# B2B email led by proof vs network size: +75% clicks, not significant

- Outcome: Flat / inconclusive
- Page type: Email (SaaS)
- Elements: Value proposition, Copy
- Date shared: 2015-02
- Test run by: [MECLABS Institute](https://liftarchive.com/practitioners/meclabs-institute/)
- Commentary by: LiftArchive (our analysis, not theirs)
- Original source: https://marketingsherpa.com/article/case-study/saas-nonprofit-increased-clickthrough-on-landing-page
- Page: https://liftarchive.com/test/volunteermatch-b2b-email-proof-vs-network/

A B2B email that led with proof that employee volunteering pays off got 75% more clickthroughs than one leading with network size, but we count it as inconclusive because the result was not statistically significant. MECLABS Institute ran the test with VolunteerMatch during a live session at MarketingSherpa Email Summit 2015, and it was published as a MarketingSherpa case study. The list was small and open rates did not differ.

## Result

**+75% clicks, not significant**

- +75% clickthrough for the proof version versus the network version. Treated as flat: the difference was not statistically significant.
- Open rates showed no significant difference between subject lines.
- A third, ease-of-use version could not be compared, so its relative difference was not computed.
- The rest of each email, including the two CTAs, was the same.

## Control

An email to VolunteerMatch's B2B list whose subject line, headline and opening paragraph led with the size of its nonprofit network.

## Variant

The same email, but the subject line, headline and opening paragraph led with proof that employee volunteering programs make a difference. The Summit audience helped write it.

## Why it likely came out this way (our reading)

- Program managers often struggle to prove value to their bosses, so proof may speak to a real pain.
- The B2B list was small, so even a large-looking gap can come from chance.
- An earlier test on the volunteer list also found network size was the weakest theme, which points the same way but doesn't confirm it.

## Caveats

Small list and not statistically significant, so we treat it as inconclusive even though the source named proof the winner. The data is from early 2015.

## How to run this test

- Hypothesis: If we open our B2B emails with proof that our product delivers results instead of how big it is, then more buyers will click because they need evidence to win internal buy-in.
- Primary metric: Clickthrough rate
- Guardrail: Open rate
- Guardrail: Unsubscribe rate
- Guardrail: Demo or contact requests from clicks
- Who should test it: B2B SaaS companies whose buyers must justify spend to managers. With a very small list, expect to repeat the test or pool several sends before you can trust the result.

---

Credit: MECLABS Institute ran this test and owns the result. Summary and commentary by LiftArchive (https://liftarchive.com/test/volunteermatch-b2b-email-proof-vs-network/).
Usage: Free to use, quote and build on, with credit and a link: name the practitioner or organization that ran the test and link to its LiftArchive page. The results belong to the practitioners who ran and shared them; the summaries and commentary are LiftArchive's.