William Davis

There are a few different messaging and persona frameworks I have used for different purposes. Here are a few of my favorites. Positioning Statement - this is typically the foundation of any product/GTM positioning. * [Target Customer] For: describe who you're targeting your product at * [Statement of need or opportunity] Who: describe the pain or opportunity you're offering the target market * [Product name is a product category] List your product name and the product category it belongs to * [Statement of key benefit] That: describe the benefits of your product for the target customer * [Competiting Alternative] Unlike: describe how your product differentiates from the primary competition (this doesn't necessarily have to only include other vendors but it could be differentiating from the status quo) First Round had a solid blog on crafting positioning statements a while back- https://review.firstround.com/three-moves-every-startup-founder-must-make-to-build-a-brand-that-matters The other framework we're using is around product/company positioning with a 3rd party consultant which is organized in the following way * Market Category * Statement of Differentiation * Message Pillars 1, 2, 3, etc. - supports the statement of differentiation and should have mulitple levels of detail depending upon the context...mapping to product/company capabilities * Big Idea - "No Software" from Salesforce is the canonical example here For personas, it's key to map out the personas that are involved in your deals..typically this will look something like this: * Buyer/decision maker * User (if not buyer) * Admin (if not user) * Technical evaluator * Champion (if not buyer) Obviously, this is for more of an enterprise sale vs. a PLG model where buyer is user, tech evaluator, champion, etc. I also recently read the Challenger Customer (same authors of the Challenger Sale) and that book has an interesting view of personas. Once you define personas, I would map out the following for each: * Description of persona * Titles that map to the persona (persona & title should be different) * Role in buying process (listed above) * Skill set mapping as it relates to your product (business & tech acumen, etc.) * Goals * Pain points * Success measures or motivation * Real life examples of the persona (can be linkedin profile) 

Here are two. Positioning Statement - this is typically the foundation of any product/GTM positioning. * [Target Customer] For: describe who you're targeting your product at * [Statement of need or opportunity] Who: describe the pain or opportunity you're offering the target market * [Product name is a product category] List your product name and the product category it belongs to * [Statement of key benefit] That: describe the benefits of your product for the target customer * [Competiting Alternative] Unlike: describe how your product differentiates from the primary competition (this doesn't necessarily have to only include other vendors but it could be differentiating from the status quo) First Round had a solid blog on crafting positioning statements a while back- https://review.firstround.com/three-moves-every-startup-founder-must-make-to-build-a-brand-that-matters The other framework we're using is around product/company positioning with a 3rd party consultant which is organized in the following way * Market Category * Statement of Differentiation * Message Pillars 1, 2, 3, etc. - supports the statement of differentiation and should have mulitple levels of detail depending upon the context...mapping to product/company capabilities * Big Idea - "No Software" from Salesforce is the canonical example here

When looking at the effectiveness of the messaging behind a product, I have always tried to focus on what are we trying to achieve with the messaging? How does the messaging tie back to overall business objectives? Answering that question can then help guide you to how to measure the effectiveness of the messaging. If the product messaging is focused on expanding the scope of the product or the market you're targeting, then you'll want to look at things like ASP and if there is an expansion of titles/personas involved in sales opportunities. If the product messaging is centered around creating a new category of products, then you'll want to track higher level awareness metrics such as message resonance (how many times the message is repeated in media/the market), share of voice, analyst/media mentions of the key message, competitor pick up of the message you're trying advocate. If you're trying to streamline the product positioning to increase adoption by the sales team and the company overall then you'll want to track the adoption of new sales decks, collateral and other assets. We've started to use Highspot as a sales enablement platform and will be closely tracking the usage of content we push out through the platform by reps and how the content influences deals. I would also track the usage of content and messaging in Gong calls to see how the message is being utilized in live customer interactions. If you're looking for product messaging to improve conversion then you can track that through the performance of landing pages, ads, SDR outbound cadences, etc. It's much easier to think about the purpose of what you're trying to accomplish with your messaging and then orient your measurement around that vs. trying to measure the effectiveness overall. A few other things to track in terms of messaging performance (or overall impact of pmm activities): * Deal cycle times * Average selling price (mentioned above) * Competitive win rates * Close rates (funnel performance overall) * Sales rep performance I would also always be speaking to reps and other stakeholders across the company to get feedback as well as industry analysts, partners, etc.. to get qualitative feedback on your positioning. These conversations always bring up something you've never thought of that can improve your positioning. 

You can't change messaging every quarter...it won't stick and you'll lose credibility internally/externally. Generally, you'll want any strategic messaging you put out to last 18 months. I think updating once per year or in certain cases every 2 quarters can also work depending on the circumstances. There is a lot of heavy-lifting required to do it right both to come up with the messaging but also to roll it out effectively so limiting frequency is important or it will be a huge time/resource drain on the company. When updating, I would focus on the goals of updating the messaging and get cross-functional buy-in on the effort before going down the path. We've seen success with a process of: * Getting key goals/ideas on the table from a x-functional group of execs and key team members * Interacting with a representatitive range of different customers to get their input on how to position * Testing potential messaging with prospects or target personas that don't know your company or brand (this can be done through 3rd parties) This input will shape the messaging changes you're making and also provide proof points for the direction you end up recommending. I think tiny tweaks can happen more frequently or be executed through campaigns/content but any overhaul needs to be done infrequently and thoughtfully given what's required for success. 

Changing messaging needs to be considered very carefully. You can't change messaging every quarter because you'll never get the adoption you're striving for and if the message changes too frequently then you may also lose credibility. That being said, your messaging is never fully "done". You should get core messaging to a point where you feel it's ready to roll out internally/externally and then constantly look at what needs to be adjusted as time passes. Small tweaks can happen but an overall messaging structure should only be done once or twice a year max. The rule of thumb that I have followed is that your messaging should ideally last 18 months before it needs to get tuned to adjust to market movement and product evolution. This is why it's so critical when rolling out new messaging that you have everyone aligned especially the CEO so it can be championed in a way that it can be made successful. For competitive positioning, this is not the case. I think you should be flexible in how you position against key competitors for specific deals or campaigns. There is always room for testing new messaging through campaigns, content and a variety of different marketing inititiatives but changing the overall positioniong for a product or company should be done less frequently given the overhead involved in making it successful internally and externally. 

One thing I try not to do is share content or messaging without walking the person I want to get feedback from through the context and purpose live on a call/zoom. Sending something over for feedback without the right context can be disastrous...especially if they share with others and expand any confusion/dissent to others. I will typically walk them through a google slide or doc with what we're trying to move towards and then offer them the opportunity to provide feedback live or in the doc once they've had some time to think about it. Always try to prove why the messaging you're recommending is the right approach with proof points...these can be based on surveys, customer/analyst feedback, A/B or some testing framework, market movement, etc. If your internal teams see the context for why you're moving in a specific direction and the proof points that support what you're trying to do then it will go a long way in getting their support/alignment. 

When moving your messaging from product-centric to solutions-centric, you're going to bring in experts in the solutions you're trying to organize around. Whether that be industry, departmental or some other orientation, you will need the people who live and breathe these domains to ensure the messaging/content you develop resonates. There can also be individuals that act as sales overlays or technical field resources to provide a level of domain expertise in customer conversations that will help in deals focused around these specific solutions. Internal messaging to motivate the different stakeholders on why to "buy-in" or invest in this transition and communicating why it's valualbe to them is critical. These transitions can be hard and take time so ensuring the broader team knows why the company is going down the path (accelerate growth, expand market, etc.) is communicated is critical. Also, taking time to repeat this and constantly reinforce it is critical....not a one time communication but something that needs to be revisited often. 

Any work on messaging needs to incorporate customers! When we're working on messaging for a campaign or a broader shift in messaging, interviewing customers and getting their feedback is vital. Often times, those conversations not only inform your messaging but also can tee up customer references to use in marketing campaigns, etc. 

Yes, persona messaging is a must always. I question I answered earlier has the framework I typically use for personas and an overall messaging structure. Vertical messaging can be required if your company targets specific industries - finance, pharma, etc. If your working with a horizontal product then my experience is that vertical messaging should be applied in campaigns and content targeting those specific verticals leveraging relevant customer examples in those industries as customer evidence. Getting buy-in on messaging is probably the most critical and most challenging part of messaging. This is absolutely vital to the success of any messaging effort. If no one is bought in on your messaging then it won't be succesfful. The top priority is to get buy-in from the CEO but then other critical stakeholders are founders, head of sales, head of product, etc. Look for people who have infuence in the organization - this includes executives but also top reps or long-tenured/respected employees. You will need them to build momentum behind your messaging. Take their feedback and look for ways to incorporate it into the messaging. If it doesn't work then explain why ahead of the roll out. Never get defensive or emotional...it's part of the process! 

I think you should always consider what's happening in the market when defining any sort of messaging. What's gaining traction? What's causing you to win/lose deals? What growth opportunities are opening up? This must factor in competition. How is your messaging differentiated from the competition but also aligned to where the market is headed? What are you saying that might play up the weakness of your competition? Competition should always play a factor because with messaging you're trying to concisely communicate how you're different.