PlaybookPrompts

Choose between PLG, sales-led, and channel for a new market

Business Strategy gtmsales-motiongrowth

Picking the wrong GTM motion wastes 6-18 months. This prompt forces a structured comparison against your actual deal economics and buyer profile before you commit headcount.

Prompt 
I need to decide on a go-to-market motion for {{PRODUCT_NAME}} entering {{TARGET_MARKET}}. Here is what I know: average deal size {{DEAL_SIZE}}, typical buyer persona {{BUYER_PERSONA}}, current team size {{TEAM_SIZE}}, and sales cycle length so far {{SALES_CYCLE}}.

1. Score the fit for each of three motions — product-led growth (PLG), sales-led (SLG), and channel/partner — against these four criteria: (a) buyer's willingness to self-serve, (b) deal economics relative to cost of sale, (c) our team's current capability, (d) competitive norms in {{TARGET_MARKET}}. Use a simple High/Medium/Low rating for each criterion per motion.
2. Based on that scoring, recommend one primary motion. State the single biggest assumption that must hold true for this recommendation to be correct.
3. Describe what 'winning' looks like in 6 months under the recommended motion — give two specific, measurable milestones.
4. Describe the earliest warning sign that the recommended motion is failing and we should reconsider.
5. If deal size is under $5K ACV, flag that a pure SLG motion is likely uneconomical and explain why.

Do not recommend a 'hybrid' motion as the primary answer — it is not a real choice at the stage where this decision matters most.
Variables to fill in
  • {{PRODUCT_NAME}}
  • {{TARGET_MARKET}}
  • {{DEAL_SIZE}}
  • {{BUYER_PERSONA}}
  • {{TEAM_SIZE}}
  • {{SALES_CYCLE}}

How to use this prompt

  1. Copy the prompt above (Copy button on the top-right).
  2. Replace each {{VAR}} with your own value. Variables: {{PRODUCT_NAME}}{{TARGET_MARKET}}{{DEAL_SIZE}}{{BUYER_PERSONA}}{{TEAM_SIZE}}{{SALES_CYCLE}}.
  3. Paste it into one of the recommended tools below.
  4. Iterate: tighten constraints in the prompt if the output is generic.

Why this prompt is structured this way

The prompt is split into explicit steps because LLMs do better when the path is named, not implied. Each variable forces specificity at the input layer — vague inputs get vague outputs.

Heads up: some of the links on this page are affiliate links — meaning we may earn a commission if you sign up after clicking, at no extra cost to you. We only recommend tools we'd put on our own stack. You can see our full affiliate disclosure here.

Pair this prompt with a tool

Notion AI

$8/user/mo add-on

AI baked into the docs/wiki/projects tool you already use.

Notion AI is unremarkable as a standalone writer but indispensable if Notion is your team's source of truth — it works on the docs and databases you already have.

productivitywriting

Perplexity

$0/mo (Pro at $20)

AI search engine with citations.

Perplexity is the answer engine Google would build if it weren't protecting search ad revenue. Cited answers, follow-up questions, focused source modes.

learningdata

Claude (Anthropic)

$0/mo (Pro at $20)

Frontier model with long context and strong reasoning.

Claude (Opus / Sonnet / Haiku tiers) is the assistant favored by writers and engineers who care about reasoning quality and tone. 1M token context on Opus.

writingcodinglearning

Gumroad

$0/mo + 10% per sale

Sell digital products with a single link.

Gumroad is the fastest path from 'I have a digital file' to 'I have a payment link.' Higher fees than DIY Stripe but zero setup, built-in audience tools, license keys.

business

The PlaybookPrompts weekly

One short email per week. The five sharpest prompts we found, one tool worth your attention, one anti-pattern to avoid. Unsubscribe in one click.

Newsletter signup is not configured. Set PUBLIC_NEWSLETTER_USERNAME in the build env.