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.
Rear-view attribution is flawed because markets, ICPs, and competitors constantly change. A more effective approach is to identify common traits among your best current customers and actively seek more prospects who fit that evolving profile.
The market is evolving so rapidly, largely due to AI's influence on buyer behavior and competitive landscapes, that companies can't rely on a static product-market fit. It's now a continuous process of re-evaluation and adaptation every few months.
As AI makes high-quality digital outreach easy to create, inboxes and call lists are saturated. Small, intimate, in-person events have become a non-scalable but highly effective way to cut through digital noise and build genuine relationships.
Don't try to prove an event "caused" a deal. Instead, track correlation. Use a simple CRM checkbox to see if deals with event attendees have a higher close rate or velocity. This is a practical, low-stress way to gauge impact.
Forecasting accuracy fails when based on a seller's checklist of actions like "proposal sent." Instead, define sales stages by concrete buyer actions, like the number of stakeholders involved or if they've reviewed a proposal. This provides a more realistic view of a deal's health.
A deal forecast is weak if the rep can't articulate the champion's personal motivation. Managers should push beyond "they like the product" and ask what's in it for the individual (e.g., a promotion, solving a personal pain point). This uncovers true deal commitment.
Instead of brainstorming, Sales Assembly's CRO Matt Green actively listens to recurring peer-group calls with AEs, BDRs, and sales leaders. He turns their real-world problems, frameworks, and successes into a constant stream of highly relevant social media content.