Vendors are looking to concentrate resources on a few partners to hit 2027 targets. It can work, but only if you can tell the swarm from the selection.
By Larry Walsh
The end of the year is approaching fast, which means salespeople and channel account managers (CAMs) are leaning into partners, looking to convert as much existing pipeline as possible. In the back of everyone’s minds, though, is setting up sales for next year to lock in early revenue and drive growth beyond whatever targets are set.
In annual operations planning exercises, channel teams are looking for new strategies, programs, incentives, and approaches that will compel partners to create new opportunities, expand within existing accounts, and upsell on renewals. Traditionally, channel teams have approached this from an all-in perspective — how to get most of their partners engaged.
A new approach is taking root: swarming, where a vendor concentrates most of its attention and resources on specific partners it deems can drive the most revenue growth and returns.
The idea has much merit and isn’t without precedent. Vendors often run trials on new channel initiatives before releasing them broadly to all their partners. And the idea of focusing resources on specific pockets follows the old “NFL city strategy” of recruiting partners in major cities with large commercial market potential, rather than recruiting from just anywhere.
Let me be clear about what I mean by a swarm. It’s a time-boxed investment of CAM time, sales engineers, funds, and executive access in a handful of partners, measured against a revenue target. It isn’t tiering. It’s a hands-on effort layered on top of the tiers, and it has an end date.
Vendors are turning to swarming because they have high productivity goals and limited resources. Budgets have been squeezed for years, and each CAM has dozens of partners. Channelnomics research shows that CAMs spend only about 30% of their time working with partners. Partners are stretched too, and on big deals, vendors want to be in the room.
Does swarming work? I think so, under certain conditions. Partners that receive vendor support and investment tend to respond with more sales, and a CAM standing by your desk makes for a better working relationship. But vendors pick partners that are likely to grow, so it’s fair to ask how much is the swarm and how much is the pick. If the partners you swarmed didn’t outgrow similar ones you left alone, you’re really just measuring how good you are at picking winners.
The partner gets a vote too. The high performers you most want to swarm have the most options and the least spare capacity. And focus has a price. Concentrating funds and deal support on a few partners can stir up channel conflict with the rest. Partners just below the line get less attention with no explanation, and they’re the ones most likely to deprioritize you.
A partner that grows because your CAM is at their desk may stall when the CAM leaves. Vendors say they want partners to self-actuate. A swarm with no exit plan builds dependence.
I expect vendors to reach for AI to cover everyone outside the swarm. Will partners accept it? Our research has found that no vendor resource influences partner engagement more than the CAM, and taking the human out for everyone outside the swarm is a bet against that. Test it before you scale it.
If you’re going to swarm, do it with discipline: Pick partners based on growth potential rather than size, and include a few outside your top tier to test whether the swarm or the selection is driving results. Set a two-to-three-quarter window with a revenue target and clear commitments from both sides, keep a comparison group of similar partners you aren’t swarming so you can measure real lift, and plan the exit before you start so the partner doesn’t stall when the CAM’s gone. Then tell everyone else what they get and how to qualify next, because silence is how the middle becomes resentful.
The bottom line is that swarming is the right instinct for a resource-starved channel, but it’s a portfolio decision, not a program feature. Vendors that use it to bypass the broader channel will trade short-term returns for long-term attrition. Those that measure lift and keep the rest of the channel covered will get focus without losing reach.
*****************************************************************************
Larry Walsh is the CEO, chief analyst, and founder of Channelnomics. He’s an expert on the development and execution of channel programs, disruptive sales models, and growth strategies for companies worldwide.
