Channel leaders agree that nothing influences partner behavior more than ease of doing business. Vendors that minimize complexity and reduce barriers see stronger engagement, faster deal velocity, and higher returns, while those that allow friction to build risk partner disengagement and lost opportunities.

No factor shapes partner performance more than ease of doing business. In the channel, even the most generous incentives or innovative technologies can't overcome the drag of complex, time-consuming processes. Friction — whether in the form of convoluted deal registration, unclear rules of engagement, or inconsistent partner support — directly affects how partners behave and, ultimately, how well they perform. Vendors that underestimate this dynamic often struggle to keep partners engaged and productive.

At the Channel Executive Council (CEC) meeting in Denver, channel leaders underscored this reality. They noted that while vendors need frameworks to maintain control over pricing, compliance, and brand standards, those same frameworks can become barriers if not designed with simplicity in mind. When partners encounter unnecessary hurdles, their instinct is to look for easier alternatives, whether that means shifting business to another vendor or slowing down their engagement.

Ease of doing business isn't a soft concept. It's measurable in terms of partner participation rates, deal velocity, and revenue growth. Research consistently shows that partners prioritize vendors that make it easy to transact, support customers, and access resources. The opposite is also true: Partners avoid programs where the effort required outweighs the benefits gained. A rebate that looks attractive on paper quickly loses appeal if its reporting requirements are burdensome or if its qualification rules change from quarter to quarter.

This friction has a compounding effect. When a partner encounters obstacles in one area of engagement, such as program compliance, its perception of the vendor is altered across the board. The result is often disengagement, with the partner still maintaining a relationship but directing its energy elsewhere. For vendors, this silent withdrawal can be more damaging than open conflict because it reduces pipeline contribution and market presence without clear warning signs.

Channel leaders recognize that removing friction isn't about eliminating governance. Vendors must protect themselves against fraud, channel conflict, and compliance risks. The balance lies in creating guardrails that provide structure without suffocating initiative. For example, automating repetitive tasks, streamlining approval cycles, and making program rules transparent reduce partner frustration while still maintaining necessary oversight.

The discussion at the CEC retreat also highlighted that partner expectations have changed. Digital-first experiences are now the standard. Partners expect intuitive portals, real-time data, and responsive support. They compare their business interactions with vendors to the seamless digital experiences they encounter as consumers. Vendors that lag in modernizing partner interfaces risk being perceived as outdated or difficult, regardless of the quality of their products.

Ultimately, ease of doing business is a growth strategy. By minimizing friction, vendors create conditions where partners are more willing to invest, take risks, and prioritize their solutions. Simplicity translates into faster deal closure, higher adoption of enablement programs, and greater partner satisfaction. Vendors that view program design through the lens of partner effort will see stronger returns than those that focus only on internal control.

In this edition of In the Margins, Larry Walsh examines the CEC's discussion on what hampers partner relationships and what vendors can do to make things easier.