B2B brand messaging consistency: Why 90% miss the mark
Brand guidelines exist. Consistency doesn’t. Here’s how to fix it.
Want articles like this straight to your inbox?
Subscribe here
Subscribe here
Your sales team just pitched your product as an "optimization platform." Your website calls it an "intelligence solution." Your CEO told an investor it's an "automation tool."
Same product. Three different stories. Zero chance a buyer understands what you actually do.
In our recent original research report B2B SaaS branding is stuck, we surveyed 100 marketing leaders from $50M+ B2B SaaS companies. Not one said they lack brand guidelines.
They all have documentation. They all have strategies. Yet only 10% maintain consistent messaging across channels.
The other 90%? They're confusing their buyers while pretending everything's fine.
When we asked about brand documentation:
Sounds good, right? Everyone's got guidelines. Problem solved.
Except when we asked about actual consistency across touchpoints:
That gap between intention and reality? That’s where deals go cold.
One CMO summed it up perfectly:
"Our sales people do what they want. I think we're in pretty good control up until the point that the collateral leaves the marketing sharepoint - and thereafter, it's the wild west. I'm sort of ok with that, or at least I've made peace with it."
Made peace with it. Translation: We've given up trying.
44% blame "cross-team alignment"
Translation: Sales ignores marketing. Product does their own thing. Customer success invents new messaging. Everyone thinks their version is better.
"Multiple teams and multiple people across the organization makes it hard to manage. Each of these areas tends to have different interpretations of guidelines and what they mean."
Here's the truth: The message is fine. The process isn’t enforced thoroughly.
22% say "too many people create content"
"Lots of teams have access to channels and there are too many messages at a given time to be monitored for consistency."
Now add AI to the mix:
"Everyone is now using the same AI tools to generate copy. Everyone sounds like they do the same thing."
Democratized content creation is great, but it can also become chaos. When everyone can publish, no one owns the message.
20% claim "we're growing too fast"
"We are growing so fast, and our messaging evolves as our product and industry changes."
This assumes growth and consistency can't coexist. But fast-scaling companies ican maintain their messaging by building systems that grow with them.
10% admit "no real enforcement"
In these companies, marketing tends to own brand but policing it is rare:
"Lack of buy-in and 'policing' within departments makes it hard for Marketing to unify the vision."
Nobody wants to be the brand police. So nobody enforces anything. So brand messaing falls apart.
Imagine a prospect seeing your LinkedIn ad promising "AI-powered insights." Interesting. They click through to a website talking about "workflow automation." Curious, they book a demo where sales pitches "operational efficiency." By the time they reach customer success, they're hearing about "digital transformation."
Four touchpoints. Four different products in their mind. Deal lost.
One leader shared:
"We underwent a CRO exercise and just going through the journey ourselves, we felt it was nebulous."
If you're confused by your own messaging, imagine how buyers feel.
Another told us:
"In cross-sell conversations we hear 'we didn't know you did that.'"
You're literally hiding features behind inconsistent messaging. That's not a brand problem. That's a revenue problem.
Here's what nobody admits: Most brand guidelines are useless.
They're 15-page PDFs nobody reads. They're full of color codes and logo placement rules. They often explain what fonts to use but not what story to tell.
Real brand consistency isn't about just matching colors. It's about everyone telling the same story about why you exist and what problem you solve.
One marketing leader nailed it:
"Brand strategy is often viewed as more visual when it really must be threaded through the organization internally and externally."
Your guidelines probably cover:
But do they explain:
If not, you don't have guidelines. You have styling rules.
"The second biggest problem we have is freelancing sales reps. People take our slides and content and develop 'custom' messaging for their individual customer, and as a result what the prospect hears doesn't match what the website says."
The marketing leaders told us sales teams destroy messaging because they're incentivized to close deals, not maintain brand consistency. When consistency conflicts with commission, guess what wins?
Crucially, the companies in that 10% with true consistency found success and consistency by using the path of least resistance.
How? They:
"We are growing so fast, and our messaging evolves as our product and industry changes. Fast growth also means growing numbers of new revenue team members requiring more sophisticated enablement processes."
This misses the real issue: It's not about speed. It's about systems that scale with you.
Companies in our research maintained consistency by:
One leader explained:
"It is operationally impossible to constantly redo everything entirely."
The answer? Don't redo everything. Build systems that update automatically (or as easily-as-possible) and remember you don't need to treat every update like a full rebrand.
The 10% of companies maintaining true consistency owe it to building their brand messaging properly.
1. Start with why, not what
Stop documenting features. Start documenting beliefs.
When everyone understands why, the what becomes obvious.
2. Create messaging hierarchy
Give teams a framework:
Flexibility within framework beats rigid rules every time.
3. Make the right way the easy way
Build tools that default to consistency:
4. Measure trust
Start tracking and understanding impact:
When teams see that consistency drives results, they'll self-enforce.
5. Pick a brand owner
"Our product and revenue functions are quite siloed, which make it really difficult to define and evolve our brand messaging as we're not looking at it holistically."
Someone needs to own the whole story. Not marketing's version. Not sales' version. The version that wins deals.
This owner needs:
As the marketing leaders told us, without ownership, you get chaos.
Every day you accept inconsistent messaging, you're choosing:
One frustrated leader told us:
"Many members of the executive team are the biggest culprits of going rogue when it comes to messaging."
If leadership won't maintain consistency, why should anyone else?
Here's the uncomfortable truth: Inconsistency isn't a capability problem. It's a choice. You're choosing the easy path of letting everyone do their own thing over the hard path of alignment.
The 10% maintaining consistency made a different choice. They decided that telling one clear story matters more than keeping everyone happy.
Stop accepting "minor variations" that confuse major deals.
Instead:
The bar is low. When 90% of companies confuse their buyers with mixed messages, clarity becomes competitive advantage.
That 10% achieving consistency aren't smarter or better resourced. They just decided that one clear message beats ten optimized variations.
Our advice: Now's the time to join the 10% who decided consistency compounds into competitive advantage.
The fix isn't complicated. It's just uncomfortable. And that's exactly why 90% haven't done it yet.
.jpg)
.png)
