Demand Typology (Five Types)

When you need this method

You are assessing a B2B software company, your own or someone else's and the growth numbers say nothing about how durable the underlying demand is. Whether demand is self-created, merely captured, legally forced, or generated by the product itself fundamentally changes the strategic picture, yet is rarely distinguished cleanly.

Approach

1. 1Assign the company's demand to one of the five types: created (own category/content builds pull), captured (existing demand is harvested), regulation-forced (law/deadline), product-as-engine (the product generates its own pipeline), or B2B2C dual (two coupled demand streams).
2. 2Derive the defensibility consequence of the type: created demand is the strongest moat; captured demand is none by itself; forced demand is a demand strength, not a positioning strength.
3. 3For regulation-forced demand, additionally apply the regulatory density test.
4. 4For dual systems, score both demand sides separately instead of merging them into one grade.
5. 5Derive the go-to-market motion from the type, deadline harvesting for forced demand, retention-first for product-as-engine.

Limits and counter-indications

The typology is a Convios-internal extension of Walker's distinction, developed in scanning practice, and has not been independently validated. Real companies mix several types; the assignment requires judgment and insight into the actual channels. It describes the demand side and replaces no analysis of monetization or economics.

How to measure impact

A suitable observation: the distribution of new business across demand types, for instance, the share of pipeline arising without paid channels or deadline pressure.

Related methods

• Demand Creation vs. Demand Capture
• Regulatory Density Test
• Growth Loops Instead of Funnels (PLG)