Becky Lawlor shares research and perspectives on B2B content marketing, with a focus on measuring content’s business impact, creating original research, and making content useful to Sales.
Measure what content changes, not just what it attracts · Use original research to give buyers something they have not already seen · Treat Sales alignment as part of content’s job
Becky Lawlor shares research and perspectives on B2B content marketing, especially how teams can show that content contributes to business results.
They focus on measuring what happens after content reaches Sales and using original research to give buyers and sales teams useful, distinctive material.
Follow their work for concrete benchmarks and questions about making content matter beyond publication and engagement.
Lawlor connects measurement to how businesses use content.
They point to measures such as Sales usage, Sales-reported influence, and deal velocity, while noting that Sales alignment and clear ownership can remain difficult even for teams that demonstrate content impact.
Publishing is not the finish line if content is not useful in buyer conversations.
They also make a specific case for original research—not simply as another format, but as a source of proprietary insight that can support PR, Sales, and a year of content.
Ask for the full report and its research methods before relying on the findings.
Lawlor’s posts connect three ideas: measure content by what it does for the business, use original research to offer buyers something new, and make content useful to Sales after publication.
Read more
The examples below show how those ideas fit together in their writing.
Measure what content changes, not just what it attracts
Lawlor argues that leads and engagement do not tell the whole story of content’s value.
Read more
They point to what happens after publication: whether Sales uses the work, whether it helps in buyer conversations, and whether it contributes to business outcomes. They frame weak measurement as a hard problem to solve, not proof that marketers are doing a bad job.
In a post about research with 252 B2B technology marketers, Lawlor says 85% of teams cannot prove their content drives revenue. They use that finding to raise questions about measuring value beyond leads and vanity metrics, and about finding out what Sales actually uses.
Use original research to give buyers something they have not already seen
Lawlor argues that publishing more is unlikely to make a company stand out if its ideas look like everyone else’s.
Read more
Original research and proprietary data can provide a distinct point of view and give a team material to use across several channels and business needs.
Lawlor reports that teams able to demonstrate content’s business impact are more likely to create original research and proprietary data than marketers overall: 54% versus 37%. They describe one study feeding a flagship report, PR, Sales conversations, and a series of posts and presentations.
For Lawlor, content should not stop being useful when Marketing publishes it.
Read more
Sales usage is one sign of impact, and measuring that use can show what resonates in real buyer conversations. They also recognize that clear ownership and alignment remain difficult, even for teams that demonstrate impact.
They contrast the 95% of impact-demonstrating teams who say Sales frequently uses their content with 73% of marketers overall.
Yet 38% of those same high-performing teams cite Sales alignment and clear ownership as a major barrier.
Lawlor reads the tension as evidence that the Marketing–Sales relationship matters, not as a contradiction.
This explains where the research comes from and why the measurement gap matters.
Read more
Start here to understand the problem the later findings address.
Lawlor opens with a blunt finding: 85% of B2B marketing teams can't prove content drives revenue.
The post frames measurement as genuinely hard, not a skills failure, and lists the questions behind a survey of 252 B2B technology marketers: how teams measure beyond leads and vanity metrics, show business value, learn what Sales actually uses, win support for bigger investments such as original research, and adapt as AI changes buyer discovery.
It names the resulting report and thanks contributors including Kellie de Leon, Rachel Wolff, Eric Doty, Superpath, and Exit Five.
For brands planning a campaign
A co-branded webinar or research collaboration can use the revenue-proof gap and five questions as its agenda. The 252-marketer base gives the agency a concrete audience and method to build on; ask for the full report and survey instrument.
This shows what separates teams that can prove content impact from those that cannot: Sales usage, post-publication measurement, and shared ownership.
Read more
The post reports a sharp split: 95% of teams that consistently demonstrate content's business impact say Sales frequently uses their marketing content, compared with 73% of marketers overall.
Those teams are also more likely to measure what happens after content reaches Sales: 57% track Sales-reported content influence, 43% track Sales usage, and 38% track deal velocity or win rate.
Lawlor highlights a tension: 38% of these same teams name Sales alignment and clear ownership as a major barrier.
The findings suggest that the most advanced teams treat the Marketing–Sales relationship as central, not contradictory.
Publishing is only half the job; the other half is making content useful across the business.
For brands planning a campaign
For a data-driven agency pitch, the 95% versus 73% contrast and specific measurement categories can anchor a webinar or research collaboration on making content useful to Sales. The alignment barrier gives the discussion a real operational problem rather than a generic thought-leadership theme.
This explains why original research is a practical differentiator, not just a content format, and lays out the outputs and planning case for proprietary data.
Read more
Lawlor's Q4 planning post argues that publishing more content is probably not the answer.
More than one-third of B2B marketers say one of their biggest challenges is finding original perspectives buyers have not already seen.
Teams that can consistently demonstrate content's business impact are much more likely to create original research and proprietary data: 54% versus 37% overall.
The post outlines what one strong research study can produce: a flagship report, year-round proprietary data, PR and earned media hooks, Sales conversation material, dozens of posts and presentations, and evidence for pipeline and authority.
It cites 67% saying original insights influence pipeline, 57% Sales enablement, and 43% brand authority, then invites readers to book research programs for a Q1 launch.
For brands planning a campaign
The post offers a brief for a co-branded research collaboration or webinar: position original research as an asset that can feed PR, thought leadership, Sales content, and demand generation across a year. The 54% versus 37% gap supports a case that research capability separates stronger content teams.
Proving content's business impact, not just publishing it
A recurring argument is that content teams should measure whether content changes business outcomes, not just whether people read it.
Read more
One post cites survey work with 252 B2B technology marketers and reports that 85% of B2B marketing teams cannot prove their content drives revenue.
It frames this as a measurement problem, not a sign that marketers are bad at their jobs.
Another post describes how teams that consistently demonstrate impact ask whether Sales uses the content, whether it helps in real buyer conversations, what resonates with Sales, and whether it moves business forward.
For brands planning a campaign
An agency selling measurement, analytics or content operations work can build a session around the shift from leads and engagement to post-publication metrics: Sales-reported content influence, Sales usage, and deal velocity or win rate. The strongest framing is that the traditional measurement set is incomplete—not that marketing teams are failing.
Original research and proprietary data as a differentiators
One post argues that publishing more content probably won't help brands stand out, noting that over a third of B2B marketers named finding original perspectives buyers haven't already seen as a major challenge.
Read more
Teams that consistently demonstrate content's business impact were more likely to create original research and proprietary data: 54%, versus 37% overall.
Lawlor lists what a well-executed study can produce: a flagship report, proprietary data for thought leadership throughout the year, hooks for PR and earned media, material for Sales conversations, dozens of posts and presentations, and evidence supporting pipeline and authority.
Among the strongest teams, 67% said original insights influence pipeline, 57% said the work supports Sales enablement, and 43% said it reinforces brand authority.
A survey comparison of high-performing teams with the overall marketer group, followed by a list of outputs one study can produce.
For brands planning a campaign
This is a direct opening for a co-branded research collaboration: design a study once, then repurpose it into a report, PR, Sales enablement, and a long tail of social posts.
The post targets fourth-quarter planning and invites direct messages about research programs booked for a Q1 launch.
Matching that timing puts an agency's pitch in the same frame Becky Lawlor is already using with the audience.
Marketing–Sales alignment as a content design constraint
One post argues that content can't be only a Marketing asset; it must also be useful to Sales.
Read more
Among teams that consistently demonstrate content's business impact, 95% say Sales frequently uses their marketing content, compared with 73% of marketers overall.
These teams are also more likely to measure what happens after content reaches Sales: 57% measure Sales-reported content influence, 43% measure Sales usage, and 38% measure deal velocity or win rate.
At the same time, 38% of this group name Sales alignment and clear ownership as one of their biggest barriers to creating high-impact content.
Lawlor presents this as reinforcement, not contradiction: the teams furthest along understand how much the Marketing–Sales relationship matters.
The closing argument is that publishing is only half the job; making content useful across the business is the other half.
The post addresses the apparent contradiction between high Sales usage and alignment being a top barrier, helping a partner anticipate an obvious audience objection.
For brands planning a campaign
A webinar or workshop on Marketing–Sales content handoffs fits this material, and the figures give an agency a data-backed agenda rather than generic alignment talk. Since even the strongest teams report alignment as a barrier, the session can target advanced content programs, not just teams starting out.
Peer-informed survey research as a repeatable content method
The method is consistent: start with questions B2B marketers want answered, survey a defined group, and publish a named report.
Read more
One post lists questions about measuring impact beyond leads and vanity metrics, showing that content creates real value, understanding what Sales actually uses versus what Marketing produces, winning support for larger investments such as original research, and adapting as AI changes how buyers find and consume content.
The research behind the report surveyed 252 B2B technology marketers.
The post credits named marketers and the Superpath and Exit Five communities for shaping the questions.
Follow-up posts present individual findings and explain their implications.
Questions gathered from practitioner communities, a defined survey sample, a named report, then single-finding posts with the author's interpretation of each result.
For brands planning a campaign
An agency can follow this sequence: gather questions from a target community, run a modest survey, then publish the report alongside a series of single-finding posts. The posts also show the report serving as a lead asset, with a direct invitation to discuss research programs—a model an agency can copy without a large original dataset.
None of the three LinkedIn posts discloses a sponsorship, affiliate, client, or investment relationship, or names a company as Lawlor's employer or as a business they own.
Read more
The posts describe research they ran with 252 B2B technology marketers and invite readers to book research programs, but do not identify the business behind that work.
Ask who operates the research programs before attributing a commercial relationship to a named brand.
The only named organizations are two marketing communities Lawlor credits as sources of input for the research.
Superpath
Mention
Lawlor credits marketers in Superpath, along with other communities and individuals, for sharing perspectives that shaped a survey of 252 B2B technology marketers on proving content's business impact.
Becky Lawlor makes a case for what B2B content should be judged on.
Read more
Start with their LinkedIn posts, which take one survey finding at a time and explain what they make of it, then read the linked reports for the full results.
Follow the argument in order: the post on measurement introduces the problem they keep returning to; the post on original research presents the answer they favour; and the post on Sales alignment lays out the trade-off they think teams should design around.
Their material is aimed at content and marketing teams planning an upcoming year, so it is most useful in planning season.
The three creators below follow adjacent threads—influencer and thought leadership programs, the content marketing role itself, and search visibility—and each is a reasonable next follow, depending on which part of the argument you want to pursue.
Odden also builds B2B marketing arguments on practitioner survey research, citing a study of nearly 800 B2B marketers, and treats original research as the input that makes content credible.
Read more
Both connect research findings to full-funnel outcomes and write for B2B marketing teams weighing where to invest next.
Odden focuses on influence and thought leadership programming, mapping influencer audiences and expert voices to content and activations across the customer lifecycle.
Lawlor focuses on proof and handoff: measuring what content changed and whether Sales actually used it.
Odden's evidence comes from pooled industry research and conference teaching; theirs comes from a single named survey they walk through finding by finding.
Hilleary writes for B2B content marketers about what the work is becoming, grounding the argument in collected data: logging hundreds of content marketing job posts and analysing a sample.
Read more
Lawlor takes a similar approach with survey responses: examine a body of evidence, look for patterns, then draw out what they mean for people doing the job.
Hilleary covers the role and career around it, along with community media such as a job board and a newsletter that carries practitioner discussion.
Lawlor focuses on the output itself: whether content can be shown to have business impact and whether Sales puts it to use.
Hilleary is a useful follow for those interested in how content teams are staffed and defined; Lawlor for those interested in how content's results are judged.
Ali also pushes back on vanity metrics in B2B content and search work, pointing out that a link report full of backlink counts and domain ratings can still say nothing about whether the work strengthened the brand.
Read more
Both argue that relevance and business context matter more than volume, and write short posts that end by asking practitioners about their own experience.
Ali focuses on off-page SEO: placements, guest posting and building authority where a specific audience already spends time.
Lawlor focuses on measurement and Sales usage after publication.
Ali reasons from client experience and reports; Lawlor from a defined survey sample.
Follow Ali for how content earns visibility, and Lawlor for how it earns its keep once it is out.
Becky Lawlor’s LinkedIn posts speak to B2B marketers working to show how content contributes to business results.
Read more
They argue that content should be measured by more than readership: one post highlights whether Sales uses it in buyer conversations and whether it helps move deals forward.
Another makes the case for original research as a source of distinctive insights and reusable material for thought leadership, PR and Sales enablement.
The topics fit a campaign about B2B content strategy.
For audience targeting, ask for follower demographics and engagement data.
Lawlor's posts do not include a published sponsorship page, media kit, rate card, or formal partner terms.
Read more
The commercial route described directly is commissioned research: a post says research programs are being booked ahead of a launch quarter and invites interested buyers to send a direct message to explore one.
Their other posts point to a published research report rather than a partnership offer, so any collaboration would be scoped in conversation, not selected from a documented package.
Ask directly about deliverables, pricing, exclusivity, and data usage rights, and allow lead time before the quarter when you want the research to launch.
Commissioned or co-branded original research program
Buyer requirement
Contact directly by LinkedIn message.
Lawlor's post says research programs are booked ahead of a Q1 launch, so start the conversation well before the target launch quarter.
Ask directly about scope, pricing, deliverables, and usage terms; no published package is available.
A B2B content marketing agency that wants to be known as the data-driven authority on content measurement asks Lawlor to co-brand an original research program: a survey of content and Sales leaders, a flagship report, and a launch webinar, with the agency supplying sample access and demand generation.
Read more
This is the closest match in the posts here.
All three cover the same ground.
One reports that 85% of B2B marketing teams cannot prove content drives revenue and describes the survey of 252 B2B technology marketers behind the resulting report.
Another contrasts teams whose content Sales actually uses (95%) with marketers overall (73%), and lists the post-publication metrics those teams track: Sales-reported content influence (57%), Sales usage (43%), and deal velocity or win rate (38%).
The third makes the case for original research in planning, with 54% of teams that consistently demonstrate impact creating original research and proprietary data, versus 37% overall.
The agency’s proposal is the kind of work Lawlor already publishes about.
The method fits too.
They describe gathering the questions B2B marketers wanted answered, surveying a defined group, naming the report, then taking one finding at a time and explaining its interpretation.
An agency bringing sample access, co-sponsorship, and a launch channel can plug into an established process rather than ask for a new format.
The commercial route is stated but unbundled: a post says research programs are being booked ahead of a Q1 launch and invites a direct LinkedIn message to explore one.
Since no rate card, deliverable list, exclusivity terms, or usage rights are published, negotiate scope, price, and data rights directly; start the conversation a quarter or more before the desired launch.
Before committing, ask for post-level results on comparable research-report posts and any follower role, seniority, and company-type data; the posts do not show who the roughly 8,900 LinkedIn followers are.
Also ask to see the survey instrument and full report behind the 85% finding before reusing its figures in the agency’s own marketing.
When to choose a specialist
A consumer subscription or product-led brand wants an always-on paid-social creator partnership: a fixed monthly retainer for short-form video and lifestyle content, with guaranteed reach numbers and a published rate card.
Read more
The posts do not support this brief.
They are text-first B2B LinkedIn posts about content measurement and Marketing–Sales alignment, not short-form video or lifestyle content.
The only commercial route described is commissioned or co-branded research, arranged by direct message after a scoping conversation; there is no published package, media kit, or price list.
A campaign requiring fixed pricing and a standard deliverable menu has no offer to select from.
The account shows about 8,900 followers, but audience roles, seniority, geography, and buying power are not documented.
Ask for post-level reach data and audience breakdowns before assessing a campaign that requires guaranteed impressions or a demographically verified audience.
The subject matter—content impact measurement, original research, and Sales enablement—also gives a consumer-facing campaign or one aimed at non-marketing buyers little topical overlap.
A worked campaign example
Campaign angle — “The Content Impact Gap”: a co-branded research program with the agency as distribution partner.
1. Research design. Reuse the questions Lawlor already works from: how teams measure impact beyond leads and vanity metrics, show that content creates real business value, distinguish what Sales actually uses from what Marketing produces, win support for larger research investment, and assess how AI is changing buyer discovery. Add the agency’s own sample so the study covers its target buyer—content and Sales leaders in B2B technology—and aim for a base comparable to or larger than the 252 marketers surveyed in the post.
2. Benchmark questions. Design the survey to compare results with the figures Lawlor already publishes: frequent Sales use of marketing content (95% among impact-proving teams versus 73% overall), Sales-reported content influence (57%), Sales usage (43%), deal velocity or win rate (38%), and original research creation (54% versus 37%). Reusing these items makes comparison possible, so launch content can show what changed.
3. Deliverables. Create a flagship report named for the joint program; a launch webinar or workshop run by Lawlor with the agency, built around the argument that publishing is only half the job and making content useful to Sales is the other half; and a series of single-finding posts, published one at a time with Lawlor’s interpretation, as in the posts here.
4. Timing. The planning post is written for the Q4 window and says research programs are being booked for a Q1 launch. Open the conversation a quarter ahead and work backward from the launch date.
5. Measurement and next step. Agree upfront on the headline number the program will be judged by—for example, Sales-reported content influence among the agency’s own clients—and how the agency will use the data: in the report, webinar, Sales enablement material, and pipeline content. Start with a direct LinkedIn message to scope the study, sample, timeline, and terms, none of which are published.
If the agency's real problem is that the content-marketer role and media model are shifting, and it wants a partner who can speak credibly about what content teams are hiring for and how to run a media property, Alex Hilleary is the better choice.
Read more
Their two posts do two things the Lawlor posts do not.
One analyzes 149 content-marketer job posts and argues the role is moving from a single SEO-blog growth channel to narrative work across social, thought leadership, demand gen, video/podcast, and community, warning that newer roles often fail to define success metrics.
The other describes commissioning a new weekly newsletter with Rachel Bicha and building it around freelancer rates, job-search reality, and what makes content good.
For an agency trying to sell 'we understand where content marketing is going' or design a service around content careers and media products, Hilleary shows that thinking through specific job data and an operating newsletter, not just survey benchmarks.
Hilleary's posts focus on content roles and media products, not content's business impact.
They offer no benchmark survey, Sales-usage or win-rate metrics, or documented co-branded research program.
An agency that needs a data report on content impact would trade measurement depth for market and role insight, and would need to supply the sample, research design, and Sales-alignment benchmark items.
If the agency needs to make content visible through SEO, link building, guest posting, and organic authority, Mansoor Ali is the better choice.
Read more
Their posts address the gap between publishing and visibility: one argues that brands publish dozens of articles and still struggle because they are not present on the right platforms with the right audience; the other challenges link-building reports that show 30 new backlinks, DR 70+ sites, 20 referring domains, and 100% delivery but cannot say whether the placements strengthened the brand.
Ali's answer is relevance: a SaaS brand should build visibility around SaaS, a fintech around finance, and an e-commerce brand where its buyers spend time.
For an agency focused on search and authority execution rather than original research, that is closer to the work.
Ali's posts focus on SEO, guest posting, link building, and backlink reporting, not content-impact measurement, Sales enablement, or original research programs.
They do not document a survey, benchmark report, webinar, or data-driven thought-leadership collaboration.
Choosing Ali gives the agency practical visibility and link-relevance thinking, but the co-branded research asset and content-measurement angle would have to come from elsewhere.
If the agency wants a partner who can connect original research, influencer partnerships, and full-funnel thought leadership—especially for a campaign that must reach B2B marketers through a conference, influencer network, and AI/search channels—Lee Odden is the better choice.
Read more
Their posts describe repeated research on B2B influencer marketing and thought leadership, including a survey of nearly 800 B2B marketers with Ascend2 that makes the case for original research integrated with influencers and experiential content.
They also lay out a system: audience insights, customer data, and original research as inputs; experiential content across relevant channels including AI search; brand validation through influencer partnerships, industry media, and social proof; and influencer thought leadership across the customer lifecycle.
Odden also documents presenting at Content Marketing World, which matters if the agency wants conference-grade thought leadership and an existing platform.
Odden's posts focus more on influencer-program strategy and conference thought leadership than on the content-impact benchmark Lawlor publishes.
They cite survey work and frameworks, but not the same Sales-usage and win-rate benchmark items or a documented co-branded research program with an agency.
An agency whose webinar depends on '85% of teams cannot prove content drives revenue' or Sales-alignment metrics would need to bring that measurement core itself.
This profile rests on three complete LinkedIn posts by Becky Lawlor, covering content-impact measurement, original research, and Marketing–Sales alignment.
The posts carry no publication dates in the material reviewed, so no timeline is claimed and nothing is inferred from posting order.
The survey reports the posts link to were not available in full, so the figures quoted here appear as Lawlor presents them, without independent verification of the questionnaire or sample.
Profiles of Lee Odden, Alex Hilleary and Mansoor Ali were reviewed only to support the similar-creator comparisons; they are not part of the account assessment or the fit decision.
The LinkedIn account showed about 8,900 followers as of October 2026.
The account is treated as Lawlor's own, and no employer, client or sponsorship is asserted because none is disclosed in the posts.
Coverage is limited to these three posts: earlier work, other channels, audience demographics and commercial terms were not reviewed.
