Free tool
What would ringing sooner be worth?
Projected from published third-party research rather than our own claims — presented as a range, with what is wrong with each study stated next to its number.
Works without an account. Everything is calculated in your browser — no figures you type are sent to us or to anyone else.
From the lead landing to the phone ringing, averaged.
Your own figure. Everything below is projected from it.
Against 45% today. The range is wide because the published research covers a handful of specific comparisons rather than a continuous curve.
Each published comparison, on its own terms
How this is calculated
The studies report how much the odds of contact change, not the rate. A 45% contact rate multiplied by 7 is 315%, which is not a possible contact rate — but that is what a calculator does if it multiplies the percentage directly. This one converts to odds, applies the published ratio, and converts back, so the result is always bounded by 100%.
This is industry research, not our data. Both studies are US, mostly B2B, over a decade old, and one was funded by a dialler vendor. They establish the direction robustly; treat the size of the effect on your own floor as something to test rather than a forecast. Your current time to first call isn't an input to the projection, because no published source gives a rate at an arbitrary minute value.
Why this figure matters
The direction is well established; the size is not
Multiple studies agree that ringing sooner connects more often, and none of them disagree about the sign. What they don't give is a reliable multiplier for an arbitrary response time, which is why this shows a range across the specific comparisons that were actually published.
Odds ratios are not percentages
The research reports how much the odds of contact change. Multiplying your contact rate by seven produces a number over 100%, which is why calculators that do it quietly show impossible results. This converts to odds, applies the ratio and converts back, so the answer is always a possible one.
Response time is the cheapest rate to move
It doesn't need better salespeople, a new script or a different lead source. It needs the lead to reach a phone faster, which is a systems problem rather than a people problem — and systems problems are the ones you can actually fix this month.
Questions
Where do these figures come from?
Two published sources: the Lead Response Management Study (Oldroyd, 2007) and “The Short Life of Online Sales Leads” in Harvard Business Review (2011). Both are linked beside the figures they produce. Neither is our data.
How reliable are they?
Directionally reliable, and not much more. Both are US studies, mostly B2B, over a decade old, and the 2007 one was sponsored by a dialler vendor — a conflict of interest we would point out in anyone else's citation. Treat the size of the effect as something to test on your own floor.
Why doesn't my current response time change the projection?
Because no published source gives a contact rate at an arbitrary minute value. Fitting a curve through three data points and reading a number off it would look more precise than the evidence allows, so the tool shows the published comparisons as they were made instead.
Does faster always mean better?
For a lead that has just asked to be contacted, the evidence is one-directional. For cold data it is a different question entirely — there the constraint is when you are permitted to call, which is a compliance matter rather than a speed one.
The other two
Same rules — free, no account, nothing leaves your browser.
If the number that needs fixing is contact rate, that's about how fast you ring and how often you get answered — which is what Dialspace is for.
See how