Targeted vs Passive Prospecting Strategies in Sales

my competitor and i launched identical linkedin campaigns. same budget, same audience, same product category. i crushed him 8:1 on deal conversion. he was confident going into the test. better product. stronger brand recognition. more funding. bigger team. we both targeted VPs of sales at 500+ person companies. same demographic criteria. same ad creative quality. $10K budget each. month one results: me: 47 deals closed. him: 6 deals closed. he was convinced i got lucky with better prospects. "let me see your targeting strategy," he asked. i pulled up my dashboard. "i don't target demographics at all." "what do you mean? you're running linkedin ads." "i target behaviors." i showed him my approach: instead of job titles, i track content consumption. instead of company size, i monitor website journeys. instead of industry filters, i watch engagement patterns. "i built an audience of people who've consumed competitor content in the last 30 days. downloaded sales automation guides. attended webinars about pipeline management. visited pricing pages of tools like ours." my "audience" wasn't demographic. it was behavioral. "linkedin lets you upload custom audiences," i explained. "i upload lists of people who've shown buying behavior. then i target those lists with ads." he was targeting people who might need our product. i was targeting people actively shopping for our product. "how do you identify buying behavior?" he asked. "third-party intent data. website pixel tracking. content engagement scoring. competitor analysis tools." i showed him my process: week 1: identify companies researching sales tools. week 2: find individuals at those companies consuming content. week 3: build custom audiences from behavioral data. week 4: launch ads to pre-qualified prospects. "demographics tell you who someone is," i said. "behavior tells you what they're doing." he was advertising to VPs of sales. i was advertising to VPs of sales currently shopping for solutions. same title, completely different mindset. my prospects were already in buying mode. his were just scrolling linkedin. the conversion difference made perfect sense. he rebuilt his entire approach: behavioral targeting instead of demographic filtering. intent data instead of job title assumptions. shopping behavior instead of profile characteristics. next month's results for him: 52 deals closed. 9x improvement over his original campaign. the lesson was clear: demographics describe who people are. behavior reveals what people need. target the behavior.

Most people think they're doing personalized outreach They're just doing spray and pray with a {{first_name}} tag There's two ways to run cold outreach and the difference in results is massive. On one side you've got the template blasters. Generic emails sent to huge lists with zero context. No research, just volume. Hoping someone responds by accident and call it a win. This is what kills reply rates and burns domains fast. On the other side you've got targeted outreach that actually works. Start by researching REAL problems your prospects are dealing with. Not surface-level stuff like "I saw you're hiring" but actually understanding what that hiring means for their business right now. — Personalize with context that ties to your offer. Not just dropping their company name but showing you understand their specific situation and why your solution matters to them. — Validate timing signals before hitting send. → Are they actually in a position to buy? → Did something just happen that makes your offer relevant right now instead of six months from now? – Test multiple angles to see what resonates. – Different value props, pain points and CTAs. – Let the market tell you what actually works instead of guessing. — Segment by buyer stage. Someone evaluating solutions needs a different message than someone who just realized they have a problem. → This takes more work upfront but gets 5-10x better results than blasting templates. The gap between spray and pray and targeted outreach isn't tools or budget. It's whether you're willing to put in the work that actually moves reply rates. Most people pick volume because it FEELS easier. Send 10,000 emails with one template instead of 1,000 with real research. Then they wonder why nothing converts. Quality targeting beats quantity every single time. But it means actually thinking about who you're emailing and why they'd care before you hit send.

If you send me this message on LinkedIn I will not reply. No recruiter will. "Hi Kristof, I hope this message finds you well. I am an executive in automotive with a successful career in growing sales. [10 more sentences explaining how good you are] I want to have a call with you to see how I can fit your clients. Please find attached my resume." Confession: I usually stop reading at "I hope this finds you well." (It found me bored.) I know. Harsh. But here's what nobody tells senior executives: 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗳𝗮𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘄𝘀: → One-way street. All take, no give. → Zero targeting. I don't work in automotive. → No differentiation. 10 executives send me the same pitch every day. The sender is probably excellent at their job. But I'll never know. Because the message screams "I need something from you." 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗱: → Research first. Know my industry, my clients, my content. → Make the ask tiny. 15 minutes, not "a call to explore." → Show the win-win. What do I get from talking to you? → Example: "I've seen a dramatic shift to robotic surgery in cardiovascular in the past 2 years. Happy to share what I learned." ❌ Generic outreach: 5% response rate. ✅ Targeted outreach: 40-65%. That's not a small difference. That's a different strategy. You're not asking for charity. 𝗬𝗼𝘂'𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝘀. Stop writing messages that sound like sales letters. 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘄𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. What's the worst cold outreach you've received? Share it below. 📩 Want more frameworks to help you land a job quickly? They're in my free newsletter (link at the top). PS. 💾 Save this post for later. Even if you're not actively looking now.

Outbound is dead in cyber. Long live AE-owned prospecting. I will die on the hill of "outbound is dead". But it's been misunderstood when I've brought it up here. In cybersecurity, generic mass outreach is dying or it's a zombie waiting to be whacked. Targeted, value-driven prospecting led by Account Executives is thriving. SDR's have a hard time doing this not because they can't, but because the system is not setup for them to do it (i.e. comp plans, org structures, etc.) We know from research that personalized outreach based on deep account knowledge delivers 3x better engagement than templated SDR approaches. Yet we keep trying to build outbound motions with higher volume and worse conversion rates 🤮 Here's my framework for building a repeatable pipeline development program where AEs actually own the process: 👉 *The Value Hypothesis Approach* 1. Narrow the focus dramatically: Your target account list should be small enough that each account gets hours of dedicated research. 2. Make AEs accountable for contact mapping They need to identify key stakeholders and understand the organizational dynamics before any outreach begins. 3. Develop specific value hypotheses This is the game-changer. Each account gets 2 customized value proposition based on their specific situation. 4. Collaborate on hypothesis refinement The best teams involve SE/PreSales, Product Management, and Sales Leadership in critiquing and improving these hypotheses. 5. Execute with precision With this foundation, outreach becomes a targeted conversation rather than a generic pitch. 6. Close the feedback loop: Sales leaders need to document which value hypotheses resonated and which fell flat - this becomes your competitive advantage. The best-performing enterprise sales teams allocate at least 1/3 of AE time to this process. Yes, it's resource-intensive, but the results speak for themselves. 2 hours a day (minimum) every day, every AE, for 3 months. Then come back and tell me 'thank you' Unexpected benefit: When AEs spend 10+ hours weekly on strategic prospecting, your inbound and partner-led conversion rates automatically improve. Why? No AE will let warm leads slip after experiencing how much work cold prospecting takes. Pro-tip? Spend 'Training Thursdays' evaluating value hypothesis together. Double pro-tip, combine Value Hypotheiss with 'Show me You Know Me' on your messaging (follow Samantha McKenna - She crushes SMYKM content) Anyone here that calls value hypothesis something else? I used to call it my 'angle'. Need something more catchy and less scientific-sounding 😆

We burned $50k chasing bad leads - 0.8% close rate. One fix took us to 12%. Last quarter, we burned $50k chasing "Director of Sales in US - job title" Close rate: 0.8% I thought the market was slow but I was screwing it up Sales isn't about more calls It's about better targeting Most teams focus on job titles. But buying intent signals matter more. Things like recent funding, hiring patterns, tech stack changes. Bad prospecting: -Director of Sales in US Good prospecting: -Director of Sales in SF -hiring SDRs -raised capital in 2024 This shift saved Floworks: ✅ Stopped casting wide nets ✅ Found patterns in our best customers   ✅ Tracked buying intent, not just titles Result? Close rate jumped to 12% Costs dropped 60% Prospecting is the first thing you do in sales. Work smarter, not harder. Agree?

“Spray and pray” is one of my least favorite phrases in M&A. It is usually used by sellers - or low-performing M&A firms - to criticize advisors that market businesses aggressively. The implication is that broad outreach is lazy, while researching a list of 50 carefully selected buyers is sophisticated. But what does the data say? Axial recently published data from 265 closed lower-middle-market transactions. For its featured deals, ONLY 5.86% to 13.82% of matched buyers chose to pursue the opportunity. These are not random names scraped from the internet. They are active buyers PAYING to access deals that match their stated acquisition criteria. One example was an internet service provider with $2.1 million of EBITDA: 535 matched buyers. 52 pursued the opportunity. A 9.72% pursuit rate. And “pursued” does not mean submitted an offer. It means the buyer expressed enough initial interest to explore the deal. Only a small fraction of those buyers will ultimately submit an LOI, complete diligence and close. Now apply that math to the traditional “curated list” of 50 buyers. At a 10% pursuit rate, perhaps five engage. How many submit credible offers? How many remain after management meetings? How many survive diligence, financing and documentation? This is why I reject the idea that broad, disciplined marketing is “spray and pray.” Consider the residential real estate equivalent: “We identified the 20 people most likely to buy your house. We will contact only them. No MLS listing. No open houses. No digital marketing. No email campaigns.” Would any serious homeowner accept that strategy? Targeted research matters. We do it. But targeted research should be one component of a comprehensive proces,. not the entire process. Buyer mandates are getting narrower. Buyers are more selective. Financing is more scrutinized. Even qualified buyers regularly pass on opportunities that appear to fit their criteria. Minimal buyer reach in this market is NOT SOPHISTICATED: It is a recipe for limited competition, weak negotiating leverage, and failed transactions. The objective is not to contact the fewest buyers possible. The objective is to reach every credible buyer necessary to create competition and produce the best executable outcome for the seller. Link to Axial’s data in the comments. #sellingabusiness #buyingabusiness #mergersandacquisitions #investmentbanking

In 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞 and 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡-𝐧𝐞𝐭-𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡 markets, the top boutiques aren’t passive. They control who they speak to—and when. They don’t rely on referrals. They build direct distribution through outbound. Because nothing scales faster than a strategy 𝘺𝘰𝘶 control. Here’s why outbound is so powerful👇🏽 𝟏. 𝐒𝐮𝐫𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 The hardest part of raising capital or landing HNW clients isn’t the pitch. It’s finding the right people in the first place. With outbound, you can carefully select prospects based on investment history, net worth, geography, AUM, ticket size, and mandate fit. This way you only have quality conversations while keeping your company discreet and well-positioned, letting only the right people know about your proposition. 𝟐. 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡-𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 Most professionals open with a cold pitch and wonder why no one replies, but in this space, pitching first is the fastest way to lose trust. The better approach is simple: lead with value. That could mean sharing a relevant allocator map, benchmarking their current strategy against market activity, or offering a short call framed as a complimentary consultation. Done properly, the right people actually want to speak with you, because in this industry, people who deliver value always get a seat in the boardrooms. 𝟑. 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐃𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 Succeeding in this market starts by accepting that not every conversation will lead to a capital commitment immediately. You build relationships. You stay visible, and lead with value. Over time, that becomes a proprietary network that accelerates your closings. Let’s say today you know 10 family office decision-makers. And in the next 12 months, you make a structured effort to reach out to FOs every week. What will happen is that after 12 months, instead of 10, you’ll have 100 FO decision-makers in your phone. That also means you’ll close deals 10 times faster, and your company will be 10 times bigger. 𝘐'𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩-𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘏𝘕𝘞 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘯𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥.

For many agencies and consulting firms, new business development feels like a 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿-𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝘆𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵, 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀, and 𝗳𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗴𝗵𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺? 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝘄𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝘁, reaching out to anyone who might be a fit rather than focusing on the right prospects at the right time with the right message. This approach 𝗱𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀, 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄𝘀 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗰𝘆𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀, and 𝘄𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗴𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵—𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵. Instead of a volume-based strategy, 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 (𝗔𝗕𝗠) 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵, where targeting, messaging, and timing align to attract high-intent prospects. Here’s how it works: • 𝗡𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗧𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗟𝗶𝘀𝘁 – Identify the companies and decision-makers most likely to need your services where you have a right to win. A well-defined audience ensures you’re not wasting time on long shots. • 𝗟𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗧𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 – Instead of generic messaging, develop a strong point of view on a problem your ideal prospects are facing. Create content that educates and challenges their current thinking. • 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗗𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗔𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 – Run campaigns that put your insights in front of your ideal audience. When prospects engage, it’s a signal they’re interested. • 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 & 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗦𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗹s – Monitor which companies and individuals interact with your content through website visitor ID tracking, email analytics, and social media engagement. These are your warmest leads. • 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗢𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁 – Instead of cold outreach, follow up with hyper-personalized 1:1 outreach that shares insights that align with the content they’ve engaged with. This makes your outreach feel timely and relevant. By shifting from mass outreach to a 𝗳𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱, 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁-𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗔𝗕𝗠 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵, you’ll stop chasing unqualified leads and 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻—leading to 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗰𝘆𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀. #accountbasedmarketing #abm #leadgeneration #businessdevelopment

High-performing Sales and Marketing teams run two high-level motions simultaneously to maximize success with pipeline generation: 1. An ABM motion against a target set of accounts that's highly personalized. 2. Run-rate strategy against a large number of accounts I've seen many posts over the last 10+ years debating if quantity (metrics driven) over quality(value driven) works the best to build pipeline. The answer (in my opinion), is that you must have both. Establishing an account-based marketing/prospecting strategy and a run-rate marketing/prospecting strategy is essential for success. Each approach has its unique strengths and, when balanced, can drive meaningful pipeline generation results. 🔍 ABM: The hyper-targeted approach that enables you to deeply engage with high-value accounts. By prioritizing key decision-makers and customizing messaging, you can build stronger relationships and secure more significant opportunities. ABM isn’t just about winning big; it’s about embedding value at every stage of the buyer journey. Marketing teams might focus on a subset of highly engaged accounts, while sales reps might make a "hot list" for the week, month, or quarter. Reps can send personalized audio messages over LinkedIn, or use video tools like Vidyard or Loom to get creative and add a human approach to their prospecting efforts. 💼 Run Rate Strategy: On the other hand, a run-rate approach keeps the pipeline flowing, generating momentum by targeting a larger volume of accounts. This strategy allows you to maintain consistent pipe generation and adapt to shifting market demands. It’s about being agile and responsive, ensuring there’s no slowdown in sales activity. You can leverage tools like ZoomInfo, or 6sense, to prioritize accounts that have shown intent, that way you're not going outbound to a large number of accounts that are completely cold. The Balance: Combining ABM with run-rate tactics means that you're strategically prioritizing without losing sight of volume. It’s about sustainable growth: leveraging high-value relationships while still driving volume-based wins. ➡️ For teams and ICs: Think about how you can align these approaches across sales, marketing, and customer success to ensure a holistic prospecting strategy that fuels consistent growth. #SalesStrategy #ABM #RunRate #Prospecting #SalesDevelopment

Your sales team is booking meetings, But closing less than 20% of those. I used to think this was a "sales skills" problem. Turns out, it's a "intelligence" problem. Let me explain with data that'll change how you think about pipeline... The average B2B founder optimizes for meeting quantity. The top 10% optimize for meeting quality and consistency. Here's the difference in their numbers: Generic prospecting: 4.82% cold call success, 15-20% close rates Research-driven prospecting: 36% higher conversions, 68% win rates But the real insight is deeper... 93% of companies exceeding revenue goals segment by buyer persona. 67% of lost sales happen because of poor qualification. 71% of quota-exceeding teams use systematic buyer research. Translation: Your pipeline problem isn't volume. It's precision. The companies hitting higher quota don't book more meetings. They book meetings with people who've already researched solutions. They book meetings with budget holders, not influencers. They book meetings with prospects who understand their value prop. How? Three-layer buyer intelligence before any outreach... Most founders think buyer personas are "marketing fluff." But here's what systematic buyer research actually delivers: ✅ higher email response rates ✅ marketing ROI improvement ✅ reduction in sales costs ✅ Shorter sales cycles The math is clear: Research = Revenue Growth. Your current approach costs you 3x more per deal. Your prospects arrive confused and skeptical. Your team wastes time educating instead of closing. The research-first approach flips this: 👍 Prospects arrive educated and interested. 👍 Meetings start with "tell me more," not "what do you do?" 👍 Close rates jump because certainty already exists. Two paths: 1️⃣ Keep optimizing tactics (more SDRs, better scripts, new tools) 2️⃣ Start optimizing intel (deeper research, better qualification, strategic targeting) Path 1 = expensive hope. Path 2 = profitable revenue engine. Your pipeline reflects your choice. What are you optimizing for?