Partner Evaluation
Separating an execution failure from a weak partnership fit
Diagnose whether a disappointing partner campaign reflects a delivery fault, a weak customer proposition or unresolved evidence.
To separate an execution failure from weak partnership fit, first establish what customers encountered. Then ask whether suitable customers had a reason to use both partners' contributions. Poor results cannot settle the fit question when a material part of the agreed activity never reached them.
Establish what ran
Compare the agreed brief with dated release records. Check the intended audience, offer, asset versions, channels, partner inputs, approvals and follow-up. Record what happened, changed or did not happen. Ask both teams to confirm their own records before proposing a cause.
A delayed email, missing landing page or changed claim can alter what customers encountered. An activity may also have launched on time but reached people outside the intended task. Record the customer-facing version, not just a task marked complete.
Ask two questions
Delivery: Could the intended customer encounter the agreed offer, understand its conditions and take the planned next step? A failed distribution or response route limits what the result says about fit. Decide whether fixing it would provide useful new evidence.
Fit: Among suitable customers who saw the complete offer, did each partner add something relevant to the same task? Examine qualified questions and stated reasons for declining or stalling. If people need only one contribution, a narrower role may fit. If they ask for a combined task the offer cannot serve, the proposition may need redesign.
| Observation | Working interpretation | Check next |
|---|---|---|
| Intended audience was not reached | Fit remains uncertain | Channel, timing and eligibility |
| Message omitted a key condition | Delivered offer differed from the approved promise | Correct the claim and assess affected material |
| Suitable customers asked only about one partner | Joint role may be too broad | Whether the second contribution helps at another stage |
| Customers asked about both roles but could not proceed | A hand-off or offer limit may be blocking use | Where progress stopped |
These are hypotheses. A few enquiries or one campaign may be too little evidence for a firm conclusion.
Make a bounded next decision
Where a specific delivery fault matters, consider a corrected activity that tests the same customer question and records what changed. Where the customer task appears weak, investigate or narrow it before buying more distribution. If both remain uncertain, choose the next activity for the question it can answer rather than changing every element at once.
Keep public claims accurate during the review. The ACCC can require businesses to back up claims about their products or services and may investigate or take compliance or enforcement action if a business misleads.
Record observed facts, possible explanations, missing evidence and the decision each partner accepts. This diagnosis informs whether to repair, narrow or end the relationship; it does not establish that either partner caused a commercial outcome.
Key Compliance & Best Practice Insights
- ACCC Authority on Claims
- Businesses must substantiate claims about products/services
- Common Execution Gap Causes
- Misaligned timelines, unapproved changes, incomplete hand-offs
