New data from the recent Storyblok Global Speed-to-Market Benchmark Report reveals the biggest causes and costs of slow go-to-market (GTM) delivery today — with tech limitations at the center of the problem.
The world has shifted gears in recent years, and the pace of change has accelerated beyond anything we’ve experienced before. Rapid advances in AI and technology, combined with the constant emergence of new digital channels and trends, have transformed GTM delivery.Â
Customer and organizational expectations are clear: deliver great work fast or lose out.
The problem is that while speed-to-market expectations are skyrocketing, only 22.5% of teams say they consistently deliver at the pace the market demands. That gap between intention and execution is clear.
So, what’s slowing teams down?
In the Global Speed-to-Market Benchmark survey, hundreds of GTM teams shared where the go-to-market process is slowing down — or, in some cases, stalling completely — what’s causing the delays, and what it takes to achieve true speed-to-market today. Here’s what they had to say.
The bottlenecks sabotaging GTM velocity
Four major bottlenecks stood out in the survey findings — and each one traces back to a technology limitation or dependency.
1. The approval process
The approval process is the single biggest bottleneck in the GTM workflow, cited by more than 50% of teams. More than half go through three or more rounds of content revisions, and nearly one in five endure five or more.
This rigorous review process isn’t necessarily driven by high standards. More often, it’s the result of stacks fragmentation.Â
When feedback is scattered across tools, with no single source of truth, unclear sign-off ownership, and no firm deadlines, reviews become the bottleneck that quietly kills momentum. It’s as much a technology failure as a process failure — and one that adds significant unnecessary time to the GTM process.
A well-configured CMS is often the most effective fix here — and for GTM campaign delivery, that increasingly means a headless CMS. Because content is decoupled from presentation, a headless CMS stores everything in a single structured repository every stakeholder (marketers, developers, legal, and others) can review. No version confusion. Just one content record for every reviewer.
Pair that with a built-in visual editor and in-app commenting, and you remove two of the biggest friction points in content review. Stakeholders can comment on specific elements while seeing exactly what will go live, and feedback stays centralized and trackable instead of scattered across inboxes and tools.
The takeaway
The report data supports that conclusion: only 50% of teams say their CMS even somewhat supports speedy go-to-market. For MarTech leaders auditing their stack, the content review layer deserves the same scrutiny as automation platforms and analytics infrastructure if faster,…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
