Earlier we discussed 4 ways to successfully achieve sales and marketing alignment (in case you missed it, you can find that post here). Achieving total sales and marketing alignment doesn’t happen overnight. Once alignment begins, many face the challenge of determining who owns the planning process, and which department has the final decision-making power.
Looking at All Sides of the Debate
Studies show that aligning your sales and marketing departments "can help your business be 67% better at closing deals, with 108% better lead acceptance, and generate 209% stronger marketing contribution to revenue” (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014).
Once you align these two teams however, the question becomes: who is in charge of the planning process?
After much debate, research suggests that the strongest benefits of sales and marketing alignment come from complete alignment in planning. What do I mean? If you’re going to align both teams, isn’t putting one in charge of the other almost sabotaging your end goal? The point of joining the two departments is to allow them to work together, not against one another. Regardless of whether marketing or sales is in charge of planning, research has shown that the ruling department always prioritizes their goals.
Let’s discuss why neither sales nor marketing should not take control of the planning process independently.
Sales enablement is a great way to help you bridge the gap between your marketing and sales teams. To find out how, may I suggest our post, “ Why use Sales and Marketing Alignment and 5 Best Practices”.
When Marketing does the Planning
Many pro-marketing supporters argue, “sales is an extension of marketing” (Source: Marketing Prof, 2012) and if you think about it, everyone in an organization delivers marketing expectations, whether for brand image, communications, targeting, and etc. (Source: Marketing Profs, 2012).
The Upside of Marketing-Led Planning
Marketing is “responsible for understanding the customer, identifying customer needs and creating as many opportunities for generating revenue as possible” which logically makes it more qualified to spearhead planning (Source: Marketing Profs, 2012). Consider this, when marketing is in charge of creating the strategy, there is a 55% increase in MQL acceptance rates, and 56% lower customer churn (Source: Math Marketing and Marketo, 2014).
The Downside of Marketing-Led Planning
There are a few pitfalls to watch out for when marketing controls the wheel. Research shows that having marketing in control of planning means you can expect to see the size of your deals fall by 47% and closure rates fall by 16% (Source: Math Marketing and Marketo, 2014). If your deals are getting smaller and your closure rate is decreasing, you will definitely take a hit to your bottom line. In fact, when marketing is in charge, a 32% decrease in revenue from new business is seen (Source: Math Marketing and Marketo, 2014).
Whether you want to believe it or not, sales rep’s aren’t using the content that your marketing team is creating. We discuss why in our post, “3 Reasons Sales Reps Aren’t Using Digital Content Created by Marketing”.
When Sales does the Planning
The common argument for seller-control is quite simple: sellers believe that they bring in the money, so they should be in charge of planning how, when, where, and from whom that money will come.
The Upside of Sales-Led Planning
Sales reps are strong at building and maintaining close relationships with buyers. When in charge of planning, this skill comes to the forefront and a reduced customer churn rate is seen (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014). Sellers are hungry for the close and eager for the next deal, which leads many to put sales reps in charge of planning for an aligned sales and marketing process.
The Downside of Sales-Led Planning
Unfortunately, the clear benefits end at customer churn. Data suggests a number of high risk outcomes from sales-led planning. While sales is generally better at closing, “closure rates are 31% worse” when they lead the planning process (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014). Without alignment, firms indicate that up to 79% of MQLs never convert to sales (Source: Type A Communications, 2014). When sellers lead the planning process, this issue is exacerbated with a 26% decrease in the probability of MQL closing, and a further 47% decrease in marketing contribution to revenue (Source: Marketing Math & Marketo, 2014).
[RELATED CONTENT] Is your sales training no longer effective? We outline how to fix this problem in our eBook chapter on The New Approach to Sales Training: Predictive Insights, Motivation, and Persuasion Science. Click the link below for a free download.
The Case for Joint Planning
Joint planning is the most ideal option because it leverages marketing contributions without stepping on sales’ toes (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014). When departments are unaligned “61% of B2B marketers send all leads directly to sales; however, only 27% of those leads will actually be a MQL” (Source: Type A Communications, 2014). Aligning sales and marketing so that they report to each other drastically changes this. When it comes to MQLs, joint planning increases MQL acceptance by 31%, and closure rates by 56% (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014).
One of the principal benefits that B2B companies can expect from joint planning is the impact on revenue in comparison to when marketing or sales is in charge individually. When both teams work together, businesses can expect a 62% increase in total revenue from new business (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014).
So, the Best Choice?
Interestingly the only choice better than joint planning is joint planning that occurs more often. 1-4 weeks is the optimal interval for new planning sessions. Frequent planning sees a 209% greater marketing contribution to revenue, and a further 13% reduction to customer churn rates.
Sales and marketing alignment is not only meant to improve the relationship between the two teams, it’s to remove internal barriers. Having one team in charge of the other will only serve to create new barriers in the long run, where joint planning provides new perspectives and actionable insight.
[RELATED CONTENT] If you found these three perspectives impactful, I think you'll really enjoy the eBook we put together which illustrates all the trends which are influencing challenges being faced by sellers, marketers, and C-suite level executives in B2B across every industry.
More info about the baseline figures – in case you were curious about the variables we provided in the comparisons of marketing vs. sales for planning, the baseline variable for comparing against was that of using finance for planning. Finance planners saw the highest percentage of revenue from new business and highest customer churn rates (Source: Math Marketing & Marketo, 2014).
