best practices for enhancing vendor/reseller relationships

Channelinsight

BEST PRACTICES: PART TWO

ENHANCING THE VENDOR/RESELLER RELATIONSHIP

http://channelinsight.com/

TABLE OF CONTENTS2

INTRODUCTION 3

SURVEY METHODOLOGY 5

HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE? 7

SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE? 14

THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END? 33

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS 47

Channelinsight© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential



© 2014 Channelinsight | Propreitary & Confidential

3


INTRODUCTION



INTRODUCTION4


Standing out from the crowd is a challenge for any business No less so for a manufacturer wanting to

distinguish itself among its many channel partners Fanciful marketing programs with little substance no longer cut the mustard For a manufacturer to stand as “hero” in a complex distribution channel, the first step is knowledge What works, and what doesn’t?

How do channel partners view their vendors? How far can manufacturers see down the channel to the end- customer? Which incentives motivate partners, producing revenue for both parties?This insight comes from a probing look into manufacturer/partner relationships A survey conducted by an independent

research firm, Silicon Valley Research Group, asked these questions and many more The questions were put to CEOs, officers, directors and managers of Fortune 500 and mid-size firms in the IT space, whose business depends on channel partners The results are telling

In this eBook we’ll explore what vendors and partners say about the complex dance between channel participants Some of what we learn is conventional wisdom But we also draw an unconventional conclusion—that fresh, accurate channel data can be the differentiator between a mediocre program or relationship and one that is highly profitable and mutually beneficial


SURVEY METHODOLOGY

5




SURVEY METHODOLOGY6


The survey from which our conclusions are drawn included a total of 295 Fortune 500 manufacturing companies,

and 195 of their U S channel partners All the companies were in the high tech industry, with average annual revenue of $848M and staffs averaging 5,859 people Companies included an even mix of large and mid-size business-to-business firms, with sales, marketing, and channel operations throughout the Americas, Europe/Africa/Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region Over half the companies derived more than 60% of their revenue from channel partners Channel partners included a mix of Value Added Resellers (VARs), distributors, and direct marketing retailers These firms averaged $125M in revenue and 75 employees They sold systems, sub-systems, software, and components, and their vendors included companies such as HP, Cisco, Microsoft, IBM, Dell, and Apple

The survey was conducted among owners, presidents, CEOs, vice presidents, directors, and managers, and included both qualitative and quantitative methods Qualitative, in-depth interviews provided insight and commentary, while the quantitative methodology provided results that can be projected to the larger population The margin of error is +/- 9 7% at the 95% confidence level and +/- 8 1% at the 90% confidence level


HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE?

7




HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE?8


I s the relationship a duel? A dance? Or worse yet, is the manufacturer getting the cold shoulder?

As noted in the survey methodology section, more than half the companies surveyed realize more than 60% of their revenue from their channel partners That’s a nice chunk of change So it behooves manufacturers to court those partners who put forth the greatest effort and generate the best results

But which ones are they?

HOW VENDORS & PARTNERS SEE EACH OTHER: DUEL OR DANCE?9


That’s the essential question that an effective channel data management program can answer First, however, let’s look at what the survey says about the expectations that manufacturers and channel partners have regarding each other

There are certain characteristics that manufacturers expect from channel partners as a given:

• Technical Expertise

• Customer Relationships

• Local Market Knowledge

Likewise, partners have their own set of expectations from manufacturers:

• Sales Leads and Best Practices

• Sales/Marketing Support

• Technical and Sales Training

• Market Research

“Manufacturers need be upfront, provide a timeline and then deliver on what is promised” – VAR Manager

http://channelinsight.com/channel-data-management


HOW TO CONTRIBUTE TO PARTNER SUCCESS10


The survey data took a deeper dive into the traits that partners consider important and effective to be successful These traits are listed in Table 1 below

WHAT IS IMPORTANT?

High Quality Products

Vendor Reputation in Marketplace

Competitive Pricing

Sales/Incentive Tracking/Reporting

Good Marketing Support Sales Training and/or Sales

Materials Good Incentive Programs

Technical Training

Competitive Benchmarking Reports

Breadth of Product Line

Face Time with Vendor Personnel

Sales Leads

Social Media

WHAT IS EFFECTIVE?

High Quality Products

Vendor Reputation in Marketplace

Competitive Pricing

Sales/Incentive Tracking/Reporting

Face Time with Vendor Personnel

Breadth of Product Line

Technical Training

Sales Training and/or Sales Materials

Good Marketing Support

Sales Leads

Good Incentive Programs

Social Media

Competitive Benchmarking Reports

Table 1

HOW WELL DO MANUFACTURERS SUPPORT THEIR PARTNERS?11


When asked how well manufacturers support their partners (see Fig 1), some activities and traits scored highly both in importance and ability to motivate, including:

• High Quality Products

• Vendor Reputation in Marketplace

• Competitive Pricing

Good tracking/reporting ability held the middle ground, followed by:

• Sales Training

• Marketing Support

• Good Incentive Programs

Social media was the outlier, ranking near the bottom in both importance and performance However social media is on the rise with savvy B2B buyers who are turning to search and social media for business recommendations



7,80

7,90

8,00

8,10

8,20

8,30

8,40

8,50

7,70 7,80 7,90 8,00 8,10 8,20 8,30 8,40 8,50 8,60

PERF

ORM

AN

CE

IMPORTANCE

CompetitiveBenchmarking

High/Quality Products

Vendor Reputation

CompetitivePricing

Good IncentivePrograms

Face Time

Social Media

Tracking/Reporting

Marketing Support

Product LineBreadth

Leads

Sales Training

Tech Training

Figure 1



For a manufacturer, traits such as product quality, company reputation, and competitive pricing are what it takes to get into and stay in the game Going beyond these traits, best practice in creating an effective manufacturer/partner relationship involves setting clear expectations, aligning goals, and setting up rules for communicating regularly

As Debra Delaney, President and CEO at CCI, states in her post “What Makes a Partnership Work?” from her blog Channel

Marketing Strategies for Success, “What does matter is that you have mutual respect, and that you support each other’s goals and values… Best practice is to establish simple rules around how often you communicate to make sure you are staying on track and not drifting apart …Equally important is establishing how each partner will be rewarded ”

And that brings us to the issue of sales incentive programs

http://www.channelmanagement.com/?s=What+Makes+a+Partnership+Work

http://www.channelmanagement.com/?s=What+Makes+a+Partnership+Work


SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?

14




SALES INCENTIVE PROGRAMS: MOTIVATE OR SALIVATE?15


“The most effective sales incentive program helps support a good product and vendor, and as a result, increases sales ” – Executive Director, Distributor



When was the last time a channel partner drooled over your incentive program?

The sad fact is that many sales incentive programs are largely ineffective The survey probed both manufacturers and partners to determine what works and what doesn’t when it comes to sales incentives Table 2 describes which incentive programs rank most important among partners



Which Incentive Programs Are Important to Partners?

WHAT IS MOTIVATING?

Big deal discounts

Performance based

MDF

Short-term price-based

SPIF

Volume rebates

Non-payment incentive

WHAT IS EFFECTIVE?

Performance based

Big deal discount

Volume rebates

Short-term price-based

SPIF

Non-payment incentive

MDF

Table 2



In the qualitative research, partners had a mouthful to say to manufacturers about sales incentive programs Here are some dos and don’ts gleaned from these interviews:

What To Do:

We love it when you provide cash incentives Cash is king The more cash the better

• Create progressive incentives

• Make goals realistic and attainable

• Pay consistently and quickly

• Communicate program details and success tips clearly and simply

• Respond in a timely way to calls and short shipping times

What NOT To Do:

• Don’t make incentives too small

• Don’t overlook the need to market the program

• Don’t create confusion with complexity

• Don’t rely on prizes They are not universally appealing and present tax complications

• Don’t ignore outstanding partner successes Doing so will hamper participation in future programs



Do Sales incentive Programs Really Increase Sales? When done properly, the answer is yes You can change partner behavior with a well-designed program that incorporates the dos and don’ts noted above, especially these:

• Use cash, not prizes

• KISS (Keep It Super Simple)

• Clearly communicate program details and success tips

• Automate to ensure fast and accurate payments

Which Incentive Programs Work Best?The survey probed respondents about program effectiveness by type (see Figure 2) Channel partners rated the following types of programs as most effective:

• Performance Based

• Big Deal Discounts

• Volume Rebates

The programs most likely to motivate partners included the following:

• Big Deal Discounts

• Performance Based

• Market Development Funds (MDF)



7,70

7,80

7,90

8,00

8,10

8,20

8,30

8,40

7,60 7,70 7,80 7,90 8,00 8,10 8,20 8,30 8,40

MO

ST E

FFEC

TIV

E

LIKELY TO MOTIVATE

MDF

SPIF

Volume Rebates

Non-payment programs

PerformanceBased

Big DealDiscounts

Figure 2 What kind of incentive programs are effective?



“We want MDF funds that we can use for custom programs ” – Manager, Retailer



Manufacturers were also asked to rank their rebate programs on the basis of four criteria (see Figure 3) 93% of manufacturers rebate programs are performance driven

Manufacturers favored performance based programs, for example, those using metrics such as year-over-year growth or sales quotas An example of an objective based program is one using new customer acquisition as a metric Programs that allocate MDFs are an example of activity-based programs, while a ranking system such as Platinum/Gold/Silver describes a program based plan

93%89% 89%

86%

80%

85%

90%

95%Figure 3

Perfo

rmance

Objectiv

e

Activity

Progra

m

PERFORMANCE METRICS23


When manufacturers were asked how many of their incentive programs met or exceeded their revenue performance goals, 86% said that “All, Most, or Some” of their programs did so (Fig 4) However, Only 28% could answer “All or Most ”

Figure 4 86% of incentive programs meet or exceed incentive goals.

4%

24%

58%

9%6%

How many of your incentive programsmeet or exceed revenue performance goals?

All

Most

Some

Few

None

SALES INCENTIVES MEAN REVENUE AND PROFIT24


The survey indicates that sales incentives programs contribute significantly to channel partners’ sales and profits Incentives can boost both these metrics as high as 40 percent (see Figure 5) In fact, channel partners depend on various types of incentive programs for revenue (see Figure 6)

Figure 5

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Part

ne

rs

Incremental Sales

Incentives Can Boost Sales By 40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Part

ne

rs

Incremental Pro�t

Incentives Can Add 40% To Partner Pro�ts

SALES INCENTIVES MEAN REVENUE AND PROFIT25


Channel partners rely significantly on incentive programs from the manufacturer for revenue

* Average Impact on Revenue

Back-end Rebates 18.4%

Revenue Rebates 17.3%

MDF 16.6%

Deal Reg 14.8%

Co-Op 14.0%

Figure 6

LATE PAYMENTS CAN DAMAGE THE RELATIONSHIP26


Partners want prompt and accurate payment for fulfilling their end of the bargain in an incentive program Yet only 7% of manufacturers pay incentives in less than 14 days (see Figure 7) Additionally, only 40% of manufacturers calculate and process incentive payments automatically all or most of the time

Figure 7

8%

32%

27%

16%

17%

What percent of incentive payments are calculated

and processed automatically?

All

Most

Some

Few

None0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100110120

# R

esp

on

de

nts

# of Days to Pay

How many days does it take to process and pay partner incentives?

7% of manufacturers pay incentives in under 14 Days

http://channelinsight.com/customer-success-story/customer-success-story-3-data-collection-commission-and-incentive-payment-benefits

http://channelinsight.com/customer-success-story/customer-success-story-3-data-collection-commission-and-incentive-payment-benefits

LATE PAYMENTS CAN DAMAGE THE RELATIONSHIP27


Resellers are likely to remember late payments And they may perceive “late” differently than the vendor because of the time difference between claim submission and payment For example, if it takes 45 days to get a claim submitted and processed, and another 45 days before that claim is paid, that’s 90 days In the reseller’s mind, that’s a late payment, which may feel like a burr under the saddle of the relationship

AVOIDING INCENTIVE OVERPAYMENT28


The survey found that respondents run an average of 21 channel incentive programs annually, costing on average 11% of their annual channel revenue (see Figure 8) Among survey respondents, this figure amounts to $31,800,000 The survey also found that 6% of channel incentives were believed to be overpayments (see Figure 8), costing vendors approximately $2 1M

Figure 8 Average Incentive overpayment is 6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0 - 9

10 -

19

20 -

29

30 -

39

40 -

49

50 -

59

60 -

69

70 -

79

80+

0 - 4

5 - 9

10 -

14

15 -

19

20 -

24

25 -

29

30 -

34

35 -

40

% R

esp

on

de

nts

% of channel incentives believed to be overpayments

Average 6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

% R

esp

on

de

nts

Incentives spend as % of channel revenue

Average 11%

http://channelinsight.com/sites/default/files/assets/Channelinsight_IncentiveManager.pdf

AVOIDING INCENTIVE OVERPAYMENT29


These survey results indicate that an otherwise successful incentive program could be overshadowed by a number of administrative problems, such as:

• Slow manual processes

• Late program analysis

• Calculation inaccuracies

The results further emphasize the need for a fully automated system to gather timely, accurate, and reliable data to manage incentive programs effectively

• Program abuses

• Duplicate claims

• Partner frustration due to slow payments

IMPORTANCE OF INCENTIVE PROGRAMS30


How do manufacturers know what they are getting out of their incentive programs? The survey indicates that 38% of manufacturers calculate ROI on their incentive spend (see Figure 9)

38%

52%

72% 73%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Calculate ROI onincentive spend

Test programsbefore launch

Pay on NET Revenue

Required to submit claims

Are You Getting the Most Out of Your Channel Incentive Programs?

Figure 9 38% of manufacturers calculate ROI on Incentive Spend



When asked about the importance of various criteria relating to their incentive programs, respondents rated the following as somewhat or very important (see Figure 10):

• Testing and modeling of incentive programs before launching (64 7%)

• Real-time visibility into the performance of incentive programs (81 4%)

• Ability to compare performance against pre-set program goals (85 3%)

• Identification of over/under performing incentive programs (78 4%)

• Speed of incentive payment (64 7%)



However, only 34% of respondents on average were somewhat or very satisfied with their ability to meet these criteria This discrepancy between importance and satisfaction spells opportunity for manufacturers who can put automated information systems into place to improve satisfaction levels

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

5,0

1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0

Importance

Satisfaction

Testing and modelingof incentive programsbefore launching.

Real-‐time visibility into incentive performance

Compare performanceagainst program goals

Identify over/underperforming programs

Rapid incentivepayment

Figure 10 Incentive Programs - All Respondents


THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?

33




THE INFORMATION “CHUNNEL”: IS THERE LIGHT AT THE END?34


Preposterous! That’s how the idea of a tunnel under the English Channel was first received It’s also the way some manufacturers may think about their ability to see down the sales funnel to the ultimate end-customer

Survey respondents were asked about their ability to identify the end-customer in their indirect sales channel, as well as market segmentation data concerning that end-use customer (see Figure 11)

Figure 11 Only 34% of Manufacturers have actionable-end customer data

39%

28%

22%

6%

4%

Can you identify the end-customer in your indirect sales?

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

18%

33%34%

10%

5%

Can you identify the end-customer market segmentation in your indirect sales?



From the 67% of respondents who reported that they can “Usually or Always” identify the end-customer, 51% of those can usually or always identify the end-customer market segment (see Figure 11)

This means only 34% of manufacturers have actionable end-customer data, meaning the ability to know not only who made the purchase, but also what was purchased and where



Among respondents, 87% were confident in their ability to identify their channel revenue by partner type However, 54% could not segment their channel partners by the market segments they serve (see Figure 12)

54%33%

8%2%

4%

Can you segment your indirect sales revenue by channel partner type?

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

Can you organize your channel partners by the segments they serve?

Companysize

Vertical market

Figure 12 54% of Manufacturers know where their partners are, but do not know who they serve.



As to the source of their information, manufacturers rely heavily on self-reporting or their own internal research to identify end-customers (See Figure 13)

57% 54%

28%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Internal team research End-customer self-description

3rd party service

What is your source for end-customer segmentation information?

Figure 13 54% of manufacturers rely heavily on self-reporting & 57% on costly internal research to identify end-customers



Given the variety and complex nature of today’s sales incentive and rebate programs, and the millions of dollars being paid out to channel partners, manufacturers cannot afford to rely on partial or inaccurate data Nor can they afford the cost of manually processing data, which leads to problems such as the following:

• Calculation inaccuracies

• Resource intensive claims processing

• Incentive program fraud and abuses

• Inability to adjust course while a program is underway

• Inability to guarantee accuracy when paying earned rebates or MDFs to partners

• Inability to ensure timely payments to partners



Best practice dictates an automated data gathering system that ensures accuracy, timeliness, and transparency for both vendor and partner

74%

61%

43%

24%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Channel partner self-description

Internal teamresearch

POS transaction 3rd party service

What is your source for channel partner segmentation information?

Figure 14 43% rely on POS from the partner & 24% from a 3rd party

http://channelinsight.com/products-ccrm-block2



For channel partner segmentation data, 74% of manufacturers rely on self-description by channel partners

Also, 43% of manufacturers depend on channel partners for point-of-sale (POS) transaction data (see figure 14)

Traditionally, the manual processing of claims and rebates has placed a huge burden on the partner To claim benefits, the partner must track sales and submit claims with proof of performance

The manufacturer must then manually verify these claims This often leads to requests for more information and delays before claims are finally paid out



Best practice in gathering POS data to support incentive programs calls for an automated approach that can accomplish the following:

• Automatically evaluate POS data to determine which transactions meet eligibility requirements for each rebate program

• Automatically calculate rebates across all programs

• Automatically process claims without the need for partners to submit paperwork

• Automatically eliminate errors that are inherent in manual processing

• Eliminate the need for “shadow” accounting by channel partners, leading to improved relations

Automation ultimately leads to reduced costs by eliminating overpayments and mistakes, and by reducing administrative costs The result: more dollars available for programs

PARTNER SEGMENTATION AND TIERING42


What do manufacturers think about the value of tiering or classifying channel partners? On average, 66% considered end-customer and partner segmentation issues as “Important or Very Important” (Figure 15)

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0

Importance

Satisfaction

Compare end-customersegment growth toindustry benchmarks

Target incentive programs to speci�c end-customer segments

Determine optimal partner coverage by market segment

Prioritze channel partners to drop

Figure 15 Partner Tiering – All Respondents



Following are the reasons that manufacturers value tiering:

• Prioritize channel partners to invest in (47%)

• Prioritize channel partners to retain (46%)

• Prioritize channel partners to drop (40%)

• Determine optimal partner coverage by market segment (42%)

• Target incentive programs to reach specific end-customer segments (31%)

• Compare end-customer segment growth to industry benchmarks (29%)

However, only 39% of respondents on average were somewhat or very satisfied with their ability to do so



Craig DeWolf also notes: “Assuming you have a means for measuring performance at the partner level, you have the basis for your partner scorecards ”

In other words, once criteria are established, measurement is the key Here again, best practice calls for an automated system to gather the needed data reliably, accurately, and in a timely fashion

PARTNER SCORECARDS45


Setting up a partner scorecard is a best practice that can address many if not all the reasons noted above

What goes onto the scorecard depends entirely on the nature of the manufacturer’s business and that of the channel partners

According to CCI Global Channel Management, below are the top ten scorecard metrics:

1 Total Sales Revenue

2 Technology Expertise

3 Operational Efficiency

4 Mindshare

5 Sales Metrics

1 Current Revenue Model

2 Vertical Expertise

3 Company Health

4 Business Plan

5 End-User Satisfaction

For more information on Scorecarding, please see: Key Scorecarding Practices for Channel Success | Top 10 Scorecarding Metrics”

http://www.channelmanagement.com/channel-wisdom/white-papers-ebooks/landing-scorecarding/

PARTNER SCORECARDS46


Some basic information to consider is provided in a post by Craig DeWolf entitled “Creating Partner Scorecards” from the CCI blog, Channel Marketing Strategies for Success His list includes the following criteria:

• Minimum number of new deals registered per year (per sales rep)

• Utilization rate for Co-op/MDF spending

• Close/Win ratio of all deals registered

• Average time to close for all deals

• Close/Win ratio for all leads distributed to the partner

• Minimum attachment rates for specific products or service packs

• Year-over-year revenue growth

• Support calls received, or received without escalation

• Average gross margin per sale

• Average deal size/value

http://www.channelmanagement.com/blog/creating-partner-scorecards/


SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

47




SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS48


Following is a summary of highlights from the research regarding channel partner and end-customer segmentation:

• Only 34% have actionable end-customer data

• 54% rely on self-reporting for identification of partners and end-customers

• 87% can always or usually segment their channel revenue by partner type

• 54% cannot identify partner market segments

• 66% believe it is important, or very important, to use partner and end-customer data in planning and decision-making

• Only 39% are somewhat or very satisfied with the data available

Regarding incentive programs, these highlights emerge:

• 93% of Rebate Programs are performance-based

• 38% calculate ROI on incentive spend

• Fewer than 7% pay rebates in less than 14 days

• 6% of incentives are overpaid

• 75% consider incentive program Best Practices to be important or very important

• 33% are somewhat or very satisfied with incentive program Best Practices implementation

BEST PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS49


For Partner Tiering

• Develop reliable end-customer segmentation data

• Segment resellers based on POS transaction data

• Use segmentation to prioritize partners to invest in

• Compare end-customer sales to industry benchmark

• Target incentive programs to specific end-customer segments

• Determine optimal partner coverage by market segment

• Prioritize channel partners to drop

• Prioritize channel partners to retain

For Incentive Programs

• Calculate ROI on incentive spend

• Speed incentive payments

• Validate accuracy of incentive payments

• Gain real-time visibility into incentive program performance

• Identify over/under performing programs

• Compare performance against program goals

• Test and model incentive programs before launch

For Both

• Rate your importance and satisfaction for each practice on a scale from 1 – 5:

• Importance Scale: 1 Very Unimportant; 5 Very Important

• Satisfaction Scale: 1 Very Dissatisfied; 5 Very Satisfied

MOVING FORWARD50


This independent survey sheds invaluable light on the current state of affairs between manufacturers and their channel partners in the high-tech arena One might reasonably assume that similar results could be derived from vendors and resellers in other industry segments

One insight gleaned from the survey is that respondents seem aware of best practices regarding sales incentives and partner segmentation, but don’t always have the means to practice them! Satisfaction levels lag behind performance on a number of criteria The antidote: fast, accurate, timely, reliable channel data to help manufacturers better manage and enhance their partner relationships

http://channelinsight.com/Product-Overview

CLOSING NOTES51


The content presented in this eBook is intended to provide foundational information to help with channel partner management, as well as provide best practices for channel data management

To assist your effort further, this information can be supplemented by other best practice white papers offered by Channelinsight including:

1 Best Practices in Channel Partner Data Collection

2 Best Practices for Using Data To Drive Channel Sales Growth

3 Best Practice in Channel Point-of-Sale for Timely Incentive Rebates

Additional reference materials may be found at www.channelinsight.com

About Channelinsight

Channelinsight the industry leader and pioneer in channel data management, delivering a cloud-based application and enablement services provides manufacturers with visibility into every partner and every end-customer in every transaction, in real time – allowing them to gain the insight necessary to drive sales and optimize inventory Channelinsight collects “raw” POS and inventory data from tens of thousands of channel partners globally, and processes over $120 billion in channel sales transactions annually Customers benefiting from this 7x24x365 solution include: HP, TE Connectivity, AMD, Sharp Electronics, Microsoft, Smart Technologies and more Channelinsight is backed by Rho Ventures, Sequel Venture Partners and Vedanta Capital, and is headquartered in Denver, CO with offices in Palo Alto, CA, as well as globally

http://channelinsight.com/white-papers/best-practices-channel-partner-data-collection

http://channelinsight.com/white-papers/best-practices-using-data-drive-channel-sales-growth

http://channelinsight.com/white-papers/white-paper-best-practice-channel-point-sale-timely-incentive-rebates

http://www.channelinsight.com


CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS

1875 Lawrence Street, Suite 1200Denver, CO 80202

Phone: 303-293-0212 855-5-Ci-DataFax: 303-293-0213

Email: [email protected]: www channelinsight.com

Channelinsight

mailto:info%40channelinsight.com?subject=



best practices for enhancing vendor/reseller relationships

Technology

fromchannel partners

vendors partners seeeach

channel operationsthroughout

survey methodologyenhancing

survey methodology section

accurate channel data

thecomplex dance

manufacturing companies