I wasn’t surprised when I saw the 2024 SMPS compensation data.

AEC marketing coordinators earn $69,680, about $10,000 more than their SaaS counterparts, who earn $59,027. That seems like good news until you look at what happens as marketers gain experience and strategic responsibility.

Marketing managers in AEC earn $91,100, compared with $94,785 in SaaS. The gap is small but growing.

Directors? $117,000 in AEC versus $150,607 in SaaS. We’re now discussing a $33,000 difference.

And CMOs? AEC firms pay $150,000 while SaaS companies pay an average of $229,691. That’s an $80,000 gap at the top!

The Inversion Tells the Real Story

This isn’t just about money. It’s about what AEC firms value.

We pay more for entry-level coordinators because the industry has massive churn. Proposals are relentless. People burn out. We need bodies to keep the machine running.

But as marketers develop strategic capabilities, such as the ability to define positioning, conduct market research, identify ideal client profiles, and shape brand voice, we stop valuing them. The compensation curve flattens exactly where strategic thinking becomes critical.

I see this pattern everywhere. AEC firms ask admins to organize proposals, order swag, post on social media, manage web developers, and create brochures. We’ve convinced ourselves this is marketing.

The strategic work never even makes it onto the radar.

What SaaS Companies Understand That We Don’t

SaaS marketing has tangible revenue metrics: lead generation, conversion rates, customer acquisition costs, churn reduction, and multiple upselling pathways.

The connection between marketing investment and revenue growth is direct and measurable.

AEC firms operate differently. We’re project-based and relationship-dependent. The bar for marketing sophistication is lower because average marketing can make you a market leader in many geographic areas or industry niches.

Most AEC firms target 5% year-over-year growth. That’s essentially keeping pace with inflation. Meanwhile, SaaS companies expect 200% revenue increases unless they’re already established market leaders.

When your growth expectations are modest, why invest in strategic marketing leadership?

The Hidden Costs of Underinvestment

Here’s what firms miss: stagnant growth creates a talent exodus.

According to industry research, architecture has one of the highest turnover rates among professions. Some companies see 30% or more of their staff leave each year. Nearly half of engineers point to career growth opportunities as the single most important benefit their company can provide.

When you’re not growing, employees don’t have advancement opportunities. They leave, making growth even harder.

I regularly see construction companies stuck in this cycle. They can’t figure out why they’re stagnating. What worked 10 years ago no longer works, yet they keep doing it.

The cost shows up in M&A valuations, too. AEC companies without growth trajectories struggle to attract buyers or command worthwhile valuations.

The Buyer Behavior Shift We’re Ignoring

Ten years ago, doing good work and having a solid reputation were enough. Social media was in its infancy. B2B buyers relied on referrals to hire professional services.

Now they’re looking for expertise. Since 2020, companies have been open to sourcing expertise outside their local markets.

The shift is from “who do I know” to “who has the expertise I need.”

But if you’re compensating marketers like they’re proposal coordinators, how are you supposed to demonstrate expertise to buyers searching beyond referrals?

Marketing has become more complex, with content creation, thought leadership, longer buying cycles, and more decision-makers involved in each purchase.

We need strategic leadership to address these challenges. Instead, we’re paying for tactical execution.

The Skill Gap Nobody Talks About

Supply and demand drive salaries. Entry-level positions pay more in AEC because we have high churn and need constant replacement.

But here’s the problem: AEC will struggle to find qualified senior marketers even if firms decide to pay more.

Many AEC marketing directors can create winning proposals and excel at tactical execution. But they don’t understand the business impact of marketing. They can’t lead revenue generation efforts.

A marketing director can translate specific revenue goals into a marketing strategy. A CMO drives the revenue discussion, determines where that revenue will likely be derived, and then creates the strategy.

I saw this difference clearly with a client who had a big out-of-state opportunity. The end client didn’t want to pay $1 million in mobilization fees. The sales leader asked the marketing director for a plan to identify local clients to help offset the mobilization costs.

When the sales leader told me about the challenge, I asked different questions: – • How much would it cost to open an office in that area?
• What’s the breakeven point with this project?
• How big is the service area for a new office?

The sales leader went from asking leadership to waive the $1 million mobilization fee to recommending that they open a new office. That project alone would allow them to break even without any additional work.

That’s the difference between tactical thinking and strategic leadership.

The Wake-Up Calls That Force Change

Most firms don’t recognize this gap until a crisis hits.

A key employee leaves because they’re tired of being stagnant. A generational change in leadership brings new perspectives. M&A activity fails because the firm lacks a growth trajectory or strategic positioning.

These moments force firms to connect the dots between underinvesting in marketing leadership and their strategic limitations.

Your opportunity for growth is massive. But firms stuck in the proposal-coordinator mindset will watch that growth happen somewhere else.

What This Means for the Future

Will this compensation gap self-correct?

AEC will improve. The need for strategic marketing leadership is becoming too obvious to ignore. But I doubt we’ll ever catch up with SaaS, given the extraordinarily high demand for experienced SaaS marketing talent.

The industry will likely split. Firms that recognize marketing as strategic revenue architecture will invest accordingly. They’ll attract better talent, grow faster, and command premium positioning.

Companies that continue to view marketing as proposal support will struggle to compete as buyer behavior continues to evolve.

For smaller and mid-sized AEC firms, fractional CMOs offer a practical solution. You get strategic leadership without the full-time executive salary. You access someone who understands where your company makes money, what’s preventing growth, and how to create new profitable service lines.

The $80,000 compensation gap isn’t just about salary. It’s a window into how our industry thinks about growth, strategy, and the future of business development.

The question is whether your company will recognize that before the next crisis forces the conversation.