All articles
Growth Hires Thrive When Leaders Protect Experimentation Over Perfect Measurement
Nick Malekos, Head of Demand Gen & Growth at Cyberbit, explains why growth roles fail when hired as rescuers, urging leaders to trade rigid attribution for an experimentation-first mindset.

Key Points
Companies often view growth marketers as a magic wand to fix structural business failures, demanding perfect attribution that paralyzes execution.
Nick Malekos, Head of Demand Gen & Growth at Cyberbit, argues that hiring a growth lead to reverse declining revenue is a systemic error. Growth is designed to amplify existing momentum, not compensate for broken fundamentals.
In his view, successful scaling requires a solid foundation of product, team, and systems, along with psychological and financial room for multi-channel experimentation.
If you have to spend 90% of your time defending your role and your results, you spend only 10% doing. In a growth role, you need to be spending 90% of your time doing.
Too many companies hire for growth when what they actually need is a rescue. Declining revenue, distracted founders, and broken fundamentals don't become scaling opportunities just because someone adds "growth" to the job title, and the distinction can make the difference between a career-building opportunity and a professional trap. The operators who recognize this mismatch before they walk in the door save themselves from roles designed to fail.
Nick Malekos knows exactly how to spot a mislabeled growth role because he knows what real scaling looks like. As the first marketing hire at LearnWorlds, he helped scale the company from $100K to $1M ARR in 18 months. Now, he's the Head of Demand Generation & Growth at Cyberbit, runs the Marketing Experts Hub, authors multiple newsletters, and mentors on GrowthMentor. He points out that many companies still misunderstand what a growth role can realistically do and what conditions it needs to succeed.
"If you have to spend 90% of your time defending your role and your results, you spend only 10% doing. In a growth role, you need to be spending 90% of your time doing," he says. He posits that the difference often becomes visible in the interview process. One focuses on the mechanics of scaling, while the other focuses on the desperation of saving.
Growth can't fix what's already broken: Malekos draws a hard line between roles where conditions support growth and roles where a single hire is expected to compensate for systemic problems. "It's not that it cannot be reversed, but it's more difficult. If you start the conversation with declining revenue and declining budgets and you're expected to do everything, you're going into a bad situation and being asked to fix it. That's different from walking into a real opportunity."
No magic wands: He's watched the pattern play out for colleagues, describing how he watched a friend accept a growth role at a company shortly after interviewing there. "I knew it was going to be a very difficult time because she was expected to do magic. After a year, she left because of the pressure," he shares. "A growth role might sound like someone who can come in with a magic wand, but in reality, the product, the team, the collaboration, the energy, and the market conditions all play a role."
When conditions are right, Malekos says the clearest signal is a founder or CEO who understands that marketing operates in uncertainty and doesn't demand that every touchpoint be measured with precision. "In B2B enterprise, it's multi-touch. You cannot say 'These ads brought us the client.' It's the brand work, the foot on the ground at an event, a personal touch, an influencer article. Then the prospect finds you organically and requests a demo. If a founder can understand that and allow people to experiment, it's going to work." This is in sharp contrast to leadership that demands perfect attribution across every channel while giving no room for experimentation. "If you see a role where someone is demanding every touchpoint to be measurable, that's a red flag. If you see someone willing to give time, budget, and experimentation, even if that's 20 or 30% of the work, that's a green flag. This is where growth does its best," he explains.
Quick wins build political capital: When Malekos joins a company with real growth potential, his first priority in the initial weeks is identifying overlooked opportunities that can produce immediate, visible results. The reason is practical. Quick wins build internal credibility, which creates the political capital needed to pursue larger, longer-term experiments. "My favorite story is joining a startup that had a thousand people on their email list. After a year of demoing, they'd never communicated that they had new features. With the first email we sent, ten past clients came back interested. Five of them were qualified leads. Just one email activated their database."
Owned audiences show their worth: He's seen similar stories play out across multiple companies, including at Cyberbit. "If you own the data and you own your audience, it's the best way to activate them. It doesn't have to be email. It could be remarketing, posting on LinkedIn, SMS, phone calls. Everything works, but it has to be direct."
Thoughts from the top: He also sees founder-led content as an increasingly powerful channel, especially as AI saturates traditional marketing formats. "Remarketing ads with the CEO speaking on video or just a post from the CEO works much better than any kind of ads," he says. "With soo much AI, people are longing for the personal touch."
The role of growth operator has evolved, but Malekos argues the core requirement is still the ability to operate productively in uncertainty. LinkedIn, which was the strongest B2B platform for the past three years, is getting noisier. AI-generated content floods every surface. No one can point to a single channel and call it the future. "A growth person has to be open-minded and willing to go into uncertainty. For each company, you have to find what works, and it's different every time." For companies hiring these roles, he warns against looking for a generalist savior. Instead, he says, look for someone close to your industry who is a fast learner and skilled at navigating ambiguity. Give them budget, team support, developer resources, and perhaps most importantly, time to experiment. "The market is changing. The demands are getting higher. When we think about what's working right now, we definitely need new experiments. The more you can experiment, the higher the probability that something will take off."






.webp)