What does a genuinely great growth team look like, and how is it different from marketing?
Marketing usually owns the top of the funnel and is measured on leads and signups. A real growth team owns the whole loop, signup to activation to retention to referral to revenue, and is measured on one business metric rather than on campaign output. The structural difference is who sits on the team: great growth teams have engineers, a designer and a data person inside them, because most of the leverage is in the product experience rather than in a campaign, and a marketing org that has to queue behind the product roadmap will never ship those changes. The great ones also run on a real cadence of hypothesis, experiment, result, decision, and they kill their own ideas fast rather than defending them. If your growth team is just performance marketing with a new title, you have renamed something, not built something.
Go deeper
3 resources, 3 link-checked.
✍️ Essay
✓ Link checkedFreeAdvanced
Balfour ran growth at HubSpot and later founded Reforge, and this is still the cleanest statement of why a growth team needs engineers and data people inside it rather than queued behind the product roadmap. If you are trying to explain to a founder why renaming the marketing team will not work, send them this.
Concrete plays with named examples: Zapier's 70,000 programmatic pages, Airtable's template library, Figma's free editor. This is what marketing looks like when the product is the channel.
Cuts through the acronym soup of PQL, PQA and MQL and says plainly when a company should add sales on top of self-serve, and what data you need first. The best explanation of the hybrid motion most companies end up with.
