A SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas to Guide the Pricing Process in SaaS Startups PDF Free Download
1 / 85/85
100%
BUSINESS INFORMATICS MASTER’STHESIS
A SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas to Guide
the Pricing Process in SaaS Startups
Author:
Yannick van Oord
(6831958)
y.j.vanoord@students.uu.nl
Supervisor:
Dr. (Slinger) Roijackers-Jansen
Second examiner:
Dr. (Gerard) Wagenaar
May 5, 2025
i
“For any tactic that works well for one company, we can show you the opposite tactic working
equally well at another. That’s why it’s an art to find your best pricing strategy and the
optimal way of representing the price to your prospective buyers.”
Omar Mohout
ii
UTRECHT UNIVERSITY
Abstract
Faculty of Science
Department of Information and Computing Sciences
Master of Science
A SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas to Guide the Pricing Process in SaaS Startups
by Yannick van Oord
Canvases, such as the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas, are widely used
tools for organisations to visualise and organise their business models. A multivocal
literature review of the current state-of-the-art has shown that these frameworks do
not sufficiently address the complexities of pricing. The literature review has shown
that identifying a software-as-a-service (SaaS) pricing strategy is often performed in
an ad-hoc and unstructured manner, leading to failure of the startup. This problem
highlights the need for a specialised tool to support startups in making informed
pricing decisions. The aim of this paper is to develop a pricing canvas to guide
startups in identifying a more structured pricing strategy for their software prod-
uct. To accomplish this objective, a first version of a Pricing Strategy Canvas was
developed, integrating key activities and elements from the Business Model Can-
vas, Lean Canvas, and other literature. Expert interviews were conducted to refine
and improve this canvas, incorporating best practices and real-world insights from
SaaS startups and small medium enterprises. The final version of the SaaS Pricing
Strategy Canvas bridges the gap between theory and practice, offering a tool that
combines both theoretical knowledge and practical application. The canvas was
validated and evaluated during hands-on workshops, which proved the canvas to
be an effective way of sparking valuable conversations between (co-)founders, in-
spiring critical thinking instead of guessing, and supporting the flexible, uncertain,
and experimental nature of startups. Ultimately, the Pricing Strategy Canvas helps
startups make more informed, data-driven pricing decisions.
Keywords: Software-as-a-service, SaaS Pricing, SaaS Startups, Pricing Strategies,
Canvas, Pricing Strategy Canvas
iii
Acknowledgements
As I conclude my thesis, I would like to acknowledge the people and groups who
have not only offered their help but have also provided (emotional) support, inspi-
ration, and guidance throughout this journey.
First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Slinger
Jansen, for his invaluable guidance and support throughout this research. His in-
sights and expertise in the field have been crucial in shaping this work as it stands
today. From the start, he inspired me to create a thesis that I found enjoyable but also
"cutting-edge" at the same time. Being able to address thesis issues and questions
with Slinger, I was able to create a thesis with which I am very satisfied. All I can
say is that I am very happy to have had him as my supervisor!
Second, I am thankful to my second advisor, Dr. Gerard Wagenaar, for his thoughtful
feedback and constructive suggestions, which have greatly contributed to the devel-
opment of this thesis. His perspective on this thesis on a higher level has enabled me
to take a second look and content-related issues or statements to assure that what I
am stating in this paper is not only scientifically correct, but also relevant!
Third, I want to thank every startup and entrepreneur that has participated in this
research. Their input has allowed me to create a pricing canvas that helps them
perform their SaaS practices in a better way, all while contributing to the larger be-
ing of SaaS pricing research. Being able to create this artefact with them makes me
appreciate the collaborative nature of this research field. Their openness to share ex-
periences, address challenges, and provide thoughtful insights has been more than
useful. I am grateful for their time and trust, as their contributions have not only
been a foundation for this research but also peaked my interest in the world SaaS
and its many characteristics.
Finally, I would like to give a huge shout-out to my study colleagues and friends,
Ilyas and Mike, for their encouragement, discussions, and advice. Sharing this jour-
ney with them has been fun and informative at the same time. Being able to make
a thesis "together" with these great minds has helped me feel good about what I am
researching, inspired me to enjoy this time, and motivated me to push through the
challenges along the way. Not only these things, but also a single moment of laugh-
ter with them, made this whole experience worth it!
Again, I would like to thank you all very much!
Yours sincerely,
Yannick
iv
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Problem definition .............................. 1
1.2 Objectives and research questions ...................... 2
2 Research Method 4
2.1 Purpose ..................................... 4
2.2 Phase 1: multivocal literature review .................... 5
2.2.1 Goal .................................. 5
2.2.2 Literature search ........................... 5
2.2.3 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria .................. 6
2.2.4 Meta-Model .............................. 6
2.3 Phase 2: Expert Interviews .......................... 7
2.3.1 Goal .................................. 7
2.3.2 Informed Consent and Research Data Management ....... 7
2.3.3 Input from non-startup software firms ............... 8
2.3.4 Who is an expert? ........................... 8
2.3.5 Participant selection ......................... 9
2.3.6 Interview Structure .......................... 9
2.3.7 Data analysis ............................. 9
Thematic Analysis .......................... 10
Narrative Analysis .......................... 10
2.3.8 Canvas versioning .......................... 11
2.4 Phase 3: Validation and Evaluation ..................... 11
2.4.1 Canvas creation guidelines ..................... 11
2.4.2 Conclusive interviews and workshops ............... 12
2.5 Research questions and method phases .................. 13
3 Multivocal Literature Review 14
3.1 Strategic business frameworks: the canvas ................. 14
3.1.1 Why a canvas? ............................ 14
3.1.2 Business Model Canvas ....................... 14
Origin and creation of the Business Model Canvas ........ 15
Business Model Canvas Elements ................. 15
3.1.3 Lean canvas .............................. 17
Origin of the Lean Canvas ...................... 17
Lean Canvas Elements ........................ 17
3.1.4 BMC and Lean Canvas and their relation to pricing ....... 18
3.1.5 Pricing Model Canvas ........................ 18
3.1.6 Disadvantages of the Pricing Model Canvas ........... 20
3.1.7 Canvas by Garlet and Wirth ..................... 21
3.1.8 Other SaaS Pricing Frameworks in a Nutshell .......... 21
3.2 SaaS pricing activities ............................. 22
3.2.1 Strategic Level ............................ 23
v
3.2.2 Tactical Level ............................. 24
3.2.3 Operational Level ........................... 25
3.2.4 Gaps and missing elements ..................... 25
3.3 SaaS pricing strategies ............................ 26
3.3.1 List of specific pricing strategies .................. 26
3.3.2 Gaps and missing elements ..................... 29
3.4 Scoping towards the strategic layer ..................... 29
3.5 SaaS Pricing Canvas Ontology ........................ 32
4 Results 33
4.1 SaaS Pricing Meta-Model ........................... 33
4.2 Literature-Based Canvas Concepts ..................... 34
4.2.1 Pricing Canvas Draft One ...................... 34
4.2.2 Pricing Canvas Draft Two ...................... 35
Filling in the Pricing Strategy Canvas ............... 36
4.3 Interview Round 1 .............................. 37
4.3.1 Interviewee demographics ..................... 37
4.3.2 Results ................................. 37
Position of the Canvas in the Startup Process ........... 37
Know Your Product ......................... 38
The Devil is in the Details ...................... 38
Four Dimensions of SaaS Pricing .................. 39
SaaS Pricing as a Startup is an Experiment ............ 40
Customer Retention ......................... 41
4.4 Pricing Canvas Draft Three ......................... 41
4.5 Interview Round 2 .............................. 43
4.5.1 Interviewee demographics ..................... 43
4.5.2 Results ................................. 43
Company Strategy .......................... 43
Price Timing .............................. 44
Know whom you are selling to ................... 44
Minor remarks ............................ 45
4.6 The Final SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas .................. 46
4.6.1 Description of canvas elements ................... 47
4.6.2 How to fill in the canvas ....................... 48
4.7 Conclusive Interviews ............................ 48
4.7.1 Results ................................. 48
4.7.2 Workshops ............................... 50
5 Discussion 54
5.1 Interpretation of Key Findings ........................ 54
5.2 The Gap Between Theory and Practice ................... 58
5.3 Practical Implications ............................. 59
5.3.1 A structured pricing decision framework ............. 59
5.3.2 Allow for experimentation ..................... 60
5.3.3 A more iterative pricing approach ................. 60
5.3.4 Improved investor/stakeholder communication ......... 61
5.4 Research Limitations and Shortcomings .................. 61
5.4.1 Literature Coverage ......................... 61
5.4.2 Canvas generalisability ....................... 62
5.4.3 Other types of software ....................... 63
vi
5.4.4 Workshop limitations and reproducibility ............. 63
5.4.5 What is considered SaaS? ...................... 64
5.4.6 Corporate bias ............................ 64
5.5 Future work .................................. 64
6 Conclusion 66
Bibliography 68
Grey Literature Bibliography 71
A Interview Consent Form 72
B Interview Questions 75
B.1 Demographic Questions ........................... 75
B.2 Questions About Software Pricing Practices ................ 75
B.3 Questions About Strategic Frameworks and Canvases .......... 75
B.4 Questions About Real-World Application and Feedback ......... 76
B.5 Questions to Validate or Challenge Academic Knowledge ........ 76
B.6 Wrap-Up Questions .............................. 76
C Participant Outreach Letter 77
vii
List of Abbreviations
SaaS Software asa Service
BMC Business Model Canvas
PMC Pricing Model Canvas
KPI Key Performance Indicator
CRM Customer Relationship Management
HR Human Resources
SME Small or Medium Enterprise
PaaS Platform asa Service
IaaS Infrastructure asService
AWS Amazon Web Services
AI Artificial Intelligence
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
Since its introduction in 2001, Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) applications are becom-
ing more common, allowing businesses to use other software easier, quicker and of-
ten better than in-house production or on-premise installation (Kaplan, 2007). One
of the most popular used definitions of the SaaS model is: a model for enabling ubiq-
uitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing
resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly
provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction
(Mell and Grance, 2011).
SaaS applications range from CRM and HR systems to, for example, Dropbox.
They are typical to have some sort of paywall that allows users to use the software.
A popular way to sell SaaS is with the "pay-as-you-go" model that is behind the use
of such software (Bhardwaj, Jain, and Jain, 2010), so you only pay for what you use.
Other advantages of SaaS is that it does not need an on-premise installation: it can be
accessed from anywhere. Furthermore, any organisation adopting SaaS is not held
accountable for any problems, the responsibility is outsourced to the owner of the
software product (Saltan, 2019).
1.1 Problem definition
Identifying a SaaS pricing strategy as a startup is complex. Therefore, startups
perform their pricing ad hoc. There is no scientific tool (canvas) to support this
complex process.
SaaS products are sold based on a specific pricing model. This includes models
such as freemium, which contains a free limited version of the service and a paid
better version of the software. Another method is dynamic or on-demand pricing,
where prices change based on consumer demand. Finally, there is also pay-per-use
(Saputra, Indartono, and Handani, 2019).
SaaS startups are new companies that focus on developing and selling SaaS prod-
ucts. They are characterised by their high uncertainty and risk-tolerant behaviour,
low resource availability, and rapidly deciding nature (Azeem and Khanna, 2024). To
shape the pricing model and make other pricing-related decisions, startups can iden-
tify a pricing strategy. The pricing strategy is the foundation upon which all pricing
decisions are made, for example the pricing model as described above (Saltan and
Smolander, 2021a). The price of the product is the result of the execution of a specific
pricing strategy that results from a (long) thought process of the startup’s founders.
Pricing plays a crucial role in the success of all SaaS businesses, whether they are a
startups or an established company, as it directly the number of sales the business
makes. However, while larger firms may have better access to pricing experts and
historical data, startups often lack these resources, making their pricing decisions
Chapter 1. Introduction 2
more complex and uncertain. Therefore, this research focusses specifically on star-
tups, where the need for structured guidance is more urgent. Furthermore, there
is often contradictory advice that helps them in pricing their SaaS product, mak-
ing it harder to do (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). For example, choosing between a
value-based or cost-based approach, which have a different approach when it comes
to pricing and selling the product. Furthermore, SaaS startups are often heteroge-
neous (diverse) in the way they approach their product pricing and are very limited
in what they share about their pricing (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). Ultimately,
this process becomes ad hoc for startups where they are guessing the price instead
of backing it with a strategy.
There exist numerous tools that startups use in order to visualise and structure
the thought process. Such a tool is called a canvas. Currently, there exist two can-
vases that capture the business model of the business: the Business Model Canvas
and Lean Canvas. Among other things, these canvases include information on costs,
target customer, the value of the product, and distribution and marketing channels
(Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). The Business Model Canvas is very popular for
a lot of businesses, where the Lean Canvas has a better focus on startups (Maurya,
2022). Unfortunately, these canvases are limited in the amount of information re-
garding the pricing strategy of a software product. Currently, only cost and revenue
are taken into account and a specific pricing canvas does not exist. With many fac-
tors at play when determining the price of a SaaS product (Mohout, 2015), it would
be beneficial to have a canvas as a tool to approach the pricing strategy as a startup.
One of the reasons being that pricing has a major impact on the success of a SaaS
startup (Saltan and Smolander, 2021a).
The question arises how a canvas can be built to support the pricing process in
startups and what elements the canvas should have. Additionally, it is still unclear
what canvases actually are, what their potential is and why they exist. By some,
canvases are currently perceived as vague and complex. To understand canvases
better, there are other theses written on the topic, for example Szulwi ´nski (2023) and
Prasad and Krishna (2023). Therefore, this research not only demystifies canvases
but also enhances their relevance and utility in today’s business environment.
1.2 Objectives and research questions
This research aims to develop a new canvas specifically tailored for the pricing of
SaaS products in startups to solve the identified problems with three objectives:
Objective 1: Identify how SaaS pricing strategies are currently identified and used
in SaaS startups.
Objective 2: Identify how SaaS pricing strategies relate to the application of frame-
works, such as the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas, which are often used
by startups.
Objective 3: Create and validate a SaaS pricing canvas that can guide SaaS startups
in the pricing process.
To accomplish the objectives, the following research question is proposed:
Chapter 1. Introduction 3
RQ1: How can a comprehensive canvas be designed to guide SaaS startups in deter-
mining optimal pricing for their software products?
We have identified four sub-questions, each addressing one part of the process of
building said canvas, to collectively answer the main research question:
sRQ 1 How does a SaaS startup come up with the pricing strategy for their software
product?
sRQ 2 How are the factors that influence the pricing of software products reflected in
frameworks such as the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas?
sRQ 3 How do the frameworks of the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas col-
lectively influence SaaS product pricing strategies in startups?
sRQ 4 What are the steps and methodologies involved in creating a canvas?
By addressing these objectives, this research contributes to a deeper understand-
ing of how SaaS startups operate in pricing and how a custom pricing framework
can enhance this process. The development of a dedicated SaaS pricing canvas will
not only provide startups with a practical tool but will also show the capabilities of
canvases. Ultimately, this study aims to support SaaS entrepreneurs navigating the
complexities of pricing, for a more informed and strategic decision-making process.
4
Chapter 2
Research Method
To answer the research questions posed in Chapter 1, we follow an approach similar
to the creation of the Business Model Canvas. We have performed a preliminary
literature review to extract the method of the Business Model Canvas creation to
apply to this research, which we call the Osterwalder method.
Alexander Osterwalder started collecting data for the Business Model Canvas
from various research papers, blended into scraps, and glued into one matrix in his
PhD thesis (Osterwalder, 2004). The literature study approach from Osterwalder
(2004) entails finding literature sources that discuss similar topics within the busi-
ness model ontology that he has identified. To unify the topics and terms of each
paper, he has created a matrix in which a unified understanding is created.
With the results from the literature review, he started with the creation of his
Business Model Canvas. Osterwalder used co-creation with practitioners to build
the canvas from theory in the form of a book publishing in Osterwalder and Pigneur
(2010). In this book, they worked together with hundreds of practitioners and other
researchers to gather practical input and to create the Business Model Canvas as it
stands today (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). In the Multivocal Literature Review,
we will elaborate more on the specifics regarding the origin of the Business Model
Canvas.
To achieve a similar result, the creation of the Pricing Canvas will follow a similar
approach. We conduct a Multivocal Literature Review (MLR) to gather theoretical
data on SaaS pricing and pricing strategies. They serve as the scraps of information
to form an ontology, according to Osterwalder (2004). We will create a complemen-
tary matrix to show the current, promising data in the topic of SaaS pricing. In
the second part, we apply co-creation by interviewing industry experts to give their
opinion on and input to the proposed pricing canvas. We differ in this step from
(Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010) as we iteratively enhance the pricing canvas to re-
duce the number of canvas versions. In the final phase, we will conduct workshops
to validate and evaluate the pricing canvas, which enhances the co-creation process.
Below, we will elaborate on each of the steps of this research.
2.1 Purpose
The purpose of the mixed method approach is to leverage the strengths of several
qualitative research methods to provide a comprehensive understanding of the com-
plexity of SaaS pricing and pricing strategies in SaaS startups. Using the theoretical
characteristics of the literature review, it allows us to synthesise findings from var-
ious sources to identify common trends, theories, and patterns in the activities and
theories that revolve around SaaS pricing. As a results, we can create a first version
of the Pricing Canvas. The practical characteristics of the expert interviews allow us
to gain qualitative insights into whether the data from the literature review holds
Chapter 2. Research Method 5
true in a real-life scenario and add that input into the theoretical canvas. By validat-
ing and evaluating the canvas, we will not only have developed a canvas, but also
show that the canvas is a usable and effective tool for SaaS startups.
2.2 Phase 1: multivocal literature review
Existing literature provides a plethora of data on startups and various pricing-related
topics. However, the data is spread across both academic and industry literature.
Therefore, a multivocal literature review (MLR) is performed, leveraging both theo-
retical and practical input, similar to other SaaS pricing research (Saltan and Smolan-
der, 2021a; Saltan, 2019; Saltan and Smolander, 2019). With that, the MLR aims to
identify and summarise the theoretical and practical knowledge to understand how
pricing strategies apply to SaaS startups in practice.
2.2.1 Goal
The main goal of the MLR is to identify how pricing strategies work, how startups
use them and how a canvas can be developed as a tool. To achieve these results,
we look into what similar canvases exist and how canvases are created. This inves-
tigation is critical to achieve the research objective 1. The MLR mainly addresses
research questions 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4, where it looks at current practices and strategies
to determine the price of a software product. The use of the Business Model Canvas
and Lean Canvas and their role in SaaS pricing is also addressed.
2.2.2 Literature search
The main source of the literature will be online academic sources such as Google
Scholar, JSTOR, the Utrecht University Library, and the Dutch Royal Library. They
offer a great number of academic papers that have been published.
The literature will also include authoritative (digital) books and white papers on
pricing strategies, startup management, and SaaS industry practices. There exist a
lot of books that have been written for managers by managers that provide a lot of
managerial experience in the field that others can use as inspiration for their own
practices. Since we use a multivocal literature review approach, it is possible that
some sources may be grey literature, that is sources that are not academic, for exam-
ple blogposts, websites and videos. For the grey literature, we will use a separate
bibliography to explicitly highlight what sources are academic and grey.
To find relevant online sources, specific keywords and phrases are entered as
search queries in the online repositories mentioned above. These queries include
and are not limited to:
• "startup pricing strategies" (~99.000 results on Google Scholar)
• "SaaS (product) pricing" (~33.500 results on Google Scholar)
• "pricing strategy" (~5.000.000 results on Google Scholar)
• "business model canvas" (~390.000 results on Google Scholar)
• "lean canvas" (~102.000 results on Google Scholar)
• "pricing canvas" (0 results on Google Scholar)
Chapter 2. Research Method 6
These queries are refined using Boolean operators, AND and OR, to narrow the
results, ensuring the inclusion of highly relevant articles. For example, searches
such as ‘SaaS pricing strategies AND business model canvas’ are used to focus on both
the pricing and business model aspects. We first assess the results on the first two
pages based on their title, as many papers are not within the scope of this research.
An example of such a title is ‘the influence of pricing strategies on corporate valuation’. If
a paper is relevant, we read its abstract and conclusion. If they are deemed relevant
after this, we read the whole paper and attempt to use them in our literature study.
It is possible that some sources are not within the scope of this research but used
to clarify a specific topic or theory, for example a financial topic. Finance is not the
topic of this research but is relevant to pricing.
2.2.3 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
We have found that many literature sources on SaaS pricing and pricing strategies
are primarily grey. Other multivocal literature reviews also state that there is much
grey literature (Saltan, 2019; Saltan and Smolander, 2019), often more than academic.
This necessitates a multivocal literature instead of a systematic literature review, as
grey literature provides valuable insights from practice, which is needed for the cre-
ation of a useful pricing canvas.
Therefore, we have set up inclusion and exclusion criteria, mainly focussing on
the grey literature sources to ensure that only high-quality and relevant sources are
included. We define the following exclusion criteria:
• Sources that do not provide direct insights into SaaS pricing strategies, prac-
tices, or business model canvases will be excluded.
• Studies published more than ten years ago will be excluded unless they are
widely recognised as foundational works with enduring relevance.
• Articles that focus on general business practices or unrelated industries with-
out a clear connection to SaaS pricing will not be considered.
• Grey literature from non-reputable sources, such as personal blogs without
industry recognition, opinion pieces without data support, or reports from un-
known organisations, will be excluded.
• Any source with unclear or questionable research methodologies, lack of data
transparency, or unverifiable claims will not be used. This is overruled if the
grey literature provides data which is relevant to support a statement, for ex-
ample a framework that has no scientific foundation but that is used by prac-
titioners.
To determine whether a source should be excluded, we will review its abstract,
introduction, and conclusion. For grey literature, we will additionally assess the
credibility of the author and the transparency of the presented information.
2.2.4 Meta-Model
The MLR’s results are used to create a meta-model of the pricing in SaaS startups
topic. Creating a meta-model allows us to visually present the key relationships,
patterns, and dependencies within SaaS pricing strategies in startups. A meta-model
Chapter 2. Research Method 7
provides an understandable framework to support decision-making on the develop-
ment of the first canvas version. Using an online modelling tool (draw.io) this model
is created. Said modelling tool is also used to create the canvases.
2.3 Phase 2: Expert Interviews
With the MLR providing us with theoretical input on SaaS pricing and pricing strate-
gies, we can create a first version of the pricing canvas. However, the target audience
for the canvas are practitioners. To ensure the canvas is both practical and applicable,
we conduct expert interviews to gather industry insights and validate our theoretical
findings. Furthermore, the interviews allow us to identify best practices. These ex-
perts provide the practical data needed to refine the canvas, making it a useful tool
for SaaS startups to develop effective pricing strategies that are both theoretically
and practically sound.
2.3.1 Goal
The goal of the expert interviews is to gain insight in current practice on software
product pricing and the application of pricing strategies to do so. Insight in current
practice can both confirm or debunk the academic knowledge that has been obtained
in the MLR and add practical input to the canvas to create a new version of the
canvas. Additionally, we are able to determine how canvases are currently used in
business and how we can make them more attractive for practitioners.
The interviews help answer research question 2.3. The experience of the experts
can aid in identifying factors that are considered in the determination of the pricing
strategy and how canvases are used to do so. The interviews also address questions
2.1 and 2.2 from a practical point-of-view.
2.3.2 Informed Consent and Research Data Management
Before conducting the interviews, each expert will be asked to review and sign an
informed consent form, granting permission for the use of their data in this research.
The consent form is provided in Appendix A. The purpose of informed consent is
to ensure that the participants are fully aware of their rights, the nature of the study,
and how the responses they have provided will be used. We clearly highlight how
their anonymity is respected using pseudonymised citations, as the possibility of
them discussing company-sensitive data is high. An example of pseudomising the
data is referring to their problem in a more general meaning, keeping the message
of their statement without breaking confidentiality.
In addition to the research itself, the consent form will inform participants that
their data may be used for a presentation and a possible publication related to the
study. All interview data will be securely stored in the Utrecht University Cloud
Environment and will remain accessible only to the research team. The data will be
retained at least until the completion of the defence presentation. After this deadline,
data will either be anonymised or securely disposed of. Handling the data in such
a way ensures that the data management process aligns with ethical standards and
legal requirements for research data storage and use.
Chapter 2. Research Method 8
2.3.3 Input from non-startup software firms
With the focus of the pricing canvas creation on startups, the question arises if we
should include larger firms in our method. To respond, it is a double-edged sword,
mainly because there are some major differences between larger software firms and
startups. For example, there are fundamental differences in the challenges faced by
larger firms and those encountered by startups. Large firms operate in a more es-
tablished environment, with greater access to capital, better brand presence, and an
established customer base. Their pricing strategies often already exist and can be
different from those that a startup has not identified yet, for example selling a prod-
uct under cost, because they are large enough to support that (Sammut-Bonnici and
Channon, 2015). Therefore, they can offer more complex tiered pricing structures
and enterprise-level contracts to earn large amounts of revenue, which are not di-
rectly applicable to startups still looking for a product-market fit or trying to find a
niche in competitive markets.
However, there are also several advantages to including larger firms. Namely,
larger and more established software firms, such as Small/Medium Enterprises (SMEs),
can offer valuable input for startups. First, since they are more established than star-
tups, their (often long) experience in pricing provides insight into SaaS pricing best
practices. Startups can leverage these best practices to better understand aspects
such as customer value perception and how to structure pricing models that appeal
to different customers. In turn, helping them in developing a better pricing strategy.
Furthermore, established firms, regardless of their size, have refined pricing strate-
gies that are prevalent across the current SaaS landscape. They use these techniques
to optimise revenue and retain customers. They often work to refine they already
existing strategy or identify a new one when launching a new product. Looking
at this data can allow us to educate startups on how larger firms do pricing using
the pricing canvas. Startups, being smaller, more flexible and agile (Maurya, 2022),
can combine the best practices from these established firms with their own ability to
adapt rapidly allowing them to perform their pricing more closely to the customer
needs while avoiding common pitfalls. Therefore, input from both SMEs and large
corporations can serve as valuable benchmarks, helping startups avoid reinventing
the wheel while still maintaining their competitive edge.
2.3.4 Who is an expert?
Interviewing industry experts allows the potential user of the canvas to give their
input and opinion on the canvas. Their experience provides valuable insights and
suggestions for improvement into the theoretical canvas. It helps identify potential
strengths and weaknesses in the canvas, ensuring it is practical, relevant, and tai-
lored to the needs of the target users. By incorporating their input, the canvas can
be refined to better address real-world challenges, making it a more effective tool for
SaaS startups and entrepreneurs. The expert’s input will help ensure that the canvas
not only meets theoretical standards but also aligns with the practical demands of
the industry. However, the question arises: who is the expert?
This research seeks employees whom have actively participated in the pricing
process of a SaaS product, either for a company or an independent advisor. For
startups and larger firms these are often on a different level of example the founder
level. In corporates, teams are often run by a product manager, but could also be
on the sales or marketing level above that. So, the non-startup expert can be any
employee of an established firm.
Chapter 2. Research Method 9
2.3.5 Participant selection
To find and reach out to experts, networks such as LinkedIn and professional re-
lations from the Utrecht University are used to find SaaS startup employees and
entrepreneurs, which is a form of convenience sampling.
Each individual is reached out to using e-mail or messages with a letter asking
for their assistance. One version of the outreach letter can be found in the Appendix
C. Depending on the nationality of the expert, a Dutch version of the letter may be
used to contact the expert.
2.3.6 Interview Structure
The interviews will follow a semi-structured format, which combines a predeter-
mined set of questions with the flexibility to explore topics that emerge during the
conversation. This approach ensures that while all relevant areas are covered, there
is also room for participants to share additional insights that may not have been
anticipated.
The interview will begin with an introduction, in which the study objectives
are explained. The introduction is followed by a set of core questions designed to
gather specific information on pricing strategies, followed by questions on the use
on frameworks, such as the Business Model Canvas, followed by the introduction of
the Pricing Canvas. The participants will not see the canvas beforehand to prevent
a biased opinion based on elements of the canvas. The questions are partly based
on the gaps and inquiries identified during the initial development of the Pricing
Canvas. The full list of questions is available in Appendix B. Before we start the
interview we ask some demographic questions, such as function, sector, and type of
product are discussed to provide context to the pseudonymised data.
Participants will be encouraged to discuss their experiences with SaaS pricing,
the challenges they have faced, and how they applied pricing strategies, as this data
could be valuable input for changes to the concept pricing canvas. Additionally,
the participants will be asked to provide feedback on the proposed Pricing Canvas,
including its usability, relevance, and any areas that might require improvement.
Each interview will be scheduled for approximately 60 minutes, but can vary
depending on the depth of the discussion. The place of the meeting will be in an
online or real-life setting, depending on the preferences of the interviewee, with
real-life being more favourable as it allows for easier sketching on a paper version
of the pricing canvas.
After the interview, participants will be given the opportunity to provide any
additional comments or corrections, most importantly since some information might
be confidential to the expert or their company.
2.3.7 Data analysis
Each of the interviews is recorded. The audio will be transcribed for further anal-
ysis. To transcribe the recorded audio from a physical interview, Microsoft Word
is used to convert the audio recordings into transcripts. Online interviews are held
through Microsoft Teams where the interviews and transcriptions happen automat-
ically. Much attention will be paid to any personal or confidential information that
needs to be anonymised or altered to protect the interviewee as promised in the con-
sent form. In the meantime, we aim to maintain the integrity of the message that is
told in the paper. All recordings will be transcribed within 24 hours after the inter-
view to ensure correct processing through the transcripts and memory recollection.
Chapter 2. Research Method 10
Once the transcripts are ready, they will be analysed to identify the following
things:
• Recurrent themes: Noting the frequent mentions of certain pricing strategies,
challenges, or elements that could be relevant to the Pricing Canvas.
• Common challenges: Identifying any shared obstacles startups face in pricing
their software products, such as market uncertainty, customer segmentation,
or competition. These elements could become important to be considered in a
new version of the Pricing Canvas.
• Divergent insights: Highlighting any differences in perspectives between star-
tups or founders, such as alternative approaches to pricing or differing views
on the applicability of the Pricing Canvas.
To identify these recurring themes, opinions, and experiences, the analysis of the
data will apply Content Analysis and Narrative Analysis:
Thematic Analysis
Thematic Analysis enables us to systematically identify, organise, and interpret re-
curring themes within the different interviews. This approach is crucial in refining
the canvas, not only by integrating practical insights from the data but also by as-
sessing which components of the theoretical canvas are most important or require
improvement.
Furthermore, thematic analysis helps us to uncover the main themes discussed
by the participants, such as “market uncertainty”,“competition”, or “pricing challenges”.
By following this method, recurring topics can be effectively identified and explored
in greater depth, providing a comprehensive understanding of the underlying pat-
terns within the data.
Thematic analysis approach is similar to grounded theory, where we will use
axial coding to categorise the statements into overarching categories. Ultimately, the
results from the thematic analysis lead to the categories, each being an element of
the improved pricing canvas draft.
Narrative Analysis
Narrative Analysis mostly focuses on the stories and experiences told during the in-
terviews and the way they are presented. Each interviewee has their own approach
to certain activities, such as pricing. The way in which they present pricing, we can
identify a common process among the experts, which can alter the Pricing Canvas to
support this process. Furthermore, using thematic analysis within these narratives,
recurring themes and topics can be abstracted from the stories and experiences that
are told by the experts and also link the emotion of the expert to that story or expe-
rience.
The analysis is going to be performed manually by abstracting anecdotes, stories
and experiences from the transcripts and solely analysing those during the narrative
analysis. Attention will be paid to words such as "struggle", or "eureka moment"
that clearly describe what the experts felt during that moment in pricing the SaaS
product.
Chapter 2. Research Method 11
2.3.8 Canvas versioning
With the execution of multiple interviews, a lot of input and feedback is gathered for
improvements and tweaks to the Pricing Canvas. We question whether it is better to
make a new version of the canvas after every interview, or bundle some interviews
and make a new version for a second set of interviews. To reduce the amount of
canvas versions and differentiating feedback on a lot of versions, we have chosen
to conduct a 50/50 approach. The 50/50 approach means that the first half of the
interviews is performed with the initial draft of the canvas. The feedback from these
interviews is bundled and passed for the improvement of the initial canvas concept.
The second half of the interviews are then held with the revised draft of the Pricing
Canvas as input. To accommodate the 50/50 approach, the results of the interviews
will be split into the two rounds, to enhance the traceability of the changes made to
the canvas in each iteration. This step is different from Osterwalder’s approach. His
approach was a continuous co-creation process, where we group our results together
before creating a new canvas version.
In addition to many canvas versions, we question when an element of the canvas
should be changed, added or removed. As a rule-of-thumb in our research, when
two or more experts state the same thing, that element is changed or implemented
to ensure that the component is examined properly and adjusted when consensus
among multiple experts indicates it is incorrect or incomplete. Therefore, it is pos-
sible that some results are a combination of statements from interviewees from the
first round and second round. It is also possible for experts to have contradicting
opinions about the elements of the canvas. When contradiction is at play, the dif-
ferent views are all considered to assess each perspective. In that case, it is essential
to investigate the reasoning behind each expert’s opinion. Further research or data
might be required to determine which viewpoint aligns best with the specific context
of the canvas element. In the end, the better reasoning is chosen.
2.4 Phase 3: Validation and Evaluation
With three iterations in which the pricing canvas was revised, being the initial ver-
sion, after the first round of interviews and after the second round of interviews, the
pricing canvas has reached its "final" version. Now, we can validate and evaluate the
canvas based on its usability and effectiveness, as well as show the participants the
final version of the canvas. Below, we describe how the validation and evaluation of
the Pricing Canvas is performed.
2.4.1 Canvas creation guidelines
To assess of the Pricing Canvas is indeed a canvas, we follow guidelines set by Jansen
(2024) to ensure the correctness and validity of the canvas. He has identified several
guidelines and principles that a framework needs to possess in order to be classified
as a canvas. Furthermore, it is important that the canvas logically extends the the-
ories that already exist and does not contradict them. The guidelines proposed in
Jansen (2024) are:
1. Usability - A canvas should be user-friendly for a broad range of stakeholders,
with attractive visualisations, an intuitive design, a solid conceptual model,
and clear instructions. It should be self-explanatory and enjoyable to use, fos-
tering an engaging experience.
Chapter 2. Research Method 12
2. Effectiveness - A canvas should effectively achieve its goals, whether in early-
stage project ideation or in communicating mature projects and goals. It must
be efficient and adaptable to various stages of project development.
3. Grounded in Theory - A canvas should be based on a solid theoretical frame-
work, ensuring consistency and correctness while simplifying complex con-
cepts for users.
4. Flexibility - It should be adaptable to different contexts and scenarios, allow-
ing for evolving and extending its scope of applicability. Flexibility is crucial
for use across various business contexts and maturity levels.
5. Iterative - Canvases are designed to be updated and refined over time, neces-
sitating version control to track changes and improvements as projects evolve.
6. Collaborative - Canvases facilitate collaboration among multiple stakeholders,
fostering communication and alignment on common goals, thereby achieving
a shared vision or facilitating productive discussions.
7. Interoperability - The best canvases should integrate well with other tools,
functioning as part of a broader toolkit rather than an all-in-one solution.
2.4.2 Conclusive interviews and workshops
To further validate the Pricing Canvas, a final assessment of the canvas is estab-
lished in a conclusive round of interviews designed to empirically validate the can-
vas. These interviews leverage the experiences and insights of the experts to assess
whether the elements and strategic perspectives in the canvas effectively address
the real-world challenges faced by SaaS startups and established firms. The experts
are asked to assess the usability and effectiveness of the canvas in guiding pricing
strategy decisions and strategic planning. Some interview questions from Appendix
B.4 will be used to examine these characteristics.
To evaluate the canvas, we will conduct live workshops where selected partici-
pants will engage in using the canvas hands-on in their SaaS businesses. The hands-
on approach enables us to observe how effectively the framework supports SaaS
pricing processes in a practical setting and how easily it can be adopted in the busi-
ness. Through direct application we aim to gain deeper insights into the usability of
the canvas and the real-world applicability. The workshops will be unstructured to
observe how the participants naturally adopt the canvas within their existing prac-
tices. The workshop will be either a one-on-one session between the researcher and
the startup or a group session between several startups and the researcher that work
independently from each other. Although the workshops are unstructured, we will
provide opportunities for participants to ask questions or seek clarification on spe-
cific elements of the canvas, ensuring that any issues can be resolved. Meanwhile,
we also validate the canvas based on the guidelines written by (Jansen, 2024) with
the participants during a classification exercise.
The participants in the workshops will consist mainly of people who have pre-
viously been interviewed for this research. To capture their relevant data, the work-
shops will be recorded in the background. The recordings will serve as a backup
method for analysis, as we will actively observe the workshops and take notes. With
these results, we can identify important themes in the adoption of the canvas. Ob-
servations and participant statements relevant to the research questions will be used
to assess the effectiveness of the framework and its practical value.
Chapter 2. Research Method 13
These discussions and workshops not only test the accuracy and relevance of the
canvas but also ensure its applicability in the current SaaS landscape. Together with
the conclusive interviews, this feedback serves as a form of empirical validation and
evaluation, testing the ability to guide pricing decisions effectively. Ultimately, while
true validation and evaluation of the canvas would require widespread use in real-
world scenarios, the conclusive interviews and workshops provide a first crucial
step.
2.5 Research questions and method phases
Table 2.1 visualises what phases of our version of the Osterwalder Method collec-
tively answer the main research question.
Research question Method phase
sRQ 1 MLR & Expert Interviews
sRQ 2 MLR
sRQ 3 Expert Interviews
sRQ 4 MLR & Expert Interviews & Validation and Evaluation
TABLE 2.1: Visualisation of what phases of the method answer the
sub-questions
14
Chapter 3
Multivocal Literature Review
In this section, the current literature on SaaS startups, pricing strategies, and can-
vases is presented. The current academic knowledge will serve as the foundation
for the second part of this research, that is the expert interviews, and serve as the
input for a first SaaS pricing canvas. First, the most popular canvases that star-
tups and businesses use, that is the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas, are
discussed and their relation towards SaaS pricing is identified. Afterwards, a litera-
ture analysis on current SaaS pricing canvases and other frameworks is conducted.
Then, we introduce a description on current SaaS pricing activities. Further infor-
mation for each activity is provided, establishing a comprehensible understanding
what each activity entails. Third, known SaaS pricing strategies are explained that
can aid businesses in identifying the pricing for their product. Fourth, we scope
our research towards the strategic layer of SaaS pricing, needed to identify a pricing
strategy, supported by additional literature. Finally, all the different perspectives of
SaaS pricing are visualised in an ontology table, summarising the need for a pricing
canvas.
3.1 Strategic business frameworks: the canvas
3.1.1 Why a canvas?
There exist numerous tools that businesses can use to help shape their company
in some way. These tools range from consultants to frameworks. One of the most
widely used methods is a canvas. The aim of a canvas is to make a business model as
simple as possible, both to understand the way a business is built as well as captur-
ing all the complexities that come with building a business (Qastharin, 2016). A can-
vas is framework of a simplified visual representation of a scientifically grounded
concept, that is used as a collaborative planning and brain- storming tool, with
the goal of fostering creative thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration (Jansen,
2024). Below, the two most known canvases are discussed together with a so-called
Pricing Model Canvas that may help organisations determine a SaaS product price.
3.1.2 Business Model Canvas
The Business Model Canvas (BMC) is the most popular canvas that is used at the
moment. The BMC originates from Alexander Osterwalder in Osterwalder (2004),
who proposed the canvas in his PhD study to bridge the gap between the theoretical
approach of business modelling and the practical application of such a method.
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 15
Origin and creation of the Business Model Canvas
The term business model is not young, with first references being used in the 1960s Os-
terwalder (2004). Of course, business was very different back then. With the market
continuously evolving, and the introduction of the Internet, new methods emerged
that reshaped how companies operate. With that, a vast amount of business and
business model related research has emerged. By extensively analysing business
model research, Osterwalder investigated how the concept of business models has
been defined in literature, how business models have been classified, what compo-
nents they are composed of and what modelling efforts have been put into business
modelling (Osterwalder, 2004). This was the first step of his method, which we refer
to as the Osterwalder method. The literature analysis has led to a scattered clump of
terms, methods and activities, with numerous researchers contributing to the cre-
ation of the Business Model Canvas.
The second step was creating an ontology that highlights the necessary elements
and relations within business model creation. Osterwalder created an ontology ma-
trix, showing the relation between the terms used across different research papers.
Osterwalder (2004) identifies a set of elements and their relationships that aim at
describing the money-earning logic of a firm. Each element is elaborated and ex-
plained using an ontology framework, highlighting its definition, structure, rela-
tionships and attributes, cardinalities, and what references discussed the element.
(Osterwalder, 2004).
The creation of the Business Model Canvas itself was in Osterwalder and Pigneur
(2010) and was an iterative and collaborative process, integrating academic research
with practical application. The core team, consisting of Alexander Osterwalder, Yves
Pigneur, and Patrick van der Pijl, initiated the project with a series of meetings to
conceptualise the business model for their book. Recognising the potential for collec-
tive intelligence, they launched an online platform, the Hub, to facilitate co-creation
with business model innovation practitioners worldwide (Osterwalder and Pigneur,
2010).
Creative Director Alan Smith of The Movement joined the initiative, bringing
expertise in visual and structural design. Additionally, JAM, a firm specialising in
visual thinking, contributed to refining the canvas and applying it in practical set-
tings (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). The book development process was fully
transparent, employing iterative engagement cycles where new content was shared
with the Hub community for feedback and contributions. A “soft launch” of the
book took place in Amsterdam, Netherlands, where Hub members met in person to
share their experiences with business model innovation (Osterwalder and Pigneur,
2010).
By merging research, practical insights, and community-driven development,
the Business Model Canvas emerged as a tool for business model innovation. Its
creation exemplifies how collaborative, iterative processes can lead to robust and
widely adopted frameworks. In the end, the development of the book and canvas
took nine years, 4000 hours of work, with almost 500 co-authors, and eight proto-
types (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010).
Business Model Canvas Elements
The Business Model Canvas contains nine building blocks. Below, each block is
explained and supported by statements from both Qastharin (2016) and Osterwalder
and Pigneur (2010):
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 16
1. Customer Segments: The distinct groups of individuals or organizations that
a business aims to target and serve.
2. Value Proposition: The combination of products and services that provide
value to a specific customer segment. The value can be measured either quan-
titatively, for example cost and speed, or qualitatively, for example design or
user experience.
3. Channels: The methods through which a business communicates with and
delivers its value proposition to customer segments. These include communi-
cation, distribution, and sales channels, which can be direct or indirect, owned
by the company, or operated through partners.
4. Customer Relationships: The types of connections a business establishes with
its customer segments.
5. Revenue Streams: The money a business earns from each customer segment.
6. Key Resources: The essential assets needed to make a business model func-
tion. These resources enable a business to create and offer a value proposition,
access markets, maintain customer relationships, and generate revenue. Key
resources can be physical, financial, intellectual, or human and can be owned,
leased, or sourced from partners.
7. Key Activities: The crucial tasks a business must perform to make its busi-
ness model effective. These activities are necessary for creating and offering a
value proposition, reaching markets, maintaining customer relationships, and
generating revenue.
8. Key Partnerships: The network of suppliers and partners that support the
functioning of a business model.
9. Cost Structure: All expenses incurred in operating a business model.
Together, these nine elements form the Business Model Canvas. The canvas has
been developed into a template that people can fill in to get a clear picture of how
the business is built. Figure 3.1 shows the template.
FIGURE 3.1: The Business Model Canvas template developed in Os-
terwalder and Pigneur (2010)
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 17
3.1.3 Lean canvas
The Lean Canvas is a variation of the Business Model Canvas that is more focusing
on the startup aspect of new businesses (Razabillah et al., 2023). Originally intro-
duced by Maurya in 2012, the Lean Canvas takes into account the uncertainty and
risk that comes when starting a new business.
Origin of the Lean Canvas
In a blogpost after the launch of the Business Model Canvas in 2010, Ash Maurya
shared his thoughts on how the application of the BMC did not help startups in
building their business as it “did not fully capture the needs of early-stage startups”
(Maurya, 2015), leading him to create the Lean Canvas. The Lean Canvas is more
centred towards the entrepreneurs while still keeping the actionable characteristics
of the BMC (Maurya, 2015). Basically, he has scrapped the key partners, key activ-
ities, key resources, and customer relationships and replaced them with problem,
solution, key metrics, and unfair advantage respectfully.
FIGURE 3.2: The Lean Canvas introduced by Maurya (2022) contain-
ing elements more relevant for startups
Lean Canvas Elements
There are four elements in the Lean Canvas that are different from the BMC: prob-
lem, solution, key metrics and unfair advantage. These new elements make the Lean
Canvas more suiting for entrepreneurs when compared to the BMC, which is more
generic. Each new element is discussed:
•Problem: described a problem the customer might be having when not using
a specific product (Maurya, 2022). Describe the problem that the startup is
trying to solve with their product.
•Solution: features that the product has that (A) describe the product and (B)
help solve the customer’s problems that are identified. Solutions can be iden-
tified with, for example, customer interviews (Maurya, 2022).
•Key metrics: since the business is a startup, tracking the performance and suc-
cess of the business is vital to survive. Maurya calls for actionable metrics, not
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 18
vanity metrics. The latter being clicks, downloads or hits, actionable metrics
are more "macro", like the acquisition of customers (Maurya, 2022).
•Unfair advantage: Maurya (2022) argues that this slot is the hardest to fill in,
as something that really stands out can often still be copied making you lose
the unfair advantage. So, the unfair advantage often lies in aspects such as
price, marketing, customer service, quality of the product and more.
3.1.4 BMC and Lean Canvas and their relation to pricing
Both the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas serve businesses and entrepreneurs
as a guide to set up their startup and map their business model (Murray and Scuotto,
2015). Traditionally, the Business Model Canvas was used, but there is a shift to-
wards the use of a newer, better canvas for entrepreneurs, the lean canvas (Razabil-
lah et al., 2023). Both canvases offer a lot of guidance in how people setup their
business, with pricing being not that well included in both of them. Both canvases
look more towards the cost structure of the product and business and their overall
revenue streams (Miˇcieta et al., 2020; Razabillah et al., 2023). As will become appar-
ent, addressing the costs and revenue is just one of the many approaches startups
can follow to price their product. SaaS pricing is much more complicated than just
having more revenue than costs. Not thinking through your pricing decisions will
cause your startup to fail.
The pricing-related elements are limited in their capabilities in helping busi-
nesses determine a price for their product. These elements merely show what comes
in and goes out the business. Also, Osterwalder (2004) did not incorporate his identi-
fied pricing mechanisms in the Business Model Canvas, which we later touch upon.
Additionally, Maurya (2022) advocates that pricing is one of the riskiest parts of set-
ting up a business model and should be tested early on in the process, although not
stating any pricing in the canvas itself. Therefore, the current BMC and Lean Canvas
are not aiding in SaaS price determination, and therefore a pricing canvas is needed.
3.1.5 Pricing Model Canvas
One grey literature canvas originates as a variant of the Business Model Canvas to
specifically target the pricing models. It is the most noticeable among the frame-
works, as it was shown on multiple business and management websites and blogs
and is a top search on Google. The Pricing Model Canvas (PMC) is published on
the website of the International Association of Project Managers and is created by
Professor Roll and Pastuch. However, there is no support on the effectiveness of this
canvas and no documentation on how the canvas is created.
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 19
FIGURE 3.3: The Pricing Model Canvas from the International Asso-
ciation of Project Managers created by Roll and Pastuch (IAPM, n.d.).
Figure 3.3 shows the Pricing Model Canvas created by Roll and Pastuch. Look-
ing at the structure of the canvas, we can see that it looks similar to the Business
Model Canvas and Lean Canvas. Additionally, there exists some overlap between
the Pricing Model Canvas and the BMC/Lean Canvas. IAPM (n.d.) is a blogpost
with descriptions for each building block. Together with Roll and Pastuch (n.d.), we
describe the Pricing Model Canvas below:
Pricing Strategy
This part of the PMC represents one of the strategies that are mentioned in, for ex-
ample, Mohout (2015). Among others, competition-based pricing and value-based
pricing are strategies that serve as the backbone of the whole PMC. Essentially, the
business states here whether they want to increase sales, exceed business objectives
or maximise profit.
Next Best Alternative
The next best alternative is the alternative product, from another vendor, that cus-
tomers can consider when choosing to buy your product. So, there needs to be a
unique value proposition that sets your product apart from the other options, as
proposed in the Lean Canvas by Maurya (2022). It also determines your position in
the market. In the context of this research, the next best alternative to the pricing
canvas would be, for example, Microsoft Excel.
Target Customers
According to both IAPM (n.d.) and Roll and Pastuch (n.d.), target customers is the
customer segmentation block also seen in the BMC and Lean Canvas.
Product Value
The perceived value of the product from the eyes of the customer. There are numer-
ous methods to obtain that value, for example the Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity
method. Essentially, there are four categories: too cheap,cheap,expensive and too ex-
pensive where the customer gives their upper and lower price point for a product of
specific quality (Lipovetsky, 2006). With the help of several mathematical equations,
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 20
the optimal product price can be calculated or an intersect is done over the several
price points from the customers.
Terms and Discounts
Discounts make customers more eager to purchase your product (Armstrong and
Chen, 2020), which allows for rapid market share growth if many people buy it.
However, it is not without risk, as it is difficult to change the price when the busi-
ness is running well. Therefore, there needs to be a well-defined set of rules that
state how the discounts are based and how these reflect on the customer value.
Innovative Pricing Models
There is a boom in subscription and pay-per-use methods (Saputra, Indartono, and
Handani, 2019). The aim here is to identify which of these models is understandable
to the customer and best represents the true added value of the product to said cus-
tomer.
Value Selling
Instead of traditional sales, such as selling a product on the corner of the street, value
selling entails selling the value that the product offers over its entire life cycle. When
the customer sees the added value, they may consider buying the product.
Organisation and Processes
Organisation and processes highlights the department that will be responsible for man-
aging all the above named building blocks (Roll and Pastuch, n.d.). This "pricing
department" could consist of experts from the sales, marketing and finance depart-
ment to effectively align with the strategies from the PMC (IAPM, n.d.).
KPI and Governance
Governing the performance of the pricing management by the pricing department,
key performance indicators (KPIs) and other measures are identified to allow for
smooth sailing over a set period.
3.1.6 Disadvantages of the Pricing Model Canvas
The Pricing Model Canvas has been developed by practitioners to make the pricing
decisions more understandable. Therefore, it contains crucial information on pricing
and could be considered THE canvas. However, looking at the Pricing Model Can-
vas and its documentation, there are multiple remarks that debunk this statement:
Insufficient differentiation
The Pricing Model Canvas does not sufficiently differentiate itself from existing
models. By focusing on elements already addressed by the BMC and Lean Canvas,
it fails to provide a unique perspective or added value that is specifically tailored to
pricing leading to its interpretation being more towards business, whereas the key
focus of the canvas should be on pricing. Furthermore, a specific scope of the canvas
cannot be determined from the canvas, with its focus being on pricing as a whole.
For example, we focus on pricing strategies, which is a specific topic our canvas will
address.
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 21
Lack of academic support
The Pricing Model Canvas by Roll and Pastuch (n.d.) lacks any support on how the
canvas is created. Looking at academic sources, there is no academic source that
closely discusses the topic Pricing Model Canvas. Additionally, the creation of the
canvas itself, the rationale behind why it has those elements, and the truth behind
the creation of the canvas are not documented. Furthermore, there is no documen-
tation on usage of the canvas. Some of the elements of the canvas, such as pricing
strategies, are based on scientific theories, but solely do not support their presence
in the pricing model canvas. Most importantly, most of the PMC does not reflect
the current state-of-the-art in SaaS pricing research, especially that from Saltan and
Smolander (2019) and Saltan and Smolander (2021a) which we touch upon later, so
it is not aligned with the current academic literature. Therefore, this canvas is more
practice-oriented based on the experience of its creators. Furthermore, we do not
know whether these elements are sufficiently relevant in practice, as we cannot find
any sources that contain a form of validation and evaluation of the canvas. Hence,
we do not know how useful and effective the Pricing Model Canvas is.
Lack of uniformity
As mentioned before, there exist numerous pricing canvases or canvases that are
categorised as a pricing canvas. They each differ in their elements, not addressing
all the same topics further supporting statements made by Saltan and Smolander
(2021b), that startups often make heterogeneous pricing decisions. Making one pric-
ing canvas can aid business is guiding them towards a strategy that works for them.
By leveraging theory and practice, we can unite the separation between the two do-
mains to create one canvas that addresses all.
Lack of validation
As there is no evidence on the legitimacy of the Pricing Model Canvas, no state-
ments can be made on the effectiveness of the canvas. Additional research could
have helped the Pricing Model Canvas to be used more widely, or either validated
or corrected. Validating the canvas both internally, for example based on the guide-
lines in Jansen (2024), and externally, based on, for example, expert interviews or
workshops, could have validated the canvas. However, there is no validation, which
shows why the canvas is not known among more researchers and practitioners.
3.1.7 Canvas by Garlet and Wirth
A similar canvas to the PMC has been created by Garlet and Wirth (2018). It follows
a similar approach, with a six-element canvas. It contains the, Customer Segments,
Value Proposition, Cost Structure, Competitors and Market, Pricing Strategy, and
Price Model. However, similar to the PMC, the instantiation of this canvas is not
supported by any literature (Saltan and Smolander, 2019). Therefore, the applicabil-
ity and usability of the canvas cannot be determined from the creation of the canvas.
3.1.8 Other SaaS Pricing Frameworks in a Nutshell
In other grey literature sources, there exist other self-made frameworks, but are lim-
ited in the amount of information that exist about them. These frameworks are often
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 22
created by managers that use them themselves. For example, they share their cre-
ation on LinkedIn1or post it on a blog. However, these frameworks, such as the
PMC, can serve as inspiration for the creation of a well-structured, scientifically sub-
stantiated SaaS Pricing Canvas.
Saltan and Smolander (2019) and Saltan and Smolander (2021a) have tested most
of the SaaS pricing frameworks in their research regarding the coverage of the SaaS
pricing factors in Table 3.2 and their applicability to the SaaS pricing process from
Saltan and Smolander (2021b). From these frameworks, 13 in Saltan and Smolander
(2019) (7 white and 6 grey) and 11 in Saltan and Smolander (2021a) (1 white, 10 grey),
none of the frameworks addressed everything, but that is also not possible. There-
fore, each framework has their weaknesses. For the proposed Pricing Canvas in this
research, their method can help in determining where the weak points of the can-
vas are an address them respectfully, either through expert interviews or theoretical
solving.
There also exist numerous pricing consultancy firms in The Netherlands and be-
yond. One name that is dropped often is the Simon-Kucher group. This firm is
highly specialised in pricing and commercial strategies2. If businesses seek advise
on pricing, Simon-Kucher sends a consultant to help structure a sound strategy. For
startups, such a consultant is very expensive. A pricing canvas would mitigate the
need for a consultant.
3.2 SaaS pricing activities
Saltan and Smolander (2021a) define SaaS pricing as the scope of the decisions, prac-
tices, underlying conditions, and processes in determining the monetary value of
the offered SaaS service, but pricing and pricing strategies have many more names
in other papers, such as pricing model, pricing structure, pricing policy, and pricing
approach (Saltan, 2019).
Two previous multivocal literature reviews have been performed in order to
grasp the complexity of SaaS pricing, written by Saltan (2019) and Saltan and Smolan-
der (2019). What is interesting is that they mention that grey SaaS literature is often
more valuable to the industry than well-formed academic literature (Saltan, 2019).
As we can see in the results, there are significantly more grey literature sources
than academic, especially containing opinions, experiences or proposals (Saltan and
Smolander, 2021a). In this case, the Pricing Model Canvas is an example of what
can be found in the grey literature. Furthermore, Saltan (2019) states that there is
an obvious separation between academia and industry, causing SaaS literature to be
scattered across multiple dimensions, which could cause different implementations
of pricing strategies (Saltan and Smolander, 2019). A Pricing Canvas would dimin-
ish this separation by bringing theoretical and practical side of SaaS pricing closer
together. (Saltan and Smolander, 2019) also calls for a so-called "SaaS pricing cook-
book", which contains the body of knowledge of SaaS pricing. Unfortunately, there
cannot be just one framework to encapsulate the whole of SaaS pricing (Saltan and
Smolander, 2019). As can be seen in the literature review by (Saltan and Smolan-
der, 2019), they researched thirteen different frameworks, of which is the canvas by
Garlet and Wirth (2018), and found that none of them address all the factors of SaaS
pricing from Saltan (2019).
1For example: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/decoding-pricing-canvas-strategic-framework-
value-creation-kraus-ujs5f/
2https://www.simon-kucher.com/en
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 23
Saltan and Smolander (2021b) have summarised the findings from the literature
reviews resulting in three levels in which SaaS pricing is performed, which was more
multidisciplinary than anticipated at first (Saltan, 2019). The three identified levels
are: strategic,tactical, and operational. Each level has their own activities that con-
tribute to the goal of said level. It is said that if there is a lack of focus in the strategic,
tactical, or operational levels the product and the company are likely to fail (Saltan
and Smolander, 2021a). Therefore, it is important that the SaaS pricing process is
carefully considered to ensure the success of the startup.
3.2.1 Strategic Level
Pricing on a strategic level allows businesses to identify their pricing strategy. Strate-
gies are not always one-size-fits-all (Zhang, 2020). Three strategic aspects are identi-
fied:
Competitive Research and Market Positioning:
For example, how a SaaS company uses pricing to shape consumer perception and
differentiate from competitors (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). This is similar to the
unique value proposition from Lean Canvas, where businesses propose where their
unique values lie, and how they can differentiate themselves from the rest of the
market (Maurya, 2022).
Market Segmentation and Value Proposition:
How a SaaS company divides potential customers into segments and defines the
benefits of their service according to these segments (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b).
Similar to the BMC and Lean Canvas, where filling in the customer segments,value
proposition, and unfair advantage lead to their uniqueness from other parties, hence
identifying their market strategy (Osterwalder, 2004; Maurya, 2022).
Pricing Structure, Strategies, and Models:
Objectives, logic, and the business model of SaaS pricing, including terms of usage
and pricing evolution principles (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). Common pricing
models identified by Saltan and Smolander (2021b) include:
•Flat-rate pricing: Fixed price for the service.
•Pay-as-you-go pricing: Payments based on usage metrics.
•Tiered pricing: Multiple price points with varying features.
•User-based pricing: Payments based on the number of users.
•Feature-based pricing: Payments based on the number of features.
•Variable pricing: Individually discussed prices.
•Hybrid models are also used, often based on tiered pricing.
The strategic level is not limited to these strategies, as strategies from, for exam-
ple, Mohout (2015) could also be used. This activity can also consider the business
model of the business, like freemium, subscription-based, pay-per-use and dynamic
pricing from Saputra, Indartono, and Handani (2019), and the strategy to give that
model a monetary value from Mohout (2015).
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 24
Note: it is important to state that the term pricing strategy here does not refer to the
overall pricing strategy of the product, but to a specific tactic or method to come to
a price or a sales strategy! This will be discussed later.
3.2.2 Tactical Level
The tactical level of SaaS pricing involves translating strategic pricing decisions into
specific offerings and actions (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). It includes the design
and implementation of the pricing strategy in a way that directly affects how the
product is presented and sold to the customers. There are three activities that the
tactical level of SaaS pricing considers:
Offering Design, Versioning, and Bundling:
How companies translate strategic decisions into specific offers, including the num-
ber and functions of offered versions and their pricing (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b).
This aspect concerns how the product will be designed, what versions of it exist,
such as a free and a paid version, and if bundles can be sold, such as Office 365.
SaaS companies can use value-based strategies to monitor certain metrics, such
as usage. Such a metric is important to base the price on usage, as seen in the pay-
per-use model in Saputra, Indartono, and Handani (2019). Metrics identified by
Saltan and Smolander (2021b) are:
•User-based: Price depends on the number of users/accounts.
•Function-based: Price depends on the number of features and functions.
•Usage-based: Price depends on usage intensity (e.g., cloud storage, transac-
tions).
•Consumer-based: Price depends on consumer characteristics (e.g., revenue,
size).
•Outcome-based: Price depends on outcomes achieved (e.g., revenue increase,
customer churn decrease).
Transparency, Promotion, and Communication:
How SaaS companies inform customers about their offerings and promote their ser-
vices to increase customer interest (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). This aspect con-
siders the marketing part for the sales and promotion of the product, similar to the
channels and customer relationships in the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas
respectfully (Osterwalder, 2004; Maurya, 2022).
Customer Acquisition, Retention, and Usage Analytics:
How pricing is used to manage customer acquisition, retention, and analyze us-
age. One theory that can be applied here is the Pirate Funnel by McClure (2007)
describing and capturing activities and campaigns to allow for excellent customer
acquisition and retention. An example of the Pirate Funnel is shown in Figure 3.4.
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 25
FIGURE 3.4: Self-made example of the Pirate Funnel
3.2.3 Operational Level
At the operational level, day-to-day activities to maintain and monitor the product
are performed. Factors, such as ownership and control, highlight how pricing deci-
sions are organised within a company and how responsibility is distributed among
the responsible team (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). Monitoring the performance of
the pricing strategy as well as the influence of external forces on the pricing strategy,
are common activities on this level (Saltan and Smolander, 2021b). For example, in-
flation is an external factor that can influence the performance of a current pricing
strategy. Amazon Prime increased its price from €2.99 to €4.99 due to inflation, thus
they changed their pricing strategy based on economical factors. Finally, resources
and cost planning ensure that pricing is aligned with the overall management of
resources and expenses (Osterwalder, 2004). This can include looping back to the
strategic level, and checking if everything is aligned there, or going further to, for
example, the filled in BMC or Lean Canvas and see if everything is conform to the
strategies identified.
3.2.4 Gaps and missing elements
The activities identified by Saltan and Smolander (2021b) provide a vast amount of
information on what businesses can do for their SaaS product pricing strategy to be
successful. However, there are also some disadvantages. The activities provided in
their paper are not widely used in other researches. Therefore, many businesses,
but also other researchers, are not aware of the full potential of the data they have
presented in their research. The absence of a framework, such as a canvas, limits the
usage of the pricing activities. Essentially, both methodologies presented are sepa-
rate from each other, but should be combined. To solve this, these methodologies
and frameworks will be included in the creation of the Pricing Canvas, as these ac-
tivities show the key elements that contribute to a successful pricing strategy for a
SaaS startup. Additionally, in another paper, Saltan and Smolander stated there is a
definite misconception between the state-of-the-art and practice (Saltan and Smolan-
der, 2021a). A canvas on this data is able to solve this misconception, as it aims to
bridge the state-of-the-art and practice in a unified, understandable way.
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 26
3.3 SaaS pricing strategies
Within SaaS pricing research, there exists confusion regarding the use of certain
terms. For SaaS Pricing, we follow the definition from Saltan and Smolander (2021a),
entailing the scope of the decisions, practices, underlying conditions, and processes
in determining the monetary value of the offered SaaS service (Saltan and Smolan-
der, 2021a). Other researchers often refer to this as the pricing strategy of the business,
for example in Zhang (2020). According to Saltan and Smolander (2021a), the pric-
ing strategy is the foundation upon which all pricing decisions are made. Since we
follow their definition on SaaS pricing, we will also follow that definition.
3.3.1 List of specific pricing strategies
As we briefly mentioned in the method, Osterwalder (2004) also describes several
pricing strategies which he refers to as mechanisms. A pricing mechanism is a spe-
cific tactic a business applies within their overall SaaS pricing process, following
the definition by Saltan and Smolander (2021a). Unfortunately, these mechanisms
never received a spot in the Business Model Canvas, causing pricing to be excluded
massively from the canvas. In addition, Mohout (2015) describes another 11 differ-
ent pricing mechanisms (called methods in his book) that SaaS startups can use to
determine a specific software price.
There are many more specific pricing strategies that can be used by businesses,
but the ones provided in this paper are diverse and regularly used strategies that
offer many different approaches for businesses. Each method is presented in the
table 3.1. Each strategy (mechanism) is categorised based on their type of pricing,
which can be value-based, market-based, cost-based, competitor-based, fixed (in-
dependent on product or customer characteristics), or differential (dependent on
product or customer characteristics) (Osterwalder, 2004). It is possible for startups
to move from one pricing approach to another over a period of time to, for example,
first grow the business in a cost-based manner and then start asking a price based
on the value of a product to gain more financial assets (Laatikainen and Ojala, 2023).
TABLE 3.1: A list of pricing strategies that businesses can use
Pricing strat-
egy
Type Description
Anchor pricing Value-Based Anchor pricing entails anchoring the price based on, for ex-
ample, a comparison with another product or other prop-
erties that people can compare to, such as a special price
(Northcraft and Neale, 1987). Anchors make your product
or service look like a good product providing customers with
a frame of reference as we often compare a product to another
one (Mohout, 2015). An anchor is especially important for a
new product or service in a new market where there is no
point of reference, which often occurs in the startup market.
Auctions Market-Based Auctions involve sellers listing goods and buyers bidding in-
crementally. The highest bidder wins the right to purchase
the product. Online auction platforms, like eBay, have ex-
panded the popularity of this method (Osterwalder, 2004).
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 27
Bargaining Market-Based Bargaining is a traditional pricing mechanism where the price
is negotiated between the buyer and seller, often depending
on power relations. Bargaining has become less common in
large markets but persists in some large contract settings (Os-
terwalder, 2004).
Breakeven
point
Cost-Based
and Fixed
This method is very common for startups as they often have
a limited amount of money when starting. Calculating a run-
way and burn rate help calculate an estimated breakeven
point where cash needs to come in to stay above the water
(Ripsas, Schaper, and Tröger, 2018; Eisenmann, Ries, and Dil-
lard, 2012). This method takes into account the costs and
maps them out against the revenue that is created in the fu-
ture (Mohout, 2015). This strategy is often applied in star-
tups and is often used in combination with the Lean Canvas,
where the cost structure of a business is mapped out accord-
ingly (Maurya, 2022).
Buy versus
Build method
Value-Based This method tackles the choice between off-the-shelf and
tailor-made software. Factors such as time value, require-
ments fit, and complexity of the product are considered.
Based on these factors, the price is determined (Mohout, 2015;
Daneshgar, Low, and Worasinchai, 2013).
Competition-
based pricing
Competition-
Based
As the name suggests, the price of the software product is
based on the competitor, if there is one! This can either be
above, on par, or below the price of the competitor. This
method can also be used as a response to the introduction
of a new competitor (Fisher, Gallino, and Li, 2018). A price is
mainly based on the similarity between the software products
(Mohout, 2015). For established firms, lower pricing is easier
than startups (Sidharta, 2014).
Customer-
characteristic-
dependent
pricing
Differential Customer-characteristic-dependent pricing tailors prices
based on detailed customer profiles, which has grown signif-
icantly with the rise of affordable ICTs and large customer
databases (Osterwalder, 2004).
Customer
interviews
Value-Based Customer interviews is not just having the customer ballpark
the price, but also letting them decide what the price is based
on costs or price sensitivity. Unfortunately, price is sometimes
not important for them (Hinterhuber, 2004). This strategy
can be applied in combination with other strategies, such as
the Silicon Valley rule-of-thumb to extract what the customer
value is and base the price on that.
Decoy pricing Value-Based A decoy is placed which is often a lesser option than the
product a startup is trying to sell, which results in customers
choosing the better option (Wu and Cosguner, 2020). People
are more attracted to products that are better than another
option (Mohout, 2015). Within SaaS, you can easily create a
decoy by making a less favourable version of a software prod-
uct, for example with less tokens or data storage. However,
the decoy should be directly comparable to your own product
(Mohout, 2015).
Dynamic mar-
ket
Market-Based A dynamic market pricing mechanism reflects real-time mar-
ket conditions. Prices fluctuate based on supply and demand,
often observed in stock markets and commodities trading
(Osterwalder, 2004).
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 28
Google Ad-
Words method
Market-Based
and Value-
Based
Using Google AdWords, now called Google Ads, businesses
can gain important insights in what customers are looking
for using keywords (Mohout, 2015). Google Ads can provide
guidance in changing the product advertisement so that more
people land on the page, increasing sales, like Search Engine
Optimisation (SEO). However, for startups SEO is often too
expensive (Tricahyadinata and Za, 2017; Mohout, 2015). Mo-
hout (2015) also discusses the Pirate Funnel, where businesses
need to invest money into the funnel to earn money on the
customer. However, if the investment is too high, like with
an expensive option such as Google Ads, the business will
lose money instead (Mohout, 2015).
Industry mar-
gin benchmark
Market-Based Looking at the industry margin benchmark is a good way to
determine a price. The strategy represents looking at the av-
erage profit margins achieved by businesses within a specific
industry sector (Ogle, 2008). However, since the profit mar-
gins are often very big in SaaS, it may be hard to determine
the right price for the software product (Mohout, 2015).
Menu pricing Fixed Menu pricing refers to fixed prices that are typically listed in
a catalog or price list, also known as "list pricing" or "catalog
pricing" (Osterwalder, 2004).
Pay-per-use Fixed Pay-per-use means customers are charged based on the
amount of time or quantity they consume of a specific prod-
uct or service. Examples include an online music provider
charging for each time a piece of music is played, or a car
rental agency charging for every kilometre driven (Oster-
walder, 2004).
Price-
distribution
fit
Market-Based The price-distribution fit method allows startups to use dis-
tributors, such as resellers, to resell the product to customers.
Reselling has the advantage of the existing channels of the re-
seller or partner. However, that service comes as a cost, which
means that a part of the margin goes to the distributor (Allen,
2019). Therefore, the margin needs to be high enough for the
startup to be able to survive and succeed.
Price-per-
user industry
average
Fixed Price-per-user industry average, which is the pay-per-
use/pay-per-user business model. Additionally, the price is
determined on industry averages. In the SaaS industry, Mo-
hout has determined this range is between $26 and $75 be-
tween 6 and 50 users (Mohout, 2015).
Product-
feature-
dependent
pricing
Differential Product-feature-dependent pricing means prices vary based
on the features of the product or service. Bundling different
products and services also falls under this category (Oster-
walder, 2004).
Reverse auc-
tions
Market-Based In reverse auctions, buyers seek goods or services by listing
their needs, and sellers bid the lowest price to win the con-
tract. This is commonly used in procurement processes (Os-
terwalder, 2004).
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 29
Silicon Valley
rule-of-thumb
Fixed Silicon Valley rule-of-thumb, which is essentially value-based
pricing, focuses on aspects such as financial value (profit) and
customer value (Hinterhuber, 2004). It uses a multiplier, of-
ten set at 10x, which is applied to the cost of delivering the
product or service. For example, if the cost of producing
and delivering a software solution is $100, the price would
be set at $1,000. The rationale behind this approach is that
the additional nine times markup represents the value that
the customer perceives in the offering (Mohout, 2015; Nagle
and Holden, 2002). If the value is perceived lower, the mul-
tiplier will also be lower. The entrepreneur has freedom in
determining what this value would be.
Subscription Fixed Subscription pricing involves customers paying a flat fee to
access a product or service for a specific time period. This
model is common in digital services, such as software as a
service (SaaS) platforms (Osterwalder, 2004).
Value-based
pricing
Differential In value-based pricing, the customer has a significant role in
determining the price. The final price heavily depends on
how much the customer values the product or service (Os-
terwalder, 2004).
Volume-
dependent
pricing
Differential Volume-dependent pricing varies based on the volume of
goods purchased. The more a customer buys, the lower the
per-unit price, creating incentive for bulk purchases (Oster-
walder, 2004).
Yield manage-
ment
Market-Based Yield management maximises profits by adjusting prices in
real-time in response to market conditions, particularly for
perishable assets like airline tickets and hotel rooms. It uses
economic modelling and forecasting to optimise pricing poli-
cies (Osterwalder, 2004).
3.3.2 Gaps and missing elements
Mohout (2015) and Osterwalder (2004) describe numerous specific pricing strategies
that currently exist in SaaS pricing academia. We can conclude that there are a lot of
strategies that can be applied. However, as seen in the process described by Saltan
and Smolander (2021b), choosing such a specific strategy (mechanism) is just one
of the many steps that need to be taken in identifying the overall pricing strategy,
that is foundation for pricing decisions. Therefore, there is no uniform definition on
what each term means. With the pricing canvas we aim to remove the ambiguity.
3.4 Scoping towards the strategic layer
As we mentioned above, there exists ambiguity among the definitions of SaaS pric-
ing and pricing strategies. Since we follow the pricing activities from Saltan and
Smolander (2021b) and their definitions from Saltan and Smolander (2021a), we can
clarify why we are scoping towards the strategic layer, as the pricing strategy is not
one tactic to employ, but a set of decisions that sets the foundation for all other pric-
ing decisions to be made upon. It basically entails the way-of-doing-business part.
The strategic layer is therefore central to the Pricing Canvas, because it serves as the
foundation upon which all pricing decisions are made, according to the definition by
Saltan and Smolander (2021a). The pricing strategies assures that pricing decisions
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 30
are not made separately but are aligned with the SaaS startup’s overall vision and
mission. Such alignment is crucial for maintaining consistency inside the business.
Moreover, pricing is not only a tactical manoeuvrer in the market, it is a long-term
commitment that can significantly influence a startup’s trajectory and success. Iden-
tifying such a strategy is the challenge in many startups, as they often do not know
how to design and implement the strategy (Saltan and Smolander, 2021a; Bontis and
Chung, 2000). It is also often seen as under-managed (Saltan and Smolander, 2021c;
Saltan and Smolander, 2019). Furthermore, for many startups it is hard to communi-
cate the added value of their product to the customer (Töytäri, Rajala, and Alejandro,
2015). By addressing the strategic layer, SaaS startups can make informed decisions
that consider market trends, competitive dynamics, and consumer behaviour over
time, fostering growth. This layer also allows these startups to position themselves
effectively in the market by defining how their pricing reflects their value proposi-
tion and differentiates them from competitors, creating a unique identity that attracts
and retains customers. Therefore, the position of the pricing canvas shifts towards
a second-stop canvas, where the Business Model Canvas is filled in first, and the
Pricing Canvas is filled in next.
Furthermore, Saltan and Smolander (2021a) say that pricing is an essential ele-
ment of software business strategy and tactics, and therefore should not fail. The
overarching pricing strategy encompasses long-term decisions that align pricing
with the startup’s overall vision, market positioning, and competitive strategy, as
proposed in the definition by Saltan and Smolander (2021a). By focusing on the
strategic layer, businesses can ensure that their pricing models not only respond to
immediate market conditions but also allow new employees to quickly grasp the
overarching strategy.
It is important to notice that the execution of said strategy is up to the startup it-
self. As has been said, pricing is still a heterogeneous process (Saltan and Smolander,
2021b). However, pricing often performed once, while other researchers call for ap-
plying a structured and disciplined pricing process with regular reviews (Neubert,
2017). The aim of this paper is not force organisations into applying a strategy in a
specific way, but help guide them in visualising and considering elements of their
overarching pricing strategy to continuously develop a pricing strategy. With that in
mind, the next version of the Pricing Canvas will be scoped to the strategic layer. We
have found several strategic elements in a case study that are relevant to consider
when identifying a pricing strategy, further substantiating the scoping towards the
strategic layer.
Saltan and Smolander (2021c) have identified four factors within the strategy of the
product that affect the pricing of the SaaS product.
Willingness to pay
Essentially, there is an upper and lower boundary a price of a product needs to be in
so that people still want to buy your product. Willingness is related to price elasticity,
which refers to the price elasticity of the product, which entails a change in demand
given a change in price (Anderson et al., 1997). The price can either be elastic, con-
sumers change their purchase behaviour for a specific price change, or they do not,
which is called inelastic (Anderson et al., 1997).
Customer segments
Saltan and Smolander (2021c) creates a distinction between B2B, B2C, and B2G mar-
kets, the target market for the product, and the amount of people they want to reach.
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 31
The customer segment can influence the pricing strategy the business should choose,
with a value-based approach being more suitable for B2B and B2C, whereas a spe-
cialist price for a custom piece of software is more suitable for only the B2B market
(Saltan and Smolander, 2021c).
Complexity of the product
People do not only pay for the product, but also the service. So, when a piece of soft-
ware is more custom, or requires more assistance through the business, it is priced
differently that a piece of software that is completely self-service for the customer
(Saltan and Smolander, 2021c).
Nicheness of the product
The bigger the niche that the product satisfies, the more generic the problem is that
the product solves (Saltan and Smolander, 2021c). The niche can be in a specific
country, industry or even under same regulations. Knowing the niche of the prod-
uct, the more understandable it is who will be using the product when it is sold.
Apart from internal factors, external factors can also influence the effectiveness and
success of the pricing process and strategy (Saltan and Smolander, 2019). Saltan
and Smolander (2021a) and Saltan (2019) provide a total of 28 unique factors that
influence SaaS pricing, divided into four categories: market, company, consumers
and product. The full list of all factors is provided in Table 3.2. These 28 factors will
also be discussed during the expert interviews.
TABLE 3.2: Unique factors influencing SaaS pricing by Saltan and
Smolander (2021a) and Saltan (2019)
Category Factors Category Factors
Market Market size and demand (or maturity) Company Business goals and opportunities
Market structure and competition Company size and maturity
Types of customers Resources availability
Barriers and constraints Costs and cost structure
Delivery and sales channels Ownership and financing
Consumers Perceived value and willingness-to-pay Product Lifecycle stage
Information asymmetry and customer uncertainty Competitive advantage
Customer satisfaction and loyalty Functions and features
Customer acquisition costs Quality attributes
Adoption readiness Software architecture
Customer usage patterns Lease and usage period
Switching and migration costs Product category
Network effect Experience required
Scalability potential
Chapter 3. Multivocal Literature Review 32
3.5 SaaS Pricing Canvas Ontology
The multivocal literature review has resulted in different flavours of SaaS pricing
and canvases. Below, a matrix according to the method of Osterwalder (2004) is
created to provide a summary of the main findings discussed in the MLR and their
input towards the creation of the SaaS Pricing Canvas.
TABLE 3.3: Summary of the most important papers and their contri-
bution to the Pricing Canvas Ontology
Relatedness to SaaS pricing Canvas? Identified gaps
Osterwalder
(2004)
Solely costs and revenue
streams, not enough to de-
termine a price.
Yes, mostly focus-
ing on core busi-
ness.
Lack of pricing re-
lated elements in the
canvas, although it is
discussed in his re-
search.
Maurya (2022)Solely costs and revenue
streams, not enough to de-
termine a price.
Yes, mostly fo-
cusing on startup
setup.
Lack of pricing re-
lated elements.
Saltan and
Smolander
(2021b)
Three levels with each three
key SaaS pricing activities.
No. No framework that
captures these theo-
ries.
Mohout (2015)11 different strategies that
businesses can use.
No. No framework to
accommodate each
strategy to give it
more potential in
practice.
Roll and Pastuch
(n.d.)
9 elements that semi-relate
to pricing.
Yes, it is solely fo-
cused on pricing-
related factors.
Lack of validation
and verification
by experts or re-
searchers.
Saltan (2019)
and Saltan
and Smolander
(2021a)
28 unique factors what SaaS
pricing entails.
No, it is only used
as a checklist to
test SaaS pricing
framework cover-
age.
Not applicable, as it
is a checklist of what
whole of SaaS pric-
ing is based on aca-
demic literature and
practice.
33
Chapter 4
Results
In this Chapter, we present the results from our research. We start by showing the
results from the Multivocal Literature Review. These are the meta-model and the
first draft of the pricing canvas based on the theory we presented in the literature
review itself. We will test the first draft by filling it in for an existing organisation,
preliminarily testing the capabilities of the canvas. Then, we present the results from
the expert interviews and the resulting drafts. Finally, we present the results from
the validation and evaluation interviews and workshops.
4.1 SaaS Pricing Meta-Model
Figure 4.1 shows the meta-model of the concept SaaS pricing based on the Multivocal
Literature Review. The meta-model gives a general understanding of what topics
come to light when considering SaaS pricing according to the current state-of-the-
art. It also allows us to create a theory-based draft of the SaaS Pricing Canvas, as can
be seen in Section 4.2.
encapsulated in* >
SaaS Pricing
Strategic activities Operational activitiesTactical activities
influences >
Pricing strategies
influences ^
External
factors
Strategic choices
Execution strategies Monitoring
influences ^
Product
< influences
Customer
Legend:
Concept
Factor
Activity
Actor
External force
Relation
Aggregation
Composition
Market
Canvas
* to a certain degree
FIGURE 4.1: Meta-model of SaaS Pricing
Chapter 4. Results 34
From the meta-model, we see that SaaS pricing strategies are not static but are
shaped by an interplay of strategic, tactical, and operational activities. External
forces, such as the market and customer needs, play a critical role influencing de-
cisions at all levels while internal actors adjust pricing as a response to these forces.
The meta-model captures the complexity of SaaS pricing by showing how strate-
gic decisions must align with execution and monitoring processes all while being
continuously influenced by external market conditions and the customer while also
being influenced by internal factors, for example the product. All these decisions
and factors can be addressed inside a canvas, but as we can conclude from the
current frameworks, that is the BMC and Lean Canvas, these frameworks are not
satisfactory to the complexity of SaaS pricing while both Osterwalder and Maurya
address pricing as being important for the business/startup. That is why we have
chosen to scope to the strategic layer.
4.2 Literature-Based Canvas Concepts
4.2.1 Pricing Canvas Draft One
With the findings in Saltan and Smolander (2021b) and the meta-model, a first ver-
sion of a Pricing Canvas is created depicting the three different layers and their re-
spective activities. In Figure 4.2, the first draft of the Pricing Canvas is displayed.
Unified Pricing Canvas
Strategic level
Tactical level
Operational level
Value proposition Pricing strategy
Product offerings Channels Customer acquisition & retention
Ownership Monitoring
Bundles, version, and the type of value it is
based upon (user, function, usage,
consumer or outcome).
The unique value proposition of the
business and the position within the
market to realise said proposition.
Silicon Valley rule-of-thumb, customer
interviews, industry margin benchmark,
breakeven point, Google AdWords method,
anchor pricing, decoy pricing, buy versus
build method, price-distribution fit,
competition-based pricing en price-per-user
industry average.
How do you communicate your product to
your customers? What channels do you
use?
How do you acquire and keep your
customers?
Who is responsible for the execution of this
pricing framework? Who controls all the
activities?
How is the performance of the pricing
framework monitored? What measures are
used?
Business model
Freemium, pay-per-use, dynamic
pricing or subscription-based?
FIGURE 4.2: First draft of the Pricing Canvas
As can be seen, the canvas consists of three layers, each targeting one of the levels
of SaaS pricing. Logically, the canvas is filled in from top to bottom, starting with
the strategy that is going to be applied followed by how the strategy is going to be
executed (tactical level). Finally, the responsibilities and monitoring activities during
the execution of the tactical level are determined on the operational level.
Chapter 4. Results 35
4.2.2 Pricing Canvas Draft Two
With more details obtained regarding the strategic layer of the pricing process in
Section 3.4, a second draft of the Pricing Canvas is created. When compared to the
first draft of the canvas, the second version does not show how organisations per-
form the whole process as is required to be specified in the tactical and operational
layer. On the contrary, the second draft of the Pricing Canvas serves as a guide to
highlight the overall strategic approach with regard to their pricing aligning with
the research objectives set at the beginning of this paper.
For that purpose, the name of the Pricing Canvas will be the Pricing Strategy
Canvas, as it only focuses on the pricing strategy of the SaaS pricing process. Figure
4.3 shows the first draft Pricing Strategy Canvas.
SaaS Pricing
Strategy Canvas
Value proposition
The value proposition of the
business and the position within the
market to realise said proposition.
Unique selling point
The unique value proposition of the
business and the position within the
market to realise said proposition.
Complexity and Nicheness
Complexity: pricing not only reflects the
product, but also the services that come
with the product.
Nicheness: how general or specific the
market is, who is going to use it.
1) Product
Pricing strategy
Silicon Valley rule-of-thumb, customer
interviews, industry margin benchmark,
breakeven point, Google AdWords method,
anchor pricing, decoy pricing, buy versus
build method, price-distribution fit,
competition-based pricing en price-per-user
industry average, upselling, not-zero.
Pricing model
Freemium, pay-per-use, dynamic
pricing or subscription-based?
Pricing method
Value-based, market-based,
competitor-based, cost-based.
Customer segments
B2B, B2C, or B2G market. Some
markets are not suited for specific
strategies to be applied.
Elasticity (willingness to pay)
The willingness of wanting to buy the
product. The minimum/maximum
value someone wants to pay to use
the product.
External forces
External factors that influence the
price or pricing of your product, for
example demand, purchase power,
trends or regulations.
2) Pricing 3) Factors
FIGURE 4.3: Canvas Concept of the Pricing Strategy Canvas
The canvas provided in Figure 4.3 is, apart from the scoping of the canvas, a
result from a feedback session with Andrey Saltan, whom has contributed to a large
part of the literature on SaaS pricing. His feedback aimed at making the canvas more
understandable, including the starting point and categorisation of canvas elements.
This model now clearly shows where to start (point 1 on the left side) and what
categories are considered when looking at a SaaS pricing strategy.
The first draft of the Pricing Strategy Canvas will be used as a starting point and
reference during the first round of expert interviews, providing a structured frame-
work to facilitate discussions around key pricing activities and elements. In partic-
ular, the 28 factors that influence SaaS pricing in Table 3.2, as identified by Saltan
and Smolander (2021a) and Saltan (2019), will serve as a core focus for additional
considerations for the canvas, but are not limited to these as the experience and ex-
pertise of the experts may lead to the identification of new factors. Their importance
is also ranked. This ranking process is necessary because, as highlighted by Jansen
(2024), canvases should be both usable and easily understandable. A canvas that is
Chapter 4. Results 36
too complex or overloaded with information risks becoming counterproductive, as
it may overwhelm users and undermine the clarity and utility that a visual tool, such
as a canvas, is meant to provide. To avoid over-complexity, the expert feedback will
be crucial in determining how to balance completeness with simplicity. This is to
ensure that the final canvas includes only the most essential factors for SaaS pricing
strategy, both theoretically and practically important.
Filling in the Pricing Strategy Canvas
To test the current usability and applicability of the Pricing Strategy Canvas, a dry
run is executed with a random software company. The question arises whether it is
possible to recognise what company is used to test the usability of this canvas con-
cept, similar to the Nespresso Business Model Canvas example from Joyce, Paquin,
and Pigneur (2015), as their business model is quite unique looking at the coffee
industry. Figure 4.4 shows the filled in Pricing Strategy Canvas.
SaaS Pricing
Strategy Canvas
Value proposition
Access to a vast amount of music
and podcasts.
Unique selling point
A personalised audio streaming
experience with advanced
algorithms for a tailored experience
over all your devices.
Complexity and Nicheness
Pricing is complex, as other subscriptions
offer other services for a more personalised
experience without advertisements.
Nicheness is very broad, as everyone can
use the service with a global reach in the
market.
1) Product
Pricing strategy
Competition-based as there are several alternatives
on the market.
Price-distribution fit, as the several subscriptions are
tailored towards different users and their preferences.
Upselling to attract users from moving from a free to a
paid subscription.
Pricing model
Freemium subscription model: free
subscription with intermittent
advertisements, a paid subscription
without advertisements, a family
subscription, subscription with
student discount.
Pricing method
Value-based on the experience of
the user, with competition-based
influencing due to the vast amount of
other options for the user.
Customer segments
B2C
Elasticity (willingness to pay)
High elasticity, as there are a lot of
alternatives in the market, but the
free tier is a good option to attract
customers and several subscription
options to choose from.
External forces
Market competition and new
entrants.
User preferences towards their
listening experience.
Copyright laws.
2) Pricing 3) Factors
FIGURE 4.4: Dry run of the Pricing Strategy Canvas
Excluding the (unique) value proposition on the canvas, how easy is it to guess
what company is being visualised in the canvas? Those who guessed Spotify are
correct. Of course, when looking at the (unique) value proposition of the company,
it is easier to recognise which company is displayed in the canvas. However, looking
at only the pricing related aspects, it is easy to determine what type of company is
being displayed. Of course, it is possible that competitors, such as Apple Music or
YouTube Music, are guessed since they have a similar product to Spotify.
If we were to look at it the other way, that is what can we do with it?, we can see that
this canvas is a decision-making support tool. It allows businesses to see what their
pricing options are based on product and factor input. For example, it can be that a
specific product complexity has influence on the pricing model choice in the second
Chapter 4. Results 37
step of the canvas. Therefore, this canvas helps startups consider what choices they
have and what they have to look out for when executing the overall strategy.
4.3 Interview Round 1
4.3.1 Interviewee demographics
Table 4.1 shows an overview of all interviewees and their respective role and area
of operation. As specified in Section 2.3.6 and 2.3.7, the data is anonymised and
pseudonymised. Therefore, more specific details regarding interviewees are not pro-
vided.
TABLE 4.1: List of interviewee demographics
Interviewee Role/Function Sector Product type
Interviewee 1*Startup co-
founder
Consultancy Process management
tool
Interviewee 2*Startup co-
founder
Consultancy Process management
tool
Interviewee 3 Small-sized com-
pany CEO & co-
founder
Fintech Payment and billing
platform
Interviewee 4 Independent
SaaS advisor
Consultancy Several SaaS product
types
Interviewee 5 Scale-up (small-
sized) CEO &
co-founder
Cybersecurity Cybersecurity aware-
ness tool
4.3.2 Results
With the first Pricing Strategy Canvas draft in Figure 4.3, we investigated how the
canvas applies in the current state-of-the-practice and what would need to change
to make it more applicable based on the input of the first round of the expert inter-
views. All main results from the interviews have been coded in overarching themes,
which are discussed below and supported by quotes from the interviewees.
Position of the Canvas in the Startup Process
The introduction of the Pricing Strategy Canvas has caused the process of setting up
a SaaS startup to be different if it were to be implemented. Therefore, we wished
to find out where the canvas fits in the startup process. Interviewee 1 and 2 are in
the startup phase where they are going to launch and sell their product. They say
that: “We foresee a big added value for this canvas especially with startups and scale-ups”.
According to Interviewee 3, the canvas is more a starting point than a stand-alone
thing, and can serve as a start to think about pricing in the startup process. Inter-
viewee 4 mentioned that “the canvas is pre-sales”. With this input, we can confirm
that the intention of the canvas, being a second-stop canvas after the BMC in Section
*Interviewee 1 and 2 work for the same startup.
Chapter 4. Results 38
3.4, is feasible. Interviewee 5 also has this opinion: “I’ve been an entrepreneur for half
my life, so a lot of things you do subconsciously on experiences, but for example that other
project, I do find it interesting to submit this to use; to start looking at your pricing”.
Know Your Product
With the first interviews, it becomes clear that it is hard to grasp SaaS and put a price
to it. Interviewee 1 and 2 discussed this problem as the intangibility of SaaS, making
it hard to put a price on something that cannot be held in the palm of your hand,
with the same feeling being displayed by interviewee 3 and 4 when discussing their
products.
As a result, the perceived value of the product is hard to grasp. “Especially if the
product is yours” according to interviewee 1 and 2. It is harder since the co-founders
have a biased opinion about their product: “the product is viewed through rose-coloured
glasses”. In the Pricing Strategy Canvas, the perceived value of the product is encap-
sulated in the value proposition element obtained from the Business Model Canvas.
However, what became apparent quickly was that all first four interviewees also
think about factors, such as effort reduction, cost saving, and time saving as per-
ceived value elements being more important that the question “what does our product
cost before we sell?” Because of the long experience of interviewee 3 and 4, and the
fairly short experience of interviewees 1 and 2, it is evident that the focus of startups
is sometimes in the wrong place. “If you aim to break even (that is cost-based pricing),
then as far as I am concerned you are not being a SaaS company.”, according to intervie-
wee 3 and 4.
Therefore, the value proposition element of the Pricing Strategy Canvas is per-
ceived as too broad, and therefore is split up to clearly show not only what the prod-
uct costs the business, which apparently is not as important, and show more the
value of the product for the customer where their advantages are clearly displayed
in the canvas.
Besides knowing your product, you should know your customer: “I find it crucial
for any business is to understand well who your customer is, how your customer thinks and
where a customer’s needs lie”. What interviewee 3 adds: “startups often look at other
firms and adopt that pricing model”, for example freemium, “but sometimes that leads to
not understanding the customer. Do they want that freemium subscription or do they just
want a fixed fee?” Not understanding how the customer uses the product to pay for it,
is one of the many steps that need to be taken to develop a pricing strategy.
Interviewee 1 mentioned the product and customer side as “the dance between
client and product” and according to them “it is hard to grasp one strategy out of that
dance”. To better summarise all the needs of the customer, interviewee 5 mentioned
that in his area of operation the Return On Investment (ROI) for the customer is very
important. “One competitor has put an ROI calculator on their website, which is completely
fake, as it is hard to grasp, but is does pull in the customers”. Fulfilling that need of the
customer, and therefore adding value, is essentially the return on investment they
get as a result. In cybersecurity, a result can be less data leaks ultimately saving
money, but a result could also be money in terms of emotional effort or man hours.
The Devil is in the Details
Besides the where-question, the what-question is important to discuss. In more detail,
we want to know what elements of SaaS pricing and developing a pricing strategy
are satisfied in the canvas. From the literature review, we have obtained 28 unique
Chapter 4. Results 39
factors of what SaaS pricing entails according to theory. From the first few inter-
views, it became evident that SaaS pricing is “these factors, and then you are modestly
missing 100 things” according to interviewee 3. Additionally, interviewees 1 and 2
mentioned that for their startup, “some specific factors are more important to us than oth-
ers”. They mentioned factors such as product scalability and switching and migration
costs. To summarise these findings, we can quote interviewee 3, who says that “the
devil is in the details”.
According to all interviewees, SaaS pricing is complex. Interviewee 4 gave a grey
literature reference of a news letter on SaaS pricing, which shows a large number of
articles addressing numerous pricing related factors and activities that are important
for SaaS pricing in practice, which is tens of times bigger than the 28 theoretical
factors *. Furthermore, interviewee 3 mentions that “every factor should be taken into
account for the canvas to be detailed enough”.
With these results, the depth of detail of the canvas needs to be better. First, “as
many elements should be considered as possible”, but at the same time keep the char-
acteristics of a canvas. Second, “we want to know how each elements relates to each
other”. Some choice influences other choices in the canvas, and the experts want to
know what that is to learn from these ’mistakes’. For example, the customer seg-
ment can already determine what pricing model is chosen: “I do not believe in B2B
and freemium”, as an example by Interviewee 3. Therefore, knowing who you sell to
can already determine what pricing model is not chosen. Furthermore, “SaaS pric-
ing is situational, and that is why pricing consultants exist”, according to interviewee 3.
Therefore, it is hard to make the canvas as detailed as possible as it might shift to-
wards one type of startup that could use the Pricing Strategy Canvas. This resulted
in interviewee 3, 4, and 5 finding the first draft of the Pricing Strategy Canvas too
abstract.
Four Dimensions of SaaS Pricing
Interviewee 4, as an independent startup advisor, presented us with four dimen-
sions of SaaS pricing that should be considered to make a pricing strategy success-
ful. Other interviewees presented several similar topics. Their results are grouped
together:
The first element, that was already discussed under know your product, is the
product value. As said before, it is important to understand well who your customer
is, how your customer thinks and where a customer’s needs lie. And then also
understand the price of the product: “it is to know how much use they make of the
platform and what is the actual added value of your platform to the customer. For that we
are going to price them”.
The second dimension stands next to the self-perceived value of the product: the
market and competition. “You also have something called the status quo. Most startups
think they are the next unicorn, but yes, of the 100,000 that are set up 99,999 are not that
lucky either and with that you forget that that there is competition and that competition
is the status quo of the market”. Therefore, the startup should not only look inside
the business, but also outside. Interviewee 4 gave the following points to consider:
“What does the status quo do now and does your software solve such an amount of the
problem they are experiencing that they are willing to pay for it as well?” Interviewee 5
had an interesting strategy: “we have partner firms which we can use to pull pricing out of
our competitors”. With that, the pricing of the competitors comes to light. Interviewee
3 states that “we absolutely looked at our competitors...” further stating the fact that
*News letter website: https://www.growthunhinged.com
Chapter 4. Results 40
looking outside the business is as important as looking inside to identify a (if need
be) competitive pricing strategy.
Interviewee 4 introduced the third dimension by saying that pricing is often a
one-time thing: “I see in 99 out of 100 startups or scale-ups or successful companies that
they have fixed their pricing strategy and never moved away from it”. However, the ques-
tion that startups should consider, either on a weekly, monthly or quarterly basis, is
“does the pricing still fit?” Holding the pricing strategy against the light on a recur-
ring basis, startups can see whether their strategy still performs well. Interviewee 1
perceived the canvas as such a document: “I think this canvas is an iterative document
where you come back times to help you think about it”, with it referring to the pricing
strategy.
The final dimension is the future-proofism of the pricing strategy. “If I choose strat-
egy A now, I can also, in the future, grow my sales along with my existing customer base”.
The question that arises here is whether the pricing strategy is still good in a year, or
shorter: “for a startup, I never look beyond 6 to 9 months”, says interviewee 4. The hope
of a future proof pricing strategy is that “you can then potentially achieve additional
growth with this pricing model”. However, when the future-proofism of a startup pric-
ing strategy is considered, it is also possible that “you will run into the limit and then
have to re-approach your entire customer base”, and that means to pivot. Consequently,
that would mean that the whole pricing strategy should be reconsidered.
SaaS Pricing as a Startup is an Experiment
For SaaS startups, determining the optimal pricing strategy is rarely straightforward
as we saw in the literature review. In fact, as interviewee 5 noted, pricing is often ap-
proached as “ballparking followed by A/B testing” rather than as a well-defined, data-
driven strategy. An experimental approach has been a recurring theme in many of
the interviews, with founders and pricing strategists indicating that refining pricing
through trial and error enables businesses to discover what works. Since startups
typically lack the resources to conduct thorough market research, experimenting
with pricing allows them to gather feedback directly from potential customer.
However, conducting research or engaging in A/B testing is not without cost,
both in terms of time and money. According to interviewee 4, “research costs money,
and you want to know what added value you have for your customer”. However, limited
financial and personnel resources can restrict the ability of startups to pursue in-
depth research. Therefore, many startups opt for a lean approach, often testing two
simple pricing strategies on a subset of prospects to see what brings them in. For
the proposed Pricing Strategy Canvas, interviewee 5 described that “an approach is
to have two pricing strategy canvases filled in, go to different customers, and then see which
one is better”.
An iterative pricing process can involve the Pricing Strategy Canvas to lay out
different elements of each strategy side by side. By isolating key pricing variables,
such as subscription fees, per-user charges, or usage-based tiers, and their respec-
tive approaches, startups can assess how each strategy impacts sales. Interviewee
3, for example, experimented with upfront costs versus a pay-per-use model. They
discovered that customers who opted for a pay-per-use model were slower to adopt
and integrate the product. Consequently, they shifted to an upfront payment ap-
proach, which encouraged customers to launch and engage with the product more
quickly, aligning better with the startup’s growth objectives.
Chapter 4. Results 41
Customer Retention
Another recurring factor discussed across multiple interviews is the significance of
customer retention in SaaS pricing, particularly through understanding the costs
and barriers associated with customer switching or migrating to another software
solution. When considering customer retention, switching costs, such as the time,
effort, and potential data loss incurred by transitioning to a competitor’s product,
are highly relevant. In some markets, the product represents a unique solution, as
seen in the examples of interviewees 1 and 2, where switching or migration costs
are not yet a concern. However, they expressed curiosity about what these costs
could eventually look like, and what features would make it more difficult for the
customer to move away.
Understanding what it would cost for a customer to switch to a competitor can
help inform the pricing strategy by identifying what makes the product essential
and thus more ’sticky’ for its customers. For instance, interviewee 1 suggested that
a unique approach could be taken, sometimes referred to as an “angler fish method”,
which prompts a critical evaluation of which features are unique and will encourage
customers to remain loyal to the product, a lock-in model. Across the interviews it
has become evident that product stickiness is a core factor in SaaS pricing strategies.
A specific approach that interviewee 3 proposed was to have customers sign two-
year contracts, effectively locking them in so they cannot easily switch to another
system.
These results emphasise that understanding the factors enhancing customer re-
tention is crucial for establishing a sustainable pricing strategy, especially in com-
petitive markets. By understanding and potentially increasing the switching costs,
startups can foster greater customer loyalty and long-term growth.
4.4 Pricing Canvas Draft Three
Based on the results of first half of the interviews, the Pricing Strategy Canvas from
Figure 4.3 has been injected with the practical data to make the theory-based canvas
applicable in day-to-day SaaS pricing activities. This has resulted in a second draft
of the Pricing Strategy Canvas displayed in Figure 4.5.
Chapter 4. Results 42
SaaS Pricing
Strategy Canvas
Value proposition
The value proposition of the business and
the position within the market to realise
said proposition.
Unique selling point
The unique value proposition of the
business and the position within the market
to realise said proposition.
Complexity and Nicheness
Complexity: pricing not only reflects the product,
but also the services that come with the product.
Nicheness: how general or specific the market is,
who is going to use it.
1) Product
Pricing strategy
E.g. Silicon Valley rule-of-thumb, customer interviews,
industry margin benchmark, breakeven point, Google
AdWords method, anchor pricing, decoy pricing, buy
versus build method, price-distribution fit, competition-
based pricing en price-per-user industry average,
upselling, not-zero.
Pricing model
Freemium, pay-per-use, dynamic pricing or
subscription-based. What levels are you
introducing, what are feature differences,
etc.
Pricing method
Value-based, market-based, or competitor-
based.
Customer segments
B2B, B2C, or B2G market. Some markets
are not suited for specific strategies to be
applied.
Elasticity (willingness to pay)
The willingness of wanting to buy the
product. The minimum/maximum value
someone wants to pay to use the product.
Market dynamics
The structure of the market, amount of
competitors, developments and trends, etc.
2) Pricing
3) Factors
Similar products (and their price)
Products of competitors or similar business
and the price they are sold for, what
different packages there are, etc.
Stickiness
Migration and switching costs. How difficult is it
for a customer to go to a different products in
terms of costs, effort, etc. (Low, Medium, High).
Perceived value
The value of the product based on the
customer's needs, market averages, other
products, internal valuation, etc.
Scalability potential
Scalability of the product regarding growth
in the market, extension of features for
customers, new offerings in the market,
etc.
External forces
External factors that influence the price or
pricing of your product, for example
demand, purchase power, trends or
regulations.
FIGURE 4.5: The Second Version of the Pricing Strategy Canvas and
Third Pricing Canvas Draft Based on Interviews in Round 1
The interviews have resulted in a more detailed SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas to
address the issues with the earlier canvas draft. The product column has doubled in
size to accommodate the wishes from the know your product section. Furthermore, the
customer segment has been moved to the product, to address remarks by interviewee
3 that the relations between choices is highlighted more. On a paper canvas show-
ing relations is difficult. An online/digital canvas could help solve this issue. Apart
from the customer segment being moved, the product column received a competi-
tive element, namely similar products (and their price). Due to most businesses looking
at the market too, as discussed above, they should know what other players there are
and how they have priced their product. Finally, another product characteristic has
been added, which is stickiness. If there are other players in the market, it is crucial
for the business to know how easy it is for the customer to switch to a competitor.
In the pricing column, one element has been added, which is the perceived value
of the product. Perceived value can be considered internal by the owners or external
by the customer. Knowing what the product is worth can already shape what sort
of pricing approach the business wants to go for.
The factors column was hard to finish, as there are countless factors that have an
influence on (large or small) on the price. Therefore, it has received two new ele-
ments and one element has been moved (customer segments). First is market dynam-
ics. From the interviews, it has become clear that an outside view has its advantages
when shaping the pricing strategy. Looking at the market also gives a more future-
proof feeling towards the pricing strategy. Looking at how the market develops
enables a more realistic and long-term pricing strategy. The same holds for the other
new element, scalability potential. Looking at specific growth prospects, the busi-
ness can already think about what needs to happen with their pricing so that they
can grow (quick) and have a realistic pricing strategy that even works with product
Chapter 4. Results 43
changes. Growth is one of the main successes of businesses, and leaving it out of the
Pricing Strategy Canvas would not have worked according to the interviewees.
As can be seen in Figure 4.5, there is still some space in the factors column. The
factors column will be a focus point for the second round of interviews to fill the
gap.
4.5 Interview Round 2
4.5.1 Interviewee demographics
Table 4.2 shows an overview of all interviewees and their respective role and area of
operation. The interviewees were interviewed with the goal of finalising the Pricing
Strategy Canvas based on the second Pricing Strategy Canvas draft in Figure 4.5.
TABLE 4.2: List of interviewee demographics
Interviewee Role/Function Sector Product type
Interviewee 6 Scale-up (small-
sized) director &
co-founder
Cybersecurity Cybersecurity plat-
form
Interviewee 7 Startup founder Metal industry CRM tool
Interviewee 8 Startup co-
founder & CEO
Health care Transcription tool
Interviewee 9 Medium-sized
company co-
founder & CEO
Online retail E-commerce plat-
form
4.5.2 Results
The same approach from the first round of interviews has been applied in second
half of the interviews. Below, we discuss the major themes that have emerged from
the narrative and thematic analysis.
Company Strategy
From the first interview results, it became increasingly evident that relying solely
on the 28 unique SaaS pricing factors from the academic literature is insufficient to
address the complexities of SaaS pricing and pricing strategies. While the interviews
confirmed the relevance of these factors, they also highlighted that practical applica-
tions of SaaS pricing often extend beyond such lists. However, the 28 factors served
as valuable guidance for discussing which elements are generally significant, even
if real-world implementations require more nuance.
One theme emerging from three interviews is the role of company strategy. As
interviewee 6 remarked, “what I am missing is the overall company strategy, that is what
will lead to my pricing strategy”. This insight into the company strategy highlights
the centrality of an overarching strategy of a startup or SME in shaping its pric-
ing strategy and its decisions. Regardless of the business being a startup or a large
enterprise, the company strategy influences how operations are conducted. Inter-
viewee 7 echoed, stating: “with a company strategy, you can dive deeper into each part
Chapter 4. Results 44
and give more value to each aspect (of SaaS pricing)”. This finding highlights the inter-
action between strategic vision and pricing strategies, positioning company strategy
as an important factor in effective pricing. Interviewee 9 also addressed this absence
in the current Pricing Strategy Canvas: “my vision and mission determine my pricing
strategy”.
As shown in the Round 1 interview results, startups frequently use an iterative
approach to pricing, using experiments to find out what pricing approach is good.
This experimental approach is based on their overarching vision and mission. By
testing various pricing models, they refine their offerings to better meet customer
needs while staying true to their strategic objectives. As noted by interviewees 1
and 8, the process often involves open negotiations with customers, helping startups
understand what drives conversion from prospects to paying clients. A dynamic
approach highlights the influence of the startup’s strategic direction and its pricing
tactics, showing how startups leverage flexibility to align pricing practices with their
broader business goals.
Price Timing
Beyond solely determining and setting the price of a software product, the timing
of customer payments plays a critical role in ensuring startup success and fostering
strong customer relationships. Interviewees 3 and 6 emphasised that payment tim-
ing is a key determinant in maintaining cash flow and securing commitment from
the customer. The implications of timing are more present in certain pricing models,
such as a pay-per-use model with a starting fee. As interviewee 3 noted, “we use
an upfront fee as an incentive so that the customer actually commits to us”. An upfront
fee mitigates the risk of delayed payments or never even receiving payments, which
can arise when customers rejects usage indefinitely which leaves the business vul-
nerable to revenue loss. Interviewee 3 mentioned: “Since we use a pay-per-use method,
they only pay when using the product. So, if the customer does not use it, we do not make
any revenue from that customer”. By incorporating an upfront incentive, startups ef-
fectively alter the payment timeline, increasing the likelihood of successful customer
relationships and allow for capital to be available upfront to invest into the growth
of the startup.
For interviewee 6, whose product operates on a subscription model, timing is
also integral to their pricing strategy. They explained, “let the customer pay both the
one-off amount and the annual subscription amount in advance within a payment period
of X days”. Such an approach aligns with the necessity of cash flow management,
especially during the initial phases of a startup. As interviewee 6 observed, “starting
the business is very thirsty when it comes to cash. Therefore, capital is needed”. By requir-
ing payments in advance, the startup ensures it has the financial resources to set up
and deliver the product to the customer. Therefore, an upfront fee or similar method
benefits both the startup and the customer: the former secures upfront capital for
the startup, while the customer receives assurance of a fully operational product as
per their investment.
Know whom you are selling to
In the first results, we already highlighted the importance of knowing your product
and customer. The second round of interviews reflects these results, with several
interviews diving into the added value of their product. Interviewee 8 spent quite a
bit of time explaining to us why it is so important to understand what you are selling,
Chapter 4. Results 45
and for their product it is also very important: “as it makes the job of our customers less
stressful”. And for them, it is difficult to put a price on that.
Next to knowing what you sell, it is also important to whom you sell: interviewee
6, to their perception of the canvas, highlighted an absence of a fourth column: the
customer. They feel: “I miss the perspective of the customer”. Of course, this customer is
part of a market that the business is selling to, and therefore it is important to know
what the problems of the customer are, but also how the market is built. If there
is no understanding of the market, unforeseen issues can arise when the product
is launched. If a customer element were to be added, interviewee 6 feels that “said
column would be before product”. The order of the canvas would become: who has
the problem (customer)?,what is the solution (product)?, and how are we going to sell it
(pricing)?.
Interviewee 9 also addressed the market: “your product has a price in a specific
market, and regulations are one of the factors in the market that influence the pricing”. They
mention that “Your factors are essentially the market in which you operate”. Looking
at the factors column, we can clearly see that the columns in the Pricing Strategy
Canvas represent the four categories from Table 3.2 from Saltan and Smolander’s
combined research, if we were to include the company strategy result shown above.
This similarity clearly shows that the Pricing Strategy Canvas encapsulates all four
categories presented in theory and are applied in practice using the Pricing Strategy
Canvas. Interviewee 9 also proposed a change in order for the canvas’ columns: “I
need to know what market is before I can give my product a price”. To do so, the pricing
column and factors (market) column need to switch positions. Interviewee 9 also
mentioned: “Personally, I would fill in the canvas in a different order. First, I would do the
company strategy, if that were implemented in the canvas, then I would do the product as
you have here. After that, I would first do the market (external factors), because I first would
need to know the market (and the competitors in their case) to finally do my pricing”. Their
interpretation of the canvas shows that there are multiple ways to approach pricing
strategies where external factors should be addressed before the pricing strategy can
be determined. Additionally, interviewee 9 has some input for the Factors column:
“market size and total addressable market is important”.
Minor remarks
In all interviews, we asked the experts whether they know and use the Business
Model Canvas. Most of the experts know and/or have used the Business Model
Canvas in the early stage of their business in order to visualise the business model
of their startup, either one time or iteratively in the case of, for example Interviewee
9, or paint what their startup would look in the future. However, what they also
saw was that the Business Model Canvas does not include many pricing-related el-
ements. Therefore, they share the opinion that a pricing canvas would have added
value when solely addressing pricing. This observation further supported our goals
of developing a pricing canvas that startups can use additional to the Business Model
Canvas for their business model.
We also encountered a definition issue: interviewee 8 mentioned that pricing
elasticity and willingness to pay are two separate topics. However, they do influence
each other. According to them, the definition of the elasticity of a price is the change
in demand when the pricing is changed, whereas the definition of willingness to
pay highlights the literal amounts of money a customer is willing to spend on the
product. To overcome confusion, we have decided to split said element into two
Chapter 4. Results 46
loose elements, where a correlation between the two can be explained in more detail
using the canvas.
Furthermore, interviewee 8 filled in the canvas in a more lean approach, where
they only filled in the elements that are necessary for them. They mentioned: “some
elements in the canvas are not that important to me”. Interviewee 9 also mentioned that
some elements are more important to them. This importance depends on where the
problem lies in their startup. For Interviewee 8, this was their perceived value and
how they communicate this with their customer. With their focus being primarily on
that element, the other elements, with no or lesser problems become less important.
Apart from the aforementioned changes, the interviewees did not suggest any
additional alterations or identify new elements for the Pricing Strategy Canvas in-
dicating that the proposed framework is comprehensive and meets the expectations
or requirements as perceived by these participants. Many participants agreed that
“the canvas is useful and effective”, “this canvas can offer guidance in the pricing process,
not only for me but also for startups” or “I would like a copy of the canvas”. The absence
of further remarks also shows a level of satisfaction with the existing components
and their alignment with the objectives of this study and with the perceived wishes
of its end users. Therefore, we have chosen to create the final canvas version based
on these final results.
4.6 The Final SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas
The second round of interviews has led to a couple of changes to the Pricing Strategy
Canvas version in Figure 4.5 as described above. These changes have been imple-
mented and result in the final version of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas, shown in
Figure 4.6.
Chapter 4. Results 47
SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas
Value proposition
The value proposition of the business and
the position within the market to realise
said proposition.
Unique selling point
The unique value proposition of the
business and the position within the market
to realise said proposition.
Complexity and Nicheness
Complexity: pricing not only reflects the product,
but also the services that come with the product.
Nicheness: how general or specific the market is,
who is going to use it.
2) Product
Pricing mechanism
A tactic to sell the product or apply to the pricing
approach to estimate a monetary value, e.g. Silicon
Valley rule-of-thumb, customer interviews, industry
margin benchmark, breakeven point, Google
AdWords method, anchor pricing, decoy pricing, buy
versus build method, price-distribution fit, competition-
based pricing en price-per-user industry average,
upselling, not-zero.
Pricing model
Freemium, pay-per-use, dynamic pricing or
subscription-based. What levels are you
introducing, what are feature differences,
etc.
Pricing method
Value-based, market-based, or competitor-
based.
Customer segments
B2B, B2C, or B2G market. Some markets
are not suited for specific strategies to be
applied.
4) Pricing3) Market
Similar products (and their price)
Products of competitors or similar business
and the price they are sold for, what
different packages there are, etc.
Stickiness
Migration and switching costs. How difficult is it
for a customer to go to a different products in
terms of costs, effort, etc. (Low, Medium, High).
Perceived value
The value of the product based on the
customer's needs, market averages, other
products, internal valuation, etc.
Price timing
How and when the customer pays what
fees.
Company goals and milestones (KPIs)
What the company wants to achieve, what milestones are
for that goal and the overall mission of the company.
1) Company
Company strategy and vision
The comprehensive plan that outlines how a business will
achieve its goals. The vision serves as a guiding principle
for what it aims to achieve or become in the future.
Elasticity
The change in demand when the price
changes. When the product is elastic, the
price can be changed more and customers
are still willing to buy the product.
Willingness to pay
The willingness of wanting to buy the
product. The maximum amount someone
wants to pay to use the product based on
their perceived value (can be influenced by
price elasticity).
Market details
The structure of the market, market size,
total addressable market, the amount of
competitors, developments and trends, etc.
Scalability potential
Scalability of the product regarding growth
in the market, extension of features for
customers, new offerings in the market,
etc.
External forces
External factors that influence the price or
pricing of your product, for example
demand, purchase power, trends or
regulations.
FIGURE 4.6: Final Version of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas
4.6.1 Description of canvas elements
The final Pricing Strategy Canvas consists of four elements with each their own
building blocks. Similar to theory, three of these four elements closely represent the
different categories that come with SaaS pricing, identified in Table 3.2. These cate-
gories are company,product, and market. The fourth category, customer, is present into
the canvas in, for example, the building blocks customer segment and market details
in different columns. These categories allow for a global view (company), internal
view (product), and external view (market).
The first column is Company. In this column, two building blocks are present
that resemble the goals and vision of the company. The Company Strategy and Vision
defines the long-term plan and objectives, while Company Goals and Milestones (KPIs)
outline the measurable targets to track the success of the startup or business.
The second column is Product. This column focuses on the product that is sold.
The product is described here by identifying its unique features and similarities
to other products. The Value Proposition defines the core benefits delivered to cus-
tomers, while the Unique Selling Point highlights the product’s competitive advan-
tage. Complexity and Nicheness determine how specialised the product is in terms of
additional service and target audience size. Customer Segments describes what the
target customer is. Finally, Similar Products (and their price) describe the competitors
on the market that sell a similar product and for what price. Stickiness describes the
switching and migration costs.
Chapter 4. Results 48
The third column is Market. This section provides insights into external fac-
tors that impact pricing. Elasticity and Willingness To Pay describe in more econom-
ical terms how demand changes when prices are changed as well as minimum and
maximum amounts the customer wants to pay for the product. The Market Details
describe the industry landscape in which the product is sold. Scalability Potential as-
sesses the growth opportunities of the product. Finally, External Forces consider, for
example, regulatory and demand-related influences.
The fourth and final column is Pricing. It contains essential elements that shape
the pricing approach. Perceived Value delves into the value the business and the
customer perceive for the product. Value can be in dollars, but also for instance
hours of work reduction. The Pricing Model defines the revenue structure, including
freemium, subscription-based, or pay-per-use options. Pricing Method describes the
methods used on which the price itself is based. The price itself can be competitor-
based, value-based, market-based or a hybrid variant. Price Timing highlights when
the customer pays what fees. For a startup, timing the price can be essential to obtain
necessary capital beforehand, as we have seen in the interview results. Finally, the
Pricing Mechanism element explores different tactics that can be used to price the
product or make certain packages more attractive than others. In earlier versions, we
named this element pricing strategy, but was perceived as ambiguous as the canvas
itself is a Pricing Startegy Canvas. We highlighted tese interpretations also during
our Multivocal Literature Review.
4.6.2 How to fill in the canvas
The canvas is filled in chronologically starting at column 1 (company) and ending
in column 4 (pricing). By following this order, we can assure that all relevant factors
are taken into account before pricing. Starting with the company, the overarching
view of the startup is determined. The overarching strategy determines the product
which, in turn, influences the market in which the product is sold. However, we
leave the canvas open to the interpretation of its user. It is possible that some infor-
mation is not known or that some elements need to be elaborated upon. Our goal
is to develop a universal pricing canvas to support this type of usage. Within each
column, it is natural to fill it in from top to bottom, but that is not necessarily the
case. Again, we leave its usage interpretation to the user.
4.7 Conclusive Interviews
The conclusive interviews serve as the critical phase of empirically validating the
Pricing Strategy Canvas. After incorporating feedback from earlier rounds of inter-
views, the conclusive phase focusses on evaluating the finished canvas as a whole.
By gathering expert opinions on its usability, relevance, and effectiveness, these in-
terviews provide a definitive assessment of whether the canvas meets the needs of
its intended users and serves as a practical tool for SaaS startups in navigating pric-
ing challenges. A conclusive step is essential for empirically validating the canvas
and ensuring its readiness for real-world application.
4.7.1 Results
The interviewees validated the Pricing Strategy Canvas as a useful and effective tool
for SaaS startups. The interviewees highlighted its applicability at various startup
stages, its iterative nature, and noted improvements over previous versions of the
Chapter 4. Results 49
canvas. Some noted missing elements, such as execution guidance and interdepen-
dencies between pricing choices. Others found the canvas well-structured, balanced,
and more comprehensive than earlier iterations. The resemblance to the Business
Model Canvas was acknowledged, with some interviewees appreciating this famil-
iarity. Several participants expressed eagerness to use the canvas in real-world sce-
narios, reinforcing its practical value.
We have summarised the highlights of each conclusive validation interview be-
low. Beware that two participants are left out, as they did not participate in this
interview due to unavailability or lack of response.
Interviewee 6: “I find the Pricing Strategy Canvas usable in the several stages of a startup,
as was one of the goals of the canvas. It is possible that a fresh startup takes longer to fill it in
as they may not have thought each step of the canvas through. A more established startup (or
even scale-up) could finish the canvas in half an hour. Furthermore, I see the canvas being
used as an iterative framework (golden plague). However, what I still miss is an overview of
the influence of specific choices on other elements of the canvas. In addition, the execution of
the pricing strategy is absent. I personally would like to know as a business how I am going
to execute the developed pricing strategy”.
Interviewee 9: “All the changes that I have proposed during our first interview have been
implemented in this final Pricing Strategy Canvas version. I find that the canvas is more
useful than the earlier version already was. I feel that some startups might not have all the
information yet, and would start with a few words or one sentence per canvas element, what
the Pricing Strategy Canvas supports (filling in the canvas with a pencil is recommended to
erase these keywords when more information is known at a later time). The company goals
are maybe a bit vague, since they may be something to do after the whole pricing process”.
“Interestingly, we are currently looking at our pricing and a canvas such as this one would
be very handy right now”.
Interviewee 8: “I think the canvas is complete and the goal of developing a canvas has been
reached. What is miss is the how-to to bring it from the strategic level to the execution level?
I can use the canvas to justify my price to explain why I am X times more expensive than the
competitor, but the canvas will not determine that I should be X times more expensive. Other
than that, I see clearly that the canvas is a second step from the BMC, but the distinction be-
tween the two is not that clear. The Pricing Strategy Canvas also contains company and
market elements, for example the BMC. However, this similarity makes the Pricing Strategy
Canvas more widely applicable, which I find very nice”.
Interviewee 5: “The version of the Pricing Strategy Canvas that I saw in the first interview
was quite complex, whereas I find the final Pricing Strategy Canvas less complex despite it
being bigger. The parts are more separated from each other but easier to understand. As an
entrepreneur, you love your own product, but the canvas helps to look beyond that. What I
miss is something about the cost structure of the company. But the BMC already has these
elements, so it is not that necessary. Finally, I wonder whether some elements are more im-
portant than others. That is not clear. In a current project, we are looking at our pricing and
are eager to try the canvas to obtain a better pricing approach using the canvas”.
Interviewee 2: “I think the canvas looks very good. I find the final Pricing Strategy Canvas
a major upgrade from the first version I saw. Although the canvas is bigger, it does not make
it complex. It allows us to consider more when developing a strategy. When we would not
know what to fill in we could just leave that space blank, which is a nice option. Considering
Chapter 4. Results 50
the company and the goals/strategy allows to think ahead in the future and about company
growth. With pricing being ad-hoc at the moment, the canvas is very relevant for us”.
Interviewee 1: “The Pricing Strategy Canvas looks similar to the Business Model Canvas,
but for pricing. Pricing is the hardest part after working with customers, so a pricing can-
vas can help us think about pricing in a more structured way. Although I think that less is
more, I feel you have found the balance between all elements compared to the first draft of the
Pricing Strategy Canvas that I saw in the first interview. Also, the canvas incorporates the
layers aim, form and perform, which I live by. I find the company layer very nice. The only
thing is that my OCD triggers when seeing the company layer not aligned correctly with the
text and blocks. Other than that, I am very eager to use the model in a workshop to look at
our pricing in a better way”.
Interviewee 6: “The Pricing Strategy Canvas is extremely cool! The canvas is thought out
well. I think it metaphorically looks similar to a coat rack on which you hang different pricing
elements. I feel it is able to capture the thought process of pricing. I also see some horizontal
relations between pricing, especially value proposition, elasticity and perceived value (where
a different value may lead to a different elasticity for example). Maybe there are more of those
relations you can identify. I would use the canvas when iteratively going back to our pricing
strategy to see what needs to change. I am genuinely interested in using the canvas and I am
looking forward to receive a copy!”
4.7.2 Workshops
Applying the Pricing Strategy Canvas to a real-life business scenario allows us to
empirically evaluate the canvas. The workshops have been held with a total of nine
startups. Seven of these startups participated in a guest lecture during the course
Science-Based Entrepreneurship at Utrecht University. In the course, students learn
how to set up a (software) startup. Naturally, pricing is a part of the startup pro-
cess. The other two workshops were held with two startups we have previously
interviewed.
The pilot-phase startup found the Pricing Strategy Canvas valuable for aligning
the ideas of the co-founders and refining their transition from pilot to paying cus-
tomers. The early-phase startups, despite limited prior pricing knowledge, used the
canvas to structure discussions and justify pricing decisions, though some elements
required clarification. An established startup leveraged the Pricing Strategy Canvas
to reassess its competition-driven pricing to strategise for differentiation, highlight-
ing the challenges in communicating value to customers, that is explaining to them
why they are more expensive. Across all workshops, the canvas proved adaptable,
facilitated structured decision-making, and received positive validation as an effec-
tive tool for pricing strategy development. Below, we summarise the results from
each workshop in more detail.
Workshop 1: Pilot-phase startup
The first workshop involved the startup of participant 1 and 2, whom are both co-
founders of the startup with four founders in total. We showed them the first draft
of the Pricing Strategy Canvas during the first round of interviews. So, they have
seen the biggest change in the canvas. Therefore, we are curious how well their
expectations hold true to the final canvas.
Chapter 4. Results 51
Observing the co-founders, we find that the Pricing Strategy Canvas is naturally
used by them due to their experience with other canvases such as the Business Model
Canvas. The startup already has some knowledge of their pricing since they are
in the pilot phase. Eventually, they want to convert the pilot customers to paying
customers. We saw that some elements of the canvas, for example elasticity, are
already thought out for them and therefore easier to fill in with more detail. Other
elements used less words. But with the company goal of converting from a pilot to
a Service Level Agreement in mind, they started to work on the canvas.
One of the biggest advantages of the Pricing Strategy Canvas noted by the co-
founders is the ability to capture the ideas by all founders and put all thoughts on
one central place. It allows them to not only think about what pricing structure
they will eventually have, but also support those choices with a rationale, which is
captured inside the canvas. Furthermore, the Pricing Strategy Canvas allows them
to pave the road towards their ultimate goal.
A second advantage was the inspirational nature of the canvas. One of the co-
founders highlighted that “we have not thought price timing through as much as the rest”.
We had a fifteen minute discussion on price timing and how that starting capital can
used to work in the startup.
Another observation made by the co-founders is the goals of the canvas. One
way, the canvas can be filled in a snapshot of the current pricing structure, whereas
it can also serve as a benchmark, being a goal they want to work towards. The lat-
ter was the case for their startup, but mentioned that “a larger firm can use a snapshot
to look back at the ideas they has X months ago and see what was implemented and what not”.
Workshop 2: Group of early-phase startups
Nine early-phase startups participated in a group workshop to apply the Pricing
Strategy Canvas in their business. All of these startups are very young, with their
age not older than two months. These startups are part of an assignment to develop
a (software) product with deliverables along the way, among which a marketing
and validation plan. Part of the report is a pricing strategy. Naturally, this is an
excellent moment to apply the Pricing Strategy Canvas to discover how it guides
these startups towards a structured pricing strategy for said assignment.
Before applying the canvas, we asked the startups if they have already started
thinking about their pricing, one startup replied hesitantly. Therefore, we were curi-
ous how the canvas was going to help them. First, we held a presentation on pricing
and their perception of it. Together with the startups, we created a word cloud. Some
students mentioned value creation or customer needs, with others simply stating
SaaS or pricing.
While the startups worked on their own version of the Pricing Strategy Canvas,
we walked by the tables to discuss how things were going. Many startups stated that
the canvas sparked discussions or raised questions among the co-founders that led
to a decision on, for example, their pricing model or perceived value. Furthermore,
during a plenary discussion this message was repeated more than once. It shows
that, although the startups have not thought of their pricing up to that moment,
the canvas helped them look at their pricing from different angles (being company,
product, and market) and see what pricing structure results from that. Furthermore,
for the Marketing and Validation report, they can use the canvas to give a rationale
on why they have chosen that specific pricing strategy.
Some startups found it hard to fill in all the boxes, which is understandable with
the startups being so young it is possible that some aspects are not known yet. Ad-
ditionally, some students were unsure what pricing mechanisms were, since it is not
Chapter 4. Results 52
explained clearly in the canvas. Therefore, we added an additional description to
the canvas element in Figure 4.6.
One question we had from the students was what the next step is after filling in
the canvas. We understand that some users do not know how to start implementing
a pricing strategy. We responded with “that is up to you” and explained that opera-
tionalising the pricing strategy is the next step. That would mean, for example, to
add pricing on the website. However, the implementation is outside the scope of the
research. Another student asked how the price itself is determined, which happens
in the next step as well. Determining specific monetary value is based on the input
given in the canvas, for example a competitor analysis for competition-based pricing
or a value-based approach if such data is not known.
We finished the workshop with the classification exercise using the guidelines
from Jansen (2024). We used a Wooclap and a Likert scale to assess each of the
characteristics of the framework to determine that it is a canvas. Table 4.3 shows the
results from the classification exercise.
Characteristic Likert score Standard deviation Number of responses
Usability 3.94 0.62 18
Effectiveness 3.93 0.80 14
Grounded in Theory 4.14 0.52 14
Flexibility 3.93 0.80 14
Iterativeness 3.67 0.75 12
Collaborativity 4.46 0.93 13
Interoperability 3.92 0.64 12
TABLE 4.3: Results from the classification exercise in Likert scale av-
erages
From the results from the classification exercise, we see that the "canvas" we have
brought is a canvas according to the students, with averages of the Likert scores be-
ing positive. Interestingly, iterativeness scored the lowest. Unfortunately, no student
wanted to elaborate why they gave it a lower score than the other characteristics.
These results could be justified in further research, as the canvas can be applied on
a larger scale.
Workshop 3: Established startup
The third workshop was held with interviewee 8 and their startup. In the end, the
workshop took two and a half hours in which we had interesting discussions on
specific pricing choices, product characteristics and market trends. What we saw in
their canvas approach is that they started filling in the canvas in the product column,
after which they stated they company goals and strategies. In the end, we see that
these two align with each other, but this small action shows that the canvas is a
versatile tool that does not limit its users to a specific approach for filling it in.
During our discussions and filling in the canvas, it became clear to interviewee
8 why they have made specific choices for their current pricing strategy, with the
majority being driven by the competition and their similar products. In the future,
Chapter 4. Results 53
they want to move to a new strategy where the competition does not exist, but for
that to happen, they first need to be competitive in the market.
Another major discussion sparked during the value creation of the product, specif-
ically the value proposition and perceived value. Their product has a lot of value for
the customer, but it does not earn money for the business. It was also a major issue
for the startup: their product is more valuable than those of competitors, but harder
to sell. These benefits are often not clear for the customer; only looking for the solu-
tion to their problem and not the opportunities beyond that. This problem was also
clear in Töytäri, Rajala, and Alejandro (2015). We had a discussion on how to show
that value to the customer, also giving a rationale why they are more expensive than
similar tools from competitors.
Looking back at the workshop, we clearly see that filling in the Pricing Strategy
Canvas, either with us or with their team (we asked to confirm this), sparks dis-
cussions on further details or choices and why they are made, that is the rationale.
The reflection using the Pricing Strategy Canvas helps them reassess and refine their
pricing strategy for now and think about where they want to go in the future: which
is the snapshot vs. benchmark feature of the canvas.
Interviewee 8 is a big fan of the Pricing Strategy Canvas and did not have any
remarks on what needs to change. They find it a relevant tool to understand their
pricing strategy capabilities. This statement was also reflected in the classification
exercise, where they were very positive on all characteristics and also classified the
framework as a canvas.
54
Chapter 5
Discussion
In this section, the main findings are be discussed. This discussion includes an in-
terpretation of the results that have been presented in Chapter 4to answer the sub-
research questions we have presented in the introduction of this paper. In addition,
we will discuss the gap between theory and practice, and how the Pricing Strategy
Canvas helps closing this gap. Afterwards, we touch upon the practical implications
of the canvas. Finally, we present several limitations and shortcomings.
5.1 Interpretation of Key Findings
The introduction has proposed a main research question and four subquestions to
seek if it is possible to build a SaaS pricing canvas and how such a canvas can be
built. Below, we will discuss the main findings from the literature review and expert
interviews to answer the proposed subquestions to ultimately answer the main re-
search question.
How does a SaaS startup come up with the (best) price for their software product?
To structure SaaS pricing and pricing strategies in a canvas, we followed the def-
initions set by Saltan and Smolander (2021a): SaaS pricing is the scope of the deci-
sions, practices, underlying conditions, and processes in determining the monetary
value of the offered SaaS service. And pricing strategies being the foundation upon
which all pricing decisions are made.
Saltan and Smolander (2021b) reveal that SaaS pricing is highly dynamic and
evolves through the interaction between strategic, tactical, and operational elements.
The strategic layer encapsulates the choices being made on how the pricing model is
set up, the tactical layer encapsulates the execution steps of said strategy, and the op-
erational layer ensures monitoring and performance checking of the execution of the
strategy. These layers are significantly influenced by external factors, such as shift-
ing market trends and the evolving needs of the customer, which serve as drivers
of decision making at every level. Concurrently, internal stakeholders continuously
refine and adapt pricing mechanisms to align with these external forces, ensuring
that the startup’s pricing approach remains responsive and competitive in a rapidly
changing landscape.
Startups and other businesses can improve their pricing approach by deploying a
specific pricing mechanism, which strengthens the execution of the pricing strategy.
Mohout (2015) and Osterwalder (2004) identify several mechanisms ranging from
a monetary valuation approach to sales strategies. Which pricing mechanism fits
best depends on the pricing structure of the product, where some mechanisms are,
for example, developed for subscription-based pricing approaches. Anchor pricing
Chapter 5. Discussion 55
is one of these mechanisms, where the most valuable subscription or package is
anchored in the middle on the pricing page (Mohout, 2015).
The expert interviews revealed that pricing in SaaS startups is very uncertain.
Therefore, these startups adopt an experimental approach to their pricing. Given
the flexible nature of startups, this approach fits them. Several interviewees gave
an example of how they experimented with their pricing, ranging from simple A/B
testing to fifteen pricing variations and selling them individually to prospects (in-
terviewee 6). Although experimentation is performed, there is some structure in the
approach the startups make: all interviewees had a strong standpoint towards their
product and the knowledge of what they are selling as seen in Section 4.3.2.
Some of the startups admitted that their pricing is performed once and forgotten
about until it is almost too late to change it again. All the while the environment
around the product, the market, changes continuously (especially with SaaS!). As a
solution, many interviewees mentioned a more external view towards their pricing.
An external view was introduced in the factors column of the first draft of the Pricing
Strategy Canvas. Many interviewees agreed that these factors are of great impor-
tance to increase the longevity and robustness of the pricing strategy, especially if
they are in it for the long run. With their input, we validated current academic fac-
tors, as were present in the first canvas version in Figure ??. It became apparent that
there are many more elements that should be added than these three, which would
even exceed the list in Table 3.2. However, for the canvas to still be considered a
canvas, we needed to tread carefully not to drift into the abyss. The first round of in-
terviews introduced some factors and shifts towards different columns, highlighting
what other factors are generally of importance, which are not specifically startup de-
pendent. These are scalability and the market, showing potential in a more long-term
pricing strategy.
Another outside perspective that many SaaS startups considered is the competi-
tion. For many SaaS products, there is often one solution that has features similar to
their product. Since their competitor already has a pricing strategy, startups can use
the pricing of the competitor as an inspiration. Many startups we interviewed used
their competitors price for inspiration, with the aim of their pricing strategy to out-
perform the competition and make their product more appealing for the customer.
To outperform competitors, startups need to consider their strong points, such as
their unique selling point incorporated in the Lean Canvas (Maurya, 2022).
The final Pricing Strategy Canvas integrates both the theoretical and practical as-
pects of SaaS pricing, ensuring a well-rounded approach using best practices from
both fields. We saw during the interviews that solely looking at theory was not
enough, causing the first draft of the Pricing Strategy Canvas to be very different
from the final one. We observed a clear difference in how pricing and pricing strate-
gies are perceived in theory and practice, where practice looks more at the executable
side, for example what pricing model, competition, et cetera, whereas theory is on
a more predictive side, for example scalability, switching costs, et cetera. While the-
ory helps startups predict their price based on input, practice shows how startups
actually arrive at their pricing decisions through experimentation, market analysis,
and competition.
How are the factors influencing software product price reflected in frameworks
such as the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas?
The Multivocal Literature Review (MLR) provided insights into the origins and ap-
plication of the Business Model Canvas (BMC) and Lean Canvas. While both the
Chapter 5. Discussion 56
BMC and Lean Canvas include some pricing-related elements, that is cost and rev-
enue streams, their inclusion of pricing factors remains limited and insufficient for
addressing the complexities of SaaS pricing as seen in the MLR.
The BMC, introduced by Osterwalder (2004), incorporates pricing considerations
solely within the Revenue streams and Cost structure elements. These elements cap-
ture the financial dimensions of the business model, but do not discuss the more nu-
anced factors that influence SaaS pricing, such as product complexity, pricing model,
pricing approach, and other external elements that are influencing the pricing strat-
egy. The original BMC paper did hint at pricing considerations, as seen in Table 3.1.
However, these aspects were not developed into dedicated components of the Busi-
ness Model Canvas, therefore remaining unexplored within the framework. This
absence highlights the need for a complementary tool, such as a SaaS Pricing Can-
vas, to look at the pricing strategy, making it the next step after the BMC.
Similarly, the Lean Canvas, adapted from the BMC by Maurya (2022), retains
the Revenue streams and Cost structure elements, while focusing more explicitly on
startups in its other elements, such as the unique selling point. Although the Lean
Canvas helps identify pain points and potential solutions specific to SaaS startups,
it does not extend to pricing strategies. The lack of detailed pricing elements reflects
a broader limitation of these frameworks; they are designed to outline high-level
business model elements rather than address the strategic considerations of pricing
SaaS products. While the BMC and Lean Canvas offer valuable frameworks for un-
derstanding business models, their focus on pricing is limited to financial outcomes
and lacks the depth required for strategising around pricing mechanisms and ap-
proaches.
The SaaS Pricing Canvas developed in this research aimed to fill the gap by pro-
viding a dedicated framework that systematically addresses the key factors influ-
encing SaaS pricing that were absent in the aforementioned frameworks. Unlike the
BMC or Lean Canvas, the SaaS Pricing Canvas focuses on specific pricing strategy
elements.
How do the frameworks of the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas collec-
tively influence SaaS product pricing strategies in startups?
According to literature, the Business Model Canvas (BMC) and Lean Canvas are
useful frameworks widely used by startups to visualise their business models. How-
ever, they do not have a direct connection to pricing of the product as discussed
above. There is a clear difference in the approach of a business model and the pric-
ing of the product. The high-level approach of the canvases means that they are best
as an initial step in the strategic process when thinking about setting up the busi-
ness as well as considering how the product is going to be sold to the customers.
The Business Model Canvas in Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010) and the Lean Can-
vas by Maurya (2022) serve as essential tools for structuring key business aspects but
fall short in explicitly guiding pricing strategies while Osterwalder (2004) addressed
pricing in his research. Unfortunately, it was never deployed in the BMC. Therefore,
practitioners sought to create their own pricing canvas, such as Roll and Pastuch
(n.d.) or Garlet and Wirth (2018). Unfortunately, models such as the Pricing Model
Canvas are not widely recognised and used. This is due to their shortcomings in,
for example, uniformity, lack of academic support and insufficient validation. With
a recent paper by Jansen (2024), we can effectively validate a framework on being a
canvas and test its effectiveness in the domain it is used in.
Chapter 5. Discussion 57
During the expert interviews, we observed that many startups were known with
the Business Model Canvas, using it to identify their business model, or iteratively
visualise what their business looks at the moment. However, the opinion that they
shared with us was the absence of more pricing-related elements to fill in. Therefore,
they see added value in the Pricing Strategy Canvas as a complementary tool of the
BMC. For SaaS startups, the SaaS Pricing Canvas offers a logical second step after
the initial BMC or Lean Canvas, providing a more granular and actionable approach
to the pricing of the SaaS product.
What are the steps and methodologies involved in creating a canvas?
To understand the process of creating a canvas, we needed to examine previous
methodologies while also considering the different steps incorporated in the devel-
opment of our own Pricing Strategy Canvas. As presented in this paper, the creation
of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas follows a structured approach to ensure a com-
prehensive, sound, and systematic framework, with a method similar to the method
of the Business Model Canvas.
For the development of the Pricing Strategy Canvas, we drew upon the founda-
tional work of Alexander Osterwalder, who developed the Business Model Canvas
by synthesising insights from various business research papers followed by a co-
creation step in the form of a book publishing. His approach involved integrating
dispersed theoretical concepts into a cohesive framework during his PhD research
(Osterwalder, 2004). His process, referred to in our study as the Osterwalder Method,
followed a structured methodology consisting of multiple phases.
During the Multivocal Literature Review, we closely examined his methodology.
First, a literature study was conducted to identify sources that discussed relevant
concepts within the defined business model ontology. Next, Osterwalder developed
an ontology matrix, allowing him to unify diverse terminologies and perspectives
found in the literature, ensuring coherence. Finally, in collaboration with Pigneur
and other researchers and co-creators a few years later, he translated these findings
into a visual framework, resulting in the Business Model Canvas published in a
book.
The development of the Business Model Canvas did not stop at academic re-
search. It extended into a community-driven book publication process. Osterwalder
and his team sought an alternative approach by launching an online platform, the
Hub, which enabled co-creation with business model innovation practitioners world-
wide. This collaborative effort ensured that the framework was not only academi-
cally sound but also practically relevant, seen in Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010).
Similar to Osterwalder’s method, our research employed a systematic approach
in constructing the Pricing Strategy Canvas. Data from the Multi-Vocal Literature
Review (MLR) served as the primary input, which was then systematically struc-
tured into an ontology matrix, as presented in Table 3.3. Instead of a large online
platform, we interviewed industry experts to grasp the practical side and apply it
in the theoretical canvas in two iterations. In the end, we validated the results with
our participants, where the BMC creation validated with their online platform and
a limited first edition book launch event. We applied a different approach in the
validation and evaluation of our canvas due to the lack of an online platform as
The Hub. We performed validation with our experts and held workshops to test the
usability and effectiveness of the Pricing Strategy Canvas in practice. Our iterative
process of research, expert validation, and practical testing aligns with the general
principles of canvas development, where theoretical foundations are continuously
Chapter 5. Discussion 58
refined through real-world application to create a tool that is usable and effective for
its intended users.
Therefore, the process of creating a canvas follows a structured, iterative method-
ology that integrates theoretical research with practical validation. Based on the
work of Alexander Osterwalder and the development process of the SaaS Pricing
Strategy Canvas, the principal steps and methodologies involved are:
1. Literature Study: Conduct a comprehensive literature review to identify key
concepts and terminologies relevant to the domain of the framework.
2. Framework Design: Translate the data from the literature into a visual frame-
work that organises the concepts from theory.
3. Co-Creation and Collaboration: Involve practitioners and experts in the field
to contribute feedback and insights. Osterwalder used an online community
platform (The Hub), whereas the Pricing Strategy Canvas development relied
on expert interviews in two iterative rounds.
4. Practical Testing and Evaluation: Test the initial version of the canvas with
real users through workshops, interviews, or early publications, using feed-
back to refine and improve the tool. Evaluate the usability and effectiveness of
the canvas in real-world scenarios to ensure it meets the needs of its intended
users.
5. Validation: Use the guidelines from (Jansen, 2024) to validate that the frame-
work that is created can be classified as a canvas.
5.2 The Gap Between Theory and Practice
The interviews have revealed a big gap between theoretical knowledge and prac-
tice in the SaaS domain. While SaaS has become indispensable in today’s digital
landscape, we see that its rapid evolution has outpaced the development of corre-
sponding theoretical frameworks, models, and theories. The difference in knowl-
edge underscores the challenge that academia often fails to keep up with the ex-
ponential growth and changes in practice and the way of doing SaaS business as a
startup. Saltan (2019) and Saltan and Smolander (2019) argue that most literature is
also practice-based, also called grey. They collectively identified 28 unique factors
that encapsulate SaaS pricing, which we summarise in Table 3.2.
From the interviews, it became evident that simplifying SaaS into a list of 28
unique factors, while useful, is not sufficient to fully capture its complexity. While
the Pricing Strategy Canvas cannot aim to contain all of SaaS pricing, it offers a struc-
tured way for its end users to consider elements that they otherwise might overlook
when developing a pricing strategy.
Our research sought to narrow the gap between theory and practice by demon-
strating that practical concepts are relevant to theory and vice versa. The Pricing
Strategy Canvas bridges the separation that often exists between academic knowl-
edge and real-world application. The canvas serves as an example of how a theo-
retical framework can provide meaningful and actionable insights for practitioners,
how the BMC and Lean Canvas did in their time. Solely relying on theory or prac-
tice, with the latter being the case with, for example, the Pricing Model Canvas in
IAPM (n.d.) and Roll and Pastuch (n.d.), is not satisfactory for practice. Osterwalder
(2004) has shown how combining the strengths from these two domains has led to
Chapter 5. Discussion 59
a canvas that is useful and effective. And in our research, we tried to apply the
same method for a whole new domain. It illustrates the potential for design science
research to bring academia and practice closer together in many domains.
From our findings, it became increasingly evident that SaaS pricing is very practice-
oriented and not necessarily based on theory, also stated in the other literature re-
views by Saltan (2019) and Saltan and Smolander (2019). Most entrepreneurs use
their experience or logic to come to a certain price. It can be as simple as a competitor
sells it for $20, so I sell it for $15. A recurring theme in the interviews is that most
(co-)founders made up the price and wait to see whether it sticks or not through ex-
perimentation. Theory also confirms the gap between theory and practice, with the
MLRs from Saltan (2019) and Saltan and Smolander (2019), with the majority of their
data also consisting of grey literature, which seems logical since most innovations in
the field of SaaS happen in practice. Theory would research the same phenomenon
after it has already been discovered. Therefore, the question arises whether SaaS
pricing should be a profession that should better be kept in practice or not. Our
research aimed to bring the two sides closer together to debunk said question by
unifying them over an overarching theme: a canvas. Therefore, practice can use a
tool that helps them in their business, and theory gets an idea of what is important
for SaaS pricing processes at the moment.
Furthermore, since SaaS, and its pricing and pricing strategies, are a continu-
ously developing phenomena, especially since AI (Artificial Intelligence) has be-
come an important part of doing business. With the emergence of cutting edge AI
features in SaaS platforms, pricing becomes a whole new level, especially since AI
can also be used to run a platform. Therefore, we do not know how long SaaS will
be a thing and when the new hype emerges.
5.3 Practical Implications
The introduction of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas opens many doors for busi-
nesses, either a SaaS startup or a more established business. The Pricing Strategy
Canvas offers real-world practicalities ranging from a more structured pricing ap-
proach to a better idea what elements are involved in pricing a software product.
In this section, we highlight the main practical implications of the Pricing Strategy
Canvas.
5.3.1 A structured pricing decision framework
As we have discussed multiple times in this paper, the Pricing Strategy Canvas
makes the SaaS pricing process more structured. We have seen from the interviews
that many startups ballpark their price and hope it sticks with their customer. Fur-
thermore, pricing is a heterogeneous process is most startups (Saltan and Smolander,
2021b). Software being an intangible product does not help, as a physical product
can be held, the material costs are known, et cetera. The literature has shown that
there are many elements at play when pricing a software product, and experts have
provided us with many more.
The Pricing Strategy Canvas provides a clear framework for systematically con-
sider all these factors, ensuring that pricing decisions are made based on structured
analysis rather than intuition. This is similar to how the Business Model Canvas
by Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010) and the Lean Canvas by Maurya (2022) work
for business models. By breaking down pricing into components, the canvas helps
Chapter 5. Discussion 60
SaaS businesses develop sound pricing strategies. Moreover, by using the canvas
as a reference, startups can avoid common pricing pitfalls, such as underpricing
due to a lack of competitor analysis or failing to adjust prices in response to market
changes. The structured approach also facilitates internal discussions and collabora-
tion among teams.
Most importantly, the framework does not dictate a specific pricing model but in-
stead offers a guiding structure that enables businesses to adapt their pricing while
ensuring strategic coherence across all layers. By integrating insights from both aca-
demic literature and industry expertise, the Pricing Strategy Canvas serves as a prac-
tical tool for SaaS companies to establish, refine, or optimise their pricing strategies
with greater confidence and precision.
5.3.2 Allow for experimentation
Startups are characterised by their uncertain and risky nature (Azeem and Khanna,
2024). To pivot quickly, pricing strategies need to be flexible and responsive to
changes in, for example, customer behaviour, competitive landscape, and regula-
tions. The Pricing Strategy Canvas facilitates their adaptability by allowing SaaS
startups to experiment with different pricing models before committing to a final
structure. A key method of experimenting with different models in SaaS startups is
A/B testing, where different pricing strategies are tested on distinct customer seg-
ments to evaluate their impact on conversion rates and customer retention. By lever-
aging A/B testing, startups can collect data on customer willingness to pay, optimal
price points, and the effectiveness of various pricing structures. For each variant,
the canvas can be filled in and directly compared to each other. In addition, startups
can test different pricing mechanisms from Mohout (2015) or Osterwalder (2004).
Again, this experimental approach with the canvas ensures, as wished for, that
pricing adjustments are based on data rather than intuition, reducing the risk of
mispricing the product and losing potential revenue. Furthermore, insights gained
from A/B testing allow for continuous refinement of pricing strategies, ensuring the
business remains competitive yet aligned with customer needs.
Ultimately, incorporating experimentation within the pricing strategy develop-
ment process helps SaaS startups minimise risk and optimise revenue.
5.3.3 A more iterative pricing approach
We have noticed during the interviews that pricing in SaaS is often a one-time thing.
Many startups set an initial price based on rough estimations (ballparking) and
rarely revisit or adjust it unless significant issues arise. But then, they are already
too late. Pricing should not be a single decision but rather an ongoing process that
evolves alongside the business, for example agile working, as mentioned by Inter-
viewee 4 and theory (Neubert, 2017). The Pricing Strategy Canvas enables an iter-
ative approach by providing a structured framework for more continuous pricing
evaluation and refinement of the pricing strategy. We have discussed this with the
participants as a metaphor of the canvas being a gold plaque on the wall. After a
set interval, which can be quarterly, every half year or even yearly, the plaque is re-
moved from the wall and put under the microscope again to reassess whether the
current pricing strategy is still performing well or whether adjustments are needed
to align with new goals or approaches. We think that this would also decrease the
complexity of pricing as stated in Saltan and Smolander (2021b), as mostly minor
adjustments need to be made to pricing.
Chapter 5. Discussion 61
A key advantage of this iterative pricing approach is that it enables SaaS star-
tups to create a pricing strategy that evolves alongside their business growth as
a complementary tool to the Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas. As cus-
tomer segments expand and new opportunities arise, pricing strategies must adapt
accordingly, for example when moving from a bost-based approach to a value-based
approach (Laatikainen and Ojala, 2023). Regularly revisiting and testing different
pricing strategies ensures that the business maintains a competitive edge and still
maximises their revenue potential. The Pricing Strategy Canvas supports such an
iterative approach, encouraging startups to embrace data-driven pricing decisions.
By iteratively refining their pricing models, SaaS startups can build sustainable rev-
enue strategies that align with their growth trajectory highlighting that a good pric-
ing strategy contributes to startup success (Saltan and Smolander, 2021a).
5.3.4 Improved investor/stakeholder communication
To gain the capital a startup needs to grow their business, they often go to investors,
such as vendor capitalists, to receive funds to grow their business, as they often do
not have many financial resources on their own (Azeem and Khanna, 2024). Effec-
tive communication of a pricing strategy is crucial for securing investor confidence
and aligning them and other stakeholders on business objectives. Pricing is not only
a revenue driver but also a key indicator of market positioning, value perception,
and long-term scalability and success (Saltan and Smolander, 2021a). However, we
have observed from the interviews that many startups struggle to articulate their ra-
tionale clearly, as they rely on their intuition when pricing their product. The Pricing
Strategy Canvas helps bridge the gap by providing a visual framework that even in-
vestors and stakeholders can understand. By outlining the different elements of the
pricing, the canvas enables SaaS startups to present a well-reasoned pricing strat-
egy backed by data rather than assumptions because investors seek assurance that
a startup’s pricing model can support sustainable growth and profitability so that
they get their return on investment. Therefore, the Pricing Strategy Canvas serves
as a powerful tool for an improved pricing approach and investor and stakeholder
communication. It not only helps startups justify their pricing decisions but also
strengthens their credibility by showing a data-driven approach towards revenue.
5.4 Research Limitations and Shortcomings
5.4.1 Literature Coverage
The findings from the multivocal literature review reveal that SaaS pricing is pre-
dominantly a practice-oriented domain, with a significant proportion of the litera-
ture stemming from grey sources. This observation was made in prior multivocal
literature reviews (Saltan, 2019; Saltan and Smolander, 2019). Notably, the academic
literature in the SaaS pricing field tends to focus on the specific application of con-
cepts or narrowly defined pricing strategies, such as case studies exploring individ-
ual pricing models or theoretical approaches applied to particular scenarios. The
overall richness of most academic papers was limited, but that was not the case for
all papers.
A key contribution to this study derives from the works of Andrey Saltan and
Kari Smolander, who have conducted extensive research on SaaS pricing. Their
studies have been groundbreaking in shaping a theoretical understanding of SaaS
pricing, including the activities it involves and the inherent challenges that come
Chapter 5. Discussion 62
when pricing software products. Despite the broad range of sources examined, sev-
eral limitations have emerged. The reliance on grey literature introduces potential
biases, as such sources may lack the methodological rigour typically associated with
academic research. Moreover, the limited availability of comprehensive academic
analyses of SaaS pricing constraints the theoretical depth and generalisability of the
findings of this research, for example with our findings on the Pricing Model Canvas
The multivocal literature review has significantly enriched the research by inte-
grating diverse perspectives. It highlights the need for future investigations to better
bridge the gap between practice and theory in SaaS and SaaS pricing. Address-
ing this gap would not only advance the field but also provide practitioners with
more robust, theoretically grounded frameworks to inform their decision-making
processes in their research.
5.4.2 Canvas generalisability
During our research, several firms from different sectors and of varying sizes were
interviewed to gather insights and input for the development of the SaaS Pricing
Strategy Canvas. These firms represented a broad spectrum of industries, show-
ing both the versatility of SaaS applications and the diverse challenges startups and
larger firms encounter when pricing their digital products. The feedback provided
by these interviews was of great importance in ensuring that the SaaS Pricing Can-
vas addressed the complexities and needs of SaaS businesses, especially startups,
comprehensively and effectively.
A variation in focus points shows the importance of designing the SaaS Pricing
Canvas to accommodate a wide array of contexts, strategies and business challenges.
However, it also raised questions about the generalisability of the framework. Are
certain components of the canvas more applicable to specific business models, in-
dustries, or stages of organisational growth within the SaaS landscape? Addressing
these questions remains an area for future exploration.
While the SaaS Pricing Canvas was originally conceived to address challenges
unique to startups operating in the SaaS domain, it has broader applicability to other
segments of the SaaS ecosystem, for example SMEs we interviewed also showed in-
terest in the canvas. Moreover, startups and other businesses might benefit from
more tailored guidance on aspects such as pricing simplicity, scalability, and cus-
tomer acquisition costs. Future research could investigate these topics, potentially
leading to the development of modular extensions to the existing canvas. These ex-
tensions could cater to the specific needs of different sectors, enabling businesses
to integrate additional components into the more universal canvas proposed in this
reseaarch study.
However, the SaaS Pricing Canvas developed in our research represents a signif-
icant step forward in addressing the pricing challenges faced by SaaS startups, as it
is something that has not existed before. It serves as a ground breaking tool for star-
tups seeking to structurally approach their pricing strategies as well as develop their
pricing strategy more effectively. By fostering a more structured and data-driven ap-
proach to pricing, the canvas motivates startups and businesses to make informed
decisions that align with their overall strategic objectives. Furthermore, it provides a
framework for ongoing investigations between academics and practitioners, laying
the groundwork for collaborative efforts to further bridge the gap between theory
and practice in SaaS pricing research.
Chapter 5. Discussion 63
5.4.3 Other types of software
Our research focused on SaaS products and SaaS startups. However, there exist
other types of software products, for example Enterprise or Open Source software.
Therefore, the question arises how the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas applies to these
other types of software and what changes are necessary to be able to do so.
Enterprise software, characterised by long sales cycles and high customisation,
may require a more tailored pricing approach. Unlike SaaS, where the product and
its pricing is often more generally applicable and subscription-based, enterprise so-
lutions frequently involve negotiated contracts, volume discounts, and tiered service-
level agreements. Adapting the Pricing Strategy Canvas to enterprise software re-
quires additional considerations.
Similarly, Open Source software operates on fundamentally different pricing prin-
ciples. While some Open Source projects rely on donation-based funding or com-
munity support, others generate revenue through dual licensing, paid support, or
enterprise versions. The SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas may need modifications to
account for freemium models, community contributions, and alternative monetisa-
tion strategies which are not present in SaaS applications.
Given these differences, further research is required to determine the extent to
which the Pricing Strategy Canvas can be generalised beyond SaaS and to identify
specific adaptations needed for different software categories.
5.4.4 Workshop limitations and reproducibility
While the workshops provided valuable insights into the applicability of the Pricing
Strategy Canvas in practice, several limitations must be acknowledged that could
impact the generalisability and reproducibility of the findings.
First, the sample size is relatively small, consisting of only nine startups, which
limits the ability to draw broad conclusions about the canvas’s effectiveness across
different business contexts. Additionally, the startups involved were primarily af-
filiated with academic or research settings, such as students from the Science-Based
Entrepreneurship course at Utrecht University.
Second, the startups we included in our workshops were all based in The Nether-
lands. Together with a small sample size, it is hard to make general conclusions on
the real applicability of the canvas. We argue that this is another research project, as
for that to be possible this canvas would need to exist in the first place.
Finally, the classification exercise relied on subjective Likert scale ratings, which
are inherently influenced by individual biases and contextual factors. The relatively
small number of responses also limits the statistical robustness of the results. In
addition, the participants of the larger classification exercise refrained from giving
their opinion on their answer, further damaging the robustness of this test.
Therefore, to enhance reproducibility, future research could expand the sample
size, include a more diverse range of startups from different industries and geogra-
phies to assess its usability without facilitation. Additionally, longitudinal studies
could evaluate how startups implement pricing strategies based on their use of the
canvas over time. To facilitate this, we have deployed the canvas online for startups
and businesses to use by themselves. The URL can be found in Section 6.
Chapter 5. Discussion 64
5.4.5 What is considered SaaS?
The focus of this research was to develop a pricing canvas designed to guide the pric-
ing processes for digital products in startups, specifically those classified as Software-
as-a-Service (SaaS). During the expert interviews, we encountered a variety of terms
related to digital products, including platforms,cloud,SaaS,software,AI,services, and
others. These terms were often used interchangeably, reflecting the evolving nature
of digital products. For example, the interviewees referred to their products, such as
cybersecurity awareness platforms and CRM systems, as SaaS.
From a definitional standpoint, the claims of the interviewees align with the def-
inition of SaaS followed in our study: a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient,
on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources
(Mell and Grance, 2011). A broad definition encompasses a wide range of products
and services, logically including platforms and cloud infrastructures. While specific
terms such as Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) ex-
ist to describe certain categories of these services, the distinctions can blur in prac-
tice. Moreover, such overlap highlights an important observation about the nature of
digital products. Many products that are categorised under SaaS, PaaS, or IaaS share
fundamental characteristics, particularly in how they deliver value to users through
shared, scalable resources accessible over the Internet. This ambiguity suggests that
businesses often adopt the term SaaS broadly, as it is widely recognised presenting a
challenge for the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas, which must address this ambiguity
in some way.
When considering the applicability of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas, it is
worth noting that the framework could potentially be used in PaaS and IaaS con-
texts as well. The core principles and processes outlined in the canvas are relevant
to pricing strategies for other types of digital products. However, the adaptability
and effectiveness of the Pricing Strategy Canvas in these contexts require further
testing and validation.
5.4.6 Corporate bias
Commonly, employees of a firm, no matter their role, execute activities based on the
overarching business strategy established by senior executives or their superiors.
Therefore, the assumption arises whether it holds true that every employee of
a firm that sells more than one product executes the same pricing principles set by
the superiors. Moreover, the question arises whether there is a correlation between
the said strategy and the eventual pricing choice by either employee or whether
there exists a bias between these two principles that is employee-dependent. Since
we do not know the answer to that question, we assume that each employee thinks
differently and therefore gives different input to, for example, the refinement of the
SaaS pricing canvas. Therefore, we wonder whether the corporate bias assumption
holds in these firms. We were not able to test this, (A) because there were not enough
large firms participating and (B) because researching this bias is outside of the scope
of our research. So, we call for future research to investigate the corporate pricing bias.
5.5 Future work
This research focused on startups and established firms that offer software prod-
ucts, which we have referred to as Software as a Service (SaaS) products. These
are software solutions delivered over the Internet. However, as discussed, there are
Chapter 5. Discussion 65
other service models, including Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure as
a Service (IaaS), which are also offered by startups and established companies. Ex-
amples of PaaS products include platforms such as Spotify, which provide not just
software but also a platform for users to listen to music. IaaS products, such as
Amazon Web Services (AWS), provide essential infrastructure resources, for exam-
ple computing power, storage, and networking over the cloud. We discussed that
the distinction between these service types appears vague, especially in the context
of pricing strategies. While each service type delivers a different kind of value to
the customer, that is a software, platform, or infrastructure, the pricing strategies
they employ are often similar in the context of online service delivery. They all typi-
cally rely on subscription-based, pay-as-you-go, or usage-based pricing approaches,
which blurs the lines between them in our research.
Given this overlap, we call for a more detailed examination of how the pricing
approaches for SaaS, PaaS, and IaaS differ, or if there are any significant differences at
all. Such investigation could help clarify whether unique pricing strategies exist for
each model, or if the perceived homogeneity in pricing structures is justified by the
commonalities in the nature of these cloud-based services. Understanding these dif-
ferences could offer valuable insights for startups and established firms when con-
sidering how to structure and optimise their pricing for maximum customer value
and business sustainability.
Another call for future research implies examining how large corporations ap-
proach pricing across their products. Unlike startups and smaller firms, large corpo-
rations often manage multiple product lines under the same organisation. Despite
being part of the same company, these products may follow distinct pricing strate-
gies based on factors identified by their product owner, which we refer to as the
corporate bias. Future research should explore whether these corporations apply con-
sistent pricing across their offerings or if pricing is tailored uniquely to each prod-
uct and its owner. Investigating these variations could provide deeper insights into
enterprise-level pricing strategies, which we have not researched due to it being out
of scope. Such an understanding would be particularly relevant for firms looking
to optimise pricing across different service models, assess how the current Pricing
Strategy Canvas supports this, and determine whether any changes are necessary to
the canvas.
Finally, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionise the way can-
vases are used. Machine learning models could enhance the Pricing Strategy Canvas
by dynamically analysing the canvas elements to offer advice, enabling startups to
make data-driven pricing decisions with greater precision. Furthermore, AI can be
deployed for other canvases and may open many doors to develop other canvases
as well. For future research on this topic, the introduction of an AI-driven canvas
could make canvases even more useful.
66
Chapter 6
Conclusion
This research proposed the main research question: How can a comprehensive canvas be
designed to guide SaaS startups in determining optimal pricing for their software products?
To answer the research question, we focused on three key objectives: how SaaS pric-
ing is currently performed in startups, how current canvases address SaaS pricing,
and creating and validating a pricing canvas.
To create a pricing canvas, we followed a similar approach to the creation of
the Business Model Canvas by Alexander Osterwalder. His method has proven to
be effective, with the Business Model Canvas being an effective and widely used
canvas by both startups and larger businesses. His method entails a literature study
and a co-creation process. To test whether this method applies to the development of
other canvases, we have created our own canvas: the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas.
We started our journey with a Multi-Vocal Literature Review (MLR) to identify
key activities and understand pricing strategies in the current state-of-the-art of SaaS
pricing. The MLR provided the foundation for the first draft of the pricing strategy
canvas. Initially, we sought to integrate strategic, tactical, and operational elements
into the canvas. However, we found that focusing on the strategic layer would pro-
vide more clarity and direction for startups leading to the development of the first
version of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas (Figure 4.3).
In the second phase of our research, we gathered different perspectives from
practitioners to ensure that the Pricing Strategy Canvas was practical and applica-
ble in real-world settings. During this co-creation process with industry experts,
we refined the canvas based on their feedback in two iterations, creating a version
that balanced academic knowledge with practical usability. Our iterative approach
ultimately led to the final version of the SaaS Pricing Strategy Canvas (Figure 4.6).
Finally, to validate and evaluate the canvas, we conducted workshops with nine
startups of varying stages. The feedback highlighted several strengths of the can-
vas: it facilitated meaningful discussions on pricing, helped clarify strategic choices,
and encouraged reflection on both current pricing and future goals. Participants
appreciated the ability to capture ideas in one place, sparking discussions that led
to more reasoned decisions. However, some startups found certain elements, like
pricing mechanisms, challenging, indicating areas for further refinement. Also, the
operationalisation of the pricing strategy was unclear.
So, besides the method to create a canvas, the Pricing Strategy is equally impor-
tant being the concrete outcome and practical answer to the main research question.
The canvas has proven to be a valuable tool in guiding startups through the process
of defining and/or refining their pricing strategy. Its flexibility, combined with its
structured approach, made it useful for startups at different stages. This confirms
that the Osterwalder method is an effective approach to develop a canvas for different
domains, in the case of this research pricing.
Chapter 6. Conclusion 67
Overall, the Pricing Strategy Canvas bridges the gap between theoretical pric-
ing principles and practical application, providing a structured yet adaptable frame-
work that can support startups in making more informed and strategic pricing deci-
sions.
In conclusion, a comprehensive canvas is developed through a structured approach
that combined theoretical insights from a (Multivocal) Literature Review with practi-
cal applications gathered from expert interviews and workshops during a co-creation
process. By drawing on the successful model of the Business Model Canvas, this co-
creation design science approach ensures that the canvas is not only grounded in
theory but also adaptable to the needs of startups. However, equally important is
the Pricing Strategy Canvas itself, which stands as the tangible outcome and practi-
cal answer of the executed approach.
A publication is being written on this thesis in Advances in Software Startups (AiSES) fo-
cusing more on the practical implications of this research.
For startups and other businesses seeking guidance in their pricing strategy, we have de-
ployed the Pricing Strategy Canvas online to download a template. The template can be
found on https://pricingstrategycanvas.wordpress.com.
68
Bibliography
Anderson, Patrick L et al. (1997). “Price elasticity of demand”. In: McKinac Center for
Public Policy 13.2.
Armstrong, Mark and Yongmin Chen (2020). “Discount pricing”. In: Economic In-
quiry 58.4, pp. 1614–1627. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12774.
Azeem, Mohd and Ashu Khanna (2024). “A systematic literature review of startup
survival and future research agenda”. In: Journal of Research in Marketing and En-
trepreneurship 26.1, pp. 111–139. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/jrme-03-2022-
0040.
Bhardwaj, Sushil, Leena Jain, and Sandeep Jain (2010). “An approach for investigat-
ing perspective of cloud Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)”. In: International Journal of
Computer Applications 10.2, pp. 40–43. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5120/1450-
1962.
Bontis, Nick and Honsan Chung (2000). “The evolution of software pricing: from
box licenses to application service provider models”. In: Internet Research 10.3,
pp. 246–255. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240010331993.
Daneshgar, Farhad, Graham C Low, and Lugkana Worasinchai (2013). “An investi-
gation of ‘build vs. buy’decision for software acquisition by small to medium
enterprises”. In: Information and software technology 55.10, pp. 1741–1750. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1867839.
Eisenmann, Thomas R, Eric Ries, and Sarah Dillard (2012). Hypothesis-driven entrepreneur-
ship: The lean startup. SSRN.
Fisher, Marshall, Santiago Gallino, and Jun Li (2018). “Competition-based dynamic
pricing in online retailing: A methodology validated with field experiments”. In:
Management science 64.6, pp. 2496–2514. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.
2547793.
Hinterhuber, Andreas (2004). “Towards value-based pricing—An integrative frame-
work for decision making”. In: Industrial marketing management 33.8, pp. 765–778.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0019-8501(03)00152-4.
Jansen, S (2024). “What is a Canvas Anyway? The Canvas as a Mechanism for Re-
search Communication and Impact in Information Systems”. In: Forty-Fifth Inter-
national Conference on Information Systems, Bangkok, Thailand 2024.
Joyce, Alexandre, Raymond L Paquin, and Y Pigneur (2015). “The triple layered
business model canvas”. In: A tool to design more sustainable business models. ARTEM
Organizational Creativity International Conference. Nancy, France.DOI:https : / /
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.067.
Laatikainen, Gabriella and Arto Ojala (2023). “The pricing capability lifecycle of dig-
ital innovations”. In: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 35.3, pp. 314–
325. DOI:10.1080/09537325.2021.1974377.
Lipovetsky, Stan (2006). “Van Westendorp price sensitivity in statistical modeling”.
In: International Journal of Operations and Quantitative Management 12.2, p. 141.
Maurya, Ash (2022). Running lean. " O’Reilly Media, Inc." ISBN: 9781098108779.
Bibliography 69
Mell, Peter M. and Timothy Grance (2011). The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing.
Technical Report Special Publication 800-145. National Institute of Standards and
Technology, pp. 1–7. DOI:https://doi.org/10.6028/nist.sp.800-145.
Miˇcieta, Branislav et al. (2020). “Business model canvas as a tool of manager 4.0”. In:
Humanitas University’s Research Papers Management 21.1, pp. 51–64. DOI:https:
//doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0014.1235.
Mohout, Omar (2015). Lean Pricing: Pricing Strategies for Startups. Die Keure Publish-
ing. ISBN: 9789048623440.
Murray, Alan and Veronica Scuotto (2015). “The business model canvas”. In: Sym-
phonya. Emerging Issues in Management, pp. 94–109. DOI:https://doi.org/10.
4468/2015.3.13murray.scuotto.
Nagle, Thomas T and Reed K Holden (2002). The strategy and tactics of pricing: A guide
to profitable decision making. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ. DOI:https:
//doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(95)91159-6.
Neubert, Michael (2017). “International Pricing Strategies of High-Tech Start-up Firms”.
In: Innovation Management, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability (IMES 2017). Vysoká
škola ekonomická v Praze, pp. 675–685. DOI:10.18267/pr.2017.svo.2216.6.
Northcraft, Gregory B and Margaret A Neale (1987). “Experts, amateurs, and real es-
tate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions”.
In: Organizational behavior and human decision processes 39.1, pp. 84–97. DOI:https:
//doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90046-x.
Osterwalder, Alexander (2004). “The business model ontology a proposition in a de-
sign science approach”. PhD thesis. Université de Lausanne, Faculté des hautes
études commerciales.
Osterwalder, Alexander and Yves Pigneur (2010). Business model generation: a hand-
book for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN:
9780470876411.
Qastharin, Annisa R (2016). “Business model canvas for social enterprise”. In: Journal
of Business and Economics 7.4, pp. 627–637. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15341/
jbe(2155-7950)/04.07.2016/008.
Razabillah, Nurlaela et al. (2023). “Lean Canvas and the Business Model Canvas
Model in Startup Piecework”. In: Startupreneur Business Digital (SABDA Journal)
2.1, pp. 72–85. DOI:https://doi.org/10.33050/sabda.v2i1.239.
Ripsas, Sven, Birte Schaper, and Steffen Tröger (2018). “A startup cockpit for the
proof-of-concept”. In: Handbuch entrepreneurship, pp. 263–279. DOI:https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-658-05263-8_21-1.
Saltan, Andrey (2019). “Do we know how to price SaaS: a multi-vocal literature re-
view”. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGSOFT International Workshop on Software-
Intensive Business: Start-Ups, Platforms, and Ecosystems, pp. 7–12. DOI:https://
doi.org/10.1145/3340481.3342731.
Saltan, Andrey and Kari Smolander (2019). “Towards a SaaS pricing cookbook: a
multi-vocal literature review”. In: Software Business: 10th International Conference,
ICSOB 2019, Jyväskylä, Finland, November 18–20, 2019, Proceedings 10. Springer,
pp. 114–129. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33742-1_10.
— (2021a). “Bridging the state-of-the-art and the state-of-the-practice of SaaS pric-
ing: A multivocal literature review”. In: Information and Software Technology 133,
p. 106510. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2021.106510.
— (2021b). “How SaaS companies price their products: insights from an industry
study”. In: Software Business: 11th International Conference, ICSOB 2020, Karlskrona,
Sweden, November 16–18, 2020, Proceedings 11. Springer, pp. 1–13. DOI:https :
//doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67292-8_1.
Bibliography 70
Saltan, Andrey and Kari Smolander (2021c). “Saas pricing practices typology: A
case study”. In: Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming–
Workshops: XP 2021 Workshops, Virtual Event, June 14–18, 2021, Revised Selected
Papers 22. Springer International Publishing, pp. 87–95. DOI:https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-030-88583-0_8.
Sammut-Bonnici, Tanya and Derek F Channon (2015). “Pricing strategy”. In: Wiley
encyclopedia of management, pp. 1–3. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.
weom120162.
Saputra, Dhanar Intan Surya, Kuat Indartono, and Sitaresmi Wahyu Handani (2019).
“Business Models Based on Technology for Startup”. In: Journal of Innovation in
Business and Economics 3.02, pp. 91–98. DOI:https://doi.org/10.22219/jibe.
v3i02.10168.
Sidharta, Helena (2014). “Start Up Business and Their Pricing Strategy”. In.
Töytäri, Pekka, Risto Rajala, and Thomas Brashear Alejandro (2015). “Organiza-
tional and institutional barriers to value-based pricing in industrial relationships”.
In: Industrial marketing management 47, pp. 53–64. DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.
2015.02.005.
Tricahyadinata, Irsan and Saida Zainurossalamia Za (2017). “An Analysis on the use
of Google AdWords to increase e-commerce sales”. In: SZ Za and I. Tricahyadinata
(2017) Int. J. Soc. Sc. Manage 4, pp. 60–67. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3126/ijssm.
v4i1.16433.
Wu, Chunhua and Koray Cosguner (2020). “Profiting from the decoy effect: A case
study of an online diamond retailer”. In: Marketing Science 39.5, pp. 974–995. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2020.1231.
Zhang, Zan (2020). “Competitive pricing strategies for software and SaaS products”.
In: Information & Management 57.8, p. 103367. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.im.2020.103367.
71
Grey Literature Bibliography
Allen, Jeremy (2019). Choosing sales channels to scale growth in a SaaS organization: a
look at an enterprise mobility management software sales company in growth mode.
Garlet, F. and C. Wirth (2018). Pricing Strategy.
IAPM (n.d.). Pricing Model Canvas: A guide to strategic pricing.URL:https://www.
iapm.net/en/blog/pricing-model-canvas/.
Kaplan, Jeffrey M (2007). Saas: Friend or foe?
Maurya, Ash (2015). Why Lean Canvas vs Business Model Canvas. LinkedIn. Accessed:
2024-08-19. URL:https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why- lean- canvas- vs-
business-model-ash-maurya.
McClure, Dave (2007). Startup metrics for pirates. This source is a slidedeck. URL:
https : / / growthlabs . com . br / wp - content / uploads / 2024 / 06 / startup -
metrics-for-pirates-long-version463.pdf.
Ogle, Scott (2008). Understanding and Using Benchmark Information.
Prasad, Babu Rajendra and Sai Krishna (2023). Pricing The Value Proposition in Start-
up Environment: A multi case study on start-up Pricing.
Roll and Pastuch (n.d.). From Business Model Canvas to Pricing Model Canvas.URL:
https://www.roll-pastuch.com/pricing-model-canvas/.
Szulwi´nski, Jakub (2023). The Canvas as a Mechanism for Scientific Impact. Master The-
sis.
72
Appendix A. Interview Consent Form 73
Appendix A
Interview Consent Form
Informed Consent Form for Participation in Research Interview
Study title: A SaaS Pricing Canvas to Guide the Pricing Process in SaaS Startups
Research team:
Yanni ck v an Oord , Business Informatics Student at Utrecht University.
Supervised by Slinger Jansen, Assistant Professor at Utrecht University
Purpose of the study:
You a re b ei ng inv it ed to par ti ci pate i n a r esearch study cond uc ted b y Yannick van Oord a t Ut re ch t
University. The purpose of this study is to gain insights into the current practices of software pricing
strategies within tech startups and to test the proposed Pricing Canvas, a strategic tool designed to assist
in software pricing decisions. During the first phase of the research, a concept version of that canvas has
been created. During the interview, this concept canvas will be discussed regarding its correctness,
purpose, and usefulness. The results of this interview will contribute to refining the Pricing Canvas to
ensure it is both theoretically sound and practically applicable.
Data Collection and Use:
We will collect personal data during this stud y, including:
• Identifiable Information: Yo ur n ame, po s it ion, an d c ompany affil ia tion.
• Interview Data: Yo ur r esponse s and insi gh ts shared d uring th e intervie w.
The audio of the interviews will be recorded in order to collect the data. All data collected will be
anonymised to protect your identity. This anonymised data will be used for academic purposes, including
the research itself, a presentation, and a possible publication. The data itself will be kept at least until
the end of the study, when the presentation is given.
Confidentiality:
Your r esponses will b e treated w ith th e ut most co nf idential it y. A ll data c ol lected d ur ing th e i ntervi e w
will be anonymised, and any identifying information will be removed or altered to protect your privacy.
The anonymised data will be used solely for academic purposes, including publications and
presentations.
Data sensitive to the organisation of the participant may be discussed. The details of this data will not
be used in the research and are confidential to the interview. References to statements made during the
interview will be limited to a “Person X from Company A” level of discretion, where the type of product
that the company offers is described, such as “Company A offers an accounting platform to Dutch
businesses”.
Voluntary P a rticipation:
Your par t ic ipation in thi s st ud y i s e nt irely volun ta ry. Yo u ma y c ho os e t o w ithdraw fro m th e st ud y a t a ny
time without any penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you decide to
withdraw, any data you have provided up to that point will be destroyed upon your request.
You h av e the fol lo wi ng righ ts :
• Right to Withdraw: You ma y wit hd raw fr om th e st udy at an y t im e w it hout penalty or loss of
benefits.
• Right to Access: You can r eq ue st acce ss t o the d at a collec te d from yo u.
• Right to Correct: Yo u ca n reque st c orrecti on s to any i na ccurate o r incompl et e data.
• Right to Erasure: Yo u ma y reques t the dele ti on of yo ur data fr om t he stud y re cords.
Appendix A. Interview Consent Form 74
Consent:
By signing this form, you acknowledge that you have read and understood the information provided
above, and you voluntarily agree to participate in this study. You will receive a copy of this form for
your records. For any other questions, you can go to the researcher.
Participant’s Name: _________________________________
Participant’s Signature: _________________________________
Date: _________________________________
Researcher’s Signature: _________________________________
Date: _________________________________
75
Appendix B
Interview Questions
B.1 Demographic Questions
1. What is your role within the organisation/startup?
2. What sector does your company operate in?
3. What type of product do you make and/or sell?
B.2 Questions About Software Pricing Practices
1. Can you describe the process your company follows to determine the pricing
of your software products?
Follow-up: What factors do you consider most critical in this process?
2. What challenges have you encountered when setting prices for your software
products?
Follow-up: How have you overcome these challenges, and what lessons have
you learned?
3. How do you balance competitive pricing with profitability when setting prices?
4. To what extent does customer feedback influence your pricing decisions?
Follow-up: Can you provide an example where customer feedback led to a
change in your pricing strategy?
B.3 Questions About Strategic Frameworks and Canvases
1. How familiar are you with strategic frameworks like the Business Model Can-
vas or Lean Canvas?
Follow-up: Have you used these frameworks in your pricing strategy, and if
so, how?
2. What are your thoughts on the proposed Pricing Canvas as a tool for guiding
software pricing decisions?
Follow-up: Shall we fill in the Pricing Canvas for your organisation?
Follow-up: Do you find it intuitive and practical? Why or why not?
3. Can you walk us through how you would apply the Pricing Canvas to your
current pricing practices?
Follow-up: Are there any specific areas in the canvas that you find particularly
useful or challenging?
Appendix B. Interview Questions 76
4. In your experience, how does the Pricing Canvas compare to other strategic
tools or methods you have used?
Follow-up: Would you recommend any improvements or additions to the Pric-
ing Canvas?
B.4 Questions About Real-World Application and Feedback
1. Based on your experience, do you think the Pricing Canvas adequately ad-
dresses the complexities of SaaS pricing?
Follow-up: Are there any aspects of SaaS pricing that you believe are not well-
represented in the canvas?
2. Do you think the Pricing Canvas can be easily adapted to different stages of a
startup’s growth?
Follow-up: How would you modify it for a startup in its early stages versus
one that is more established?
3. What are some practical considerations or real-world constraints that you be-
lieve should be integrated into the Pricing Canvas?
4. After using the Pricing Canvas, what feedback would you provide to improve
its usability and effectiveness?
B.5 Questions to Validate or Challenge Academic Knowledge
1. How do your real-world experiences with software pricing compare to the aca-
demic frameworks and concepts you’re familiar with?
Follow-up: Do you find any discrepancies or gaps between theory and prac-
tice?
2. Are there any pricing strategies or concepts that you think are underrepre-
sented or overlooked in academic literature?
B.6 Wrap-Up Questions
1. Is there any additional feedback or insights you would like to share about the
Pricing Canvas or software pricing in general?
77
Appendix C
Participant Outreach Letter
Dear [Expert’s Name],
I hope this message finds you well.
My name is Yannick, and I am currently conducting research at Utrecht University
on pricing strategies in the SaaS industry. As part of this project, we are working
on developing a specialised canvas designed to help startups, like yours, optimise
their pricing process. To ensure that the canvas is practical, relevant, and meets the
demands of the industry, I am reaching out to experts with direct experience in star-
tups.
Given your role at [Company Name], I believe your insights would be incredibly
valuable to this research. Specifically, I would like to ask if you would be open to
an interview to discuss your experience with pricing in the SaaS space and provide
feedback on the canvas we are developing.
The interview should take no more than 60 minutes, and your input would sig-
nificantly contribute to refining a tool that we hope will benefit startups and en-
trepreneurs. I would be more than happy to accommodate your schedule and pro-
vide any additional information about the project.
Thank you in advance for considering my request. I look forward to the possibility
of collaborating with you.
Kind regards,
Yannick van Oord, Master Business Informatics Student at Utrecht University
