Partner Registration Form Template
Structured onboarding for your partner pipeline. Company profile fills page one; partnership fit and pitch fill page two.
We build with partners on purpose, choosing a few rather than many. Tell us who you are and how we win together, and strong applications get a call instead of a form letter.
Partner programs die of two diseases: too little structure, a partnerships inbox full of unparseable pitches, or too much, a twelve-section portal application nobody finishes. This registration form is the working middle, two short pages that produce a reviewable, comparable partner file for every applicant.
Two pages, and what each carries. Page one is identity: legal company name, the name that will sit on an agreement, the human who owns the relationship, their work email, and an approximate customer count. Page two is the fit conversation: which partnership model, which region, and the pitch. The page break is not cosmetic, because separating "who you are" from "why us" makes applicants answer the second page with intent instead of dumping everything into one box, and it gives your reviewers a consistent reading order. In Document mode the pages advance with a clear step, and partial submissions mean a page-one-only applicant still leaves a recoverable trace.
The fields that do the routing. Partnership model and region are dropdowns because they map onto how programs are staffed: a reseller application in Latin America and a technology-integration application in Europe go to different humans with different checklists. Filter the responses view by either column and the weekly review meeting runs itself. The customer-count number gives a size signal without demanding confidential revenue data this early.
The pitch is the real filter. It is required, and its placeholder sets the bar: your customers, your motion, the overlap. Applicants who can write five specific sentences about mutual value are worth a call almost regardless of size, while applicants who paste their company boilerplate have plainly answered a different question. Effort filters beat criteria filters at the top of a partner funnel.
What waits for the onboarding call. Contract terms, margin expectations, NDA checkboxes, and document uploads all belong after mutual interest is established, in the onboarding conversation. Asking for them up front signals bureaucracy and scares off the nimble partners a program claims to want.
Match the models to your programs. SaaS vendors build channel programs on it, platforms recruit integration partners, manufacturers vet regional distributors, and agencies formalize referral relationships. Match the partnership-model options to the programs you run, and delete the ones you do not, since an option that leads nowhere wastes everyone's time. Tune the regions to your coverage map, and wire a webhook so each application lands in the partnerships channel with model and region visible at a glance. Reply speed is program marketing: the ending screen promises a human, so hold the review every week without fail.
Frequently asked questions
Why is the form split into two pages?
Page one captures identity and page two captures fit, and the separation produces sharper pitches and a consistent review order. Applicants who stall on page two still leave partial data you can follow up on.
How do applications route to the right reviewer?
Filter the responses view by partnership model or region, or push each submission via webhook into your partnerships channel or CRM with those two fields prominent. Both were designed as routing keys.
Should I ask for revenue or margin expectations here?
Commercially sensitive terms belong in the conversation after mutual interest is confirmed. Early demands for confidential numbers depress application quality and volume.
Can I add model-specific questions?
Use conditional logic to reveal extra questions per model, like "which platforms do you integrate with?" when Technology integration is selected. Everyone else keeps the shorter form.