The rules for internals are different
Every internal product has a team.
That means salaries, licenses, and ongoing costs.
For it to survive, it needs investment and a way to recover those costs.
If no one pays?
The product gets sunsetted.
The team is redirected.
That’s why the “who and how” question is a PM’s job.
The problem I ran into
When I asked PM leaders with 15+ years of experience, the answer I got was simple:
Sure.
But what if your product is new and doesn’t have scale yet?
No buyers because it’s expensive.
No scale because no one buys.
A vicious circle.
So I researched other models.
Here are 5 that make more sense internally.
Imaginary example
You work at a global furniture company.
Most of the business makes everyday sofas.
But there’s also a special line — wild, crazy designs for people bored of the mundane.
To support those designers, you build a homegrown design tool.
It can’t be bought off the shelf.
It has to be custom.
Now you need to “sell” this tool to 60 design departments worldwide.
How do you recover costs?
1. Free trial
Give departments free access for 6 months.
Example: Germany and France create dozens of wild prototypes. Smaller teams experiment freely. By the end of the trial, they don’t want to lose the tool.
Advantages
→ Low barrier to adoption
→ Builds champions
→ Lets value speak for itself
Disadvantages
→ Risk of no conversions
→ Finance may resist
→ Usage can vanish overnight
Nuance
Works best if your value shows fast.
2. Flat fee
Charge one fixed annual fee for the company.
Example: HQ pays €300,000/year. All 60 departments get unlimited access. No debates about per-team cost.
Advantages
→ Simple and predictable
→ No usage barriers
→ Easy company-wide rollout
Disadvantages
→ Small teams feel they subsidize big ones
→ Harder to prove ROI
→ Risk of mis-pricing
Nuance
Great for tools everyone needs.
3. Per usage
Bill departments based on activity.
Example: Germany produces hundreds of crazy sofa projects and pays more. Portugal only makes a few and pays less.
Advantages
→ Fair: costs scale with value
→ ROI is easy to show
→ Encourages efficient use
Disadvantages
→ Finance hates unpredictable bills
→ Teams may hold back usage
→ Complex reporting
Nuance
Best for variable-demand tools.
4. Enterprise
Once adoption is high, switch to a company-wide contract.
Example: After 2 years, leadership sees the crazy sofa line as strategic. They sign a 3-year deal with SLAs and integrations. The tool becomes a “platform,” not an experiment.
Advantages
→ Funding security
→ Enables long-term planning
→ Cements product roadmap
Disadvantages
→ Long approvals
→ Heavy governance
→ Risk of over-promising
Nuance
Best when the tool is proven.
5. Chargeback/Showback
Finance allocates costs back to teams based on usage.
Example: The tool costs €300,000/year. Germany created 50% of sofa projects → €150,000 allocated. Portugal created 5% → €15,000 allocated. With showback, they just see their share, no billing.
Advantages
→ Transparent
→ Encourages responsible use
→ Common in IT
Disadvantages
→ Can feel unfair
→ Requires tracking
→ Sparks debates
Nuance
Different from per usage:
- Per usage = teams choose and get billed.
- Chargeback = Finance splits costs across teams.
- Showback = only visibility, no billing.
Takeaway
Each model answers the same question differently:
- Free trial → Build adoption first
- Flat fee → Keep it simple
- Per usage → Tie cost to value
- Enterprise → Cement importance
- Chargeback/Showback → Spread costs transparently
