Enrique Kalb

★ Compliance, IT Support, Cybersecurity ★ Stop the worry and get the Continuous Threat Check. ★ Business-focused IT ★ LinkedIn Cyber Ninja ★

Cybersecurity sales leader with 13+ years driving growth across enterprise, federal, and regulated commercial markets.

I’ve spent my career across cybersecurity, compliance, managed IT, managed security, and co-managed IT, supporting teams in the DoD, Intelligence Community, and regulated industries like healthcare, legal, manufacturing, financial services, and construction.

I’ve built and scaled revenue engines inside growth-stage startups while also closing complex enterprise and regulated-market deals across cybersecurity, compliance, and managed services.

What I’m known for is building and scaling sales teams, putting real GTM structure in place, and helping buyers make confident decisions through complex security and compliance requirements without unnecessary friction. I do my best work when deals are messy, stakeholders are senior, and trust actually matters.

Day to day, I’m working with executives, technical teams, and channel partners to move deals forward, reduce risk, and drive sustainable growth with clear communication and practical execution.

I run complex enterprise sales cycles using MEDDPICC and Sandler to qualify, forecast, and close predictable revenue across cybersecurity and SaaS platforms

Bilingual in English and Spanish.

If you’re building or scaling enterprise cybersecurity sales in regulated environments, let’s connect.

Director of Cybersecurity Sales

Continuous Networks, LLC is a locally owned IT company specializing in making IT Personal.
Continuous was started in 1997 as a web hosting company, providing organizations with Windows and Unix cloud hosting. Continuous became increasingly aware of the need for small businesses to offload their internal IT applications from in-house data closets to data centers with redundant power and networks and built their first datacenter in 2004. With the increasing reliance on hosted technologies now called the "cloud", Continuous expanded its services to include personal IT consulting, hardware procurement and provisioning, and MSP services built upon our advanced cloud technologies and expertise. For over 15 years, Continuous has helped companies expand past their IT closet with Cloud technologies, such as daily backups and high availability. Continuous has 20 employees and 24/7 monitoring.

Continuous manages over 1,000 servers, representing 1,000 companies across 100 countries worldwide.

Valentine’s Day isn’t just about flowers or gifts to me. 

It’s really about taking a moment to appreciate the person who’s been there through everything. For me, that’s my wife Leticia Kalb.

I’m grateful for you today and every day. 😘

Cybersecurity Sales Leader | U.S. & LATAM Expansion | Enterprise, Federal & Regulated Markets | Reducing Cyber Risk & Compliance Gaps

https://lnkd.in/g8S-MTYX

This is the scary part. 

We’re giving these bots access to our email, our calendars, our documents, even our money and people just see a helpful assistant booking flights. I see one system holding the keys to everything in my digital life.

If that bot gets hacked or tricked that’s it. The malicious hacker doesn’t have to break into anything else. They get it all at once.

Open article: OpenClaw creator Peter Steinberger joins OpenAI | TechCrunch by techcrunch.com

OpenClaw creator Peter Steinberger joins OpenAI | TechCrunch

Krista Mollion

Last Business Coach You'll Ever Need I 100% Activator + Rebel 💥 Blow Up Your Solopreneur Business By Joining Profitable Solopreneur/MBA/Accelerator 🚀 Free Masterclass: Path To 10k+ Months 🎯 Content AI Workshop 5/10🧠

What worked at $1M strains at $5M.
What carried you to $8M may stop working at $15M.

Different symptoms.
Same root cause.

Revenue feels harder
Pipeline inconsistent
CAC creeping up
Forecast moving every month

You’ve reached a GTM bottleneck.

Pipeline is active.
Sales is working.
Marketing is producing.

Yet the number shifts.

Your revenue system hasn’t evolved with the company.

That’s where I operate.

I operate at the layer before marketing and sales execution to redesign the system leaders execute within.

I prepare growth-stage companies for structural maturity and turn forecast fragility into defensible revenue.

Predictability is not about slowing down.
It’s about removing growth drag.
When structure matures, growth compounds instead of depending on intensity.

 I work primarily with founder-led B2B SaaS companies between $8–30M ARR, and selectively with earlier-stage companies preparing for scale to stabilize forecasts in 90 days by aligning positioning, demand, conversion, and operating rigor to the company’s next stage.

The tension looks different at each level:

Early Stage ($500k–$8M)
• Activity without concentration
• Offers without pricing power
• Pipeline without predictability

Mid-Stage ($8–$30M)
• CAC expansion
• Longer cycles
• Forecast volatility
• Capital efficiency pressure

Revenue feels harder because the system hasn’t matured.

I install Predictable Revenue Systems aligned to your next stage — not your last one.

So forecasts hold.
So capital compounds.
So growth becomes controllable.

How I Work

Predictable Revenue Foundations™
For $500k–$8M B2B SaaS.
Install the first disciplined GTM engine.

Predictable Revenue Reset™
For $8–30M B2B SaaS.
Private 90-day structural intervention for forecast stability.

Selective Fractional CMO & Advisory available post-engagement.

If you’re a founder who wants structural control — not more activity — we should talk.

20+ years rebuilding revenue systems across US & EMEA.
Founder-led. Operator-minded. Board-ready.


Fractional CMO + Chief Creative Disruptor for SaaS Brands

Attention is currency and it is our mission to get you more of it. 

We design creative, AI-driven, digital and influencer marketing campaigns For micro brands with macro goals

“Fractional CMO” is the official title.
It’s also incomplete.

I work with B2B founders ($3–20M ARR) who’ve built something real —
and now feel growth getting heavier instead of clearer.

They don’t need more activity.
They need alignment.

By the time I come in, the problem usually isn’t effort.
It’s blurred ownership, soft positioning, and revenue systems built on momentum instead of structure.

In practice, I’m not just a Fractional CMO.

I’m also:

• Brand Architect (when the company outgrows its story)
• Revenue Translator (when sales and marketing speak different dialects)
• CEO Confidant (when pressure has nowhere else to go)
• CRO Thought Partner (when pipeline feels unpredictable)
• Pattern Spotter (before the dashboards catch up)

This isn’t a fit if you want campaigns without accountability.

It is a fit if you want clarity before speed —
and a growth system that compounds.

If that’s the stage you’re in, we’ll recognize it quickly.

Revenue Architecture for $8–30M B2B SaaS I Fractional CMO for Revenue Volatility & GTM Redesign I Subscribe to the Revenue Reset Brief Newsletter

No alternative text description for this image

Another International Women’s Day is quietly here.

Some people celebrate it.
Some people roll their eyes at it.
And many probably didn’t even realize it is today.

For some, it’s an important day of recognition.

For others, it feels like a fringe holiday — something associated with radical feminism or corporate virtue signaling.

But after two decades working in SaaS, I think the conversation around women in the workplace is still missing something important.

The problem isn’t women — it’s the environment they’re expected to navigate.

And if you’ve spent years working inside corporate environments, you probably know exactly what I mean.

Over the years I saw patterns many women in tech will recognize.

I remember sitting in conference rooms where I was the only woman at the table.

Sometimes the conversation was productive.

But other times there was a different dynamic — a kind of unspoken pack behavior where ideas were challenged in ways that simply didn’t happen when another man presented them.

And then there were the quieter things.

Comments about appearance that male colleagues never received.

Important deals and relationships forming in informal environments where women weren’t present.

High-visibility opportunities quietly shifting away from women during pregnancy or early motherhood because leaders assumed they wouldn’t be available.

None of this was usually overt hostility.

In fact, if you asked the men involved, many would genuinely say they support women in leadership.

That’s what makes it so difficult to address.

The bias is often subtle, cultural, and largely unconscious.

So when I hear “women should just be more bold,” I think we’re missing half the conversation.

Encouraging women to raise their hand is good advice.

But we also have to look honestly at how opportunity and influence actually flow inside organizations.

Because if the table itself is shaped by a culture that excludes people, telling them to “take a seat” doesn’t solve the problem.

Sometimes the real solution is changing the room.

And sometimes the most rational response is exactly what many women have done:

Build their own tables.

Interestingly, in my consulting work today, most of the founders I end up working with are still men.

I would genuinely love to see more women building and scaling ambitious companies — because the ecosystem becomes stronger when more perspectives are at the table.

Curious to hear from others:
Do we still underestimate how much workplace culture — not individual confidence — shapes who actually succeeds?

You’ve scaled. So why does revenue still feel fragile? I fix the revenue engine when growth stalls (8-30M ARR) | 20+ yrs scaling SaaS revenue systems | Growth, GTM, Marketing Leader | Creator of the 90-Day Revenue Reset™

You’re in the meeting.

You see campaigns running, deals moving, roadmaps full — and growth still feels heavy.

What’s unfolding is decision drift. Effort keeps increasing while direction stays unsettled, so momentum resets instead of stacking.

This article looks at how unresolved decisions quietly become the real GTM bottleneck, why pressure shows up first, and how activity expands when judgment has nowhere to land.

It’s a pattern many founders recognize only after the cost has already compounded.

Read the full piece here →

Founder | Predictable Revenue CMO for $8–30M B2B SaaS | From Forecast Volatility → Stability in 90 Days

Why busy GTM teams stall — and how decision drift quietly kills momentum You’re sitting in the meeting. Marketing is running campaigns. Sales is worki

Open article: Unresolved Decisions Are the Real GTM Bottleneck by Krista Mollion • 3 min read

Unresolved Decisions Are the Real GTM Bottleneck

You will fire your CMO.

If you haven’t already.

Not because they lack talent.

Because you demanded activity before architecture.

The numbers should make you uneasy:

CMOs have the highest turnover in the C-suite.

In SaaS, average tenure is 18–24 months.
In non-SaaS, it rarely exceeds four years.

That isn’t random.

If month one with your marketing leadership feels like campaigns and execution, risk is already compounding.

If by week two of hiring a new CMO, you say:

“We need campaigns live this month.”

You have just wasted capital.

Because month one is diagnosing revenue architecture.

It defines:

• who owns revenue decisions
• how marketing and sales align
• which targets survive financial scrutiny
• what remains unfunded

And at least two more months in most cases to fix it and re-build it right.

This is where trade-offs get enforced.

Most companies skip it.

Common breakdowns surface fast:

• decision-right confusion
• sequencing gaps
• incentive drift

Layer execution onto that and spend rises.

Alignment doesn’t.

Thirty-day execution is easy to generate.

Twelve-month compounding requires proper foundational revenue architecture design.

So here’s the uncomfortable question:

When you hired your CMO,

did you first design the system for them to operate in —

or did you set them up to burn out so you can rotate to the next one and pretend they failed?

Recycling leadership is not a growth strategy and it doesn't look good on you.

If you've burned through multiple CMOs, it's not them.

It’s the CEO's failure to design a role where marketing leaders can thrive.

Revenue Architect for Scaling B2B SaaS | Designing the systems behind predictable revenue: ICP • Positioning • Pricing • Pipeline Creator of the 90-Day Revenue Reset™ Founder, Unignorable Brands

“Community” is being sold as strategy.

Private groups.
Inner circles.
Founder clubs.

Belonging packaged as growth infrastructure.

Here’s the problem.

Most of it is retention design.

High-touch onboarding.
Constant engagement.
Emotional language.

Until the invoice stops.

Then the signal drops.

Mid-market operators don’t need belonging mechanics.

They need:

• durable relationships
• performance accountability
• long-term trust beyond contract cycles

If the relationship only exists while money flows,
it’s distribution — not partnership.

I don’t sell community.

I build working relationships that survive the contract.

That’s harder to scale.

It’s also harder to fake.

Question for operators:

Do your partnerships survive renewal cycles —
or depend on them?

CEO: We need to cut costs. Can we hire overseas?
Exec Team: Okay.

(Three months later.)

CEO: It’s not working.
Timezone and cultural barriors.
Communication gaps.
Deadlines slipping.
Fire them.

Exec Team: Okay. Should we hire locally?
CEO: No. Move everything to AI.
Including your role.

Exec Team: …

Welcome to hiring, 2026.

For years, the debate was:
Cheap vs expensive.
In-house vs outsourced.

Now it’s:
AI vs humans.

New focus.
Same problem.

Because the real question was never about cost or tools.

It is:
did you build a company where people thrive and use technology effectively?

Most companies don’t.

So they rotate through “solutions”:
• cheaper labor
• better agencies
• more software
• more automation

Without ever building:
• ownership
• sequencing and automations
• feedback loops
• decision discipline
• SOPs and trainings

You can change the inputs all you want.

If you skip systems, nothing compounds.

High churn, overrated tools, wasted budget, and constant reset.

AI won't save you.
Building strong foundations around goals, ownerships, roles and responsibilities, and technology will.

If this feels familiar, the issue isn’t AI vs human.

Because the real issue was never “people or machines.”

It was:
No one ever defined what humans are supposed to own — and what machines are supposed to handle.

In strong organizations, AI accelerates execution.
Humans own judgment, trust, and narrative.

That line rarely gets drawn.

So executives end up doing tactical work…
While systems try to automate relationships.

That’s backwards.

In 2026, the companies that deliberately design how humans and AI work together will compound — and everyone else will still be debating tools and hires while falling behind.

AI may take your job if roles are built on tactics and repetition, not judgment.

When does hiring a full-time CMO actually make sense?

Founder-led marketing works.
Until it doesn’t.

Usually around $3M ARR, the cracks show:

• ICP and positioning keep shifting
• Pricing isn’t pressure-tested
• Sales spends half its time explaining
• Budgets exist, authority doesn’t
• Results are hard to defend

Then I hear this:

“Revenue isn’t stable enough for a $300K CMO, so we’re thinking fractional.”

Not wrong.
Wrong frame.

This isn’t a cost decision.
It’s a sequencing decision.

Cost view:
Fractional = discounted exec.

Reality:
Fractional = executive brought in before the system exists.

Hire full-time too early and you lock in cost before clarity.

Then you ask one person to fix a structure they didn’t design.

That’s when:
• frustration builds
• turnover starts
• boards get nervous

A full-time CMO makes sense when:

• the growth engine is defined
• budgets are approved
• ownership is clear
• the job is scale + leadership — not reconstruction

Building the engine and running it at speed are different skills.

Most companies don’t hire the wrong person.

They hire the right role at the wrong time.

That mistake costs 12–24 months.

One clarification:

Fractional ≠ “30-day consultant.”

It’s executive ownership at fractional capacity.

The job is to design the revenue infrastructure above marketing
so your future CMO can actually win.

If this decision feels heavy,
your stage isn’t clear yet.

That’s the real work.

Founder @Unignorable Brands | Predictable Revenue CMO for Founder-Led B2B SaaS ($8–30M ARR) | From Forecast Volatility → Stability in 90 Days | Accelerate and Compound Growth

Three Ways To Work Together

The fastest promotion in marketing history:

Intern → Director → “Good luck.”

No team.
No budget.
No authority.
Just a bigger title and higher expectations.

Titles are cheap.
Revenue risk is not.

This is how companies accidentally create fragility at $8–15M ARR.

They promote execution talent
without redesigning decision rights, capital allocation, or enterprise motion.

Then when growth stalls…

They blame “marketing.”

Nothing here is malicious.

It’s structural.

Founders:

If you want senior outcomes, you must design senior roles:

• Clear revenue layer ownership
• Budget authority
• CRO integration
• Forecast accountability
• Training (if promoted)

Otherwise you’re not building leadership.

You’re increasing risk.

Most enterprise SaaS ceilings aren’t demand problems.

They’re leadership design problems.

Replacing a GTM leader feels decisive.

Boards like decisive.

It signals control.
It signals accountability.
It signals movement.

But most resets don’t fix growth.

They reset the clock.

Not because the leader was incompetent.

Because the revenue architecture never changed.

If:

• The ICP economics are inflated
• Decision rights are unclear
• Capital allocation logic shifts quarter to quarter
• Sales capacity doesn’t match segment reality

Rotating leaders won’t compound growth.

It compounds volatility.

Every replacement quietly erodes:

• Forecast credibility
• Institutional memory
• Marginal CAC efficiency
• 2–3 quarters of execution momentum

Churn creates the appearance of discipline.

Structural clarity creates operating leverage.

Leadership replacement is visible.

Revenue architecture work isn’t.

That’s why one gets applause.

And the other gets deferred.

If you keep replacing leaders that don't drive results, it's likely your revenue volatility is a structural design problem, not a talent problem.

The hidden 18–24 month cost most companies never calculate There’s a familiar moment in many companies when growth stalls. Pipeline slows. Forecasts w

Open article: Why Replacing Leaders Rarely Fixes GTM by Krista Mollion • 4 min read

It’s easier to add 50K followers than to fix inconsistent pipeline.

That’s why so many B2B founders double down on visibility.

Here’s the uncomfortable part:

You can grow fast.
You can go viral.
You can build a big audience.

And still have:
• Unpredictable pipeline
• Discount pressure
• Slipping deals

Because it’s easy to build an audience.

It’s hard to build the right audience.

In this article, I break down:
– The real ways to grow quickly
– Why most founders grow the wrong room
– What buyer gravity actually looks like
– And how visibility quietly misallocates capital

Growth is easy.

Alignment is rare.

If you care about revenue more than applause, this one’s for you.

The hidden cost of building attention that doesn’t convert It’s easier to add 50K followers than to fix inconsistent pipeline. That’s why so many B2B 

Open article: How to Grow From 0 to 50K Followers in Under a Year (On Any Platform) by Krista Mollion • 4 min read

How to Grow From 0 to 50K Followers in Under a Year (On Any Platform)

"We tried marketing.”

At $8–15M ARR, that statement is often accurate.

You probably did:

• Hire an agency
• Launch paid ads
• Redesign the website
• Invest in content
• Add SDRs

And growth still didn’t stabilize.

The issue usually isn’t effort.

It’s sequence.

Marketing applied before:

• ICP compression
• Clear ownership
• Capital pacing logic
• Incentive alignment
• Governance over trade-offs

Execution inside structural ambiguity compounds noise.

Not revenue.

Marketing doesn’t fail because it was tried.

It fails because it was layered on top of an undefined system.

That’s not a talent issue.

It’s architecture.

What Really Failed When Marketing Didn’t Work You’ve probably said this at least once. “We tried marketing.” “It didn’t really work.” “We spent a lot 

Open article: Why “We Tried Marketing” Is Usually True — and Still Misleading by Krista Mollion • 4 min read

Why “We Tried Marketing” Is Usually True — and Still Misleading

I used to confuse confidence with permission.

Every time I thought about reaching out to someone who could actually change the trajectory of my business, a voice would show up:

Who do you think you are?
They won’t take you seriously.

So instead of standing cleanly in my value, I performed.

I made jokes.
I name-dropped.
I tried to be “easy” to accept.

Not because that’s who I am—but because it felt safer than claiming responsibility for what I knew I could do.

The problem with that strategy?

It doesn’t just cost you opportunities.
It erodes your clarity.

You start outsourcing your sense of legitimacy to other people’s approval.

At some point, that stops working.

Not because you suddenly become fearless—but because you realize leadership isn’t granted.
It’s assumed.

I don’t need to be liked.
I don’t need permission.
And I don’t need to perform to belong.

I know how I operate.
I know the standard I bring.
And I only work with people who recognize value without needing a show.

If you’ve reached the stage where pretending feels heavier than being precise,
you’re probably closer to clarity than you think.

Speed doesn’t come from urgency.
It comes from clarity.

When roles are clear,
decisions don’t escalate emotionally.

When priorities are explicit,
execution doesn’t reset every quarter.

This is what alignment looks like in practice:
	•	decisions are owned, not endlessly debated
	•	tradeoffs are explicit, not political
	•	metrics guide behavior, not opinions

Most teams don’t need more pressure.
They need fewer unresolved decisions.

When speed feels expensive,
it’s usually because ownership is still fuzzy.

This line has been quietly following me around lately:

“What I’m not changing, I’m choosing.”

For a long time, I thought “not changing” meant being:
patient
thoughtful
responsible
realistic

I blamed timing.
Circumstances.
Life.

I told myself I was waiting for “the right moment.”

Now I see it differently.

Most of the time, not changing is about fear.
About passivity.
About avoiding discomfort.

We stay broke because learning to make money is hard.
We neglect our health because excuses are easier than discipline.
We stay in bad jobs and bad relationships far longer than we should.

Because change is scary.

Humans are wired to avoid risk.
To stay small.
To not place bets.

So we wait.

We tell ourselves we’ll deal with it “later.”
When things are calmer.
When we’re more confident.
When we feel ready.

But later rarely comes.

There were so many things I thought I’d still have time to say to my dad.
Then he died.

So many places I wanted to see.
Then work and kids arrived.
And “maybe later” became never.

What comes instead is repetition.

The same patterns.
The same frustrations.
The same quiet knowing that something is wrong.

A loop.

And slowly, that becomes your life.

Not through one big decision.
Not through one dramatic failure.

Through thousands of small delays.

A quiet choice.
Made daily.

And once you see that…

You can’t unsee it.

Where in your life are you choosing by staying the same?

And when will you decide you’re done waiting?

At $10M+, attribution debates aren’t marketing arguments.

They’re governance leaks.

When leadership fights over “what drove the deal,”
they’re not debating dashboards.

They’re exposing confusion about how growth actually works.

Credit fights don’t start in Salesforce.

They start when:

• Capital allocation logic is fuzzy
• Influence isn’t defined
• Decision rights are politically negotiated

The model explains the click.

It doesn’t explain conviction.

Revenue confidence forms long before the tracked touchpoint.
Before the demo.
Before the opportunity.

If attribution arguments resurface every quarter,
it’s not a reporting issue.

It’s a trust issue.

Incomplete data is survivable.

Incomplete alignment corrodes quietly.

And when capital decisions rely on partial models,
risk doesn’t explode.

It accumulates.

Attribution isn’t a marketing layer.

It’s a board-level question:

What counts as influence —
and who has authority to define it?

Full breakdown here →

What Attribution Can’t Explain About How Deals Actually Get Done You’ve probably been asked this in a meeting: “What actually drove this deal?” You pu

Open article: Why Attribution Keeps Failing (Spoiler: It’s Not a Tools Problem) by Krista Mollion • 4 min read

Why Attribution Keeps Failing (Spoiler: It’s Not a Tools Problem)

If you’re a SaaS founder, this CMO stat should make you uncomfortable.

The average CMO lasts 18–24 months.
In established companies, it’s over four years.

That gap matters.
And it’s rarely a talent issue.
It’s a systems one.

CMOs are usually hired at a moment of pressure:
	•	growth has stalled
	•	CAC is rising
	•	investors are uneasy

That’s understandable.

But the real constraints are often upstream:
	•	unclear ICPs
	•	pricing or packaging misalignment
	•	sales inefficiencies
	•	product–market tension
	•	revenue targets that don’t match reality

Marketing ends up carrying symptoms for problems it didn’t create.

Then comes the expectation:
“Build a durable growth engine — and show revenue in 90 days.”

All while holding the CMO accountable
without real influence over:
	•	pricing
	•	sales execution
	•	RevOps
	•	the product roadmap

That’s accountability without authority.

Add founder-led growth that’s hit its ceiling,
skeptical buyers,
and boards expecting marketing to fill strategic gaps —

and when progress doesn’t appear fast enough?

The CMO is replaced.
Not the assumptions.
Not the model.
Not the math.

High CMO turnover in SaaS doesn’t mean the role is broken.
It usually means expectations weren’t sequenced and time horizons weren’t realistic.

Replacing CMOs rarely fixes growth.
Fixing the system does.

What helped you catch this before it became expensive?

You don’t choose sales-first growth because you don’t believe in marketing.

You choose it because when the number is at risk, sales is the only lever that moves fast enough.

Pipeline fills.
Activity spikes.
Deals get pulled forward through effort.

And for a while, it works.

This week’s article looks at why sales-first growth feels faster — and what quietly starts to break underneath once effort replaces leverage.

Not as a critique.
As a pattern leaders eventually run into.

If sales keeps carrying more of the load each quarter, this will probably feel familiar.

Read the full piece here →

The hidden costs of relying mostly on sales, and underfunding marketing Sales-first growth usually doesn’t start as a strategic choice. It starts as a

Open article: Why Sales-First Growth Feels Faster Than Marketing — Until It Breaks by Krista Mollion • 5 min read

Why Sales-First Growth Feels Faster Than Marketing — Until It Breaks

Most founders experience marketing as lead generation.

That makes sense — leads are the most visible output.

But when pipeline looks active and decisions still stall, leads aren’t the real problem.

Marketing’s real job is decision acceleration.

If a qualified buyer can’t confidently say yes or no within one sales cycle, something is broken — and it’s rarely Sales.

Here’s where marketing actually earns its keep:

At the founder level
Marketing reduces decision friction.
Clear positioning. Clear tradeoffs. Fewer “we need to think about it” loops.

At the revenue / board level
Marketing makes the risk math explicit.
Risk vs. status quo. Risk vs. delay.
Boards don’t approve stories — they approve defensible decisions.

At the execution level
If uncertainty around price, value, or switching costs isn’t resolved quickly, friction wins.

Awareness doesn’t close deals.
Clarity does.

And the hardest competitor you’re always up against?

The status quo.

If this feels familiar, marketing probably isn’t broken.
It’s just not designed around how buying decisions actually get made.

Marketing only feels expensive when it’s doing the wrong job.

When:

– it can’t clearly explain its impact
– it produces motion without reducing risk
– it optimizes channels before defining direction

That isn’t a talent issue.

It’s a leadership design failure.

When governance is explicit, marketing behaves like capital allocation.

When governance is loose, marketing feels like overhead.

The budget didn’t create the discomfort.

Ambiguity did.

Compounding depends on which system you built.

How cost becomes the symptom of role confusion Marketing starts to feel expensive when every dollar requires explanation — and effort elsewhere doesn’

Open article: Why Marketing Feels Expensive When It’s Doing the Wrong Job by Krista Mollion • 4 min read

Why Marketing Feels Expensive When It’s Doing the Wrong Job

Bad news for many.

Your ideal client is not seeing your LinkedIn posts.

They probably don’t know you exist.

The “post consistently and the algorithm will reward you” advice?

It works.

For employees.

LinkedIn was built for:
• job seekers
• recruiters
• corporate teams
• enterprise sellers

The algorithm clusters by function.

Marketers see marketers.
HR sees HR.
Founders see founders.

So when you post about marketing?

LinkedIn shows it to other marketers.

Great for peer visibility.

Terrible for revenue if your buyers sit outside your function.

You’re building authority in the wrong room.

And celebrating engagement from people who will never buy.

Revenue isn’t driven by volume.

It’s driven by precision.

So be honest:

Are your buyers seeing you —

or just your competitors?

Comment “ALGO” if you want the fix.

taplio

The Battle

Enrique Kalb

Krista Mollion

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreEnrique Kalb's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreKrista Mollion's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Enrique Kalb

Krista Mollion

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Enrique Kalb's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreKrista Mollion's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreEnrique Kalb's LinkedIn Performance