It’s good that trust is back in fashion for demand generation at the strategic level – but we’ve got to put those words into action across all marcom tactics too
“How do marketers balance trust-building with immediate lead generation?
That’s a question a consultancy called The Marketing Geeks put to 300 marketers in December of 2024 – just a few months ago. The results of the survey suggest that many are coming to believe trust has an increasingly important role in demand generation (demand gen).
The final report produced findings like the following:
- 60% of CMOs and marketing VPs “identified trust-building strategies as essential for long-term success”;
- Likewise, 60% of demand gen managers aim to earn trust through “customer testimonials” because they believe testimonials build credibility; and
- “65% of respondents rated educational content as ‘very important’ for audience engagement, highlighting the demand for trust-building and value-driven strategies.”
In fact, the word “trust” appears 20 times in a 20-page report.
Trust shows up in several of the graphics created based on the data. For example, in the graphic below, trust ranks as one of the top three factors necessary to generate demand. More importantly, the more tenure in marketing the respondent had, the more likely they were to prioritize trust-building activities.
(click image for higher resolution) 
Trust is also among the top priorities moving forward. For example, ~48% of respondents who identified as the “head of marketing” said trust-building was the most important factor. Interestingly, those with junior titles were more likely to say trust building was a top priority moving forward than those holding a CMO or VP of marketing title.
Taking these two charts together, I don’t think it’s a leap of faith to conclude that trust has always been a priority for senior marketers – and the idea is catching on in the rank and file.
(click image for higher resolution)
Bold ideas on trust need tactical actions that match
It’s good to see that trust-building is a strategic priority for marketers of all ranks moving forward. It’s long overdue. We’ve been ruining trust on a tactical level for years. Consider the following examples:
- Datelines. Many companies have stopped putting datelines on content. Why? Because we want people (or search engines) to think the content is fresh even when it’s not. That’s intentional deception. There is no reason to remove datelines from content except to be deceptive.
- Bylines. Many companies have stopped putting bylines on content. Why? There are a myriad of reasons, but some of the common ones are a) an ego problem with someone on the team or b) no one wants to be held accountable for the words published. Unless you are writing for The Economist, put a byline on it!
- Gated content. We want contact information in exchange for gated content. This is a tried-and-true tactic that works when the copy behind the gate is valuable. Too often, it falls short of the promises on the landing page – and then you get bombarded with a “nuture stream” and messages from a well-intended SDR. This erodes trust.
- About us. These sections of company websites have been paired down. I’m always surprised by the number that do not describe the people behind the company explicitly. Prospects and customers want to know who the key players are. Why? I have no idea. This makes no sense to me. Do you trust nameless and faceless organizations? People want to know who you are and that you have a meaningful backstory.
- No-reply emails. Many companies send emails from no-reply addresses. Why? Because they don’t really want to hear back from customers. Customers are a pain in the butt – so they make it hard to get in touch with a real person. So, email as a channel catches a disease called “output only” where communication, by definition, is dialogic. Do you trust people who make it hard to talk to them? Probably not. The same goes for a brand.
- Pricing pages. Too many tech companies have a pricing page with no pricing on it. Not even a price range. To get a price, you have to have that awkward discovery call with a salesperson, who will ask uncomfortable questions. They are not asking these questions to help – they are asking to gain leverage to maximize the deal size. I can appreciate that sales is a hard and thankless job, but balance is still useful.
- No contact info on press releases. I frequently see press releases on major distribution platforms with no contact information. As a public relations person, I do not understand the logic here. It’s like tossing an announcement over the fence to reporters and expecting them to cover it; good luck with that.
These are just a few examples off the top of my head – there are many more that could be listed here. And maybe you’d quibble with me over some of these. I’m not here to argue the corner cases. The point I’m making is that the collective behavior of marketing shops everywhere has to match what we are saying.
In other words, it’s great that this survey says trust is back in fashion for demand generation, but we’ve got to put those words into action.
The Marketing Geeks conclude the report, in part, by noting:
“Marketers must establish relationships built on trust by consistently delivering valuable insights, educational content, and meaningful interactions that go beyond the sales pitch.”
For sure, I agree. And yet I’d hasten to add, it’s not just the content or the message alone that matters – but how it’s delivered – to include the experience. We can’t say one thing yet do another and expect that to build trust.
I first spotted the survey in a Martech article by Mike Pastore; the complete report is available here.
* * *
>>> Subscribe by email for free: Check out my weekly blog posts, weekly podcasts, or a monthly newsletter that rounds up interesting reading from the last 30 days (examples).
If you enjoyed this post, you might also like:
Trust issues: the one reason buyers give B2B content a letter grade of “D”
Image credit: Google Gemni and respective report
English