Instead of justifying brand building as a defense against AI-driven commoditization, frame it as an offensive move that builds long-term value. A strong brand shortens sales cycles and increases customer lifetime value, directly impacting revenue and making it a proactive investment that resonates with CEOs and CFOs.
Related Insights
To convince a skeptical CFO who dismissed brand spend, MasterCard's CMO Raja Rajamannar pointed to her expensive Cartier watch. He explained that the significant price premium she paid over a functional, cheaper watch was the tangible, financial definition of brand value. This personal, disarming example immediately reframed the conversation.
A rebrand should be viewed as building the fundamental foundation of a business. Without it, growth attempts are superficial and temporary. With a solid brand, the company has a stable base that can support significant scaling and prevent the business from hitting a growth ceiling.
The key to justifying brand marketing isn't a perfect dashboard, but internal education. A marketing leader's primary job is to explain to the CFO and sales team that buying decisions are not linear and are influenced by multiple, often unmeasurable touchpoints over time.
To prove brand's financial impact, connect it to the three core levers of Customer Lifetime Value (CLV). A strong brand lowers customer acquisition costs, increases retention, and supports higher margins through pricing power. Since aggregate CLV is tied to firm valuation, this makes brand's contribution tangible to a CFO.
Stop viewing brand as a top-of-funnel activity. For elite companies, brand isn't a precursor to selling; it is the selling. It creates inbound demand that bypasses traditional conversion tactics like search ads or affiliate marketing, making it the most powerful and sustainable growth engine.
Former AB InBev CMO Chris Burgrave argues that brand building is a financial activity, not just a marketing one. A brand's ultimate purpose is to de-risk a business by creating repeatable, predictable future cash flows. This reframes the conversation from soft metrics to tangible financial outcomes like growth, profit, and risk reduction.
To get buy-in from financial stakeholders, translate the 'soft' concept of brand love into hard metrics. Loved brands can command higher prices, maximize customer lifetime value, and reduce customer acquisition costs through organic advocacy, proving brand is a tangible asset.
The common "brand vs. demand" debate is flawed. Panelists argue that consistent, long-term brand building (creating "brand gravity") is not something to balance with short-term pipeline goals, but rather the foundational investment that makes demand capture easier and more predictable.
Position marketing as the engine for future quarters' growth, while sales focuses on closing current-quarter deals. This reframes marketing's long-term investments (like brand building) as essential for sustainable revenue, justifying budgets that don't show immediate, direct ROI to a CFO.
While difficult to attribute directly, strong brand recognition provides critical "air cover" for sales teams. When prospects already know who the company is, sales reps can skip the introductory explanation and focus immediately on selling the solution. This shortens the sales cycle and increases the effectiveness of outreach, justifying brand investment.
