onlycfo.io · 2025-06-06 · 363d

Bad Commission Plans are Expensive: Designing Sales Incentives to Optimize LTV and CAC

This article examines how poorly designed sales commission plans waste money by overpaying underperforming reps relative to revenue generated, and provides a framework for structuring commissions around primary goals (ARR, cash flow, churn, ACV) and secondary goals (new logos, margins, discounts). The author covers seven key compensation design considerations including quota-setting, ramp periods, usage-based pricing structures, clawbacks, churn penalties, multi-year SPIFs, and accelerators, with emphasis on aligning incentives to customer acquisition cost and lifetime value metrics.

5 metrics· Cited 0× in the knowledge base ·Open source ↗

Metrics in this report

Commission Rate - Expansion ARR

8-12percent of revenue closed

market benchmark

SaaS expansion revenue commissions (same as new logo)

Commission Rate - New Logo ARR

8-12percent of revenue closed

market benchmark

SaaS new logo acquisition commissions

Multi-Year Contract SPIF

1-2percent additional commission

typical

Extra commission incentive for closing multi-year deals

Sales Compensation - Base/Variable Split

50/50percent

market benchmark

Standard SaaS sales rep compensation structure

Sales Rep Underperformance Threshold

30percent of quota

illustrative

Example quota closure rate used to identify chronically underperforming reps