The document discusses insights gained from market research and client interactions that highlight the importance of usability and onboarding in reducing churn, alongside positioning video-based services effectively. It outlines strategies for demand creation, concept testing, and competitive intelligence, along with the identification of distinct market segments. Additionally, it includes details about various services offered, client feedback on existing products, and an analysis of investment returns, including significant cost savings from enhanced application deployment and administration.

1. Introduction to Our Work
Actionable Insight

2. Insight that drives decisions
 Recognized usability & onboarding as
drivers of churn – not price
 Determined best positioning for video-
based services
 Armed sales with best questions to ID
high-probability buyers
 Identified distinct market segments
and unique value propositions
 Selected a product tag line that does
not alienate the non-profit sector
2
Based on our work, clients have:
 Decided not to enter
Canadian market
 Built a product that improves
workflow rather than one that
contains IT cost
 Purchased company in an
adjacent market
 Prioritized development of
Denials product over
Collections

3. Cory’s Background
 Corporate training & HR
 MBA
 Associate Director,
Gartner Consulting
 Market Intelligence Lead
 Market & Competitive
research consulting
3

4. Research Capabilities & Staff
Recruiter/scheduler
Phone banks
Trade advertising
Client CRM
Assoc Partners
Research Agencies
List Brokers
Interns
SMEs
Research Librarians
Industry Analysts
Data Junkies &
PhD Candidates
SMEs
Ind. Mktg
Consultants
Project
design
Published
research
Lists &
panels
Recruit &
promote
Tool dev
& coding
Execution
Data
analysis
Recommend-
ations
4

5. Services Offered For…
Marketing
 Demand analysis
 Concept testing
 Competitive
intelligence
UX & Product
Management
 User wants & needs
 Portfolio planning
 Customer sat
Sales
 Win/Loss analysis
 Attack & defend
 ROI calculator
5

6. Demand-Creation is Key to Opening Market:
Focus on Automating Paper-Based Approaches
11%
17%
14%
12%
46%
Purchase Intent of Currently
Un-Penetrated Markets
Currently implementing
a commercial product
Evaluating options for a
purchase this year
Considering purchasing
next year
Considering purchasing
2 or more years out
No plans to buy
commercial software
DemandAnalysis
6

7. Critical Variables by Market Segment
Current
Infrastructure
Vertical
Industry
Staff
Skills
Preferred
Buying
Channel
Number of
Employees
Other
1 = Unimportant
5 = Very important
0
5 5
5
55
5
7
ConceptTesting

8. Competitive market perception of buyers
SERVICES
Boutique
RELATIONSHIPS
AT&T
Us
Tactical
Strategic
Narrow Broad
Comprehensive
Mom &
Pop
Value
8
CompetitiveIntelligence

9. Product Rated Highly for Integration, Reporting,
Flexibility & Ease of Use
Poor Excellent
A B C D Why
Ease of
Implementation &
Admin
3rd-party bolt-ons seen as adding admin
burden. Quoted faster deployment than
B.
Ease of Integration
B has good integration tools for EDI,
mapping tool for source data to inbound
fields.
Flexibility/Ability to
customize
Key criterion. A has tables to map field
names to channel partners’ ERPs.
Conflicting feedback on if B able to
modify without changing core.
Ease of Use
A &D seen as strong for end-users &
developers.
All-in Cost
Very similar, higher ongoing
support/development costs for C, D.
9
UserWants&Needs

10. Determine product adoption drivers
Win
10
Loss
1
11 of 27 Rated “Ease of use”
as Primary Decision Driver
Ease of
implementation
Easier for IT to
maintain & upgrade
Ease of use (to
business)
Easier for IT to
develop on
Flexibility/ability to
customize
Definition of “Ease of Use”
Win Loss
10
PortfolioManagement

11. Providers
Buying Net
New 62,446
Providers
Using
Incumbent
Systems
769,353
~62k Providers Will Buy New Solutions in 2009, 90%
in Practices <50 Physicians
Source: SK&A 11/25/2008
Assumptions:
 14% of providers will buy new
solution annually (based on 7 yr
lifespan for solution)
 Enterprises will buy at rate of
20%/year 2008-2010 due to
aging systems
 2009 buying will be depressed to ½
of normal
Billable US providers in 2008
Primary Care
Physician
Primary Care
Nonphysician
Specialty
Physician
Specialty
Nonphysician
1-3 93,858 1,677 154,815 141,256
4-50 84,433 2,157 232,986 75,030
51+ 3,621 41 24,621 2,522
US Providers Buying New PM/Billing
Solutions in 2009
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1 to 3 3 to 50 51+
NumberofDoctors
Doctors Buying New PM/Billing in 2009
athena can't
serve
athena can
serve
11
MarketSize&Growth
Practice Size

12. A Large Proportion of Former LCCs Were
Dissatisfied with Morale, Job Duties & Policies
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Working conditions
Performance appraisals
Recognition of achievements
Relationship with RCC
Commun/collaboration w RCC
Supervision & support from RCC
Training and development
Policies and procedures
Job duties & workload
Work unit morale
Distribution of Ratings
Poor Average Good-Excellent
12
Please rate the following aspects of your job on a scale of 1-5, where 1 = poor and 5= excellent
CustomerSatisfaction

13. “Marketo is very good about monitoring the community.
Employees often step in to help.”
— Drew, Marketo Customer, <50 FTE
“Has a large online community and makes sure you are
involved in a local user group.”
— Cathy, Marketo Partner, <50 FTE, service provider
Attack (real customer complaints)
Inflexible Reporting
 “When we tried to get the system to show
us the create date…Marketo couldn't do
it. In salesforce.com, I would simply run a
report with Create Date, Lead Source =
Website, and Lead Source
Name... Marketo was unable to break
down the data along those dimensions.”
(Marketo Customer, Blog Post 12/11)
Poor Analytics
 “Marketo is designed for looking at the
behavior of individual leads…not for
analyzing the behavior of groups of leads.”
(Marketo Customer, Blog Post 3/12)
Difficult to Work With
 Consistent complaints about pushy sales
reps, uncooperative support, too much
effort needed to get information. (Marketo
Customer, Blog Post, 3/12, among others)
Defend (real sales reps’ attacks)
“Marketo is purely market automation, this is
not what Client does well.” (Chip, Marketo
Sales Rep)
 We combine lead gen with nurturing and
automation for a more complete solution
than Marketo (which is solely focused on
automation).
Client doesn’t do nurturing, scoring, tracking
well” (Chip, Marketo Sales Rep)
 Our segment/list approach to nurturing and
scoring is based on behavior, actions, and
data collected through forms, CRM, etc. It’s
more flexible and robust than Marketo.
Marketo’s difference: pace of innovation –
every year 1 major release. Each one is looked
at as a competitive advantage. [Ex: Crowd
Factory, first to move to B2C social media]
(Chip, Marketo Sales Rep)
 We are continually shipping new features.
Just check out our blog.
Marquis
Customers
“Really easy. All object oriented.”
— Mari, Marketo Partner, <50 FTE, consultant
Product
Screenshot
Marketo Dashboard Funnel
Top Features
Positioned by their
reps during sales calls
1. Convenient Pre-built
campaigns
2. Complete third-party
Integration
3. Intricate marketing
system
4. Elaborate lead
scoring system
5. “IT Free”
“Marketo drives [leads] through [the] sales function. HubSpot
drives [leads] to [the] company.”
— Matt, Marketo Employee
Battle Marketo with Flexibility & Complete Solution
from Top of Funnel
Prepared in collaboration with Explorics. www.explorics.com
13
Attack&Defend

14. Jeff
VP EE
Benefits
Pamela
Parks &
Resorts
Tom
Operations
Barbara
Strategy
Deloitte
Jeff Was Final Decision-Maker; Barbara Highly
Influential, Then Tom
Decision influencers included:
 Deloitte: Input in the beginning of process. Encouraged
Client to invite Client to bid
 Tom : Facilitated RFP process. Ran previous program with
Payer/Client partnership. Now rolling out new
Payer program.
 Barbara: Strategy, long term focused. Open to best-in-class
solution. Her team developed RFP.
 Pamela: Medical Director, Client Resorts, represented 80%
of employee population
14
“My team designed the RFP, but
Tom facilitated the project to get
a new vendor. This would
normally be my role…Due to
lack of bandwidth, Tom took on
the role running the integrated
medical management stream.”
– Barbara
“is consensus-
driven…He [Jeff]
influenced the final
decision. He is
oriented towards
bundling of vendors.
Some of us felt best-
in-class was the way
to go.”
– Barbara
Win/Loss

15. Analysis Demonstrates Year 1 Savings of
$12.3 Million
ROI Year 1: 219%
Breakeven in 3.76 months
5-Year Net Present Value of $13,525,000
 Negative annual returns in years 2-4
pertain to lost tax savings as an offset to
avoiding bulk replacement of client
hardware in year 1.
 Additional Intangible benefits:
 Improved application response time, saving branch
employees an average of 30 minutes per day
 Enhanced flexibility of IT architecture, enabling
future data center centralization
 Ability to deploy new applications with minimal
impact on networking costs
Sources of savings year 1 include:
 Application Deployment
$436k
 Application Administration $383k
 Client Hardware $17,157k
15
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Annual Return 17,975 -182 -182 -182 -182 ,000 US Dollars
Annual Investment 5,634 2,283 2,283 2,283 2,283 ,000 US Dollars
Net Return 12,341 -2,465 -2,465 -2,465 15,692 ,000 US Dollars
ROIToolDevelopment&Analysis
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Annual Return
Annual Investment
Net Return

16. Principal Consultant
twitter: @corymann
Actionable Market Insight