Here you'll find a description of our services, and samples of the kinds of deliverables clients can expect.

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