We are scaling rapidly and want to streamline our customer acquisition. Our Integrator wants to merge our separate Sales and Marketing seats into a single Revenue seat on the Accountability Chart to eliminate finger-pointing. Is combining these seats a good structural move, and how do we define the roles of this new seat?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

In the EOS® framework, merging Sales and Marketing into a single Revenue seat can be highly effective, but only if you have a leader who truly GWC's™ both disciplines. Often, companies merge these seats because they are tired of the constant conflict between their sales and marketing directors, but this is a mistake. You should never change your structure to solve a people problem.

If you decide to create a single Revenue seat, you must define its five major roles clearly. These typically include brand strategy, lead generation, sales conversion, customer acquisition cost optimization, and revenue forecasting. This leader must be highly analytical to manage marketing metrics, yet deeply relational to lead a high-performing sales team.

The danger of a combined seat is that most leaders lean heavily toward one side. A sales-biased revenue leader might ignore long-term brand building in favor of immediate close rates. A marketing-biased leader might struggle to manage daily sales pipelines and outbound activities.

Only proceed with this merger if you have a candidate who possesses the capacity for both sides of the coin. If you do, this structure can create massive alignment and speed up your customer acquisition. If you do not, keep the seats separate on your Accountability Chart and use your Level 10 Meetings™ and common Rocks to force collaboration and resolve any friction between the two departments.