Insights — PartnerImpact ======================== Source: https://www.partnerimpact.net/insights Text version: https://www.partnerimpact.net/text/insights.txt Site: PartnerImpact — B2B SaaS partnerships advisory by Bart Dirksen Field notes on partner program design, co-sell, tiering, attribution, and the operating model behind partnerships that compound. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ # Insights Essays, build guides, and field notes on partner program design, co-sell, tiering, attribution, and the operating model behind partnerships that compound. - The partner base is about to split in two — AI is automating the routine middle of partner services. Sort your partner base into the tiers that will matter in 18 months, before the split forces you to. - A co-sell SPIFF is a bet on behavior, not a reward for revenue — Most co-sell SPIFFs are built like recognition programs and then miss the target. Design yours as a bet on one specific seller behavior instead. - Co-sell that actually closes — Co-sell stalls when partnerships and sales run different playbooks. Fix the handoff spec, the compensation, and the weekly cadence. - Why multi-agent deals break partner attribution — Deals now route through multiple partners and AI agents at once, and sourced/influenced attribution breaks. The fix is governance, not another tool. - Most programs enable partners too early — Programs lose partners in the gap between recruit and first deal. Sequence the heavy enablement after early momentum, not before it. - Building partner attribution in HubSpot — HubSpot has no partner attribution module. Here is how to assemble one from deal properties, UTM tracking, workflows, and reporting, plus the multi-partner and rep-level models, and where the native setup gives out. - An ecosystem is shaped by who leaves — Every partner program tracks who joins. Almost none decide who should leave. Exit criteria are what keep an ecosystem from carrying dead weight. - Partner metrics, mapped to the whole journey — Most partner programs measure the partnership with one lagging number. This interactive map lays out the volume, conversion, and time metrics underneath it. - Your partner org chart is not an operating model — Reorganising the partner team rarely fixes execution. The org chart moves, the operating model does not. Change the operating model instead. - Work backwards from the number: a partner pipeline planner — Most partner targets are set forward from last year. Set them backwards from the number instead: the deals, opportunities, and partner-sourced pipeline a revenue goal actually requires. - A partner program is a system, not a channel — The whole partner function on one page: seven domains on an AI foundation, and why having every part does not mean the system works. - Your partner program is rewarding the wrong things — Tier thresholds and certifications made sense when partners sold and installed software. Buyers now buy outcomes and most programs have not caught up. - The partner program ROI most teams never run — Partner teams report gross revenue and pipeline, but rarely put the cost of the function and the margin of the deals on the same slide. Run the number that makes the program believable. - A partner score without a recommendations layer is a report card — A partner score without a recommendations layer is a report card. Turn the number into the two or three actions that move a partner up a tier. - When a partnership stalls, suspect structure before people — When a partnership stalls, the first instinct is to blame the people. The cause is almost always structural. Here is how to tell the two apart. - Points-based scoring that's still a revenue scoreboard — Most points-based partner scores are revenue scoreboards in disguise. Weights collapse onto one axis and partner behaviour never actually changes. - The partner portal went live. Nobody came. — The partner portal goes live and nobody comes. Programs get built inside out. Design the partner value proposition before the internal machinery. - Promote monthly, demote semi-annually — Promote monthly, demote every six months. That asymmetric cadence is deliberate behavioural design, and it is why tier models actually drive activity. - Why partner programs stall between year one and year three — Partner programs stall between year one and three not because of partners but because the operating model was never built. Here is what tends to be missing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Navigation: - Home: https://www.partnerimpact.net/ - Insights: https://www.partnerimpact.net/insights - Partner Program Maturity Assessment: https://www.partnerimpact.net/partner-maturity-assessment - Finding Traction in Partnerships (book): https://www.partnerimpact.net/book - Free book sample: https://www.partnerimpact.net/book/sample - Contact: https://www.partnerimpact.net/#contact - Privacy policy: https://www.partnerimpact.net/privacy All plain-text pages: https://www.partnerimpact.net/text/ Contact: partnerimpact@outlook.com © PartnerImpact — Kweldam 1, 6678DK Oosterhout, NL — VAT NL005331357B74