Liam Moroney

B2B Trust Is Really About Reducing Decision Risk

B2B talks about building trust where we often mean reducing risk. Yes, we certainly want people to trust that our product can do what we claim, and trust in the accuracy of our data or integrity of our security, but much of the trust we're really talking about is trust that going with us won't turn out to be a bad decision for them. A lot of the reason that people don't go with a vendor isn't because they don't believe it can do what it says, but because they don't want to risk being wrong, and have to shoulder the blame for it. The trouble with trust is that we frequently think about it in the same way for businesses as we would for personal relationships. Where trust grows with exposure - the more you get to know a person, the more you see their character and the more you come to trust them. And so that's how we conduct much of our marketing. We deliver as many touchpoints as we can (only digitally measurable ones, of course), especially using the most hyped-up social proof we can create, and we keep following the same decades old logic of lead scoring and lead nurturing: Market to them until we shape them into customers. And, for sure more brand interactions do build relationships and perceptions, especially the human-to-human ones like events and community, but they usually doesn't mitigate the real purchase risk that prevents us from becoming a serious contender, especially when selling into bigger companies. Purchase risk is comparative. It's about how risky you are compared to alternatives, usually bigger companies or legacy options. It's also about whether legacy technology is safer than newer options, and it's worth noting that older isn't always better in tech. Of course, small companies can't suddenly change the reality that they are small, so they have to approach that risk differently. Who is most likely to tolerate riskier options, and why? What is the upside for them taking on that risk or the perceived risk that comes with choosing the safe status quo? Instead of reducing that risk, we can look for who doesn't share the same view of it. Instead of beating the low odds of winning as an underdog we search for places where the odds are better because the risk is not felt the same. Small brands don't overcome risk by pretending to be big brands. Buyers, and especially buying groups see through that and are often designed to prevent that from working. We often overcome risk by understanding it better and using that understanding to our advantage. We think in bets instead of accrued touchpoints, finding the audiences and segments who will choose the better, riskier purchase, that allows us grow and become a bigger, less risky one.