The Bullseye Framework for Channel Selection: How I Prioritise What to Scale and What to Kill

Why Channel Selection Is So Critical

In most businesses I work with, growth struggles are not due to poor product quality or weak offers. They come from betting on the wrong traction channels for their stage and capacity. Running Google Ads when the CAC payback horizon is twelve months. Investing in organic search when sales need to happen this quarter. Chasing virality in a product that people do not talk about naturally. All these mistakes are common, and avoidable.

This is why I use the Bullseye Framework. It is a systematic way to explore and prioritise marketing channels without relying on founder instinct or copying what worked for someone else in a different context.

What Is the Bullseye Framework?

The Bullseye Framework was popularised in "Traction" by Gabriel Weinberg and Justin Mares. It divides the channel selection process into three concentric circles:

  • The outer ring is all possible channels
  • The middle ring is the shortlist of channels you will test
  • The bullseye is the one or two that actually work and should be scaled

It encourages wide thinking early, fast validation, and sharp focus later. I have adapted the original idea to include key metrics and business context. Here is how I actually use it in projects.

Step One: Define the Constraints

Before even listing channels, I define what success would look like, and what boundaries I am working within.

  • Target CAC: Based on contribution margin and payback expectations
  • Payback period: Especially for cash-constrained startups, this matters more than LTV
  • Stage of the business: Early-stage companies need fast feedback. Later-stage businesses can afford longer term plays
  • Team bandwidth and skills: A great channel is useless if no one can run it properly

For example, if the target CAC is under £50 and the payback window must be under two months, then channels like outbound sales or display advertising may be ruled out immediately. The framework begins with reality.

Step Two: Map the Universe of Channels

I list all nineteen traction channels, but I do not treat them as a buffet. I look at them through the lens of the current product, offer and audience. The list includes:

  • Search engine optimisation
  • Paid search
  • Paid social
  • Influencer outreach
  • Sales
  • PR
  • Community building
  • Offline events
  • Business development
  • Engineering as marketing
  • Viral referral
  • Partnerships
  • Targeted blogs and newsletters
  • Content marketing
  • Direct mail
  • Podcast sponsorships
  • Affiliate programmes
  • Display ads
  • App store optimisation

But I never assume they are equally viable. For example, an ecommerce brand with low margins and mid-ticket items will not survive long on paid social unless LTV is high. A SaaS platform solving a niche B2B problem probably should not try to grow through PR.

I evaluate each one with quick, directional data: CPMs, CPCs, channel saturation, audience intent, prior brand lift in similar companies.

Step Three: Run Focused Tests

From the universe of channels, I pick three to six to test aggressively but efficiently. Each test must:

  • Be set up to isolate the channel’s contribution
  • Have a clear success metric: lead volume, CAC, trial activation rate
  • Be time-boxed, usually two to four weeks
  • Be affordable, I never bet large on unvalidated channels

This is where many founders go wrong. They run a small test, get weak results, and either scale too early or write off the channel entirely. I frame these tests like experiments, not growth initiatives. The goal is information, not performance.

An example: testing influencer outreach by contacting twenty micro-influencers with bespoke messages and affiliate links. If five reply, three publish, and one generates converting traffic, that is signal. I can then structure a real programme.

Step Four: Select the Bullseye

After the tests, I compare:

  • Actual CAC vs. target
  • Lead quality and downstream conversion
  • Operational ease and repeatability
  • Payback dynamics

I choose one or two channels that show the best fit. Not necessarily the highest top-of-funnel metrics, but the ones that match business constraints and can scale. This becomes the bullseye.

This focus does not mean ignoring other channels entirely. But I avoid spreading resources too thin. I structure my growth around the best-performing loop and add supporting elements later.

Real Example: Marketplace Channel Focus

A two-sided marketplace client had tried five channels: SEO, PR, influencer outreach, paid search and events. None had scaled.

I ran a fit analysis:

  • SEO had long ramp time and required more content than their team could support
  • PR drove traffic but no conversion
  • Events were costly and only worked in London
  • Paid search was expensive due to competitive CPCs
  • Influencer outreach had small tests but one campaign broke even quickly

We doubled down on micro-influencer outreach with structured referral links, testimonials, and niche segmenting. Within eight weeks, cost per acquisition dropped by 38 percent and lead quality improved sharply.

It was not magic. It was just a structured test followed by disciplined focus.

Why This Framework Works

It removes ego from the process. It focuses attention. It puts structure behind a decision that is usually reactive.

Channel selection is a multiplier. The right choice lets you scale with efficiency and confidence. The wrong one burns cash and time.

That is why I do not just test channels. I evaluate them using this process. And I only scale what earns its place in the bullseye.

If your marketing feels scattered, or if your paid campaigns are working but margin is tight, this is where I can help. I will audit your channel spread, test what matters, and help you build growth from the inside out, with a bullseye, not a guess.