You already have the data that proves buying groups work. You're just not looking at it.
.svg)
In partnership with:
Featuring
Featuring
How are you going to stand out in 2026?
Buyers are in control of the buying process. Over 70% of it is happening online. And they are putting companies on their short list of vendors that provide value and establish trust with their content.
How are you accounting for this in your 2026 strategy?
You need to stand out. To make sure your buyers notice you. Let us help you build that into your strategy for next year -->
%20(1).webp)
The Revenue Marketer
You already have the data that proves buying groups work. You're just not looking at it.
Still chasing 10% efficiency gains?
2023-2025 were the years of experimentation with AI. 2026 is the year to make it transformative. If you're still trying to figure out the strategic advantage AI will bring to your team, we're here to help!
Your closed-won deals already know the answer.
Go pull them. Look at how many stakeholders were engaged before the opportunity went to sales. Compare the ones where marketing touched five people versus the ones where marketing touched one. The deals with more buying group coverage close faster, at higher rates, and at better prices. Almost every B2B revenue team that does this exercise finds the same thing.
So the question isn't whether buying groups work. The question is why most marketing teams are still organized around individuals.
That's what Inverta's second webinar on buying groups set out to answer — not with theory, but with the practitioners who are actually building these motions. Brandie Marone, SVP of Revenue Operations at Intentsify, Andrea Frazier, Senior Consultant at Inverta, and Austin Sandmeyer, Director of Go-to-Market Engineering at Sendoso, spent an hour walking through the four operational pillars that make a buying group motion real: signals, team alignment, technology and data, and metrics.
Here's what they said.
Signals are not just intent data
The word "signals" has been so thoroughly colonized by intent vendors that most revenue teams have stopped thinking creatively about what they're actually listening for.
Austin Sandmeyer put it plainly: "Before that, they were just called activities in some MAP somewhere, and they've changed names and done a lot of stuff over many years." The point isn't the label. The point is the matrix.
Think about web activity alone. You can track it for one person, for a department, for a function, for seniority levels, for geolocations within a multinational. That's before you add Gong conversation signals, CRM internal signals, product usage data, and business events like hiring decisions, PE acquisitions, or leadership changes.
Jessica Fewless shared an example from a peer demand gen leader who had figured out that when a prospect account hired a CFO from a certain type of company, they became dramatically more likely to convert. That is a signal. It has nothing to do with intent data. It came from a deep understanding of their ICP and a willingness to think beyond page views.
The practical starting point, per the group, is to work backwards from your sales process. Look at your stage entry and exit criteria. Your AEs already know which stakeholders are supposed to be engaged at each stage. Use that map to figure out what signals should precede each stage — and what you should be watching for to get there first.
Brandie Marone added one more dimension that often gets overlooked: the incomplete group. It is not just about responding to the signals you see. It is about identifying what is missing. Which roles haven't shown up yet? What should you be doing to bring them in? Flagging gaps early is itself a signal worth building around.
Alignment isn't a slide deck moment — it's a structural change
Every buying group conversation eventually arrives at the same wall: alignment. Not the aspirational kind — the mechanical kind. Who is responsible for what? How is the BDR team being measured? What does "a good meeting" mean now versus before?
Brandie described the shift her team had to make when BDRs moved under Revenue Operations. The BDR role had been built around speed to lead — one person, fast response, hand off. Buying groups require the opposite: research, patience, multi-contact coverage, portfolio thinking at the account level. You can't comp someone the old way and ask them to behave the new way. Those two things are in direct conflict.
Austin went further and named a segment that often gets left out of the alignment conversation entirely: subject matter experts. At a previous HR tech company, his team realized that the CHRO stakeholders in their buying groups were more likely to engage with their company's own CHROs than with salespeople. Not to pitch the product — just to connect, share challenges, and operate in the same professional circles. That relationship, built over time, was what moved deals when they reached the evaluation stage. Marketing alone could not create it. Alignment with the executive team could.
Jessica reframed what alignment means for each marketing function specifically. Content teams need to stop writing for the champion and start writing for the full buying group — including the roles that come in at stage three or four who have never seen the brand before. Field teams need to design events that either serve a specific buying group role or deliberately bring multiple roles into the same room. "Marketing as a monolith" doesn't survive a buying group motion. Every function has to think differently about what they're building and why.
Andrea tied it together with a reminder that the feedback loop matters as much as the initial alignment. What teams are experiencing at the beginning of this transition is different from what they'll experience six months in. The conversations need to keep happening. The definitions need to keep evolving.
Your tech stack doesn't need to be perfect. It needs to be started.
One of the clearest moments in the conversation came from Andrea, who put a name to something that stalls a lot of buying group initiatives before they start: the idea that you need a complete, sophisticated tech stack before you can begin.
"We've heard countless times, 'Oh yeah. We'll do that once we implement this new tool.' And it just pains me so much."
Brandie made the same point from a customer perspective. She described working with large enterprise organizations with messy data, disconnected tools, and incomplete setups who were waiting for conditions to be perfect. They weren't going to be. They never are. The answer is to start, iterate, and improve.
Austin's take was equally direct: your MQA definition, at the very beginning, can be three people you know are part of the buying committee and one of them submitted a demo request. That is a fine definition. You build from there.
What both Brandie and Austin's tech stack slides illustrated — one from Intentsify, one from Sendoso — is that the sophistication is earned over time, not installed at once. The questions worth asking at the start are simpler than people think: Can my rep see who's engaged? Can they see which roles are missing? Does the system tell them what to do next? If yes, you're moving.
Austin also made a sharp point about first-party data that often gets undervalued in all the noise around intent signals. Nobody else knows that a prospect previously evaluated your platform at another company. Nobody else knows that an executive at a target account used to work somewhere that was a customer. That information lives in your CRM, and it is more predictive than almost anything you can buy. Prioritize it.
The metrics shift is a behavioral shift — don't skip that part
Changing your metrics sounds like a technical exercise. It is actually a change management exercise.
Brandie made this argument directly: "If you don't identify these new metrics, if you don't change them upfront, by default, your team is just gonna go back to the old funnel." The pull toward MQL volume is institutional. It's in the dashboards, the comp plans, the questions your leadership team asks in the weekly pipeline review. If you change the motion without changing what you measure, the old behavior will win.
The new metrics the group pointed to aren't complicated. Buying group completeness — have you identified all the roles? Multi-role engagement — are multiple people in the account actually doing things? Quality of engagement per function — a finance stakeholder engaging three times over ninety days might be more significant than a marketing stakeholder engaging every day, because finance is not on your website every morning. These nuances matter, and they're worth building into your scoring logic.
Austin simplified it to a single question that cuts through all the sophistication: "Can I get the one or two marketers and the one or two salespeople and the one or two finance people involved at Amazon that I need?" Not the 300 marketers at Amazon. The right ones.
Andrea added the change management framing that the other two hadn't named explicitly: you need to train your leadership team to ask different questions. As long as your CMO and CRO are asking about MQL volume in every meeting, you're fighting institutional gravity. Part of the job is helping them understand what questions they should be asking instead, and why those questions are better predictors of outcomes they actually care about.
Where to start (three different answers, all of them right)
The webinar closed with a lightning round: if your CRO or CMO came to you tomorrow and said we need to make this shift, what's the first thing you do?
Andrea's answer: framing and messaging. Get people excited for the idea before you ask them to do anything differently. Plant the seed. Make the case for why this matters to each function specifically.
Brandie's answer: data model. Decide what information you need to collect and set up the infrastructure to capture it. Everything else flows from that.
Austin's answer: walk your sales process. Sit down with your top AEs who are already multithreading and ask them who they engage with, at what stage, and what content they're using. You'll learn what your buying group looks like in practice, what content gaps you have, and what signals you should be tracking — all in one conversation.
Three different answers. All of them right. The point isn't to pick one. The point is that each role on your revenue team has a natural entry point into this transition, and the teams that make it work tend to start from where they are rather than waiting for someone else to go first.
Your closed-won data is already making the case. The question is whether you're going to listen to it.
[Pull quote, unattributed: "You probably already have the data that proves buying groups work. If you look back at your closed-won deals and see how many stakeholders were involved, the evidence is already there."]
[Pull quote, attributed: "If you don't identify these new metrics upfront, by default, your team is just gonna go back to the old funnel." — Brandie Marone, SVP Revenue Operations, Intentsify]
[Pull quote, attributed: "It's not about getting the 300 marketers at Amazon. It's about getting the one or two marketers and the one or two salespeople and the one or two finance people that you actually need." — Austin Sandmeyer, Director of GTM Engineering, Sendoso]
Download the complete guide to buying groups, including the seven-step checklist from this webinar series.
About the author
Service page feature
Demand gen
Your closed-won deals already know the answer.
Go pull them. Look at how many stakeholders were engaged before the opportunity went to sales. Compare the ones where marketing touched five people versus the ones where marketing touched one. The deals with more buying group coverage close faster, at higher rates, and at better prices. Almost every B2B revenue team that does this exercise finds the same thing.
So the question isn't whether buying groups work. The question is why most marketing teams are still organized around individuals.
That's what Inverta's second webinar on buying groups set out to answer — not with theory, but with the practitioners who are actually building these motions. Brandie Marone, SVP of Revenue Operations at Intentsify, Andrea Frazier, Senior Consultant at Inverta, and Austin Sandmeyer, Director of Go-to-Market Engineering at Sendoso, spent an hour walking through the four operational pillars that make a buying group motion real: signals, team alignment, technology and data, and metrics.
Here's what they said.
Signals are not just intent data
The word "signals" has been so thoroughly colonized by intent vendors that most revenue teams have stopped thinking creatively about what they're actually listening for.
Austin Sandmeyer put it plainly: "Before that, they were just called activities in some MAP somewhere, and they've changed names and done a lot of stuff over many years." The point isn't the label. The point is the matrix.
Think about web activity alone. You can track it for one person, for a department, for a function, for seniority levels, for geolocations within a multinational. That's before you add Gong conversation signals, CRM internal signals, product usage data, and business events like hiring decisions, PE acquisitions, or leadership changes.
Jessica Fewless shared an example from a peer demand gen leader who had figured out that when a prospect account hired a CFO from a certain type of company, they became dramatically more likely to convert. That is a signal. It has nothing to do with intent data. It came from a deep understanding of their ICP and a willingness to think beyond page views.
The practical starting point, per the group, is to work backwards from your sales process. Look at your stage entry and exit criteria. Your AEs already know which stakeholders are supposed to be engaged at each stage. Use that map to figure out what signals should precede each stage — and what you should be watching for to get there first.
Brandie Marone added one more dimension that often gets overlooked: the incomplete group. It is not just about responding to the signals you see. It is about identifying what is missing. Which roles haven't shown up yet? What should you be doing to bring them in? Flagging gaps early is itself a signal worth building around.
Alignment isn't a slide deck moment — it's a structural change
Every buying group conversation eventually arrives at the same wall: alignment. Not the aspirational kind — the mechanical kind. Who is responsible for what? How is the BDR team being measured? What does "a good meeting" mean now versus before?
Brandie described the shift her team had to make when BDRs moved under Revenue Operations. The BDR role had been built around speed to lead — one person, fast response, hand off. Buying groups require the opposite: research, patience, multi-contact coverage, portfolio thinking at the account level. You can't comp someone the old way and ask them to behave the new way. Those two things are in direct conflict.
Austin went further and named a segment that often gets left out of the alignment conversation entirely: subject matter experts. At a previous HR tech company, his team realized that the CHRO stakeholders in their buying groups were more likely to engage with their company's own CHROs than with salespeople. Not to pitch the product — just to connect, share challenges, and operate in the same professional circles. That relationship, built over time, was what moved deals when they reached the evaluation stage. Marketing alone could not create it. Alignment with the executive team could.
Jessica reframed what alignment means for each marketing function specifically. Content teams need to stop writing for the champion and start writing for the full buying group — including the roles that come in at stage three or four who have never seen the brand before. Field teams need to design events that either serve a specific buying group role or deliberately bring multiple roles into the same room. "Marketing as a monolith" doesn't survive a buying group motion. Every function has to think differently about what they're building and why.
Andrea tied it together with a reminder that the feedback loop matters as much as the initial alignment. What teams are experiencing at the beginning of this transition is different from what they'll experience six months in. The conversations need to keep happening. The definitions need to keep evolving.
Your tech stack doesn't need to be perfect. It needs to be started.
One of the clearest moments in the conversation came from Andrea, who put a name to something that stalls a lot of buying group initiatives before they start: the idea that you need a complete, sophisticated tech stack before you can begin.
"We've heard countless times, 'Oh yeah. We'll do that once we implement this new tool.' And it just pains me so much."
Brandie made the same point from a customer perspective. She described working with large enterprise organizations with messy data, disconnected tools, and incomplete setups who were waiting for conditions to be perfect. They weren't going to be. They never are. The answer is to start, iterate, and improve.
Austin's take was equally direct: your MQA definition, at the very beginning, can be three people you know are part of the buying committee and one of them submitted a demo request. That is a fine definition. You build from there.
What both Brandie and Austin's tech stack slides illustrated — one from Intentsify, one from Sendoso — is that the sophistication is earned over time, not installed at once. The questions worth asking at the start are simpler than people think: Can my rep see who's engaged? Can they see which roles are missing? Does the system tell them what to do next? If yes, you're moving.
Austin also made a sharp point about first-party data that often gets undervalued in all the noise around intent signals. Nobody else knows that a prospect previously evaluated your platform at another company. Nobody else knows that an executive at a target account used to work somewhere that was a customer. That information lives in your CRM, and it is more predictive than almost anything you can buy. Prioritize it.
The metrics shift is a behavioral shift — don't skip that part
Changing your metrics sounds like a technical exercise. It is actually a change management exercise.
Brandie made this argument directly: "If you don't identify these new metrics, if you don't change them upfront, by default, your team is just gonna go back to the old funnel." The pull toward MQL volume is institutional. It's in the dashboards, the comp plans, the questions your leadership team asks in the weekly pipeline review. If you change the motion without changing what you measure, the old behavior will win.
The new metrics the group pointed to aren't complicated. Buying group completeness — have you identified all the roles? Multi-role engagement — are multiple people in the account actually doing things? Quality of engagement per function — a finance stakeholder engaging three times over ninety days might be more significant than a marketing stakeholder engaging every day, because finance is not on your website every morning. These nuances matter, and they're worth building into your scoring logic.
Austin simplified it to a single question that cuts through all the sophistication: "Can I get the one or two marketers and the one or two salespeople and the one or two finance people involved at Amazon that I need?" Not the 300 marketers at Amazon. The right ones.
Andrea added the change management framing that the other two hadn't named explicitly: you need to train your leadership team to ask different questions. As long as your CMO and CRO are asking about MQL volume in every meeting, you're fighting institutional gravity. Part of the job is helping them understand what questions they should be asking instead, and why those questions are better predictors of outcomes they actually care about.
Where to start (three different answers, all of them right)
The webinar closed with a lightning round: if your CRO or CMO came to you tomorrow and said we need to make this shift, what's the first thing you do?
Andrea's answer: framing and messaging. Get people excited for the idea before you ask them to do anything differently. Plant the seed. Make the case for why this matters to each function specifically.
Brandie's answer: data model. Decide what information you need to collect and set up the infrastructure to capture it. Everything else flows from that.
Austin's answer: walk your sales process. Sit down with your top AEs who are already multithreading and ask them who they engage with, at what stage, and what content they're using. You'll learn what your buying group looks like in practice, what content gaps you have, and what signals you should be tracking — all in one conversation.
Three different answers. All of them right. The point isn't to pick one. The point is that each role on your revenue team has a natural entry point into this transition, and the teams that make it work tend to start from where they are rather than waiting for someone else to go first.
Your closed-won data is already making the case. The question is whether you're going to listen to it.
[Pull quote, unattributed: "You probably already have the data that proves buying groups work. If you look back at your closed-won deals and see how many stakeholders were involved, the evidence is already there."]
[Pull quote, attributed: "If you don't identify these new metrics upfront, by default, your team is just gonna go back to the old funnel." — Brandie Marone, SVP Revenue Operations, Intentsify]
[Pull quote, attributed: "It's not about getting the 300 marketers at Amazon. It's about getting the one or two marketers and the one or two salespeople and the one or two finance people that you actually need." — Austin Sandmeyer, Director of GTM Engineering, Sendoso]
Download the complete guide to buying groups, including the seven-step checklist from this webinar series.
Resources
About the author
Service page feature
Demand gen
You already have the data that proves buying groups work. You're just not looking at it.
Speakers
Other helpful resources
Your closed-won deals already know the answer.
Go pull them. Look at how many stakeholders were engaged before the opportunity went to sales. Compare the ones where marketing touched five people versus the ones where marketing touched one. The deals with more buying group coverage close faster, at higher rates, and at better prices. Almost every B2B revenue team that does this exercise finds the same thing.
So the question isn't whether buying groups work. The question is why most marketing teams are still organized around individuals.
That's what Inverta's second webinar on buying groups set out to answer — not with theory, but with the practitioners who are actually building these motions. Brandie Marone, SVP of Revenue Operations at Intentsify, Andrea Frazier, Senior Consultant at Inverta, and Austin Sandmeyer, Director of Go-to-Market Engineering at Sendoso, spent an hour walking through the four operational pillars that make a buying group motion real: signals, team alignment, technology and data, and metrics.
Here's what they said.
Signals are not just intent data
The word "signals" has been so thoroughly colonized by intent vendors that most revenue teams have stopped thinking creatively about what they're actually listening for.
Austin Sandmeyer put it plainly: "Before that, they were just called activities in some MAP somewhere, and they've changed names and done a lot of stuff over many years." The point isn't the label. The point is the matrix.
Think about web activity alone. You can track it for one person, for a department, for a function, for seniority levels, for geolocations within a multinational. That's before you add Gong conversation signals, CRM internal signals, product usage data, and business events like hiring decisions, PE acquisitions, or leadership changes.
Jessica Fewless shared an example from a peer demand gen leader who had figured out that when a prospect account hired a CFO from a certain type of company, they became dramatically more likely to convert. That is a signal. It has nothing to do with intent data. It came from a deep understanding of their ICP and a willingness to think beyond page views.
The practical starting point, per the group, is to work backwards from your sales process. Look at your stage entry and exit criteria. Your AEs already know which stakeholders are supposed to be engaged at each stage. Use that map to figure out what signals should precede each stage — and what you should be watching for to get there first.
Brandie Marone added one more dimension that often gets overlooked: the incomplete group. It is not just about responding to the signals you see. It is about identifying what is missing. Which roles haven't shown up yet? What should you be doing to bring them in? Flagging gaps early is itself a signal worth building around.
Alignment isn't a slide deck moment — it's a structural change
Every buying group conversation eventually arrives at the same wall: alignment. Not the aspirational kind — the mechanical kind. Who is responsible for what? How is the BDR team being measured? What does "a good meeting" mean now versus before?
Brandie described the shift her team had to make when BDRs moved under Revenue Operations. The BDR role had been built around speed to lead — one person, fast response, hand off. Buying groups require the opposite: research, patience, multi-contact coverage, portfolio thinking at the account level. You can't comp someone the old way and ask them to behave the new way. Those two things are in direct conflict.
Austin went further and named a segment that often gets left out of the alignment conversation entirely: subject matter experts. At a previous HR tech company, his team realized that the CHRO stakeholders in their buying groups were more likely to engage with their company's own CHROs than with salespeople. Not to pitch the product — just to connect, share challenges, and operate in the same professional circles. That relationship, built over time, was what moved deals when they reached the evaluation stage. Marketing alone could not create it. Alignment with the executive team could.
Jessica reframed what alignment means for each marketing function specifically. Content teams need to stop writing for the champion and start writing for the full buying group — including the roles that come in at stage three or four who have never seen the brand before. Field teams need to design events that either serve a specific buying group role or deliberately bring multiple roles into the same room. "Marketing as a monolith" doesn't survive a buying group motion. Every function has to think differently about what they're building and why.
Andrea tied it together with a reminder that the feedback loop matters as much as the initial alignment. What teams are experiencing at the beginning of this transition is different from what they'll experience six months in. The conversations need to keep happening. The definitions need to keep evolving.
Your tech stack doesn't need to be perfect. It needs to be started.
One of the clearest moments in the conversation came from Andrea, who put a name to something that stalls a lot of buying group initiatives before they start: the idea that you need a complete, sophisticated tech stack before you can begin.
"We've heard countless times, 'Oh yeah. We'll do that once we implement this new tool.' And it just pains me so much."
Brandie made the same point from a customer perspective. She described working with large enterprise organizations with messy data, disconnected tools, and incomplete setups who were waiting for conditions to be perfect. They weren't going to be. They never are. The answer is to start, iterate, and improve.
Austin's take was equally direct: your MQA definition, at the very beginning, can be three people you know are part of the buying committee and one of them submitted a demo request. That is a fine definition. You build from there.
What both Brandie and Austin's tech stack slides illustrated — one from Intentsify, one from Sendoso — is that the sophistication is earned over time, not installed at once. The questions worth asking at the start are simpler than people think: Can my rep see who's engaged? Can they see which roles are missing? Does the system tell them what to do next? If yes, you're moving.
Austin also made a sharp point about first-party data that often gets undervalued in all the noise around intent signals. Nobody else knows that a prospect previously evaluated your platform at another company. Nobody else knows that an executive at a target account used to work somewhere that was a customer. That information lives in your CRM, and it is more predictive than almost anything you can buy. Prioritize it.
The metrics shift is a behavioral shift — don't skip that part
Changing your metrics sounds like a technical exercise. It is actually a change management exercise.
Brandie made this argument directly: "If you don't identify these new metrics, if you don't change them upfront, by default, your team is just gonna go back to the old funnel." The pull toward MQL volume is institutional. It's in the dashboards, the comp plans, the questions your leadership team asks in the weekly pipeline review. If you change the motion without changing what you measure, the old behavior will win.
The new metrics the group pointed to aren't complicated. Buying group completeness — have you identified all the roles? Multi-role engagement — are multiple people in the account actually doing things? Quality of engagement per function — a finance stakeholder engaging three times over ninety days might be more significant than a marketing stakeholder engaging every day, because finance is not on your website every morning. These nuances matter, and they're worth building into your scoring logic.
Austin simplified it to a single question that cuts through all the sophistication: "Can I get the one or two marketers and the one or two salespeople and the one or two finance people involved at Amazon that I need?" Not the 300 marketers at Amazon. The right ones.
Andrea added the change management framing that the other two hadn't named explicitly: you need to train your leadership team to ask different questions. As long as your CMO and CRO are asking about MQL volume in every meeting, you're fighting institutional gravity. Part of the job is helping them understand what questions they should be asking instead, and why those questions are better predictors of outcomes they actually care about.
Where to start (three different answers, all of them right)
The webinar closed with a lightning round: if your CRO or CMO came to you tomorrow and said we need to make this shift, what's the first thing you do?
Andrea's answer: framing and messaging. Get people excited for the idea before you ask them to do anything differently. Plant the seed. Make the case for why this matters to each function specifically.
Brandie's answer: data model. Decide what information you need to collect and set up the infrastructure to capture it. Everything else flows from that.
Austin's answer: walk your sales process. Sit down with your top AEs who are already multithreading and ask them who they engage with, at what stage, and what content they're using. You'll learn what your buying group looks like in practice, what content gaps you have, and what signals you should be tracking — all in one conversation.
Three different answers. All of them right. The point isn't to pick one. The point is that each role on your revenue team has a natural entry point into this transition, and the teams that make it work tend to start from where they are rather than waiting for someone else to go first.
Your closed-won data is already making the case. The question is whether you're going to listen to it.
[Pull quote, unattributed: "You probably already have the data that proves buying groups work. If you look back at your closed-won deals and see how many stakeholders were involved, the evidence is already there."]
[Pull quote, attributed: "If you don't identify these new metrics upfront, by default, your team is just gonna go back to the old funnel." — Brandie Marone, SVP Revenue Operations, Intentsify]
[Pull quote, attributed: "It's not about getting the 300 marketers at Amazon. It's about getting the one or two marketers and the one or two salespeople and the one or two finance people that you actually need." — Austin Sandmeyer, Director of GTM Engineering, Sendoso]
Download the complete guide to buying groups, including the seven-step checklist from this webinar series.
About the author
Service page feature