In almost every Indian B2B company I have worked with or consulted for, the same conversation happens in some form every quarter. Sales says marketing sends bad leads. Marketing says sales does not work the leads they send. Both are partially right and both are missing the point. The problem is not bad leads or lazy sales reps. The problem is structural misalignment between two teams that are supposed to be working towards the same revenue outcome but are measured on different metrics, evaluated on different timelines, and incentivised to serve their own function's optics rather than shared outcomes.
Fixing this is not complicated. It requires three things: shared definitions, shared accountability metrics, and a regular forum where both teams look at the same data together.
The single most important alignment question in B2B sales and marketing. Marketing's definition of a qualified lead (form fill plus email open plus page visit score above 50) is often categorically different from sales' definition (a person with budget, authority, need, and timeline who answered a discovery question correctly). Until both teams agree on an exact, written definition of what constitutes a qualified lead, the handoff between them will always generate conflict.
A practical approach: define qualification jointly using a BANT-plus framework: industry match, company size match, a specific behaviour that signals intent (not just a page visit), and a role level that suggests decision-making authority. Any lead that does not meet all four criteria stays in marketing's nurture flow. Only leads that meet all four get handed to sales.
Sales cannot be the only team accountable for what happens after marketing generates a lead. If 80 percent of the leads being sent to sales are from the wrong industry or the wrong company size, that is a marketing targeting problem. Define a joint Service Level Agreement: marketing commits to delivering leads that meet the agreed qualification criteria. Sales commits to contacting those leads within a defined window and providing disposition feedback for every lead that does not advance. Both are held accountable for their side of the SLA.
Misalignment persists when marketing is measured on MQLs and sales is measured on closed revenue. They are optimising for different things. The metrics that align both teams:
Joint accountability without a regular joint forum becomes theoretical within 30 days. The format that works: a 45-minute weekly revenue review attended by the sales head, marketing head, and representatives from inside sales and digital marketing. The agenda covers three things only: pipeline generated this week by source, pipeline advanced this week from existing leads, and one specific action from each side to address the most important funnel gap identified in the data.
This meeting is not a reporting meeting. It is a problem-solving meeting where the same funnel data is visible to everyone and decisions are made based on what the numbers show rather than what each team believes the other is doing wrong.
The feedback loop that most teams skip: Sales reps hear objections every day that marketing does not know about. "Your competitor offers this feature" or "I was not aware you served this industry" or "I heard your pricing changed" are signals that should flow back to marketing within 24 hours. Build a structured feedback mechanism: a weekly objection log submitted by team leads to marketing that identifies the top five things prospects said in the past week that surprised the rep or that the marketing materials did not prepare them for. Marketing uses this to update messaging, content, and campaign targeting. This feedback loop, sustained over 6 months, produces marketing content that actually resonates with prospects because it is built from real sales conversations.
In early-stage Indian B2B companies (below 50 crore ARR), the sales and marketing alignment problem is often solved by the simplest possible mechanism: the same two or three people are doing both. The insight to carry forward as the company scales is that the natural alignment that exists in a small team needs to be deliberately rebuilt as functional separation happens. The companies that struggle most with alignment are those that grew their sales team rapidly, hired a marketing team to support them, and never built the structural bridges between the two functions before the silo walls went up.
Sales and marketing alignment is not a feel-good initiative. It is a revenue architecture decision. The companies that get it right have measurably shorter sales cycles, higher lead-to-close rates, and more predictable revenue. The ones that do not keep having the same quarterly blame conversation indefinitely.
Back to all posts