| name | marketing-qbr |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| description | AUTO-TRIGGER: Apply this skill when the user is preparing for a
quarterly business review where they will present marketing performance
to executive leadership. Trigger phrases include: "QBR," "quarterly
business review," "presenting to the CEO," "presenting to the CRO,"
"quarterly marketing review," "how do I present last quarter's results,"
"the quarter was below expectations," "preparing my Q review," "how do
I present pipeline attribution," "leadership wants to see what marketing
produced," or any situation where the user is preparing to account for
marketing performance to senior leadership on a recurring basis.
Also trigger when the user needs to handle a QBR where results missed
targets, where attribution is contested, or where leadership is likely
to question the ROI of specific programs.
Do NOT trigger for the marketing budget defense conversation (use
marketing-budget-defense for situations where funding is at risk), or
for one-time presentations that are not part of a recurring review
cycle. This skill is specifically for the recurring quarterly
accountability conversation between a marketing leader and the executive
team.
|
| allowed-tools | ["Read","Write","Edit"] |
Marketing QBR: The Quarterly Accountability Conversation That Builds or Erodes Credibility
This skill prepares a demand gen or RevOps Director to present quarterly
marketing performance to executive leadership in a way that builds
credibility, connects activity to business outcomes, and controls the
narrative around results, including the quarters when results were below
expectations.
The marketing QBR is not a reporting exercise. It is a credibility
exercise. The CEO and CRO are not learning what happened from your QBR.
They already know the pipeline number and the revenue number. What they
are evaluating is whether you understand what drove those numbers,
whether you can identify what is and is not working, and whether you
have a clear-eyed plan for the next quarter. A Director who presents
data confidently is worth less than a Director who demonstrates judgment
about what the data means.
HOW TO SET UP THIS SKILL
Provide:
- Last quarter's key metrics: pipeline generated, pipeline contribution
to revenue, CPL by channel, MQL to SQL conversion rate, any other
metrics your leadership team follows
- Targets for the same metrics: what you committed to and what you
delivered
- The programs that drove the most significant results, positive or
negative
- Whether the quarter hit, missed, or exceeded expectations
- What leadership is currently most focused on: pipeline, revenue
attribution, spend efficiency, or specific channels
- Any contested or sensitive items: attribution disputes, programs
that underperformed, budget that was spent without clear return
The Structural Mistake Most Marketing QBRs Make
The default QBR structure is: here is what we did, here is what we
measured, here is what it produced. This structure puts leadership
in the position of drawing their own conclusions from your data.
They will draw conclusions that reflect their priors, not your
analysis. If the CRO already suspects that paid LinkedIn is a waste
of budget, presenting LinkedIn metrics without context gives them
evidence for the conclusion they already hold.
The structure that builds credibility is: here is what the quarter
set out to accomplish and why, here is what the data shows happened,
here is what I believe drove those outcomes, and here is what changes
as a result. This structure keeps you in the analytical role and
leadership in the decision-making role. It also surfaces your judgment,
which is what the QBR is actually evaluating.
Section 1: Framing the Quarter Before Presenting the Numbers
Open with one slide or one paragraph that reminds leadership what the
quarter was designed to accomplish and what context shaped the plan.
Do not assume they remember what you committed to last quarter or what
circumstances you were operating in.
State the quarter's primary objective. Not a list of everything
marketing did. The one or two things that the quarter was structured
around. "Q3 was built around two objectives: accelerating pipeline
in the commercial segment where we had the most sales capacity, and
rebuilding inbound volume after the website migration reset our SEO
performance."
Acknowledge any material changes in context that affected the plan.
A budget cut in month two, a product launch that pulled attention,
a competitive move that changed the messaging, a channel that
underperformed expectations from day one. Leadership needs this
context before they see the numbers, not after.
This framing takes two minutes and changes how every number that
follows is interpreted.
Section 2: Results Against Commitment
Present what you committed to and what you delivered. Side by side.
Every meaningful metric. Do not bury the misses. Leadership already
knows the numbers. Presenting them clearly and directly signals
confidence and honesty. Hiding or softening them signals the opposite.
For each metric, present three things: target, actual, variance.
Then one sentence of context for any metric that missed by more than
ten percent.
Metrics that belong in a demand gen QBR for executive leadership:
Pipeline generated (total and by segment if relevant). This is the
primary metric. Everything else is context for this number.
Pipeline contribution to closed revenue. Not marketing influenced
(which includes everything). Marketing sourced or marketing attributed
first-touch. Be specific about your attribution methodology and
consistent with it quarter over quarter. Attribution disputes come
from inconsistent methodology more than from unfair credit-taking.
MQL to SQL conversion rate. This tells leadership whether your
pipeline is qualified, not just voluminous. A high pipeline number
with a low conversion rate is a warning sign leadership will notice.
Explain it before they ask about it.
Cost per pipeline opportunity by channel. Not CPL (cost per lead)
unless leadership explicitly uses that metric. CPL is a marketing
metric. Cost per pipeline opportunity is a business metric. The
difference in framing matters.
Top three programs by pipeline contribution. What drove the most
pipeline and at what cost. This is where leadership focuses attention
and where you have the most influence over the narrative.
Section 3: What Drove the Results (Your Analysis)
This is the section that separates a reporting exercise from a
leadership conversation. Present your interpretation of why the
results came out the way they did. Not a description of what happened.
Your analysis of the causal factors.
For the programs that outperformed: what specifically worked and why
you believe it worked. Not "the ABM campaign performed well." What
about it worked. The targeting was tighter than prior campaigns.
The sequence timing aligned with intent signals. The content matched
the buying stage of the accounts in the list. One of those
explanations is more useful than none.
For the programs that underperformed: what specifically did not work,
what you believe caused it, and whether you know the root cause or
are still investigating. It is acceptable to say you do not yet know
the root cause. It is not acceptable to present a miss without
acknowledging that it happened and that you are taking it seriously.
For external factors that affected results: name them and be specific
about their impact. "The Q3 website migration reset our organic traffic,
which accounts for approximately X pipeline that did not materialize
from the inbound channel. We expect recovery by [month]." This frames
an external factor as something you understand and are managing, not
an excuse.
The rule: your analysis should include at least one uncomfortable
observation. A QBR that finds no problems is not credible. Leadership
knows the business is not running perfectly. A marketing leader who
presents only wins is either not looking hard enough or not being
honest.
Section 4: Handling the Quarter Where You Missed
A quarter where results missed targets is the QBR that tests your
credibility most directly. How you present a miss determines whether
leadership sees you as someone they can trust with more resources or
as someone who manages information rather than managing the function.
The wrong approach:
Lead with what you accomplished before getting to the miss. Present
the miss with extensive context and mitigating factors before naming
the number. End with a forward-looking plan that implies the miss
is behind you.
This approach makes you look defensive. Leadership notices the
structure and interprets it as information management.
The right approach:
Name the miss directly in the framing section, before the numbers.
"Pipeline came in at $X against a target of $Y. That is a miss of
Z percent. Here is what I believe drove it and what changes in Q4."
Then present the full results section as you normally would, with
the miss visible in the target versus actual table.
Then present a specific analysis of what drove the miss. Separate
factors you could have controlled from factors you could not. Be
honest about both. "Our ABM targeting was too broad, which diluted
spend across accounts that were not ready to buy" is a controllable
factor. "The rep team had 40 percent of its capacity absorbed by a
large enterprise deal that did not close, which reduced follow-up
on marketing-sourced pipeline" is a factor outside your direct
control but worth naming.
Then present the specific changes you are making in the next quarter
in response to what you learned. Not aspirational changes. Specific
ones. "We are tightening the ABM account list from 300 to 150
accounts, adding a secondary qualification step before SDR
enrollment, and adding a monthly check on rep follow-up rates for
marketing-sourced opportunities."
On attribution disputes:
If leadership contests your attribution numbers, do not defend the
methodology in the QBR. Instead: "I want to make sure we are aligned
on how we measure marketing contribution. Let me schedule time
separately to walk through the methodology and make sure it reflects
what we all agree is fair." This removes the dispute from the room
where it would derail the conversation and creates a separate
context to resolve it properly.
Section 5: The Plan for Next Quarter
The next quarter plan should do three things: state the commitment
clearly, explain why the plan is structured the way it is, and
identify the one or two things that could prevent the plan from
working.
State the commitment with the same metrics you reported on. Do not
add new metrics. Do not change the definition of metrics between
quarters. Consistency in measurement is how leadership develops
confidence in the numbers over time.
Explain the logic. Why is the budget allocated the way it is? Why
are these programs prioritized over others? What did you learn last
quarter that is shaping this quarter's plan? Leadership does not need
to approve every decision. They do need to understand the reasoning
well enough to support it when it is questioned by others.
Name the risk. "The Q4 plan requires the SDR team to follow up on
marketing-sourced pipeline within 48 hours. If that SLA slips, the
conversion rate assumptions in this plan will not hold." This tells
leadership what they can do to help, and it sets an honest expectation
rather than a number that requires perfect execution of every adjacent
function.
Delivering the QBR
Output in this format:
MARKETING QBR PACKAGE
Quarter: [Q and year]
Audience: [CEO / CRO / both / other]
Quarter result: [hit / miss / exceeded]
Built: [today's date]
OPENING FRAMING (2 minutes)
[The quarter's primary objectives as stated at the start of the
quarter, and any material context changes that affected execution.
Specific. Not a list of activities.]
RESULTS TABLE
Metric | Target | Actual | Variance | Context
[Pipeline generated]
[Pipeline to revenue]
[MQL to SQL conversion]
[Cost per pipeline opportunity by top channels]
[Top program results]
ONE-LINE CONTEXT for each metric that missed by 10%+:
[Specific, honest, not defensive]
WHAT DROVE THE RESULTS
[Your analysis of the top two or three causal factors, positive
and negative. At least one uncomfortable observation. Stated as
your interpretation, not as fact.]
MISS HANDLING (if applicable)
[The exact language to open the miss section. The separation of
controllable from uncontrollable factors. The specific changes
in response.]
ATTRIBUTION DISPUTE RESPONSE (if applicable)
[The language to use if attribution is challenged in the room.
The specific ask for a separate conversation.]
Q[NEXT] COMMITMENT AND PLAN
[Same metrics as the results table. The logic behind the
allocation. The one or two risks that could cause the plan not
to work as designed.]
QUESTIONS LEADERSHIP WILL LIKELY ASK
[The two or three questions most likely to come up given what
the user has described, and the specific answers to have ready.
Not general questions. The ones specific to this quarter's results
and this leadership team's known concerns.]
Output Rules
- Never recommend leading with wins before naming a significant miss.
The structure of hiding a miss signals information management.
Leadership notices it and it erodes credibility faster than the
miss itself.
- The attribution dispute response must be a redirect, not a defense.
Do not recommend defending the methodology in the QBR room.
- The "questions leadership will likely ask" section must be specific
to what the user has described. Generic questions ("what is your
plan for next quarter") are not useful preparation.
- If the user has not stated what they committed to last quarter,
ask before building the results section. Presenting results without
the commitment context is a reporting exercise, not a QBR.
- No em dashes. Use commas or periods.
