The Future of Win-Loss Analysis

Update: This webinar was held on August 28, 2018. To request access to the webinar recording click here.

---

Win-loss analysis is a tactic B2B organizations have used for decades to fine-tune their sales processes, improve their product or service offerings, and capture valuable competitive intelligence.

Whether you’re new to the practice, or have been a practitioner for decades, it’s important to stay informed of new developments in win-loss best practices, methodologies, and technologies.

Webinar 3.jpeg

On Tuesday, August 28th, Clozd will host the webinar, “The Future of Win-Loss Analysis.” Join us as Andrew Peterson (Clozd co-founder) and Braydon Anderson (VP Operations) contrast outdated win-loss methods with modern alternatives.

We’ll explore some of the innovative methods being used by leading B2B organizations to improve data quality, boost participation rates, broaden sample sizes, and drive more meaningful action.

Title: The Future of Win-Loss Analysis
Presented by: Clozd
Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Time: 12:00 PM EDT
Cost: Free

Webinar Transcript

Braydon Anderson:                                  

Hello everyone, and welcome to today's webinar. We're really excited to be hosting this webinar on the future of win-loss analysis. Just some quick introductions. First of all, I'm Braydon Anderson. I'm the VP of operations here at Clozd. Clozd is a win-loss provider conducting win-loss interviews, win-loss surveys, and we'll dive a little bit more into that as we go through this webinar today. And then I also want to introduce Andrew Peterson, who is the co-founder here at Clozd. And will be taking the majority of today's webinar.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Hey everybody, this is Andrew. We appreciate you guys attending. We know you're all really busy and so we've tried to put together a webinar that we think will be valuable for you guys. And we assume that a lot of you who are joining are probably practitioners of win-loss analysis. And so we're excited to have you on the call. That survey that you're taking is just going to ask you some questions about your current efforts as it relates to win loss analysis, and then serve up some suggestions for you at the end. So it's a fun little exercise to go through if you are in fact already practicing win-loss analysis.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

So to get started, we just want to tell you a little bit about our company's roots. Our roots as an organization go back to my co-founder Spencer Dent's days at Bain & Company. He was a case team leader there for a while, and he was involved in their Salesforce effectiveness practice. Spencer, as I was saying, spent about four years at Bain involved in their Salesforce effectiveness practice. He was involved in overhauling the go-to market strategy and structure for example, a fortune five telecom company, did a lot of executive interviewing there. And also was involved in helping companies implement customer experience measurement programs. For those of you that are familiar with a net promoter score framework, that was invented by Bain & Company and Spencer was involved there in implementing those kinds of research programs. And that led to Spencer being recruited to Qualtrics back to his home state of Utah, where Qualtrics, for those of you who aren't familiar is a world leader in survey research. They have a platform designed for customer and an employee experience measurement. They're becoming more and more well-known. There's probably an IPO looming later this year for them.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And that's where Spencer and I met each other. I had been at Qualtrics for about four years when Spencer came. We were both there together for about four more years seeing the company go from about 30 employees to about 1500 employees. And in the process, we were involved in initiatives like launching new products, opening new offices and new geographies, and also transforming the sales, go to market from an inside sales model to an enterprise sales model. And as the company grew, we realized in about 2013 that we needed be doing win loss analysis. And there were a lot of different reasons for that. But as the company grew, the executive team was growing more and more distant from our customers. And we needed more strategic alignment around why we were actually winning and losing. And we found that up to that point, as the company grew, a lot of strategic decisions were being made based off of anecdotes that made their way up to the C-suite.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And we wanted a real robust understanding of why we're winning and losing to shape strategy rather than those anecdotes. And so we knew we needed to implement win loss analysis. Some of the other reasons we were hoping to enable the sales team and improve our win rates. We thought a solid win loss analysis would help sales reps in their efforts to improve sales productivity, and also help new sales hires get up to speed faster. We knew that it would help our product team to hone product strategy and roadmap. It would help us capture valuable competitive Intel and sharpen our marketing content and messaging, help us empathize more with our actual buyers and what they're looking for, what their key requirements were. And also, ultimately, as we made changes and implemented the feedback from win-loss, we knew it also helped us increase our client retention rates.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And so as an organization, we came to this realization that win-loss analysis or feedback from your buyers post decision is perhaps the most valuable form of feedback that you can be getting as an organization. Even though Qualtrics is a feedback company, we realized that win-loss analysis is more closely tied to revenue generation than any other feedback, any NPS, employee experience measurement, market research, and win loss analysis is all about improving your win rates and driving more revenue for your business. And so we were very motivated to go and implement a program. And what we expected when we came to look for vendors that could help us... we knew we needed a third party to help us implement the program as it wasn't our specialty, even though we were a feedback company. And we also felt like it was important to have a neutral third party conducting the qualitative interviews that we wanted to conduct with our buyers.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And so we went out and we looked for vendors. And we expected to find a similar pace of innovation and similar level of competency in the win-loss space that we were used to in other feedback realms, like the employee engagement space. And these are charts just from G2 Crowd, where you can see there are so many competitors in each of the feedback arenas the Qualtrics is involved in. You look at employee engagement, you look at the market research space, you look at the customer experience or NPS measurement space. Each of these areas had fierce competition and technical innovation happening constantly for years. The NPS space going back a decade has seen incredible evolution of the offerings in that space. And we just expected to see more of the same in the win-loss space.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And to be frank, we were disappointed or let down when we found that there were really only four or five entities that we could even find that offered win-loss analysis services. And when we did investigate them more thoroughly, we found that very few of them had any technology enabling their programs. So we were let down by that and surprised by that. We ended up going with a vendor that helped us, but not surprisingly the program floundered a little bit when we implemented that. And it was through these experiences that Spencer Dent and I realized that there was an opportunity and there was a need to go and innovate in this space. And that's what led us and others from Qualtrics to leave and go found Clozd.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And so our goal today is just to essentially introduce you to our perspective on the future of win-loss analysis. And highlight some of the prevailing practices that we've seen, that we saw while we were at Qualtrics. And that we've seen since as we founded Clozd and talked with hundreds of organizations over the last two years, about how they're implementing win loss. And propose modern alternatives to that and introduce some of the things that we're doing with clients. And also that we foresee happening in this space going forward. And we hope it's helpful to you guys, as you practice win-loss analysis. And of course, if there are any questions throughout this, any areas that we don't cover as thoroughly as you'd like, feel free to reach out to us and post questions during the webinar, through the chat, or feel free to reach out to us afterwards. And we'd love to hear your perspectives and talk to you more about these different points.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

But the first prediction that we have for this space is that we really feel like with these other types of feedback, that win-loss is going to transform from a niche market research activity that traditionally has struggled to garner the attention of key leaders or the C-suite. And it's going to transform into a very highly visible executive sponsor type of initiative that's going to drive meaningful insights at meaningful moments for key leaders in these businesses. It's going to become a key tool for the executive team. And we've seen that transformation in these other feedback spaces. Ten years ago when I started at Qualtrics, very few executives that I talked to had ever heard of the NPS framework. Fast forward to 2018, and it's almost table stakes now. The companies have implemented some form of customer experience or customer loyalty program and that the executive team is plugged into that and tracking that. And the same thing we foresee happening in the win-loss space.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

We've also seen, as we've talked to various organizations that traditionally companies have had very small qualitative sample sizes for their win-loss programs, and that could be due to budget constraints or other constraints in their organizations. But in the future, as we move forward, we really foresee that that's going to change. And that companies are going to pursue larger qualitative sample sizes. And that's going to be enabled through probably a few different factors. We feel like as the executive team becomes more engaged and involved in sponsoring these programs, now that's going to expand the budgets for these programs and enable more interviews to be conducted and broadened broader sample sizes. But we also foresee that companies are going to start coupling their qualitative sample size with broader quantitative sampling, where maybe they can't reach out to all of their accounts or their entire pipeline with qualitative interviews, but they can supplement the qualitative with quantitative research. And we've seen that happening with some organizations and seen success stories. And we feel like that's going to become more and more common going forward.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Another element that we feel like will change going forward is... As we've looked into the space, as we've talked to companies, we've found that there's really antiquated techniques being used for how people schedule interviews. And going forward, companies are going to pursue more technology heavy approaches to scheduling that are going to ease the burden on the interviewee and improve participation rates. And there's all kinds of tools available now that can help with that. So even if you're running a win-loss program internally and doing these interviews yourself, there are tools out there that can help you lessen the burden on the interviewee. Expecting them to exchange emails with you or exchange phone calls with you to try and schedule an interview just doesn't make sense in 2018. And we're continually surprised that that's how other vendors or other companies are pursuing scheduling these interviews.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

You need to use technology. There's tools like bookio or Calendly, checkfront that, make this process really simple and easy. And lessen that burden on the participant so that they can just select the time to meet with the consultant or meet with you for an interview without having to have all of that back and forth. Another prevailing practice that we've seen in this space is that the interviews being conducted, resemble more of a rigid phone survey that have a tendency to lead the participant and prevent them from being able to tell their full story. A good qualitative interview should enable that participant to really open up and tell their story from their perspective. And what we found is that a lot of organizations have really rigid, really long interview guides with really specific questions about the topics that they as an organization want feedback about. And they're not taking into account that the goal of win-loss analysis is to find out why they made the decision that they made.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And you need to hear the story from their perspective. You can obviously probe and drill down as you hear key topics surface as they give their explanation, but you need to have more open-ended interview guides. If you're using technology to synthesize the feedback, to organize the transcripts from the interviews, and things like that, you need to have a more flexible platform that caters to that flexibility that allows the interviewer to ask unique questions and unique situations based on what they're hearing from the participant. And so we see going forward that the qualitative component of these programs needs to allow more adaptation, more flexibility on the part of the interviewer. Obviously, to do that, you need a skilled interviewer. Someone that's also familiar with your company who's built up a good foundation of understanding about your product offering, your company, your market, your competitors, so that they can be ready to probe appropriately. But it's important that you give that interviewee the opportunity to tell their story from their perspective.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Another opportunity going forward to improve your approach to win loss analysis is to move away from an antiquated incentive strategy. And in fact, most of the companies we've talked to don't have an incentive strategy in place for rewarding your interviewees. And we realized that there are regulations in certain industries or certain companies have certain policies around incentive. So it's not possible for every company to offer incentives, but for those that can, it's valuable to implement an incentive strategy. And to use modern technology to automate the incentives and provide an incentive that's going to motivate a higher percentage of your lost prospects or won and lost prospects to participate in these interviews.

Braydon Anderson:                                    

Andrew, I think a common question that we get a lot around incentives is around industry regulation. Some people have concerns around giving incentives and whatnot. What would you say to those people that are worried about maybe industry regulations around incentives and whatnot?

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Good question. There are a few things that we see. Some companies, it's just not possible. Industries like healthcare are highly regulated. And there's a lot of trepidation for those types of companies to offer an incentive. But ultimately you have to think about a few things. If you're using the right technology, you can allow things like charitable donations, which will still allow you to offer an incentive, but the recipient's going to be able to self-regulate and decide, is it appropriate for them to accept some monetary incentive or gift card, or will they opt for donating that to charity? The other factor that you have to consider is that if you are working with a third party that is conducting these interviews for you, there's an advantage in that sense that it is the third party that's offering the incentive and providing that monetary incentive, not your organization. And that can help some organizations get around the regulation and enable an incentive strategy. And there are also some other concerns that people have about incentivizing.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And I've pulled some of the research from Eleanor Singer. This is information that was presented at the national science foundation about research that's been done on incentives. And Eleanor's from the University of Michigan Survey Research Center. And there are a few important things here as they relate to incentivizing your participants. The first thing is that they do in fact improve participation rates. And we've seen that in the programs we've run for clients. It's not going to be a huge change in your participation rate, but it is going to drive higher participation. The second thing is that monetary incentives tend to be better than gifts. So as you've scoped technology to automate your incentive program, you can take that into consideration. But then probably most importantly is that third item that some people are worried that incentives are going to impact response quality, and that has been found to not be true. In all the research that's been done, at least from the perspective of Eleanor, incentives have almost zero effect on the quality of the response.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And so really the only objective that we've found to incentivization that's probably realistic is if there is some form of regulation in your industry or at your organization that prevents you from implementing incentives. Another trend or prevailing practice that we've seen is that companies have really time-consuming or manual processes for compiling their lists of interviewer survey candidates. For those of you that have been involved in working with a third party to run your win-loss program, you've probably been involved in that. It's usually the most rigorous part of implementing a win-loss program, is actually getting the contacts over to your vendors so they can go and schedule interviews or send out surveys invitations. And we believe going forward is that technology is going to enable the automation of list generation through CRM integration.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And some people have Some fears about Automating the list generation. They tend to believe that certain accounts need that manual oversight. And so we believe that will be addressed though, too, as far as configurable rules and flexible workflows that put careful rules in place as to which accounts do get passed over. And could even enable a workflow where certain individuals or leaders have an approval list that they'd looked through before the contacts actually pass over to the vendor or invitations actually gets sent out to schedule interviews or surveys.

Braydon Anderson:                                

So basically what I'm trying to understand there, Andrew, is a lot of times you want to have a very strict sample of who you're trying to interview and get feedback from. So when you're trying to vet who to actually interview, how do we handle that? And it sounds like it's setting up rules in the CRM and making sure that you're still going to only reach out to the people you want to reach out to, but just automating the entire process within the CRM and the integrations. Is that accurate?

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Yeah, exactly. And we believe that going forward, just like has happened in other feedback rounds, companies are going to start erring on the side of inviting people, rather than not inviting them to participate in a win-loss review, whether it's a survey or an interview. It doesn't hurt to be turned down, but it does hurt if, for example, your sales org always says no to you reaching out to accounts that you really need feedback about. The sales reps have a tendency to want feedback from their won accounts and to not want feedback from their lost accounts. And that makes sense. But as an organization, you need that feedback. And so, going forward, there's going to be a flexible automations built with CRM systems that take out that manual effort that compile the lists of potential candidates automatically. And then potentially pass that over to someone, like those of you who are on the call for some oversight before those go out. But ultimately companies are going to start erring on the side of inviting and leveraging technology to reduce that burden of figuring out who they should invite to participate in win-loss reviews.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Another practice that we've seen is conservativism, as far as who you share the feedback with. And even antiquated methods of sharing the win-loss findings across your organization. And what we mean by that is, companies that we've talked to, many have some fear about sharing the win-loss findings widely. What if there's negative feedback about a particular sales rep? Or what if there's critical feedback about a product or element of a product that's been built by a particular product team or whatever that might be? There may be fear of offending people. There may be fear about how has the negative feedback or the critical feedback impact morale or company culture? But what we have seen again and again and again, in these other feedback rounds that we were involved with at Qualtrics is that companies move away from that. And they develop a culture that embraces critical feedback. And they begin to realize that, "Yeah, in many cases, the feedback that we get, those that participate are going to have negative feedback and it's an opportunity to learn and grow and improve."

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And so companies that have embraced that are leveraging innovative technology to help democratize the win-loss findings. And share them much more liberally across the organization, rather than having a gatekeeper summer in the org that holds that information tightly and only disperses it out at certain times or in certain meetings or what whatnot. There's going to be a movement towards total democratization of the win-loss findings.

Braydon Anderson:                                    

Which begs the question of, how liberal should people be with sharing of the findings?

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Obviously, it's going to differ from one company to the next. There is a company culture element that you have to tackle when you go and try to share the win-loss insights. But ultimately we found that almost every company that we work with, that we talked to could be more liberal with how they're sharing their win-loss findings and that ultimately it would be beneficial for the company. So it's really a case by case basis, but technology is what's going to enable that to be easier. And enable you to share the right information with the right people in the organization so that people can have access and be implementing change. Think about the things you've learned in a win-loss interview and how could that not be so empowering to a new sales hire who is trying to get up to speed and replicate the successes of their more tenured peers? They would love to have access to this information, but what we find is in most cases they don't.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And the companies or the clients that we worked with that are having the most success are those that are giving out access to as many people as possible in the organization. They're publishing the findings, publishing the transcripts either through the portal that we provide or through their own LMS system so that people across the organization, product managers, sales people, new hires, the executive team, can all have appropriate access to the win-loss findings, so they can be learning, getting better and taking action. And as we move forward into the future, there are a lot of different ways that technology will enable this. And these are just a few of the examples. Having technology that's simple and easy to use, that you can give out access to unlimited users in your organization, having timely email notifications that notify key stakeholders in your organization that new interviews or nurses new surveys have been collected or published

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Engagement tools that help people in your organization talk about and interact with the feedback. So tools like commenting, where people can post comments about the feedback or the transcripts that they're reading. A colleague tagging. So if they see something that's interesting, that's relevant to another person in the organization, they can easily tag that individual and post a note or a comment. So that individual is made aware of the feedback. Or just simple ways of sharing, like URLs that people can pass around the organization or post to their LMS or posts within the CRM system that make it easy for people to access the individual interview transcripts or the reports that are being published that summarize the findings. And having appropriate reports or push reports that go out to different functions or teams that summarize the feedback for that part of the organization, especially as sample sizes expand and there's relevant feedback for many different teams in the organization, it's invaluable for those individuals or those team members to be pushed.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Reports that summarize the feedback from across interviews and across surveys, that's relevant for them in their role, whether that's a product team or a segment of the sales organization or whatever that might be. Another big one that we foresee is CRM workflow integrations. And what we found at Qualtrics when we investigated vendors is that those that did have technology and that touted CRM integration, really all they were doing was putting a tab within the CRM system that displayed the portal that they hosted elsewhere. And to us, that's not a real meaningful integration with the CRM system. What's meaningful is embedding information into people's workflows. Into a sales reps workflow, for example, where pertinent information is surfaced to them when it's important to them.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

So for example, serving up competitive intelligence within the CRM when they select a given competitor on an often opportunity. How valuable would that be for a sales rep when they mark that in the CRM to suddenly see via email or through a pop over in the CRM system that, "Hey, this is the information that we have about that competitor that you're dealing with. That would be invaluable for that individual. And it's very unlikely that they will be proactive and go search for the information elsewhere. But if it's served right up to them in context of their workflow, that can be invaluable. And there's other ways to do that as well, like embedding request interview options right within your CRM system, or accessing interviews that have already been completed for that particular opportunity. And having that readily available right within the opportunity page, or being able to assign win-back opportunities to sales people, or sales teams.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

A lot of times when we go and conduct an interview with an opportunity that our clients have marked as lost and assumed was lost, we find out that now the decision has just been delayed or there was a misinterpretation, and there actually is an opportunity to go back and win this deal. And having a workflow to publish those to the right people in the organization through the CRM system would be invaluable. And then there are a lot of other ways that we foresee going forward that we don't have time to get into, but we foresee as big opportunities and big changes that will eventually come to the wind loss space. Currently, there's the prevailing practices, the manual tagging of themes or topics from a crosswind loss interviews and surveys. In the future, there will be automated sentiment and topic analysis via machine learning and artificial intelligence.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

The existing technology for machine learning and artificial intelligence. Isn't good enough right now to read through an entire interview and tag the themes and topics for you. And we actually had a fortune 500 client that we've been scoping a program for, that previous win-loss programs and interviews they'd actually run their win-loss interviews through really what we knew at Qualtrics to be the best topic and sentiment analysis technology that's available right now. And they ran that through the system, and it really wasn't helpful. It really wasn't accurate. But there is an opportunity here. And with all the development that's taking place, there's a big opportunity going forward for that to be automated through the technology that's coming.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Another big one is the transition from qualitative only programs and technology that synthesizes findings from just your qualitative interviews to a more expansive technology stack or platform that's going to incorporate your qualitative interviews, your quantitative surveys, input from your sales organization, and data from your CRM system that's being pulled automatically to give you a much more comprehensive and robust view of why you're winning and losing sales opportunities. And we foresee that as a big change that's going to be coming going forward. And stuff that we are working on is bringing that information together from those various sources into one harmonious platform so that you have that authoritative expansive view of why you're winning or losing rather than just basing it on one channel.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And then today, most organizations, if they're doing any benchmarking, it's really just against their own company's performance over time. And we really foresee in the future that companies are going to have an opportunity to benchmark their performance against similar companies, especially as there's standardization and the promotion of best practices in the space. Just like has happened with NPS or employee engagement spaces, there's going to be an opportunity from the vendors in the space to offer up these capabilities. And ultimately, as things move forward with win-loss analysis and being a win-loss vendor, we feel very responsible for driving this space forward. We talked early on about how we believe that win-loss is going to transform from a niche market research function to a much more executive level sponsored initiative with executive oversight and executive interest.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And to get to that point, it's really on primarily us as the win-loss vendors to drive that. It's been the vendors in these other spaces that have driven the awareness and the popularity of these other research frameworks. From technical innovation and building technology that caters to the C-suite, to more effective marketing of win-loss practices, to building out C-suite worthy success stories, and having executives share those success stories with each other is what's really going to drive that. But we do need the help of pioneers in the space who can fight within their organizations to implement these programs and to oversee these changes and transformations to their existing win-loss programs to drive this. But we feel that a lot is on our shoulders as the vendors to really make all of this happen. And we believe that as companies embrace these changes, they're going to see a difference in the organizations. They're going to start seeing the impact on things like win rates and client retention rates. And this is an example from Qualtrics. Since, since leaving Qualtrics to found Clozd, we've been fortunate to bring Qualtrics on as a client.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And as you can imagine, they're very forward-thinking in their approach to win-loss. And they've been a great partner for us to work with in the delivery of their win-loss program. And this is a comment from [John D'Agostino] , he's the executive vice president of global sales, or the CRO of Qualtrics, who talks about how win-loss is now in the groundwater at Qualtrics. That's a metaphor he likes to use. There are more than 70 people across the organization that have direct access to all of the information that is published. All of the interview transcripts, all of the reports that are published, all of the themes that have been tagged across interviews. They are publishing this information to a wide set of leaders and stakeholders across the business. And it's making a difference. They feel like the program is already paid for itself. And as a CRO, John's never felt more tuned in to why his team is winning or losing.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

The same innovation is taking place at NICE inContact, where we're working together with them as a partner to figure out how we can deliver more deep probing interviews, like we talked about, to provide them more flexibility in their program design, to deliver the innovative and easy to use software that will enable them to democratize the findings. And also enable a larger sample size for them by delivering a greater value for the price that they're paying. And that can go a long way in helping companies to push forward and expand their programs and expand their sample.

Braydon Anderson:                                  

We've had a couple of questions come in. The first one would be around... You talked earlier around the surveying versus interviewing, should companies consider surveying buyers that don't get interviewed?

Andrew Peterson:                                    

We think so. There are some questions about the survey methodology and what types of questions should be asked and how expansive the surveys can be. We've see a tendency. And we saw this all the time at Qualtrics for companies to be way too rigorous in their surveys. And so we've been pioneering some methodology Qualtrics that like NPS or other frameworks that is much simpler, but can get you ultimately the answer of why you win and lose, which is what you're looking for. And having that methodology or framework to work with can enable companies to expand their sample on a quantitative basis. And we feel like that is very valuable. There will never be a replacement for interviews. We feel like the qualitative interviews are so important for going deep and deepening your understanding of why you're winning and losing, especially on key accounts or in key pockets or segments of your business. But based on constraints, you won't be able to interview everyone. And a survey mechanism can really help you to broaden that sample and get a bigger picture across a wider number of accounts as to why you're winning and losing.

Braydon Anderson:                                  

We have a question from Nolan. He asked a couple of questions here. One of them that we'll get to first is, what is the best time to contact interviews? And I think what you mean is, how recent after a deal is closed should we be reaching out? Is that...

Andrew Peterson:                                      

And that's a common question. Obviously, recency is valuable. So some of these innovations actually help with that. As you think about technical integrations with the CRM that automate the generation of a list for approval, that in and of itself is going to shorten the timeline of getting in touch with these customers. And really the sooner, the better as far as reaching out and getting their feedback. And so what we can do as vendors to help enable that is important going forward, and an important consideration of ours at Clozd. And we have another question coming in about privacy and GDPR considerations. A lot of companies are just in the early stages of interpreting and understanding the implications of GDPR. At Clozd, we've had to take that into consideration. We've had to develop a GDPR statement and make some changes to how our platform houses and stores data and protects that data. And so that's something that would be glad to share with anybody that's interested or has those concerns. They can reach out to us.

Braydon Anderson:                                  

Perfect.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

Perfect. There's some other questions coming in about, what of all of this exists today versus what's going to be made available going forward in terms of what Clozd offers? We really wanted to focus today on our perspective of the future of this space, not necessarily a sales pitch or a demo of what we currently do. So we haven't restricted ourselves to just pitching or showing what we're actually capable of doing. There are some things we've talked about that our capabilities were in the process of building that we don't yet offer. And that we know vendors in general in this space don't offer. So we haven't limited ourselves by just talking about functionality we currently offer, but for anybody that is interested, we'd love to dive in and show you what's available.

Andrew Peterson:                                      

For example, integrations with Salesforce, there are some things that we've been trying that we've implemented on a custom basis for clients. We talked about request interview buttons, or the publishing of interview transcript and links within the CRM. Those are things that we have done with certain clients on custom basis that we want to productize going forward. So that's just one example, but again, we haven't limited ourselves to just what we're capable of, but instead laid out the framework of where we believe the space is going in the future.

Braydon Anderson:                                  

For sure. Awesome. Well, thanks a lot, Andrew. This has been really helpful for me and hopefully for all of you that have attended today. If you have additional questions and you'd like to get some answers to that, feel free to email Andrew himself at andrew@Clozd.com, C-L-O-Z-D.com. And we'll be more than happy to answer any additional questions you may have about running your own win-loss program or some other best practices. So again, thanks so much for attending today and we'll talk soon. Thanks. Bye.