The breakup email is one of the best examples of misinterpreting performance data.
At one point, someone looked at their email response rates and saw that the email shaming potential customers for not responding to your spam mail (what is now known as ‘the breakup email’) was performing better than other emails.
They accepted that this data point meant the breakup email would lead to more responses, so they demanded that their BDR team have a breakup email in every cadence they send.
Some vendors with a great deal of self-interest in better-performing spam emails picked up this response rate as proof of a good tactic and pushed out use cases, case studies, and speaker series, preaching the power of the breakup email. Others copied this same practice in the pursuit of better response rates, and the mob mentality around this trend has resulted in most of us with inboxes full of breakup emails and its equally painful sister email that simply says 'thoughts?'.
This is all because we incorrectly used response rate as the metric that defined success in driving demand.
Instead, we needed to look at breakup emails success in the context of actual revenue performance. Setting up a revenue engine framework means that you can evaluate areas of your GTM such as email performance against important revenue milestones such as better meetings, higher rate of pipe gen, more closed customers and most importantly customers that retain and grow.
The popularity of the breakup email is one example of the problem when we interpret results in siloed, one-off metrics without looking at performance across your revenue engine.
This means that to make data-driven decisions, you must take the time to define, identify, and track your key go-to-market milestones that drive revenue for your organization. Once this is in place, you can obtain a realistic picture of what actions, behaviors, and strategies drive revenue. Skipping this critical step is how your potential customers end up with inboxes full of breakup emails.