SLA (Marketing-Sales)
A marketing-sales SLA is a formal, two-way agreement defining the quantity and quality of leads marketing will deliver and how quickly and thoroughly sales will follow up on them.
Key takeaways
- The lead commitment is derived backwards from the revenue target through known conversion rates.
- Both sides commit: delivered qualified volume on one, attempts and recorded outcomes on the other.
- The shared qualification definition is the hinge; changing it changes both obligations.
- Commitments set against outdated conversion rates become impossible or trivial without anyone noticing.
- New markets lack the conversion history an SLA needs to be anything but guesswork.
In depth
An SLA is arithmetic before it is a document. Start from the revenue target, divide by average deal size to get the number of deals needed, divide by the opportunity-to-close rate to get required opportunities, then divide by the qualified-lead-to-opportunity rate to get the monthly lead commitment. The sales side commits in the same concrete terms: a number of contact attempts across defined channels within a defined window, and a recorded outcome for every lead so that unworked and rejected can be told apart.
Everything rests on the shared qualification definition, which is why moving it moves both obligations at once. Raising the bar reduces the volume marketing can promise but lifts acceptance and protects sales time; lowering it flatters the lead count while filling queues with records reps will not call twice. Conversion rates also drift as the channel mix changes, so a commitment set against last year's rates quietly becomes either impossible or trivially easy without anyone rewriting the document.
In practice the agreement is short, written down where both teams can see it, and reviewed on a fixed cadence with one dashboard covering both sides. Breaches are discussed as data rather than blame. A scorecard funnel helps because it makes the qualification definition machine-checkable: a threshold score becomes the boundary, so whether a given lead met the agreed standard is a fact in the record rather than an opinion argued after the fact in a monthly meeting.
The model assumes conversion rates stable enough to forecast against. Entering a new market or launching a new product, those rates do not exist yet, and committing to a lead number invents precision nobody has. An SLA also cannot repair disagreement about the ideal customer profile; it will simply formalise the disagreement into a number. And consequences that get punitive invite gaming on both sides, with volume padded on one and disqualification accelerated on the other.
Example in practice
How to measure it
Measure each side against its own promise. For marketing, track qualified leads delivered against the commitment and, more revealingly, the acceptance rate, meaning the share of delivered leads sales agreed were genuinely qualified. For sales, track coverage: the share of delivered leads with a logged contact attempt inside the agreed window, attempts per lead, and how many records carry a completed outcome code rather than sitting untouched.
Then read the joint numbers, because the SLA exists to serve them. Watch qualified-lead-to-opportunity conversion over time and the pipeline value sourced from delivered leads. If acceptance falls while volume holds, marketing is stretching the definition. If acceptance holds while conversion falls, the qualification bar and the real buying behaviour have drifted apart and the definition needs rewriting.
Common mistakes
Committing to a raw lead count invites the wrong behaviour. Marketing hits the number with a content offer that attracts anyone, sales sees the quality drop, and the agreement becomes the reason for the argument it was meant to end. Commit to accepted leads or to sourced pipeline value instead, both of which require sales to agree the lead was real before it counts, which aligns the incentive with the outcome rather than with volume.
The second failure is signing an agreement nobody instrumented. There is no report showing attempts per lead, no required outcome code, and so no way to establish whether sales worked what was delivered. Six weeks later both sides are certain the other broke the deal and neither can prove it. Before the SLA goes live, build the report and make the outcome field mandatory, so the first review is about facts.
Frequently asked questions
Why are marketing-sales SLAs bidirectional?
Because both teams hold obligations: marketing must deliver quality leads at volume, and sales must work them promptly and thoroughly. A one-sided agreement just shifts blame instead of fixing the handoff.
How do you enforce a marketing-sales SLA?
Enforcement requires instrumentation, typically a shared dashboard tracking lead volume, quality, and follow-up speed against the agreed targets. Regular revenue meetings then review breaches and adjust the agreement as needed.
What should a marketing-sales SLA actually contain?
A shared definition of a qualified lead, a monthly volume commitment from marketing, a follow-up commitment from sales covering response window and number of attempts, a required outcome code for every lead, a review cadence and a stated process for handling breaches. Anything longer than a page tends not to be read, and unread commitments are not commitments.
How do you decide the lead number to commit to?
Work backwards from the revenue target. Divide it by average deal size for the deals needed, then by the opportunity-to-close rate for opportunities, then by the qualified-lead-to-opportunity rate for leads. Use the conversion rates from recent actual data, not aspirational ones, and rebuild the calculation whenever those rates move materially.
What counts as a qualified lead in an SLA?
Whatever both teams can verify in the record without debate. Usually that combines firmographic fit, a role that can influence the purchase, and a behavioural or scoring threshold. The test is whether a third person could look at a record and reach the same verdict; if the definition needs interpretation, it will produce disputes every single month.
What happens when one side misses the agreement?
The review should identify which input caused the miss rather than assigning fault. A volume shortfall might reflect a channel change; a follow-up shortfall might reflect a routing failure or an understaffed team. Useful agreements state in advance what happens on a miss, such as a joint diagnostic and a corrective action with an owner and a date.
How often should an SLA be renegotiated?
Review the numbers monthly and the underlying definitions quarterly, or sooner if conversion rates move materially or the target market changes. The definition of a qualified lead should be the most stable part; the volume commitment naturally moves with targets and capacity. Rewriting definitions too often removes the comparability the agreement was created to provide.
Is an SLA worth it for a small team?
Yes, in a shorter form. Even with two marketers and three reps, agreeing what qualified means and how quickly leads get worked prevents the arguments that scale badly later. A small team can keep it to a paragraph and a single shared report; the value is in the shared definition, not in the formality of the document.