Where the assumption came from
Every function had its own roadmap and each one was full. Because everyone was busy and every initiative had a rationale, the natural conclusion was under-resourcing rather than over-commitment.
← Engagement stories
B2B lead generationB2B SaaSDiagnostic then 90-day sprint
The busy plateau
Some businesses do not have a marketing problem. They have a prioritisation problem wearing a marketing costume.
- Scale
- £6m–£10m ARR
- Engagement
- 90-Day Growth Sprint
- Client
- Anonymised by default
Quantified movement
Each figure is a measured band against the pre-engagement baseline stated beside it. Ranges are used because the underlying numbers are real and anonymised, not rounded into a single headline claim.
Active initiatives
From 31 to 7
Baseline: Baseline concurrent marketing and growth initiatives
At sprint kick-off
Initiatives with a named owner and target metric
From 23% to 100%
Baseline: Baseline share of live work with defined accountability
At sprint kick-off
External supplier cost
−£8k to −£11k per month
Baseline: Baseline retained spend across overlapping suppliers
Within two months
Planned hire deferred
1 senior role, ≈£75k
Baseline: Approved headcount request
Deferred for two quarters
- UK region
- Scotland
- Company stage
- Scaling (£5m–£15m)
- Constraint found
- Capability and prioritisation
Presented as
"We are doing everything, and growth is flat. We think we need more resource."
The real constraint
Capability and prioritisation. Too many concurrent initiatives, none resourced to the point of impact, with no agreed mechanism for deciding what to stop.
What the diagnostic looked at
Active initiative inventory against senior time, the decision path for starting and stopping work, agency and contractor scope overlap, and which initiatives had a defined metric they were meant to move.
What it found
A large majority of active initiatives had no owner accountable for a specific outcome metric. Two external suppliers had materially overlapping scope. The initiatives with the clearest commercial case were consistently the ones losing senior attention to newer, louder ones.
What changed
Active work was cut to a small number of prioritised workstreams with named owners and target metrics, supplier scope was consolidated, and a monthly stop/fix/scale/test review was introduced so prioritisation became a repeated decision rather than a one-off exercise.
Would the same diagnosis hold in your business?
The Growth Economics Snapshot takes a few minutes and shows where your biggest commercial lever sits before you commit to anything.