Rachel sat in the conference room watching two of her best marketing directors argue—again. On one side: Alex, the demand gen lead, frustrated that campaign conversion rates were down 30%. "The messaging isn't resonating. We need to test new angles." On the other side: Jordan, product marketing lead, equally frustrated. "The messaging is fine. You're targeting the wrong audience. Half these leads don't even fit our ICP."
Both pulled up dashboards to prove their point. Alex showed ad performance: click-through rates were good, but demo requests were down. Jordan showed lead quality scores: 40% of MQLs from last month's campaign came from companies with under 20 employees—way below their ICP threshold. The meeting ended with no resolution, just a vague agreement to "collaborate more."
Rachel, the CMO, had seen this movie before. It wasn't about bad people—Alex and Jordan were both excellent at their jobs. It wasn't even about bad data—both were right. Demand gen needed to hit pipeline targets this quarter and couldn't afford to narrow targeting too much. Product marketing needed to maintain brand positioning and messaging consistency. Neither was wrong. They just had different mandates, different timelines, and no clear framework for deciding who owned what.
This is the most common dysfunction in B2B marketing orgs. PMM and demand gen should be natural allies—instead they're constantly at odds, debating messaging, fighting over ICP, and blaming each other when campaigns underperform.
Here's how Rachel fixed it—the operating model that turned PMM and demand gen from adversaries into partners who actually drive pipeline together.
Why PMM and Demand Gen Fight
Rachel identified three core tensions that explain why even great PMM and demand gen teams end up fighting:
Tension 1: Strategic vs. Tactical Timelines
PMM thinks in quarters and years. Positioning takes months to sink in. Messaging needs consistency to build brand recognition. Product launches have long lead times. Jordan, Rachel's PMM lead, would build messaging frameworks designed to work for 6-12 months.
Demand gen thinks in weeks and months. Campaigns run for 4-6 weeks. Conversion rates are measured weekly. Pipeline targets are monthly. Alex, the demand gen lead, needed to hit this quarter's numbers and couldn't wait six months for positioning to "sink in."
The conflict: PMM wants to lock messaging for consistency. Demand gen wants to iterate messaging based on what's converting this week. Both are right. Brand building requires consistency. Performance marketing requires optimization. The question isn't who's right—it's how to balance both.
Example: PMM spends 6 weeks developing new positioning and messaging. Demand gen runs ads for 2 weeks, sees low conversion, and wants to try different messaging. PMM says "give it time to resonate." Demand gen says "we're burning budget on messaging that doesn't work."
Tension 2: Quality vs. Volume
PMM optimizes for message-market fit. Did we reach the right audience with the right message? Did they understand our differentiation?
Demand gen optimizes for pipeline volume. How many MQLs did we generate? What's the cost per SQL?
The conflict: PMM wants to target a narrow, well-defined ICP with crisp positioning. Demand gen wants broader targeting to hit pipeline goals.
Example: PMM defines ICP as "Series B+ SaaS companies with 50-200 employees in North America." Demand gen says "that's too narrow to hit our MQL targets" and expands to include Series A companies, services businesses, and EMEA.
Now half the leads don't fit ICP, sales is frustrated, and PMM says "you're targeting the wrong audience."
Tension 3: Ownership of Messaging
PMM owns strategic messaging. Value props, positioning, messaging pillars.
Demand gen owns tactical execution. Ad copy, email subject lines, landing page headlines.
The conflict: Where does strategic messaging end and tactical execution begin? Who decides if an ad headline is "on message" or not?
Example: PMM creates approved messaging: "GTM command center for product marketers." Demand gen writes ad copy: "Tired of launch chaos? Organize your GTM in one place." PMM says "that's off-message." Demand gen says "it's the same message, just written for ads."
Nobody's wrong—you just never defined where PMM's authority ends and demand gen's begins.
The Fix: Clear Swim Lanes with Collaboration Points
The solution isn't "PMM and demand gen should collaborate more." It's defining who owns what, with specific handoff points.
PMM Owns (Strategy Layer)
- Positioning and core messaging - Value props, differentiation, messaging pillars
- Target ICP definition - Who we sell to (company size, vertical, role)
- Campaign themes and narratives - Overarching story for each campaign period
- Launch messaging - Product launch messaging and positioning
- Sales enablement messaging - What sales says in discovery and demos
Demand Gen Owns (Execution Layer)
- Campaign mechanics - Channels, budget allocation, timing
- Tactical copy - Ad headlines, email subject lines, CTA text
- Landing page optimization - Testing headlines, layouts, forms
- Audience targeting - Specific targeting parameters within ICP boundaries
- Performance optimization - What to run more of, what to kill
Joint Ownership (Collaboration Required)
- Campaign strategy - PMM sets theme, demand gen designs execution
- Asset creation - PMM provides messaging, demand gen adapts to channels
- ICP refinement - Demand gen surfaces conversion data, PMM adjusts ICP
- Messaging performance - Both teams review what's converting and why
- Launch campaigns - PMM leads strategy, demand gen owns execution
The Operating Rhythm That Works
Weekly or biweekly touchpoints prevent small disagreements from becoming major conflicts:
Weekly Sync (30 minutes)
Purpose: Tactical alignment on active campaigns
Agenda:
- Demand gen shares performance data from last week
- PMM and demand gen review any messaging or targeting questions
- Align on any quick optimizations needed
Output: Alignment on any tactical changes for the coming week
Monthly Campaign Planning (60 minutes)
Purpose: Plan next month's campaigns collaboratively
Agenda:
- PMM shares upcoming product releases, positioning updates, or campaign themes
- Demand gen shares pipeline targets and channel strategy
- Jointly design campaign plan: theme (PMM), channels and budget (demand gen)
- Define success metrics both teams agree to
Output: Documented campaign plan with clear DRIs
Quarterly Strategy Review (90 minutes)
Purpose: Align on what's working and what needs to change
Agenda:
- Review quarter's performance: What messaging converted? What didn't?
- PMM shares any positioning or ICP changes based on win/loss data
- Demand gen shares channel performance and budget recommendations
- Align on strategic priorities for next quarter
Output: Updated messaging based on performance, revised ICP if needed, strategic priorities for next quarter
The Decision Framework
When PMM and demand gen disagree, use this framework:
Question 1: Is this a strategic or tactical decision?
- Strategic (affects positioning, ICP, or long-term brand) → PMM decides
- Tactical (affects this campaign's performance) → Demand gen decides
Question 2: Do we have performance data?
- Yes → The team whose metrics are impacted decides, with input from the other
- No → Run a test. Split budget 50/50 between approaches, measure, decide based on results.
Question 3: Is this a one-time decision or a precedent?
- One-time (this campaign only) → Demand gen decides
- Precedent (affects future campaigns) → PMM decides
Example: Demand gen wants to test a provocative ad headline that's off-brand but might drive clicks.
- Strategic or tactical? Tactical (one campaign)
- Do we have data? No
- One-time or precedent? One-time
Decision: Demand gen runs it as a test (25% of budget). If it converts well without hurting brand perception, it can continue. If it drives clicks but doesn't convert, kill it. Document the result for future reference.
Common Mistakes That Kill the Partnership
PMM mistake: Treating demand gen like an order-taker.
PMM creates messaging and expects demand gen to "execute it" without input. Demand gen knows what actually converts in their channels—their input makes messaging better.
Demand gen mistake: Changing messaging without telling PMM.
Demand gen sees low performance and rewrites ad copy without checking if it's still on-message. Now the messaging in ads doesn't match the website, pitch decks, or sales conversations.
Joint mistake: Optimizing for different metrics without alignment.
PMM optimizes for message-market fit (qualitative). Demand gen optimizes for conversion rates (quantitative). Neither is wrong, but if you don't align on what success means, you'll always be fighting.
Fix: Define shared success metrics. Not "PMM owns brand metrics, demand gen owns pipeline metrics" but "we both own qualified pipeline from target ICP."
The Real Partnership Looks Like This
Scenario: New product launch in 6 weeks.
Week 1-2 (PMM leads):
- PMM develops positioning and messaging
- PMM tests messaging with 5 target customers
- PMM shares messaging framework with demand gen
Week 3-4 (Joint):
- PMM and demand gen workshop campaign strategy together
- PMM provides messaging pillars and key value props
- Demand gen proposes channel mix and budget allocation
- Together they design campaign: PMM approves messaging, demand gen approves tactics
Week 5-6 (Demand gen leads):
- Demand gen creates ads, emails, landing pages using PMM's messaging
- PMM reviews for brand/message consistency (not dictating exact copy)
- Demand gen launches campaign
Week 7-10 (Joint):
- Both teams review performance weekly
- Demand gen shares conversion data
- PMM shares win/loss insights from sales
- Together they iterate: messaging tweaks (PMM), tactical optimizations (demand gen)
Notice how ownership shifts but collaboration is constant.
The Uncomfortable Truth
Most PMM-demand gen conflicts aren't about messaging or targeting—they're about trust and respect.
PMM doesn't trust demand gen to stay on message. Demand gen doesn't trust PMM to care about conversion rates. Both teams think the other doesn't understand their job.
The fix isn't better processes—it's building mutual respect:
PMM: Demand gen knows what converts in their channels better than you do. Let them adapt your messaging for performance, within boundaries you set.
Demand gen: PMM knows the market and competitive landscape better than you do. When they say messaging isn't resonating, it's not because they don't care about your metrics.
When both teams respect each other's expertise and collaborate instead of protecting territory, you get messaging that's both strategically sound and tactically effective.
That's when pipeline actually grows.