Marketing investment is under scrutiny
Determine whether marketing investment is creating sufficient commercial value.
When marketing spend comes under scrutiny, the debate rarely stays technical. It becomes a question of confidence in the function itself.
Defending a budget with activity metrics tends to confirm the sceptics. Defending it with commercial logic changes the conversation.
"We just need better attribution."
Attribution answers 'which touchpoint'. The board is asking 'was this worth doing'. Different question, different evidence.
"Brand can't be measured."
Not precisely. But it can be evidenced, through pricing power, conversion, retention and cost of acquisition over time.
"Marketing spend should be a fixed percentage of revenue."
That's a budgeting convention, not a commercial rationale. It tells you nothing about marginal return.
Anton's perspective
Before you spend more, work out where you're getting value today.
The first question isn't how to calculate ROI. It's what commercial outcome marketing is supposed to create. Answer that and the measurement question gets much easier.
Almost every marketing budget I've looked at contains spend nobody would approve if it were proposed fresh today. It survives because it's already in the base.
Agree what marketing is being asked to produce, acquisition, retention, margin, pricing power, or entry into a new segment.
Group investment by the outcome it's meant to serve, not by channel or agency.
The useful question is what the next dollar does, and what the last dollar did.
Write the reasoning down. It's what makes the decision defensible six months later.
Evidence
Best & Less
The high-value segment bought 2.5 times more often and was worth three times the average customer. That changed what the investment case looked like, and where spend went next. Run with partner Ian Bennett.
Bridie Schibrowski, CMO, Best & Less
Read the full Best & Less story →Antinol / Vetz Petz
Vet clinics were segmented into three tiers with a lifetime rebate system behind them. The direct-to-consumer funnel was then tracked on CAC, subscription and advocacy so investment decisions had commercial numbers attached.
Sometimes the answer is to invest more. Sometimes it's to stop doing something. The point is to make that call on evidence rather than instinct.
Not every opportunity returns the same value, so I start by finding out where the value actually sits, which segments, products and channels have the greatest commercial potential, rather than spreading budget evenly across everything that's plausible. Concentrated investment against the highest-value opportunities beats a broad spread every time.
Usually, yes. Investment questions get resolved faster when finance and marketing are looking at the same evidence.
Improve measurement and understand marketing's commercial contribution.
Understand what is holding growth back and where the greatest opportunities may exist.
Challenge assumptions and gain an experienced external view before making an important decision.
No brief required. Start with the situation you're facing.
