Zero To One GTM: Positioning vs. Fractional and My Experiments
Lessons in Refining My Offering and (Starting to) Building a Repeatable Offering
Day 29 of writing daily.
On my post yesterday on refining my own value proposition as a solopreneur, Joe Ballou1 wrote the following comment:
I appreciate your open reflection here. The difficulty of wide vs narrow, when, and how much data is necessary to make a move to "niche" down is a real challenge. How does the approach of problem and market discovery (wide) fit with your view of experimentation / testing of a specific hypothesis (narrow)? I'm not sure what your "human co-pilot" value prop means in practice in terms of an offering type (fractional work, project based work, advisory work, etc), but I know at least for me, that it's true that if I'm thinking of MYSELF as the "offering" it can be much more difficult to narrow (I'm a human being) than if I were simply trying to test one product idea with one ICP.
How do we balance going broad with problem and market discovery while also narrowing down to test a specific hypothesis? Especially when the "offering" is us, as human beings, not just a product.
This resonated with me because I’ve been navigating this exact challenge in my own business. As solopreneurs or consultants, it’s tough to “niche down” when our offering feels broad—fractional work, project-based work, advisory services, coaching—it’s all a bit of everything.
Let me attempt to:
a) clarify where I’m at and my offering
b) then share why fractional is not the way for me, and
c) what I’m prioritizing in terms of current experiments.
🤲🏼 David’s ‘Offering’
I’m also going to try to speak in third person in an attempt to be ‘objective’ or step outside myself to observe without judgment.
📱 Offering/Product:
Right now, David’s offering is his time. It’s via consulting, fractional, etc. It’s still vague/generic as he’s trying to figure it out. He’s changed his LinkedIn headline countless times, and also iterated on his consulting page: https://bit.ly/davidfuconsulting
(to give a taste, is my ‘thing’ growth? product? edtech? all, none? that’s why currently it’s zero to one GTM here and on LinkedIn; he’ll see if that is clarifying or not; also getting to product-market fit is a potential way to frame it)
🧧 Pricing
It’s priced on a value/project scope basis, and to have a light, medium, heavy offering. This is aligned with different budgets, needs, and starting with a ‘light’ offering to try and help deliver value and get started.
internally, I have a minimum hourly rate
hourly: and sometimes projects and contracts are hourly, but usually with a specific project, scope and rough milestones
project: sometimes it’s a specific project scope with deliverables, and I align broadly on expectations for days or hours per week
🌟 Value Proposition:
Thought partner + cofounder level support without the need to find a cofounder is probably better --> this is what David has been told via feedback and testimonials, and is aiming to capture / will continue to iterate on —> what he shared yesterday for his value prop in practice
🧠 Unlocking Brain Space for founders and leaders.
I’m someone they can bring in to build, implement, and provide strategic thought partnership to launch and grow their business. The value I deliver is through:
startup ICP 1:
refining your product-market fit
(through execution and experimentation driving learning & strategic iteration)incubator/program/studio ICP 3:
providing frameworks, coaching, and facilitation to help their founders navigate product-market fit.
👤 Persona:
For example, David used to chase and prioritize startups at any stage (esp. early). David is of course still absolutely open to them and still having tons of convos and trying to help, but he’s now prioritizing going after ICP 2 (larger orgs) and ICP 3 (accelerators, studios, funds, etc):
Shifting to ICP 2 and 3:
That’s because his conversion rate with ICP 1 was bad. He hypothesizes that
early-stage startups don’t have cash to pay
the founders themselves are doing most of the 0 → 1 product discovery and strategy work
what they want to pay for is actually building the product (technical skills) —> know lots of others who are successfully fractional with early stage when technical (e.g., Bill Boulden who is a Techstars mentor)
when founders do raise:
they then start hiring full-time or
when they want fractional, they want and can find deep expertise in specific functional domains — sales, marketing, etc.
The hypothesis and thing being etsted is whether ICP 2 and ICP 3 have more budget and ability to pay; ICP 2 and ICP 3 are still largely in edtech/workforce, but David’s also expanding into broader impact.
🚀 GTM
is via existing networks, 1:1, conferences, positions.
The current work he does helps him learn more about the landscape and opportunities and connect in the flow of working also.
market research (JFF x 2, once to publish an external piece on GenAI and workforce and one to support an internal strategy and productization decision)
problem/product/customer discovery 0 → 1 (with venture studios and founders),
coaching/connecting/mentoring and creating content/frameworks (for venture studios, accelerators, etc.)
The fractional work he did that was more sales oriented first 6 months of 2024 also naturally allowed for outbound/lead gen.
🕺🏻 My Dance With Fractional
I’m going to shift back to first person here.
My last two attempts at fractional arose:
Because I transitioned a FT client to part-time.
Someone wanted my help as a test to FT. Ultimately, both sides decided FT with me wasn’t a fit so I completed the contract and they found someone who seemed like a perfect fit for FT.
Going back to Joe’s comment: but I know at least for me, that it's true that if I'm thinking of MYSELF as the "offering" it can be much more difficult to narrow (I'm a human being) than if I were simply trying to test one product idea with one ICP. (from Joe)
I have learnt a lot observing folks like Wes, yourself (Joe), and others -- and I think it's useful to do testing (website, offering, value prop, ICP) that helps you gauge test a hypothesis about a core offering of yours, but each of us has to calibrate to our own strengths, goals, stage how wide or how narrow.
You framed your own offering around fractional/interim in your recent Open For Business, which is a specific offering but can be challenging to keep scoping more narrow -->
Wes actually just wrote about this beautifully, and it helped me coalesce my thoughts about Fractional —> if you’re exploring or in this space, I highly recommend you read this:
https://developmyip.ck.page/posts/interim-fractional-vs-signature-service
https://developmyip.ck.page/posts/so-what-s-a-fractional-anyway
Another useful framework of his is: is it a done for you, done with you, or do it yourself type offering? (Interim/Fractional very much in the Done With You camp)
For now, I’m ok being more agnostic/open as I figure out my core service offering, the repeatable thing I’m doing across all these clients.
BUT there are things that are challenging around fractional right now and I couldn't pinpoint them until reading Wes’ pieces above.
A few immediate thoughts/reactions on big advantages of niching down and refining your signature service or offering:
- test and validate demand more precisely
- you aren't competing the same way against all the fractionals2 which is growing a lot
I want to shift to a few more specific offerings that are more repeatable, systematizeable --> both from lead gen and monetization perspective.
🧫 What am I testing right now
ICP: becoming stronger on my ICP and communicating + recognizing urgency
inbounds, when someone sends something that fits fractional product/GTM
GTM/Sourcing: building relationships and shifting focus (esp. of sync time) to those that fit within my ICP
I still lose clients/opportunities or things don’t manifest, but I also know it’s a long-game
Getting to no quicker is still useful, and I can sense when there isn’t urgency/budget (let’s talk in a few months, when I raise, etc) - and while I don’t deprioritize them as a relationship and human, I deprioritize likelihood of revenue opportunity —> critically important when dealing with startups.
Writing is a way to capture my expertise and helps with easily showcasing value and helps with middle of funnel (MOFU) engagement
🔑 Conclusion:
I think it's about matching what you’re seeing and what you’re sensing (gut, intuition) with making time to dive into data once you've been at it a while (how many convos have you had, how many converted, what's the value prop, why they didn't).
So doing this work is helping me narrow a bit on the focus of what people might come to me for, why I close, what goes well, and seeing if it's possible to systematize that. While being/making yourself open to other opportunities and things that arise. Again, hope it’s helpful to continue to take off the kimono and share 👘!
A long time friend and writer of his own Substack Timeless Leadership and offering (leading transformation roles as interim/fractional).
I had tested my own fractional offering, even stood up a landing page e.g., fractional CFO/COO offering —> occasionally gotten bites but with transparency, but I haven’t landed anything through this; but I also haven’t publicized it widely, although it was in my email signature for a while and randomly got 1-2 meetings from that.