Foward Deployed Engineering

Published on: September 16, 2025

Tags: #fde #go-to-market #strategy #saas


The FDE Model vs. Traditional SaaS

graph TD;
    subgraph "FDE Model (Problem-First)"
        direction TB
        A["Identify a High-Value
Problem Area"] --> B{"Partner with an Early Customer"}; B --> C["FDEs Build Custom Solution On-site"]; C --> D["Learn & Gather Insights"]; D --> E["Generalize Solution into a
Scalable Product
"]; E --> F["Expand to Similar Customers"]; end subgraph "Traditional SaaS Model (Solution-First)" direction TB G["Define a Scalable
Product First
"] --> H{"Find Customers with that
Exact Problem"}; H --> I["Sell & Onboard"]; I --> J["Scale Sales & Marketing"]; end %% Styling to emphasize key differences style A fill:#d2ffd2,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px style G fill:#cde4ff,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px style E font-weight:bold style F font-style:italic style J font-style:italic

The FDE "Unscalable at Scale" Loop

graph TD;
    subgraph "On-Site (Field)"
        direction TB
        A(Customer N);
        B["FDE Team Deploys
(High-touch custom work)"]; C{Solves Specific Problem}; A --> B --> C; end subgraph "At HQ (Core)" direction TB E[Core Product & Eng Team]; F["Generalize & Improve the Platform"]; E --> F; end C -- "Insights & Learnings" --> E; F -- "Improved Product (More Leverage)" --> B; %% Styling to highlight the key parts of the loop style F fill:#d2ffd2,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px; style B fill:#cde4ff,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px;

Information Flow: The Learning Company

graph TD;
    subgraph Customer Site
        direction TB
        A(Customer Needs & Problems);
        B(FDE Team);
        A --> B;
    end

    subgraph Company HQ
        direction TB
        C(Product Team);
        D(Engineering Team);
    end

    B -- "Real-time Feedback & Product Gaps" --> C;
    C -- "Generalized Requirements & Vision" --> D;
    D -- "New Product Features & Leverage" --> B;

    style B fill:#d2ffd2
    style C fill:#cde4ff

The "Consulting Firm Trap"

graph TD;
    subgraph Ideal FDE Path
        direction TB
        A[Customer A Needs] --> B(FDE Builds Solution A);
        B --> C{Generalize Learnings};
        C --> D[Improve Core Platform];
        D --> E[Serve Customer B Faster/Cheaper];
    end

    subgraph "The Consulting Trap (Failure Path)"
        direction TB
        F[Customer A Needs] --> G(FDE Builds Solution A);
        H[Customer B Needs] --> I(FDE Builds Solution B);
        I --> J[Customer C Needs];
        J --> K(FDE Builds Solution C);
        G --> H;
        H --> J;
        J --> L(...);
        L --> M[No Scalable Product - Just Services];
    end

    style M fill:#ffcccc,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px
    style D fill:#d2ffd2

The Cultural Divide: Field vs. HQ

graph LR;
    subgraph "Field (FDE Team)"
        direction LR
        A("Priority:
Customer Success (Now!)"); B("Incentive:
Solve the immediate problem, whatever it takes."); C("View of HQ:
'They're too slow and don't understand the real world.'"); A --> B --> C; end subgraph "HQ (Core Product Team)" direction LR D("Priority:
Scalability & Maintainability"); E("Incentive:
Generalize solutions to serve many customers."); F("View of Field:
'They're building messy hacks and creating tech debt.'"); D --> E --> F; end A -- "Requests for
Urgent, Custom Features" --> F; D -- "Pushback on
One-Off Solutions" --> C; style A fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px style D fill:#9cf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px

Financial Risk: The Trough of Sorrow

gantt
    %% Subtitle
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s

    section Traditional SaaS
    Initial Burn      :a1, 0, 3s
    Breakeven         :a2, after a1, 2s
    Steady Growth     :a3, after a2, 8s

    section FDE Model
    Deep Burn (Customer 1) :crit, b1, 0, 6s
    Continued Burn (Customer 2+) :b2, after b1, 4s
    Potential Breakeven :b3, after b2, 3s
    High Growth (If successful) :b4, after b3, 5s

Share this post

Share on X  •  Share on LinkedIn  •  Share via Email