Your RevOps team built a dashboard tracking pipeline velocity. You didn't know about it until sales asked why PMM's numbers don't match.
Meanwhile, you're running a campaign that's generating SQLs. RevOps has no idea which assets are actually converting because nobody told them.
Both teams are tracking revenue impact. Neither team is sharing data. Leadership gets conflicting reports and trusts neither.
This happens at every B2B company where RevOps and PMM operate in silos. Two teams with overlapping goals, separate systems, and zero collaboration framework.
Here's how to fix it.
The Natural Alliance: What RevOps and PMM Should Be Doing Together
RevOps owns: Pipeline health, revenue operations, systems and data infrastructure, forecasting accuracy
PMM owns: Product positioning, launch execution, sales enablement, competitive intelligence
The overlap: Both teams need to prove their impact on revenue. Both need attribution data. Both need to understand what's actually working in the market.
The problem: They measure success differently and use different tools to track it.
Gong's collaboration model: RevOps and PMM share a weekly 30-minute data review. RevOps shows pipeline trends by segment. PMM shows which competitive battlecards are being used in winning deals. Together they identify what's working and what's not.
What makes it work: Regular touchpoints focused on shared metrics, not turf protection.
The Data Sharing Framework: Who Owns What
Bad approach: "RevOps owns all data, PMM requests reports when needed"
Good approach: Shared responsibility with clear boundaries
RevOps owns and provides:
- Pipeline data by segment, source, and stage
- Conversion rates and velocity metrics
- Win/loss data from CRM fields
- Campaign attribution from marketing automation
- Forecast accuracy and revenue trends
PMM owns and provides:
- Qualitative win/loss insights from interviews
- Competitive intel from sales calls and market research
- Product feedback from customer conversations
- Launch performance metrics (adoption, usage, feedback)
- Sales enablement usage data (which assets are actually used)
Shared ownership:
- Attribution modeling (how to credit revenue impact)
- Ideal customer profile definition (who converts best)
- Sales process optimization (what moves deals forward)
- Market segmentation (where to focus resources)
Asana's approach: They created a shared "Go-to-Market Data Council" with RevOps, PMM, and Sales Operations. Monthly meetings to align on metric definitions and quarterly reviews of attribution models.
Critical rule: RevOps provides the infrastructure and pipeline data. PMM provides the market context and qualitative insights. Neither is complete without the other.
The Tool Stack: Systems That Actually Connect
The dysfunction: RevOps uses Salesforce and Clari. PMM uses Google Sheets and hopes for the best.
The reality: You need shared access to systems where both teams can pull relevant data.
Minimum viable stack:
Salesforce (shared access):
- RevOps: Manages pipeline stages, forecasting categories
- PMM: Tracks competitive losses, reads win/loss notes, monitors deal trends by product
Gong or Chorus (both teams need it):
- RevOps: Analyzes talk time, question patterns, deal risk
- PMM: Pulls competitive mentions, objections, positioning validation
Attribution platform (choose one together):
- Bizible, Dreamdata, or HockeyStack
- Both teams must agree on attribution model
- RevOps configures, PMM validates that it captures launch impact
Shared dashboard (Tableau, Looker, or Mode):
- Weekly view of pipeline by segment and source
- Campaign impact on pipeline creation
- Competitive win/loss trends
- Launch performance tracking
Stripe's setup: PMM has view-only Salesforce access to run reports on competitive trends. RevOps has edit access to PMM's launch tracking sheets to add revenue impact data. Both use a shared Looker dashboard updated daily.
The Process: Weekly Syncs That Don't Waste Time
Bad meeting: "Let's align on our goals" (30 slides, no decisions)
Good meeting: "Here's what the data shows, here's what we're doing about it" (15 minutes, actionable)
Agenda template for RevOps x PMM weekly sync:
Week 1-3 (15 minutes):
- RevOps shares: Top pipeline changes this week, which segments are accelerating/slowing
- PMM shares: Competitive intel from recent calls, sales feedback on new assets
- Joint decision: One thing to test or change based on data
Week 4 (30 minutes - monthly deep dive):
- Full funnel review: Where are prospects converting or dropping off?
- Launch performance: Are recent launches driving pipeline?
- Attribution analysis: What's actually driving revenue?
- Competitive trends: Where are we winning and losing?
- Next month priorities: What should both teams focus on?
Datadog's approach: They use a shared Notion doc updated by both teams daily. RevOps logs pipeline anomalies. PMM logs competitive intel. Weekly sync reviews the doc and decides actions.
The Attribution Battle: How to Stop Fighting Over Credit
The fight: PMM launches a new positioning campaign. Pipeline increases. RevOps credits inbound marketing. PMM says it's the new messaging. Both claim credit. Leadership is confused.
The fix: Agree on attribution model before launch, not after.
Three attribution approaches that work:
First-touch for awareness, last-touch for conversion:
- First touch: What made them aware? (Content marketing, events, ads)
- Last touch: What convinced them to convert? (Demo, pricing page, comparison content)
- PMM and RevOps both get credit for different stages
Multi-touch with weighted stages:
- Awareness (10%), Consideration (30%), Decision (60%)
- RevOps tracks touches by stage
- PMM validates that messaging/positioning is consistent across touches
Contribution model (most honest):
- Every touchpoint gets partial credit
- No single owner of a deal
- Focus on what's working, not who gets credit
6sense's model: They use a contribution approach. When PMM launches new battlecards, RevOps tracks deal velocity before/after in Salesforce. Both teams report the improvement. No fights over credit.
Critical insight: Attribution models should measure "what's working" not "who deserves credit." If you're fighting over credit, you've already lost.
Common Collaboration Failures
Failure 1: RevOps builds dashboards PMM can't access
Fix: PMM gets view access to key Salesforce reports and revenue dashboards from day one.
Failure 2: PMM launches products without telling RevOps
Fix: RevOps is in every launch planning meeting. They need to prepare forecasting and pipeline tracking.
Failure 3: Different definitions of key metrics
Fix: Create a shared "Metrics Definition" doc. What's an SQL? What's pipeline? What's a competitive loss? One source of truth.
Failure 4: Only talking when something breaks
Fix: Weekly standing meeting. 15 minutes. Non-negotiable. Even when things are going well.
The Uncomfortable Truth
Most PMM teams measure success through launches, assets created, and sales feedback. Most RevOps teams measure success through pipeline accuracy, forecast reliability, and conversion rates.
You're both trying to prove impact, but using completely different scorecards.
What doesn't work:
- Separate systems with no data sharing
- Monthly "alignment" meetings with no action items
- Fighting over attribution instead of focusing on what drives revenue
- Treating RevOps as a reporting service, not a strategic partner
What works:
- Shared data access and regular sync cycles
- Agreed attribution models set before launches
- Joint ownership of pipeline quality and velocity
- Weekly reviews of what's working based on actual data
The best RevOps-PMM partnerships don't fight over credit. They collaborate on what moves deals forward. If you're arguing about who gets credit for a win, you're focused on the wrong thing.
Stop protecting territory. Start sharing data.