Model the growth equation
The key metric, the input levers and the orders of magnitude that matter.

Write your key metric as a formula, put today’s values in it, and you can see which input has to move for the goal to be reachable. It takes a spreadsheet and a day of data work, and it usually settles arguments that have been running for months.
The deliverable is a one-tab model: the equation, the current value of each input, and a scenario table. As an illustration, take a B2B SaaS at 2M ARR with two motions, self-serve trials and a sales team for larger accounts. The goal is 3M ARR in 12 months. All figures in this chapter are invented for the example.
Choose one key metric that means money
The metric at the top has to move when the business really gets better, and to be hard to inflate by accident. Signups and traffic fail that test, because you can grow both while earning less.
| Business model | Key metric | Why |
|---|---|---|
| B2B SaaS | Net new ARR | Captures acquisition, expansion and churn in one number |
| Consumer subscription | Net new subscribers, or MRR | Same logic, with shorter cycles |
| E-commerce | Contribution margin after marketing | Revenue can grow while margin disappears |
| Marketplace | Transaction volume on the side that constrains supply | Growing the wrong side adds nothing |
Use the metric leadership will accept in the framing note. If it reports ARR and you model signups, your conclusions will have no owner.
Write the equation down to inputs a team can move
Break the metric down until each term is something a named team can change. Keep separate branches for motions that behave differently, because a blended conversion rate between self-serve and sales describes nobody.
net_new_arr = new_arr + expansion_arr - lost_arr
new_arr = self_serve_new_arr + sales_led_new_arr
self_serve_new_arr = signups * activation_rate * activated_to_paid * self_serve_acv
sales_led_new_arr = qualified_opportunities * win_rate * sales_acv
expansion_arr = opening_arr * expansion_rate
lost_arr = opening_arr * gross_arr_churn_rate
Now the current year for our example:
| Input | Value | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Signups | 6,000 | |
| Activation rate | 30% | 1,800 activated |
| Activated to paid | 20% | 360 customers |
| Self-serve ACV | €800 | €288,000 |
| Qualified opportunities | 120 | |
| Win rate | 25% | 30 deals |
| Sales ACV | €15,000 | €450,000 |
| Expansion rate on opening ARR | 6% | €120,000 |
| Gross ARR churn on opening ARR | 18% | €360,000 lost |
| Net new ARR | €498,000 |
At this pace the company ends the year at about 2.5M. The goal requires €1,000,000 of net new ARR, so the gap is roughly €500,000. Everything else in the audit is now measured against that figure.
Collect each input with a definition
Most of the work is making these numbers mean one thing. Write the definition next to the value.
| Input | Definition to agree on | Source | Common trap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Signups | New accounts, excluding invited teammates | Product database | Counting users instead of accounts |
| Activation rate | Share of accounts reaching the value event within a fixed window | Product analytics | A value event too easy to reach |
| Activated to paid | By signup cohort | Product and billing | Dividing this month’s customers by this month’s signups |
| Qualified opportunities | Using the sales team’s written criteria | CRM | Criteria that change by quarter |
| Win rate | Won over opportunities closed in the period | CRM | Leaving open deals in the denominator |
| ACV | First-year contract value, after discounts | Billing | List price |
| Churn and expansion | On the ARR at the start of the period | Billing | Mixing logos and revenue |
Use cohorts wherever there is a delay between two steps. If the sales cycle lasts four months, this quarter’s deals come from opportunities created earlier. Before you trust the rates, check them against the data reliability sheet.
Run scenarios on plausible changes
In a chain of multiplications, 20% more on any input gives the same result as 20% more on any other. The percentage tells you nothing. What separates the levers is how far each one can realistically go and what that costs. So give each input a range you can defend from the data or from what the team has already achieved.
| Lever | Today | Hypothesis | Effect on net new ARR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Activation rate | 30% | 40% | +€96,000 |
| Signups | 6,000 | 7,200 | +€57,600 |
| Qualified opportunities | 120 | 150 | +€112,500 |
| Win rate | 25% | 30% | +€90,000 |
| Gross ARR churn | 18% | 14% | +€80,000 |
| Expansion rate | 6% | 10% | +€80,000 |
Each line is computed alone, holding the others constant. Apply activation, opportunities, win rate, churn and expansion together, and new ARR reaches about €1,059,000, expansion €200,000 and lost ARR €280,000, for a net new ARR of about €979,000. So in this example, the goal needs five levers to land in the same year and still falls just short. That is what the model is for. The founder can now choose between concentrating on fewer levers with a later date, or adding one that isn’t modeled, such as pricing.
Two effects are invisible in a one-year table, so note them. Lost ARR scales with the base: 18% costs €360,000 at 2M and €900,000 at 5M, which makes retention weigh more each year. And some inputs compound. Derrick’s programmatic pages were still bringing 88 clicks a day two years after the last SEO action, as told in the Derrick case. A channel like that behaves like a stock, unlike ads that stop when the budget stops, so model it separately. The same goes for seasonality: on Grosbill’s Black Friday, ad revenue over the period was multiplied by 7, and an annual average would have hidden the moment that mattered.
Check that growth pays for itself
Add the unit economics per segment and per channel, using fully loaded costs.
cac = (marketing + sales costs, salaries and tools included) / new customers
monthly_margin = monthly_revenue_per_account * gross_margin
payback_months = cac / monthly_margin
ltv = monthly_margin / monthly_revenue_churn_rate
Say a sales-led account brings €1,250 a month at 80% gross margin and costs €12,000 to win: payback is 12 months. Judge that number against how long this segment actually stays and how much cash the company has, rather than against a generic benchmark. A 12-month payback is comfortable on customers who stay for years, and a serious problem on a segment that churns at month 10. Treat LTV with suspicion on a young base, where it extrapolates a lifetime nobody has observed yet.
What to deliver
The model tab, plus findings written in this form: “Reaching 3M requires €1,000,000 of net new ARR against €498,000 at the current pace. Qualified opportunities and activation carry the largest plausible gains, and retention matters more each year as the base grows. The audit will therefore go deepest on those.” Those hypotheses go straight into the funnel analysis, which tests where the rates actually break.
Your next step: write the equation for your business on one line per branch, fill in the last twelve months, and mark in red every input for which two people gave you different numbers.