3 Signs It’s Time for Your Business to Embrace the Subscription Model

Linda Deeken

Much can be learned from the successes and missteps of companies large and small across the marketplace. My partner, Eddie Yoon, and I have begun to unlock the emerging theme for 2019 around subscription models and their potential for the marketplace at large.

As Eddie has discussed in several videos recently, subscription models are clearly not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon. There is important nuance in the merits of “subscriptionizing” products vs. categories, and the fundamental nature of the underlying business model. What has emerged from that are questions around how one can determine when it is time to make the leap for your business. And this is where we must take a look at the practical/tactical side of subscription models.

Repeat customer base: First and foremost, subscription models do not make any logical or financial sense without a sizeable share of repeat customers… either of the brand specifically, or the product category more broadly. It’s the fundamental underpinning of subscription models. The understanding of the percent of units that source from repeat customers is what should empower companies to recognize its time to make the leap.

As Starbucks began to realize that X percent of its customers were visiting Y times per week it was clear there was an opportunity to secure and cement those relationships to avoid a jump ship to the nearest Dunkin Donuts. This is obvious. What is less obvious is that not all repeat customers are created equal. There is a distinction between the repeat haircut buyer and the repeat coffee drinker, whose need can only be satisfied with a Starbucks latte.

That difference is in the Superconsumer, the subset of repeat customers who not only buy the category regularly, but feel passionately about it and evangelize the benefits of it to others. Establishing the presence of Supers (and they exist across every category) as well as the share of your customers that are Supers is an important way to tease out your company’s progress down this evolution pathway. Do more with your loyalty program data; don’t just use it to track purchases, but purchase frequency and spend levels. Start with this core and the option for the subscription program and build from there.

Value Delivery: As any good marketer will tell you, your value is only as good as your benefits delivered vs. your price commanded. What is mission critical is being clear that A) your product already delivers clear and differentiated value to the customer, and B) your subscription program will further boost the delivered value.

If the subscription model only brings dependable revenue streams to you but no further value to the end customer, the subscription model will ultimately die on the vine. The free coffee options, pre-ordering flexibility and early announcements for the latest products bring incremental value to the Starbucks Superconsumer and bring unique value to the subscription model for them. Caterpillar’s maintenance program allows those who are passionate and high-value buyers of Caterpillar products to share the burden of scheduled maintenance and ensuring the product’s optimal operation with someone else. It’s a valuable benefit they trust from Caterpillar corporate.

Pricing Power: The confidence to take, hold and see the positive financial result of pricing increases are credible markers to any marketer that your brand is ready for a subscription model. Why? It’s as solid an indicator as any that your products are delivering sufficient value to your core customers that they will and do pay incrementally for them. Netflix is a common example used in this discussion, but Dollar Shave Club and Amazon Prime demonstrate the success of this model as well. In all of these businesses, with a solid enough base of customers and delivered value price increases were a solid indicator of progress.

Find the Supers in your industry and document the benefits and potential benefits that could be unlocked via subscription models. The benefits are there. It’s just a matter of identifying your audience and delivering a valuable subscription option or options.

Linda Deeken is founder of Deeken Strategies, and an affiliate of Eddie Would Grow. Formerly chief marketing officer of The Cambridge Group, she focuses on developing customer-driven strategies, new product development, positioning and consumer segmentation, in addition to advancing critical new pieces of intellectual capital for her clients about go-to-market strategies centered on growth.

Getting Culture Right: Five Lessons for Merger Success in the Sales Department

David Sill

In August 2017, the DiscoverOrg sales team was working at top speed, well aware that Q4 was right around the corner, when our CEO announced the acquisition of a formidable competitor, RainKing. A sort of panic set in: this meant merging two sales teams that had been accustomed to going head to head.

This situation presented a challenge precisely because each team was so effective – and not surprisingly, so competitive. How do you successfully integrate sales professionals who have their own way of doing things, and two teams with their own culture? It isn’t easy. It took an equal amount of operational organization, resource alignment, empathy, patience and psychology – and an understanding that it’s a continual work in progress.

That isn’t always the way it goes. According to the International Journal of Applied Studies, the largest contributor to merger and acquisition failure is people – specifically, a lack of effective communication between them, and an inability to successfully traverse cultural differences. Says the study author, “…the employee must be pivotal. Any attempt to sideline the employee…will spell doom for the new setup.”

So, how do you avoid doom?

1. Have a plan and commit to its faithful execution

That well-worn adage “if you fail to plan, you plan to fail” applies, without question, when it comes to merging sales teams. Developing a point-by-point operational plan that outlines every minute detail of an acquisition and merger is critical – and worth the substantial effort. Invest on the front end and you’ll spend less time fixing things during the integration process.

DiscoverOrg was extraordinarily fortunate that it had appointed a new chief of staff with a deep background in operations and project management. His first order of business was to oversee the acquisition and merger of the two companies. He built and trained our teams on a system rolled out with clock-like precision to manage every detail of the acquisition, which allowed me to institute the change needed to effectively combine our sales teams.

2. Identify cultural patterns in each team and evolve a new culture that brings the “best of” together.

Company cultures can vary widely, are typically formed at the top, and can be difficult to change once ingrained. One company may have a vastly different approach to how it hires its sales and customer success talent, educates its teams, determines sales goals and expectations, and manages performance. Further, it’s a good idea to be sensitive to team pride, and if that can be preserved in the evolving culture.

The key to shifting cultural patterns lies in determining what produces the most positive results for the newly integrated company as a whole, acknowledging the best “heritage” aspects, and applying these practices effectively across the entire department. A new culture should feel more like evolution than hitting a reset button.

3. Quickly share tools and processes for success.

When a company has invested in tools and workflows that speed processes and make everyone’s lives easier, you should train the other sales team as quickly as you can on those tools. At the same time, the other sales team may have processes and programs of their own valuable to both teams, so plan on sharing information in both directions. By doing so, you assure the newly acquired team they’re valued – and at the same time expected – to get up to speed on software and processes.

In our case, we discovered one team was significantly farther along in the maturity of its technology stack and marketing function to support sales and customer success with content, efficient workflows, and human capital resources. The excitement and gratitude they expressed in receiving tools and support they didn’t previously have was a pivotal moment in successfully bringing the teams together.

4. Choose when to combine the teams and when to keep them separate.

Some might think the best way to get two teams on the same page is to simply combine them and let each individual find their own way. But that’s not necessarily the right approach when the two teams are on different learning curves. Similar to educating young students, you don’t want the advanced learner to disengage out of boredom, nor the slower learner to skip important steps because the pace is too fast.

The key is to give each team some space in advance of a full-scale integration. We carefully chose which areas of integration to initially combine, and which to keep separate. We held daily sales huddles locally for several months following the acquisition, until no purpose was served by maintaining two identities. In contrast, group “call review,” where a full sales or customer success team meets to listen to and break down an actual prospect or client call, continues to make sense locally.

5. Find common ground in a new identity.

One of the biggest challenges of the acquisition was getting two sales and customer success teams that had previously viewed one another as “the enemy” to transition beyond that mentality. Not surprisingly, expecting bitter rivals to suddenly hug it out and put the same jersey would take some doing. Respect had to be earned, and it wasn’t freely offered. Social settings helped this part of the challenge. Bringing everyone together for our annual sales kickoff delivered on its “bonding” promise. We walked away from that week as a different, stronger, unified team. We also committed to platooning leaders and high performers to spend time with the new team to further the unification.

The surprising part of the challenge, however, was the sudden realization that there was now a gap where an enemy used to be. Anyone who’s competitive knows how important locker room fodder is: somebody telling you that you can’t win, that you’re not good enough – and the sickening thought of losing to a competitor. Post-acquisition, our team wasn’t ready for that void. With each team’s bitter foe gone, at times we felt like a team ready for the big game, but we were still unsure who we were playing against. Motivation wasn’t missing; it was just confused. We worked hard to regain focus and galvanize against a new common enemy.

The End Game

The RainKing integration process is now a distant memory for most of us, which tells me our efforts were a success. Getting deeply driven and competitive sales teams on the same page wasn’t easy, but by avoiding common missteps and forging common bonds, we emerged as a stronger, smarter, singular team – a whole greater than the sum of its parts.

David Sill is head of sales enablement at DiscoverOrg, the leading global sales and marketing intelligence tool used by more than 15,000 of the world’s fastest-growing companies to accelerate growth.

Want to Create Amazing Experiences? Start With Design Thinking.

Pete Dufner

As a creative director in a past life, I witnessed Natasha Jen’s “Design Thinking is Bull***” presentation back at the HOW conference in 2017. That’s why I approached this article carefully, with eyes wide open and BS detectors set on high. (If you haven’t seen her video yet, it’s 13 minutes well spent.)

Alexa, what’s design thinking? “Design thinking is a design methodology that provides a solution-based approach to solving problems. The five stages of design thinking are: empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test.” Ok, now hold on for a minute…is anyone else confused? Isn’t all problem-solving a solution-based approach? The answer would be, yes, but the real question we should be asking is HOW are we solving problems?

What if we started to solve problems with empathy, setting aside our own assumptions to get to the heart of what really matters? THAT is the beauty of design thinking. To those of us who have spent our lives sweating it out in creative departments, it really isn’t all that new. The process may not be perfect, but it lays the groundwork for us to ideate and execute programs that work harder, with greater return. Say it with me folks, empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test. And can I get an amen?

Changing participant behavior

Here at Creative Group, design thinking helped lead to the genesis of i|xperience® – our proprietary, human-centered design methodology. (Your BS detector might be going off, but stick with me.) It’s focused on one thing: changing participant behavior in support of our client’s goals. We use it to create meetings, events and incentive programs, but it’s really at the core of everything we do. It centers on the participant’s entire journey and infuses all the things that make up an amazing experience: intrigue, inspiration, influence, impression, interruption and immersion.

For example, we have a client that was set on having its event in the same tried-and-true destination, with the same tried-and-true activities. At the same time, they were amid a major culture change, as they looked to elevate their brand with a newly introduced luxury product line. The challenge was to get their team to elevate their game – their service, professionalism and brick-and-mortar aesthetics. By understanding their objectives, and applying our i|xperience methodology, we helped them create much greater impact by moving their event to a state-of-the-art NFL stadium – inviting their audience to go “Pro!” Participants were invited to run onto the field from the locker room (amidst adoring cheerleaders), see themselves on the JumboTron, attempt a few field goals and meet their favorite players. There was even a motivational “coach” who spoke on the topic of elevating their brand. Suddenly, an otherwise typical event became an unforgettable, once-in-a-lifetime, behavior-changing experience.

Another client had the all-too-familiar challenge of engaging a group with a broad variety of backgrounds, interests and ages – from twenty-somethings to baby boomers. We used i|xperience to create a program that offered a variety of different experience “paths” for participants to select from. For those looking to relax, we offered a serene, mountaintop sunrise yoga session. Others that valued hands-on learning (and tasting), enjoyed an afternoon with a local brewer, joining in on the beer-making process. And the thrill seekers? They had an epic off-road adventure awaiting them. These were just a few of the ways we offered personalization. And, by delivering the element of choice, it let employees know that their company was truly focusing on their desires – allowing them to enjoy their experience the way they wanted to.

Our philosophy is simple – it’s not just an event, it’s a journey. We do our best to walk in the participant’s shoes to ensure that we have engaged them at every touchpoint throughout the program – before, during and after the experience. To quote someone who said it better than I ever will – Charles Eames – “The role of the designer is that of a good, thoughtful host anticipating the needs of his guests.”

Pete Dufner is the Experience Design Director for Creative Group, a company that creates business-changing experiences that help people thrive. He has spent over 20 years crafting brand stories, and some tasty beers too.

Four Questions

Hug by Peter Dutton 5791411376 EDIT Salute by Michael Fletcher 1540211498 EDIT
Graduation by Germanna CC 26708111790 EDIT Firefighters by Andrew Magill amagill 3225245640 EDIT

Someone once shared with me how they assessed people, and it’s stayed with me for years. They would simply ask four questions:

Do I like you?

Do I respect you?

Would I recommend you for a job?

Would I follow you into a fire?

The answer doesn’t need to be Yes to all four questions all the time, of course. Just the one that’s most important at the moment.

Photos: Hug by Peter Dutton. Salute by Michael Fletcher. Graduation by Germanna C.C.. Firefighters by Andrew Magill. Yay Flickr and Creative Commons.

Hammering Eggs (Leadership and Problem-Solving)

Hammer Egg by Matthew bb_matt 207102083 EDIT

You’re a leader at a growing company who feels a great deal of responsibility to help your employees and colleagues solve problems. You’re skilled at spotting trouble early, identifying a solution quickly, and implementing it with vigor, and this has served you well, particularly in the early stages of the business. As I’ve observed in my coaching practice, “in the first few months (and sometimes years) after launching the company…every task and issue seems important, there aren’t many other people to delegate to, and it seems perilous to ignore things.” [1] In such an environment, a leader’s bias for action can mean the difference between survival and extinction.

But as you grow more senior and your organization scales, this forceful approach to problem-solving will at times be like cracking eggs with a hammer: Something gets accomplished, but a mess is made in the process. You may see a problem where none exists, or you may misdiagnose it. Your preferred solution may not be the best option, or the process by which it’s arrived at may generate resistance among your team. And you may miss organizational factors that will prevent or delay successful implementation of a solution.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that you should avoid acting decisively, abandon your intuitive judgment, or always delegate problem-solving to others. I am suggesting that you adapt your approach to problem-solving to fit the evolving needs of the organization around you, and this may entail doing less of what’s worked in the past. A central theme in my practice is that “a leader who continues to lead by doing more often becomes less effective and may even undermine the organization as it grows larger and more complex.” [2]

So before you jump in with a hammer, slow down and ask these questions first:

1. IS there a problem?

Your vantage point as a leader allows you to see problems that others can’t, and an ability to predict unanticipated problems may have enabled you to obtain a leadership role in the first place. At the same time, all human beings can be unduly influenced by vivid memories of past problems. Bad experiences are much more influential than good ones in shaping our impressions, and such memories are “more resistant to disconfirmation,” so we can cling tightly to any information that we interpret as evidence of a problem. [3]

And while your position affords you a broader perspective, your employees are probably closer to the issues at hand and may have more relevant or up-to-date expertise. As Peter Drucker realized long ago, “once beyond the apprentice stage, knowledge workers must know more about their job than their boss does–or else they are no good at all. In fact, that they know more about their job than anybody else in the organization is part of the definition of knowledge workers.” [4]

When you assume that a problem exists, employees may defer to your perspective and discount their own views.

2. WHAT is the problem?

Your experience allows you to pick up patterns that others miss and interpret data that others find opaque. Your holistic view across functions also enables you to see inter-dependencies that employees may not be able to observe. This can allow you to quickly diagnose the source of the issue–and yet a danger of early diagnosis is rooted in how our brains work, particularly when we’re under stress.

In every new situation, we construct an explanatory narrative that enables us to interpret what’s happening, and we can do so almost immediately based on only a tiny fraction of the potentially available information. Our brains are operating on the principle that it’s safer to have a story to help us make sense of our circumstances–any story at all–than to wait for additional information that will allow us to be absolutely sure our version of events is correct. We’re usually right–this is how we navigate the world successfully–but when we’re wrong it’s extraordinarily difficult to let go of our initial explanation, leading to overconfidence in our beliefs. As Nobel Prize-winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman has written,

The confidence that individuals have in their beliefs depends mostly on the quality of the story they can tell about what they see, even if they see little. We often fail to allow for the possibility that evidence that should be critical to our judgment is missing–what we see is all there is. Furthermore, [our brain] suppresses doubt and ambiguity. [5]

When you leap to a diagnosis, it’s easy to be “confidently wrong,” so bear in mind how much you don’t know and challenge your interpretation of events. [6]

3. What MIGHT be the solution?

The same skills that allow you to diagnose a problem rapidly may also you them to adopt a solution just as quickly–and, of course, the same cognitive biases noted above can hinder your ability to choose the best solution. Further, the difficulty of creative problem-solving is exacerbated when we’re under stress, which reduces our ability to process information and collaborate effectively, as executive coach David Rock has noted:

When threatened, the increased overall activation in the brain inhibits people from perceiving the more subtle signals required for solving non-linear problems, involved in the insight or ‘aha!’ experience (Subramaniam et al, 2007). [And] with the amygdala activated, the tendency is to generalize more, which increases the likelihood of accidental connections. There is a tendency to err on the safe side, shrinking from opportunities, as they are perceived to be more dangerous. People become more likely to react defensively to stimuli. Small stressors become more likely to be perceived as large stressors (Phelps, 2006). [7]

The key is keeping stress levels sufficiently low–your own and those of your employees–in order to allow for more expansive thinking and intuitive insights. A leader’s emotions are contagious, so your behavior and demeanor will have a significant impact on the surrounding atmosphere and the team’s ability to generate options.

4. How are WE contributing to the problem?

The term “iatrogenic illness” refers to health care problems caused by the health care system. Philosopher Ivan Illich noted that “iatrogenesis can be direct, when pain, sickness, and death result from medical care; or it can be indirect, when health policies reinforce an industrial Organisation which generates ill-health.” [8] There are analogous factors in business–we can think of them as “iatrogenic management.” In our haste to solve problems we often fail to consider ways in which our own behavior is contributing to the issue. Further, our efforts to solve the problem may actually make it worse.

It can be extremely difficult to assess the potential negative impact of our actions–we assume that our good intentions translate into positive results. Your perspective as a leader may allow you to observe how others are contributing to the problem, but sharing such observations can readily evoke defensiveness. This results from what Columbia Business School professor Adam Galinsky calls the “power amplification effect”–feedback from a leader often has a stronger impact than was intended, and ambiguous comments by those with more power tend to be interpreted negatively by those with less. [9] So it’s essential to use clear language and to work on making feedback less stressful. [10]

At the same time, you face the same challenge in assessing your own potential contributions to the problem, and others may be reluctant to give you this feedback. Power distorts what others choose to tell us and what we choose to hear, and the more power we have relative to someone else, the more distortion there is in the dialogue. You can and should seek to heighten your self-awareness by cultivating the practice of what Kennedy School professor Ron Heifetz calls “getting off the dance floor and going to the balcony” [11] to observe your own behavior, but you should also explicitly ask for direct feedback from others and make it safe for employees to point out how you may be making things worse.

5. WHO owns the decision?

This question was easier to answer early in the development of your company or team: You do. This offers advantages of simplicity and clarity, but when decision-making authority remains centralized as a business grows, the leader becomes a bottleneck, and decisions are made too far away from vital information. Employees need more agency and independence to move quickly and make full use of their expertise.

Management thinker Jurgen Appelo has identified “7 Levels of Delegation” to help leaders and their teams clarify how a decision will be made in any given situation:

1) TELL: Leader decides, no discussion

2) SELL: Leader decides and convinces

3) CONSULT: Leader seeks input and decides

4) AGREE: Leader and group decide together

5) ADVISE: Leader suggests and others decide

6) INQUIRE: Others decide and inform leader

7) DELEGATE: Others decide with no further discussion [13,14]

(Here’s an illustration.)

While it’s clearly useful to give some consideration to which level is best suited to a given issue, simply being aware of the options and agreeing on the process in advance may be the most important step.

6. What’s our collective readiness to CHANGE?

Successful implementation of a solution will likely require organizational change–and that process is almost certainly more complex than it was when the company was smaller and you were working on issues that cut across fewer functions. This is where even talented leaders can struggle to adapt–they grow frustrated with the longer timelines and the wider range of stakeholders that senior roles and larger organizations must accommodate. After laboring to surmount the issues discussed above, when resistance to change is encountered during implementation a leader may revert to past practice and break out the hammer.

Leaders in growing companies shouldn’t simply give in to bureaucracy, but they also need to keep their hammers safely stowed for real emergencies. As London Business School professor Rob Goffee and INSEAD professor Gareth Jones have written,

Leaders must conform enough [to the surrounding culture] if they are to make the connections necessary to deliver change. Leaders who succeed in changing organizations challenge the norms–but rarely all of them, all at once. They do not seek out instant head-on confrontation without understanding the organizational context. Indeed, survival (particularly in the early days) requires measured adaptation to an ongoing, established set of social relationships and organizational networks. [15, emphasis original]

This advice obviously applies to leaders who join long-established organizations as change agents from outside, but it also applies to leaders within growing companies where the culture is continuously evolving. Using Reid Hoffman’s metaphor, early-stage startups are like pirate ships–they “lack formal processes and are willing to question and even break rules.” [16] However, Hoffman continues, successful startups transition from a “pirate culture” to a “Navy culture” that’s more “sober and responsible.” The leader whose piratical ways saved the company in its early stages may find themselves out of step in a culture that now finds value in a more thoughtful, measured approach. [17]

When a leader is able to “conform to the culture just enough,” they can promote change in a complex environment by challenging established ways of operating without triggering undue resistance. A key step in this process is creating a sense of psychological safety. Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson has been studying the concept of safety in organizations for decades. [18,19] Leaders can take three specific steps to enhance safety, Edmondson notes:

First, set the stage. Create a shared understanding of the nature of the work we do and why everyone’s input matters… This is not about calling out potential incompetence. It means acknowledging out loud that by their nature our systems can compound mistakes, and unless we do everything with interpersonal awareness and focus, things can go wrong.

Having set the stage, it’s also important to proactively invite input. Asking is the simplest and best way to get people to offer their ideas. Even if a leader has explained how error-prone the work is, people still have a threshold to overcome in speaking up with concerns or mistakes. To help them, simply ask questions…like: “What do you see in this situation?”…

Third, respond appreciatively. Having explained the nature of the work and asked for input, if you bite someone’s head off the first time they bring bad news, that will kill the psychological safety pretty quickly… Responding appreciatively does not mean that you’re thrilled with everything that was said; it means that you recognize the courage it takes to come forward with bad news, or to ask a question when you’re unsure about something. [20]

In the absence of psychological safety, we resist change because of what longtime MIT Sloan professor Edgar Schein called “learning anxiety,” which is “the feeling that if we allow ourselves to enter a learning or change process, if we admit to ourselves and others that something is wrong or imperfect, we will lose our effectiveness, our self-esteem and maybe even our identity… It is the dealing with learning anxiety, then, that is the key to producing change… This process can be conceptualized in its own right as creating for the learner some degree of ‘psychological safety.'” [21]

So note that psychological safety in an organization is a resource, not a destination. The point is not to create safety for the mere sake of doing so, but to make it easier for people to experiment, take risks, learn and grow–in short, to change. [22]


[1] Early-Stage Survival and Later-Stage Success

[2] How to Scale: Do Less, Lead More

[3] Bad Is Stronger Than Good (Roy Baumeister, Ellen Bratslavsky, Catrin Finkenauer and Kathleen Vohs, Review of General Psychology, 2001)

[4] Management Challenges for the 21st Century, Chapter 1: “Management’s New Paradigms,” page 18 (Peter Drucker, 2001)

[5] Thinking, Fast and Slow, pages 87-88 (Daniel Kahneman, 2011)

[6] Seeing What’s Not There (The Importance of Missing Data)

[7] SCARF: A brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others, page 3 (David Rock, NeuroLeadership Journal, 2008)

[8] Medical nemesis (Ivan Illich, The Lancet, 1974. Reprinted in the BMJ: Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2003)

[9] When You’re In Charge, Your Whisper May Feel Like a Shout (Adam Galinsky, The New York Times, 2015)

[10] Make Feedback Less Stressful

[11] A Survival Guide for Leaders (Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky, Harvard Business Review, 2002)

[12] How to Scale: Do Less, Lead More

[13] Leadership, Decision-Making and Emotion Management

[14] The 7 Levels of Delegation (Jurgen Appelo, 2015)

[15] Why Should Anyone Be Led By You?, pages 109-110 (Rob Goffee and Gareth Jones, 2006)

[16] Why Uber Needs to Transition from “Pirate” to “Navy” (Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn, 2017)

[17] Pirates In the Navy

[18] Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams (Amy Edmondson, Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999)

[19] The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace (Amy Edmondson, 2018)

[20] Make Your Employees Feel Psychologically Safe (Amy Edmondson interviewed by Martha Lagace, Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, 2018)

[21] Kurt Lewin’s Change Theory in the Field and in the Classroom: Notes Toward a Model of Managed Learning, page 5 (Edgar Schein, 1995)

[22] Safety, Trust Intimacy

For Further Reading

The Importance of Slowing Down

Taking the Leap (Dealing with Risk and Uncertainty)

How Leaders Create Safety (and Danger)

Photo by Matthew. Yay Flickr and Creative Commons.

Lead Generation Experts