.png)
Frameworks, core principles and top case studies for SaaS pricing, learnt and refined over 28+ years of SaaS-monetization experience.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
In the rapidly evolving SaaS landscape, pricing represents one of the most potent yet underutilized levers for growth. According to a study by OpenView Partners, a mere 1% improvement in pricing can translate to an 11% increase in profits. Despite this outsized impact, many SaaS companies struggle with a fundamental question: who should own pricing?
This question isn't merely organizational—it's strategic. The ownership of pricing decisions directly influences how value is communicated, captured, and ultimately converted to sustainable revenue. Let's explore the various stakeholders who might own pricing, the pros and cons of each approach, and how leading SaaS companies are resolving this critical question.
The Common Contenders for Pricing Ownership
Product Management
Many SaaS companies place pricing under the product team's purview, given their intimate understanding of feature value and user needs.
Advantages:
- Deep product knowledge enables value-based pricing approaches
- Natural alignment with product roadmap and feature development
- Ability to design pricing architecture that mirrors product usage patterns
Challenges:
- Product managers may lack commercial or financial expertise
- Potential bias toward feature value rather than market perception
- May not fully incorporate competitive intelligence or customer willingness to pay
According to Product Plan's 2023 State of Product Management Report, 37% of SaaS companies position pricing ownership primarily within the product organization.
Marketing
Marketing teams frequently own or significantly influence pricing strategy, particularly in marketing-led organizations.
Advantages:
- Strong understanding of market positioning and competitive landscape
- Expertise in messaging and communicating value
- Ability to align pricing with broader go-to-market strategy
Challenges:
- May lack detailed understanding of unit economics
- Could focus excessively on competitive pricing rather than value-based approaches
- Potential disconnect with product development priorities
Finance
Finance-led pricing is common in more mature SaaS organizations or those with complex business models.
Advantages:
- Rigorous analytical approach to pricing decisions
- Clear focus on profitability and unit economics
- Sophisticated modeling capabilities for scenario planning
Challenges:
- May prioritize financial metrics over customer needs or market realities
- Potential disconnect from frontline customer feedback
- Risk of overly complex pricing structures that optimize revenue but complicate sales
Sales
While less common as primary owners, sales teams often exert significant influence over pricing in many SaaS companies.
Advantages:
- Direct visibility into customer objections and competitive situations
- Practical understanding of what pricing structures close deals
- Real-time feedback on pricing effectiveness
Challenges:
- Tendency toward discounting to meet short-term goals
- May lack strategic perspective on long-term value capture
- Potential to create pricing inconsistencies across customers
Cross-Functional Pricing Committees: The Emerging Best Practice
According to data from Profitwell, companies with cross-functional pricing ownership outperform those with siloed approaches by 15% in average revenue per user (ARPU).
Leading SaaS companies like Salesforce, HubSpot, and Atlassian have increasingly moved toward a committee-based approach to pricing, bringing together multiple stakeholders:
Core pricing governance typically includes:
- Product leadership (contribution: value definition, feature packaging)
- Marketing leadership (contribution: competitive positioning, value communication)
- Finance leadership (contribution: margin analysis, revenue modeling)
- Sales leadership (contribution: market feedback, deal velocity insights)
This collaborative approach ensures pricing decisions incorporate all critical perspectives while maintaining strategic alignment.
How Pricing Ownership Should Evolve with Company Maturity
The optimal ownership model often correlates with company stage:
Early-Stage SaaS:
In startups, pricing often defaults to the CEO or founder, with significant input from product leaders. This centralized approach allows for rapid experimentation and frequent adjustments as the company discovers product-market fit.
Growth-Stage SaaS:
As companies scale, the need for more structured pricing processes emerges. This typically marks the transition to either product-led or marketing-led pricing, depending on the company's go-to-market motion.
Enterprise SaaS:
Mature SaaS companies generally implement formalized pricing committees with clear governance structures, scheduled review cycles, and dedicated pricing roles or teams.
According to research from Simon-Kucher & Partners, 65% of SaaS companies with ARR exceeding $50M have dedicated pricing functions or committees, compared to just 12% of companies below $10M ARR.
Implementing Effective Pricing Governance
Regardless of which function "owns" pricing, successful SaaS companies establish clear processes for pricing decisions:
Defined review cycles: Scheduled pricing reviews (typically quarterly for high-growth companies, bi-annually for more mature organizations)
Clear decision rights: Explicit documentation of who can approve pricing changes and within what parameters
Data infrastructure: Investment in tools to capture pricing analytics, discount patterns, and competitive intelligence
Experimentation framework: Structured approach to testing pricing changes with controls and success metrics
Customer feedback integration: Formalized processes to incorporate voice-of-customer into pricing decisions
Real-World Example: Zoom's Pricing Evolution
Zoom provides an instructive case study in pricing ownership evolution. In its early growth phase, pricing was primarily owned by product and marketing, focusing on a freemium model that prioritized user acquisition over monetization.
As the company matured, Zoom implemented a formal pricing committee structure with representatives from product, marketing, sales, and finance. This cross-functional approach enabled Zoom to:
- Launch enterprise tiers with sophisticated value-based pricing
- Implement industry-specific packaging
- Develop add-on pricing for complementary services
- Balance growth with increasing profitability requirements
This evolution contributed significantly to Zoom's successful scaling, with gross margins consistently above 70% even during periods of explosive growth.
Conclusion: Finding Your SaaS Company's Right Model
There is no universal "correct" answer to who should own pricing in SaaS companies. The optimal ownership structure depends on:
- Company size and maturity
- Business model complexity
- Primary go-to-market motion
- Competitive dynamics
- Customer purchase process
What's unequivocally clear, however, is that pricing is too important to leave undefined or under-resourced. The companies that outperform in the SaaS space increasingly treat pricing as a strategic capability requiring dedicated ownership, cross-functional input, and continuous optimization.
For SaaS executives navigating this decision, the most critical step isn't choosing between product, marketing, sales, or finance ownership—it's ensuring pricing receives the strategic attention it deserves, with clear accountability and collaborative input from all stakeholders who influence or are affected by pricing decisions.