OMB Digital

Groeispurt voor je business of duurzaam groeien? Wij geloven meer in duurzame groei.
We gaan samen op zoek naar jouw verhaal om dit te vertellen aan jouw potentiële klanten.
We schakelen de slaapstand van jouw verborgen saleskansen uit met onze technologie en jouw beschikbare data. 
Wij gaan jouw onweerstaanbare communicatie boodschap verspreiden o.a. via LinkedIn waardoor klanten naar je toe komen.

Laten we connecten +31 (0)6 24 23 53 99 / tom.spoor@ombdigital.io

Sales empowerment - Connecting Customers via process, tools en services

NCOI Opleidingsgroep

Docent internet marketing, online marketing

Nationale Nederlanden

Verantwoordelijke voor projecten communicatie en sales activiteiten

Project, communicatie, sales adviseur bij diverse organisatie's zoals KPN, NN, Ministeries, VVN

Business2grow

Online marketing Strategie en social media training. Inmiddels meer dan 2400 mensen getraind in de afgelopen 10 maanden. Mensen informeren, inspireren en structuur aanbrengen op het gebied van online marketing en social media.

Online marketing ♦ social media Trainer

Ministerie van BZK

Trainer

Verantwoordelijk voor diverse (online) communicatie projecten voor de merken van KPN - Hi- Digitenne-Planet- Digitale TV.

Communicatie adviseur a.i.

De Connector voor salesgroei | LinkedIn & AI-oplossingen voor bedrijven met 10-50 FTE | Founder Joobi.io | Meer tijd voor klanten, minder gedoe

De Toekomst van Sales: Versterk jouw bedrijf met AI-gedreven sales oplossingen

Nieuwe manieren vinden om je sales-efficiëntie te verbeteren kan een uitdaging zijn in de snel veranderende markt van vandaag. Traditionele methoden schieten vaak tekort als het gaat om het leveren van consistente resultaten. Daarom kiezen vooruitstrevende bedrijven ervoor om AI en SalesTech in te zetten om een voorsprong te nemen op de concurrentie.

Bij Joobi.io zijn we gespecialiseerd in het helpen van bedrijven om het volledige potentieel van AI te benutten. Zo optimaliseren we processen, vergroten we de effectiviteit van teams en versterken we klantrelaties.

Overzicht van de Joobi AI-oplossingen:

Strategie

	•	Visie en Missie Optimalisatie:
Helpt bedrijven hun communicatie en boodschap aan te scherpen. Gebruikt Large Language Models (LLM) voor output.

Leadgeneratie

	•	LinkedIn Automation - Joobi + AI:
Automatiseert het versturen van gepersonaliseerde berichten. Gebruikt informatie van LinkedIn-profielen en blogposts. Past berichten aan op basis van doelgroep en pijnpunten.
	•	Inbound en Outbound AI calling:
Automatiseert het opvolgen van leads met telemarketing en gebruikt AI om interesse van de doelgroep te peilen.

Voorbereiding salesgesprekken

	•	Lead summary:
Verzamelt informatie over leads van bronnen zoals LinkedIn, websites en CRM. Maakt een samenvatting met gesprekstips en relevante onderwerpen.

Salesgesprekken

	•	Voice AI:
Neemt gesprekken op, zowel offline als online, en biedt opties voor samenvattingen, offertes of blogposts. Integreert de output in het CRM-systeem.
	•	AI Respons Generator:
Helpt bij het opstellen van reacties op LinkedIn-berichten. Personaliseert antwoorden op basis van profielen en reacties.

Chatbot

	•	Voice Agent:
Stelt klanten in staat om te praten en vragen te stellen. Biedt gesproken antwoorden en kan doorverbinden naar een mens.
	•	Chatbot:
Beantwoordt vragen 24/7 met informatie van de website en integreert met het CRM voor naadloze communicatie.

Content

	•	RSS Content Aggregator:
Verzamelt content van relevante websites en creëert blog- en LinkedIn-posts op basis van verzamelde informatie.

Deze tools helpen bij het stroomlijnen van werk- en salesprocessen, recruitment, het verbeteren van klant- en kandidaatinteracties en het optimaliseren van contentcreatie.

Benieuwd hoe jouw organisatie efficiënter kan werken, betere resultaten kan behalen en klaar kan zijn voor de toekomst? Laten we in gesprek gaan. 

Neem vandaag nog contact met mij op:

	•	Bel mij op: +31 6 24 23 53 99
	•	Mail: tom.spoor@ombdigital.io

Tom Spoor

Co-Founder @ Omni Lab | Paid Media for B2B SaaS brands

Over the last 15+ years, I've worked for 4 VC backed SaaS companies, consulted with more than 100+, helped 1 get acquired, 1 reach unicorn status, and many more generate millions in net new revenue.

I've also seen a handful of those startups go out of business...including my own SaaS business so I know many of the mistakes. 

Over that time I've noticed that the buyer's journey has evolved. 

Today buyers have the power.

Yet, many SaaS businesses still continue to run the same programs that worked a decade ago. 

They continue to over-rely on lead gen and create friction in the buying process. 

This is pushing customer acquisition costs sky high and causing many to miss their targets. 

The way forward is to take a buyer-centric approach to creating and capturing demand. 

Buyer-centric demand gen is when your funnel aligns with how the buyer wants to learn about your company. 

It means you write in the language your buyer understands, you consider how they consume information, and when and how they want to buy. 

When you take a buyer-centric approach you generate more pipeline and revenue and an enduring brand. 

This is why we started Omni Lab.

------------------------------------------------------------

What we do for Series A to Series C SaaS startups:

→ Manage and optimize paid media across any digital channel
→ Distribute content/messaging via paid to grow pipeline and revenue
→ Build out engaging ad creative
→ Focus on optimizing the funnel based on pipeline and revenue. 

Results from SaaS companies we have worked with: 

→ Unicorn Status in 10 months
→ Grew pipeline 372% and lead > opp rate 266%
→ 1,300% increase in revenue Q3 > Q4
→ 20% increase in revenue Q over Q

If you are looking to create and capture demand via paid media, let's chat :) 

email: jonathan@omnilabconsulting.com or DM me

Jonathan Bland

When I was in sales, I remember saying these exact words: "We already knew about that lead." 

At that time, for me to value marketing, I needed marketing to bring me a deal served on a silver platter that I didn't know anything about. 

If that didn't happen, I wondered what marketing was even doing. 

I was incredibly naive...

First off, marketing's role isn't just to be a lead generator for sales; it's to position the company, develop a brand, build amazing content, guide the product roadmap, determine which channels their ICP hangs out in, conduct market research, and so much more.

The psychology of what makes buyers buy hasn't changed much, but the number of channels and the way information is consumed has changed drastically over the last 10 years. 

Sales doesn't hold as much power over information anymore. 

That information is freely available via a Google search, chat with an LLM, or chat with a friend. 

And they are waiting longer and longer to reach out to sales. 

I don't even need data to know this, just think about when you reach out to sales. I'm sure you did a fair amount of research across a few different channels before getting on a 30min call. 

Marketing and sales need to win together, not argue about who sourced the deal. 

And it starts with getting compensation and measurement right. 

I won't pretend to be the expert in that category, but I can tell you from firsthand experience that compensating sales reps more for sourcing deals leads to the behavior you see below. 

With B2B categories more crowded than ever, it requires marketing to get in front of buyers before they ever show "signals" of in-market behavior. 

They must build familiarity and trust early.

This is what makes capture channels more efficient. 

You can only tweak ad copy, landing page, and bid strategies so much until there is no juice left to squeeze. 

TL;DR It takes a team to drive revenue, marketing doesn't do that on its own, and neither does sales.

undefined undefined

Omni Lab 

Snapdata, in the business of waste and recycling analytics, was selected to participate in NUMA's Smart City Program in Paris to connect with corporate leaders like Cisco, Suez, and City of Paris Government to discuss innovative solutions for cities. Out of 200 startups, we were one of 4 selected to participate. 

Google Exchange Program Finalist - NUMA; Paris

Ogilvy partnered with IE Business School to invite IE based startups to pitch their ideas to Ogilvy to compete in getting the chance to have Ogilvy support their branding & marketing needs as well as partnering with some of their clients to bring about new innovation. 

Ogilvy Competition, Top 3 Startups

Achieving outstanding performance during the IE Business School Startup Lab. Voted best Startup to invest in. 

Investors' Award

Small team of marketing professionals at IE Business School were tasked to develop a new marketing strategy for a SMB company called DriveGum. DriveGum distributes and manufactures CPG goods like gum, granola bars, and others in Europe. We:

•	Repositioned the key value proposition.
•	Created three new strategies to grow brand recognition and improve sales.
•	Made improvements and updates to current marketing material. 




IE Business School - Marketing Case Competition, Finalists

James Madison University Austin Alumni Chapter

Managing Director

Snapdata designs and develops a range of sensors and data analytics platforms for the Internet of Things.

Primarily responsible for European operations developing a go to market strategy and doing business development in the waste and recycling sector.

Confirmed 3 letter of intents with governments and corporate size clients to test our product. 

Developed pricing matrixes for products and services, ROI for our clients, and detailed process for proof of concepts. 

Managed Google AdWords campaigns and analyzed Google Analytics to improve our messaging and positioning. 

Won four separate competitions for leading innovative technology and startup in Spain:

Venture Day Finalist, IE Business School
Investors Award, IE Business School
Google Exchange Program Finalist, NUMA 
Top 3 Startups, Ogilvy


Snapdata

Learn how Omni Lab helps 100+ B2B SaaS brands create and capture demand with paid ads.

Book a Call

Co-Founder @ Omni Lab | Paid Media for B2B SaaS brands (HIRING)

Guess which channel is the 2nd-most referenced by LLMs like ChatGPT?

Reddit?

Google?

Nope, it was LinkedIn. 

Semrush analyzed 230,000 prompts across ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, and Perplexity over a 13-week period and found a sharp shift in AI citation patterns.

In mid-September, ChatGPT dramatically reduced citations to Reddit and Wikipedia. But one domain moved in the opposite direction: LinkedIn.

LinkedIn showed a steady rise across all three platforms. Google’s AI Mode cited LinkedIn in nearly 15% of responses throughout the quarter, and both ChatGPT and Perplexity trended upward after the Reddit/Wikipedia drop. 

In some cases, LinkedIn appears to have absorbed the citation share that those domains lost.

What does that mean for you?

If LinkedIn is becoming a more trusted source across AI systems, that has strategic implications:

- Executive thought leadership may carry more distribution weight
- Expert-driven content could influence AI answers
- Authority on LinkedIn extends beyond the feed into AI-generated responses

The brands and individuals shaping conversations on LinkedIn may also be shaping how AI systems answer category-level questions.

So, for you, that means thinking about some of the big questions people ask LLMs as they relate to your product category, and creating content around them. 

Pretttyyyyy interestingggg. 

I'll drop the link below.

Semrush

I thought this post from Sam Kuehnle was pretty spot on...

This is what stood out.

"Somewhere in this process, our intuitive understanding of how buyers (and ourselves) actually behave when making purchase decisions (AKA non-linear, messy, multiple people involved) got buried under the accumulated weight of common practice (AKA linear funnels, sequenced campaigns, decision-maker is also the end user)"

I'm sure most Heads of Marketing would nod and agree to what he said, but then find themselves in the same difficult conversations with their CEO or board, trying to help them understand the impact of their investment. 

Often, we want to show data, present a logical path, and share information to convince someone that our way is the best. 

However, as Sam points out, an additional path might be to ask some really good qualitative questions to get them thinking and to come to their own conclusions. 

For example:

"Tell me about the last purchase you made for the business. What brought it to your attention? How did you go about the path to purchase?"

Or I'd even add a few more: 

- "How long did it take our best customers to decide to buy?"
- "Do we expect finance, product, or hiring decisions to show clean cause-and-effect within 30-60 days?"
- "If we only invested in activities we could perfectly measure short-term, what would we stop doing?"
- "When a prospect converts, how confident are we that the last click was the real driver? 
- "If someone hears about us on a podcast, sees a LinkedIn post, then Googles us and converts, what deserves credit?"

You don't need to ask these questions in a defensive way to prove your point. 

It's more about getting a good conversation going so that both sides understand how to make the best decision.

👏 again on this post!

This may be hard to hear, but lots of B2B content could have been answered in less than 5 seconds with a simple chat with Claude. 

Whether you gate content or not, we still see the highest engagement and form fill rates when content:

- Partners with other SME influencers in the space 
- Has proprietary data and/or unique survey data
- Contains real examples with real stories
- Is practical/specific/& tactical with POV
- Uses a different approach to promote (not just a single image ad with a picture of a book)

A few brands that are top of mind that are doing exactly that: 

1.) Dreamdata's recent report on LinkedIn Ads

What did they do:

- Partnered with other SMEs
- Put up a billboard to promote it
- Put an ad in the newspaper
- Organic posts (exposing content)
- Pull real data from all their clients

2.) Ahrefs released a report detailing a decrease in traffic and CTR 

What did they do:

- Partnered with other SMEs
- Organic posts (exposing ALL content)
- Then later promoted via TL ads
- Additional posts that break it down in short-form
- Pulled real data from all their clients

3.) Omni Lab released a LinkedIn Ads guide

What did we do:

- Partnered with other SMEs
- Organic posts (scrolled through guide in a video)
- Then later promoted via TL ads
- Additional text-based posts that break it down in short-form
- Real examples from more than 10+ B2B SaaS brands

Next time you hit publish, you should ask yourself if your content has some of these elements. 

It takes more time, but the result is worth it.

Most B2B brands promote content on paid social in the same way.

- A clean 1200×1200 ad
- A headline.
- A link to download the guide.

Technically fine. Strategically limited.

I saw an example from Datadog promoting an AWS Lambda cheat sheet. 

Nothing wrong with the ad itself. But it highlights a much bigger missed opportunity.

Today, buyers rarely click ads the way they used to.

Feeds are where content is consumed.

So when a brand promotes a guide, a blog, or a cheat sheet purely as a link to click, they are asking the buyer to take on all the risk:

“Is this worth my time?”

A better approach is to bring the content into the feed itself.

Instead of just promoting the asset with a single-image ad, try: 

1.) Recording a short video via Loom, walking through it.
2.) Scroll through the guide on screen (no audio, just expose the content).
3.) Post the content organically, then promote via thought leader ads

Now the ad is the content.

The buyer can start consuming it immediately without leaving the platform.

This matters because most B2B buyers are not in-market at any given moment. Their job isn’t to download whitepapers all day. They’re skimming, learning, and forming impressions long before they ever raise their hand. 

When the content lives inside the feed:

• It reduces the friction of clicking
• It builds familiarity earlier in the buying journey
• It earns attention instead of demanding it

You can still run the traditional single-image ads.

But pair them with formats that expose the content directly in-channel.

In crowded B2B categories, the goal isn’t just to capture demand.

It’s to make sure buyers already recognize your POV by the time they start looking.

P.S. All ❤️ for the Datadog team, just some thoughts on other ways to promote this piece. :)

Marketing isn’t an expense.

And most teams don’t defund marketing because they think it’s useless.

They defund it because it isn’t producing an immediate return.

- Pipeline feels thin
- Cash feels tight
- Leadership wants efficiency

So budgets get pulled back to the only thing that feels safe:

Demand capture.

- Branded search
- High-intent keywords
- Retargeting
- 3rd party in-market signals
- Bottom-of-funnel offers

Which is absolutely necessary, but inefficient on its own. 

But here’s the structural issue I continue to see across all the SaaS brands we talk to and in our portfolio. 

Most of your buyers are not in-market (no news there), and by the time they are, preferences are already forming.

When you go quiet upstream (aka out-of-market audiences), you don’t just “save money.”

You shrink future efficiency.

A few realities worth confronting:

1.) Familiarity drives conversion efficiency:

Buyers rarely choose a vendor they’ve never seen before (TrustRadius data backs this up). If your paid program only activates at the moment of intent, you’re competing late and paying more to win.

2.)  Short-term efficiency can create long-term fragility: 

Optimizing only for CPL or demo volume often narrows reach and over-indexes on a small in-market audience pools. CAC rises not because platforms are broken, but because you’re fishing in the same shrinking pond as everyone else.

3.) Silence compounds negatively:

When competitors reduce spending, attention becomes more available. Brands that maintain presence build brand preference that pays off quarters later, often when no one ties it back to the earlier investment.

4.) Momentum improves capture channels:

Broad reach and distinctive creative make search, retargeting, and direct traffic perform better. Capture becomes cheaper when a preference already exists.

The answer isn’t “never cut budget.”

It’s this:

If performance isn’t working, redesign the system.

Paid media should do three things simultaneously:

✅ Build reach across your ICP, not just signal-based audiences 
✅ Earn attention with a creative that aligns with key buying triggers and distinctive brand assets
✅ Optimize against CRM progression and revenue quality, not just platform conversions (P.S. that doesn't mean everything needs a UTM parameter)

When structured this way, marketing stops behaving like a volatile expense line.

It becomes a coherent growth system.

And in today’s market, that distinction determines whether efficiency improves over time or continues to erode quarter after quarter.

Most B2B SaaS paid programs aren’t underperforming because the team is bad at execution.

They’re underperforming because they’re built on an outdated assumption.

For years, it was rational to optimize around leads, CPL, and short-term conversion volume. 

- Channels were cheaper. 
- Categories were less crowded. 
- Intent data actually created an edge.

That environment no longer exists.

Categories are saturated. Buyers are risk-averse. Most of them are not in market. And by the time someone fills out a demo form, they’ve often already formed a preference.

If your entire paid strategy is built around capturing declared intent, you are competing late and paying a premium for it.

The issue is not that we need more tools, more data, or better optimization. 

It’s a mismatch between how programs are designed and how modern B2B buyers behave.

The shift that needs to happen is that paid media can’t just activate demand; it has to build its brand preference. 

That means:

- REACH: Optimize for comprehensive audience reach, not narrowing down the audience more and more
- ATTENTION: Earning attention through diversity of content themes that can be consumed in-feed (like this post)
- EFFICIENCY: Optimizing against CRM outcomes, not just platform-reported conversions

And a measurement approach that doesn't just measure paid media based on a UTM parameter appended to a contact, but also considers the overall efficiency of your inbound motion holistically. 

When you do this, what we continue to see from the brand we work with is: 

- Your capture channels get more efficient
- Pipeline quality improves
- Sales cycles shorten

Not because you forced more people into a funnel,  but because more buyers already knew, trusted, and remembered you when the moment arrived.

This is the difference between running campaigns and designing a growth system.

And in this competitive and noisy market, the latter is no longer optional.

Here's my experience working with Clay for the first time. 

1.) I build a table gathering data based on website visitors, then narrowed it by ICP

2.) Wow, this is freakin cool and easier than I thought

3.) I then discover "Chat with Sculptor."

4.) Wait, I can just type in what I want you to do, and you build it. Wow.

5.) Then, I want to integrate an email sequence tool that needs HTTP API access

6.) Clay says I need to upgrade, so I upgrade to Explorer

7.) Everything is working well, pushing data over, but then I realize I need to exclude leads and customers from my CRM, etc. 

8.) I went to integrate HubSpot with Clay, and it took two seconds

9.) Then I ask the Clay Sculptor to build it

10.) Then it says you need to upgrade again to Pro, $149 to $800.

There is no doubt that Clay is capable of way more than my small use case, but at this point, I was really just interested in doing this, and $800/month is a lot if you aren't using its full capability. 

It made me think about the future of pricing models being more use-case-specific or outcome-focused. 

For example, what if they simply charged you for credits used, so you only pay for what you use in the use cases you implement? 

I have no clue about the limitations of doing this, but my experience above was a bit of sticker shock for the use case. 

There was actually an interesting article about the future of SaaS pricing models that I'll comment on below. 

I'm still l learning, but maybe someone has some thoughts on the above.

This B2B SaaS brand saw a spike in cost per SQL from June to August, followed by stabilization in September of 2025. Let's analyze what happened and why. 👇

The graph below shows that the cost per SQL spiked mid-year (May-Aug), which would set off alarm bells for anyone (even me).

Often, the immediate reaction most teams have in that moment is to start pulling levers, cutting budgets, restructuring campaigns, swapping targeting, and overhauling bidding.

Or worse, they have AI automations that pause keywords/campaigns based on arbitrary cost-per-SQL thresholds (seems smart, but can cause more damage than you think)

We instead took a more pragmatic and slow approach to figuring out what might be happening. 

"slow and incremental" are very important here. 

Here's the systematic approach our team took: 

- Reviewed if we are appearing for the right search terms
- Reviewed budget allocation across best/worst performing keywords in SQL
- Reviewed CTR and text ad copy to ensure benchmarks are met
- Reviewed landing pages to ensure strong alignment with ad group
- And a few other technical settings

After completing that analysis, we found literally no event change (channel-wise) that would've led to the spike. 

Zero. 

Then we reviewed historical data from the year prior (albeit campaign mix/budget was very different) and found that a similar spike occurred. 

We determined that it was a demand fluctuation, with the lull primarily driven by a lower conversion rate in the summer months. 

We spent time talking with the VP of Demand Gen, step by step, about what we were seeing, so we could communicate it to her CEO and set expectations.

Fast forward to August, and we started to see a huge decrease in cost per SQL. 

While regular maintenance was happening on the account during June-August, NO big changes were made. 

It wasn't until September that we started broadening targeting on phrase match (a match type in paid search) that we saw even more improvement in conversion rate (to SQL creation).

What's the lesson?

Demand isn't a straight line, and it isn't always a 'we need to optimize better' issue. 

It is correct for you to question results, evaluate your channel mix, and reconsider what you are doing. 

It would be irresponsible not to. 

But, if you can take away one thing from this post, it's 

- Be systematic in how you evaluate a problem
- Be slow and incremental
- Don't pull too many levers at once to avoid shocking performance

Cheers :)

If you are still running paid social like the left side of this graph, take 3 minutes and read this post. 👇

First off, I'd bet most marketers want to run paid social like the right side, but they run into internal problems justifying the budget. 

Paid media has been ingrained in every executive's mind as a "spend $1, get $3" for years. 

If it doesn't convert, doesn't show direct ROI, and doesn't append a UTM parameter to a contact, then it must not be working. 

It's the reason why you spend more of your budget on Google Ads. 

However, social channels operate very differently from search channels, as I'm sure you would agree. 

People come to search channels to:
- Compare products
- Expand the list of vendors for an evaluation
- Do research on new tools to solve x problem
- Learn something new or answer a question

People come to social channels to: 
- Look for a job
- Waste time between meetings
- Learn something new
- Network with peers

If you agree with that, then the question you should be asking your CEO/Exec team is: if those are the reasons people go to a social channel, shouldn't we align our strategy with that? 

Or ask them, "Why do you spend time on LinkedIn, Meta, Reddit, etc.?"

I'd be surprised if they say, "I come to click on ads for high-ticket SaaS products."

For years and still today, paid social continues to be run as a capture-only channel with:

- Narrow targeting
- In-market audiences
- One-off ads
- Platform-reported conversions
- Gated assets

It worked when categories were less crowded, and buyers were easier to convert.

That environment no longer exists.

Today’s buyers are risk-averse, spend most of their time out of market, and form preferences before they ever click a demo ad. 

....take a breath and think for 10 seconds about the last product you bought.....

And there is even more free/ungated content on the web, thanks to 3 big LLMs to do research before ever contacting sales. 

The shift is not about abandoning performance. It is about redesigning the system.

Many of the SaaS brands we are working with are changing the way they run paid social by: 

- Building brand preference across your ICP before the buying moment
- Broadening reach so your brand is familiar with when intent appears
- Developing distinct content themes, not random tests
- Blending CRM data with blended efficiency gains from organic, direct, and brand search traffic. 
- Optimizing for in-channel consumption to earn attention first

Paid social is your "brand megaphone," not just your click on my ad and book a demo channel. 

When paid social is structured around attention, reach, and efficiency, capture becomes cheaper because preference already exists.

You should start to see the share of search increase, brand traffic/conversion increase, and your overall funnel become more efficient. 

It doesn't happen overnight, and it doesn't mean abandoning your entire strategy; it means slowly adapting it to how buyers consume and build trust.

If Google/Bing Ads shut down tomorrow, where would you reallocate that budget and why?

Events? 
Paid social?
Community?
New program you have never had budget for? 

I know it’s a big line item for any serious mid-market SaaS brand.

I thought this post from Peep Laja was really interesting and reminded me why we win as a TEAM, not as a department or channel. 

In this survey, the sales presentation and demo were the second-most important factors for CFOs evaluating new products. 

This is exactly why April Dunford wrote Sales Pitch, and why it’s so important that ALL teams work together to close a deal.

For example, teams often want to know the ROI of a specific channel:
“Is Google Ads profitable for us?”

That question is reasonable, but it often overstates the amount of control a channel actually has.

Google Ads is simply a mechanism for directing quality traffic to your website, either indirectly (view-through) or directly (click-through).

That's it, nothing more. 

It doesn’t position the product, run the demo, handle objections, or ultimately close the deal.

The success of your investment in Google (or any channel, paid or not) means all other teams need to work together to bring a deal to a close. 

Focus on what you can control at each stage of the buyer journey, make tweaks, and then evaluate performance holistically.

This is slightly dated, but LinkedIn late last year showed that 94% of marketers agreed that trust is even more key to success. 

Basically, everyone agrees..., but how we get there is a bit different for everyone. 

I asked Google to summarize what trust is, and it said....

"a willingness to accept vulnerability based on the expectation that another person, system, or outcome will behave reliably and not harm your interests."

And then it made me think more about how you operationalize that, what are the questions I would have when I'm about to work with someone? 

I ask myself: 

1.) Can they do what they claim?
2.) Will they do it consistently over time?
3.) Are they acting in my general interests?
4.) Am I already familiar with them?
5.) Who else trusts them that I trust?

A lot of those questions are answered before someone comes in-market and even considers a product. 

Dreamdata has also backed that up with its most recent report, which shows that buyers are waiting even longer to reach out to sales. 

So then, how does one earn trust, and how does one create a system for building trust?

The brands that are doing well in our portfolio are:

✅ Leveraging video (selfies, hard takes, narrative-based content), not stale product demos 

✅ Social proof in the form of quotes, case studies, real screenshots of results, or real takes from actual clients via organic posts on LinkedIn. 

✅ Consistent, always on campaigns that remind people who you are, what you do, and the problems you solve

✅ Partnerships with influencers to steal trust from their audience and build more authority with their own brand

✅ Taking a stance and expressing their POV on how they frame the problem and solve it. 

✅ Ensuring content expresses a strong POV, is practical, leverages proprietary data, and shares real examples and stories. 

Measuring trust in a dashboard isn't going to happen, but proxy metrics can help, such as:

- Engagement rate
- Views/dwell time
- Brand sentiment (e.g., call recordings)
- Gut feel from conversations with prospective customers
- And ultimately, people reaching out to you (demos/trials, etc.)

I really think more brands need to slow down their roll in scaling content with AI and ensure that what they put out there builds trust. 

I'll drop the link to this below if you haven't seen it.

Imagine if the first thing humans asked the aliens in Arrival was:

“Want a demo?”

It would feel absurd.

But that’s how a lot of B2B marketing behaves.

The moment someone discovers a company, the message is immediate:

Book a demo.
Talk to sales.
Start a trial.

The problem is that most buyers aren’t ready for that conversation yet.

- They’re still learning about the problem.
- Still trying to understand the different approaches.
- Still deciding which companies even deserve a spot on their shortlist.

or 

- They simply don't have a budget, yet
- They already want to work with you, but they are in a long-term contract
- There are other competing priorities, you're not top on the list

Yet many marketing programs treat every interaction like a buying moment.

So instead of building familiarity and trust, the experience jumps straight to a sales ask.

And when you skip that step, you’re asking buyers to commit before they’ve had a chance to form an opinion.

The companies that consistently win rarely rush the demo.

They focus first on becoming known, understood, and credible.

So that when a buying moment does arrive…

The conversation doesn’t start from zero.

And the best part is, sometimes the best content that doesn't explicitly ask someone for a demo is the content that converts best.

Emily Kramer over at MKT1 just put out another banger of a newsletter titled "How to Build Your Marketing Strategy in Claude." 

As I was reading it, it reminded me again how important it is to provide an LLM with enough context to improve its output.

Marketing creates amazing presentations and documents containing positioning, personas, ICP, value props, JBTD, strategy, etc. 

But often those docs get lost somewhere in GDrive...

This, no doubt, has been an issue for us in the past. 

However, if you store that data, structure it into clear priorities and constraints, and consistently inject it into prompts, LLM output improves drastically

We have a "similar" process at Omni Lab where we: 

1.) Create an updatable data store 
- ICP
- Positioning
- Strategic Narrative
- Buying Triggers
- Tone
- and more

2. Then, standardized prompt templates that use that data store as reference material to ensure alignment with our brand. 

3.) Then feeds outputs and learnings back into the system (updating prompts, refining strategy fields, or improving inputs over time).

The biggest unlock isn’t just giving the LLM more context, it’s giving it constraints (what to prioritize, what to ignore, and how to make tradeoffs).

We can then update this whenever things change and be confident that, for predefined use cases, the outputs remain consistent and on-strategy.

Still requires good seed data and human involvement, but materially improves the back-and-forth frustration you sometimes have when an LLM just doesn't "get you". 

🙏 Appreciate the partnership, ya'll, and if you haven't subscribed, go to mkt1 and get on it!

P.S. It's tiring to keep up with everything happening in AI...every day there's a new approach, model, tool, system, blah. Props to the warriors out there who are putting in the reps and helping level us all up.

I talked to Tim Salikhov, CFA, (previous 4x VP of Finance) about the biggest issues of alignment between marketing and finance...here are 5 takeaways: 

1.)  All finance cares about is CAC and runway. How much does it cost to acquire a new customer? How long until we run out of cash? Everything else is marketing's job to figure out.

My take: This means marketing has to speak the language of finance (know your audience)

2.)  Finance's role isn't to micromanage channels or tactics. It's to ensure marketing understands the financial constraints and milestones needed for the next fundraising round. Then trust them to execute.

My take: Again, speak the language of finance and show you have a plan to meet those goals (it's not about attribution...no one cares if you meet the goal)

3.)  Set expectations upfront on time AND dollars. The magic happens when marketing says, "In 6 months, we'll know if this works. Here's the cost." Now, finance can model it, explain it to the board, and avoid surprises.

My take: Planning can and should happen with finance (and sales)... when everyone is aligned from the get-go, reporting/interpretation becomes easier. 

4.)  Surprises are the enemy. The worst conversations? When a roadmap shifts three months in without explanation. "We pivoted" isn't a plan; it's a red flag that burn rate just increased, and nobody communicated it.

My take: Pivoting is sometimes necessary...however, it's better to set expectations early on how we will interpret performance from a given channel.

5.) Compensation structures drive behavior. So structure incentives accordingly, SDRs on volume, sales on closing, and marketing on "impact".

My take: Compensation structures should be shared between marketing and sales; we win together, not in silos.

TL;DR Know your audience, align and set expectations early, and make sure you speak finance.

I know I own an agency. 
I know I post about paid media for SaaS brands. 
But that doesn't mean I just want to see posts about paid media in my feed.

I'd like to hear about all sorts of things happening in marketing, as they relate, directly or indirectly, to the topic I write most about. 

An interest-based algorithm is great in theory (it shows you more of the stuff you like to engage with), but it can really narrow down your view. 

Does anyone else feel this way?

Maybe I need to force it to go broader by directly searching for topics outside of my primary focus area.

taplio

The Battle

Tom Spoor

Jonathan Bland

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreJonathan Bland's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Tom Spoor

Jonathan Bland

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Jonathan Bland's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreJonathan Bland's LinkedIn Performance