'The conversation has shifted': The CFO moved upstream. Now agencies have to as well

"Marketing is still largely treated as an expense, not an asset. Inventory or capital investments can be amortized. Brand building cannot. So it carries a higher internal hurdle rate. That's why many organizations default to performance spend. It's easier to match the expense to a result in the same budget cycle."

"A lot of our day to day right now is helping CMOs prepare for board conversations where finance is in the room and the questions are sharper. Most companies treat marketing as an operating cost, expensed immediately and never capitalized, which means boards instinctively view it as something to be minimized rather than invested in."

"Vaynerchuk's point - that marketers have spent years hiding behind metrics that flatter the work while the business declines - is indicative of a wider wave of finance logic reshaping how CMOs have to show up. Technology spend sits on the balance sheet as an asset. Brand building doesn't."

CFOs are increasingly engaging directly with marketing teams and agencies, asking more sophisticated questions about marketing's business impact. This shift reflects both economic uncertainty and a fundamental structural problem: marketing is typically treated as an operating expense rather than a capitalized asset. Unlike technology investments that appear on balance sheets, brand building is expensed immediately, causing boards to view marketing as something to minimize rather than invest in. This accounting treatment gives CFOs significant leverage. Agencies like VaynerMedia are now directly engaging finance teams, while others help CMOs prepare for board conversations where finance scrutinizes marketing decisions. The challenge stems from marketing's historical reliance on metrics that may not align with actual business outcomes, forcing a reckoning with how marketing value is measured and communicated.

Read at Digiday