A year ago, I went on the record with nine predictions about where demand gen and growth were heading in 2025. I called it âofficially memorializedâ and promised weâd see how it panned out.
Well, itâs December 2025. Time to face the music.
Hey Siri, play: Anti-Hero:
Iâve always believed that if youâre going to make predictions publicly, you owe it to your audience to come back and score yourself honestly. So thatâs exactly what Iâm doing. Some of these predictions landed. Others? Not so much. And a few played out in ways I didnât expect at all.
đ Hiii, itâs Kaylee Edmondson and welcome to Looped In, the newsletter exploring demand gen and growth frameworks in B2B SaaS. I write this newsletter every Sunday, and wildly, a few thousand of you read it each week. Iâm grateful!
If youâre one of the newest 33 readers that have joined us since last weekâs edition, welcome! Glad youâre here. I write whatâs top of mind based on what Iâm hearing across DemandLoops clients, networking calls, and friend groups. If thereâs ever anything top of mind, shoot me a reply. I read every single one!
Prediction #1: The Year of Orchestration â Signals Will Drive Plays That Fuel Demand Loops
(see what I did there đ)
My Take Then: 2025 will be the year we all move to signals which is what Iâm considering 1P, 2P, and 3P activities, insights, and data that can inform an action.
What Actually Happened: I got this one mostly right, but it played out messier than I expected.
Signal-based marketing absolutely exploded in 2025. Every single client I worked with this year involved implementing signal-based frameworks, and all saw meaningful improvements in pipeline velocity. The shift from old school lead scoring to dynamic signal orchestration happened faster than I anticipated.
But hereâs what I didnât predict: the orchestration part became the bottleneck. Most companies I worked with could identify âmainstreamâ signals just fine. They could even track them across multiple tools. Where they struggled? Coordinating the response across marketing, sales, and customer success.
And the market ate it up like pancakes. Wild the amount of companies that pivoted or shifted their focus 180 to try and grab up a piece of the âsignalsâ market. Iâm sure thereâs so much more to come here in 2026.
The companies though that won this year? They built what I started calling âsignal response playbooksâ. Clearly documented frameworks with the signals that trigger which plays, owned by which team, with clear SLAs. Unsexy, but effective.
Grade: B+ (Right direction, underestimated the complexity and new players that entered the chat)
Prediction #2: PLG and Demand Gen Will Merge Into One Growth Engine
My Take Then: Marketers will focus more on monetizing intent (not just capturing leads) by layering in sales-assist strategies, expansion plays for existing users, and growth loops that create self-sustaining demand.
What Actually Happened: This one is still in progress, but Iâm calling it a largely a miss (at least across the companies I have visibility into).
The merger happened conceptually at a lot of companies. I saw plenty of reorgs where PLG and demand gen teams started reporting to the same leader. But the actual integration of workflows, metrics, and go-to-market motions? Thatâs proving harder than I thought.
The issue isnât buy-in. Every CMO I talked to this year understood why these functions need to work together. The problem is that the tooling, attribution models, and team incentives are still really siloed.
I worked with one company that combined their PLG and sales-led motions under a unified growth org. Six months in, theyâre still fighting about which metrics to optimize for. Product-qualified leads (PQLs) and marketing-qualified leads (MQLs) donât play nicely together in most CRM configurations.
That said, the companies making progress on this integration are seeing outsized results. When you can route a free user showing high-intent signals directly to sales while keeping low-intent users in automated nurture, conversion rates jump. I saw this work at two clients this year with 30%+ increases in free-to-paid conversion.
Grade: C+ (Right concept, but way underestimated implementation challenges)
Prediction #3: AI-Generated Content Will Fuel Hyper-Personalized Plays at Scale
My Take Then: AI tools will generate hyper-relevant outreach, dynamic landing pages, and even tailored video content based on a prospectâs industry, company size, and intent signals.
What Actually Happened: Yes, but mostly no. AI content generation scaled dramatically in 2025, but not quite how I envisioned.
The personalization part happened. I saw companies using AI to customize email sequences, landing page copy, and even demo flows based on firmographic and intent data. One client used AI to generate account specific landing pages on the fly, pulling relevant data points based on the prospectâs profile, tailoring the content based on calls from Gong data, adjusted testimonials/social proof based on case studies that were most relevant. It worked.
But the âfuelâ metaphor I used in my predictions? That missed the mark. Weâre just not there yet. AI content became more noise and slop. The teams that succeeded used AI to generate the structure and first draft, then had humans heavily refine for voice, accuracy, and positioning.
The companies that tried to use AI as a pure content factory ended up with generic, obvious-AI output that prospects could spot from a mile away. The em dash epidemic was real, folksâthough I do want justice. đ
What surprised me most: The biggest AI wins in 2025 werenât in content creation. They were in data synthesis and research. Tools like Clay and AI-powered enrichment platforms let small teams do research that would have required an army of SDRs two years ago.
Grade: C- (Happened-ish, but differently than expected)
Prediction #4: Cold Outbound Will Be Rebranded as âStrategic Activationâ
My Take Then: The best demand gen teams will take a surgical approach, using buyer triggers to craft highly relevant outbound plays... Make outbound feel like an extension of the buyerâs journey, not an interruption.
What Actually Happened: I think I get partial credit on this one.
The rebrand didnât happen with the exact term âstrategic activation,â but the shift absolutely occurred. Cold outbound as we knew it in 2022-2023 basically died this year. Well, something in B2B Marketing is nearly always dying but this year felt like all the LinkedIn posts were saying âdeath to outboundâ.
What replaced it? Signal-triggered, multi-channel plays that feel coordinated rather than random. I worked with three companies this year who completely overhauled their outbound approach from spray-and-pray to trigger-based sequences. All three saw lift email response rates.
The method to the madness was slightly different for all three of them, but essentially it went:
- Wait for a meaningful signal (job change, product usage spike, competitive research, funding announcement)
- Orchestrate a multi-touch sequence across email, LinkedIn, and sometimes direct mail.
The key word is âorchestrate.â Sales and marketing had to coordinate timing, messaging, and channel selection.
One client implemented nearbound playsâusing partner signals and shared community engagement to warm up accounts before any direct outreach. Their meeting-set rate from outbound jumped from 3% to 11%. *These were for very targeted accounts.
Grade: A- (Called it correctly, but it could definitely still use refinement)
Prediction #5: Demand Gen Evolves From a Function to a Company-Wide Growth Mindset
My Take Then: Demand gen wonât just be a marketing responsibilityâitâll be a company-wide priority... Customer success will take on a bigger role in demand gen, running expansion campaigns and customer advocacy plays.
What Actually Happened: This oneâs playing out slower than I predicted, but the trajectory is right.
I saw more companies talk about breaking down silos between marketing, sales, and CS. I saw fewer companies actually do it successfully.
The org chart changes happened. I consulted for four companies this year that restructured their revenue teams to create more alignment. But organizational structure doesnât automatically create new behaviors or mindsets.
Where I did see progress: Expansion and retention strategies moving out of pure CS ownership and into shared revenue initiatives. Companies starting to give marketing some OKR expectations tied to expansion and retention revenue vs just pure new business.
But at most companies, demand gen is still primarily seen as a new biz function, even if everyone agrees it shouldnât be.
Grade: C (Directionally right, timeline too aggressive)
Prediction #6: The AI Effect â Digital Channels Will Saturate in Months, Not Years
My Take Then: Pre-AI there was more natural, slower saturation because channel maturity had to be achieved through personal mastery. Post-AI there will be insane acceleration because channel mastery will happen nearly instantly.
What Actually Happened: I completely nailed this one, and itâs both exciting and terrifying.
Channel saturation happened even faster than I predicted. We all watched LinkedIn go from emerging AI content to completely saturated with AI slop in about six months. Same with certain types of programmatic SEO plays. Itâs getting rough out there.
The first-mover advantage window shrank dramatically. I had one client launch an AI-powered content play that was genuinely innovative in March. By July, three competitors had launched similar approaches. By October, the differentiation was gone.
The lesson for 2026: You canât build sustainable advantage on AI capabilities alone anymore. Everyone has access to the same models. The advantage comes from how quickly you can test, learn, and adapt. And separate but maybe related thoughtâŚhow well you can actually build human-led relationships.
Grade: A (Unfortunately correct)
Prediction #7: The Rise of the New-Age CMO
My Take Then: The top 1% of CMOs are still practitioners in a few areas. Theyâre staying sharp and close to the problems the org is trying to solve.
What Actually Happened: I really wanted this one to be true. And for the top 1% of CMOs? It is.
Look at the CMOs who are absolutely crushing it right nowâtheyâre expert leaders, amazing storytellers, but also deep practitioners in specific areas. I worked with one CMO this year who personally built out their companyâs first signal-based campaign framework in Clay before handing it off to the team to operationalize. That hands-on approach cascaded through the entire organization. Her team moved faster and with more conviction because they knew she understood the work at a tactical level.
But itâs still only about 1% of CMOs operating this way.
Across my client base in 2025 most CMOsâeven really good onesâarenât fighting for this level of hands-on expertise. And honestly, I get why.
The CMO role is impossibly demanding. Itâs ever-changing, ever-scrutinized, and spans an absurd number of functions. Most CMOs I worked with this year spent the majority of their time in meetings trying to create alignment between sales, product, customer success, and their own teams. Theyâre fighting budget battles, justifying headcount, and translating marketing metrics into language the board cares about.
When youâre spending 6 hours a day in meetings, when are you supposed to learn Clay? Or dig into campaign performance data? Or test new AI tools?
The CMOs who managed to stay hands-on in 2025 either had exceptional teams that freed up their time, worked for companies with strong cross-functional alignment already, or just sacrificed sleep and personal time to stay technical.
So did this trend accelerate in 2025? For the elite performers, yes. For the average CMO? No. I feel the gap between the top 1% and everyone else actually widened this year.
Grade: B- (True for the top performers, wishful thinking for everyone else)
Prediction #8: Teams Will Shrink W-2s and Rely More on Contractors
My Take Then: In 2025 I see more teams shrinking their W-2 fixed cost and instead rely more heavily on specialized contract resources for more project-based execution.
What Actually Happened: I undersold this one. This trend absolutely accelerated in 2025, and itâs only getting more pronounced heading into 2026.
The shift toward contractors and fractional resources didnât just continue. It became the default planning assumption. Iâm personally proof of that. My consultancy stayed fully booked all year. But more importantly, as I worked through 2026 planning with clients over the past few months, every single one is moving more budget from fixed W-2 costs to variable contractor spend.
But hereâs what I didnât fully articulate in my original prediction: this shift only works when you get the model right.
The companies that succeeded with this approach in 2025 built lean core teams of strong generalist marketers. These are people who might naturally be talented in content, but can now use AI to transform that content across multiple mediums, build distribution plans to get it seen, and start motions to build an audience around it.
Then they bring in fractional resources, agencies, and hyper-specialized solopreneurs for specific programs or areas where the company hasâor is testingâa marketing advantage.
The companies that struggled? They tried to run everything through contractors without building that strong generalist core. One client started the year trying to run demand gen almost entirely through agencies and fractional resources. By mid-year theyâd brought several roles back in-house because the lack of institutional knowledge was killing execution speed.
You need people who deeply understand your product, market, and customers in-house. Then you augment them with specialists who bring specific expertise you canât justify hiring full-time.
This isnât just a 2025 trend. Based on the 2026 budgets Iâve seen, this model is becoming standard operating procedure. The variable cost structure gives companies flexibility to experiment, scale what works, and cut what doesnât without the friction of layoffs.
Grade: A- (I actually got this right, just didnât give myself enough credit)
Prediction #9: Top CMOs Will Own the Entire Acquisition Engine (last one, I swear)
My Take Then: Itâs time CMOs own the entire acquisition engine. Both âinboundâ and âoutboundâ (or better said, the BDRs).
What Actually Happened: I need to be honest hereâIâm not sure I even agree with this prediction anymore.
I did see this happen at two companies in my client portfolio this year. Both tried moving their SDR/BDR teams under the CMO. And you know what? Neither one worked well.
The problem wasnât execution. The problem was my entire premise.
Most CMOs (even really talented ones) spent their entire careers in marketing. They donât have deep experience managing sales motions. They donât know how to structure comp plans that actually motivate BDRs. They donât understand the daily cadence of scrum-style stand-ups that keep outbound teams aligned and productive. They donât have the muscle memory for the difference between managing a creative team and managing a sales development team.
I thought the attribution warfare between marketing and sales would get solved by putting both under one leader. But organizational structure doesnât fix alignment problems. It just papers over them temporarily.
But, when both teams are working from the same signals, optimizing for the same account engagement stages, and coordinating their outreach, alignment happens naturally. You donât need an org chart change to make that work.
The CMOs who succeeded at improving marketing-sales alignment this year didnât do it by taking over the BDR team. They did it by creating shared definitions of target accounts, shared signal frameworks, and shared rules of engagement. The reporting structure stayed separate, but the collaboration got dramatically better.
I wish I could take this prediction back. The real shift needed in 2025 wasnât organizationalâit was operational. Better systems, better data sharing, better coordination. Not a power grab. My bad.
Grade: D (Happened in a few places, but I fundamentally disagree with my own prediction now)
All of my misses werenât random
They follow a pattern: I consistently underestimated how hard organizational and cultural change would be relative to technical or tactical change. Tis the reason I work in startups and scale-ups and not corporate America. I definitely donât have the patience it takes to redirect those cruise ships.
Signal-based marketing (technical) rolled out faster than I expected. Merging PLG and demand gen (organizational) moved slower.
AI content generation (tactical) scaled quickly. CMOs staying hands-on (cultural) exceeded expectations. Teams going fully fractional (organizational) proved more complex than I predicted.
In 2025, technical capabilities and tactical execution could change overnight. Culture and organizational structure? Those take longer, even when everyone agrees they need to change.
In the next few weeks Iâll go on record to humiliate myself again with 2026 predictions.
Kaylee âď¸
It's interesting how you approach this self-assessment. Your commitment to transparent scoring of predictions is higly commendable and a valuable practice.
I agree with the line âhow naturally you can build human relationships.â We were able to do this by sending personalized gifts to prospects.
p.s. thank you for sharing a âHow It Wentâ post!! Iâm shocked by how many people donât follow-up on predictions. +1 recommendation for you to draft a 2026 predications too (guessing you probably will)