Most ISVs do not miss revenue because they do not have a channel. They miss revenue because they build one at the wrong time, with the wrong expectations, and then blame partners when reality shows up.
“Should we build a channel?” sounds like a go to market question. In practice, it is a timing question, a sequencing question, and a leadership patience question. Channels are compounding engines, but only after you build the right runway.
If you treat channel like a lever you can pull, you will be disappointed. If you treat channel like a system you have to earn, you will build something durable.
The strategic timing question most teams ask too late
Here is the trap. You hit a plateau in direct sales, CAC creeps up, and the team starts looking for the next growth move. A channel looks attractive because it promises scale without adding the same headcount, and it promises credibility because partners already have trust.
But channel is not a switch. It is a relationship based operating model, and operating models have their own physics. Partners need a reason to lean in, a path to early wins, and a cadence that keeps behavior alive after the kickoff call. When those pieces are missing, you can recruit a lot of logos and still end up with nothing more than a long list and a quiet pipeline.
If you want a simple way to frame the timing, use this: build a channel when you are ready to run a program, not when you are desperate for leads. Programs create repeatability. Desperation creates shortcuts, and shortcuts create partner distrust.
What you are really building, a Channel ecosystem revenue engine
When an ISV says “channel,” they often mean “resellers.” What they are actually building is a Channel ecosystem revenue engine, which includes identity, incentives, enablement, and execution. That engine has multiple fuel lines, referrals, co selling, implementation influence, marketplace visibility, and services pull through, but it still runs on one thing: consistent partner behavior.
This is why partner systems matter as much as partner strategy. If you have not already mapped how partner activity becomes pipeline and how pipeline becomes closed revenue, start there. The simplest on ramp is to ground your program in a clear operating model and the supporting systems that make it real. That is exactly what Partner Systems 101: What It Is and What It Replaces is designed to clarify.
Think of channel like building an airport, not buying a plane. The plane is the partner. The airport is your program. If your runway is too short, even the best aircraft cannot take off without risk. If your runway is clear, marked, and staffed, average partners can surprise you.
Timing signals that say build now, not later
ISVs that succeed with channel tend to have a few traits in common. They are not perfect, but they are ready in the ways that matter. They have enough product maturity to survive third party delivery, enough messaging clarity to be taught, and enough organizational discipline to sustain a cadence.
If most of these are true, you are likely in the window where building channel makes sense.
- You can explain your value in one minute, and your ICP in one sentence, without qualifiers.
- You have a repeatable direct motion that you can teach, even if you still refine it.
- Your implementation and support experience is stable enough that a partner can deliver without heroics.
- You can fund enablement and partner success for more than a quarter, without starving direct demand.
- You have defined what “first win” means for a partner, and it is achievable fast.
- You are willing to say no to partners who will never activate, even if the logo looks good.
Timing signals that say wait, or you will pay for it
There is nothing wrong with deciding to wait. In fact, waiting is often the most disciplined move, especially when your internal foundation is not ready. What hurts ISVs is when they start recruiting anyway, then they confuse motion with progress.
If several of these are true, you are likely early, and the channel will cost more than it returns for a while.
- Your product positioning changes every time a new competitor shows up.
- Your pricing and packaging are not stable enough to put in a partner playbook.
- Your implementation is still heavily founder led, or depends on internal tribal knowledge.
- Your team cannot commit to a partner cadence because direct deals always take priority.
- You are relying on a portal and content library as the “program.”
- You cannot clearly define deal ownership, rules of engagement, and escalation paths.
The hidden cost of building channel too early
Building too early does not just waste money. It burns trust. Partners have long memories, and the channel is a small world. If you recruit a partner into a program that cannot support them, you are not just losing that partner, you are creating a negative reference inside their ecosystem.
It also creates internal confusion. Sales blames partners for “not selling.” Partners blame the ISV for “not supporting.” Marketing blames everyone for “not using the portal.” Meanwhile, the real issue is that the system was not designed to produce behavior.
This is where one hard truth matters. Channel productivity is not instant. A CGS channel enablement infographic notes that 24% of companies say channel partners take over a year to become fully productive. (Source)
If you are not ready to carry that runway, you are not ready to build channel. That does not mean you do nothing. It means you build prerequisites first, the playbook, the onboarding sequence, the first win definition, and the accountability rhythm.
The hidden cost of waiting too long
Waiting has a cost too, and it is not always obvious until it is painful. If you wait until direct acquisition is strained, you will approach channel with urgency. Urgency makes you recruit fast, accept misfit partners, and over promise enablement you cannot deliver. That is how many ISVs accidentally create a noisy program that never becomes a real engine.
There is also a strategic cost. When your category heats up, partners start choosing. They will prioritize the vendors who make it easy to win, protect their client relationships, and show up consistently. If your competitor becomes the default partner option while you are still debating program tiers, you are not just late, you are displaced.
The practical answer is to start earlier than your desperation would suggest, but later than your ego would prefer. You begin with a designed pilot, not an open recruitment campaign. You build proof, then scale.
Scenario: The portal looks great, but nothing moves
An ISV launches a partner portal with certification tracks, slick decks, and a training library. The team celebrates the launch, because it looks like a program. They recruit a wave of partners, and onboarding attendance is strong. The CEO is thrilled because partner count is rising.
Three months later, the pipeline is quiet. Partners are “enabled,” but they are not selling. The internal narrative turns sour fast. The ISV assumes the partners do not care. The partners say the ISV is not helping them create demand. Both are partially right, and the system is fully wrong.
Instead of adding more content, the ISV replaces the library first mindset with a guided sequence. Week one is a focused positioning workshop that forces a tight ICP and a single primary use case. Week two is a short sales motion rehearsal with one talk track and one discovery path. Week three is deal mapping, where each partner identifies a small list of existing customers who match the ICP and can benefit now. Week four is joint outreach, with the ISV showing up live to co sell and remove friction in real time.
Most importantly, the ISV adds accountability. A simple cadence call every two weeks, a shared scoreboard for first win progress, and clear next steps after every conversation. Partners stop asking “what should we do” because the program tells them. The portal becomes a supporting asset, not the strategy.
This is the moment where PartnerPath Atlas becomes useful, because it forces a behavioral view of activation. It is not “did they complete certification.” It is “did they execute the first selling motion, and did it produce the first win signal.”
The one quote that should shape your program design
“Activation is a runway. Without it, every new partner starts strong and then disappears.” by Tim Phelan of PartnerPath. (Source)
A practical way to decide, and a cleaner way to start
If you want a clean decision framework, ask three questions. First, do we have a teachable motion that works in direct sales today. Second, can we define a partner first win that is achievable quickly and meaningful to both sides. Third, can we commit to a cadence that keeps behavior alive after onboarding.
If the answer is yes to all three, build the channel, but build it as a pilot. Choose a small group of partners, define the first selling play, and instrument the process. You are not scaling partner count, you are scaling partner behavior. When the behavior is repeatable, the channel scales with it.
If you want a nearby read that connects the dots between partner influence and closed outcomes, this will pair well with the attribution side of the house: Attribution That Works: Connecting Partner Influence to Closed Revenue.
Want a second set of eyes on your activation runway? Let’s talk.
The takeaway that changes how ISVs win with channel
Build channel when you are ready to operate it, not when you are hoping it will save you. The timing is right when your product and message are stable enough to teach, your customer success is stable enough to deliver through others, and your leadership team is willing to fund the runway long enough for partners to become productive.
If you do that, channel stops being a gamble. It becomes a compounding system that produces predictable partner behavior, and predictable behavior is what turns partner activity into revenue.
