Article
Ranking and Prioritizing Channel Partners: To Tier or Not ...
forrester.com
Quoted on this wiki
Every place a page here uses this source, in the order the words come in it.
Results in missed opportunities. Over the years, programs have expanded to include tiering criteria such as certifications and customer satisfaction. Revenue attainment is still the primary criterion, however, for moving up to a higher tier in most partner programs. There are several concerns with this criterion. For one, it is difficult for smaller partners, or partners in small markets, to reach the highest partner level — even if they are doing all the right things to drive customer and supplier success. Also, by exclusively prioritizing the top performers, it is easy to overlook emerging superstars. Finally, revenue is a lagging indicator. It tells you what a partner did in the past — not what they are capable of doing in the future. “A growing priority is expanding beyond resellers working independently to partner ecosystems: a network of diverse types of partners — some transacting and some nontransacting — working together to help customers achieve their business outcomes.” Provides no end-customer value. Historically, suppliers implemented tiering to also provide partners with endorsement and differentiation in the marketplace. Customers do not select a partner based on how much they sell or because of their label, however. Based on the results of Forrester’s Buyers’ Journey Survey, they are more interested in their expertise, reputation, and experience.
Actionable intelligence. Insight is provided on the level of engagement and type of investment that is appropriate for each of the nine partner categories. For example, avoid allocating resources to the partners in box 9 at the bottom-left. They should either be removed from the partner program or solely supported via self-service (i.e., the partner portal). “For example, if a partner scores low on the number of qualified leads they produce, they may need additional marketing training and support.” Final Words Of Advice
“Aligning resources to engage and enable the right ones is crucial.” The Traditional Approach: Partner Tiering
The Traditional Approach: Partner Tiering “The traditional channel partner segmentation and prioritization approach, and the primary method used by 98% of the top IT (information technology) partner programs, is tiers (or levels).” Results in missed opportunities. Over the years, programs have expanded to include tiering criteria such as certifications and customer satisfaction. Revenue attainment is still the primary criterion, however, for moving up to a higher tier in most partner programs. There are several concerns with this criterion. For one, it is difficult for smaller partners, or partners in small markets, to reach the highest partner level — even if they are doing all the right things to drive customer and supplier success. Also, by exclusively prioritizing the top performers, it is easy to overlook emerging superstars. Finally, revenue is a lagging indicator. It tells you what a partner did in the past — not what they are capable of doing in the future.
The Traditional Approach: Partner Tiering “The standard practice is to categorize partners into an average of three tiers, using a naming convention that conveys “good, better, best.”” Results in missed opportunities. Over the years, programs have expanded to include tiering criteria such as certifications and customer satisfaction. Revenue attainment is still the primary criterion, however, for moving up to a higher tier in most partner programs. There are several concerns with this criterion. For one, it is difficult for smaller partners, or partners in small markets, to reach the highest partner level — even if they are doing all the right things to drive customer and supplier success. Also, by exclusively prioritizing the top performers, it is easy to overlook emerging superstars. Finally, revenue is a lagging indicator. It tells you what a partner did in the past — not what they are capable of doing in the future.
The traditional channel partner segmentation and prioritization approach, and the primary method used by 98% of the top IT (information technology) partner programs, is tiers (or levels). Each program tier has a higher level of requirements in return for a higher level of benefits. The standard practice is to categorize partners into an average of three tiers, using a naming convention that conveys “good, better, best.” Yet despite the widespread use of tiering, this approach has several shortcomings: “Over the years, programs have expanded to include tiering criteria such as certifications and customer satisfaction.” Excludes new types of partners in supplier ecosystems. A growing priority is expanding beyond resellers working independently to partner ecosystems: a network of diverse types of partners — some transacting and some nontransacting — working together to help customers achieve their business outcomes. Under this model, a prioritization approach primarily based on revenue attainment is risky. It makes it easy to overlook partners who would rather refer qualified leads or deliver incremental services than resell.
“That said, it is unwise and unrealistic to support all partners in your ecosystem equally.” The Traditional Approach: Partner Tiering
The Traditional Approach: Partner Tiering “Each program tier has a higher level of requirements in return for a higher level of benefits.” Results in missed opportunities. Over the years, programs have expanded to include tiering criteria such as certifications and customer satisfaction. Revenue attainment is still the primary criterion, however, for moving up to a higher tier in most partner programs. There are several concerns with this criterion. For one, it is difficult for smaller partners, or partners in small markets, to reach the highest partner level — even if they are doing all the right things to drive customer and supplier success. Also, by exclusively prioritizing the top performers, it is easy to overlook emerging superstars. Finally, revenue is a lagging indicator. It tells you what a partner did in the past — not what they are capable of doing in the future.
Actionable intelligence. Insight is provided on the level of engagement and type of investment that is appropriate for each of the nine partner categories. For example, avoid allocating resources to the partners in box 9 at the bottom-left. They should either be removed from the partner program or solely supported via self-service (i.e., the partner portal). “The scoring can provide insights into the right enablement strategy to drive performance improvement.” Final Words Of Advice