Feedback-to-$ Agent
The Manual Process Today
Signal lands across tickets, CSAT, onboarding notes, and renewal calls.
An analyst pulls it together into themes by hand, periodically.
Themes get sized by gut feel; no dollars attached.
Fixes are chosen by the loudest anecdote, not by $ impact.
Recurring issues surface late, after they've already cost renewals.
Product/CS act on whatever made the list, with no $ feedback loop.
Working Assumptions
| Assumption | Estimated | |
|---|---|---|
| Est. Customers | ||
| Avg. Contract Value | $/yr | ≈ $12.0M at risk / yr |
| Annual Churn | % | of customers / yr |
| Addressable Share | % | of churn driven by fixable themes |
| Recoverable Share | % | ≈ $750k recoverable / yr |
| Analyst Hrs / mo | hrs | ≈ 480 hrs / yr compiling feedback |
| Loaded Analyst Cost | $/hr | fully-loaded |
Illustrative estimates, not fixed numbers. Edit any value to recompute the pain-point figures below and the Impact Analysis tab, or tap the ⓘ on a row for its rationale.
Note: any edits are saved in your browser only, so different viewers may see different numbers. Use Reset to defaults to restore the original values.
Pain Point
Feedback is compiled by hand on a cadence, so recurring themes surface weeks after they start costing renewals.
Across ~12,000 customers at ~$20k ACV, ~5% annual churn is ~$12.0M at risk; ~25% is driven by addressable themes and ~25% of that is realistically recoverable, ~$750k/yr.
Without dollars attached to each theme, fixes get prioritized by the loudest voice instead of by revenue impact.
Compiling feedback into themes by hand is ~40 analyst-hrs/mo (~480 hrs/yr), ~$24k/yr of back-office time before any insight is ranked.