Partnerships generate revenue through third parties, so I track sourced and influenced pipeline as two separate lines. Blend them and you double-count with direct; the number inflates and nobody trusts the program.
The least-standardized area in GTM; most public figures come from ecosystem-tool vendors with self-selected data. All directional.
Shape of it
6 metrics
Pipeline originated by a partner (net-new that would not otherwise exist).
sum of opp value where source = partnerBenchmarkFor top performers, partner-attached revenue reaches ~58% of the total; early programs far lower. Keep sourced separate from influenced
The clearest proof the program creates net-new demand, not just rides existing deals.
Closed revenue a partner touched but did not originate.
BenchmarkTypically a multiple of sourced; publish the attribution rule (first- vs any-touch) so it does not double-count with direct
Captures assist value, but easily inflated and double-counted with direct.
Win rate on deals worked jointly with a partner.
co-sell wins / co-sell oppsBenchmarkPartner-attached deals close 46–50% faster and win 5–10% more; watch selection bias, since co-sell often tags already-warm deals
Tests whether co-selling actually lifts outcomes, or just tags warmer deals.
Share of signed partners producing at least one registered deal.
producing partners / total signedBenchmarkThe 80/20 pattern is near-universal: a small share drives most revenue
Total-partner counts are vanity; producing counts are the real program size.
Days from partner onboarding to first sourced opportunity.
BenchmarkAim within the first quarter; flag stalling past ~180 days
Leading indicator of onboarding effectiveness; long ramps predict partner churn.
Share of target accounts where you overlap with a partner (account mapping).
overlap accounts / target accountsTurns the ecosystem into a targeting layer; overlap accounts convert better.