The 2x2 Matrix That Determines How You Get Paid In GTM

Trying to pioneer some of these shorter, punchier posts - almost a longer form of certain LinkedIn posts that seem to hit.

I've been thinking a lot about this concept lately of candidate leverage in a hiring market.

We run a recruiting firm at vibescaling, and I keep coming back to this simple 2x2 that determines your leverage in the market.

Axis 1: Product Complexity. Technical product (infrastructure, dev tools) vs. app layer (easier to understand)

Axis 2: Deal Size. SMB deals (sub $100k) vs. enterprise deals ($100k+).

The money zone? Top right. Technical product + enterprise size deals.

And yes, you can still do well selling apps - but not being technical enough is going to be an anti-skill you’ll regret not building each year in this new world of selling AI.

I’ll break down each quadrant.

Starting Point (App Layer + SMB): This is where most reps begin. Lower complexity, smaller deals, faster cycles. It's a great place to learn the fundamentals. Comp here typically ranges from $150-200k OTE.

Enterprise App: You can still do very well here. App layer + enterprise deals means you're running complex sales cycles without needing deep technical chops. Think selling to marketing, HR, or finance buyers. OTEs in this zone often land $250-300k+.

Technical SMB: You've got the technical credibility but smaller deal sizes. Dev tools companies with PLG motions often live here. The technical knowledge is valuable, but the deal sizes cap your earnings. Expect $175-250k OTE range.

The Money Zone (Technical + Enterprise): This is where reps have the most leverage and typically get paid the most. We're talking $275-350k+ OTE. Infrastructure, security, data platforms sold to technical buyers at F500s.

My biggest learning in my career - If you sell a technical product, you can always move to app layer. But if you only sell apps, you'll get hit with "not technical enough."

Same with deal size. If you can close $500k+ deals, you can always go down-market (whether as an IC or leadership). Going up-market is way harder.

We're seeing this play out in real-time with our recruiting practice. Companies selling to developers want to pay quite bit more for maybe less experience, because these profiles are just more rare.

The profile of an AE is moving more technical. I was chatting with my homie Liam Mulcahy recently, and he said something that stuck with me:

He thinks in 2030 the best reps are going to be former SEs and/or solution engineers. I tend to agree. Being more technical is going to make you an absolute weapon in AI-native selling.

There’s more “architecture” explaining to do to buyers who aren’t used to buying new AI tools. More FDE + last-mile deployment questions. It will be benefit a more technical rep who can run more parts of the sales process (and not need an SE).

Start wherever you can get in (usually app layer + SMB). Pick one axis to climb. Either go more technical OR sell bigger deals. Over time, get to that top right quadrant.

💬 If you're trying to get more technical, we wrote an article on How to Be More Technical that breaks down the exact steps.

For those who are new, my name is Chris Balestras, partner @ Vibescaling - a GTM advisory, recruiting, media, and investing firm, working with seed through series C AI-natives to help them grow.

Where to find Vibescaling:

We work with many of the hottest AI-native startups in various capacities, and for those who are interested, shoot me an email at [email protected] or a DM on LI.

🫡 cheers,

Chris