How to Manage a Services Channel Partner Who Could Rebuild Your Product

Model the economics that would lead a large implementation partner to build what you built, then manage the relationship with visible consequence and demonstrated arithmetic rather than with goodwill and a clause.

Maintained in the open at github.com/Golden-Section-Tx/playbook · CC BY-SA 4.0

PlayersFounder, Exec Team
Initial Effort8 SP
Ongoing5 SP
FrequencyQuarterly
StageGrowth

A vendor was told they had won a large account. They had gone through every hoop with their implementation partner leading the process. Then it evaporated, and nobody at the partner would explain why. Some months later a senior partner at that same firm, which had already committed in writing not to build a competing product, floated the idea that perhaps they should pay a royalty to copy the system.

That is economics rather than character. Large consultancies run their build practices offshore. For a partner sitting on a major account, standing up something shaped like your product is a multi-million-dollar engagement he has to consciously walk past. Goodwill can't carry that relationship. And no clause in a partner agreement survives it either.

What does survive it is arithmetic the partner can see, plus a consequence he has already watched you impose.

The goal: A written partner economics model, reviewed quarterly, that says what the partner earns by reselling you and what he earns by replacing you.

Background

The partner is not one actor. Three groups inside the firm want different things, and you are managing all three at once.

  1. The account partner. Paid on the size of the engagement he sells into his account, and structurally indifferent to whose software sits underneath it.
  2. The build practice. Usually offshore, measured on utilization, and always looking for the next platform to construct.
  3. The firm. Wants durable revenue in the account and hates losing a competitive process, which is the only one of the three whose interest points the same way yours does.

Steps

  1. Model the partner's economics rather than his intentions. What does building your product once earn him? What does reselling yours earn him per year, across every account you are both in? If you cannot answer both numbers you cannot manage the relationship.
  2. Take the sale. You lead the process and they deliver services. No situational hand-offs, and no partner-led processes where you are briefed at the end.
  3. Never let the partner set your price to the customer. A partner quoting three hundred thousand in services next to your four hundred thousand in software has lost you a build-versus-buy fight he did not have to win.
  4. Keep at least one flagship account the partner is not in. It is your proof that you do not need them, and it is the only thing that makes exclusion credible.
  5. Make the consequence visible when it comes. One founder cut a misbehaving partner out of his flagship account entirely and told them why. It cost some ripples, because the account mattered to them. And it worked, because it was specific and other partners heard about it.
  6. Show them the number they win by behaving. For example, a mid-size customer was a fifty-thousand-dollar software deal, small enough that the partner barely noticed the attached services. The vendor stayed in the account as the connective tissue between divisions, and the partner has since sold that customer a million-dollar program-reset project that would not otherwise exist.
  7. Teach them to sell the upgrade on its merits. Some customers genuinely need a five-million-dollar custom solution, those are not your deals, and pretending otherwise costs you the partner.
  8. Review the model quarterly with your exec team. Look at partner-sourced revenue and partner-influenced losses together, and follow-on partner services per dollar of your own ARR, and the count of flagship accounts they are not in. Reading only the first number is how a founder discovers the problem two deals late.

Troubleshooting

A deal I was told I had won died and the partner will not explain why. You have your answer. Act on it.

The partner has asked to renegotiate into a royalty. He has already priced the alternative. Take the conversation seriously and take the warning seriously.

I only have one partner and cannot afford to lose them. Then you do not have a partner strategy, you have a dependency. Run Channel Partnerships first and come back to this play when there is a second name.

Mistakes this play prevents: #55 #81 #92 #166

Questions this play answers

What do I do when my implementation partner starts building a competing product?

A vendor was told they had won a large account. They had gone through every hoop with their implementation partner leading the process. Then it evaporated, and nobody at the partner would explain why.

How do I keep a consultancy from pricing me out of my own deal?

Model the economics that would lead a large implementation partner to build what you built, then manage the relationship with visible consequence and demonstrated arithmetic rather than with goodwill and a clause.

Should I ever cut a partner out of an account?

A vendor was told they had won a large account. They had gone through every hoop with their implementation partner leading the process. Then it evaporated, and nobody at the partner would explain why.