Redesigning an ERP partner program

Partner programs shape channel performance. The client needed a redesign.

An ERP software company wanted to improve its channel partner program. Its team knew that partners compared commission, support, lead sharing, training and program status across several vendors. The client needed to understand what strong programs offered, how they were managed and which practices partners valued in day-to-day work.

The challenge

The existing program had developed over time, without a clear external benchmark. The client could review the published terms of competing programs, but those materials revealed little about how the programs worked in practice.

The channel team wanted answers to two sets of questions. The first concerned the offer itself. What financial rewards did partners expect? Which non-financial benefits influenced participation? How should tiers be structured? What support helped partners sell more effectively?

The second concerned program management. How many partners could each manager support? Which roles were needed? How did software companies handle conflicts between direct sales teams and channel partners? When did customers prefer to buy through a partner, and what value did the partner add?

The client wanted to compare direct competitors with software companies known for effective partner programs in other markets.

The research therefore needed to combine competitive analysis with broader benchmarking. It also needed to capture the partner’s perspective. Published program descriptions alone could not show whether partners found the benefits useful, whether rules were applied consistently or whether the relationship helped them meet sales targets.

What we did

Aqute selected seven software companies for the study. Two were direct ERP competitors. Five operated in other software categories and had strong reputations for their partner programs. This mix gave the client a view of current practice in its own market and examples of programs that had solved similar channel problems elsewhere.

We reviewed each program’s structure and stated benefits, including tiers, qualification requirements, commercial rewards, enablement, marketing support and lead processes.

The main evidence came from primary research. We contacted dozens of partners connected to the seven target companies and conducted one-to-one telephone interviews. These discussions explored what partners received, which benefits they actually used, where the program created friction and how the relationship affected their ability to generate sales.

We asked about commission expectations and non-financial support such as training, certification, vendor expertise, marketing assistance and help developing opportunities.

Channel conflict was another major area. Partners explained how vendors handled situations where direct sales teams and channel companies pursued the same customer. We looked at rules, escalation processes and the behavior that built or damaged trust.

Customer interviews added the buyer’s perspective. They helped explain when customers preferred to work through a partner and what partners contributed that the software vendor could not provide directly. This included specialist knowledge, implementation support, sector experience and an existing commercial relationship.

We combined the findings in a practical benchmark for the channel team. It covered program benefits, tier design, commission, staffing, coverage ratios, conflict management and the roles required to support partners effectively.

Results

The client used the research as the basis for redesigning its partner program. It could compare its existing approach with direct competitors and with software companies that partners regarded highly.

The findings gave the channel team evidence for decisions that had previously depended on internal opinion. It had clearer information on commission expectations, the additional benefits partners valued and the way successful programs differentiated their tiers.

The staffing analysis helped the client consider how many partners each channel manager could support and which specialist roles the program required. This mattered because an attractive program could still disappoint partners if the company lacked the people to deliver training, marketing support or opportunity management consistently.

The work on channel conflict gave the client practical models for protecting partner trust. It could see how other vendors set ownership rules, managed overlapping opportunities and dealt with disputes between direct and indirect sales teams.

Customer interviews also clarified the role partners played in winning and delivering business. This helped the client decide where a partner-led approach was most useful and how its own messaging should explain the value of the channel.

The redesigned program was grounded in evidence from partners, customers, competitors and respected software companies. The client gained a more structured offer, a clearer view of the resources required and a stronger basis for building long-term partner relationships. The work also gave PMM and channel marketing teams a sharper answer to a basic recruitment question: why should a capable partner choose this program?