An operator,
not an advisor.
The engine finds the one constraint capping your growth and writes the 90‑day plan. If you want it executed, you get me: one to two days a week inside your team and GRIP OS, until the number moves. Not a deck. Not a workshop. The work.
Tom Meijer, founder. I helped build the GTM systems behind Contentsquare’s rise from startup to a $5.6B valuation, then Greenly. You can test my method on your own numbers before we ever speak. Name another operator who lets you.
Fractional 1‑2 days a week · two slots · Report credited in full · interim on request
One way to run the fix
Most engagements start the same way: where there is a revenue system to score, the GTM Intelligence Report names the constraint and sequences the 90‑day plan; entering a new market, we start from a transfer audit instead. Your team can run that plan on its own. When you want senior hands, there is one way to get them: I run the plan with your team, one to two days a week. Two slots, delivered by the founder. The Report fee is credited in full.
Step one
The Report names the constraint
The GTM Intelligence Report names the binding constraint and sequences the 90‑day plan, with owners and exit conditions. Run it yourself, or hand it to me.
- Sequenced 90‑day plan with owners and exit conditions
- Every action tied to a quantified leak
- Re-run the diagnosis when you want proof of progress
The engagement
Tom Meijer, 1‑2 days a week
I embed in your team and execute the engine's plan, accountable to the score, not to a slide deck. Two slots, deliberately: every engagement gets my full attention.
- Runs the 90‑day plan the engine wrote
- Works in GRIP OS for the length of the engagement (included, not sold separately)
- Progress reviewed weekly on the live GRIP score
- €750 Report fee credited in full
Consultancies sell opinions. Caugia sells a measured fix: deterministic scoring, so identical inputs give an identical result you can reproduce and audit, with execution read on the same score your board can open. Confidence still depends on the quality of your inputs and the benchmarks in play, and the report says so.
When people bring me in
Three shapes cover almost every engagement. One rule runs through them: the engine scores a revenue system that exists. Where there is one, the measurement goes first and sets the build order. Where there is none yet, I start from a transfer audit and my own experience. Either way the scope is never “GTM in general”: one named constraint, a number, and a 90-day plan with owners from the team you actually have.
After the raise
The mandate to scale, and nobody senior to build it
The money is in the bank and the plan says triple. You raised on a revenue engine that exists, so the measurement goes first: it shows which pillar breaks first at three times the load, in which order to build, and who carries each step in the team you have today. Hiring a full-time CRO takes two quarters and one wrong hire costs a year. Until that person arrives I build the system, one to two days a week, so they inherit a build order with names on it instead of a blank page.
Plateau
Revenue flattened and nobody agrees why
Sales says the leads are weak. Marketing says the follow-up is slow. Customer success says the product needs work. Everyone is busy; growth still underperforms. This is the case the engine was built for: the Report ends that argument with one named constraint and a number, and I work the plan with your team until the release condition is met.
Market entry
Europe, from the United States
You have product-market fit at home and a board asking about EMEA. There is no European engine to score yet, so this does not start with the Report. It starts with a transfer audit: which parts of the US motion carry over and which break, because buying cycles are longer, the first European hire is a different profile at a different price, and pricing and procurement norms shift per country. Out of that audit comes the first-year plan: market order, first hire, price model, and the numbers that tell you by month six whether Europe is working. I am Dutch, based in Paris, with a decade building GTM systems in B2B SaaS (Contentsquare from startup to a $5.6B valuation, then Greenly), and I run that first year with you, deliberate instead of experimental. France is usually the first market in that plan: see go-to-market experts for B2B SaaS in France.
How an engagement works
Diagnosis first, always
Where there is a revenue system to score, the GTM Intelligence Report names the binding constraint and writes the 90‑day plan; for market entry, the transfer audit does that job. The Report fee is credited in full against the engagement.
Scope the engagement
One call to agree the plan, cadence and owners. Fractional means one to two days a week; interim is scoped on request.
I embed
I execute the Report’s 90‑day plan, one to two days a week: actions shipped, gates cleared, drift caught. I work in GRIP OS; you follow progress on the live GRIP score for the length of the engagement.
The score decides
Progress is reviewed weekly on the live GRIP score. After ninety days: renew, or I hand over to your team, with the plan and the live score as the contract.
Two slots, deliberately
Engagements are run by Tom Meijer, Caugia's founder and an ex-GTM executive. Scarcity protects the quality of both the engagements and the product.
Built for B2B SaaS: one segment, served deeply, from seed-stage teams to scale-ups.
Engagements are scoped and priced per company. There is no rate card, for the same reason there is no opinion in the diagnosis: the scope is derived from your constraint, not from a menu.
Questions boards ask
Start with the diagnosis.
Decide who executes after.
The Report names your constraint either way. Whether your team runs the plan or Tom Meijer does, the score is the contract.