AIStart360 / growth lever / 04

Partner model

Another business reaches the customer you need.

Test how to create value and sell together. Agree the offer, roles and economics of one partnership scenario.

Discuss this growth lever Working library

Challenge and test scope

These are test directions, not growth promises. Agree one primary metric, costs and decision criteria for the chosen challenge.

Who it is for: For a company that can solve a customer task jointly with another business. Start with mutual value rather than exchanging logos or promising large earnings.
Data needed: Verified partner profiles with source and date, segment, offer, permitted contact, discussion stage and agreed terms. For transactions: source, deal ID, owner, payments, costs and commission.
AI and people: AI compares verified candidates and drafts a joint offer and negotiation questions. People agree responsibilities, lead handover, payments and pilot criteria.
What the company keeps: Partner profile, joint offer, responsibility map and economics model. A customer test starts only when both parties are ready; otherwise document verified interest and the next conditions.

Three AI scenarios. People remain accountable.

Partner research

AI prepares: Public and permitted information → a profile with sources, gaps and a compatibility hypothesis
A person checks: Checks the facts and whether they are current

Joint offer design · starting point

AI prepares: Our offer + partner profile → options for shared value and a pilot
A person checks: Discusses and approves the actual terms

Partner sales assistant

AI prepares: Approved materials + enquiry → a brief and a proposed next step
A person checks: Checks qualification, rights and the deal handover

AI must not invent prices or terms, send important messages without agreed oversight, change agreements or execute payments.

What to measure and compare

Channel contribution when sales exist

Revenue after returns minus fulfilment, commissions and variable channel costs. Report one-off launch costs separately.

Partner activation

A pre-defined completed action, such as the first eligible enquiry handed over under the agreed rules.

Funnel and speed

Candidates → agreed pilots → eligible enquiries → payments; time for each transition.

Guardrail measures

Duplicates, attribution disputes, broken promises, returns and dependence on one partner.

From GRI findings to a test

GRI is an author-developed analytical framework, not independent certification, an investment rating or a growth guarantee.

GRI
Understand the constraint
Find an observable loss and test possible explanations against the facts.
GTM
Connect the change to the customer
Define the segment, value, offer, channel, funnel step, economics and accountability.
AI
Build an assistant for the task
Specify the inputs, expected output, limits and employee’s role.
TEST
Build a basis for a decision
Agree a metric and comparison method, check quality, include costs and decide the next step.

Explore the methodology

The first 21-day cycle

The shared Bootcamp structure. Data, actions and the metric are tailored to the chosen lever.

Before the start

Discuss the challenge, available examples, team involvement and scope. Agree the work before the programme begins.

Days 1–701
Choose and design
Review the workflow and data, choose a constraint and one lever, define the GTM action and experiment rules.
Constraint map · GTM on one page · experiment brief
Day-by-day calendar
1. Day 1
  Session: map the customer journey and locate the loss
  Process map and challenge statement
2. Day 2
  Collect examples; check IDs and dates
  Data dictionary and missing-data list
3. Day 3
  Review relevant GRI areas and test two or three explanations
  Evidence-backed constraint map
4. Day 4
  Session: choose one lever, segment and GTM action
  GTM on one page
5. Day 5
  Describe the usual process, a non-AI improvement and an AI variant
  Technology role and comparison variants
6. Day 6
  Define cohort, metric, observation window, costs and stopping rules
  Experiment brief v1
7. Day 7
  Checkpoint: agree the solution scope
  Build / revise / prepare data
Days 8–1402
Build and test
Prepare context, build the AI workflow, test typical cases and exceptions, and define human handover rules.
Tested workflow version · error log · limited-test approval
Day-by-day calendar
1. Day 8
  Session: create a context base and first prompt
  AI scenario v0.1
2. Day 9
  Run typical cases and verify source facts
  Error and correction log
3. Day 10
  Test missing data, conflicts, duplicates and refusal
  Exception set and human handover rules
4. Day 11
  Session: independent quality review on held-out examples
  Readiness assessment and critical defects
5. Day 12
  Run in shadow mode without contacting customers
  Time measurement and staff usefulness review
6. Day 13
  Prepare the log, group assignment and instructions
  Launch pack with prompt version
7. Day 14
  Checkpoint and owner decision
  Limited-test approval or correction plan
Days 15–2103
Observe and decide
Check execution, compare available outcomes, account for costs and limitations, and prepare team handover.
Report · instructions · next-step decision
Day-by-day calendar
1. Day 15
  Session: check the first live events and stopping procedure
  Working limited test
2. Day 16
  Review deviations and protocol adherence
  Event and error log
3. Day 17
  Reconcile customers, orders, payments, costs and time
  Observed-results table
4. Day 18
  Review group comparability and alternative explanations
  Limitations of the conclusion
5. Day 19
  Session: calculate measures and economics
  Draft report and decision
6. Day 20
  Prepare instructions, materials and continuation plan
  Handover pack
7. Day 21
  Review: continue, change, stop or extend
  Approved report and 30/60/90 plan

A long sales or repeat-purchase cycle may require more than 21 days to assess a monetary effect. In that case, the result is tested execution and a plan for continued observation.

Team involvement · proposed format

Proposed format: six 90-minute working sessions and three 30-minute checkpoints. Indicative time for the experiment owner: 7–9 hours per week plus 2–3 hours of preparation. This is not an approved package; scope and involvement are agreed separately.

What the team keeps

Partner profile, joint offer, responsibility map and economics model. A customer test starts only when both parties are ready; otherwise document verified interest and the next conditions.

01Constraint map
02GTM plan
03Experiment brief
04AI workflow or prototype within the agreed scope
05Log and calculations
06Staff instructions
07Final decision and 30/60/90 plan

A 90-day plan is a document, not 90 days of included implementation and support. Production integration, data migration, licences and ongoing support require separate agreement.

04 / Partner model

Prompts, research, cases and books

Research and cases inform hypotheses; they do not guarantee the same result in your company. External companies are not Bootcamp clients or partners. Not every case concerns generative AI.

Materials: 10 / 10

AI prompt04

Map a partner scenario

RAFT working template · English Bootcamp adaptationRead material

Using [verified partner profiles and sources], [customer segment] and [value proposition], compare complementary contributions and one joint scenario.

R — You are a careful business workflow analyst for this specific task.

A — Using [verified partner profiles and sources], [customer segment] and [value proposition], compare complementary contributions and one joint scenario. Mark unverified information; do not invent contacts or interest.

F — Evidence and source IDs; observations; missing facts; draft action; human review checklist; metric, costs and limits.

T — Clear, specific and without growth promises.

Before starting, ask the clarifying questions needed to understand the context, objective and limits. Do not proceed until the inputs and rules are clear.

Limits of the findingUse permitted or anonymised data. A person verifies facts and approves consequential actions.

Bootcamp practiceReplace bracketed inputs with approved context. Test typical cases, exceptions and stopping rules before operational use.

AI prompt04

Draft a joint offer

RAFT working template · English Bootcamp adaptationRead material

Using [agreed capabilities], draft a joint offer, handover rules and negotiation questions.

R — You are a careful business workflow analyst for this specific task.

A — Using [agreed capabilities], draft a joint offer, handover rules and negotiation questions. Leave commissions, exclusivity and legal commitments for authorised people to approve. Do not send outreach.

F — Evidence and source IDs; observations; missing facts; draft action; human review checklist; metric, costs and limits.

T — Clear, specific and without growth promises.

Before starting, ask the clarifying questions needed to understand the context, objective and limits. Do not proceed until the inputs and rules are clear.

Limits of the findingUse permitted or anonymised data. A person verifies facts and approves consequential actions.

Bootcamp practiceReplace bracketed inputs with approved context. Test typical cases, exceptions and stopping rules before operational use.

AI prompt04

Check partnership economics

RAFT working template · English Bootcamp adaptationRead material

Using [attributed deals], [payments], [commissions], [returns] and [costs], calculate confirmed channel contribution.

R — You are a careful business workflow analyst for this specific task.

A — Using [attributed deals], [payments], [commissions], [returns] and [costs], calculate confirmed channel contribution. Separate launch costs and readiness before live sales. Report attribution disputes and duplicates.

F — Evidence and source IDs; observations; missing facts; draft action; human review checklist; metric, costs and limits.

T — Clear, specific and without growth promises.

Before starting, ask the clarifying questions needed to understand the context, objective and limits. Do not proceed until the inputs and rules are clear.

Limits of the findingUse permitted or anonymised data. A person verifies facts and approves consequential actions.

Bootcamp practiceReplace bracketed inputs with approved context. Test typical cases, exceptions and stopping rules before operational use.

Research04

Value can emerge between companies

[R07] Dyer, J. H.; Singh, H. (1998). The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage.Read material

Dyer and Singh’s relational view describes joint value through specific assets, knowledge exchange, complementary resources and governance.

Limits of the findingThis is a theoretical framework, not a trial proving a fixed partnership profit. A contract or prominent partner is not evidence of a working business model.

Bootcamp practiceSpecify complementary contributions and the handover rules that prevent losses between partners.

Original source

Research04

Collaboration needs real joint execution

[R08] Cao, M.; Zhang, Q. (2011). Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance.Read material

Cao and Zhang study supply-chain collaboration, collaborative advantage and firm performance using US manufacturing survey data.

Limits of the findingSurvey associations and structural modelling do not establish causality or transfer automatically to agency sales.

Bootcamp practiceMeasure lead handover quality, data completeness and fulfilment; discussions alone are not profit.

Original source

International case04

Salesforce × AWS · product and channel

[C07] Salesforce (27.11.2023). AWS and Salesforce Announce Expanded Global Strategic Partnership.Read material

The November 2023 partnership announcement combines product and data integration with procurement through AWS Marketplace.

Limits of the findingAn announced scope, not an independent estimate of additional partner or customer profit.

Bootcamp practiceDefine the joint customer task, procurement route, responsibilities and economics.

Original source

International case04

ServiceNow × NVIDIA · complementary capabilities

[C08] NVIDIA (17.05.2023). ServiceNow and NVIDIA Announce Partnership to Build Generative AI Across Enterprise IT.Read material

The May 2023 announcement combines enterprise workflow expertise with AI technology.

Limits of the findingAn announcement of direction, not proof of completed implementation for every customer or universal payback.

Bootcamp practiceCheck complementary capabilities and test readiness before promising a joint service.

Original source

Quote04

partners interact to deliver a value proposition

Ron Adner · Winning the Right Game glossaryRead material

A discussion excerpt for the partnership route. Use the source’s own context, not as a promise of programme results.

Limits of the findingAn expert quote is not causal evidence or a universal business rule.

Bootcamp practiceUse the question to sharpen your own hypothesis, metric and decision criteria.

partners interact to deliver a value proposition

Original source

Book04

Ron Adner · Winning the Right Game

[B07] Adner, R. (2021). Winning the Right Game: How to Disrupt, Defend, and Deliver in a Changing World.Read material

Map ecosystem dependencies and the contributions required to deliver a customer value proposition.

Limits of the findingThe AI exercise is an original Bootcamp adaptation, not content attributed to the book. The programme uses publisher descriptions and open excerpts, not a claimed analysis of every full text.

Bootcamp practiceMap ecosystem dependencies and the contributions required to deliver a customer value proposition.

Original source

Book04

David A. Yovanno · The Partnership Economy

[B08] Yovanno, D. A. (2022). The Partnership Economy: How Modern Businesses Find New Customers, Grow Revenue, and Deliver Exceptional Experiences.Read material

Design partner channels around responsibilities, customer experience and transaction economics.

Bootcamp practiceDesign partner channels around responsibilities, customer experience and transaction economics.

Original source

Working templates

Selected from AIStart360 Growth Labs, edition 2.0, 26 October 2026. Each item retains its provenance, limitations and links to original publications.

Articles and practical guides

GTM & launch

How to enter a market with a clear offer

Choose an initial segment and buying situation. Position your value against existing alternatives, test one channel and define handoffs between marketing, sales and customer success. End the plan with a metric and a decision rule.

Read the article

Partnerships · AI

The partner channel is not producing predictable growth

AI can help compare audience fit and collaboration options. The $2–4M figure is a hypothesis only; validate it with agreements, costs, timing and actual sales.

Read the article

Related leadership decisions

The Nokia Paradox: How a Market Leader Lost the Smartphone Transition

How can a company with a powerful brand, manufacturing expertise and distribution lose a market it helped build? Nokia's story illustrates a change in the basis of competition. Customers increasingly evaluated a smartphone as a software platform: interface, applications, developer support and connected services. Hardware remained necessary but was no longer sufficient. Nokia did not disappear or enter bankruptcy as a result of this episode; it sold substantially all of its Devices & Services business and continued in other activities.

Read the case

Microsoft: How Satya Nadella Linked Culture and Strategic Renewal

What changes first: strategy, or the culture that must execute it? Microsoft's renewal suggests that the question is often a false choice. Cloud investment, subscription relationships, developer tools and cross-functional learning developed together. Revenue growth cannot be attributed solely to one leader, one cultural practice or a slogan.

Read the case

Kaspi.kz: Building an Ecosystem Around Everyday Customer Needs

Kaspi.kz illustrates connected value between consumers and merchants. The lesson for a smaller business is not to build a super app. It is to identify adjacent tasks that become easier when information and service continuity are connected. Distinguish the company's reported scale from our interpretation of the mechanisms behind it.

Read the case

Kolesa Group: From a Newspaper to a Digital Platform in Kazakhstan

Kolesa Group's story asks whether the product was a newspaper or a way for buyers and sellers to find one another. A durable customer task can survive a change of medium. The case is a regional example of platform renewal, not proof that any traditional publisher can reproduce its audience or economics.

Read the case

Terms and participation

The challenge first. Then the terms.

Check whether the challenge fits, and discuss examples and team involvement. Then agree location, language, format, scope, fees and participation terms.

Design a partner scenario

Before we speak

Do we need a technical specialist?

A manual workflow usually needs a process owner and permitted data. Integration with operational systems requires technical participation and a separately agreed scope.

Can we cover all six levers?

A company works on one lever per cycle. The others inform the next step; they are not six parallel projects.

What if we have little data?

Establish minimum record-keeping and test on permitted examples first. Never replace missing facts with invented data.

What if the hypothesis is not supported?

Document quality, costs and limitations. A justified stop helps avoid expanding an uneconomic solution.

Are software and implementation included?

Licences, integration development and ongoing support are included only when explicitly agreed in the scope.

When should we expect sales?

It depends on the workflow and customer cycle. The 21 days cover a limited scenario; long-term effects are assessed separately.

How is data used?

Agree permitted materials, anonymisation, access and external services before starting. The first-contact form does not need customer databases or documents.

Challenge and test scope

Three AI scenarios. People remain accountable.

Partner research

Joint offer design · starting point

Partner sales assistant

What to measure and compare

Channel contribution when sales exist

Partner activation

Funnel and speed

Guardrail measures

From GRI findings to a test

Understand the constraint

Connect the change to the customer

Build an assistant for the task

Build a basis for a decision

The first 21-day cycle

Before the start

Choose and design

Build and test

Observe and decide

What the team keeps

Prompts, research, cases and books

Map a partner scenario

Draft a joint offer

Check partnership economics

Value can emerge between companies

Collaboration needs real joint execution

Salesforce × AWS · product and channel

ServiceNow × NVIDIA · complementary capabilities

partners interact to deliver a value proposition

Ron Adner · Winning the Right Game

David A. Yovanno · The Partnership Economy

Working templates

Articles and practical guides

More from the library

Related leadership decisions

The Nokia Paradox: How a Market Leader Lost the Smartphone Transition

Microsoft: How Satya Nadella Linked Culture and Strategic Renewal

Kaspi.kz: Building an Ecosystem Around Everyday Customer Needs

Kolesa Group: From a Newspaper to a Digital Platform in Kazakhstan

The challenge first. Then the terms.

Before we speak