Why CSMs are underpaid and how to fix it

Companies say they want CSMs to "drive value, not just revenue." Then they turn around and pay them like glorified support reps. Here’s where the math ain’t mathing: You expect CSMs to own renewals, drive expansion, and increase product adoption… ...but you comp them like customer service agents with a small retention bonus. 🤷🏻♂️ That’s a fundamental misalignment. The best revenue leaders don’t just pay CSMs more. They pay them differently: - Base salaries at AE-level (or close). Treat them as revenue drivers, not cost centers. - Variable comp split: 50% retention, 50% expansion. Lagging (GRR/NRR) and leading (upsells, adoption). - Clear line between CSM & AM. CSM = Expansion & retention. AM = Negotiation & new product cross-sell. Too many companies lowball their CSMs, then wonder why: - Retention tanks. - Growth stalls. - Top CSMs quit to become AEs. If you want CSMs to act like revenue drivers, pay them like revenue drivers. It’s not a cost. It’s a growth strategy.

Noah Sturm

Connect, Orchestrate, Scale | Relationship OS | Ex-Accenture | Outcomes Over Optics | Father

7mo

Absolutely spot on. If incentives aren’t aligned, you’ll never get someone truly focused on revenue. We learned this firsthand at N3—one of the largest outsourced inside sales orgs in the world. Our teams consistently outperformed in-house reps by 15%+. Why? Because we paid for performance and execution, not activity. Every role had comp tied to the value they delivered—not tickets supported. Real revenue leadership means being involved in every role matrix across the org. That includes CSMs. If you want them thinking like revenue owners, pay them like it.

Like
Reply
Sarabjeet Arora

Driving SaaS & ISV Growth | Scaling Profitability with Cloud, AI & FinOps | Customer Success, Revenue Acceleration & Strategic Program Management | Sr. Customer Solutions Manager @AWS | Ex Capgemini

7mo

You can’t expect CSMs to own revenue and expansion if you don’t compensate them like they’re driving growth. It’s not just about paying more, it’s about aligning incentives with outcomes. Comp plans are a strategy, Matt Green.

Like
Reply
Kuber S.

Customer Success Leader | Driving Adoption, Growth & Trust | ‘Churn Is Dead’ Newsletter

7mo

Bang on, Matt. I have always believed that how you pay your CSMs is a reflection of what you actually value in your CS org. If an org is serious about CS driving GRR/NRR, then comp plans need to reflect that—with thoughtful splits across retention, expansion, and product impact. Retention bonuses are nice. But if you want your CSMs to stay, grow, and scale value with you—treat them like the growth engine they are!

Karen Loiterstein

GTM Exec | P&L Owner | 360˚ Revenue Leader | Marketing, Sales, Customer Success, Product, Operational Alignment | Mom of 3 (yes, twins) | Strength Training & Global Travel | Podcast Junkie & True Crime Fan

7mo

Could not agree more. When you ask CSMs to own core revenue outcomes, but treat them like support, you’re undermining your entire growth engine. Paying for adoption and expansion isn’t a reward — it’s a requirement if you want to scale.

Mason Cosby

Founder & CEO @ Scrappy ABM

7mo

You have to compensate CSMs and create an environment that incentivizes them to drive value and revenue. This is how growth happens. You need to make it easy for them to do the work and get rewarded. Hoping they "come around" or magically start increasing your expansion is nonsense if you're going to look the other way when paying them. And this only hurts your retention in the long run.

Rachit Kataria 👨🏽🌾

Co-Founder @ Centralize (YC W24) | Helping revenue teams operationalize multithreading with AI

7mo

CS is undergoing an identity shift. Historically, they were never thought of as a revenue generating org, when they should've been from Day 1. Now seeing a slow but sure shift from CEOs and boards to have their CSMs own NRR, not just GRR. While it requires a new skillset for reps, and they will have to adapt, it's what's necessary. Caveat: depends if you have both a CS and AM function, but seeing these consolidate more and more with the "do more with less" mentality.

Like
Reply
Mike D'Angelo

Helping overloaded leaders & parents make life easier with one simple daily system | Creator of ResultsOS™ | High Performance. Great Relationships. Stronger Wellbeing. | For Individuals, Teams & Organizations

7mo

Right there with you, Matt. You’ve mapped out the perfect way to run a bad play from the playbook; expect growth, reward support, then wonder why churn creeps in. ¯\(ツ)/¯ We see this misalignment all the time. It's not just unfair; it’s unscalable. If you want your CSMs to think like owners, comp them like drivers. Otherwise, you're coaching the wrong game. Last known sales fact: Compensation Drive Behavior. Period. Paragraph. End of Story.

Taylor Martino

She’s a Sales Coach | 3x Sales Leader | Retired D1 Athlete and National Champion

7mo

if someone is responsible for driving revenue, pay them for driving revenue! Really not sure why CSMs have been (in my opinion) getting the short end of the commission stick for so long. losing customers is much more expensive than the commission you'd pay them.

See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories