According to the SmartUp methodology, many founders fail to define their ICP because they rely on broad generalizations such as “anybody who has X.” Yonatan Stern emphasizes that a valid ICP must pass the “list” test—the ability to generate a finite list of prospects. Founders must define attributes that can be entered into databases like Apollo or LinkedIn to produce real names. If the definition is too broad to generate a list, it is not a strategy but a wish.
SmartUp prioritizes attributes over traditional categories like industry or location. Relevant ICP attributes include specific job titles, employee ratios such as the number of engineers versus salespeople, ownership of specific assets like warehouses or refrigerated trucks, and details of the company’s tech stack, such as whether it uses Salesforce or a specific CRM.
The sources highlight that an ICP is often discovered rather than invented. In the case of Intelligene, the company initially targeted SMBs but found them too price-sensitive. Through sales experience, they discovered that large enterprises were more receptive and shifted their ICP accordingly, leading to increased revenue. Similarly, Metaverse initially targeted enterprise metaverse clients but later discovered that their true ICP was Learning & Development departments and content marketing agencies that required long, high-engagement sessions.
Because the total addressable market is often too large to pursue at once, SmartUp advises narrowing the ICP to a Market Beachhead. This is a small, uniform segment that is easiest to penetrate. By focusing resources on this beachhead, startups can achieve profitability before expanding to a broader ICP.
Yonatan Stern also critiques predictive analytics approaches to ICP definition. He argues that most companies already know who they want to sell to, and the real challenge is acquiring the specific list of contacts, not having an algorithm predict the profile.
