Subscribe for Access
How should a partner pro think about investing in relationships vs driving revenue, sharing leads, etc.?
Recap of the nearbound daily this week
- How Negar Nikaeein Manages Partnership Chaos
- 3 Nearbound Plays for Personalized Gifting
- How Agencies Want You To Partner With Them
- How to Layer Partners into Co-Marketing
- Help Your Sellers Tap Into Nearbound Revenue
Recently published
- How Box Uses Reveal Every Day to Power Their Nearbound GTM with Dan O’Leary
- How to Execute an Effective Nearbound Channel Strategy by Nate Roybal
- Good Partner Managers/ Bad Partner Managers by Rasheité (Radcliff) Calhoun
- Solving the Biggest Challenge: Starting with the Right Partners
- A Recommended Ecosystem AI Strategy: Take an Integrated Rather Than a Top-Down Approach by Allan Adler
- Better together—Reveal and Reachdesk
- Nearbound Podcast #150: Navigating the Post-SaaS Landscape - Insights with Nate Roybal
- Nearbound Podcast #149: Evolving Partnerships in Business with Pete Rawlinson
- Friends with Benefits #32: Building a Partnership Program from Scratch with Rasheité Calhoun
- Howdy Partners #66: Pipeline Paradigms: Unveiling Event Marketing Mastery with Justin Zimmerman
Leads and Steaks; Relationships and Revenue
We had a great chat with Pete Rawlinson from Allbound about the metamorphosis of partnerships with the emergence of nearbound GTM.
Pete explained in one of my favorite lines that you can’t just wine and dine partners and expect good things because "One lead is equal to an infinite amount of filet mignon." AKA driving business trumps just being friendly.
I’ve had some back-and-forth conversations with friends in the partner world over whether and to what extent we should think about investing in relationships vs driving revenue, sharing leads, etc. (Contrast this Nearbound Podcast convo with Rasheité with this FwB convo with Vaughn).
In an era where trust is paramount, don’t you need to go to people first (HT to Mark Kilens)? Or, given the tough market conditions, should it be all business?
You’re gonna hate me, but the answer is "both".
It’s not an either-or, it’s an interconnected web.
There are two ways in which investments in relationships are valuable.
- If that investment increases the odds of driving more revenue.
- If that investment makes the revenue more attractive.
The first is obvious. Does the steak dinner help you forge the business relationship that will drive revenue (and better than the next best alternative)? If yes, go for it.
The second is less obvious. Say you have two partners. A campaign with either of them will likely drive the same revenue. But darn it, you have a deep relationship and know you will like working with one. Which will you go with? The choice is obvious.
Not all revenue is equal.
Relationships can make some revenue more attractive.
Relationships are foundational AND icing on top at the same time. If revenue is the steak, relationships are both the plate and the sizzle.
But a plate full of sizzle won’t get you far unless it’s got steak too.
Is it hard to balance? Of course. If it were easy, everyone would be doing it. But the fact that it’s so hard means those who do it well have outsized returns.
As a partner pro, your job is to figure out how to drive revenue with and invest in relationships to create revenue, without destroying either.
Don’t sacrifice revenue for relationships or relationships for revenue. Marry them together like a pro.
—Isaac
A plate of nearbound
Share this with a partner pro needs to subscribe to the daily!
