Why sales and marketing keep blaming each other

Because nobody wrote down what a good lead is. Marketing counts leads, sales counts junk, and both are measured on different numbers from the same funnel, so the argument is built in. It isn't a people problem, it's a definitions problem: what counts as a lead, when it qualifies, who owns it at each step, and which single number both teams answer to. Fix those four things and the finger-pointing stops, because there's finally one shared line to stand on. Here's how.

Good people run this argument for years inside good companies. It survives reorganisations and awaydays because none of those fix the wiring underneath.

Why do sales say the leads are junk?

Usually because "lead" means two different things. Marketing celebrates 40 leads: anyone who downloaded a guide. Sales worked 12, and eight were students or competitors. Neither side is lying. They're counting different populations and calling both "leads", so every conversation starts from incompatible facts.

The fix is a written, agreed definition of a qualified lead, specific enough to sort a real record into yes or no. Not "interested and a good fit", but the actual criteria: company size, role, problem, buying signal. When both teams sign the same definition, the volume drops and the quality argument mostly disappears with it.

What is a sales and marketing SLA, and do you need one?

It's a written agreement on what each side owes the other, and yes, most growing teams need one. Marketing commits to a number of qualified leads, to the agreed standard. Sales commits to working each one within a set time and logging the outcome, so marketing learns what converts.

It sounds bureaucratic and isn't. It's just the handoff made explicit: what qualifies, how fast it's actioned, and what feedback comes back. Without it, leads fall down the gap between the two teams and each blames the other for the drop.

How does the CRM cause or cure the problem?

The CRM should enforce the definitions. In a well-built one, a lead can't reach sales without meeting the agreed criteria, ownership passes cleanly with a timestamp, and both teams read the same funnel report. In a messy one, each team keeps its own private spreadsheet of the "real" numbers, and the drift becomes permanent.

This is why alignment is a systems job, not a team-building one. You can't personality your way out of two sources of truth. One funnel, one definition, one report, wired into the tool everyone already uses.

What's the one number both teams should share?

Pipeline generated, or revenue, not lead volume. The moment marketing is measured on qualified pipeline it helped create rather than raw leads, its incentive snaps into line with sales. Chasing a big lead count rewards quantity; sharing a pipeline number rewards the leads that actually turn into deals.

Change what you measure and behaviour follows without a single motivational meeting. That's the whole trick: align the metric and the teams align themselves.

Where should you start?

With an honest look at where the handoff breaks, because the fix is usually one or two wires, not a reorganisation. Run a free commercial systems health check: a few minutes, a score across your data, pipeline and reporting, and the three fixes worth doing first. If your two teams tell different stories about the same funnel, it will show you exactly where the definitions drift.