The most confusing layer of GTM is partner context. A partner requests an intro to a key account. The customer success manager has never heard of them and has no idea what they do. Partner marketers walk into co-marketing meetings blind. Will the other side be organized? Will they actually deliver, or just look good in a spreadsheet? Your sales team has a mental scorecard a mile long for working with partners. One bad experience and they're done trusting you. You mapped out the whole campaign and asked sales to send invites and follow up. But you have zero visibility into what actually happened. And product? They want proof that existing customers will adopt the integration before prioritizing it. But that data doesn't exist, and they're not measured on partner-sourced pipeline anyway. Every team is flying blind. And nobody is talking to each other. This is the context gap. It's why the relationships driving 50% of new business are invisible to the very people responsible for closing deals. That's what we're fixing at heyBTW. We're bringing context to collaborative GTM. The relationships, the history, the signals that live outside your CRM. So every team can finally see what's actually moving the business.
The context gap framing is compelling and the vignettes land. This framing is the closest I've seen anyone get to naming why partnerships underperform despite being responsible for a huge chunk of new business. I'm guessing the person you're really writing for is the VP of Partnerships who can't get sales to care, can't prove attribution, and can't defend the channel at QBR. Everything else in the post follows from their problem. Would love to hear how you're thinking about that buyer and who you find underserved within this problem.
I’m interested to see your solution!