Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Launch HN: Accord (YC W20) – Repeatable sales and onboarding for B2B startups
64 points by rossrich on Nov 18, 2021 | hide | past | favorite | 30 comments
Hello HN! I’m Ross, and alongside my brother / co-founder Ryan, we’re building Accord (https://inaccord.com) with the goal of making B2B sales suck less for buyers and sellers. Yep, sales... sometimes a dirty word in the startup community, but read on—it’s not what you think!

I helped Stripe’s sales org go from a couple of us trying to find potential users, to scaling a 450-person global revenue machine. That rollercoaster of a learning curve turned all my ideas about sales on their head. At first I assumed that success in sales was based on someone’s ability to be a smooth talker, applying ad-hoc tricks, improvising each deal. Thousands of conversations and hundreds of deals at Stripe taught me the opposite: the key to personal success in winning deals, as well as the success of the entire sales org, is in building repeatable processes and iterating on them each day. What works best is not a cowboy operation with people winging it—it’s orderly, iterative, and actually more reminiscent of building great products.

Jumping ahead a bit: the idea behind Accord is to take all those lessons and build them into a platform that sellers and buyers can immediately use, so you don’t have to learn the hard way like we did. A well-oiled B2B sales machine is surprisingly well-suited for software, so we built that software. We let you easily create a repeatable, collaborative sales process (even if you don’t have a background in sales), and that is really what helps you hit your revenue goals.

Ok, so back to the wild world of startup sales and why I decided to leave Stripe after 4 amazing years. Well, similar to a lot of you, I truly felt the bar for B2B sales today sucked and wanted to use the tough lessons learned to level-up the experience, making sales more collaborative, transparent, and genuinely helpful. Every startup needs to sell, but very few do a decent job at it, and I think this is because many founders feel like they need to be born with amazing interpersonal skills. In reality, sales is more of a science than an art, and is much more accessible than founders think.

For example: Customers don’t want to talk to sales reps. One of our wildest learnings is that 95% of the buying process is NOT spent with a seller. You get only 5% of the entire process to engage, so you’d better get it right. How? By partnering with customers to actually solve their problems.

Not only that, but the average B2B sale involves 14+ people, and that’s only on the buyer’s side! You can imagine the inefficiency and crossed signals here.

Even if you have the above all figured out, you need a system to reinforce this collaborative, buyer-first approach. You need to structure your sales the way you can structure engineering (Github), design (Figma), product (Jira). No matter what you try, you’re never going to see a real transformation in sales until you bring the buyer into the process.

Accord provides a radically collaborative workspace that makes you look like seasoned sellers. We give you collaborative, customer-facing workspaces to drive alignment throughout the process; templated sales & onboarding playbooks; a Resource Hub for managing key deal documents, images, etc.; Engagement Insights (see how prospects are interacting with your process); Contextual Conversations— commenting system contextually attached to particular key parts in the sales process; integration with Slack & Salesforce plus integrations through Zapier - like Hubspot; and Smart Notifications(keep stakeholders informed by sending the right message or reminder at the right time).

If you’re curious to try it out we offer free trials (https://inaccord.com/free-trial/hacker-news) and free sales consulting sessions from our founding team (Seed/Series A startups + Stripe, Shopify, Google Cloud).

We'd love to hear if this resonates with your experience as either a seller or buyer of tech!




This is really awesome.

We’ve come to the same conclusion in my business, buyers want to buy not be sold to. This means they need information to make a decision on their own. With many people involved in that decision.

For us, that’s half of the battle. The other half is social proof and case studies. Many businesses want to see proof that others like them found value. Oddly, this is usually something like G2 reviews.

Unfortunately social proof is a catch 22 but someone will “take a chance” and I bet a workspace like this would go a long ways in building trust. I’m excited to see how this goes.


Thanks Shane! So funny you mention G2 and social proof since that's also been one of the biggest learnings I've had selling Accord so far... didn't need that while I was at Stripe (the brand was just so powerful already). When you're a younger startup ppl want that 3rd party validation from others and investing in a few case studies & G2 went a loooong way in terms of accelerating deals & building trust.


Hi HN! I'm CTO and the third co-founder of Accord. Having never been professionally in sales, I had to reset my expectations of how to be successful in sales today.

The first realization that customers don't want to talk to you, but that was just the beginning of my journey. Approaching sales as "how can I help my customer solve THEIR problem together" instead of "how can I sell the customer MY solution" was the second level.

The final realization is that these sales reps already exist in every successful startup. How can we build software to give everybody (not just sales reps!) this super power has been the most reward challenge of my career.

We're just getting started... but also in true HN fashion, we're also hiring! wayne at inaccord dot com.


I do think there is something in the comment that a lot of people in big companies don’t know how to buy. Agreeing to a plan with them would help to surface the process and get everyone aligned around it. Note that this process would likely be unique to each organisation not the vendor.

The messaging would have to be carefully handled with this. Being given a step by step process by a vendor too early in the process would annoy me. I would also need to see and hear the benefits such as the vendor aligning resources etc.

A bit of feedback on the website and pitch. I didn’t quite understand what you did until seeing the first screenshot, but then I liked the concept. I think the positioning might need some work. It feels like some kind of “collaborative close plan” to a sales person, though not sure I like that either.

I also feel the word partner is overused a little. I get the difference, but I think your buyers will care about moving product and hitting their numbers. Maybe be a little more direct with this?


That’s helpful feedback around the pitch - trying to stay away from “close plan” since it’s intended to be much more bi-directional and transparently showing what the typical process to purchase and onboard looks like vs just get the deal done.

Hopefully shipping a demo video in the coming weeks will help with bringing more clarity to both how the product works and the why behind it.

Using the word Partner has been polarizing but haven’t been able to frame the aspirations of what the buyer <> seller relationship should be building towards. Open to suggestions!


Is there any place on your site to see what this actually looks and functions? I see a lot of descriptions of the problems and generalities on what you're doing to solve them, but little of the actual specifics. I'm getting the sense this is sort of a collaborative Asana-like product, but primarily for task tracking across projects created from templates.

Something like a demo video would go a long way for me, a non-salesperson, to understand what kind of product this is. How am I going to interact with it? What exactly is it capable of?


Really tried to get a demo video out in time for this launch so people could see before jumping into a trial or eval but still working on shipping something!

Nailed it with the collaborative Asana-like product though.

If you want to play around in a demo environment though I’m happy to set it up for you and send your way. Feel free to ping at ross @ inaccord if you’d like!


I am a little bugged by how you tricked me into signing up, asked my details including a phone number but then made me book in a time with your team. This is deception in my opinion. You asked me whether I wanted a free trial, which I did. I signed up but now I have to speak to someone to get it ? Why not say that upfront then ?


We have not yet perfected onboarding for Accord, especially for new users. Not every company needs Accord today. We add the highest value for multi-stakeholder opportunities.

Given that, we ask for time to understand your current sales and/or onboarding process, translate that to repeatable playbooks within Accord, and introduce the best practices we've found on how to engage your customers using the platform.

That being said, if you'd like a free trial workspace (which I'm happy to create) shoot me an email wayne at inaccord dot com.


We are a 30 people team with 10 reps on the floor. We use pipedrive and the bar to win a smaller team like us is set too high. We currently pay $2500 P/M but with this tactic, I suspect you will never win my business.


You’re a sales and onboarding startup and you haven’t learned yet that this isn’t how people want to buy or be onboarded? Good luck.


Congratulations on your launch and good luck! The following are my initial impressions and thoughts upon a brief review of your product. Hope this helps.

1. It seems that pretty much all of the functionality that your platform offers could be quite easily re-implemented (assuming relevant in-house B2B sales knowledge and experience) by using one of comprehensive general team collaboration & task management platforms (e.g., Asana). It would be much cheaper on a per-seat basis in the long term as well as incomparably less limiting in terms of external application integrations.

2. It appears that your unique selling proposition is bundling B2B sales functionality with relevant playbooks (in the form of templates) and on-demand help by B2B sales experts.

3. Apparently, your platform belongs to the "sales enablement" category of SaaS platforms (with the focus on B2B sales). If I'm right on the classification, how do you position your product among relevant competing platforms (e.g., Outreach, Salesloft, Reply, Dock, Gong)?

4. Application integration limits are not attractive. So is the platform fee (apparently, it's not refundable if, for whatever reason, your customer decides to bail out in several months after onboarding). Pricing seems to be on the high side (see my point #1). Moreover, considering that this is a B2B-focused platform, I would make the solo tier free. That would not decrease your revenue much, since B2B sales is mostly a team sport, but might enable you to use the strength of now very popular Product-Led Growth (PLG) strategy to grow revenue in a more organic fashion (yes, I know that you offer a free trial, however, AFAIK it doesn't have as large of a positive effect as a free tier).

5. Last point is more of a curiosity question: why does a 13-person startup need a 24-person(!) Product Advisory Board?


Congratulations on the launch Ross & Ryan! As an engineer and occasional entrepreneur I admittedly struggle with “selling” and have always viewed it as an ad hoc effort. The structured, repeatable process you describe appeals to me quite a bit.

I’m curious what insights you’ve had so far into the customer’s willingness to sign into the product and engage with the process?


The main lessons we've observed are – 1: buyers want to be shown what success looks like with your solution - i.e., the buyer journey (what do I actually have to do to solve my problem) and 2: the easier you make it for a buyer to walk down this path and solve their problem the more likely they are to partner with you.

We've seen teams that take a buyer-first approach have the most success. It takes a lot of work to iterate and refine your sales process to make it more buyer friendly. It parallels the iteration needed to build a smooth onboarding flow.


Jinx :)


honestly this is the first big one product related question we needed to answer if the idea behind Accord was actually going to work in the real world.

We initially thought the workspace acceptance and engagement rate would be closer to 30-40% and we’d have to iterate from there to move it up. However, the feedback from our customers’ customers was incredibly positive to start and saw a 90%+ rate from the beginning. The positive qualitative feedback from end customer’s has been around how helpful it is for them to understand what the entire journey looks like when starting a sales process, and feels much more collaborative than just being “sold to” by another rep.


Nice! I love this. Is B2C on your roadmap? The training + onboarding challenges are very similar.


Interesting you mention B2C since I honestly wasn't imagining that being a use case when we started this. But have had a handful of startups reach out about using it for that reason despite the heavy B2B messaging so could be onto something there. What's the status quo for this on the B2C side??


We homebrew on-boarding and documentation. The challenges of getting call-center employees up to speed, running the correct playbook and compliant with all of the relevant regulatory requirements is important.


Did you build something on apps like Notion or GDocs for that? That makes a lot of sense especially with the onboarding of new customer-facing roles. We originally thought about solving the higher-touch sales / onboarding but totally makes sense that a similar solution could help solve for the B2B use case.


Yup, we're using documents and lots of training time with trainers.


> By partnering with customers to actually solve their problems

I'm so tired of hearing this word from a vendor.

We are not partners. If I'm paying you money, then I'm a customer. You are a vendor. Partners is "this is going to cost us $X. I pay half. You pay half"


That’s a very fair point. And I don’t like hearing it either from reps or companies that don’t truly value my business or treat me as I’d treat others.

On the other side, I do believe in a world where you can still charge someone $$ and the relationship is built in a way where 1+1 = > 3.

I’ve personally told potential buyers that we’re not a fit for them even though I know I could close the deal. I’ve had others do the same thing for me and point me to a competitor.

That’s what we mean by partnership vs vendorship. It’s about being a partner regardless of the outcome and focusing on adding value over just closing another deal. I’m not saying this is the world we live in today but one I’m passionate about driving towards.


> On the other side, I do believe in a world where you can still charge someone $$ and the relationship is built in a way where 1+1 = > 3.

I totally agree with this, but none the less this is nor a partnership. I'm not upset that I'm being treated as a customer. I'm upset when I am being told that I'm being treated as a partner, except that you are making out like a bandit on what you are selling me.


So it’s more about the framing and language than it is the actual relationship itself?

I think my perspective differs slightly in that I don’t see anyone “making out like a bandit” and the exchange is (ideally) mutually beneficial. Another angle is that vendors can be so crucial to your business that it also feels more like a partnership. At least that’s how I felt at Stripe working with customers (who called me/us their partner if we did things right)


You're going to love our tagline then :) Moving B2B sales from vendorship Partnership.

Don't get me wrong, there will always be transactional purchases, but in the B2B SaaS space we're operating in buyers are looking for partners to teach and guide them.

The businesses that we sell to (and that our users sell to) are trying to solve a problem rather than purchase a product. It's hard to help someone solve a hairy problem in a meaningful way if you look at the sale as transactional. Also since this is SaaS the buyer can leave. You need to continue to provide value over an extended period of time.


I see this as a sign that we are getting ready to collapse as it reminds me of the way the borderline finance scams are being sold to elderly -

- "we are not here to sell you financial products -- that's evil and it just enriches the brokers, we are here to educate you on stuff that we happen so have a partners that sell. And if you know of other products that could be sold to people like you, tell them about our program."


Maybe my experience is unique, but I've seen large and small businesses successfully partner together (with money, knowledge, and other goods being exchanged as part of the partnership). This was true during my time building the sales process at Google Cloud, and helping other startups build their go-to-market motions at Accord.


> I’m Ross, and alongside my brother / co-founder Ryan, we’re building Accord

Maybe the messaging around the founding team could be made a bit clearer. This sentence strongly suggests that there are two founders, while it seems that there is a third one, commenting on this very forum.


Hi, your friendly third co-founder here! Good point around the way that the post was written. Ross and Ryan went through YC W20 for Accord. I joined shortly after and the impetus for founding is based on their learnings and what is shared in this post.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: