How I work

The operating system.

Evidence before changes, a framework that covers the whole lifecycle, a scorecard leadership actually reads, and outcomes defined before anyone knows the answer.

The premise

Most marketing plans are activity lists wearing a strategy costume.

They describe what will happen: campaigns, content, a website refresh, a new channel. What they rarely state is what the business needs, what has to be true to get there, what the company is deliberately not doing, and how anyone will know if it worked.

A marketing budget is a portfolio of bets with different time horizons, different risk profiles, and different expected returns. Treated that way, the job becomes allocation rather than production. Everything below exists to make that allocation defensible.

01 · First 30 days

Three audits, and nothing changes yet.

The most expensive mistake in a new engagement is changing something before anyone can measure whether the change worked. The first month produces findings, not campaigns.

Audit	The question it answers	What it usually finds
Revenue origin	Where did the last twenty customers actually come from, deal by deal?	A channel nobody is funding is producing real revenue, and the one absorbing most of the budget is producing very little
Allocation	What does each line of spend return, fully loaded with agency fees and internal time?	Between 15 and 30 percent of the budget cannot be defended with evidence by anyone in the building
Asset	What does this company already own that it is not using?	A dormant list, content that ranks and never converts, customers nobody has asked for a referral or a review

Sourced from sales conversations and the accounting system rather than platform dashboards, because every advertising platform counts a conversion it touched as one it caused, and no platform is positioned to report what the whole portfolio returned.

What the first 90 days should contain → Run a version of this yourself →

The short version, enough to get the thinking started. The four categories in it turn up almost every time.

02 · The RISE Cycle

One framework, the entire lifecycle.

Most marketing functions are organised around acquisition and quietly stop caring once someone buys. I built RISE to stop that, by giving each stage of the lifecycle an owner, a measure, and a named failure mode.

Four stages, twelve components, read clockwise from the top. The table below is the operating detail behind it.

Stage	What it owns	What it measures	What breaks when it's skipped
Reach	Content, social proof, organic and paid amplification that put the message in front of the right audience	Qualified traffic, share of voice, cost per qualified visitor	Nothing enters the system, and every downstream improvement compounds against a shrinking base
Interact	Testing, conversion rate optimisation, and the cross-department agreement on what qualified means	Stage-to-stage conversion, lead to qualified rate, close rate	You pay to acquire attention and leak it, which makes every channel look worse than it is
Support	Onboarding, cross-sell and upsell, the experience after the sale	Retention by acquisition channel, expansion revenue, lifetime value	Acquisition cost has to be recovered from a single purchase, which caps what you can afford to spend
Empower	Loyalty, referral, affiliates, review generation, strategic partnerships	Referral share of new revenue, review velocity, partner-sourced pipeline	Growth stays entirely rented, so it stops the moment spend stops

The sequence matters. Working on Reach while Interact leaks is the most common and most expensive error in marketing, because it buys more of a problem. The order of operations is almost always conversion first, then lifecycle, then volume.

03 · The scorecard

Six numbers, reviewed weekly, one of which can embarrass me.

Marketing generates enormous quantities of flattering data. The scorecard exists to be the one artifact that cannot be gamed, which is why it stays short and why it goes to leadership rather than staying inside marketing.

What goes on it, and why

Number	What it answers	Who it's really for
Blended return	What did the entire marketing budget produce, across every channel at once?	The owner and the CFO
Qualified opportunities	How much real, workable demand did we create?	Sales
Cost per acquired customer	What does a customer cost once agency fees and internal time are included?	Finance
Stage-to-stage conversion	Where exactly is the funnel leaking this week?	The marketing team
Pipeline created	What is the forward value of what we produced?	The leadership team
Payback period	How long until an acquired customer has repaid what they cost?	Whoever manages cash

What it looks like in practice

Illustrative figures for a hypothetical company, shown to demonstrate the format rather than to report any client's results.

Metric	This week	Prior	Target	Status
Blended return	3.4x	3.1x	3.5x	Close
Qualified opportunities	41	38	45	Close
Cost per acquired customer	$1,840	$1,910	Under $2,000	On track
Lead to qualified	22%	19%	25%	Close
Pipeline created	$612K	$548K	$650K	Close
Payback period	6.1 mo	5.4 mo	Under 5 mo	Off track

The last row is the point. A scorecard where everything is green is not a scorecard, it is a status update. If nothing on it can go the wrong way, nobody is measuring anything that matters, and leadership will stop reading it within a quarter.

Why blended return is the number that can't be gamed → KPIs versus metrics →

04 · Target derivation

No target goes on that scorecard until it has been divided down from revenue.

The table above has a target column, and a target nobody derived is a number nobody owns. Before anything gets a threshold, the revenue number gets divided down through the conversion rates that connect it to weekly activity.

Step	How it is derived	What it exposes
Revenue target	Given by ownership and finance	The only number in the chain marketing does not negotiate
Required pipeline	Revenue target ÷ win rate	Whether the coverage assumption is sound or a reflex
Required opportunities	Pipeline ÷ average deal size	What moving upmarket actually costs in volume
Required appointments	Opportunities ÷ appointment rate	The department's real workload, before anyone argues about it
Weekly appointments	Appointments ÷ selling weeks	A number a team can manage on a Monday

The rule that does most of the work. Coverage has to be at least 1 divided by the win rate. The familiar 3x pipeline target is not a rule of thumb, it is an unstated assumption that you win a third of what you quote. A team closing 20 percent and planning at 3x has built the miss into the plan before a single campaign runs, and no amount of channel optimisation closes a gap that was created in the spreadsheet.

Running this in the open also changes the budget conversation. When a conversion rate moves, the chain shows exactly what it costs in weekly volume, so a close rate problem on the sales side stops arriving on marketing's desk as a lead volume request. Recovering five points of close rate and increasing budget by a quarter can be worth the same amount. Both are legitimate. Only one of them is visible before somebody does the division.

The full derivation, with worked examples →

05 · Three-tier outcomes

Every bet gets a kill criterion before it launches.

The argument about whether a campaign worked is almost always an argument about a standard nobody set. So the standard gets set first, in three tiers, agreed in writing before any money is spent.

Tier	What it means	What happens next
Favorable	The bet outperformed. The thesis was right and there is headroom.	Increase allocation, and work out what specifically drove it before assuming it repeats
Acceptable	It cleared the bar without excitement. It earns its place, marginally.	Hold allocation, fix the weakest input, re-evaluate next quarter
Unfavorable	It missed the floor we agreed to. This is the kill criterion.	Stop, reallocate, and write down what we learned before the reasoning is forgotten

A worked example. A new paid channel gets a 90 day test at $12,000 per month. Favorable is a blended return above 3x with cost per acquired customer under $1,800. Acceptable is 2x to 3x. Unfavorable is below 2x, or any result where the channel cannot clear a six month payback. Those numbers are agreed on day zero, so on day 91 nobody is negotiating with the evidence.

The discipline this creates is not analytical, it is political. It removes the option of quietly redefining success after the fact, which is the single most common way marketing budgets survive despite producing nothing.

Why this is political rather than analytical, and the three things that make it fail in practice.

06 · Cadence

90-day plans, two-week sprints, a two-year view.

Three clocks running at once, deliberately. Strategy should be slow, execution should be fast, and confusing the two is why marketing teams either thrash or stagnate.

Horizon	What changes at this cadence	Who it involves
Two years	Positioning, the buyer, the category we intend to own. Changes rarely, and only when evidence forces it.	Owner and leadership
90 days	Allocation across channels, the two or three deliberate bets, hiring and vendor decisions.	Leadership and the CMO
Two weeks	What actually gets built and shipped, by whom, with what deadline.	The team, agencies, contractors
Weekly	Nothing. This is the review, not a planning session.	Leadership, 30 minutes

The weekly row is the one people get wrong. If the weekly meeting becomes a planning session, the sprint has failed and the team is being managed by interruption. It exists to look at the scorecard, name what is off track, and decide whether anything needs escalating to the 90 day plan.

07 · Alignment

Every initiative gets translated into the language of whoever approves it.

Marketing does not usually fail on execution. It fails at the seams: where marketing and sales disagree about what qualified means, where product ships something marketing did not know how to sell, where finance sees a cost centre rather than a growth engine.

So the same initiative gets three descriptions. Finance hears payback period and cash impact. Sales hears qualified pipeline and close rate. Operations hears capacity and lead time. It is the same plan each time, and each function can evaluate it against something they already care about.

Cross-department questions get asked before launch rather than after a campaign collides with reality, and the weekly cadence keeps everyone looking at the same numbers, so alignment is maintained by routine rather than by heroics.

What it produces: fewer and sharper meetings, decisions made faster, a team that executes with conviction instead of waiting for permission, and an owner who gets their time back.

The instrument

The diagnostic I built for this.

None of it runs from a template. It runs through RISE Discovery, a nine-section instrument I developed covering business economics, revenue origin, unit economics, allocation, measurement integrity, pipeline, owned assets, constraints and agreed targets. Every answer carries a confidence marker, so the output states how much of the picture is evidenced rather than asserted.

01Establish what's true

01Context

02Revenue origin

03Unit economics

02Test the machine

04Allocation

05Measurement

06Pipeline

03Decide

07Assets

08Constraints

09Targets

Work through it yourself, or with me in the room. Nothing you enter is transmitted anywhere.

Open RISE Discovery →

The contrast

What this replaces.

	The usual approach	This method
First month	Campaigns launch in week two	Three audits, no changes, findings circulated
Reporting	Each channel grades its own homework	One blended number reconciled to what finance booked
Targets	One goal, reinterpreted after the result	Three tiers agreed before launch, including a kill criterion
Scope	Acquisition, with retention treated as someone else's job	The full lifecycle, with an owner and a measure at each stage
Budget	Last year's split, adjusted for inflation	Reallocated quarterly against evidence
Knowledge	Lives in one person's head	Documented as it goes, so the function survives any individual

FAQ

Common questions.

What happens in the first 30 days of a fractional CMO engagement?

Three audits and no changes. The revenue origin audit establishes where customers actually come from, sourced from sales and finance rather than platform dashboards. The allocation audit works out what every line of spend returns, fully loaded. The asset audit inventories what the company already owns and is not using. Recommendations come after evidence, never before.

What is the RISE Cycle?

A four-stage operating framework I developed, covering the full customer lifecycle: Reach, Interact, Support, Empower. Its purpose is to stop marketing being defined as top-of-funnel acquisition alone. Each stage has a distinct owner, a distinct measure, and a specific failure mode when it gets skipped.

What goes on a weekly marketing scorecard?

Six to eight numbers, no more. Blended return across the whole portfolio, qualified opportunities created, fully loaded cost per acquired customer, stage-to-stage conversion, pipeline created, and payback period. At least one of them should be capable of making the person presenting it look bad.

How do you set marketing targets?

In three tiers agreed before anything launches: favorable, acceptable, and unfavorable. Unfavorable is the kill criterion. Defining all three up front removes the argument about whether a result was good, because the answer was written down before anyone knew the outcome.

How often should marketing plans change?

Plans are set in 90-day blocks tied to a two-year view and executed in two-week sprints. The plan changes quarterly. The sprint contents change every two weeks. The strategy underneath should change rarely, and when it does, it should be because evidence forced it.

How do you keep marketing aligned with the rest of the business?

By translating every initiative into the language of whoever approves it. Finance hears payback period and cash. Sales hears qualified pipeline and close rate. Operations hears capacity and lead time. Cross-department questions get asked before launch rather than after a campaign collides with reality.

Learn more

What clients say.

Read all reviews on Google →

★★★★★

"I've had the pleasure of working closely with Baron for over 5 years, and in that time he's consistently proven himself to be one of the sharpest strategic minds I've ever met..."

Natali LischinskiGoogle review

★★★★★

"Working with Baron has been an outstanding experience. He brings not only deep marketing expertise but also sharp strategic thinking to drive real business outcomes..."

Benjamin DrydenGoogle review

★★★★★

"Baron is exceptional: strategic, organized, and results-driven. He brings clarity to complex marketing efforts and provides leadership that makes a real impact. Highly recommend."

Pawis PalomaresGoogle review

★★★★★

"Baron is a diligent and effective CMO whose expertise in go-to-market strategy is unmatched."

Khalil ChamounFounder & CEO, RevSuite

★★★★★

"Baron implemented a comprehensive CRM system complete with digital strategy, automations, workflows and SOPs - on time and within budget."

Daniel MazourFounder, Coldture

★★★★★

"Baron provided valuable insights... clear, actionable, and eye opening."

Oscar NaziriFounder, Athlete's Kitchen

★★★★★

"I've had the pleasure of working closely with Baron for over 5 years, and in that time he's consistently proven himself to be one of the sharpest strategic minds I've ever met..."

Natali LischinskiGoogle review

★★★★★

"Working with Baron has been an outstanding experience. He brings not only deep marketing expertise but also sharp strategic thinking to drive real business outcomes..."

Benjamin DrydenGoogle review

★★★★★

"Baron is exceptional: strategic, organized, and results-driven. He brings clarity to complex marketing efforts and provides leadership that makes a real impact. Highly recommend."

Pawis PalomaresGoogle review

★★★★★

"Baron is a diligent and effective CMO whose expertise in go-to-market strategy is unmatched."

Khalil ChamounFounder & CEO, RevSuite

★★★★★

"Baron implemented a comprehensive CRM system complete with digital strategy, automations, workflows and SOPs - on time and within budget."

Daniel MazourFounder, Coldture

★★★★★

"Baron provided valuable insights... clear, actionable, and eye opening."

Oscar NaziriFounder, Athlete's Kitchen

See it applied to your P&L.

The first conversation is a diagnostic, not a pitch. You will get a direct answer about whether this method fits your situation, and if it doesn't, I'll say so.

Book a Strategy Call →

The operating system.

Most marketing plans are activity lists wearing a strategy costume.

Three audits, and nothing changes yet.

One framework, the entire lifecycle.

Six numbers, reviewed weekly, one of which can embarrass me.

What goes on it, and why

What it looks like in practice

No target goes on that scorecard until it has been divided down from revenue.

Every bet gets a kill criterion before it launches.

90-day plans, two-week sprints, a two-year view.

Every initiative gets translated into the language of whoever approves it.

The diagnostic I built for this.

What this replaces.

Common questions.

What happens in the first 30 days of a fractional CMO engagement?

What is the RISE Cycle?

What goes on a weekly marketing scorecard?

How do you set marketing targets?

How often should marketing plans change?

How do you keep marketing aligned with the rest of the business?

More on the fractional CMO role.

What a fractional CMO actually does

Marketing, run as capital allocation

What clients say.

See it applied to your P&L.