Feature Story
I've helped build exec sponsor programs at more than one company. And every single time, without fail, the same conversation happened in the design phase.
Someone would ask what the level of commitment would be, but no one ever asked, "What's the objective of this program?" So most teams would focus on how many touchpoints sponsors should have per quarter. We'd debate it and land on two or three, maybe four if we were feeling ambitious. We'd write it down, build it into the program, roll it out, and call it done. Seriously, once it was scoped it was defined.
And every single time, I knew something was off. I just couldn't fully name it yet. Over time I realized we were missing the "why," and this gap would cost us.
At one company, I decided to test it. We built out an exec sponsor program and I pulled in leaders from across the organization to own accounts alongside me. I kept a set of accounts for myself and distributed the rest. On paper, everyone had the same program responsibilities. We'd attend the kickoff, support the QBR or EBR, and make ourselves available as part of the same escalation protocols. The structure was identical.
But a few months in, the data started telling a different story. The engagement and response rates on my accounts were noticeably stronger than the accounts owned by the other sponsors, and we couldn't figure out why, so we started digging in.
What I found wasn't that the other leaders were slacking. In fact, they were doing exactly what we asked. They attended the kickoffs and business reviews, strategized with the CSMs when asked, and served as the exec voice in serious escalations. By every measure on the program checklist, they were doing their part.
But that was it. They did what was on the list and nothing more.
My accounts looked different because I treated the program requirements as the floor, not the ceiling. I was checking in between the scheduled touchpoints because I genuinely wanted to know how things were going. I was flagging adoption trends I noticed before they became problems. I was celebrating milestones with customers, not because it was on a task list, but because I actually cared that they hit them. I was holding both sides accountable, making sure my team was delivering and making sure the customer was doing their part too. I was paying attention in the unscripted moments.
The other sponsors weren't bad leaders. They were doing what the program asked them to do. But to our customers, this felt like a transactional relationship. It felt required, obligatory, like someone told them they had to be there. Customers know the difference between someone who is assigned to them and someone who actually gives a damn about their success.
That was the moment I finally understood what had been nagging at me every time we had the "how many touchpoints per quarter" conversation. When you define an exec sponsor program only by its required activities, you accidentally tell people exactly how little they need to do. The list becomes the maximum, not the minimum, and the relationship suffers because of that.
The trust I built with my accounts wasn't built in the QBRs, it was built in the moments that weren't on anyone's calendar, or as I refer to it, the inbetween. A call when I spotted something in their usage data and wanted to understand it before it became a problem or a quick note when their champion got promoted. A conversation I initiated just because I hadn't heard from them in a while and wanted to check in. None of that was in the program plan, yet all of it was what made it actually work.
The Takeaway: A defined cadence tells your customers you're organized, but what you do between the calendar invites tells them whether you actually care. Build your program around the outcome, customer success, not the activity. Then let leaders who genuinely own that outcome show what that looks like beyond the list, and track it.
THE FIELD REALITY
If you're a CS leader building or rebuilding an exec sponsor program, here's where I see it break down most often, and what to do about it.
The first problem is that most programs are designed to exist, not to work. Someone wanted to be able to say "we have executive sponsorship in place" during a renewal conversation, and the program was designed just far enough to make that statement true. If you never defined the objective, if no one on your team can answer the question "what does success look like for this program?", that's where you start.
The second problem is that sponsors get assigned without being enabled. A leader from another department gets pulled in with no account context, no brief, no guidance on what good actually looks like in practice. And then we're surprised when their engagement feels surface-level. This one is partly on us as CS leaders. If we want our exec sponsors to show up well, we have to make it easy for them. That means a tight prep brief before every customer touchpoint, a clear ask, and a fast debrief after. Give them what they need to be good partners and most of them will rise to it.
The third problem is the one I lived through directly. Engagement gets measured by activity instead of impact. The number of meetings logged tells you nothing about whether trust is being built, whether the customer feels like someone at your company actually owns their outcome, or whether your sponsor would be the first call a customer makes when something goes sideways. If the honest answer to that last question is "whoever is assigned in the system," you don't have a sponsor program. You have an org chart.
And for CSMs reading this: you have more influence over your exec sponsors than you think. Here is where you can help, brief them well, give them the context they need, and tell them specifically what you need from them in each conversation. When you make it easy for an exec sponsor to add value, you make it much harder for them to just go through the motions.
THE RESOURCE
The Exec Sponsor Prep Brief
The single most practical thing you can do to close the gap between an assigned sponsor and an effective one is to stop assuming they know what to do when they walk into a customer conversation.
Before every touchpoint, your CSM should be building a short brief that covers the account health, the current relationship map, what you need the sponsor to accomplish in this specific conversation, any sensitivities or open issues to be aware of, and who owns follow-up afterward. It doesn't need to be long. It needs to be useful and it needs to be required.
This is what separates a sponsor who walks in cold and asks "so, how is everything going?" from one who walks in knowing exactly where to add value. It also gives CSMs a natural forcing function to stay close to the account and think critically about what executive involvement actually needs to accomplish.
This is a great use case for AI. With the right context and data you can automatically create a brief that provides them with the information they need to be as impactful as possible.
FROM MY WORLD
Quick updates … Events, podcasts, awards, news, etc.
EPS #8: Survive or Thrive: The Real Cost of Lazy CSM Onboarding
Most companies spend months recruiting top CS talent then then hand them a laptop, a Salesforce login and wish them the best.
The Hotel Management Aspirant turned Founder of Running Mate ft. DenaLewis
Dena Lewis discusses career pivots, entrepreneurship, resilience, and the personal story behind Running Mate, an on-demand app that matches runners with verified companions for safer runs.
Planhat Open: May 17-20, 2026, Malibu, California
Excited to be joining leaders from across the industry at Planhat Open this year. Looking forward to the conversations ahead.
ATLCS SUMMIT
I’m the Keynote Speaker at the ATLCS Summit: April 23rd
Summit is the premier gathering for CS thought-leadership in the Southeast. An interactive, one-day event built for customer practitioners and leaders.
NEW CUSTOMER SUCCESS COURSE
The CS Architect Workshop is closing in 2 weeks and we only have a few spots left.
If you're building a CS program for the first time or finally ready to stop patching the one you have, this is for you.
Over 10 weeks, in a small cohort setting, we build together. Not theory. Not slides you'll never open again. Actual frameworks, real feedback, and a program you walk away with.
Here's what we cover:
How to create customer segments that actually matter (not just sorted by ARR)
How to design an intentional, outside-in customer journey instead of one built around your internal convenience
How to define what a healthy customer looks like in YOUR business, not someone else's benchmark
And so much more
You'll leave with a playbook, a clearer strategy, and the confidence to lead it.
10 weeks. Small cohort. I teach and build alongside you.
Investment: $4,000
We close in 2 weeks and seats are almost gone. If you've been waiting for the right time, this is it.
👉 Grab your spot here
POLL
When it comes to exec sponsor programs at your company, which best describes where you are right now?
A FINAL NOTE
CLOSING WITH KRISTI
Executive sponsorship done right is one of the hardest things to build in CS, not because the concept is complicated, but because it requires leaders who treat accountability as something they actually own rather than something they perform.
The program gives you the structure, but what you do in the in between gives it meaning. And your customers will always know which one they're getting.
If this resonated, send it to someone who's building or rethinking a program right now. And if you want to dig deeper into exec visibility and customer relationships, reply to this email and let’s discuss.
See you next week,
Customer Success. Revenue Follows.