hire a whole Business Development Director, full or part-time. Outsource the elements that you most need support with - the prospecting and pipeline management.

For many clients, the real value we deliver comes from having someone who is nurturing those prospects until there is a real opportunity.

Labels: business development, new business agency, new business development

I recently attended Social Media 09 in London, which was a face-paced tour of social media comment, case studies and demos.

As usual at these excellent mashup event, there are always some nuggets of information which change your perceptions.

For me, a couple of speakers nailed it.

Mat Morison talked about how "social norms", rather than "business norms" are applicable within social media and Andrew Grill made the point that it's the same rules which apply to any social gathering, such as a networking event.

Now these may seem obvious, but if you look at how many people behave within social media you can see how the point isn't always grasped.

It's a bit like seeing someone at a networking event who's rushing from group to group, working the room and gathering business cards rather than engaging in meaningful conversations.

In a networking environment you'd just call them a jerk; on a linkedin group you'd call them a spammer.

Many of the speakers used a simple 3-step approach for brands using social media. I think that it's equally applicable for business development.

Firstly you listen. Next you respond. Finally you engage.

It reminds me of much of the advice about "networking" in the 90's so it makes perfect sense in the context of social media, such as a Linkedin group that you've just joined.

Listen to what's happening and wait for an opportunity to respond.

Finally, once you understand the tone of the group you can initiate a discussion.

I kind of think that if more people took this approach then every LinkedIn group wouldn't have those "featured discussions" laying down the rules.

Labels: business development, social media, social networking sites

It was interesting to read in the latest Profit Track 100 report that, in the wake of the credit crunch, strategic alliances are being seen as a strong route to profitable growth.

With the days of cheap debt behind us, companies are looking at alliances and joint-ventures as alternative strategies for rapid expansion.

There are a number examples in the report, including the Virgin credit card, an alliance between Virgin and Bank of America.

Certainly, strategic alliances are a good way of leveraging growth potential. In the case of the Virgin credit card, it now accounts for 5% of all new credit card business in the UK, just 5 years after it's launch.

As the report high-lights, with M&A transactions significantly down on last year and a third of the list having improved their earnings through acquisitions, "next year's tenth anniversary Profit Track 100 may well have a different complexion"

Labels: business development, funding, strategy

I recently posted a blog on Ecademy, "Are you a "Renaissance" Salesperson or "Coin-Operated Rep"?".

The blog looked at three different types of sales people identified by authors Mark Leslie & Charles A. Holloway in their article "The Sales Learning Curve" (excellent article by the way).

Comments on the blog evolved around the label we gives ourselves. Is it "Sales", "Business Development"... and what's the difference?

I've nearly always worked in a role with the "Sales" label. That is, I've been clearly responsible for selling directly to customers. However, when working in a management capacity, I was responsible for developing & managing indirect sales channels & partners. So, that's "business development", right?

My line on this used to be that business development is focused on growing business revenue through indirect routes, such as partnering, sales channels, joint-ventures, etc, whilst sales had the same objective but through direct customer engagement.

Today, this has become a little blurred when many companies (particularly consultancies) adopt the term "business development" to cover direct sales activity in a less, well, "sales-ey" way.

Wikipedia is always a good place to turn to. It's definition (at the time of this post) of Business Development is:

"Business Developmnet encompasses a number of techniques designed to grow an economic enterprise. Such techniques include, but are not limited to, assessments of marketing opportunities and target markets, intelligence gathering on customers and competitors, generating leads for possible sales, follow-up sales activity, formal proposal writing and business model design. Business development involves evaluating a business and then realizing its full potential, using such tools as marketing, sales, information management and customer service. For a sound company able to withstand competitors, business development never stops but is an ongoing process."

For me, this is right on the money.

That last sentence from Wikipedia sums it up for me, "for a sound company able to withstand competitors, business development never stops but is an ongoing process."

Labels: business development, sales