42DM

Your lead scoring is broken. Here's the model that predicts revenue with 87% accuracy. Most B2B companies score leads like it's 2015. ┣ Downloaded whitepaper: +10 points ┣ Attended webinar: +15 points ┗ Opened email: +5 points Meanwhile, 73% of these "hot" leads never convert. Here's what we discovered after analyzing 10,000+ B2B leads: The leads scoring highest in traditional systems aren't buyers. They're information collectors. They download everything. Open every email. Click every link. But when sales calls? ↳ "Just doing research." ↳ "Not ready yet." ↳ "Send me more info." The leads that DO convert show completely different signals: They don't just visit your pricing page. They spend 8 minutes there, come back twice more that week, then search "[competitor] vs [your company]." They're not reading blog posts. They're calculating ROI and researching implementation. Activity doesn't equal intent. And that's where most scoring models fall apart. We rebuilt lead scoring from the ground up. Instead of rewarding every action equally, we weighted four factors based on what actually predicts revenue: ┣ Intent signals (40%) - someone searching "implementation" is closer to buying than someone downloading an ebook ┣ Behavioral depth (30%) - how someone engages tells you more than what they engage with ┣ Firmographic fit (20%) - perfect ICP match or bust ┗ Engagement quality (10%) - quality of interaction matters The framework is simple. The impact isn't. We map every lead to one of four tiers: ┣ 90-100 points → Sales gets them same-day ┣ 70-89 points → Automated nurture + retargeting ┣ 50-69 points → Educational content track ┗ Below 50 → Long-term relationship building No more dumping mediocre leads on sales and wondering why they don't follow up. Results after 6 months: ┣ Sales acceptance rate: +156% ┣ Sales cycle length: -41% ┗ Lead-to-customer rate: +73% The biggest shift wasn't the scoring model. It was the mindset. 🛑 Stop measuring marketing by MQL volume. ✔️ Start measuring it by how many MQLs sales actually wants to talk to. Your automation platform will happily score 500 leads as "hot" this month. But if sales only accepts 50, you don't have a volume problem. You have a scoring problem. Traditional scoring optimizes for activity. And fills your pipeline with noise. Revenue-predictive scoring optimizes for intent and fills it with buyers. If you'd like help with assessing your current lead scoring logic, comment "SCORING" and I'll get in touch to schedule a FREE consultation.

If your FMCG/CPG team manages packaging artwork across multiple SKUs and markets, minor errors are probably costing you more than you track. A missed label translation. An outdated spec that survives three revisions. A claim change on day 29 of a 30-day cycle. Few teams have a clean way to catch these earlier in the process. That's why I'm sharing this: On March 26, Jorgen Bartsch (ex-Unilever), Mike Baird, and Dagmar M. are doing a practitioner-led breakdown of why FMCG packaging rework keeps happening and how teams are stopping it before files go to print. 🐇 The FMCG Artwork Rabbit Hole: How to Get Packaging Right First Time 📅 March 26 · 12 PM EST / 16:00 GMT · 30 minutes Sign up here 👉 https://lnkd.in/eT9CuMiU This is the 30 minutes your next project cycle will thank you for.

Get a free AI visibility audit to see which prompts you lose, which competitors win, and what to change now.

Explore how algorithms now describe, cite, and compare your brand. Get a free AI visibility audit.

Start with a free AI visibility audit and decide if you’re ok with the current level (probably not).

Rank in AI search asap or watch competitors take your space. Get a free AI visibility audit.