agentsclimarketplace

Gtm motion picker

Skill ReachRobin/skills/skills/core/gtm-motion-picker

Open-source GTM playbook as skills for Claude Code, Cursor, and other LLM clients | skills.reachrobin.com

Install
npx -y skills add ReachRobin/skills --skill gtm-motion-picker

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Decide between PLG, sales-led, hybrid, or community-led GTM motion based on ACV, time-to-value, buyer complexity, and self-serve readiness. Use when launching or repositioning a product, or when sales costs are out of whack with ACV.

The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.

SKILL.md

8.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

GTM Motion Picker

A GTM motion is the system through which a product reaches its market -- not a single channel. The wrong motion creates compounding waste: PLG with too-high ACV burns customer acquisition costs you can't recoup; sales-led with too-low ACV burns headcount on deals that can't pay for the AE.

When to use

  • Pre-launch: deciding initial motion
  • ACV much less than CAC payback target -> motion is too expensive for price point
  • Self-serve signup with 0% activation -> product can't be PLG yet, or onboarding is broken
  • Sales team selling deals < $5K ACV with full demo cycles -> motion is too heavy
  • Hybrid drift: started PLG, accidentally hired AEs, no one knows who owns what

When NOT to use

  • You haven't shipped yet and are doing hypothesis work -- answer the 4 scoring variables first, then run this
  • You want to plan a single marketing campaign, not a go-to-market system -- channel tactics don't require a motion decision
  • ACV/TTV are completely unknown -- gather data first; scoring without numbers produces wrong recommendations

Use this instead

  • icp-definer -- if you don't know who you're selling to, fix that before deciding how to reach them
  • positioning-canvas -- if the question is how to describe the product, not how to sell it
  • pricing-teardown -- motion choice has pricing implications (PLG requires a self-serve tier; sales-led allows "contact us"); run after this

The 4 deciding variables

Score each. The combination determines the motion.

1. ACV (annual contract value)

  • <$1K -> PLG strongly favored (sales economics don't work)
  • $1K-$15K -> PLG with sales assist (PLS)
  • $15K-$100K -> hybrid (PLG top-of-funnel + AE close)
  • >$100K -> sales-led (relationship-driven, multi-stakeholder)

ACV is the dominant variable. If ACV < $1K and you want sales-led, you're wrong about the motion or the price.

2. Time-to-value (TTV)

  • <10 minutes -> PLG viable (user can hit "aha" alone)
  • 10 min - 1 day -> PLG with onboarding investment
  • 1 day - 1 week -> PLG hard, hybrid or services-assisted onboarding needed
  • >1 week -> sales-led or implementation-led (can't expect self-serve)

If TTV > 1 week, PLG is fantasy without major product investment. Either invest in shortening TTV or accept sales-led economics.

3. Buyer complexity

  • 1 buyer = 1 user (individual contributors, freelancers) -> PLG
  • 1 buyer, not 1 user, same team (manager buys for team) -> PLG with team-upgrade flow
  • Multi-stakeholder, single department -> PLS or hybrid
  • Cross-functional buying committee (security, legal, procurement, finance) -> sales-led

You cannot self-serve through a procurement review. Beyond a certain buyer complexity, sales-led is the only motion that closes.

4. Self-serve readiness (product side)

A 5-checkpoint test:

  • Can a user sign up without talking to sales?
  • Can they get to "aha" without onboarding from a human?
  • Can they invite teammates without an admin handshake?
  • Can they upgrade plans without a quote?
  • Is there an in-product upgrade trigger when limits are hit?

5/5 -> PLG-ready. 3-4/5 -> PLG with friction; fix gaps. <3/5 -> not PLG-ready regardless of what you call it.

Decision matrix

                        ACV -> low ($1K-$15K)    mid ($15K-$100K)    high (>$100K)
TTV: minutes/hours      PLG / PLS               PLG + AE assist     Sales-led, PLG-influenced
TTV: days               PLS                     Hybrid              Sales-led
TTV: weeks+             Probably wrong product  Sales-led           Sales-led + services

Adjust toward sales if buyer complexity is high. Adjust toward PLG if buyer = user.

The motions defined

PLG (Product-Led Growth)

User signs up, activates, and upgrades themselves. Sales mostly absent. Examples: Linear, Notion (early), Figma (individual).

Implementation moves:

  • Activation event defined and instrumented
  • Free tier with usage-based upgrade gate (not feature-based -- feature gates feel punitive)
  • In-product upgrade prompts at moments of value
  • Self-serve checkout (Stripe / Paddle)
  • Help docs > sales calls; community > AEs
  • North-star metric tied to product usage, not pipeline

PLS (Product-Led Sales)

PLG funnel plus sales-assist on accounts showing buying signals. Examples: Slack, Atlassian, Loom.

Implementation moves:

  • Activation event triggers PQL (Product-Qualified Lead) scoring
  • Lightweight sales team focused on expansion, not new acquisition
  • Self-serve up to a threshold (seats, usage, $X ACV); sales kicks in above
  • Reverse trial: start premium, downgrade if not used (forces conversation)

Hybrid (PLG + traditional sales)

Two motions running in parallel for different segments. PLG for SMB/individual, sales-led for mid-market+. Examples: Notion (now), Datadog.

Implementation moves:

  • Clear segmentation rule (size? ACV? industry?) with no overlap
  • Separate funnels with separate metrics
  • Compensation model that prevents AE poaching of PLG accounts
  • Different pricing tiers for each motion

Sales-led

AE-driven from first touch. Long cycles, multi-call, custom pricing. Examples: Salesforce, ServiceNow, most enterprise.

Implementation moves:

  • ICP locked tight (every AE hour is expensive)
  • Outbound + ABM as primary channels
  • Custom pricing / "contact us" -- public pricing optional
  • Implementation/CS team for post-sale (high-ACV customers expect handholding)
  • Quota-carrying AEs with multi-quarter cycles

Community-led / Developer-led

Special case where the user community is the channel. Open-source-driven (Hashicorp, MongoDB, GitLab) or developer-tools (Vercel, Supabase). Usually a flavor of PLG with heavy investment in DevRel.

Process

  1. Score the 4 variables with the user. If they don't know one, that itself is a signal -- usually they don't have the data.
  2. Apply the matrix to get a motion candidate.
  3. Pressure-test: do they have the team and product to execute it? PLG with no growth team and no instrumentation will fail. Sales-led with no sales hires will fail.
  4. Pick the motion. Be opinionated -- "hybrid" is the default cop-out, only choose it when the segmentation rule is clean.
  5. List 3-5 implementation moves specific to this product, not generic ones.
  6. Identify metrics that prove the motion is working (and lagging metrics that say it's not).

Output format

GTM MOTION RECOMMENDATION: [Product]
Date: [YYYY-MM-DD]

1. INPUTS
   - ACV: $[X]
   - Time-to-value: [duration]
   - Buyer complexity: [1 buyer = 1 user / team / multi-stakeholder / committee]
   - Self-serve readiness: [score]/5 -- gaps: [list]

2. RECOMMENDED MOTION
   [PLG / PLS / Hybrid / Sales-led / Community-led]

3. WHY THIS, NOT THE OTHERS
   - vs [other motion]: [reason it's wrong here]

4. IMPLEMENTATION MOVES (do these next, in order)
   1. [Move + owner + timeframe]

5. METRICS TO WATCH
   - Leading: [metric] (signal that motion is working)
   - Lagging: [metric] (proof that motion is working)
   - Tripwire: [metric] (signal motion is failing)

6. WHAT TO STOP DOING
   [Activities that fit a different motion and now waste resources]

Common failure modes

  • PLG cargo-culting -- calling everything PLG because it's fashionable. PLG requires <$15K ACV, low TTV, and self-serve product. Without all three, it fails.
  • Sales-led on a $50/month product -- the AE costs more than the customer is worth. Fix by raising ACV or moving to PLG.
  • Hybrid as a hedge -- choosing hybrid because you can't decide. Hybrid only works with clean segmentation; otherwise it's two half-funded motions.
  • Ignoring buyer complexity -- beautiful PLG product that hits a procurement wall at $50K. Add sales-assist before hitting the wall, not after.
  • Motion mismatch with comp plan -- PLG product with quota-carrying AEs creates AE behavior that breaks the funnel (forcing conversations on PQLs that wanted self-serve).

Handoffs

  • Motion choice changes pricing structure -> pricing-teardown
  • Motion choice changes who you target -> icp-definer
  • Motion choice changes how you describe the product -> positioning-canvas
  • Motion implementation requires team/process changes -> user owns this; this skill stops at the recommendation

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.