The pattern I keep seeing
A founder shows me their tech stack. There is a CRM nobody trusts, an email platform being used as an address book, a loyalty programme (sometimes a capable platform like Leat) that has never sent a single reward, and an analytics tool that was set up once and never checked. The monthly invoices are paid without question. The usage is close to zero.
The business is not short of tools. It is short of someone senior enough to decide what the tools are for, and then to make them work.
A dormant platform is not a sunk cost. It is an active cost. And every month it stays dormant is money leaving the business for no return.
Why it happens
This is rarely about laziness. It is about how the tools were bought in the first place.
They were bought reactively. Someone had a problem, a demo solved it in twenty minutes, a contract was signed. Nobody asked who would own it, how it would integrate, or what behaviour change was needed to make it land.
They were bought for the future. The business imagined a version of itself that had the time, the team and the processes to use the platform. That version never arrived. The software did.
They were bought without a workflow. Software only works when it sits inside a process people actually follow. Drop a CRM into a team with no sales rhythm and it becomes a data graveyard. Drop a loyalty platform into a business with no customer communications plan and it becomes a dashboard nobody opens.
What switching things on actually looks like
The work I often do with clients does not start with buying anything new. It starts with an audit of what they already own. We list every platform, every licence, every monthly cost. Then we ask three questions against each one.
Three questions to run against every platform you pay for
What commercial outcome is this meant to support?
Not what the software does, but what it is supposed to move in the business. Retention. Leads. Average order value. Customer satisfaction. If you cannot name the outcome, you cannot measure whether it is working.
Who owns it, and what are they accountable for?
Not "the marketing team" or "operations". A named person, with a clear remit, and the authority to make decisions. Shared ownership is almost always no ownership.
What does good use look like this quarter?
A short, specific definition of what you expect to see if the platform is working. Volumes, behaviours, conversions, whatever is relevant. Without this, you cannot tell the difference between active use and expensive wallpaper.
Most of the time, two or three platforms survive that test with strong answers. The rest either get switched on properly, consolidated into something simpler, or cancelled. All three outcomes save money.
The commercial upside
Activating a platform the business already owns is usually the cheapest growth move available. There is no purchase decision, no procurement cycle, no internal campaign to justify new spend. The cost is already in the P&L. The only thing standing between the business and the benefit is the work of setting it up properly.
A loyalty programme that actually runs can lift repeat purchase rates across a full customer base. A CRM that reflects real segmentation can make sales conversations shorter and conversion rates higher. An email platform tied to behaviour can generate pipeline at a fraction of the cost of paid media. None of this requires new tools. It requires decisions, ownership and a bit of patience.
Where a fractional CMO fits
This is exactly the kind of work a good fractional CMO should be doing, and often is not. It is less visible than a big launch or a rebrand. It is not exciting. It is, however, commercially significant, quick to show results and a strong signal that marketing is actually joined up with operations.
It is also where the Stancia partnership with Catalyst12 earns its keep. Marketing leadership on the Stancia side makes sure the platforms are pointed at the right audience and outcome. Operational and commercial leadership on the Catalyst12 side makes sure the workflow, accountability and reporting actually hold. Between the two, dormant platforms get switched on and stay on.
Where to start
If you suspect your business has more software than workflow, the first step is simple. Pull the list of every platform you pay for. Put the monthly cost next to each one. Then write, honestly, what each one delivered in the last ninety days.
If the honest answer against most of them is "not much", you are not looking at a technology problem. You are looking at a leadership gap. And you do not need more budget to close it. You need someone senior to do the work of making what you already own earn its place.