|
Barry Leeson-Earle, our Data Director, writes:
Are B2B data owners getting away with unacceptable levels of accuracy? According to some data users in this sectors, leading providers are selling files that are only 30 per cent accurate, with key variables such as named contact and job title wrong and even contact data out-of-date.
So is there a problem with B2B data?
In my experience there is definitely less confidence in B2B data than B2C from a marketing perspective. This is commonly a natural function of the type of data being collected, generally business data, be it contact name, job title or contact details such as telephone or email address decays at a very rapid rate, due in part to a buoyant job market and to the rapid turnover of UK companies. It is therefore costly for high volume suppliers to turn their files to represent these changes on a regular basis.
This being the case, quality can vary greatly from supplier to supplier, often depending on factors such as volume or the depth of contact details available.
Generally, smaller, more specialist suppliers commit to updating their contact on a more frequent basis; thereby offering a more accurate end product.
I've not experienced inaccuracy levels in the region of 70% myself, but it is important for users to understand the B2B landscape and just how the various providers can be utilised to provide the most accurate end file. And of course, it’s vital not to ‘sit’ on the data; email lists used within 0 – 3 months will typically be worth 3 times as much as 12 month-old email contacts. At Tri-Direct we look to balance the need for in-depth company data with the most accurate and relevant contacts, regardless of source.
|