erik

erik

How To Craft A Winning Go To Market Strategy For Your Startup

What is a Go-To-Market (GTM) Strategy?

A go-to-market strategy is your startup’s plan to introduce a product or service to the right audience with the right message at the right time. It’s about more than just launching—it’s about building traction, growing awareness, and creating a repeatable path to revenue.

Think of it like this: a GTM strategy helps you avoid shouting into the void. It’s a framework for getting in front of the people who actually care, in a way that actually works.

Whether you’re entering a new market, releasing a new product, or repositioning an old one—your GTM plan is how you bring it all together.

Why You Need a GTM Strategy

The #1 mistake we see early-stage founders make? Building something cool… and assuming people will just show up.

They don’t. A GTM strategy saves you from:

  • Wasted budget on the wrong channels
  • Talking to the wrong audience
  • Confusion inside your team
  • Launching before you’re ready

It forces clarity. It answers:

  • Who are we serving?
  • Why do they care?
  • How will they hear about us?
  • What will they do next?

Key Elements of a Go-To-Market Strategy

You don’t need a 50-page slide deck. Just cover these essentials clearly and honestly:

1. Target Customers

Who are you building this for—really? Define your ICP (ideal customer profile) as specifically as you can. If you say “anyone,” your strategy’s already off track.

2. Value Proposition

Why does this matter to them? What pain are you solving? What’s your “so what?”

If you can’t say this in one sentence without jargon, go back to the whiteboard.

3. Messaging

Once you’ve nailed the value prop, translate it into messaging that resonates. This isn’t just taglines—it’s how you talk across your site, pitch deck, emails, ads, and demo.

4. Channel Strategy

Where will you find your customers, and how will you reach them?

Your choices might include:

  • Organic content
  • Paid ads
  • Cold outreach
  • Partnerships
  • SEO
  • Events

Choose a few—test, then double down on what works.

5. Customer Journey & Activation

Map out the steps from “I’ve never heard of you” to “I’m a happy customer.” Where are the drop-offs? What do you need to improve or automate?

6. Pricing & Offers

How will you package and price the product? What’s the first thing you’ll ask someone to buy—or try? It should feel low-friction and high-value.

7. Metrics That Matter

Track the right things—not just traffic or impressions, but:

  • Conversion rate
  • CAC (customer acquisition cost)
  • LTV (lifetime value)
  • Retention
  • Activation rate
8. Number of Qualified Leads

This one deserves its own line:

If your top-of-funnel is full of the wrong people, it doesn’t matter how clever the rest of your strategy is.

Make sure your early messaging and targeting are attracting the right prospects. If you’re not getting qualified leads, revisit everything upstream.

Final Thought: Your GTM Strategy is a Living Thing

This isn’t a “set it and forget it” document. Your GTM evolves as you learn more, as the market shifts, and as your product grows.

The goal is simple: put something structured in place, run experiments, measure results, and keep improving. The sooner you find a repeatable motion that works, the sooner you’ll build momentum.

How To Craft A Winning Go To Market Strategy For Your Startup Read More »

Team Motivation: An AI + Human Perspective

Team Motivation: An AI + Human Perspective 

Today’s question is, how do we maintain team motivation during turbulent times?

In this blog by Las Vegas based FarsideHR Solutions, we’re going to take a modern approach to this age-old question. First we’re going to ask ChatGPT to summarize the basics. Then we’re going to add human experience and insights.

As a husband and wife CHRO and organizational effectiveness consulting duo, we’ve helped 70+ private and public companies solve for scaling, efficiency, productivity and performance.

Let’s see how AI + human experience tackles this perpetual management challenge.

ChatGPT:

Maintaining team motivation during turbulent times requires a multifaceted approach centered on clear communication, support, and adaptability. Firstly, ensure open and transparent communication. Regularly update the team on the situation, goals, and any changes, fostering a sense of security and trust. Encourage team members to voice their concerns and ideas, ensuring everyone feels heard and valued.

Secondly, reinforce a shared vision. Remind the team of the larger purpose and how their efforts contribute to the overall goals. This can help maintain a sense of direction and collective purpose.

Thirdly, provide support and resources. Offer training, tools, and mental health resources to help the team navigate challenges. Show empathy and understanding, acknowledging the difficulties they face.

Fourthly, promote a positive and inclusive culture. Celebrate small wins and recognize individual and team achievements. This boosts morale and fosters a sense of accomplishment. Encourage collaboration and teamwork, creating opportunities for team members to support and learn from each other.

Finally, be adaptable and flexible. Allow for adjustments in work processes and expectations to accommodate the changing circumstances. By implementing these strategies, leaders can sustain team motivation and resilience, even in the face of turbulence.

Jennifer:

As always, a solid checklist from our AI co-pilot.

Derek:

Of course, it’s missing a lot of context. So much of what goes into maintaining team motivation started way back during the recruiting process for each team member. My default belief is that creating a ‘Theory Y’ culture (that employees want to work, want to take responsibility and do not need much supervision) is best. That starts with screening and selecting who gets through the front door following intentional communication about the needs and interests of both the organization and the employee. A big shout out to Talent Acquisition teams who understand their strategic importance vs. just order taking!

Jennifer:

100%. The ‘deal’ for every organization sets expectations at the beginning of the relationship. Those expectations are either met or not met. A large gap in expectations vs reality creates a massive “I didn’t sign up for this!” mental deficit. And that can create a mental brick. There’s a big difference between working on a factory line, joining the army, working for private equity owned firms or venture capital firms. The deal is just different. If you’re entrepreneurial at heart, don’t join a 150,000 person organization and expect it to change fast. 

Derek:

I suppose managing expectations falls under the broad category of ‘culture’ and when we talk about culture, we have to talk about manager consistency and competency. Culture is ‘how we do things around here’ and if we have managers leading with inconsistent or random operating principles, it can add to confusion and the breakdown of trust. 

Jennifer:

And when I think of the highest performing and most motivated teams I’ve worked with, the presence or absence of trust has been the #1 differentiator. Some of the most motivated teams were fighting impossible odds to make the organization just survive. Some of the most demotivated teams no longer ‘assumed good intent’ whenever ANYTHING was said (goals, recognition or changes in direction).

Derek:

Which brings up the inconvenient truth – you can be doing everything ChatGPT suggests, but if you misrepresented expectations to people coming in the front door and then some/all managers act in erratic trust busting ways, then you can provide updates, talk about your vision, show support and celebrate wins at every all-hands. But your engagement scores are going to stay stubbornly in the red as people perceive the say/do gap in their day to day experiences. We’ve said it again and again, just focus on Making Managers Awesome

Jennifer:

This is the true change management/culture reset zone. Get the right people and managers on the bus in the right seats doing the right things. Then get the wrong people off the bus. Intentional organizational re-planning is necessary when full trust breakdown has happened. Some people can’t let things go, won’t trust new leaders with fresh momentum, or continue to obsess on marginal special interest goals that are no longer a priority. It’s not a popular thing to say, but the most motivated people can become quickly demotivated when management tolerates these unproductive behaviors. You have to also include removing the folks that can’t evolve as part of your motivational strategy.

Derek:

So we have:

  1. Proper recruiting and aligning on a clear deal/expectations at the front door.
  2. Focus on trust and confidence building across all management layers (Say it, do it, talk and tell success stories). Some of the ChatGPT suggestions may help guide managers who are still honing their craft.
  3. And don’t be afraid to actively exit those who don’t want to be on the bus or won’t get into the right seats doing the right things. It’s not your first choice, but don’t be afraid to do so.

Anything else to add?

Jennifer:

We can’t ignore the value of pay and rewards as a proper hygiene practice vs emergency response. This is a trust thing too. You just can’t get into the habit of saving people who have resigned with last minute bonuses and creating an environment where you have to quit to get recognized. Avoid ‘the squeaky wheel gets the grease’ trap.

Derek:

That’s a whole master class. Retention bonuses and stay bonuses alone are not a solution without the corresponding system wide reset on performance expectations. As with all complicated problems, a highly motivated team is the by-product of a well designed and executed management system.

Jennifer:

And that rounds out our additional insights:

  1. Pay and rewards are best set up as a proactive and fair system that people understand and can achieve.
  2. There are no simple listicles here. The key to success is an intentional high performing and motivational life-cycle system based on predictable/repeatable and trustworthy inputs and outputs. People need to understand how to be successful in this system. And if we take the ‘Theory Y’ approach, people will be motivated to achieve their highest potential if the system is well designed and consistently executed.

————————————-

About FarsideHR Solutions

As a husband and wife CHRO and organizational effectiveness consulting duo, we’ve helped 70+ private and public companies solve for scaling, efficiency, productivity and performance.

About Jennifer Farris 

Jennifer is a seasoned HR executive and consultant. She has been a part of the technology start-up scene for close to 20-years and has led many of her organizations through some of their highest growth and infrastructure scaling needs. Jennifer is currently the Chief People Officer at Verana Health. Prior to joining Verana, Jennifer was the Chief People Officer for Terminal. Before that she ran her own consulting firm where she worked with companies such as Virgin Galactic, Flexport, Grammarly, Ampush & Udemy.

Jennifer has her Masters from University of Edinburgh, Scotland and her BA from Santa Clara University.

About Derek Sidebottom 

Derek is a multi-industry 20+ year high growth HR executive with extensive talent, consulting and HR Tech product advisory experience. With multiple IPO’s, M&A’s, hyper growth scaling and top employer awards across diverse industries, Derek continues to lead and embrace excellence within talent dependent organizations. Derek holds a BA is Psychology from L’Université d’Ottawa, a Graduate Diploma in Human Resources from Humber College and an MBA from Athabasca University

 

 

Team Motivation: An AI + Human Perspective Read More »

NV Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar and Jeff Saling of StartUpNV present investment check to Adaract founders Marcus D'Ambrosio and Clay Payson.

Advice for Entrepreneurs Raising Venture Capital by Jeff Saling

It’s simple to raise money from venture investors… once you understand how venture investors think.  Like any group, investors are not all the same – but the advice is directionally accurate (and free).

Foundational reality – startups are a high risk asset class:

Google it… the public stock market has delivered more than 7% average annual returns for 100+ years, including during recessions. Real estate returns are similar. At a 7% annual return, an investment’s value doubles every 10 years. At 10% annual return, an investment doubles every 7 years. Investors count on this “7-10” rule (aka “the rule of 72”) to build wealth. While there are short term risks, it’s proven reliable over the long term. 

How do startup investments compare? As a high-risk investment class, startup venture funds must offer a significant upside to these traditional lower risk investments to attract capital. 

How to win at startup investing invest in a portfolio

Decades of history inform us that 75% of startups (15 of 20) fail. Google it. There are thousands of examples. No one intends or desires this failure rate. Many smart, motivated people are constantly working on improving this result, but so far “the best” funds have similar results. So, that 75% failure rate is the baseline assumption for startup venture investing.  

Of the 25% that don’t fail, roughly 5% (1 in 20) return more capital than was invested. That’s why venture funds and angel groups “bet” on portfolios of 20+ startups – to have a good chance for at least one big winner. The winners have to be big to make up for the losses and breakeven returns.  

Portfolio investment math – simplified

Venture funds  search through hundreds or thousands of startups and screen carefully to find companies that can return “at least 2 times the fund. For a small $10M fund, that means each company must have a strong chance to be acquired, creating a $20M profit to the fund – considering dilution, fund operating costs, etc. The “2x the fund” goal accounts for the historic 75% failed companies value going to zero and the 20% that make a small or breakeven return as net neutral (1x). 

Following this “2x method” to its logical conclusion, a $10M fund returns $30M, 50% more than traditional (rule of 72) type investing – with nearly all of the profit coming from one or two portfolio companies. Of course this is only true if the fund chooses the businesses and founders wisely AND invests at a “proper” company valuation.  

An example

A “small” $10M seed fund makes 30 investments ($333k avg). Each investment buys 15% of a startup company, imputing a $2.2M post money valuation to the startup. From the fund’s “2x” perspective, each startup company investment must have a strong potential to generate a $20M (2x the fund) net profit to the fund.  When funds consider prospective dilution at 50% from the early rounds to an exit, fund operating costs, etc, over a likely 7+ year investment horizon – the exit size and gross profit required is much larger to meet the “2x the fund” goal. 

Continuing the example, the startup in this scenario (valued at $2.2M) must be acquired for $270M ($20M/.075) to make the required profit of $20M for the fund’s 7.5% ownership, diluted in half from the original 15% due to later investments.  Fund management is considering whether the founding team can create a $270M company over 7(ish) years – AND get it to an exit.  As a means of comparison, Crunchbase and Seraph Investor document the average and median startup exit at $154M and $50M respectively.  With no dilution, the $270M requirement is $133M ($20M /.15) – still hard compared to the median.

Competing perspectives

Founders may be frustrated by this example with a “just a $2.2M valuation” – preferring $10M or more. If the fund agrees to $10M – and assuming the investment stays the same, fund ownership percentage drops to 3.3% (before dilution). The founder is now happy that they’re keeping more and getting “a proper valuation”. But the investor has a different perspective – focused on meeting the 2x goal. The fund managers are well aware of the odds of failure – even when all parties are talented, motivated, and diligent. So, how does the target for exit change?

With a $10M valuation, the company must sell for $1.25B ($20M /.016) to meet “2x the Fund” investment objectives – with 50% dilution. That’s a tall order… likely requiring at least $250M in rapidly growing annual revenue in a large market – and/or $80M in EBITDA.  The likelihood of meeting fund objectives in this scenario is slim, even for a great startup, in a large market, with strong founders.  

This high valuation scenario is where the protections of strong preferred terms (like full ratchet dilution, participating preferred with a multiple, etc.) enters an investor’s mind.  These terms mitigate investor risk at a low or middling exit, but place the founding team at great risk of losing the company with a down round or having a zero payout due to preferred multiples with a lower exit compared to the $1.25B requirement in this scenario. Investors will want one or the other (an investable valuation or strong terms) – food for thought on what constitutes a “realistic” valuation. Is this company truly a potential unicorn?  Can the founding team get it there and execute an exit?  

Advice

“Everyone” thinks their startup is a certain unicorn, but keep those median and average exit numbers in mind (along with the failure rate). A founder seeking investment should be aware of this general investor analysis and the valuation multiples and exits in their specific market. Founders should be able to clearly show how their company will be “the one” (out of 20) in the investor’s portfolio that will return at least 2x the fund.  The valuation at the start makes a huge difference in whether the investment is worth the risk for an investor.  As the investment rounds and fund sizes grow, the math gets tougher. 

My advice for founders, remembering this is free advice and likely worth at least 10x what you paid for it,  is that it’s better to have a small piece of a successfully exited company than a big piece of a failed startup.  

Advice for Entrepreneurs Raising Venture Capital by Jeff Saling Read More »

Beware the Carpetbaggers & Scalawags by Jeff Saling

Carpetbaggers come to town selling something sketchy (of dubious value) to “take” from locals without any intent of sticking around. Scalawags are their local enablers who lend credence to the carpetbaggers either out of naivete or because they’re in on it. As our startup ecosystem grows, we attract both – like moths to a flame. Beware.

I’ll (Jeff Saling) drop an occasional blog post in our newsletter to call out the behaviors I see – sometimes by name if it’s particularly egregious, and I hope our community will fight them off, like an infection. In chapter 1, I’ll pick on those who trade on the dreams and naivete of new founders. People or organizations that scam founders for cash and /or equity – – such as:

Charging founders a four figure amount to pitch to their investor group
Charging founders four figure amount and/or 2% equity to create a pitch deck, then access their “network”
Charging founders a four figure amount to “consult” on their business plan or financials – then pitch to their investor group
Getting professional help to create a great looking pitch deck is fine, but NEVER pay to pitch.

People or organizations that scam founders for equity with super sharky deals. This will happen even more as investment funds tighten.

Offer founders a $20k investment for 5 or 6% of their company… and access to their “network” of funders and mentors once they’ve completed their course.
Offer founders an investment – usually mid five or low six figures, then require they use the investor’s “professional services” to create pitch decks, business plans, rent office space, etc. – promising access to funders and mentors at the completion of a course.
You get the idea. These types of arrangements rarely work. Ask for success stats in advance – talk with other founders that have been in the program – and find them yourself. Don’t accept groomed references. You shouldn’t expect 100% great references – but be skeptical. It’s difficult because it seems SO REAL – SO POSSIBLE when you’re a founder and convinced you’ve got the next big thing.

Beware of Carpetbaggers and Scalawags.

Beware the Carpetbaggers & Scalawags by Jeff Saling Read More »

Introduction to Economics and Control market sizing template 2

Intro to Term Sheet Terminology

There is a lot of mystifying language and terminology used by experienced founders, investors, term sheets, and investing documents. But, it all revolves around just two issues: money and control. Jeff Saling will help unpack common startup investment language and terminology and help founders, investors, and the curious to understand what the terms mean, how they work together, and what the implications are for founders and startup investor(s).

Intro to Term Sheet Terminology Read More »

do the hard thing first pre seed startup funding 2

Intro to Raising Angel Capital Part 2: Building a Great Investor Summary

Building a Great Investor Summary. Learn to build an Investor Summary – not an Executive Summary. Answer just enough of what an angel investor wants to know in order to meet with you, but not so much that it’s overwhelming or verbose. Learn how to prepare your “deal room” to make due diligence as easy and fast as possible. Don’t be in a position where you get a verbal “yes”, then can’t close.

Intro to Raising Angel Capital Part 2: Building a Great Investor Summary Read More »