.png)
Most Marketing Doesn’t Fail. It Just Never Becomes Reliable.
- 1 day ago
- 4 min read
Most marketing doesn’t fail.
It doesn’t implode.
It doesn’t produce nothing.
And it doesn’t look obviously broken.
It just never becomes something you can regularly rely on.
There’s often lots of activity.
There are campaigns.
There’s spend.
There are occasional strong months.
But when you step back and ask a simple commercial question: What is actually driving sales revenue? The answer is often unclear. And that lack of clarity is where the real problem sits.
The Illusion of Activity
Modern businesses are rarely inactive.
You might be running:
Google Ads
LinkedIn activity
Email campaigns
Website optimisation
SEO
Social media
A CRM system
Maybe one or two agencies
On paper, this looks sensible and in isolation, most of these tactics are valid.
And yet, according to multiple industry reports, average website conversion rates still hover around 2–3% across many sectors.
In B2B, sales don’t happen overnight and rarely follow a straight line, which makes it surprisingly difficult to know what really drove the sale.
So, businesses increase activity.
More posts. More ads. More automation. More tools.
But revenue does not seem to keep pace with the amount of marketing activity.
That gap is rarely a tactics problem.
It is usually structural.
Why Marketing Plateaus
There are a few predictable patterns I see repeatedly in established businesses.
Pattern one:
Results spike, then flatten.
A new campaign launches.
Performance improves.
Optimism rises.
Then over time, results settle into a new baseline and then slowly fall back.
Pattern two:
More effort is required to maintain the same outcome.
You need to increase spend to maintain enquiry volume.
You need more content to maintain engagement.
You need more follow-up to maintain conversion rates.
The system begins to demand more input just to stand still.
Pattern three:
Marketing becomes something you manage rather than something you can rely on.
There are meetings (so many meetings!).
There are reports.
There are dashboards with data, data and more data.
But there isn’t confidence and it’s not down to a lack of skill. Most businesses I see have capable teams and decent external support.
The issue is disconnection.
The Structural Problem
Marketing works best when it behaves like a system.
1. People find you.
2. They show interest.
3. You respond well.
4. Some of them buy.
5. You learn what worked and repeat it.
When those steps are clean, your marketing starts to compound and grow but when those links are unclear, performance becomes erratic.
Typical gaps include:
Traffic sources not connected to meaningful revenue data
Enquiries generated but not tracked to closed sales
Email databases sitting underutilised
Ads optimised for clicks rather than commercial outcomes
Multiple suppliers working in silos
None of these are dramatic failures.
But collectively, they create leakage and can cause you to wonder just why there isn’t as much money coming from marketing as there should be.
A Few Numbers Worth Considering
It costs significantly more to acquire a new customer than to retain or resell to an existing one. Yet many businesses allocate disproportionate energy toward new acquisition while often missing cheaper sales from existing customers.
Research consistently shows that improving customer retention by even a small percentage can significantly increase profitability.
The 80:20 principle also shows up repeatedly in marketing data. A minority of channels, campaigns or customers tend to drive the majority of revenue. But unless systems are connected, that pattern remains hidden.
Without clarity, decisions are made on noise rather than based on solid data.
Three Signs You May Have a Systems Issue
You do not need a full audit to figure out whether this applies, just ask yourself three questions.
If you removed one marketing channel tomorrow, would you know the financial impact within 30 days? If the answer is no, then your tracking is probably weak.
Can you clearly see where most of your profitable customers originate? If not, optimisation of your marketing is likely happening at the wrong level.
Does marketing performance feel predictable?
If revenue swings feel disproportionate to activity, you may have problems with the structure of your marketing.
Before You Do Anything Else
The instinct when results feel inconsistent is to change tactics.
New agency.
New channel.
New automation platform.
New content strategy.
But structural issues are rarely solved by adding components.
Before changing anything, I would suggest three simple steps.
First, map the journey from first touch to revenue in one visual line. Not a flowchart with fifty boxes. A single line showing how strangers become paying customers.
Second, identify where measurement stops being commercially meaningful.
Third, identify where effort is increasing without a proportional return.
You do not need perfect data for this exercise because often whatever is holding your marketing back (the constraint) becomes visible quickly once you view the system as a whole.
The Real Cost of Disconnected Marketing
When marketing is disconnected, three costs accumulate quietly:
Financial waste
Decision fatigue
Loss of confidence
Financial waste is obvious, no need to explain that.
Decision fatigue is less visible. Leaders begin second-guessing marketing investments.
Erosion of confidence is the most serious and means that marketing shifts from being an asset to being an expense.
Once that happens, growth becomes stifled rather than natural.
A Final Thought
Most marketing does not need more energy.
It needs to be aligned.
It needs a clear connection between activity and revenue.
It typically needs fewer steps rather than more.
When those links are restored, marketing becomes calmer, more predictable and profitable.
If any of this feels familiar, I have written separately about the common structural patterns that cause this disconnection and how to recognise them properly before making changes.
Comments