This checklist is for the operations lead who sets the standard for a firm's first replies: a consultancy, an accounting practice, an MSP or a brokerage whose people mention SourceX to owners they know. It covers a single message, the reply to an owner's first sign of interest. The fuller briefing a founder may want before deciding is in what to send before a founder accepts, and everything after the CEO's written yes belongs to the handoff checklist.
The owner's first question sets the terms of the whole referral
An owner who writes back "interesting, tell me more" has usually asked one or two things: what the company would have to do, what it might be worth, who else would know. A reply that answers something else, or answers more than was asked, starts setting expectations that only SourceX's review can meet. Plain-language guidance on the U.S. government's Digital.gov puts the purpose and bottom line at the top and background at the end (our paraphrase). For a first reply, that means the owner's own question is answered before anything about the program.
The bigger risk is the overpromise. SourceX's partner agreement bars a partner from telling a referred company that an indicative estimate, positive interest, a signature or a data upload secures a purchase or a reward (section 4.6, our paraphrase). It also says a partner is not SourceX's agent and cannot commit SourceX to prices, licenses or payouts (section 7.1). Those slips rarely happen in a careful briefing. They happen in a quick, friendly reply to someone who sounds keen.
What the reply may draw on, and what stays out of it
Before anyone drafts, settle which facts a first reply is allowed to use. At this stage the company record holds four things: who wrote, their role, the date of their message and the question they asked.
| Where a fact came from | Can the first reply use it? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| The owner's own message | Yes, in the owner's words | It is theirs to repeat |
| The company's public website or announcements | Yes, sparingly | Anyone can check it |
| SourceX's published pages: terms, screening page, application page | Yes, linked rather than retold | They carry versions and dates, and they are the authority |
| What your firm saw in paid work: ledgers, tickets, system access | No | It belongs to that engagement; the company describes its own systems if it applies |
| Board packs, information rights or a data room | No | Confidential to the relationship that produced them |
| Your own view of fit, value or timing | No | Only SourceX's review and the company's signed deal records settle these |
The first-response quality checklist
Run every draft against all ten checks before it leaves. There is no partial credit: one failed check means rewrite, not send.
| # | Check | The draft passes when it | The failure it prevents |
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Answer first | answers the owner's question in its first two sentences | A reply that pitches instead of answering |
| C2 | Who decides | names the company's CEO as the person who agrees to a licensing discussion and signs, and asks whether the owner is the CEO if that is unclear | An introduction the decision-maker never approved |
| C3 | Your interest | says SourceX could pay you a reward if the company licenses data, that SourceX pays it and does not deduct it from the payout the company agrees, and that conditions apply | An incentive the owner discovers later |
| C4 | Fit screens | lists the four published screens and links the screening page | Weeks spent with a company that misses a basic screen |
| C5 | No outcome | contains no "you'll qualify", no estimate and no figure for what the records are worth | An expectation that only SourceX's review can meet or break |
| C6 | No timing | gives no date for any SourceX step and commits only to your own reply times | A deadline nobody at SourceX agreed to |
| C7 | Nothing private asked for | requests no files, samples, exports, logins, customer names or system lists | Company records in your inbox that you have no right to hold |
| C8 | Earlier contact | asks once whether anyone at the company has dealt with SourceX before | Effort spent on a company SourceX already knew |
| C9 | Ways to reply | offers four short replies: introduce us, we'll apply ourselves, not now, no; and says a no needs no reason | A yes given only to end an awkward exchange |
| C10 | Nothing sent yet | says nothing goes to SourceX until the CEO agrees in writing, and the sender has signed the Channel Partner Agreement | A submission the CEO did not authorize |
A few checks need more than a line.
C2 and the owner who is not the CEO. Under the program, the CEO authorizes a licensing discussion. Most owner-run companies make that easy, because the owner holds the title. Where they are different people, such as a chair who owns the shares while a hired CEO runs the business, the reply goes back to the owner with a question: would you like to raise this with your CEO? SourceX's screening page lists introductions made without the decision maker's knowledge among the cases that are usually not a fit.
C4 and the size screen. The four screens are a full-time workforce that peaked at 50 or more people, contractors left out; years of records the company created in its own work; the right to license them; and a CEO who wants the conversation. Location rules sit on the who qualifies page; link it rather than retyping it, and add the company fit checker for a first, non-binding look.
C8 and earlier contact. Section 3 of the terms is broad: "A relationship includes any earlier lead, account or email correspondence between SourceX and the company, however it began." A company SourceX already knew is not credited to a later partner. The owner's answer tells you whether more of your time makes sense; SourceX runs its own check regardless.
C9 and the direct route. The company can always apply itself. SourceX's application page opens with a fit check of three screens, about seven minutes, and asks for no files, passwords or API tokens; it also says applying licenses or transfers nothing and does not mean an offer or payment. Whether any application is credited to a partner is SourceX's decision from dated records, so the reply should not argue the owner out of applying directly.
C10 and the agreement. Partners sign the SourceX Channel Partner Agreement before submitting introductions. An unsigned colleague can still send the reply, but not the submission.
Who writes, who reviews, and six moments that go to the operations lead
The person who holds the relationship writes and sends the reply. Nobody else writes to the owner. The operations lead reviews a draft only when the owner's message contains one of these triggers, and the review is a second reading of the draft, never a second email to the owner.
| Trigger in the owner's message | Who decides | What the reply does |
|---|---|---|
| The owner is not the CEO | The CEO | Goes back to the owner only, asking whether they will raise it with the CEO |
| A sale of the company is under way | The target's CEO until closing; the acquirer's CEO after it | Names who decides at each point and leaves the timing to them |
| Another advisor has already raised SourceX | SourceX, in its duplicate review | Neither competes nor asks the owner to choose; only one introduction can be credited |
| Files or a sample arrive with the message | The CEO, about the company's own records | Says they were not opened or kept, and that SourceX's application takes no files |
| The owner asks what it is worth or how soon it pays | SourceX, in its review and the company's signed deal records | Says neither is published for any company and links SourceX's process |
| The owner asks the firm to handle everything | The company | Explains that SourceX deals with the company directly and the partner does not sit in the middle |
The last row rests on section 2.2 of the partner agreement: SourceX may communicate directly with a referred company, and a partner need not join every call or email. When the owner's first worry is legal, the response pattern in client wants to talk to a lawyer first fits better than this checklist; when a CFO is the hesitant one, see the founder is interested but the CFO is not ready.
Draft A, failed and rewritten (Illustrative)
Illustrative. A generic company and firm, invented details, no outcome implied.
A partner at an outside accounting firm mentions SourceX to the founder and CEO of a 140-person regional claims administrator. The founder replies: "Interesting. What would we have to do?" The partner's first draft, Draft A, ran six lines:
- "Great news: with 14 years of claim files, you'll qualify."
- "Deals like this close in about 30 days."
- "Send me a sample export and I'll pass it on."
- "As owner and CEO, the decision is yours."
- "If you license, SourceX could pay me a reward; it is paid by SourceX, not deducted from your payout, and subject to its terms."
- "Reply: introduce us, we'll apply ourselves, not now, or no."
| Check | Draft A | The rewrite |
|---|---|---|
| C1 Answer first | Fail: opens with a verdict, and line 3 answers the question wrongly | Pass |
| C2 Who decides | Pass | Pass |
| C3 Your interest | Pass | Pass |
| C4 Fit screens | Fail: missing | Pass |
| C5 No outcome | Fail: "you'll qualify" | Pass |
| C6 No timing | Fail: "about 30 days" | Pass |
| C7 Nothing private asked for | Fail: asks for a sample export | Pass |
| C8 Earlier contact | Fail: missing | Pass |
| C9 Ways to reply | Pass | Pass |
| C10 Nothing sent yet | Fail: missing, and line 3 implies sending | Pass |
Seven of ten failed. The rewrite that went out:
Thanks for asking. The first step is small: the company answers a few questions on SourceX's own application, with no files, and SourceX decides whether to look further. Nobody can say what records are worth before SourceX reviews them, and I won't guess.
As founder and CEO, the decision is yours. I should say up front that if your company licenses data, SourceX could pay me a reward. SourceX pays it, it is not deducted from the payout your company agrees, and it depends on conditions in SourceX's terms.
SourceX's published screens are a full-time workforce that peaked at 50 or more people, years of records you created in your own work, the right to license them and a CEO who wants the conversation. The screening page is here: [link].
One question: has anyone at the company dealt with SourceX before?
If you'd like to go on, you can ask me to introduce you, apply yourselves, say not now or say no. Any of those is fine, and nothing goes to SourceX unless you ask me to in writing.
The rewrite is longer than Draft A by four sentences, and every added sentence removes a promise or adds a fact the owner needed.
The first-response log, and when the thread closes
Keep one line per first reply. It records the date the owner's message arrived, who replied and when, the check result (all ten passed, or which ones failed at review), the owner's answer in one word, a single follow-up date if there was no answer, and the closing date with its reason. It holds nothing else about the company.
- "Introduce us." Move to the handoff checklist once the CEO's yes is in writing.
- "We'll apply ourselves." Note it and step back. Credit, if any, is SourceX's decision.
- "Not now." Record the date the owner named, if any, and nothing about why. The pattern in following up after a company asks for more time applies.
- "No." Close the line the same day. No reason goes in the log.
- Silence. One follow-up, then close.
Once a month the operations lead counts which checks failed most often at review and retrains on the top one. Closed lines are kept as long as your firm's retention policy says.
What a pre-send check cannot catch
- Authority. The checklist makes the draft ask who the CEO is; it cannot confirm the answer. A title in an email signature is a clue, not proof.
- Fit. A reply that passes all ten says nothing about whether the company fits. Each SourceX program sets its own criteria, so today's no from one program does not settle what another might want next year.
- Speed against care. A one-day reply standard can push someone to send a draft they have not checked. The checks exist to slow down the four risky ones: C3, C5, C6 and C7.
- Evidence. No firm has published whether checked first replies lead to more CEOs saying yes. Count it yourself: owners who replied, CEOs who asked for an introduction and owners who said no, from one quarter to the next. No figures are published yet.
More operating guides for partner firms are in the guides library.
Next step
Refer a company. No cap on rewards. Default reward on a company's first qualifying transaction: the greater of $50,000 plus 5% and 15% of Actual Supplier Payout, with no cap; further qualifying transactions first agreed within 12 months of the first Closing pay 15%. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, including the USD 100,000 Minimum Transaction, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
Before the next reply to an interested owner leaves your firm, make sure its sender has registered as a partner and signed the agreement, keep who qualifies open for check C4, and read the program terms behind checks C3, C8 and C10.