Most AI & SaaS startups don't die from a lack of product. They die from a lack of market clarity.

I help VC-backed founders bridge the dangerous gap between "cool tech" and a "scalable business" which have up to $10M ARR.

I work with startups where I am in their ICP which gives me a front seat to how the product will be used by the buyer.

My SaaS experience into the buying committee helps me define route to market with least resistance. 

My focus is singular: Nailing "Product-Solution Fit", securing "Product-Market Fit" & sharpening "Positioning" so you don't burn cash on the wrong growth levers.

The Experience: Enterprise Rigour, Startup Speed! I bring 21+ years of execution experience from Google, Dentsu, and Sage (where I ran £90M global ops). I know what "scale" looks like at the highest level, but I apply that discipline to the startup ecosystem; where speed, precision, and clarity matter more than big budgets.

How I Partner with Founders: I am not a consultant who hands over a slide deck and leaves. I operate as a strategic partner and embedded operator, bridging the gap between Product, Marketing, Sales, and Finance to ensure:

Product-Solution Alignment: Shaping features, packaging, and pricing to drive NRR and adoption, not just signups.

True Product-Market Fit: Moving beyond "early traction" to repeatable, scalable demand that proves the business model is ready for investment.

Sharp Positioning: Turning feature lists into a "must-have" narrative that resonates with a precise ICP.

Effective Marketing Frameworks: Audit marketing strategy & execution to accelerate revenue and reduce sales friction.

The Data That Matters: I don’t deal in vanity metrics. I anchor every strategy around the numbers that determine long-term sustainability and valuation: CAC Payback Velocity, NRR Lift, CLTV, and EBITDA impact.

Recent Impact 📈 $950K New ARR in 90 Days: Streamlined ICP targeting for an AI Integration Platform/Seed Stage 📈 35% Adoption Lift in 60 Days: Removed friction in the PLG motion for an embedded analytics startup/ Series A 📈 3-Month Sales Cycle Reduction: Realigned Sales & Marketing for an AI automation platform/Seed stage

I fix the disconnect between "building" and "selling." 

How This Comes Together: Weekly Sprints, Embedded Advisory, Workshops:

PSF Core (road to build an MVP and develop the product)
PMF Signal Lab (find product-market fit)
Positioning Reset (clarify ICP & messaging)
Marketing Blueprint (Audit of current strategy, tech stack, set up & measurement)

If you are ready to validate, scale, or expand, let's get to work.

There is a critical disconnect between traditional Product-Market Fit (PMF) advice and how technical founders actually operate. The standard marketing lexicon—ICPs, cohorts, and value propositions—often fails to resonate with engineers, leading them to build "top-down." 

This results in founders creating perfect solutions for problems they haven't validated, leading to false signals of traction and eventual churn. 

To bridge this gap, I’ve translated PMF into a framework that speaks the native language of builders: 'The Bootloader Protocol'!!!

The metaphor is simple: just as an operating system cannot launch without a successful bootloader sequence, a startup cannot launch an MVP without validating the underlying layers first. 

The protocol operates strictly bottom-up: starting with the Kernel Space (Minimal Viable Concept + Market + Buyer) and moving to the Driver Level (Problem/Solution fit) and Shell Layer (PoC/Prototype) before ever attempting the "OS" (MVP). 

If the bottom layer fails to initialize, the system won't boot—saving founders from building a product that the market will inevitably reject.

Ayse Guvencer

Dynamic and seasoned B2B SaaS Marketing Director boasting an illustrious 20+ years in digital marketing and strategy, honed through influential roles at esteemed international big 6 agency holding companies such as Dentsu and Publicis, advertisers like Sage and partners like Google. 

My proven track record showcases a history of successfully developing and steering high-impact performance and brand/integrated media initiatives across a spectrum of industries – Pharmaceutical, Retail, CPG, Travel, Finance, eCommerce, Government & Public Services, Gaming, Gambling, and SaaS – adeptly navigating both B2B and B2C landscapes.

Renowned for my ability to provide robust directorship, I specialize in leading multinational campaigns and spearheading the digital media transformation agenda with an innovative, data-centric approach. My strategic insights are geared towards enhancing efficiency and driving substantial revenue growth.

Adept in team development and management within the intricate framework of matrix organizations, I leverage strong leadership skills to foster increased performance, ensuring that teams excel and deliver exceptional results. My wealth of experience positions me as a trusted expert capable of navigating the complexities of the ever-evolving paid media landscape with confidence and precision.

Ready to step into CMO, Head of Digital, Marketing Director, Marketing Lead, Head of Marketing, Business Development, Sales Director, Product Marketing and Country Manager roles.

Core Skills:

•B2B SaaS Leader
•Demand Generation
•Performance & Brand Marketing
•Integrated Creative Communications
•Pipeline Growth & Biz Dev 
•Consumer Insights & Strategy	
•Digital Transformation & Operations
•Data & Analytics & Marketing Technology
•Team Leadership
•Stakeholder Management (including C-Level)
•Agency & Partner Management
•ABM
•Product Marketing
•Sales

Product-Market Fit & Positioning for VC-Backed Startups | I Turn “Cool Tech” into “Must-Have” Products | AI, DeepTech, MarTech | Ex-Athlete with a Killer Work Ethic | Real-Talk Advisor | Boardroom Sharp | AI Ethics

Today, I sat through another demo. This time a sales/outreach tech.

As the space is becoming extemely cluttered with automation, data enrichment, SDR agents, I am not the only one in buying committees that are getting to the point of ‘enough is enough’

I got a message the other day from one of the partners of Instantly.ai telling me they can send out 17K+ emails to my prospects.

In what world does that make sense?

Anways, back to the demo.

I asked for a technical team to be on the call. I am not an easy prospect. I have been in tech over two decades; and I am the nerdy techie type.

The sales pitch, ok; standard… Basic walk through the platform, okish.

Then comes my questions. 

How does the underlining tech works in terms of scraping online? Answer; I will get more information on that…

What is different that your product does that others in the category don’t? Answer; we have been in market the longest and we have the best data.

How can you tie a specific person to the scraped data online? Or how do you even tie that person to a site visit? Answer; we do that with cookies.

Well, cookies… Not with the cookies that I know…

Site visits are anonymized; IP sure, you can identify accounts, affinity buckets, demographics, behavioral patterns.

But specific name and the title of that person?? That is PII. It also doesn’t show up in cookies for a generic visit unless the person left their details… 

Even then, tying an anonymous visit aggregated… 

I have questions…

Here is my advice to sales folks and founders. 

If the prospect tells you in advance they want a technical demo, be prepared to answer technical questions, if not get someone who can.

If you don’t know what type of demo the prospect wants; research the person- economic buyer, champion, end user….

That is a consistent tension with startups and prospects.

When you are selling, you need to know your audience and tailor the sales approach.

This can only happen when you have a solid positioning in the market category you are operating in and you also have a solid PMF.

You need to be able to also talk about how your product differs from the pack.

Be prepared for every type of buyer…

Otherwise, you leave them researching the product themselves… 

Extra step for the buyer… 

Before you know it, the buyer is gone…

If you are not a technical seller but come across a technical buyer who demands deep "under the hood" insights, attempting to fake technical expertise creates frustration and loses the sale. 

Worse is saying 'I am not so technical'.

Instead, you should "flip the bootloader protocol pyramid" by pivoting from a technical demo to a strategic interrogation, starting with the "Kernel Layer" (Concept, Market, and Buyer). 

Rather than answering technical questions you cannot handle, you must proactively ask probing questions about my current landscape: what is working, what isn't, and which other market vendors are being considered. 

This shifts the focus from the product's internal mechanics to my external reality.

Once the landscape is defined, you can move to the "Driver Layer" (Problem and Solution) to ground me in the urgency of my specific issues. 

By asking how these problems impact day-to-day operations and validating the pain points, you can discuss the solution strictly at a value level rather than a technical one. 

This approach enables you to gather critical intelligence and maintain deal momentum, effectively setting the stage for a Sales Engineer to handle the "Shell" and "Goldmaster" layers (technical proof and MVP) in a future, better-tailored conversation.

I talk to many startups day in and day out. I have spoken to over 25 founders in the past 1.5 months.

I am seeing some common threads in these conversations. 

If they are a technical founder, the focus in on ‘building the perfect’ MVP – not the generic product but the whole product. 

The idea that you can ship a shell layer  - MVP doesn’t have to be a product at all, it can be a video, slide deck, concierge MVP – is not really intuitive.

I do understand where this is coming from. If you are an engineer, and you have been working with the premise that your product has to be perfect before going out the market, that is in your DNA.

However, in the initial days of a startup, that is somewhat of a bottleneck. 

What you need at the start is not the perfect whole product. What you need is not building what you think how the buyer solves their problem. What you need is insight into how the buyer prefers to solve for that problem, the alternative or another vendor. 

Unless you understand this, you will sacrifice resources and your runway while building, not much feedback from the buyer - you talked to a few that were ecstatic about the product, hence you thought you were on the right path - you are risking not being able to pivot quickly once the product doesn’t have much traction.

Most of the time, the customer you talk to that are early adopters (Enthusiasts/Visionaries) will always be ecstatic about a new tech. They are more than ok having 70% of the whole product and work with the bugs, and other issues that the product might have.

However, the bread and butter of a startup is the pragmatists – main market. They expect the 100% of the whole product. They are more concerned about their internal operations rather than being on the forefront of a new tech.

You can’t get to pragmatists before the early adopters. That is a fact. 

However, if the only prospects that you ask feedback are early adopters, you are risking not being able to cross to the mainstream markets. 

The incentives, expectations and reasons to buy are different for each of these prospects.

You start with a shell of a product, it doesn’t have to be pretty. You identify the must have/performance/delighter features (The Kano Model) and do a lot of A/B testing on a cohort level. 

Not the gross number of sign ups, not the overall usage, not vanity metrics.

This doesn’t happen without feedback and solution validation.

If you are hellbent on building the perfect product – efficiency and building on budget- doesn’t really mean much when the product is not the solution that the mainstream market needs.

I was not an easy kid.

I’ll admit I was a bit nightmarish. My mom can attest to that; gladly…

I know my flaws and I’d like to think I did update my software for the better over the years.

I was the kid bugging my teacher at kindergarden asking “why” obsessively.

Miss Poor Teacher: "Okay everyone, time to put the toys away!"
Me: “Why?"
Miss Poor Teacher: “Because we have to get ready for snack time."
Me: "Why?"
Miss Poor Teacher: “Because if we don't clean up, the room will be messy."
Me: “But why?"
Miss Poor Teacher: "Because we need a tidy space to learn."
Me:"But... why?"

Then mom and me end up at the principal’s office on a weekly basis.

That followed me to high school,  shockingly!!!

Mr. Poor Teacher: "Today we are learning the Quadratic Formula."
Me: "Why?"
Mr. Poor Teacher: "Because it helps us solve complex equations."
Me: “Okay, but why do I need to know that? When am I going to use it?"
Mr. Poor Teacher: "It teaches you critical thinking and problem-solving skills."
Me: “Yeah, but I’m going to be a doctor. Why do I need to find x?"
Mr. Poor Teacher: “It’s on the SATs."
You: "Okay, but why? Just to get into college to learn more stuff I won't use?"

Well the same scenario. Mom and me… and the principal… again…

Now rather than being a pain, working with the startups, I find this ‘why’ interrogation is actually a super power.

When I am trying to map customer development to product development in a cluttered category where the risk of customization for each customer is dangerously high, ‘why’ works wonders.

“Why” you would ask I am sure:)

Most technical founders are brilliant engineers. My inquisitive habits don’t even come close to their imagination. They never will.

But the ‘always build’ mode clouds judgements when trying to build feature after feature to rush to build the perfect product.

You don’t see the forest from the trees.

That is when my “why” senses kick in…

Founding Engineer: “We are shipping out three new feautures this week”
Me: “Why are we still building?”
Founding Engineer: “Because one of the buyers wanted these”
Me: “Why do they want them?”
Founding Engineer: “I had a call with them and they need these’”
Me: Why do they need them?”
Founding Engineer: “They said they would be nice to have’”

(Jist- So we don’t have to build them right this second, they are not must haves or performance, they are semi deligthers)

And it goes until one of us gives up…

Why… Why… Why…

As Simon Sinek says, start with the ‘why’ not the ‘what’

Also I learned Mr. Toyoda - before it was Toyota Motor Corporation - founded the “Five Whys” and since then, they have been using it across all their lean manufacturing protocols.

Seems like I knew something after all… all along…

⭐️Saturday Wisdom for my Dear Founders⭐️

There is a difference between Minimum Viable Concept (MVC) and Minimum Viable Product (MVP)

You can’t get to MVP before nailing down MVC.

Happy Saturday 🙌

⭐️Sunday Wisdom for my Dear Founders⭐️

If you are starting top down, you are building blind.

If you don’t test your hypothesis first, validate it is a pain point, understand market demand, how the buyer does/would solve for that problem and then build and ask for feedback; you can’t there from here.

You need feedback at every stage, and lots of it. 

Happy Sunday 🙌

I have been wracking my brain about this for the past 2 months. 

Where are we going wrong and why do we get stuck on PMF? 

The metrics nosedive, buyer is confused, founders rush to build new features but it is still the wrong signals. 

It is not churn- it is the buyer rejecting the product. 

Period!

Over and over again…

We talk about problems, solutions, MVPs, buyers, pain points, satisfaction, the market, ICPs, segments, cohorts, concepts, opportunity scores, value props, constant user feedback…

Still we get stuck…

I realized I wasn’t speaking the same language as the tech founders. 

I was so wrapped up in my head that I might as well have been speaking in Aramaic.

That’s when it hit me… 

I needed to put these somewhat marketing, somewhat product, somewhat market, somewhat buyer, somewhat positioning concepts in a language that makes sense to the tech founders.

They are brilliant coders, some of the smartest that I know. Passionate, focused, absolutely brilliant…

Yet, I wasn’t explaining myself when I talked about this PMF that we needed to reach… 

Magically…

I found my solution- ‘The Bootloader Protocol’. 

Cool name ha..This is as creative as I can get picking it…

After reading as much as I can about OS layers and trying to find analogies to the best of my abilities, I came up with this protocol.

OS doesn’t build itself. It is a pyramid. It is dependent on the layer below and another layer below and another layer below.

Minimal Viable Concept + Market + Buyer —Kernel Space (Root Access)

Problem + Solution — Driver Level (Interrupt Request and Handler)

PoC + Prototype — Shell Layer (Command Line Interface + Graphical User Interface)

MVP- OS (Goldmaster Release)

4 layers; each laddering up to the one above.

Syntax Model- If the bottom layer doesn’t work, the system won’t boot.

So presenting the ‘Bootloader Protocol’ ladies and gents…

Am I a coder? No
Am I a software engineer? No
Am I as brilliant as they are? No
Can I explain PMF in a language that makes sense? Hell yeah, I think at least…

I’ll deep dive into this more in the next few weeks.

For now you have the pic definition below.

#bootloader #PMF #tech #startups #founders #vc #pe #software #OS

Something weird happened today. 

As an occupational hazard, I am always on the look out for new tech - especially in MarTech, Sales, Data Analytics -- you get it.

I am very technical and I try to talk to founders where I am in their ICP for their products.

I figured this was more of a disconnect between the technical founders that are not domain experts in the spaces they are operating in.

It turns out that is not the case - this happens with domain expert technical founders as well.

I sat thru a demo today for a MarTech (channel optimization) tool - I am not an easy prospect so I always ask the technical folk to be in the demos as well.

We started off as a high level discussion on what the tool is supposed to solve and for whom.

Everything was fine until then, but then I saw the demo, what was under the hood.

It is not uncommon that the UX is not all beautiful when you have 4 clients. That is not a problem, you can pivot. It is not painful.

The issue here was that the product was built for the marketers, but that is not how marketers optimize, or traffick the campaigns. 

That was really weird for me; especially from a technical founder that was also a domain expert. 

If you are building for a specific ICP, you first need to understand how the buyer is operating and solving those challenges or bottlenecks. 

You can't decide for them - they are either working with a legacy vendor, agency on in platform themselves.

The product can't be counterintuitive to how campaign optimization is done. 

At that point, pivot is as painful as they come.

If you are feeling this pain, let's chat.

Stop building… Just stop…

I was talking to a technical founder that is also the domain expert in the vertical that he is operating in. 

He has been doing the actual work for years, and identified an underserved need in the tech marketing space specifically.

Being a domain expert already puts you couple of yards in front of the founders that are just technical.

However, it can be a blessing or a curse.

You are really tuned into what the problem is, and how you would solve for that problem. This prevents you from taking a bird’s eye view of the market. 

I have looked at the MVP. There is a lot of features. Really a lot of features.

Having done tech sales and marketing and having, I can see really clearly that the product is intimidating.

Buyer already knows this is a problem day in and day out; they live it already. It is time consuming and very manual. That is the current status quo.

There is also not another vendor in the space solving for that specific problem.
 
However, the solution is too complicated to use in the product. It takes more time to use the tool to solve for the output than actually doing it manually. 
The current way of addressing that, the founder is using his own tool to solve for the problem. 

That is what I call a Concierge MVP. You are solving a few clients’ problems yourself until the product reaches PMF. 

This is ok while you are at the very early stages. However, if the product is not intuitive to how the buyer solves for this problem and in fact creates more friction, you are building a consulting business and not a software business.

What would be ideal is not build very complicated features. The ideal thing is probing as much as you can with the prospects. 

This is not the early adopters that are ok with the generic product. This is with prospects that are the pragmatists – they need the whole 100% of the product.

However you can’t get there from here. 

If you are hellbent on building without A/B testing, or gathering both qualitative and quantitative feedback, you end up building a solution that doesn’t match the problem.

At that point the pivot is painful and you have burnt cash and wasted runway.

taplio

Ayse Guvencer's Linkedin Analytics

Ayse Guvencer

Performance ScoreAyse Guvencer's LinkedIn Performance

Ayse Guvencer's Best Posts (last 30 days)

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

.css-6ytdur{background-image:linear-gradient(284deg, rgba(39, 43, 72, 1) 0%, rgba(33, 47, 183, 1) 100%);color:transparent;-webkit-background-clip:text;background-clip:text;}Ayse Guvencer's Linkedin Analytics

Ayse Guvencer

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Ayse Guvencer's LinkedIn Performance

Ayse Guvencer's Best Posts .css-1emoo84{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:400;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);}(last 30 days)

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Ayse Guvencer's Linkedin Analytics

Performance ScoreAyse Guvencer's LinkedIn Performance

Ayse Guvencer's Best Posts (last 30 days)