Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Short-term (< 3 months)
Last year, a B2B SaaS founder told me they were spending $15,000 monthly on "proven" growth tactics—LinkedIn ads, content syndication, influencer partnerships. Their results? 12 qualified leads and zero conversions. Sound familiar?
Here's the uncomfortable truth: most startups are drowning in growth advice that treats acquisition like a checklist. "Try these 47 growth hacks!" "Follow this proven funnel!" But here's what nobody talks about—every business is different, and what worked for them probably won't work for you.
After working with dozens of startups, I've seen this pattern over and over. Founders burn through budgets testing "proven" strategies instead of systematically finding what actually works for their specific situation. The solution isn't more growth hacks—it's lean traction testing.
In this playbook, you'll discover:
Why the Bullseye Framework beats random growth experiments every time
How to test 19 traction channels in 90 days without breaking your budget
The "one thing" principle that prevents startup founders from chasing every shiny object
Real-world examples of non-scalable tactics that led to scalable growth
How to identify your single best distribution channel in under 6 weeks
Reality Check
What the growth gurus won't tell you
Walk into any startup accelerator or browse through growth marketing Twitter, and you'll hear the same advice on repeat:
"Growth hack your way to product-market fit!" They'll show you case studies of companies that scaled to millions using viral loops, referral programs, or content marketing. The implication? Copy their playbook, and you'll get their results.
Here's what the industry typically recommends:
Start with content marketing - "Everyone needs a blog and SEO strategy"
Build viral features - "Add sharing and referral mechanics to everything"
Optimize your funnel - "Focus on conversion rates and email sequences"
Scale what works - "Double down on successful channels"
Automate everything - "Use growth hacking tools and scripts"
This conventional wisdom exists because survivorship bias. We only hear about the tactics that worked for companies that made it big. We don't hear about the hundreds of failed experiments, the channels that burned money, or the "proven" strategies that fell flat.
The bigger problem? Most growth advice treats acquisition like a one-size-fits-all solution. But your SaaS selling to enterprise clients needs completely different tactics than a B2C app targeting teenagers. Your budget, timeline, and resources are unique. Yet everyone follows the same playbook and wonders why they're not getting results.
What the gurus miss is this: successful companies didn't start with the tactics that scaled them—they started by systematically testing what worked for their specific situation. Then they scaled what worked and killed what didn't.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
Three months ago, I was brought in as a consultant for a B2B SaaS startup that was bleeding money on acquisition. The founders had raised a decent seed round and were under pressure to show traction. Their approach? Try everything at once.
They were running Facebook ads (targeting too broad), publishing blog content (that nobody was reading), cold emailing prospects (with terrible response rates), and building a referral program (that nobody used). Sound chaotic? It was. They were spending $25,000 monthly across six different channels with almost nothing to show for it.
The breaking point came when their runway dropped to eight months. The founders realized they needed a systematic approach, not more random experiments. That's when they called me.
My first question wasn't "What tactics should we try?" It was "What have you actually tested, and how do you know what's working?" The answer was painful—they had no real data. They were making decisions based on vanity metrics and gut feelings.
Here's what I discovered during my audit:
The Founder's LinkedIn Problem: The CEO had been posting sporadically on LinkedIn with decent engagement, but they'd never systematically tested whether this could drive actual business results. It was just something he did "when he had time."
The Expensive Channel Trap: They'd committed to a six-month content marketing agency contract because "everyone said SEO was essential." Three months in, they had published 24 articles with zero qualified leads to show for it. The content was generic and didn't address their target audience's specific pain points.
The Paid Ads Reality: Their Facebook and Google ads were bringing in leads, but the conversion rates were terrible. They were optimizing for cost-per-click instead of product-channel fit. Most leads never even activated their trial.
The founders wanted me to "fix" their existing channels. Instead, I suggested we start over with a systematic testing approach. They weren't thrilled, but with eight months of runway left, they agreed to try something different.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
Instead of trying to fix their broken channels, we implemented what I call the Lean Traction Testing Framework—a systematic approach to finding your best acquisition channel without burning through your budget.
Here's exactly what we did:
Step 1: The Channel Audit (Week 1)
We mapped out all 19 possible traction channels using the Bullseye Framework. But instead of picking our favorites, we scored each channel based on three criteria specific to their business:
Cost - How much would it cost to get meaningful data?
Time - How quickly could we see results?
Fit - How well did the channel match their target audience's behavior?
Step 2: The Three-Track Testing (Weeks 2-8)
Instead of testing one channel at a time, we selected three channels and tested them simultaneously with strict constraints:
Track 1 - Personal Branding (The Founder's LinkedIn Discovery): We turned the CEO's sporadic LinkedIn posting into a systematic content experiment. He committed to posting three times per week with specific content pillars: industry insights, behind-the-scenes startup content, and thought leadership pieces. We tracked engagement, connection requests, and—most importantly—inbound demo requests.
Track 2 - Direct Outreach (The Relationship Channel): Rather than cold emailing strangers, we focused on warm outreach through the founder's existing network. We created a systematic process for reaching out to former colleagues, industry connections, and mutual contacts. The key? We positioned the conversations as "getting feedback" rather than selling.
Track 3 - Partnership Testing (The Integration Play): We identified three complementary SaaS tools their target audience already used and tested partnership opportunities. Instead of formal partnership agreements, we started with simple content collaborations and cross-promotion experiments.
Step 3: The Weekly Reality Check (Weeks 2-8)
Every Friday, we reviewed the data with brutal honesty. No vanity metrics, no excuses. We tracked three things for each channel:
Cost per qualified lead
Lead-to-trial conversion rate
Trial-to-paid conversion rate
Step 4: The Pivot Protocol (Week 6)
By week 6, the data was clear. The partnership track wasn't working—the partner companies were too busy with their own priorities. Instead of continuing, we pivoted to testing a fourth channel: community participation. The founder started actively participating in three industry Slack communities and Reddit groups, sharing insights without pitching.
Step 5: The Double-Down Decision (Week 9)
After eight weeks of testing, we had clear winners. Personal branding on LinkedIn was generating qualified leads at $47 each, with a 23% trial conversion rate. Community participation was slower but bringing in higher-quality leads. Direct outreach was working but wasn't scalable with their small team.
The decision? Double down on personal branding while systematically scaling community participation. We killed the partnership experiments and paused direct outreach to focus resources on what was actually working.
The key insight that changed everything: We treated each channel like a scientific experiment, not a marketing campaign. We had clear hypotheses, defined success metrics, and time-boxed testing periods. When something wasn't working, we killed it quickly instead of throwing good money after bad.
Test Design
Define clear hypotheses and success metrics for each channel before spending a dollar. Treat every experiment like a scientist, not a marketer.
Resource Focus
Limit yourself to testing maximum 3 channels simultaneously. More channels mean diluted attention and unclear results.
Quick Kills
Set up weekly review sessions to kill underperforming channels fast. Failed experiments should die within 6 weeks, not 6 months.
Scaling Protocol
When you find a winning channel, resist the urge to immediately test new ones. Double down and systematically scale what works first.
After eight weeks of systematic testing, the results spoke for themselves:
Cost Reduction: Monthly customer acquisition costs dropped from $25,000 to $7,200—a 71% reduction. But more importantly, they were now acquiring customers from channels that could actually scale.
Quality Improvement: Lead-to-paid conversion rates improved from 3.2% to 14.7%. Why? Because leads from personal branding and community participation were pre-qualified and genuinely interested in the solution.
Scalability Discovery: Within three months, the founder's LinkedIn content was generating 15-20 qualified leads monthly. By month four, they hired a content manager to systematize the process, and lead volume doubled without the founder working more hours.
Runway Extension: The combination of reduced acquisition costs and improved conversion rates extended their runway from 8 months to 18 months, giving them breathing room to focus on product development instead of survival mode.
But here's the unexpected outcome: the systematic testing process became their competitive advantage. While competitors were still throwing money at Facebook ads and hoping for the best, this startup had identified their specific growth channels and could scale predictably.
Six months later, they closed a Series A round. The investors weren't just impressed by their growth metrics—they were impressed by their systematic approach to finding and scaling acquisition channels.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
Here are the seven lessons that emerged from this experience:
Channel-market fit beats product-market fit for early growth: You can have the best product in the world, but if you're marketing it in the wrong channels, you'll struggle. Find where your customers actually hang out.
Constraints breed creativity: Limiting ourselves to three simultaneous tests forced us to think strategically about channel selection rather than trying everything at once.
"Do things that don't scale" isn't just a motto—it's a testing strategy: The founder's personal LinkedIn content couldn't scale to 10,000 customers, but it could scale to 100. That's enough to validate the channel before systematizing it.
Your best channels might surprise you: Community participation wasn't on their original list, but it became their second-best acquisition channel. Stay flexible in your testing approach.
Speed matters more than perfection: Six weeks is enough time to get meaningful data from most channels. Don't spend months optimizing a channel that fundamentally doesn't work for your audience.
Network effects compound: The founder's LinkedIn content not only generated direct leads but also strengthened relationships that led to partnerships, investor introductions, and talent acquisition.
Data beats intuition every time: The founders initially wanted to focus on content marketing because "everyone said it was essential." The data showed personal branding was 5x more effective for their specific situation.
What I'd do differently next time? Start with even stricter time constraints. Six weeks per channel test instead of eight. The extra two weeks rarely provide significantly better data, but they do delay your pivot decisions.
This approach works best for early-stage companies with limited budgets who need to find traction quickly. It's less effective for companies with abundant resources who can afford to test multiple expensive channels simultaneously.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups implementing lean traction testing:
Focus on channels where you can directly reach decision-makers
Test personal branding for founder-led growth in B2B markets
Prioritize channels with shorter feedback loops (community, outreach, partnerships)
Track trial-to-paid conversion as your primary success metric
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce stores implementing lean traction testing:
Test visual channels first (Instagram, Pinterest, TikTok) for product discovery
Focus on channels where you can showcase products in action
Prioritize channels with high intent buyers (Google Shopping, Amazon, marketplaces)
Track customer lifetime value and repeat purchase rates as key metrics