B2B Marketing Budget Allocation Model
A governance-based capital allocation model for B2B leadership teams managing CAC volatility, fluctuating payback periods and board-level budget scrutiny.
Within 60–90 days, the model establishes clear allocation logic, reallocation thresholds and decision ownership, replacing reactive budget shifts with controlled capital movement.
Decision scope
This model defines the decision scope for growth and marketing budget allocation under uncertainty. It converts performance ambiguity into explicit capital moves: what gets funded, what gets reduced, what gets paused, and what requires escalation.
It is designed for situations where acquisition economics fluctuate, attribution is imperfect, and leadership needs a defensible, repeatable allocation logic. The model formalises three things:
Allocation logic — how spend is split between base investment and controlled bets.
Reallocation rules — thresholds, triggers, and cadence for moving capital without improvisation.
Governance — decision ownership, approval limits, and the forum in which reallocation decisions are made.
The scope is intentionally narrow: it governs capital movement. It does not replace strategy work, creative development, channel operations, or sales execution. You can study more in growth prioritisation playbook.
A decision model for allocating and reallocating growth capital under uncertainty.
Book a callWhen it is used
Budget pressure and board scrutiny
When growth investment requires defensible logic rather than narrative justification, and allocation decisions must withstand financial review.
CAC volatility and unclear payback
When acquisition economics fluctuate across channels and leadership lacks a structured method for adjusting capital without destabilising demand generation
Repeated reforecasting without governance
When budgets are revised frequently, but reallocation lacks predefined thresholds, ownership, and escalation logic.
Conflicts between growth ambition and risk tolerance
When leadership alignment breaks down between aggressive expansion and capital preservation, and no formal risk framework exists for allocating “base” versus “bets”.
Inputs
Current budget structure and constraints
Breakdown of spend categories, committed base costs, discretionary lines, and structural limits on reallocation.
Historical performance ranges and volatility
Performance distribution over time, including variance in CAC, conversion efficiency, and revenue lag.
Payback assumptions and risk parameters
Target payback windows, acceptable capital exposure, downside thresholds, and tolerance for experimental allocation.
Ownership model for budget decisions
Clear identification of who proposes reallocations, who approves them, and under what authority limits. You can read more in budget governance playbook.
Outputs
Budget allocation logic (base vs bets)
A defined split between protected investment and controlled growth experiments, with explicit sizing logic.
Guardrails and approval thresholds
Predefined performance bands triggering review, reduction, scaling, or escalation.
Reallocation cadence and triggers
Agreed review intervals and signal-based triggers that govern when capital moves.
Decision ownership and forums
Defined decision rights, approval pathways, and governance structure for allocation adjustments
A simple decision pack for leadership review
A standardised summary format enabling fast executive review without narrative justification cycles.
Application
Used to stabilise investment decisions and reduce reactive budget shifts when performance signals are noisy. The model creates a controlled reallocation cadence, so budget changes happen through agreed thresholds and ownership, not opinion cycles.
Commercial terms
Commercial terms are defined by decision complexity: the number of budget lines, the frequency of reallocation cycles, and the governance depth required. Scope is priced by the amount of decision design and the number of decision packs required per quarter.