Like most Salesforce Admins, I spend a lot of time in meetings. In fact, I spend more time in meetings talking about Salesforce than I actually do working in Salesforce. One of the topics that comes up for every single client, no matter what the company size, is Lead Source. Lead Source is a standard picklist, every org has it by default, and everyone needs to use it in some form or another. In this post, we’re going to talk about the meaning behind the phrase “Lead Source” and why there’s such a heavy debate over what purpose it serves. If you’re looking for a technical understanding of how this field functions across objects, check out this excellent article by Lucy Mazalon.
So, if everyone needs it, and it’s a standard field, why have the debate? It seems straightforward enough – select the source of the record, and then move on with your life. Unfortunately in the real world, that’s not how it works. The real debate comes when you try to answer the question…
What Does “Lead Source” Mean?
The answer to this question is not so clear cut. I asked this question to some of my clients, and got a wide variety of answers:
Client A: “Lead Source means what is the physical source of the lead stamped on the Lead Record (i.e. did the name come from a physical event and lead list uploaded, an inbound from the website for a demo request, a BDR pulling it in from LinkedIn Sales Nav, a Rep typing the lead details in manually from a contact on their phone that they’ve worked with before, etc.)”.
Client B: “To me, “lead source” asks “What initiated this person to engage with our company?” – whether it’s through outbound activities, online/conferences/field events, word of mouth, previous relationship at another company, etc.”.
At first glance, it may sound like they’re saying the same thing, but they’re saying the exact opposite of each other. Client A argues that Lead Source refers to the technical mechanism by which a record came to exist in the database. Client B is saying that Lead Source refers to what action initiated the prospect to engage (not how the prospect came into our database.)
Here’s an example to illustrate the difference. Let’s say I’m a Sales Rep, and I’m targeting the VP of MegaCorp. I get the email address for the VP from ZoomInfo, and invite them to have a meeting with me at our upcoming Trade Show. The VP agrees, and the meeting is a success. What is the Lead Source here?
Answer A: “I don’t think so. ZoomInfo is just the tool we use to collect contact details, and that’s about it. If we found the contact details through a list-building agency, would we credit the list-building agency as the source? Probably not.”
Answer B: “Yes. If a rep sourced a lead via ZoomInfo, wouldn’t that be the perfect lead source?”
The arguments generally fall into these two categories:
I’m going to make a broad generalization here, so keep in mind this is not always true. I’ve found that Marketing tends to favor the first definition, and Sales tends to favor the second. This is because (again, generally speaking) Marketing is often responsible for the bulk of inbound Lead generation. Trying to get as many high-value prospects into the database as possible.
With this in mind, it makes sense that they’d want to know the exact mechanism by which a Lead came in, and then be able to calculate the cost and return on investment. On the other hand, Sales tends to be less concerned with where the Lead came from itself, and more from which actions changed that Lead from a random prospect into measurable potential pipeline.
And so begins the battle.
Make It Make Sense!
As Admins and Consultants, Salesforce users often look to us to determine what is the “right” way to do things. But what is “right” in this situation? If we think about the above example, neither client is wrong – the Lead’s information did come from ZoomInfo, and the Lead did engage because they met with the Sales Rep.
So if they’re both right, why argue? It comes down to who gets the credit, where does attribution fall, and measuring ROI for prospect acquisition tools.
The real problem here is that there’s only a single field, and it’s the same field on Leads, Contacts, Accounts, and Opportunities.
In the real world, “Lead Source” on an Opportunity probably means something totally different than “Lead Source” on a Lead or Contact record.
Conflict Resolution
As with most things, the way to resolve this issue has multiple steps. Decide what you need, customize your org, and educate your users.
Decisions, Decisions, Decisions
This is where each team is going to decide what metrics they want to track, and how they want to do so. Here’s a list of some of the most common metrics I see:
- Original Lead Source
- Original Lead Source Detail
- Most Recent Lead Source
- Most Recent Lead Source Detail
- Opportunity Source
- Opportunity Source Detail
- UTM Source
The list could go on. You may notice on that list that there is no plain “Lead Source”. You’ll also want to consider the hierarchy of the data that you’re capturing. For example, most people use multiple prospecting databases, so your Original Lead Source might be “Prospecting Database” but your Original Lead Source Detail would be “Lusha”. This allows you to group your Leads at a high level, but also see the detail if and when needed. The method above allows both Sales and Marketing to get what they need, on the object they need, without conflicting with data requirements from other teams.
Another thing to consider is what are your legal obligations in your country, or the countries that you sell to. If a prospect sends you an angry email that says, “Why are you sending me this? I didn’t subscribe to this. Explain to me how you got my email address.” Are you legally obligated to answer? What is a sufficient response, must you include the exact name of the database?
You may need to work with the legal team for your business to find out what your specific obligations are in this situation.
Customize Your Org
Almost everybody needs more than one field. What you need will depend on your business model, what teams are using the data, what your legal requirements are, and what other tools you have that might measure sources (like Marketo, Hubspot, or Pardot.) Now is the time to build out in a sandbox, create test data, and work with your stakeholders to make sure that the metrics you generate are valuable and scalable for your business.
Education
This step is critical. Everyone in your org who looks at Leads, Contacts, Accounts, and Opportunities should know exactly what each of your custom fields mean, and what purpose they serve. You do not want to spend the rest of your time at your company answering the same questions over and over again, and you certainly do not want to get into another debate when new team members come on board.
Create thorough documentation that explains everything your company has decided on as a business practice, and make sure all new users are trained. (I get this is not exciting for a lot of admins – remember, training videos and documentation are your friend!)
Summary
As an admin, the existence of a single, cross-object Lead Source has been a never-ending source of frustration for both myself and my users. That’s why establishing meaning and metrics upfront is so crucial to running a successful Salesforce org. Hopefully, this post helps you better understand why the disagreement exists, and be better prepared to help your users resolve the issue. This will ensure that the future of your Salesforce org is stable, and provides valuable metrics for business growth over the long term.