In a recent post, we shared the results of a LinkedIn test where we sponsored “lower equity” content and the results proved that sponsoring blog posts and infographics can be worthwhile. In the test, 72% of the leads that came in over an 8-week period were from “lower equity” content compared to high-value white papers and executive briefs.
In this post, we look at another hot topic on LinkedIn: Native LinkedIn Lead Generation Forms or traditional landing pages?
Which should you use, lead generation forms or landing pages?
The same life sciences company, where we tested low-equity versus high equity content sponsorship, once again asked for our expertise about the ROI of LinkedIn Lead Generation Forms versus driving to a landing page on their website, because they had heard landing pages were better.
What do you think our answer was? You guessed it: Let’s test that.
Putting LinkedIn Lead Generation Forms to the test
Over the life of the campaign there was a 1,250% increase in leads by leveraging Lead Generation Forms on LinkedIn versus driving traffic to a landing page.
When we normalized the data against run rate and budget, the results were the same. Our client experienced an increase in leads, stronger engagement rates, and lower cost per lead.
For this client, utilizing LinkedIn Lead Generation Forms worked across a variety of content types: case studies, blog posts, eBooks, and infographics. The campaigns drove both hand-raisers and meeting requests which helped them achieve their two marketing goals of contributing to the pipeline and lower funnel leads for their inside sales team to nurture.
Every company, product, and audience is different. And your strategy depends on your goals. But, we challenge you to consider testing this tactic because it might accelerate your lead generation efforts.
Interested in learning more about developing a lead generation strategy and plan? We can’t wait to meet you.
