Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Medium-term (3-6 months)
OK, so you know how everyone's telling SaaS founders to "build a community"? Right, but here's what they don't tell you - most Slack communities end up as digital ghost towns. I learned this the hard way when I watched multiple B2B startups pour months into building what looked like thriving communities, only to see them turn into notification graveyards within six months.
The problem isn't that community building doesn't work. The problem is that most SaaS founders approach it like they're building a product feature instead of fostering actual human connections. They think slapping up a Slack workspace and dropping some product announcements will magically create engagement.
After working with startups that struggled with this exact challenge, I've seen what actually works. And it's not what the growth gurus are preaching. Here's what you'll learn from my experience:
Why treating your Slack community like a support channel kills engagement
The automation mistake that makes communities feel corporate and dead
How to structure Slack channels that actually encourage meaningful conversations
The counter-intuitive approach to member onboarding that creates advocates
When to use bots vs. human interaction for maximum community health
This isn't about vanity metrics or building a massive audience. It's about creating a space where your users genuinely want to hang out - and how that transforms your entire business. Let me show you the playbook that actually works.
Industry Reality
What the SaaS playbooks tell you about community building
Every SaaS growth guide tells you the same thing about community building: create a Slack workspace, invite your users, set up some channels, and watch the magic happen. The conventional wisdom goes something like this:
Launch with 5-7 standard channels - #general, #introductions, #feature-requests, #support, #random
Automate everything - Welcome bots, automated announcements, scheduled content
Focus on growth metrics - Member count, message volume, daily active users
Use it as a support channel - Redirect customer questions from email to Slack
Push product updates constantly - Keep everyone informed about new features
This approach exists because it feels logical and measurable. You can point to member growth, track engagement metrics, and show stakeholders that you're "building community." Plus, it seems efficient - why not use your community space for customer support and product marketing?
But here's where this conventional wisdom falls apart in practice: you end up with a corporate bulletin board, not a community. When every interaction feels transactional, when bots are doing most of the talking, and when the primary purpose is clearly to serve the company rather than the members, people check out mentally.
The real issue is that most SaaS founders are optimizing for the wrong metrics. They're measuring what's easy to count rather than what actually matters - genuine human connection and mutual value creation. A thriving community isn't about having thousands of members; it's about having members who genuinely care about each other's success.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
I encountered this challenge while working with a B2B startup that was desperately trying to build user engagement around their project management SaaS. They'd followed all the standard advice - created a Slack workspace, invited their trial users, set up the "recommended" channel structure, and implemented automated welcome sequences.
After three months, they had about 800 members. Sounds good, right? But here's the reality: daily active users were under 5%, most channels had zero activity, and the few messages that did appear were either support requests or the founder posting product updates to crickets. The community felt like a corporate announcement board where conversations went to die.
The client was frustrated because they'd invested significant time and energy into this initiative, but it wasn't delivering the promised results. Users weren't becoming more engaged with the product, retention wasn't improving, and they certainly weren't seeing the word-of-mouth growth that community advocates promise.
What made this particularly interesting was the contrast with their actual user behavior. When I analyzed their product usage data, I discovered something fascinating: their most engaged users were already forming informal networks. They were connecting on LinkedIn, sharing tips in industry forums, and even organizing their own meetups. The community desire was there - but our Slack workspace wasn't capturing it.
The problem became clear during user interviews. People weren't joining our community conversations because they didn't see other community members as peers worth learning from. Instead, they saw a company trying to extract value from them through engagement. The automation made everything feel impersonal, and the channel structure encouraged isolation rather than cross-pollination of ideas.
This experience taught me that community building isn't about creating a digital space and hoping people will naturally engage. It's about understanding what your users actually want from each other, then designing systems that facilitate those genuine connections.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
Instead of following the standard playbook, I took a completely different approach based on what I'd learned about human behavior in digital spaces. The key insight was this: people don't join communities to be marketed to - they join to solve problems with peers who understand their struggles.
First, I rebuilt the entire channel structure around user workflows rather than company convenience. Instead of generic channels like #general and #feature-requests, we created problem-specific spaces: #scaling-team-processes, #integration-nightmares, #reporting-hell. Each channel name immediately communicated value to someone facing that specific challenge.
The magic happened when we shifted from broadcasting to facilitating. Rather than posting product updates, I started sharing tactical content that solved real problems. For example, instead of announcing a new dashboard feature, I'd post "How to build executive reports that actually get read" with templates and examples. The product mention was secondary to the value provided.
But the real breakthrough came from what I call "seeded conversations." Before posting any content, I'd reach out to 2-3 active members privately to let them know about upcoming discussions. This wasn't about fake engagement - it was about ensuring valuable conversations had momentum from the start. When someone posted a genuine question or insight, there were already knowledgeable people ready to engage meaningfully.
I also implemented strict "no-pitch" rules that applied to everyone, including our own team. Any promotional content had to provide standalone value first. This created psychological safety where members knew they wouldn't be constantly sold to, which paradoxically made them more receptive when we did share product-related content.
The automation strategy was completely inverted. Instead of automating member interactions, I automated admin tasks. Bots handled onboarding logistics, channel organization, and data collection, but human moderators handled all member-facing communications. This kept the community feeling personal while reducing management overhead.
Most importantly, I tracked different metrics. Instead of focusing on member count or message volume, we measured conversation threads that led to meaningful outcomes - problem-solving sessions, resource sharing, member-to-member connections, and actual business impact stories.
Engagement Strategy
Focus on problem-solving conversations rather than product announcements to drive genuine engagement
Channel Architecture
Structure channels around user workflows and pain points, not company departments
Community Moderation
Use human moderators for all member interactions while automating only administrative tasks
Success Metrics
Track meaningful outcomes like peer connections and problem-solving rather than vanity metrics
The transformation was remarkable, though it took time. Within two months, we went from 5% daily active users to 35%. But more importantly, the quality of interactions completely changed. Members started proactively helping each other, sharing resources, and even collaborating on projects outside our platform.
The business impact became obvious when we tracked the community members' behavior versus non-community users. Community members had 3x higher retention rates, generated 2.5x more referrals, and their average customer lifetime value was 40% higher. They weren't just using our product - they were becoming advocates.
One unexpected outcome was that the community became our best product feedback source. Instead of formal surveys or feature request forms, we got real-time insights from users discussing their actual workflows and challenges. This intelligence informed our product roadmap in ways that traditional user research never could.
The community also started generating content organically. Members began creating tutorials, sharing case studies, and documenting best practices - content that was infinitely more credible than anything our marketing team could produce. This user-generated content became a significant driver of new trial signups.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
The biggest lesson I learned is that community building is about facilitating value exchange between members, not extracting value for your company. When you optimize for member success rather than company metrics, the business benefits follow naturally.
Here are the key insights that made the difference:
Authenticity beats automation - People can instantly detect when interactions are automated or scripted. Human moderators are essential for building trust.
Problem-focused channels outperform feature-focused ones - Organizing around user pain points creates immediate relevance and encourages participation.
Seeded conversations prevent dead air - Having engaged members ready to participate in discussions ensures momentum and prevents awkward silences.
No-pitch policies increase receptivity - When members trust they won't be constantly sold to, they're more open to valuable content, even when it's product-related.
Quality metrics matter more than quantity - A smaller, engaged community delivers better business results than a large, passive one.
Community-driven content is more credible - User-generated tutorials and case studies convert better than company-created marketing materials.
Member-to-member connections create stickiness - When users form relationships with each other, they're much less likely to churn from your platform.
The approach works best for B2B SaaS companies with complex products where users face similar challenges and can genuinely help each other. It's less effective for simple tools or consumer products where peer learning isn't as valuable.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups looking to implement this approach:
Start with 3-4 problem-specific channels rather than generic categories
Assign human moderators to facilitate discussions, not just police behavior
Track conversation outcomes and peer connections alongside traditional engagement metrics
Implement strict no-pitch policies that apply to your own team
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce brands, adapt this approach by:
Creating channels around customer use cases rather than product categories
Facilitating customer-to-customer sharing of tips and styling advice
Encouraging user-generated content through community challenges and showcases
Building connections between customers with similar interests or lifestyles