who-is-this-for

Solid

Define a real ICP and the developer personas in the sale. Use when the founder says the product is "for developers," can't name who would say no, or is marketing to whoever holds the budget instead of who actually adopts.

AI & Automation 12 stars 1 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 79/100

Stars 20%
37
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Who is this for? > "Developers" is not a market. It's a medium. If your ICP doesn't exclude anyone, it isn't one. **Use this when:** you describe your user as "developers" or "engineering teams," you can't name a person who is clearly *not* a fit, or you're aiming your messaging at the VP of Engineering because they have the budget. ## The core idea A usable ICP is specific enough that some people are obviously **out**. "Every developer" gives you nothing to say, because a message that speaks to everyone speaks to no one. Sharpen until exclusion is possible. And in almost every AI/dev-tool sale there is **more than one person**: the developer who adopts is rarely the person who pays. Market to the adopter; sell to the buyer. Confuse the two and you get great meetings and no decisions. ## Framework 1: The personas in the sale (Frankl) Map who plays each role. You need all of them for a complex sale; skip one and the deal stalls. | Persona | Cares about | Role in the sale | |---|---|---| | **Alpha Dev** | "What's possible?" Lives in the future. *No budget.* | Finds you, experiments, advocates internally, creates social proof | | **Empowered CTO** | Kairos, weeks off a release cycle, competitive edge. *Has budget.* | Approves spend and strategic fit | | **VP Engineering** | Team velocity, DX, quality at scale. Fears downtime/security | Evaluates feasibility, tests in staging | | **SRE / Platform Eng** | Reliability, less toil. *Reads your code before your copy.* | Gate...

Details

Author
AIDevGTM
Repository
AIDevGTM/gtm-cofounder
Created
2 days ago
Last Updated
today
Language
N/A
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category