After reviewing performance over the past six months, we’ve decided to discontinue marketing.

We reached this conclusion by removing it and observing what happened.

Campaigns stopped. Messaging work paused. Positioning exercises were abandoned midstream. There was no announcement and no attempt to compensate elsewhere. The expectation was that something would break, or at least degrade enough to justify putting it back.

It didn’t.

In one case, a prospect described us as “a category-agnostic alignment layer.” We did not correct them.

People continued to find us, form opinions, and describe us to others. Those descriptions were inconsistent, occasionally inaccurate, and delivered with a level of confidence that suggested precision where none existed.

None of that appeared to matter.

One customer described us as “a platform for operational storytelling,” which is not a phrase we have ever used. Another referred to us as “basically a consultancy, but faster,” which is also not something we would have said. Both converted. Neither asked for clarification. A prospect later summarized us as “middleware for decision-making energy,” which we briefly considered adopting before deciding it was already performing.

A partner explained our offering on a call using language that directly contradicted our last published positioning. The deal still moved forward. When asked how they understood what we did, the response was, “We have a sense of it.”

That sense appears to be sufficient.

Work continued. Demand held. In a few cases, engagement improved, though not in ways that map cleanly to any previous attribution model. At that point, continuing to produce messaging began to feel less like a driver of performance and more like a parallel activity with its own internal logic.

So we’re formalizing the change.

We will no longer explain what we do in a way designed to resolve ambiguity. We will not attempt to differentiate ourselves through language that converges with the rest of the category. Information will remain available where necessary, but it will not be organized around clarity as an objective.

Interpretation will be allowed to vary.

Rather than attempting to control how we are understood, we are allowing understanding to form externally, even when it diverges or conflicts. We are less concerned with whether we are understood than with how many distinct explanations of us circulate, how confidently they are expressed, and how far they travel.

Internally, marketing will continue to exist, though its function has narrowed. Instead of producing clarity, it will monitor for it. When something becomes too easy to explain, it will be adjusted. When alignment forms too quickly, it will be interrupted.

This approach may feel unfamiliar. It is, however, consistent with what has already been happening.

In early internal discussions, someone asked at what point we step in if people are misunderstanding us.

At this point, correcting it would likely reduce performance, so we won’t.

🤪