Back to Details

partnerships-architect

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

partnerships-architect

合作伙伴架构工具（partnerships-architect）

Purpose

用途

Help Head of Partnerships, Head of BD, and Founder-CEOs answer four questions when a prospective partner shows up:
  1. Is this a real partner, or someone hunting preferential terms without independent demand?
  2. At what tier should we sign them? (Referral / Reseller / OEM / SI-Consulting / Strategic Alliance)
  3. What's the 90-day joint GTM plan that proves the partnership works?
  4. What revshare makes economic sense — and at what point does the partnership beat direct sale?
The skill emits a tier verdict + GTM plan + revshare band with explicit kill criteria. It does not sign the deal. The human, after running this skill, decides.
帮助合作伙伴负责人、业务开发（BD）负责人以及创始人兼CEO在潜在合作伙伴接洽时回答以下四个问题：
  1. 这是真正的合作伙伴，还是无独立需求仅寻求优惠条款的诉求方？
  2. 应将其归入哪一合作层级？（推荐/经销商/OEM/系统集成商咨询（SI-Consulting）/战略联盟）
  3. 能证明合作有效的90天联合GTM计划是什么？
  4. 怎样的分成比例（revshare）具备经济合理性——合作在何时能优于直销？
本工具会输出层级判定结果+GTM计划+分成比例区间，并明确列出淘汰标准。它不会直接签署合作协议，人类需在使用本工具后做出最终决策。

When to use

适用场景

  • A prospective partner has approached and asked for reseller / OEM / "strategic" terms
  • You're designing a new partner program tier structure
  • You're reviewing an existing partnership that's underperforming and need to decide: re-tier, restructure GTM, or unwind
  • A Big Logo wants a "strategic alliance" — and you need to validate it's real, not vendor-lock theatre
  • A consulting firm or SI wants services revshare on your product
  • A platform vendor offers OEM / white-label and you need to model the math
  • You suspect "partner-sourced" deals are actually your own pipeline being skimmed for margin
Do not use for:
  • Technical demos and POCs → 
    business-growth/sales-engineer
  • Cost-to-serve and ROI math on existing channel → sibling 
    channel-economics
  • Whole-company revenue strategy → 
    c-level-advisor/cro-advisor
  • Acquiring a company instead of partnering → 
    c-level-advisor/ma-playbook
  • Per-deal discount approval inside a signed partner contract → 
    deal-desk
  • 潜在合作伙伴已接洽并要求经销商/OEM/"战略级"合作条款
  • 你正在设计新的合作伙伴计划层级结构
  • 你正在审核表现不佳的现有合作关系，需要决定：调整层级、重构GTM计划或终止合作
  • 某知名企业提出"战略联盟"合作——你需要验证其真实性，而非只是供应商锁定的表面文章
  • 某咨询公司或系统集成商（SI）希望从你的产品中获得服务分成
  • 某平台供应商提供OEM/白标服务，你需要对其进行收益建模
  • 你怀疑"合作伙伴开发的客户"实际上是从自己的销售管道中截取的订单，只为赚取利润
不适用于：
  • 技术演示与POC → 
    business-growth/sales-engineer
  • 现有渠道的服务成本与ROI计算 → 同类工具
    channel-economics
  • 全公司营收战略 → 
    c-level-advisor/cro-advisor
  • 收购公司而非合作 → 
    c-level-advisor/ma-playbook
  • 已签署合作协议后的单笔订单折扣审批 → 
    deal-desk

Workflow

工作流程

Step 1 — Intake (≈ 20 min)

步骤1 — 信息收集（≈ 20分钟）

Fill 
assets/partnership_intake_template.md
. Capture: partner_name, partner_type, evidence of independent demand (named accounts they've sourced, end-customer relationships, their sales team size), strategic value (geo / product / brand / channel economics), commitments they've offered (joint marketing spend, dedicated headcount, certification, sales targets).
If the intake template can't be honestly filled out, the prospective partner has not demonstrated enough substance to evaluate. Stop. Go back to them.
填写
assets/partnership_intake_template.md
。记录：合作伙伴名称、合作伙伴类型、独立需求证据（已开发的指定客户、终端客户关系、销售团队规模）、战略价值（地域/产品/品牌/渠道经济性）、对方已提出的承诺（联合营销投入、专属人力、认证、销售目标）。
若无法如实填写信息收集模板，则说明潜在合作伙伴未提供足够的实质信息以供评估。请停止流程，向对方补充索要信息。

Step 2 — Tier classify

步骤2 — 层级分类

Run 
scripts/partner_tier_classifier.py --input intake.json --profile saas --output markdown
. Output ranks the partner into 1 of 5 tiers — REFERRAL / RESELLER / OEM / SI-CONSULTING / STRATEGIC — with deterministic floors. STRATEGIC requires named_accounts ≥ 5 AND multi-year commit AND dedicated resources. Skill emits rationale + kill criteria.
运行
scripts/partner_tier_classifier.py --input intake.json --profile saas --output markdown
。输出结果会将合作伙伴归入5个层级之一——推荐（REFERRAL）/经销商（RESELLER）/OEM/系统集成商咨询（SI-CONSULTING）/战略级（STRATEGIC），并明确各层级的判定门槛。战略级（STRATEGIC）要求指定客户数量≥5、多年合作承诺以及专属资源。本工具会输出判定理由+淘汰标准。

Step 3 — Joint GTM plan

步骤3 — 联合GTM计划

Run 
scripts/joint_gtm_planner.py --input gtm.json --profile saas --output markdown
. Output: 90-day plan with pre-launch milestones (training, certification, materials), launch motion (target accounts, sales play, MDF allocation), mid-quarter checkpoint, and 90-day success criteria. Validates: cannot plan channel-led GTM for REFERRAL tier; cannot plan white-label for non-OEM tier.
运行
scripts/joint_gtm_planner.py --input gtm.json --profile saas --output markdown
。输出内容：90天计划，包含启动前里程碑（培训、认证、物料准备）、启动动作（目标客户、销售策略、市场开发资金（MDF）分配）、季度中期检查点以及90天成功标准。验证规则：无法为推荐（REFERRAL）层级规划渠道主导的GTM；无法为非OEM层级规划白标服务。

Step 4 — Revshare model

步骤4 — 分成比例建模

Run 
scripts/revshare_modeler.py --input revshare.json --output markdown
. Computes margin per deal direct vs. via partner, recommended revshare % band based on partner contribution depth (sourced > influenced > delivered), break-even partner ROI, and long-term economics — at projected scale, does partner economics beat direct?
运行
scripts/revshare_modeler.py --input revshare.json --output markdown
。计算直销与通过合作伙伴销售的单笔订单利润，根据合作伙伴的贡献深度（开发>影响>交付）推荐分成比例区间，计算合作伙伴的盈亏平衡ROI，以及长期经济效益——在预期规模下，合作模式是否优于直销？

Step 5 — Decide

步骤5 — 决策

Take tier + GTM plan + revshare band into the partnership committee. Skill does not sign the partner — you do. Document kill criteria in the contract so the unwind is mechanical when triggered.
将层级判定结果+GTM计划+分成比例提交至合作委员会。本工具不会签署合作协议——由你做出最终决策。将淘汰标准写入合同，以便在触发条件出现时可按流程终止合作。

Scripts

脚本说明

  • scripts/partner_tier_classifier.py
    — 5-tier classifier with deterministic floors per tier
  • scripts/joint_gtm_planner.py
    — 90-day joint GTM plan generator with tier-validated motion
  • scripts/revshare_modeler.py
    — revshare band + break-even ROI + long-term economics
All scripts: stdlib only. 
--help
and 
--sample
work on all three.
  • scripts/partner_tier_classifier.py
    — 5层级分类器，各层级有明确判定门槛
  • scripts/joint_gtm_planner.py
    — 90天联合GTM计划生成器，会根据层级验证动作合理性
  • scripts/revshare_modeler.py
    — 分成比例区间+盈亏平衡ROI+长期经济效益计算
所有脚本：仅使用标准库。三个脚本均支持
--help
和
--sample
参数。

References

参考资料

  • references/channel_partner_canon.md
    — Caro on HP indirect channels, Chintagunta on channel economics, Hessling on partner programs, Forrester channel software stack, IDC channel research, Tien Tzuo subscription-channel models, Geoffrey Moore whole-product partnerships
  • references/joint_gtm_canon.md
    — Aaron Ross Predictable Revenue (cold-source vs partner), Winning by Design, Jay McBain on co-sell, Microsoft Partner Network playbook, AWS Partner Network research, SiriusDecisions partner benchmarks, Bridge Group SaaS partner data
  • references/partnership_anti_patterns.md
    — Forrester partner-led-from-your-pipeline research, Tom Tunguz on channel conflict, Hessling failure analyses, MIT Sloan on disproportionate strategic revshare, HP channel post-mortems, IBM channel-conflict cases, Salesforce AppExchange research
  • references/channel_partner_canon.md
    — Caro关于惠普间接渠道的研究、Chintagunta关于渠道经济性的研究、Hessling关于合作伙伴计划的研究、Forrester渠道软件栈、IDC渠道研究、Tien Tzuo订阅渠道模型、Geoffrey Moore全产品合作理论
  • references/joint_gtm_canon.md
    — Aaron Ross《可预测营收》（Predictable Revenue）（冷启动开发vs合作伙伴开发）、Winning by Design、Jay McBain关于联合销售的研究、微软合作伙伴网络手册、AWS合作伙伴网络研究、SiriusDecisions合作伙伴基准数据、Bridge Group SaaS合作伙伴数据
  • references/partnership_anti_patterns.md
    — Forrester关于"从自身管道截取订单的合作伙伴"研究、Tom Tunguz关于渠道冲突的研究、Hessling失败案例分析、MIT Sloan关于不成比例战略分成的研究、惠普渠道事后分析、IBM渠道冲突案例、Salesforce AppExchange研究

Assumptions

假设前提

  • A partner who cannot produce evidence of independent demand (named accounts, end-customer relationships, their own sales team) is hunting preferential terms, not a partner.
  • Industry profiles (
    --profile
    ) tune defaults — they don't override your data.
  • Revshare % bands are recommendations; the contract negotiation, MDF policy, and exclusivity terms are human commercial decisions outside this skill.
  • "Partner-sourced" requires the partner to have introduced the deal AND owned the primary relationship. "Partner-influenced" pays at a lower band. Pay attribution matters more than slide-deck claims.
  • This skill is for partnership design, not signed-partner deal management — once signed, per-deal commercial review routes to 
    deal-desk
    .
  • Kill criteria are mandatory. A partnership without a written unwind trigger compounds the bad-partner problem over years.
  • 无法提供独立需求证据（指定客户、终端客户关系、自有销售团队）的合作伙伴，只是寻求优惠条款的诉求方，而非真正的合作伙伴。
  • 行业配置文件（
    --profile
    ）用于调整默认值——不会覆盖你提供的数据。
  • 分成比例区间为推荐值；合同谈判、MDF政策以及排他性条款属于人类商业决策范畴，不在本工具的处理范围内。
  • "合作伙伴开发的订单"要求合作伙伴既介绍了订单，又拥有主要客户关系。"合作伙伴影响的订单"分成比例更低。分成归属判定比演示文稿中的声明更重要。
  • 本工具用于合作关系设计，而非已签署合作协议后的订单管理——签署协议后，单笔订单的商业审核需转至
    deal-desk
    工具。
  • 淘汰标准为必填项。未设定书面终止触发条件的合作关系，会在多年后加剧不良合作的问题。

Anti-patterns

反模式

  • "Partner = anyone who asked." A partner with no independent demand is a discount hunter. Run the tier classifier — REFERRAL tier exists precisely to absorb these without giving away reseller margin.
  • Granting OEM / white-label terms without margin sufficient to fund support. OEM means you support a customer you don't own. If the revshare doesn't fund Tier-2 support cost, the OEM deal is a losing trade.
  • Paying sourced-tier revshare on influenced-only deals. Influenced ≠ sourced. The deal was going to close anyway. Pay the influenced rate.
  • No kill criteria for under-performing partner. "Strategic alliances" without sunset clauses become permanent obligations after the executive sponsor leaves.
  • Channel conflict ignored until reps quit. When your direct rep and your partner both show up at the same account, you lose either the rep or the partner. Decide the rules of engagement before, not after.
  • Exclusive territory granted to a weak partner. This locks out the strong partner who would have actually sourced the deals.
  • MDF without ROI accountability. Market Development Funds without named pipeline, reported ROI, and a quarterly true-up are subsidy, not investment.
  • No offboarding plan when partnership ends. Customer continuity, data hand-back, IP cleanup, and brand take-down must be pre-negotiated. They're impossible to negotiate after the relationship has soured.
  • "合作伙伴=所有接洽者"：无独立需求的合作伙伴只是折扣诉求方。运行层级分类器——推荐（REFERRAL）层级正是为了吸纳这类对象，同时避免让出经销商利润。
  • 在未提供足够利润覆盖支持成本的情况下授予OEM/白标条款：OEM意味着你要为自己不拥有的客户提供支持。如果分成不足以覆盖二级支持成本，那么OEM交易就是一笔亏损的买卖。
  • 为仅产生影响的订单支付开发层级的分成：影响≠开发。订单原本就会成交，应支付影响层级的分成比例。
  • 未为表现不佳的合作伙伴设定淘汰标准：无终止条款的"战略联盟"会在执行发起人离职后变成永久义务。
  • 忽视渠道冲突直到销售代表离职：当你的直销代表和合作伙伴同时接触同一客户时，你要么失去销售代表，要么失去合作伙伴。请提前制定参与规则，而非事后补救。
  • 向弱势合作伙伴授予独家区域：这会将真正能开发订单的强势合作伙伴拒之门外。
  • MDF未设定ROI问责机制：未指定目标管道、未报告ROI且未进行季度调整的市场开发资金（MDF）是补贴，而非投资。
  • 合作终止时无退出计划：客户连续性、数据返还、IP清理以及品牌下架必须提前协商。关系恶化后再协商这些事项是不可能的。

Distinct from

与其他工具的区别

  • business-growth/sales-engineer — technical sale: demos, POCs, integration scoping. Operates after the partnership decision is made and a deal is in flight.
  • channel-economics (sibling) — cost-to-serve and ROI math on an existing channel. Quantifies whether a signed partner is profitable. partnerships-architect decides whether to sign in the first place and at what tier.
  • c-level-advisor/cro-advisor — strategic CRO judgment (when to hire a VP Channel, whole-company revenue mix decisions). partnerships-architect is per-partnership.
  • c-level-advisor/ma-playbook — when the answer is "acquire them" not "partner with them." Trigger: the partner has independent moat you cannot replicate, or the partnership requires equity to align incentives. Re-route to ma-playbook.
  • deal-desk — per-deal discount approval on signed partner contracts.
  • business-growth/sales-engineer — 技术销售：演示、POC、集成范围界定。在合作决策完成且订单进入流程后使用。
  • channel-economics（同类工具）—— 现有渠道的服务成本与ROI计算。量化已签署合作伙伴是否盈利。partnerships-architect用于决定是否签约以及归入哪一层级。
  • c-level-advisor/cro-advisor — 首席营收官（CRO）的战略判断（何时聘请渠道副总裁、全公司营收组合决策）。partnerships-architect针对单个合作关系。
  • c-level-advisor/ma-playbook — 当解决方案是"收购对方"而非"与其合作"时使用。触发条件：合作伙伴拥有你无法复制的独立护城河，或合作需要股权来对齐激励。请转至
    ma-playbook
    工具。
  • deal-desk — 已签署合作协议后的单笔订单折扣审批。

Forcing-question library (Matt Pocock grill discipline)

强制问题库（Matt Pocock质询准则）

Walked one at a time by 
/cs:grill-commercial
or the orchestrator. Recommended answer + canon citation per question. Never bundled. Lock 1-3 before opening 4-6.
  1. "Name 5 end customers this partner has already sold to in the last 12 months — at companies you would target yourself." Recommended: if they cannot, they have no independent demand. Sign at REFERRAL tier only, if at all. Reseller/OEM/Strategic floors require demonstrated end-customer relationships. Canon: Joe Hessling — partner-program failure analyses identify "no independent demand" as the #1 root cause of dead partner tiers.
  2. "Is this partner asking for preferential commercial terms, or asking how to bring you customers?" Recommended: discount hunters lead with terms; real partners lead with accounts. Listen to the first 30 minutes of the first meeting. Canon: Forrester channel research — 60%+ of "partner inquiries" at early-stage SaaS are discount hunting, not channel investment.
  3. "What's the joint value proposition in one sentence, and who is the named end-customer it serves?" Recommended: if there is no joint value prop distinct from either party's solo offering, there is no partnership — there is co-marketing at best. Canon: Geoffrey Moore (Crossing the Chasm) — whole-product partnerships exist when neither party alone delivers the customer outcome.
  4. "At what % discount / revshare does this partnership beat the direct-sale economics, and at what scale?" Recommended: model break-even pipeline volume. If partner-sourced deals must exceed 30% of channel volume to beat direct, and partner can plausibly deliver 5%, you have built a losing program. Canon: Pradeep Chintagunta (Chicago Booth) on channel economics — channel partnerships without volume floor break even in theory and lose money in practice.
  5. "What are the named kill criteria for unwinding this partnership, and are they in the contract?" Recommended: minimum pipeline floor by quarter, minimum certified resources, minimum joint deals closed, 90-day cure period. Unwinding without pre-agreed criteria becomes a 2-year legal battle. Canon: IBM channel-conflict case studies (1990s post-divestiture) — undocumented kill criteria converted bad partners into permanent obligations.
  6. "If this partner sells to one of YOUR direct accounts, who wins — your rep or them?" Recommended: Rules of Engagement in writing, signed before kickoff. Territory by named account, by segment, or by geo. Conflict resolution at named human, not committee. Canon: Jay McBain (Canalys) — channel conflict is the #1 partner program killer; written ROE published before partner signs prevents 80% of disputes.
  7. "Is this a partnership, or should this be an acquisition?" Recommended: if the partner has independent moat you cannot replicate AND the partnership requires multi-year exclusivity AND the partnership requires equity-like alignment, you're describing an acquisition. Re-route to 
    ma-playbook
    . Canon: HP channel post-mortems (Indigo, EDS partial integrations) — partnerships structured as acquisitions-without-equity destroy more value than either pure path.
Walk depth-first. Lock 1-3 (is this a real partner?) before opening 4-7 (is the structure right?). After all 7 are answered, invoke 
partner_tier_classifier.py
→ 
joint_gtm_planner.py
→ 
revshare_modeler.py
in sequence.
由
/cs:grill-commercial
或编排器逐一提出。每个问题配有推荐答案+参考资料引用。切勿批量提问。需完成1-3题后才能开启4-6题。
  1. "请列出该合作伙伴在过去12个月内已销售的5个终端客户——这些客户需属于你自身的目标客户群体。" 推荐答案：若对方无法列出，则说明其无独立需求。仅可将其归入推荐（REFERRAL）层级（如有必要）。经销商/OEM/战略级层级要求已证明的终端客户关系。 参考资料：Joe Hessling——合作伙伴计划失败案例分析指出"无独立需求"是合作层级失效的首要根源。
  2. "该合作伙伴是在寻求优惠商业条款，还是在询问如何为你带来客户？" 推荐答案：折扣诉求方会先谈条款；真正的合作伙伴会先谈客户。留意首次会议的前30分钟内容。 参考资料：Forrester渠道研究——早期SaaS公司收到的"合作伙伴咨询"中，60%以上是寻求折扣，而非渠道投资。
  3. "用一句话描述联合价值主张，并指出其服务的指定终端客户是谁？" 推荐答案：若不存在与双方单独提供的产品不同的联合价值主张，则不存在合作关系——最多只是联合营销。 参考资料：Geoffrey Moore《跨越鸿沟》（Crossing the Chasm）——全产品合作关系存在于任何一方都无法单独交付客户成果的场景中。
  4. "该合作在何种折扣/分成比例下能优于直销经济性，达到何种规模时实现？" 推荐答案：建模计算盈亏平衡的管道量。若合作伙伴开发的订单需超过渠道总量的30%才能优于直销，而合作伙伴实际仅能交付5%，那么你设计的是一个亏损的计划。 参考资料：Pradeep Chintagunta（芝加哥大学布斯商学院）关于渠道经济性的研究——未设定量门槛的渠道合作在理论上盈亏平衡，但在实践中会亏损。
  5. "终止该合作关系的具体淘汰标准是什么，是否已写入合同？" 推荐答案：每季度的最低管道量门槛、最低认证资源数量、最低联合成交订单数、90天整改期。未提前约定标准的终止流程会演变为长达2年的法律纠纷。 参考资料：IBM渠道冲突案例研究（1990年代剥离后）——未记录的淘汰标准将不良合作伙伴变成了永久义务。
  6. "若该合作伙伴销售给你的某一直销客户，谁能获得订单——你的销售代表还是他们？" 推荐答案：参与规则需以书面形式呈现，并在启动前签署。按指定客户、细分领域或地域划分范围。冲突需由指定人员解决，而非委员会。 参考资料：Jay McBain（Canalys）——渠道冲突是合作伙伴计划的头号杀手；在合作伙伴签约前发布书面参与规则可避免80%的纠纷。
  7. "这是合作关系，还是应该进行收购？" 推荐答案：若合作伙伴拥有你无法复制的独立护城河，且合作需要多年排他性，还需要类似股权的激励对齐机制，那么你描述的是收购场景。请转至
    ma-playbook
    工具。 参考资料：惠普渠道事后分析（Indigo、EDS部分整合）——结构类似无股权收购的合作关系，比纯粹的合作或收购更具价值破坏性。
请按深度优先顺序提问。完成1-3题（这是真正的合作伙伴吗？）后再开启4-7题（结构是否合理？）。回答完所有7题后，依次调用
partner_tier_classifier.py
→ 
joint_gtm_planner.py
→ 
revshare_modeler.py
。