Per-seat pricing

Per-seat pricing scales revenue with headcount. It remains the dominant model in B2B SaaS because it is simple to understand, correlates loosely with value, and expands on its own as a customer’s team grows.

What “a seat” means has to be defined precisely

The definition is contractual and consequential:

• Named users — each individual gets a license, whether or not they log in.
• Active users — only users who did something in the period count.
• Concurrent users — a pool of simultaneous sessions, shared.

Named is easiest to bill and most generous to the vendor. Active is fairest and hardest to meter unambiguously. Concurrent suits shift-based workforces and almost nothing else.

The structural weaknesses

Seat sharing. Customers share credentials to avoid buying seats. Enforcement requires either technical controls or an annual true-up, and both create friction.

Adoption penalty. Every additional user costs money, which gives customers a direct incentive to limit rollout — the opposite of what you want, since usage drives retention.

AI decoupling. As agents perform work that used to require a person, headcount stops tracking value delivered. A customer whose team shrinks while their workload grows pays you less. This is the single strongest force pushing B2B SaaS toward usage and outcome-based models.

The common hedge

A hybrid structure — a modest per-seat fee plus a usage or outcome component — keeps the familiarity of seats while restoring the link between value and price.