Recommendation: go hybrid, with PLG as the top of the funnel and sales-assist on top of it. Don't choose one motion over the other.
Your data already points this way. Signups are growing while revenue is flat, so self-serve is producing volume but not dollars. Your biggest accounts come from sales calls, so the buyers who matter aren't converting through the product alone. This matches the skill's PLG-vs-sales finding: self-serve brings volume at low ACV (~$5K), and sales-led brings high ACV (~$50K). In the skill's parallel test, sales won about 10x on revenue despite about 10x less volume. That test isn't your data, so treat it as a hypothesis for you to check.
Run the decision tree on your product
- Can a user get value in under 10 minutes without docs? For an API this is often yes, so measure time to first API call.
- Can they self-serve implementation? Small projects usually can. Production integrations at larger companies usually can't.
- Is the buyer the user? Your developers are the users. The budget owner at a large account usually isn't a developer.
If the answers are yes, yes, no, the tree gives hybrid. Check each answer against your own activation data.
What to do
- Keep the free tier and self-serve checkout for accounts under about $10K.
- Add sales-assist for $10K–$50K accounts. Trigger it on product-qualified signals:
- several users from one company
- usage near the free-tier limits
- questions about SSO, SLAs, security or team pricing
- Make outreach specific. For example: "Your team is calling endpoint X from 12 services. Want 15 minutes on rate limits?" Don't send "I saw you signed up."
- Leave sub-$5K accounts alone. Early sales contact on small deals hurts the self-serve motion.
- Look at your closed-won accounts first. Did they start as free signups and then get a call, or did they come in through sales without ever using the product? If most started in the free tier, the PQL triggers will work. If not, the free tier is mostly serving hobbyists.
- Run a 4–6 week test. Compare PQL-triggered outreach against a no-contact control group on conversion and ACV.
- Fix activation. If time to first value is over 10 minutes, shorten it with sample data, a working quickstart and less setup before the first call.
Reviewing channel economics (SEO blog, paid search, community events)
Report every metric by channel and by acquisition source, not as a blended number. The weakness in most reviews is that they stop at signups.
| Metric | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| CAC (spend ÷ new users) | Include content production and staff time for SEO and events, not just ad spend. |
| Signup → activated (first successful API call) | Shows whether a channel brings real developers or just clicks. |
| Signup → paid, and → $10K+ | Your revenue comes from large accounts, so measure this too. |
| 30- and 90-day retention | Cheap users who churn cost more than expensive users who stay. |
| LTV and payback period | Use revenue, and revenue by account size, not signup counts. |
Then apply the rule:
- CAC below LTV × margin: scale. Check 90-day retention first. If it's above 60%, put about 3x the budget there. If it's below, fix activation first.
- CAC about equal to LTV × margin: optimize, but don't scale.
- CAC above LTV × margin: give it 4 weeks to improve, then kill it.
Build a growth equation for each channel before you scale it. Examples are 1 post → N visits → X% signup, $1K → clicks → signups, and 1 event → attendees → users. Validate with 4 weeks of data, then scale on that basis.
Channel-specific notes (my expectations, to be checked against your numbers)
- SEO blog: often the cheapest per user and the best retained. Segment by post type, because tutorials and integration guides probably bring developers who build, while top-of-funnel posts bring browsers.
- Paid search: probably the highest CAC and the lowest retention of the three, but test that. Look at which keywords bring activated accounts, and cut the ones that only bring signups.
- Community events: small volume, but attendees may be the most likely to become sales-assisted accounts. Track attendee → account → pipeline through CRM, not signups alone. Events are the channel most likely to look bad on a self-serve-only view and good on a pipeline view.
- Sales-sourced accounts: put your sales calls in the same table as a fourth channel, with fully loaded CAC. That's how you compare them fairly with the other three.
Cadence
- Review monthly. Reallocate quarterly. Test two new channels a month.
- Forecast baseline, upside and downside, and update the forecast monthly.
- Write a one-page playbook for each channel that works.
What I need from you to turn this into numbers
- spend and new users by channel
- activation, paid conversion and retention by source
- ACV and LTV by source
- the origin story of your top 20 accounts
I haven't seen any of your data, so everything above about your channels is a framework or a hypothesis, not a finding. If you share even a rough export, I can build the channel table.
Real run in an isolated folder with only this skill installed. Only the Skill and Read tools were enabled, so nothing was fetched from the web and no file was written. The example is fictional. The model answered from SKILL.md alone and said it had no real channel data.
它做什麼
協助模型認真分析自助式成長,而不是預設它一定有效。內容包括 PLG 現實檢驗(作者做過六個月的並行測試,業務驅動在營收上勝出)、依通路把投入對應到產出的成長公式、通路經濟(獲客成本、轉換、留存、LTV、回本週期)、首次價值時間、自助模式在哪個節點失效並需要業務介入、三種情境的成長預測,以及一頁式手冊的習慣。
運作方式
- 模型先判斷:價值是否幾分鐘內可見、導入是否簡單、買家是否就是使用者。
- 為每個通路建立成長公式與「保留/加碼/砍掉」規則。
- 依使用深度、團隊擴展與購買訊號,提出業務介入的觸發條件。
適合什麼場景
開發者工具與 B2B SaaS 在 PLG 與業務驅動之間做選擇、修正免費版轉換、為通路排優先順序。
純指令檔:沒有腳本,不連網、不寫檔、不需要帳號。5K 到 50K 美元的轉折點、4 週砍通路規則等數字來自作者的經驗,並非基準值。Skill 看不到你的分析資料,所以任何數字都取決於你提供的內容。請把輸出視為待驗證的計畫,而不是預測。