The Thinking Problem
Go-to-market strategies aren't broken often because of execution.
They’re broken because of invisible assumptions.
We take shortcuts.
We cluster patterns.
We confuse correlation with intent.
And we build systems on top of all of it: execution engines, sales cadences, funnel logic, tech stacks, that reinforce the original bias.
Then we wonder why we’re not seeing growth.
It’s not a marketing problem.
It’s not a product problem.
It’s a thinking problem.
Strategy Starts to Break When We Start to Assume
The assumptions usually sound small. Harmless, even.
- If someone pushes back on price, they’re only shopping for rate.
- If a client uses our direct platform, they don’t want advice.
- If an advisor isn’t engaging, it’s because they’re not interested.
These feel like useful generalizations.
They make segmentation easier.
They make enablement tidier.
They help us move fast.
But when assumptions harden into defaults, they stop us from seeing what’s actually happening in the market.
Let’s look at how this shows up.
Direct Investing ≠ Do-It-Alone
In my experience, a common (and costly) assumption in wealth and banking is:
“If a client chooses direct investing, they’re rejecting advice.”
That assumption gets baked into everything:
- The product roadmap: low-touch, self-serve, automated only.
- The engagement model: no access to advisors or planning tools.
- The metrics: measure clicks, not conversion to deeper relationships.
But what do direct investors actually want?
When you dig deeper, a different picture emerges:
- They want control, but not isolation.
- They value access, just not pressure.
- They’re open to insight, but on their own terms.
Many affluent and mass affluent clients toggle between self-directed and advisor-led behaviors. They manage part of their portfolio themselves but want help with taxes, estate planning, or complex investment decisions. They’ll engage, if, and I mean, if, the timing, context, and value are clear.
They’re not rejecting advice.
They’re rejecting irrelevance.
And if your GTM motion is built on the wrong assumption, you’ll never reach them.
The Fix: Design for Behaviour, Not Labels
Go-to-market should be built on how people actually make decisions, not on the categories we put them in.
That means:
- Don’t treat direct and advised as two separate personas. Treat them as interchangeable modes.
- Don’t build GTM engines around static segments. Build systems that adapt to behavior in real time.
- Don’t wait for clients to request advice. Design opt-in moments that offer it without pressure.
This is how growth happens: when we stop assuming, and start observing.
Because the best GTM strategies aren’t clever.
They’re accurate.
KB