The US business was built sales-first, and it worked: a few strong reps, the same events every year, and enough deals to justify a real office. Then growth flattens. Pipeline still depends on a handful of people and their networks, and every new hire adds cost faster than it adds pipeline.
Marketing sits at headquarters, producing campaigns, content, and messaging built for the home market. The US team ignores most of it or rewrites it on the fly. Headquarters sees the US as expensive and slow, and the US sees headquarters as out of touch. Both are partly right.
More reps won't fix a market that has no engine.
A global SaaS company had a large, established US business, running on a growth model built for the years of cheap capital: a heavy events calendar, agency-run programs, and pipeline that grew mostly with spend.
What we measured
- Where the company actually won, segment by segment
- Which channels converted to revenue, not just volume
- What each event produced in new customers and deals moved forward
What we changed
- Agency-run programs brought in-house
- Events kept only when they won new customers or moved deals in flight
- Budget repointed to the segments already winning, with an account-based motion for enterprise
- Buying signals routed straight to sales development
How the team changed
Pipeline grew while spend came down.
- Sales development organized around account coverage, not activity
- One definition of a qualified opportunity, shared with sales
- The team reshaped across three regions to match the new model
No two US businesses stall for the same reason. These are the answers that change the plan.
Where does your US pipeline actually come from today?
If most of it traces back to a few reps and the same events, you have a sales team, not a market. Adding people will add cost faster than pipeline.
Who owns US marketing: headquarters or the US team?
If headquarters builds it and the US rewrites it, nobody owns it. The US needs marketing built for US buyers, with someone accountable for it on US time.
What will the next rep cost, against what they'll produce?
Before approving another hire, compare the fully loaded cost with the pipeline the last few hires actually added. The answer usually points to the engine, not the headcount.
Which programs are still earning their place?
Events, agencies, and paid programs that worked at entry rarely all survive the move to scale. Keep what wins customers or moves deals, and repoint the rest.
Who decides when headquarters and the US team disagree?
If the answer is "it depends," every plan becomes a negotiation. Clear decision rights on budget, message, and hiring let the US move at its own speed.
If more than two of these don't have a clear answer, that's where to start.
Start a conversation