Especially for early-stage SaaS that are still doing their own marketing or designing for product led growth, the Salesforce is often put on the back burner. While it shouldn’t be put on the back burner for too long, it makes sense.
But what if you could find other customers through allies — in this case, other SaaS founders who don’t compete directly with you?
In this post, I’ll talk about the idea and why it’s effective, but then talk about why it’s so difficult to typically do.
Then I offer a way to actually do so without changing much of anything.
- Why having a salesforce is typically good
- Why a Salesforce is not a good idea for most SaaS till they hit the right price point and scale
- A story the revealed the potential of an “ally”
- What makes for a good “ally” versus an ”affiliate”?
- How big enterprise companies traditionally do this (and why it’s not a good option for most SaaS companies)?
- The elements of building a great Allyforce for emerging SaaS
Why having a Salesforce is typically good
Many anticipated the death of the salesman with the rise of the Internet. It’s not proven to be true.
The Internet was to make sales totally frictionless.
Because the prospect is able to get all the information they want without talking to anybody through the browser, they didn’t need salespeople.
They would just hit the “buy” button and be done with it.
This ended up being only “partially” true.
What the Internet did was enable an entire category of products and services that don’t need a salesperson.
Retail grew, eliminating the need for the retail salesperson in so many industries for most purchases (not all, but most).
Product Led Growth / Self Service web products grew, without the need of a sales persont to talk to on the phone about buying a $25/month subscription.
Even for traditional ”big ticket” items for software sold to the enterprise, the Internet did not eliminate the salesforce. It changed the required skill sets.
Order taking and providing feeds and speeds was replaced by the Internet.
However, complex consultative insights became more in demand and valued by prospects.
However, those ”complex sales” needed actual meetings scheduled with the right people.
The rise of the SDR filled this gap.
SDRs were focused on appointment-setting and qualification to ensure getting to the right buyer who, more often than not, was not casually browsing a website.
So the benefit of the SDR as part of the Salesforce became targeting communication and qualification of prospects.
If you can win in the ad space, Google ads can sort of get at it (intent from searching reveals a level of qualification).
Arguably, a user’s online behavior (returns, email opens, downloads) can indicate some kind of a “score” as marketing qualified. The SDR can then dig a little deeper into the nature of the problem, decision-making ability, that sort of thing.
So the quality of the data both to target and to qualify is a huge value of the SDR.
And then navigating multi-actor decision-making the value of the salesperson.
Why a Salesforce is not the right option for a SaaS business based on their business
As you can see from the above, the complexity and size of the deal correlates to the value of having a Salesforce.
When the deal size and complexity goes up, a Salesforce is good, even required.
If the deal size and buying complexity is low, the Internet and self-service is better.
Although this framework could result in SaaS building a Salesforce too late, it’s a good way to not start too early.
The question, however, is whether some of those benefits of a Salesforce can be captured before hiring one.
How “big tech companies” do this (and why it’s so hard)
At a big tech company, I saw the way enterprise software companies apply this “Allyforce” concept.
My takeaway was that, while it could be effective, it was also very complex and cumbersome.
However, that seed of an idea made me ask, “Could this be done more easily for the smaller SaaS business?”
Here’s how it worked:
BigCo A would identify a (typically) comparably sized “ally” BigCo B. The criteria would often be:
- BigCo A and BigCo B technology “play well” together (lots of variations on this, but basically, don’t compete and delivery complementary value)
- Buyers are the same for BigCo A and BigCo B
However, executing these relationships was often difficult. Even if they were good “allies,” at the end of the day, these relationships would need some way for the sales reps of BigCo A to be able to target the customers of BigCo B and vice-versa.
While they could do so directly, as you can imagine, it took a lot of trust, 1:1 coordination and relationship building.
The more scalable and programmatic way to do this?
”Meet in the channel.”
What does that mean?
It meant that Channel C was empowered to sell the solutions of both BigCo A and BigCo B. They would earn the “margin” and were given a reseller’s price by each of the two BigCos.
BigCo A and B would then provide Channel C lists of relevant customers.
Channel C would then cross-sell (directly or by hosting joint webinars).
Allies needed a trusted third-party to work.
As you can tell from this simplified description, it is a pain for most SaaS businesses to develop.
But there are some insights into the benefits, the “why,” which might still be achievable by performing a different “how.”
Why did “allies” work and how can this benefit you?
Unlike downloading a white-paper or even talking to an SDR, the targets identified through these complex “allyforce” relationships were better in many ways.
Remember: the targets were customer lists (or lost customer lists, as well) from each of the respective BigCo’s.
The one who purchased a solution from BigCo A was very often (except for extremely, extremely large companies) the same buyer for BigCo B.
The ability to make a purchase decision was proven by behavior.
The presence and priority of certain problems was proven by the purchase decision.
These two things are often the jewels that a good SDR tries to surface, and even then, can be very hard to do.
This is often why SaaS businesses will buy “lists” of companies that have purchased certain technologies.
Can you still miss hidden opportunities? Of course.
But Channel C is motivated to sell both products. They don’t care.
But that foothold into the customer because they are aware of (and often can service) an original purchase gives them access and credibility.
These are complex relationships that can be maddening to manage.
But companies that do so well can grow very big, very fast, in the enterprise world.
Question is: how can these principles work for the smaller, bootstrapped or early-stage SaaS company?
How can SaaS businesses build an Allyforce?
As you can tell, these complex partnerships are way too cumbersome for most businesses.
But the benefits can help any SaaS business scale. These same to be the requirements:
- Targeting the right buyers of complementary products
- Trusted party is custodian of the customer data
- Same trusted party is motivated to sell both products
In the beginning, no SaaS company is going to hand over their existing customers.
Without a willingness to do this, no Allyforce is possible. Even the BigCos know this.
But their customer list is just as, perhaps more valuable, than the ones for smaller business. So it is possible.
It takes a mind shift on the part of the SaaS Founder to make this happen.
But, before this, as customers become more savvy and intelligent, they can opt-in to share their information.
Customers have become more willing to write reviews (for an incentive) on public websites.
They would likely be willing to share their current tech stack in exchange for future benefits.
This combination of willing customers and SaaS founders with the “allyship” mindset can create a small, vibrant ecosystem.
This is still a hard concept both to fully grasp and, more importantly, to execute.
But by thinking “Allyforce” versus a “Salesforce” — SaaS founders can begin to see their customer acquisition approach in a new way.