Your board does not understand marketing. That is not a criticism of your board. It is a structural observation about how commercial governance works at the scale you are operating at.
The board understands revenue, margin, churn, CAC, LTV. They understand those numbers as outputs. What they do not understand, and cannot be expected to understand without significant investment of time you do not have in that meeting, is the commercial system that produces those outputs and the specific structural reasons why that system is producing them at the rate it currently is rather than the rate it should be.
So the board conversation about marketing is conducted in the language of outcomes rather than causes. The number went up or down. The explanation is channel-level or market-level. The decision that follows is budget-level. And the structural cause of the outcome, the thing that would actually change the number durably rather than temporarily, never quite makes it into the room in a form the board can govern from.
The CMO who can change that conversation is the one with an externally verified, structurally honest read of what the system is actually doing. That read is the thing that turns a performance conversation into a governance one.
Related reading