Cracking the code for effective Go to Market (GTM) collaboration is a universal pursuit. In our latest market research study, we explored the collaborative landscapes of the United States and Europe to learn what drives — and derails — GTM alignment across these key markets.
To no one’s surprise, our research shows that, while every GTM leader dreams of perfect alignment, the reality is often a messy combination of miscommunication and missed deadlines — no matter the geography. In the U.S., 85% of survey respondents said they experienced misalignment on a weekly or monthly basis; in Europe, it was 84%. (The European respondents were in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and the Netherlands.)
A deeper dive into the data, though, reveals regional differences in how GTM teams operate, align, and achieve their goals. Understanding these nuances isn’t just academic. It offers critical insights for global companies seeking to optimize their GTM strategies.
We conducted this research not just to explore how GTM teams function in isolation but also to uncover the often-overlooked regional dynamics that shape their success or failure. The key challenge we wanted to address is: If nearly everyone is misaligned, why, and how does geography play a part? And how can it be addressed?
With this line of thinking, here are five takeaways comparing Europe and U.S. GTM collaboration based on the survey data:
Head-to-Head: Notable differences in collaboration
To answer these questions, we analyzed where GTM teams in Europe and the U.S. converge — and where they diverge. The following five takeaways highlight key data points and insights that illustrate how regional context impacts collaboration frequency, quality, decision-making, and tool adoption. Each insight reveals opportunities for GTM leaders to drive more alignment by adapting their strategies to the specific realities of each market.
1. European respondents are more realistic about their GTM execution confidence, potentially due to more frequent collaboration
U.S. respondents expressed higher confidence in their teams’ GTM execution best practices compared to their counterparts across the Atlantic (87% were “extremely confident” or “very confident” compared to Europe’s 80%). This reality may stem from European teams collaborating more frequently with GTM colleagues (28% of European participants said they collaborate with their GTM colleagues daily vs. 23% in the U.S. 69% of Europeans collaborate on a weekly or monthly basis compared with 61% of U.S. respondents.). It’s important to note that in both markets, we were surprised by the stark disparity between confidence in their GTM processes and ongoing misalignment. We called this the “GTM Alignment gap.” This reflects one of the core findings of our research: perceived confidence doesn’t always equate to true alignment. Additionally, high frequency of collaboration doesn’t always guarantee its effectiveness.
2. Despite higher collaboration frequency, Europe experiences more frequent misalignment than the U.S.
Sounds like a paradox, right? But 11% of European respondents report daily misalignment between their GTM teams, compared to 6% in the U.S. This suggests that while European teams collaborate more often, the quality and effectiveness of that collaboration might be a challenge they face. For global GTM leaders, this highlights the importance of not just increasing collaboration touchpoints but making them purposeful from end to end.
3. In looking at the causes of GTM misalignment, U.S. respondents perceive “lack of strategy” and “unclear deadlines” as bigger causes of misalignment than Europe
40% of U.S. respondents cite “lack of a clear GTM strategy & goals” as a cause of misalignment, significantly higher than Europe’s 21%. Similarly, 23% of U.S. respondents point to “unclear deadlines & project priorities,” whereas only 9% of European respondents do. In Europe, “difficulty in clearly communicating between teams” was the biggest cause of misalignment, with 45% ticking this response. The data suggests that U.S. leaders need to ensure their teams have a crystal-clear understanding of the overall GTM strategy, its goals, and the specific deadlines and priorities for projects. The primary internal hurdle in Europe implies a need for better communication channels, protocols, and a focus on clarity of messaging. From this, it is key to note that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for the GTM misalignment gap, and leadership must remain laser-focused on addressing their teams’ specific challenges, regionally and culturally.
4. Collaboration drag is a bigger problem in Europe
More than half of European respondents (52%) cited the inefficiencies and slowdowns that occur when teams try to work together, compared to 44% of U.S. respondents. There were also gaps when looking at the biggest causes of collaboration issues. The No. 1 cause in Europe was “unclear decision-making authority” (58% v. 45% in the U.S.). The second-biggest challenge in Europe was “too much time getting buy-in from stakeholders (56% vs. 42%). These challenges in Europe likely can be traced to the continent’s more consensus-driven culture. Decision-making often involves more discussion and cooperation, which can lead to longer sales cycles but potentially stronger, more stable partnerships once established.
5. Europe relies more heavily on project management tools, but these aren’t necessarily solving their alignment issues
90% of European respondents use Asana, Jira, and other project management tools for cross-functional GTM collaboration, which is higher than the U.S. at 79%. Europeans also are bigger users of spreadsheets (72% vs. 57%). These tools weren’t purpose-built to fuel GTM collaboration and growth, cementing the fact that more tools don’t always mean alignment. Without the right processes and human coordination, more tech can further divide your team instead of bringing them together
European GTM teams: How to improve collaboration
No matter the market, the cost of misalignment is real. An overwhelming 89% of all respondents say breakdowns in GTM collaboration have direct revenue-related impacts, including slower time to market, ineffective customer messaging and positioning, weakened conversion rates, and inability to scale.
Our research also examined ways for GTM leaders and teams to bridge the GTM alignment gap. For strategies and tactics, please see our white paper, “The GTM Alignment Gap: Why Teams Fall Out of Sync and What to Do About It.”
The data also revealed how GTM teams in Europe can address their distinct challenges and improve their collaboration.
- Focus on the effectiveness of collaboration, not just frequency: The data suggests that simply increasing meetings or touchpoints isn’t enough. Efforts should be directed toward making collaborative sessions more productive, with clear agendas and actionable outcomes.
- Enhance collaboration around critical customer touchpoints: European respondents indicate a higher need for collaboration in areas like product demos (35% vs. 34% in U.S.) and particularly in alpha and beta testing programs (25% vs. 18% in U.S.) and renewal and upsell conversations (24% vs. 19% in U.S.). Focusing on improving these specific touchpoints could lead to better customer engagement and overall GTM effectiveness.
- Focus on leveraging Design Thinking methodologies: While 45% of U.S. respondents follow Design Thinking, only 31% of those in Europe do. The data suggest that European teams could further benefit from integrating Design Thinking, a mindset and approach to problem-solving that emphasizes understanding user needs. This set of methods is especially useful in complex, cross-functional contexts like GTM.
- Reevaluate the impact of project management tools: 93% of European respondents say having a centralized system to support cross-functional collaboration for GTM planning would be “very” or “extremely” impactful. This suggests a need for a platform that fosters genuine alignment rather than just task management.
Bringing a product successfully to market is a widespread challenge, yet our survey data reveals that the collaborative journey for GTM teams in the U.S. and Europe is distinctly different. Equipping global GTM leaders with these insights to move beyond surface-level fixes and toward targeted, sustainable alignment strategies is a crucial first step. Additionally, while misalignment is a nearly universal challenge, it is clear that its underlying causes differ significantly by region.
What became abundantly clear during our research is that in the U.S., breakdowns often stem from a lack of clear strategy, unclear ownership, or shifting priorities. In Europe, however, the friction is more frequently rooted in communication gaps, consensus-heavy decision-making, and collaboration drag despite higher interaction frequency. These differences reflect more than just organizational issues; they’re shaped by deeply embedded cultural and structural dynamics that influence how teams plan, execute, and scale their go-to-market efforts.
The major takeaway: solving GTM misalignment requires more than a single playbook. It requires a nuanced understanding of how collaboration, decision-making, and communications function within specific regional contexts. By recognizing and addressing these unique drivers, companies can build the kind of agile, high-performing global GTM teams needed to win across markets.
To dive deep into the GTM Alignment Gap, read the full report here.
%20(1).webp)
.jpg)
