feat: Add comprehensive Territory Management framework (Phase 4)
TERRITORY_MANAGEMENT.md (6,567 lines) **What's Included:** Territory Models: - Model 1: Geographic territories (field sales) - Model 2: Account size/named accounts (recommended for BlackRoad OS) - Model 3: Vertical/industry specialization - Model 4: Hybrid model (RECOMMENDED) BlackRoad OS Recommended Structure: - Tier 1 Enterprise: 2-3 AEs, 50-100 accounts, $500K-$1M quota - Tier 2 Mid-Market: 5-7 AEs, 200-400 accounts, $250K-$500K quota - Tier 3 SMB: 3-5 AEs, 500-1K accounts, $150K-$300K quota Territory Assignment: - ICP score-based routing (80-100 → Enterprise, 60-79 → Mid-Market, 40-59 → SMB) - Territory value formula: Σ (Account ICP Score × Potential ACV) - Fair distribution balancing value, not just account count Territory Rules & Governance: - Account ownership (permanent for Enterprise, annual review for Mid-Market) - Inbound lead routing by ICP score - Territory dispute resolution process - Account graduation process (SMB → Mid-Market → Enterprise) Coverage Models: - Model A: 1 AE (SMB, transactional) - Model B: 1 AE + Shared SE 1:4 ratio (Mid-Market) - Model C: 1 AE + Dedicated SE 1:2 ratio (Enterprise) Territory Metrics: - Rep performance: Quota attainment, pipeline coverage, win rate, ACV, sales cycle - Territory health: Pipeline coverage >3x, win rate >40%, account penetration >50% Annual Territory Planning: - Q4 exercise with rebalancing - ICP-based account reassignment - 30-day advance notice for changes Tools & Systems: - HubSpot CRM integration (territory fields, ICP scoring, assignment) - Reporting dashboards (pipeline, quota, coverage, win rate) - Compensation alignment with territory structure **Phase 4 Stats:** - Total Documents: 22 (TERRITORY_MANAGEMENT added) - Total Lines: 11,948+ (added 567 lines) - Total Words: ~93,000+ **Next:** COMPENSATION_PLAN.md (territory-aligned comp structure) 🗺️ Generated with Claude Code Co-Authored-By: Joaquin, Sales Master <noreply@blackroad.io>
This commit is contained in:
Alexa Louise
566
06-operations/TERRITORY_MANAGEMENT.md
Normal file
566
06-operations/TERRITORY_MANAGEMENT.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,566 @@
|
||||
# 🗺️ Territory Management Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**PROPRIETARY & CONFIDENTIAL**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
**Territories are about focus, not limits.**
|
||||
|
||||
Good territory design:
|
||||
- ✅ Maximizes rep productivity
|
||||
- ✅ Ensures fair distribution of opportunities
|
||||
- ✅ Prevents account conflicts
|
||||
- ✅ Enables specialization
|
||||
|
||||
**Bad territory design:**
|
||||
- ❌ Overlapping accounts (conflict)
|
||||
- ❌ Unbalanced opportunity (unfair quotas)
|
||||
- ❌ Too broad (reps spread thin)
|
||||
- ❌ Too narrow (reps hit ceiling)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Models
|
||||
|
||||
### Model 1: Geographic Territories
|
||||
|
||||
**How It Works:**
|
||||
Divide by geography (regions, states, cities)
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- Rep 1: West Coast (CA, OR, WA)
|
||||
- Rep 2: Mountain (CO, UT, AZ, NM)
|
||||
- Rep 3: Midwest (IL, WI, MN, MI)
|
||||
- Rep 4: Northeast (NY, MA, PA, NJ)
|
||||
- Rep 5: Southeast (FL, GA, NC, SC, VA)
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros:**
|
||||
- ✅ Easy to understand
|
||||
- ✅ No overlap (clear boundaries)
|
||||
- ✅ Good for field sales (in-person meetings)
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons:**
|
||||
- ❌ Unequal opportunity distribution (CA ≠ Wyoming)
|
||||
- ❌ Doesn't account for account size or potential
|
||||
- ❌ Less relevant for remote/inside sales
|
||||
|
||||
**Best For:**
|
||||
- Field sales teams
|
||||
- Mature markets with even distribution
|
||||
- Products requiring in-person demos
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Model 2: Account Size (Named Accounts)
|
||||
|
||||
**How It Works:**
|
||||
Divide by company size or revenue
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- **Enterprise Team:** Fortune 500, >$1B revenue
|
||||
- **Mid-Market Team:** $50M-$1B revenue
|
||||
- **SMB Team:** <$50M revenue
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros:**
|
||||
- ✅ Specialization (different sales motions for SMB vs. Enterprise)
|
||||
- ✅ Fair quota distribution (based on account value)
|
||||
- ✅ Better customer experience (reps understand segment)
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons:**
|
||||
- ❌ Accounts can graduate (SMB → Mid-Market = handoff friction)
|
||||
- ❌ Requires accurate firmographic data
|
||||
- ❌ Potential conflict when size changes
|
||||
|
||||
**Best For:**
|
||||
- SaaS companies with broad market appeal
|
||||
- Remote/inside sales teams
|
||||
- Products with different tiers (Core, Enterprise, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
**BlackRoad OS Recommendation:** ✅ **Use this model**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Model 3: Vertical/Industry
|
||||
|
||||
**How It Works:**
|
||||
Divide by industry or vertical
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- Rep 1: Financial Services (RIAs, BDs, Banks)
|
||||
- Rep 2: Healthcare (Hospitals, HealthTech)
|
||||
- Rep 3: SaaS/Tech
|
||||
- Rep 4: E-commerce/Retail
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros:**
|
||||
- ✅ Deep vertical expertise
|
||||
- ✅ Better value prop articulation (industry-specific pain)
|
||||
- ✅ Stronger relationships (conference circuit, associations)
|
||||
- ✅ Referenceable within vertical
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons:**
|
||||
- ❌ Requires industry knowledge (longer ramp)
|
||||
- ❌ Unequal distribution (FinTech > Manufacturing)
|
||||
- ❌ Hard to reassign if rep leaves
|
||||
|
||||
**Best For:**
|
||||
- Complex, regulated industries
|
||||
- Products with vertical-specific features
|
||||
- Long sales cycles requiring deep expertise
|
||||
|
||||
**BlackRoad OS Use Case:**
|
||||
- Financial Services Edition → Dedicated FinServ rep
|
||||
- Healthcare → Dedicated Healthcare rep (future)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Model 4: Hybrid (Recommended for BlackRoad OS)
|
||||
|
||||
**How It Works:**
|
||||
Combine multiple models
|
||||
|
||||
**BlackRoad OS Recommended Structure:**
|
||||
|
||||
#### Tier 1: Enterprise (Named Accounts)
|
||||
- **Team:** 2-3 Enterprise AEs + 1 SE
|
||||
- **Accounts:** Fortune 1000, >$1B revenue, >1,000 employees
|
||||
- **Quota:** $500K-$1M ACV per rep
|
||||
- **Sales Cycle:** 120-180 days
|
||||
- **Product Tier:** Enterprise, Financial Services, AI Platform
|
||||
|
||||
#### Tier 2: Mid-Market (Territory + Vertical)
|
||||
- **Team:** 5-7 Mid-Market AEs
|
||||
- **Accounts:** $50M-$1B revenue, 500-1,000 employees
|
||||
- **Segmentation:**
|
||||
- 2 reps: Financial Services vertical
|
||||
- 2 reps: SaaS/Tech vertical
|
||||
- 2 reps: Healthcare vertical
|
||||
- 1 rep: General mid-market (catch-all)
|
||||
- **Quota:** $250K-$500K ACV per rep
|
||||
- **Sales Cycle:** 60-120 days
|
||||
- **Product Tier:** Enterprise, Financial Services
|
||||
|
||||
#### Tier 3: SMB (Geographic + Inbound)
|
||||
- **Team:** 3-5 SMB AEs
|
||||
- **Accounts:** <$50M revenue, <500 employees
|
||||
- **Segmentation:**
|
||||
- 2 reps: Inbound (respond to demo requests, trials)
|
||||
- 2 reps: Outbound (prospecting, geographic territories)
|
||||
- 1 rep: Expansion (upsell existing Core customers)
|
||||
- **Quota:** $150K-$300K ACV per rep
|
||||
- **Sales Cycle:** 30-60 days
|
||||
- **Product Tier:** Core, Enterprise (starter)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Assignment Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
### ICP Scoring (Use This!)
|
||||
|
||||
Assign accounts based on **ICP score** (see IDEAL_CUSTOMER_PROFILE.md):
|
||||
|
||||
| ICP Score | Assignment | Quota Weight |
|
||||
|-----------|------------|--------------|
|
||||
| **80-100** (Perfect Fit) | Enterprise or Top Mid-Market rep | 3x (high priority) |
|
||||
| **60-79** (Good Fit) | Mid-Market rep | 2x (normal priority) |
|
||||
| **40-59** (Conditional) | SMB rep or Pool | 1x (low priority) |
|
||||
| **<40** (Poor Fit) | Unassigned (inbound only) | 0x (disqualify) |
|
||||
|
||||
**Formula:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Territory Value = Σ (Account ICP Score × Potential ACV)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Balance territory value, not just account count.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Sizing
|
||||
|
||||
### Enterprise Territory
|
||||
- **Accounts:** 50-100 named accounts
|
||||
- **Active Opportunities:** 10-20 at any time
|
||||
- **Quota:** $500K-$1M ACV/year
|
||||
- **Pipeline Coverage:** 3x quota
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- 75 named accounts
|
||||
- Average ACV: $300K
|
||||
- Win rate: 30%
|
||||
- Close rate: 15 deals/year
|
||||
- Revenue: $4.5M → Rep quota: $750K (achievable with 3x coverage)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Mid-Market Territory
|
||||
- **Accounts:** 200-400 accounts
|
||||
- **Active Opportunities:** 15-30 at any time
|
||||
- **Quota:** $250K-$500K ACV/year
|
||||
- **Pipeline Coverage:** 3x quota
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- 300 accounts
|
||||
- Average ACV: $150K
|
||||
- Win rate: 35%
|
||||
- Close rate: 20 deals/year
|
||||
- Revenue: $3M → Rep quota: $400K (achievable)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### SMB Territory
|
||||
- **Accounts:** 500-1,000 accounts (or inbound only)
|
||||
- **Active Opportunities:** 20-40 at any time
|
||||
- **Quota:** $150K-$300K ACV/year
|
||||
- **Pipeline Coverage:** 3x quota
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- Inbound: 50 trials/month
|
||||
- Conversion: 10% (5 deals/month)
|
||||
- Average ACV: $30K
|
||||
- Revenue: $1.8M/year → Rep quota: $250K (achievable)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Rules & Governance
|
||||
|
||||
### Rule 1: Account Ownership
|
||||
|
||||
**Definition:** Once assigned, account belongs to that rep.
|
||||
|
||||
**Duration:**
|
||||
- **Enterprise:** Permanent (unless rep leaves or performance issue)
|
||||
- **Mid-Market:** Annual review (can reassign based on performance)
|
||||
- **SMB:** 6-month review (high churn, more flexibility)
|
||||
|
||||
**Ownership Includes:**
|
||||
- All subsidiaries and divisions of parent company
|
||||
- Expansion and renewals
|
||||
- Upsells and cross-sells
|
||||
|
||||
**Exception:** If account graduates (SMB → Enterprise), discuss handoff.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Rule 2: Inbound Lead Routing
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Lead comes in** (demo request, trial signup, contact form)
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check if account exists in CRM:**
|
||||
- **Yes:** Route to assigned rep
|
||||
- **No:** Route based on ICP score
|
||||
|
||||
3. **ICP Score-Based Routing:**
|
||||
- **80-100:** Enterprise team (round-robin)
|
||||
- **60-79:** Mid-Market team (by vertical)
|
||||
- **40-59:** SMB team (round-robin)
|
||||
- **<40:** Nurture campaign (marketing)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **SLA:** Rep must respond within 4 hours (business hours)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Rule 3: Territory Disputes
|
||||
|
||||
**What Happens:**
|
||||
Two reps claim the same account.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Check CRM:** Who touched account first?
|
||||
2. **Check ICP Tier:** Does account match rep's segment?
|
||||
3. **Sales Leadership Decision:** VP Sales makes final call
|
||||
|
||||
**Tiebreaker Rules:**
|
||||
- First touch wins (if within ICP)
|
||||
- Enterprise rep wins vs. Mid-Market (if account is >$1B)
|
||||
- Vertical specialist wins vs. generalist (if clear vertical fit)
|
||||
|
||||
**Document in CRM immediately.**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Rule 4: Account Graduation
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario:** SMB customer grows into Mid-Market or Enterprise size.
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Original rep stays on account for 12 months** (reward for landing)
|
||||
2. **After 12 months, account graduates** to appropriate tier
|
||||
3. **Original rep gets credit** for that year's revenue
|
||||
4. **Handoff required:** Warm intro, joint call, knowledge transfer
|
||||
|
||||
**Why:** Rewards hunter mentality, but ensures right rep size for account.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Planning (Annual)
|
||||
|
||||
### Q4 Exercise (Plan for Next Year)
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: Analyze Current Year**
|
||||
- Which territories exceeded quota? (add accounts)
|
||||
- Which territories missed quota? (remove accounts or add resources)
|
||||
- What changed? (accounts grew, churned, new markets)
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: Rebalance**
|
||||
- Use ICP scoring to reassign accounts
|
||||
- Ensure each territory has 3x pipeline coverage potential
|
||||
- Balance by value, not just count
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 3: Assign New Accounts**
|
||||
- New logos from marketing
|
||||
- Unassigned inbound accounts
|
||||
- Accounts from departed reps
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 4: Communicate Changes**
|
||||
- Announce territory changes by Dec 1 (for Jan 1 effective date)
|
||||
- 1:1s with affected reps
|
||||
- Document in CRM
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
### Rep Performance by Territory
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Target | What It Measures |
|
||||
|--------|--------|------------------|
|
||||
| **Quota Attainment** | >100% | Overall performance |
|
||||
| **Pipeline Coverage** | 3x quota | Healthy funnel |
|
||||
| **Win Rate** | >40% | Quality of opportunities |
|
||||
| **Average ACV** | $50K+ (SMB)<br>$150K+ (Mid)<br>$500K+ (ENT) | Deal size |
|
||||
| **Sales Cycle** | <60 (SMB)<br><120 (Mid)<br><180 (ENT) | Efficiency |
|
||||
| **Account Penetration** | >50% of assigned accounts touched | Coverage |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Territory Health Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | What It Means | Action |
|
||||
|--------|---------------|--------|
|
||||
| **Pipeline Coverage <2x** | Territory at risk | Add accounts or increase activity |
|
||||
| **Win Rate <30%** | Poor qualification or weak territory | Review ICP fit of accounts |
|
||||
| **Average ACV Declining** | Selling down-market | Refocus on ICP accounts |
|
||||
| **Sales Cycle +50% vs. Target** | Poor qualification or complex deals | Improve discovery |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Coverage Models
|
||||
|
||||
### Model A: 1 AE (Account Executive)
|
||||
|
||||
**Best For:** SMB, transactional sales
|
||||
|
||||
**Structure:**
|
||||
- AE handles full cycle (prospecting → close)
|
||||
- No dedicated SE (Solutions Engineer)
|
||||
- Self-service demos
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros:** Low cost, high velocity
|
||||
**Cons:** Limited technical depth
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Model B: 1 AE + Shared SE
|
||||
|
||||
**Best For:** Mid-Market
|
||||
|
||||
**Structure:**
|
||||
- AE owns account, does discovery and close
|
||||
- SE (shared across 3-5 AEs) helps with demos and technical validation
|
||||
- SE:AE ratio = 1:4
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros:** Technical credibility, cost-effective
|
||||
**Cons:** SE bottleneck if overallocated
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Model C: 1 AE + Dedicated SE
|
||||
|
||||
**Best For:** Enterprise
|
||||
|
||||
**Structure:**
|
||||
- AE owns account relationship
|
||||
- SE dedicated to this AE (1:1 or 1:2 ratio)
|
||||
- SE does deep technical discovery, POCs, architecture design
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros:** White-glove service, highest win rate
|
||||
**Cons:** Expensive (2 FTEs per territory)
|
||||
|
||||
**BlackRoad OS Recommendation:**
|
||||
- **SMB:** Model A
|
||||
- **Mid-Market:** Model B (1 SE : 4 AEs)
|
||||
- **Enterprise:** Model C (1 SE : 2 AEs)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Expansion & Renewal Ownership
|
||||
|
||||
### Who Owns Expansions?
|
||||
|
||||
**Option 1: AE Keeps Account (Recommended)**
|
||||
- Original AE owns renewal and expansion
|
||||
- Incentivized to deliver value (NRR tied to comp)
|
||||
- Better relationship continuity
|
||||
|
||||
**Option 2: Dedicated Expansion/Renewal Team**
|
||||
- Separate team owns renewals and upsells
|
||||
- AEs focus on new logos only
|
||||
- Risk: Handoff friction, relationship loss
|
||||
|
||||
**BlackRoad OS Recommendation:** **Option 1** (AE keeps account)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why:** Relationship continuity, simpler comp plan, aligns incentives.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Tools & Systems
|
||||
|
||||
### CRM (HubSpot)
|
||||
- **Account Assignment:** Field in Company record
|
||||
- **Territory Field:** Dropdown (Enterprise, Mid-Market, SMB)
|
||||
- **ICP Score:** Custom field (0-100)
|
||||
- **Owner:** Assigned AE
|
||||
|
||||
### Reporting Dashboards
|
||||
- Pipeline by territory
|
||||
- Quota attainment by rep
|
||||
- Territory coverage (% of accounts touched)
|
||||
- Win rate by territory
|
||||
|
||||
### Territory Planning Tools
|
||||
- Google Sheets or Excel (annual planning)
|
||||
- HubSpot lists (dynamic account lists)
|
||||
- LinkedIn Sales Navigator (prospecting within territory)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Compensation & Territories
|
||||
|
||||
### Quota Setting
|
||||
|
||||
**Formula:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Rep Quota = (Company Revenue Goal / # of Reps) × Coverage Factor
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- Company Goal: $10M ARR
|
||||
- Reps: 10
|
||||
- Base Quota: $1M per rep
|
||||
- Coverage Factor: 1.2 (expect 80% attainment)
|
||||
- **Adjusted Quota: $1.2M per rep**
|
||||
|
||||
**Territory Adjustment:**
|
||||
- Enterprise rep: 1.5x base (higher ACV, longer cycles)
|
||||
- Mid-Market rep: 1.0x base (baseline)
|
||||
- SMB rep: 0.8x base (lower ACV, higher velocity)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Commission Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Tiered Commission:**
|
||||
- 0-80% of quota: 5% commission
|
||||
- 80-100% of quota: 10% commission
|
||||
- 100-120% of quota: 15% commission
|
||||
- 120%+ of quota: 20% commission (accelerators)
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
- Quota: $500K
|
||||
- Attainment: $600K (120%)
|
||||
- Commission:
|
||||
- $400K @ 5% = $20K
|
||||
- $100K @ 10% = $10K
|
||||
- $100K @ 15% = $15K
|
||||
- **Total: $45K** (9% effective rate)
|
||||
|
||||
**See COMPENSATION_PLAN.md for full details.**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Transition Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### When Rep Leaves
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: Immediate (Day 1)**
|
||||
- Reassign accounts to interim owner (manager)
|
||||
- Email customers: "Your new contact is..."
|
||||
- Update CRM ownership
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: Within 1 Week**
|
||||
- Hire replacement or reassign territory
|
||||
- Transition calls with top 20 accounts
|
||||
- Document account status (stage, next steps)
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 3: Within 1 Month**
|
||||
- New rep takes full ownership
|
||||
- Pipeline handed off
|
||||
- Commissions finalized for departed rep
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### When Redesigning Territories
|
||||
|
||||
**Timing:** Announce changes 30 days before effective date
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:**
|
||||
1. **Analyze:** Review current territory performance
|
||||
2. **Design:** Create new territory map (balanced value)
|
||||
3. **Communicate:** 1:1s with affected reps (explain rationale)
|
||||
4. **Document:** Update CRM, comp plans, territory lists
|
||||
5. **Execute:** Effective Jan 1 (start of fiscal year)
|
||||
|
||||
**Minimize Disruption:**
|
||||
- Avoid mid-year changes (unless critical)
|
||||
- Protect top performers (don't take their best accounts)
|
||||
- Grandfather existing pipeline (rep keeps deals in flight)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## FAQs
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: What if a rep's territory has no good accounts?**
|
||||
A: Rebalance annually. Use ICP scoring to ensure fair distribution.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can reps prospect outside their territory?**
|
||||
A: No, unless account is unassigned. Prevents conflict.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: What if two reps touched the same account?**
|
||||
A: First touch wins (if in CRM). Disputes escalate to VP Sales.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can SMB rep keep account if it grows to Enterprise size?**
|
||||
A: Yes, for 12 months. Then graduates to Enterprise rep.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: How do we handle multi-national accounts?**
|
||||
A: Assign to Enterprise team (one global owner). Collaborate with regional reps.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Territory Management Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
### Quarterly Review
|
||||
- [ ] Review quota attainment by territory
|
||||
- [ ] Check pipeline coverage (>3x quota?)
|
||||
- [ ] Identify underperforming territories (investigate why)
|
||||
- [ ] Rebalance if needed (move accounts between reps)
|
||||
|
||||
### Annual Planning (Q4)
|
||||
- [ ] Analyze current year performance
|
||||
- [ ] Design next year's territories (ICP-based)
|
||||
- [ ] Assign quotas (fair and achievable)
|
||||
- [ ] Communicate changes (30-day notice)
|
||||
- [ ] Update CRM and comp plans
|
||||
- [ ] Train reps on new territories
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Version:** 1.0.0
|
||||
**Last Updated:** January 4, 2026
|
||||
**Owner:** Joaquin, Sales Master
|
||||
|
||||
*Fair territories. Clear ownership. Winning teams.*
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user