FinTech · B2B Payments

From Referrals Only to 220+ Qualified Leads Every Month

A B2B payments company had grown on events and referrals alone. That worked until it didn't — growth targets outran the referral network, and there was no second channel to turn on.

Reconciled against client CRMIncludes what did not workIdentity withheld by request
Result summaryCLOSED
Outbound engine
Cold call + cold email, built from zero
LIVE
Qualified leads
220+ per month at steady state
220+
Cost per lead
65% below event-driven baseline
-65%
New ARR
Attributed within engagement window
$1.4M
220+
Qualified / month
-65%
Cost per lead
$1.4M
New ARR
Last updated: August 2026 Written by The FlairLytics client delivery team Reviewed by The FlairLytics Editorial Team 8 min
The situation

Where They Started

The company provided payments infrastructure to mid-market businesses, selling primarily to finance directors and heads of treasury. Deal values were healthy and retention was strong. The problem was where deals came from.

Essentially all pipeline arrived through two sources: industry events and referrals from existing customers. Both worked well and neither could scale on demand. When the board set a growth target that exceeded what the referral network could plausibly produce, there was no third channel to switch on.

There was also no CRM. Pipeline was tracked in a shared spreadsheet with a tab per rep. Nobody could answer basic questions about conversion rates, and the sales process existed only in the heads of the people running it.

Regulated-industry messaging added a genuine constraint. Every outbound asset required compliance review before use, which meant the usual approach of rapid copy iteration had to be redesigned around a review cycle rather than fought against.

Engagement — Quick Facts
Industry
FinTech — B2B payments infrastructure
Company Size
Approximately 60 employees, 6 quota-carrying reps
Engagement Length
Eight months, retainer model
Services Used
Outbound engine, branding & awareness, RevOps + CRM, B2B database
Headline Result
220+ qualified leads monthly, $1.4M new ARR
CRM
Zoho, implemented from a spreadsheet-based process
Compliance Constraint
Regulated messaging review on every outbound asset
Model
Monthly retainer
What we did

The Programme, Phase by Phase

01Month 1

Foundation

  • Zoho implementation
  • Process documented
  • ICP defined
  • Compliance review workflow agreed
Outcome: A system and a repeatable process
02Month 1–2

Infrastructure

  • Sending domains
  • Authentication and warmup
  • Audience extraction
  • Script and sequence approval
Outcome: Deliverability proven before volume
03Month 2–5

Activate

  • SDR calling live
  • Email sequences at volume
  • Weekly copy iteration within compliance cycle
Outcome: First consistent non-referral pipeline
04Month 4–8

Amplify & Scale

  • LinkedIn executive programme
  • Volume scaled
  • Objection library matured
  • ARR tracking
Outcome: 220+ qualified leads monthly at steady state
Outcome

Before and After

Figures measured over the engagement period and reconciled against the client CRM.

MetricBeforeAfter eight months
Qualified leads per monthReferral and event dependent220+, consistently
Cost per leadEvent-driven baseline65% lower
Acquisition channels2 (events, referrals)4 (events, referrals, outbound, brand)
New ARRBaseline$1.4M attributed
CRMShared spreadsheetZoho with documented process
ForecastabilityNoneMonthly volume predictable within a band

Cost per lead compared against the fully loaded cost of the previous event-driven motion including stand, travel and staff time. ARR is new annual recurring revenue closed during the engagement window.

Lessons

What Actually Made the Difference

Transferable lessons

  • 01The compliance cycle had to be designed into the programme, not treated as an obstacle. We built a batch review workflow where copy variants were approved in groups on a fixed weekly cadence. Fighting the review process would have stalled the programme; designing around it kept iteration speed acceptable.
  • 02The CRM had to come first even though it delayed outbound by a month. Launching outbound into a spreadsheet would have produced volume nobody could measure or follow up reliably. The month spent on Zoho was the least visible and most necessary part of the engagement.
  • 03Events were not replaced, they were supplemented. The referral and event motion continued and remained the highest-converting source. The point was never to replace what worked but to remove the dependency on it.
  • 04The LinkedIn brand programme lifted outbound response rates measurably. Once executives were visibly active in the category, cold outreach from the same company converted better. The two channels were not independent.
  • 05Deliverability work took four weeks and was non-negotiable. In a regulated category with finance-function recipients, landing in spam would have been both a performance problem and a reputational one.
Services used

What This Engagement Involved

FAQ

Questions About This Engagement

By designing around the compliance review cycle rather than treating it as friction. We batched copy variants for weekly group approval, maintained an approved-phrase library, and built sequences from pre-cleared components. Iteration speed was slower than an unregulated programme but entirely workable once the workflow was agreed.

Because outbound into a spreadsheet produces volume nobody can measure, route or follow up reliably. The month spent implementing Zoho delayed first meetings by four weeks and was the reason the programme could be scaled afterwards. Skipping it would have created a larger problem in month four.

No, and it was never intended to. Referrals remained the highest-converting source throughout. The objective was removing a single-channel dependency, not replacing a channel that worked. Both motions ran in parallel for the full engagement.

Steady state was reached around month five. Month one was CRM and process, month two was deliverability infrastructure and compliance workflow, months three and four were ramp with copy iteration, and volume stabilised from month five onward.

Yes, measurably. Response rates on outbound sequences improved after executives became consistently visible in the category. We would not claim precise attribution between the two, but the direction was clear enough that the brand programme was extended rather than treated as a separate experiment.

FL
Reviewed by The FlairLytics Editorial Team
B2B revenue practice · a team with 15+ years, startups to enterprise

Figures on this page are reconciled against the client CRM at the end of the engagement window. Client identity withheld at their request.

Last updated: August 2026 · Next review: February 2027

Dependent on One or Two Channels?

The free pipeline audit maps where your pipeline actually comes from and what happens if the largest source stops producing.

  • 30-minute strategy call
  • Free pipeline & CRM audit
  • Honest fit assessment

+91 93266 17504 · India · USA · UAE