Use when a startup is approached by a prospective partner and someone has to decide should we sign this partner, at what partner tier (referral / reseller / OEM / SI-consulting / strategic alliance), with what joint GTM commitment, and at what revshare. Classifies partner tier
Installs just this skill. Get the whole plugin for auto-invocation.
⚡ How it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
Fires itselfClaude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
Slash command/partnerships-architect
👁️ Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Use when a startup is approached by a prospective partner and someone has to decide should we sign this partner, at what partner tier (referral / reseller / OEM / SI-consulting / strategic alliance), with what joint GTM commitment, and at what revshare. Classifies partner tier
📊 Stats
Stars23,062
Forks3,139
LanguagePython
LicenseMIT
📦 Ships with claude-skills
</> SKILL.md
partnerships-architect.SKILL.md
---name: partnerships-architect
description: "Use when a startup is approached by a prospective partner and someone has to decide should we sign this partner, at what partner tier (referral / reseller / OEM / SI-consulting / strategic alliance), with what joint GTM commitment, and at what revshare. Classifies partner tier from independent-demand evidence vs. preferential-terms hunting, designs a 90-day joint GTM plan, models revshare against direct-sale margin, and surfaces kill criteria for unwinding under-performing partnerships. For Head of Partnerships, Head of BD, and Founder-CEOs doing reseller agreement, OEM deal, or strategic alliance review — not technical sale enablement, not channel cost economics, not M&A."
version: 2.8.0
author: claude-code-skills
license: MIT
tags: [commercial, partnerships, channel-partners, joint-gtm, revshare, oem, reseller, strategic-alliance]
compatible_tools: [claude-code, codex-cli, cursor, antigravity, opencode, gemini-cli]
---# partnerships-architect
## Purpose
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?**
long-term economics — at projected scale, does partner economics beat direct?
### Step 5 — Decide
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.
## Scripts
- `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.
## Quick example
```bash
# Emits a 5-tier partner classification with deterministic floors per tier for the built-in sample partner
cd commercial/skills/partnerships-architect && python3 scripts/partner_tier_classifier.py --sample
```
## References
- `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
## Assumptions
- 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.
## Anti-patterns
- **"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
