Why are the rates of marketing automation adoption so low?

We have made the leap and committed to Marketo - I think one of the first UK customers. One reason is that initially the platforms seem to be aggregating other tools and have a reasonably substantial price tag. The second reason is that the investment in time to fully implement, integrate and train is also quite a burden - this is stage we are currently at. The big payback though looks to be where we as a central team supply content and campaign framework which can then be accessed and rolled out by our regional teams. It really helps with brand consistency but equally gives autonomy to local users who chose what to send, to whom and when. Then there is the lead nurturing aspect...but we are still working on that!

My experience is that the key is not the technology, but its around having a clear vision, a sensible implementation strategy and then the right people to implement, test and measure. No surprises there for anyone who has implemented any new marketing approach. I'm sure it will come but the key I'm sure will be juggling competing priorities and having a clear business case over and above other traditional marketing approaches.

I think the key problem is market automation is seen very much as a great but vague idea which companies know they should probably get around to doing sometime. Vendors haven’t yet managed to build “the pain” enough to make people breakdown their doors demanding their software. Not many companies can stop the world to implement a new system, especially if they don’t see potential enormous benefits. And as Jane is finding out it is a big commitment. Marketing automation has a difficult position in most companies. The marketing department see the benefits but IT will generally be in charge of new system and it'll be a mjor project for them. As Casper says, both are likely to have more pressing business priorities than implanting a new and expensive system that fixes a problem they didn’t know they had.