I was recently a part of a spirited discussion between some scientists and marketers in the Analytical Instruments Professional Network Group on LinkedIn. It came about as a result of sharing this blog post about getting content first (in any form) and worrying about format later, which I still think is a great idea.
You can read the LinkedIn discussion yourself, but it touched on what a few scientists found useful (and sometimes useless) in marketing communications from our industry.
I thought it would be more helpful (and fun) to talk to someone than to debate endlessly on LinkedIn. I invited one of the participants, Bob Kobelski, to share his buying process and ideas on how MarCom could be more helpful.
In this recorded conversation, Bob reveals:
- A detailed buying process for analytical instrumentation
- Where MarCom falls short in providing useful information to customers
- The consequences of making irrelevant claims
- The types of data he finds most useful for purchase decisions
- What he really wants to know about your software, regardless of whether it’s “intuitive”
- His preferred scenario for training
Oh yeah, at the end he shares his favorite pastime. Scientists are full of surprises.
What are your thoughts? Leave a comment below.
About my Guest: Robert (Bob) Kobelski
Bob is a chemist who has made a career working for Johnson & Johnson, Hewlett Packard, and most recently the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. He is currently the owner and principal scientist at Resolution Sciences, a training and consulting company in Alpharetta, Georgia specializing in chromatography and mass spectrometry.