.png)
Estd 4.22.2023
In the high-stakes world of SaaS, few decisions impact growth and profitability as directly as pricing. Yet despite its critical importance, pricing ownership often becomes an organizational hot potato, bouncing between product, marketing, finance, and sales teams. Recent research from OpenView Partners reveals that while 98% of SaaS companies agree pricing is strategically important, only 56% have dedicated pricing resources.
This glaring disconnect raises a crucial question: who should really own pricing in a SaaS company? The answer has significant implications for your revenue performance, organizational alignment, and competitive positioning.
The Current State of Pricing Ownership in SaaS
Pricing ownership in SaaS companies typically falls into one of several common models:
The Product-Led Approach
Many early-stage SaaS companies default to product management owning pricing. This makes sense when product teams understand technical value drivers and feature development costs. According to a 2023 Paddle survey, approximately 40% of SaaS companies place pricing responsibility with product teams.
However, this approach has limitations. Product managers often lack pricing expertise and may focus too heavily on feature value rather than market positioning or customer willingness to pay.
The Growth Team Model
As companies mature, pricing ownership frequently shifts to growth or marketing teams. These teams typically bring a data-driven perspective, focusing on conversion optimization and packaging that resonates with market segments.
According to Price Intelligently, companies with marketing-led pricing strategies are 25% more likely to implement value-based pricing models that maximize revenue per customer.
The Finance-Driven Approach
In enterprise SaaS companies, finance departments increasingly claim pricing responsibility. Their focus on unit economics, contribution margins and investor expectations creates rigorous pricing frameworks.
A 2022 study by SaaS Capital found that companies with finance-led pricing achieved 15% better gross margins compared to their peers, but sometimes at the expense of market growth rates.
The Cross-Functional Reality: Why Pricing Needs Multiple Stakeholders
The reality is that effective SaaS pricing requires multiple perspectives. As Kyle Poyar, Partner at OpenView, notes: "Pricing is not a one-person job. It's inherently cross-functional, requiring inputs from customer-facing teams, product, finance, and executive leadership."
An optimal pricing process incorporates:
- Product insights on feature value and development costs
- Sales feedback on competitive dynamics and deal objections
- Marketing data on customer value perceptions and segment needs
- Customer success input on retention drivers and expansion opportunities
- Finance analysis on margin implications and revenue modeling
This multi-stakeholder approach acknowledges that pricing sits at the intersection of corporate strategy, product value, and market positioning.
Three Emerging Models for Effective Pricing Governance
Forward-thinking SaaS companies are adopting one of three governance models to manage this cross-functional reality:
1. The Pricing Committee
Companies like Salesforce and HubSpot utilize pricing committees that bring together leaders from product, sales, marketing, and finance on a regular cadence. These committees establish pricing frameworks, approve major changes, and ensure alignment across departments.
The committee approach works well for companies with complex product portfolios or multiple market segments, but can slow decision-making without strong executive sponsorship.
2. The Pricing Operations Function
More mature SaaS businesses are establishing dedicated pricing operations teams. According to Simon-Kucher & Partners, 65% of high-growth SaaS companies now have dedicated pricing roles or teams.
These specialists act as internal consultants, gathering cross-functional input, conducting pricing research, and developing optimization strategies. They typically report to the Chief Revenue Officer or Chief Commercial Officer, ensuring alignment between pricing and revenue strategy.
Pricing operations teams excel at implementing sophisticated approaches like usage-based models, value-based pricing, and dynamic discounting frameworks.
3. The Chief Monetization Officer
The most cutting-edge approach is the emergence of the Chief Monetization Officer (CMO) role. Distinguished from the traditional CMO (Chief Marketing Officer), this executive position takes holistic ownership of how the company captures value.
As Patrick Campbell, founder of ProfitWell (acquired by Paddle), explains: "The Chief Monetization Officer sits at the intersection of product, marketing, and finance, focusing exclusively on optimizing how the company turns product value into revenue."
Companies including Twilio and MongoDB have adopted variations of this model, with dedicated executives owning pricing strategy as part of broader monetization responsibilities.
Choosing the Right Model for Your Organization
The optimal pricing ownership structure depends on your company's stage, complexity, and strategic priorities:
For early-stage startups (Pre-Series B): A product leader typically owns pricing with regular input from founders and sales. Formal governance isn't yet needed, but regular pricing reviews should occur quarterly.
For growth-stage companies (Series B to D): A pricing committee with clear executive sponsorship often works best. These companies benefit from establishing pricing operations capabilities within a revenue or product team.
For mature SaaS companies (Post-Series D or public): Dedicated pricing operations teams or a Chief Monetization Officer provide the sophistication needed to optimize complex pricing models across product portfolios and segments.
Implementation Best Practices: Beyond Structure
Regardless of which ownership model you choose, these best practices ensure effective pricing governance:
Define clear decision rights - Document who can approve pricing changes at different thresholds and establish a formal review process.
Develop pricing intelligence capabilities - Invest in competitive monitoring, willingness-to-pay research, and price sensitivity analysis.
Create pricing playbooks - Document pricing frameworks, discount guidelines, and value metrics to ensure consistency.
Establish pricing KPIs - Monitor metrics like average revenue per user (ARPU), pricing power, and price realization to track performance.
Build pricing fluency - Train stakeholders across the organization to understand value-based pricing principles.
The Future: Pricing as a Core Competency
As SaaS markets mature and competition intensifies, pricing will continue to evolve from a periodic exercise to a core strategic capability.
According to OpenView Partners' 2023 SaaS Benchmarks Report, companies that treat pricing as a continuous process (rather than an annual event) grow 30% faster than peers that revisit pricing only during major product releases.
This evolution means that regardless of which governance model you choose, pricing must receive dedicated resources, executive attention, and cross-functional collaboration.
Conclusion: Finding Your Pricing Leader
The question of who should own pricing in your SaaS company doesn't have a one-size-fits-all answer. The optimal approach balances your organizational structure, available expertise, and business complexity.
What's clear is that pricing can no longer exist as an organizational orphan. Whether through committees, specialized teams, or dedicated executives, effective SaaS companies are establishing clear ownership and investing in pricing as a strategic capability.
As you consider your own approach, remember that the most successful pricing strategies aren't distinguished by which department owns them, but by how effectively they align your product's value with customer needs and company objectives.
The time to resolve your pricing ownership is now. In today's competitive SaaS landscape, you simply can't afford to leave money on the table through fragmented or under-resourced pricing processes.