Our VP of Marketing and VP of Sales both claim they own the client acquisition strategy, leading to territorial wars during budget planning. How do we resolve this overlapping ownership?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When your VP of Marketing and VP of Sales both claim ownership over client acquisition, you have a structural flaw on your Accountability Chart. This overlap leads to turf wars, wasted budget, and fragmented metrics. You cannot have two people running the same process.

To fix this, you must clearly define where Marketing ends and Sales begins. In EOS, we solve this by refining the five major responsibilities of each seat. Marketing is typically responsible for brand awareness, lead generation, and positioning. Sales is responsible for converting those leads into paying clients.

Use the IDS process during your next Level 10 Meeting to isolate the friction. Have the Integrator facilitate. Walk through the customer journey and map every step to a single seat. If both leaders must collaborate on a shared campaign, one must still own the ultimate result and the associated scorecard metric.

Next, look at their conative profiles. A high Quick Start marketing leader will constantly pitch new acquisition channels, while a high Follow Thru sales leader will want predictable, repeatable processes. If their Kolbe A Index scores show this mismatch, use that knowledge to assign roles. The Quick Start generates the ideas, but the Follow Thru builds the sales pipeline.

The Integrator must make the final call on budget allocation. Once the decision is made, both leaders must align behind the V/TO and focus on their respective Rocks. If the territorial behavior continues, it becomes a GWC issue. You must have leaders who put the greater good of the company ahead of their personal department size.