Getting a Seat at the Executive Table as PMM

I found out about the pricing change three days before launch. The exec team had decided to raise prices 30%, restructure packaging, and shift our competitive positioning—all without involving PMM. Sales was furious because they hadn't been trained. Customers were confused because messaging was inconsistent. The launch was a disaster.

When I asked my boss why PMM wasn't in the room for that decision, she said: "You weren't invited because exec team meetings are for strategic discussions, not tactical execution."

That stung. I was doing strategic work—competitive analysis, market research, positioning frameworks. But executives didn't see it that way. They saw PMM as the team that makes decks and coordinates launches. Tactical, not strategic.

Most PMMs never get a seat at the executive table. They spend their careers executing decisions made by others, then wonder why they hit a career ceiling. The problem isn't that they lack strategic thinking—it's that they haven't demonstrated strategic thinking in ways executives recognize.

I've watched PMMs with brilliant strategic instincts stay stuck at the director level because they couldn't translate their work into the language of business strategy. And I've watched mediocre strategists get promoted into exec roles because they knew how to position themselves as strategic partners.

The difference isn't talent. It's how you show up.

Why PMMs Get Excluded From Strategic Discussions

Here's what I learned after being excluded from that pricing decision: Executives invite people who solve executive-level problems.

If you're known for making decks, you get invited to discussions about decks. If you're known for coordinating launches, you get invited to discussions about launch logistics. If you're known for strategic insights that inform business decisions, you get invited to strategy discussions.

The first time my CEO invited me to a board prep meeting, it wasn't because I'd proven I could execute launches. It was because I'd given him market intelligence that changed his competitive strategy. I'd analyzed why we were losing enterprise deals and identified a gap in our positioning that was costing us millions. He presented my analysis to the board. A board member asked a follow-up question. The CEO turned to me: "You should answer this directly at the next board meeting."

Suddenly, I was invited to strategic discussions because I'd solved a problem the CEO cared about.

That's the pattern: You earn a seat at the table by solving problems that already exist at that table.

Executives spend their time on:

• Revenue growth (how do we hit targets?)
• Market positioning (how do we win against competitors?)
• Product strategy (what should we build?)
• GTM efficiency (how do we scale without proportional cost increases?)
• Business model (pricing, packaging, expansion strategy)

If you're not providing insights or solutions in those areas, you're not solving executive-level problems. You're solving execution problems. Execution is valuable, but it doesn't get you invited to strategy meetings.

The Shift From Tactical to Strategic

Most PMMs think they're being strategic when they're actually being tactical.

Tactical: "I created a competitive battle card for Competitor X."

Strategic: "I analyzed why we're losing to Competitor X and identified that their packaging strategy targets a segment we're ignoring. We should either build a new package to compete directly or reposition to differentiate against their strength. Here's the business case for each option."

Tactical: "I coordinated a successful product launch."

Strategic: "I analyzed our last 12 launches and found that launches with pre-sales customer validation generate 3x more pipeline than launches without. We should implement a validation process before committing to launch dates. Here's the ROI."

Tactical: "I updated our messaging framework."

Strategic: "I researched how our top 50 customers describe our value and found we're messaging features while they buy outcomes. Shifting messaging to outcome-based positioning could improve close rates 15-20%. Here's the test plan."

Notice the difference? Tactical PMM work solves immediate execution problems. Strategic PMM work identifies patterns, quantifies business impact, and proposes changes to how the business operates.

Executives care about the second type. That's what earns you a seat at the table.

How to Demonstrate Strategic Thinking

I used to think being strategic meant thinking big thoughts about market trends. That's not what executives care about. They care about insights that drive decisions.

Here's what worked for me:

Strategy 1: Surface problems executives don't know they have

I was analyzing win/loss data and noticed a pattern: We were winning SMB deals but losing mid-market deals at an 80% rate. Nobody had noticed because overall win rates were fine—the volume of SMB wins masked mid-market losses.

I brought this to the CRO with a hypothesis: Our pricing is optimized for SMB but too rigid for mid-market buyers who need custom solutions. Mid-market is where our highest revenue potential is, but we're losing because we can't negotiate terms.

The CRO hadn't seen this pattern. We dug into the data together. He agreed it was a problem. He brought it to the exec team. Suddenly I was in the room for pricing strategy discussions because I'd identified a revenue problem nobody else saw.

Strategy 2: Connect dots across functions that executives can't see

Executives sit at the top of the org but often can't see cross-functional patterns. PMM sits in the middle and sees everything.

Product was building features enterprise customers requested. Sales was pitching those features in demos. But churn was increasing in enterprise accounts.

I interviewed 10 churned enterprise customers and found the pattern: They bought for the features we demoed, but churned because our onboarding process was built for SMB self-serve. Enterprise customers needed white-glove implementation. We sold them a product we couldn't deliver at the level they expected.

I brought this to the CEO with a recommendation: Either build an enterprise onboarding team or stop selling to enterprise until we can support them. We were damaging our brand by selling something we couldn't deliver.

The CEO paused new enterprise sales and greenlit an onboarding team. I got invited to product strategy discussions because I'd connected dots across Sales, Product, and CS that nobody else saw.

Strategy 3: Quantify the business impact of strategic choices

Executives make decisions based on projected ROI. If you can't quantify impact, your strategic recommendations won't get prioritized.

I proposed changing our competitive positioning from "fastest solution" to "most secure solution." Product thought it was a branding exercise. The CEO wanted to know: What's the business impact?

I analyzed our win/loss data and found that security was the #1 driver in enterprise deals (80% of wins mentioned security, only 30% mentioned speed). But our marketing and sales positioned us on speed. We were misaligned with what buyers cared about.

I calculated: If we repositioned to security and captured even 10% more enterprise wins, that's $4M ARR. If messaging resonated better and closed deals 20% faster, that's another $2M in accelerated revenue.

The CEO approved the repositioning and I joined the exec team meeting where we discussed the rollout strategy. Not because I had a good idea, but because I'd quantified the business case.

The Behaviors That Get You Invited

Even if you're solving executive-level problems, you won't get invited to strategic discussions unless you demonstrate executive-level judgment.

Here's what executives look for:

Behavior 1: You bring solutions, not just problems

I've watched PMMs get excluded from exec meetings because they flagged problems without proposing solutions. Executives are drowning in problems. They invite people who solve problems.

Early in my career, I'd say things like: "Our competitive positioning isn't working. We're losing deals to Competitor X."

True, but useless. The exec response: "Okay, figure it out and let me know when you have a solution."

Now I say: "We're losing 70% of competitive deals to Competitor X. I've analyzed why and have two options: (1) Reposition to avoid direct competition, which requires messaging changes and 2-week sales training, or (2) Build feature Y to neutralize their advantage, which takes 3 months. Here's the business case for each. Which direction should we go?"

Now I'm in the room for the decision because I've framed the options and quantified the trade-offs.

Behavior 2: You think in terms of trade-offs, not wishlists

Executives operate in a world of constrained resources. They respect people who understand trade-offs.

Bad: "We should do better competitive intelligence, invest more in launches, hire more PMMs, and expand into new markets."

Good: "We have three strategic options: (1) Focus on competitive displacement (high effort, high revenue impact), (2) Improve launch effectiveness (medium effort, medium impact), or (3) Expand into new markets (high effort, uncertain impact). Given our resources, I'd recommend #1 because the ROI is clearest. Here's why."

Executives invite people who think about priorities and trade-offs, not people who want to do everything.

Behavior 3: You communicate in business terms, not marketing jargon

I lost credibility early in my career by talking about "messaging frameworks" and "positioning pillars" in exec meetings. Executives don't care about process—they care about outcomes.

Instead of: "We need to update our messaging framework to better align with customer pain points."

Try: "Customer research shows we're losing 30% of deals because prospects don't understand our differentiation. Clarifying our positioning could improve win rates 10-15%, worth $3M ARR. Here's the plan."

Same idea, different language. One sounds like a marketing project. The other sounds like a revenue initiative.

What to Do When You're Not Invited

What if you're doing strategic work but still not getting invited to exec discussions? Three options:

Option 1: Build an executive sponsor

You don't need the CEO to invite you. You need one exec who values your strategic input and brings you into discussions.

I've worked at companies where the CEO didn't value PMM but the CRO did. The CRO brought me into revenue planning, competitive strategy, and GTM discussions. I built credibility there, and eventually the CEO invited me to broader strategy meetings.

Find the exec who feels the most pain PMM can solve. Become indispensable to them. They'll pull you into higher-level discussions.

Option 2: Create your own strategic forum

If you're not invited to exec strategy meetings, create a forum where you can surface strategic insights.

I started a monthly "Market Intelligence Review" where I shared:

• Competitive landscape changes
• Win/loss trends and patterns
• Customer feedback themes
• Market shifts impacting our positioning

I invited the CEO, CRO, CMO, and VP Product. Framed it as: "30 minutes to align on market trends shaping our strategy."

Within three months, execs were referencing insights from those meetings in board updates. Within six months, the CEO asked me to join quarterly planning discussions because my market intelligence was shaping strategy.

You don't have to wait to be invited. Create the space where you can contribute strategically.

Option 3: Leave for a company that values strategic PMM

Some companies will never see PMM as strategic. The exec team views PMM as tactical support for Product and Marketing.

I stayed too long at a company where the CEO saw PMM as "the launch team." No matter how much strategic value I provided, I was never invited to strategy discussions. My career stalled.

When I joined a company where the CEO had worked with strong PMMs before, I was in exec meetings from day one. They expected PMM to inform strategy. My career accelerated.

Don't waste years proving PMM is strategic to execs who don't believe it. Go somewhere that values strategic PMM from the start.

The Uncomfortable Truth About Getting to the Table

Most PMMs want to be recognized for the strategic work they're already doing. They think: "If I just do great work, executives will notice and invite me to strategic discussions."

That almost never happens.

Executives don't notice strategic thinking unless you explicitly surface it. They're too busy with their own priorities to observe that you're doing strategic work behind the scenes.

You have to make your strategic contributions visible:

• Share insights proactively (don't wait to be asked)
• Quantify business impact (don't assume value is obvious)
• Frame recommendations in business terms (revenue, costs, competitive advantage)
• Surface problems executives don't know exist
• Propose solutions with clear trade-offs

The PMMs who get executive seats aren't necessarily the best strategists. They're the ones who make their strategic thinking visible and frame it in terms executives care about.

That feels like self-promotion. It is. But it's also necessary.

I've watched brilliant PMMs with exceptional strategic instincts stay stuck at the director level because they thought their work would speak for itself. It doesn't. You have to speak for your work.

And I've watched mediocre strategists get promoted because they knew how to position their work as strategic and executive-worthy.

The quality of your strategic thinking matters less than your ability to communicate it in ways executives recognize as strategic.

That's frustrating, but it's reality.

Start framing your work in business terms. Start surfacing insights that inform executive decisions. Start quantifying the impact of your recommendations. Start thinking about problems at the exec table, not just problems at your desk.

Do that for six months and watch how differently executives treat you.

Or keep doing great strategic work in silence. Wonder why you're not invited to the discussions that matter.

Your choice.