What CEOs Really Want From Marketing — and Why Marketing So Often Fails to Deliver

I’ve worked with CEOs from very different contexts throughout my career — corporate environments, mid-sized IT service providers, growing tech companies. And I’ve made one observation that stays with me: most CEOs don’t have a problem with marketing. They have a problem with the marketing they’re getting.

That’s an important distinction.

What CEOs say — and what they mean

When CEOs talk about marketing, they tend to sound similar: “We need more visibility.” “We need to get into the market.” “Marketing needs to help us grow.” Marketing teams usually interpret these statements as a briefing. More campaigns, more content, more events.

That’s the wrong translation.

What CEOs actually mean when they talk about marketing is usually one of three things: they want growth they can explain. They want differentiation that helps them in their next client conversation. Or they want a signal to the inside — to investors, employees, partners — that builds trust.

None of these three expectations is met by more activity. They’re met by strategic clarity.

The language of business — not the language of marketing

The core problem is linguistic. Marketing reports in marketing metrics: reach, impressions, MQLs, conversion rates, cost per lead. CEOs think in revenue, margin, market share and risk.

As long as marketing describes its work in a language the CEO can’t translate into their own world, marketing remains a cost center. Not because it has no impact — but because the impact isn’t made visible.

I’ve experienced this firsthand: a lead generation program that produced 55 qualified first conversations at decision-maker level, 20 concrete sales projects and a first POC deal in the six-figure range. That contribution wasn’t perceived by the CEO as “good marketing.” It was perceived as a growth contribution. The difference isn’t in the performance — it’s in the communication.

A marketing leader talking to the CEO must be able to translate marketing’s contribution into pipeline, into ARR, into market positioning. Those who can’t do this lose the argument — no matter how good the work was.

Strategic function or internal service provider?

The real tension in many companies is this: marketing wants to be perceived as a strategic function. But it behaves like an internal service provider.

It waits for briefings. It implements what others decide. It measures what’s measurable — not what’s relevant. And it justifies its value with activities, not with impact.

CEOs have little patience for this — rightfully so. A strategic function brings its own hypotheses. It challenges decisions rather than executing them. It defines what the market needs before sales comes back and reports it.

I’ve experienced multiple times what happens when marketing takes on this role. The Sovereign Cloud strategy for the DACH market wasn’t an assignment I received. It was a market observation I made, a gap I identified, and a positioning I developed — before the topic was on the management agenda. The result was a market success that was profitable from day one. But the real value was different: marketing had contributed a strategic perspective that wouldn’t have existed without marketing.

That’s the standard CEOs mean when they talk about marketing as a strategic function. Not as a buzzword — as an expectation.

What marketing must deliver to be taken seriously

The requirements are more concrete than often discussed.

First: market intelligence. CEOs expect marketing to know what’s happening in the market — before sales reports it back from client conversations. Competitors, regulatory developments, shifts in buying motives. Marketing that only looks inward loses this function.

Second: positioning decisions. Not positioning proposals that hang in review processes forever. But clear recommendations: What do we stand for? What don’t we stand for? And why? These decisions must be made — and marketing must be willing to defend them, even when they’re uncomfortable.

Third: impact that’s visible. This doesn’t mean every marketing measure must translate directly into revenue. It means marketing can articulate a clear contribution to the growth strategy — and regularly validates that contribution.

The uncomfortable truth

CEOs who say they have no confidence in marketing usually mean: they have no confidence in the marketing they’re currently seeing. That’s an invitation — not a verdict.

The invitation reads: stop presenting activities. Start showing impact. Stop waiting for briefings. Start developing your own hypotheses. Stop reporting in marketing language. Start speaking the language of business.

That requires a different self-understanding. It requires the courage to defend your own positions. And it requires the willingness to be measured — against standards that marketing didn’t define.

Those who do this are perceived as strategic partners. Those who don’t remain service providers — no matter how good the campaigns are.