Why Inbound-Only is Costing

Here's the 3-17-80 rule:

3% of your target market is searching for a new provider right now.

17% of your target market will never leave their current solution.

80% of your target market is in the Zone of Indifference.

Here's how the numbers look if you target 1,000 businesses:

• 30 are actively shopping

• 170 will never leave their current solution

• 800 are ripe for displacement

Here's an over-the-shoulder explainer of the Zone of Indifference I gave to a client yesterday.  He targets EOS Implementors.

CQ

What is the 3-17-80 rule?

A breakdown of any target market into three groups: 3% actively searching for a new provider right now, 17% who will never leave their current solution, and 80% sitting in what's called the Zone of Indifference.

What does the Zone of Indifference actually represent?

The 80% of a target market that isn't actively shopping but also isn't fully committed to staying with their current solution. They're not searching, but they're not locked in either.

Why does relying solely on inbound growth miss most of the market?

Because inbound typically only reaches the 3% actively searching. That leaves the 80% in the Zone of Indifference largely untouched, even though they represent the biggest opportunity for displacement.

What do these numbers look like applied to 1,000 target businesses?

About 30 are actively shopping, 170 will never leave their current solution, and 800 sit in the Zone of Indifference, ripe for displacement with the right approach.

How does this concept apply to a real example, like targeting EOS Implementors?

The over-the-shoulder explainer walks through how this framework was applied directly with a client in that space, showing how the 80% Zone of Indifference specifically shows up when targeting EOS Implementors.