Summary

At moments of change, it’s easy to debate who owns the brand. The signal blurs as brand decisions bounce between teams. Real progress follows when one leader is accountable, a small council shapes the choices, and adoption is tracked against clear measures. That’s when organisations regain speed, coherence and market impact.

→ Watch more videos in this playlist on YouTube

Our Perspective

What this means for leaders navigating growth, change or transformation in their organisation.

The Real Trade-Off

Treating “who owns brand” as a tug of war between marketing and the board sounds neat, but it creates a deeper problem: no single place where decisions are made, sequenced, and held to account. The practical tension isn’t speed versus rigour; it’s whether choices are coherent across product, sales, and delivery when pressure rises. If the centre moves from meeting to meeting, brand becomes a set of disconnected preferences rather than a system of choices.

McKinsey notes that only 32.7% of organisations have a single customer or growth leader reporting directly to the chief executive, signalling diffuse ownership where it matters most. In that vacuum, competing priorities thrive and signals conflict.

Design For Accountability

The answer is governance design, not departmental ownership. One person must be accountable for brand decisions; a cross‑functional council brings market context, stress‑tests options, and keeps execution honest. That pairing—single accountability, broad input—preserves speed and raises the quality of judgement without re‑litigating the brief every month.

SaaStr observes that in larger organisations, just 48% of chief marketing officers report to the chief executive, a reminder that reporting lines vary and governance needs to be intentional. In our experience with scale‑ups and mid‑market organisations at inflection points, the best fit is about capability and context, not title.

Decision Rights That Scale

Set decision rights in plain language so every team knows when to shape, when to recommend, and who decides. A light, repeatable structure beats heroic effort.

• Name the brand custodian (chief executive or senior marketing lead) with final say and visible ownership.
• Convene a small brand council spanning sales, marketing, product, and delivery to interrogate choices, not re‑design them.
• Create a monthly rhythm with concise pre‑reads, clear options, and documented outcomes to prevent circular debates.
• Define thresholds that trigger board review (e.g., entering a new market or renaming) so escalation is rare and purposeful.

Metrics That Matter

Without measures, accountability drifts. Track the few signals that reveal whether decisions compound across the business rather than stop at the deck.

• Decision speed: time from proposal to outcome, by decision type.
• Adoption: cross‑functional handovers, rework rates, and adherence to the agreed story in sales and service.
• Market response: movement in qualified demand, win‑rate against target segments, and search interest for your distinctive terms.
• Talent signals: offer acceptance rates, onboarding confidence, and tenure in customer‑facing roles.

When brand becomes a governed system—one owner, many shapers—organisations make faster, steadier calls, and as markets shift, those choices compound into clarity rather than detours.

Sources:

• Do CEOs understand modern marketing? 66% of CMOs say no — McKinsey
• Who Should Marketing Report To? What 3,000+ Companies Actually Do — SaaStr

Further Resources

1. Positioning Decisions: Who Holds the Decision Rights?
2. Aligning Brand and Strategy to Overcome Misalignment
3. Brand Architecture That Enables Post-M&A Growth

Curious how this applies in your market? We’re speaking with leaders across industries every week. Let’s talk.

Back to top