Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Jon Miller calls measuring marketing-sourced vs. sales-sourced pipeline a "terrible KPI." He argues it’s impossible to do accurately due to the complex buyer journey. More importantly, it actively undermines the collaboration required for GTM success by creating a culture of credit-taking instead of teamwork.

Related Insights

Attributing pipeline to a single source (Marketing, SDR, AE) oversimplifies a collaborative process. This reporting style identifies team underperformance but offers no insight into *why* it's happening or how to fix it, rendering it strategically useless for scaling or problem-solving.

Most GTM systems track initial outreach and final outcomes but fail to quantify the critical journey in between. This "ginormous gray area" of engagement makes it impossible to understand which activities truly influence pipeline, leading to flawed, outcome-based decision-making instead of journey-based optimization.

The persistent arguments between sales and marketing over who "sourced" a deal are the ultimate proof that attribution systems are fundamentally flawed. If these models worked as promised and provided a single source of truth, there would be no debate.

Instead of marketing and sales running separate races with siloed KPIs, a modern GTM model measures the entire journey like a relay. Both teams are measured on how efficiently accounts move through the funnel, focusing on the quality of handoffs and collaborative impact on velocity.

Misalignment stems from sales and marketing using different numbers and narratives. High-performing organizations treat GTM as a single, unified motion. They focus on seamlessly passing the customer from one stage to the next, prioritizing a collective win over defending individual functional metrics.

In B2B sales with multiple decision-makers, tracking individual MQLs is a "lazy metric" that misrepresents buying intent. Success depends on identifying and engaging the entire buying group. Marketing's goal should be to qualify the group, not just a single lead.

The battle over attribution isn't a personality conflict but a systemic issue. It's caused by measuring marketing on MQLs and sales on closed revenue. Unifying both teams under a single, shared revenue goal eliminates this friction and fosters collaboration.

Average teams measure success in functional silos (sales vs. marketing), leading to finger-pointing. Elite teams remove functions from the equation. They focus entirely on the customer's journey, identifying patterns that lead to pipeline and fixing those that don't, regardless of which department "owns" them.

Relying on outdated metrics like "marketing sourced" or "SDR sourced" pipeline creates departmental silos and credit disputes. This flawed measurement system prevents teams from understanding the true sequence of events and collaborative patterns that actually lead to conversions.

Relying on a single data point like "first touch" to explain pipeline creation is flawed. It ignores the complex buyer journey and inevitably leads to a blame game—marketing providing "shitty leads" versus sales doing "poor follow-up"—instead of a systematic analysis of what is truly broken in the process.