Proposal · Impact Sprints

Five out of five on Situation.
One out of five on Impact.

A plan to close the gap you already found.

Prepared for Mitch Beck, Vice President of Sales, PDQ
From Jacco van der Kooij and Dan Smith, Winning by Design
Date 28 July 2026  ·  Proposed start August 2026
View as slides
What we heard from you

You have already done the hard part.

In two and a half months you put in a sales process with real entry and exit criteria, rolled out SPICED, and stood up a forecasting and QBR cadence. You have set the expectation of two call reviews per rep per month. None of that existed before you arrived.

What you asked for is a second voice to reinforce it, and a way to know whether it is landing. That is what this proposal is.

SPICEDWhat you told us
SituationA $120M ARR business with about 35 sellers across SMB, mid-market, an account-management motion on the installed base, and a small K-12 team. Primarily inbound, round-robin, no territories. Deeply technical: you estimate 80 percent of your reps could step in and work as a sysadmin.
PainReps quote, hear a no, and move to the next one. MEDDIC existed on paper and was used by one or two reps on roughly 20 percent of deals. Your words: there is a ton of money left on the table.
ImpactRoughly $1M of quota per rep and around 120 deals a year each, at an $8,000 ACV. Attainment sits between 80 and 130 percent and the team lands at 95 to 98 percent of plan. The gap is conversion on volume you already touch.
Critical EventYou want this in August, framed as opportunity cost rather than a deadline. Your board is asking why new-logo growth is slowing year over year.
DecisionYou asked for a full version and a slimmed-down version so you can choose. All three below start in August and are delivered remotely.
Where the gap sits

Your own scorecard is the brief.

You graded the team without being asked. We have not changed a number.

Situation5/5
Pain4/5
Impact1/5
Critical Event1/5
Decision1 to 3
Decision splits by motion: you scored mid-market 2 to 3 and SMB 1.

A team that scores 5 on Situation and 1 on Impact is not undertrained on your product. They know the sysadmin's world better than most of their buyers. What they have never been taught is how to turn that knowledge into a number the customer says out loud.

That is a single, teachable skill. It is also the one that stops a rep from quoting and moving on.

The method

An Impact Sprint is four weeks on one skill.

Not a curriculum. One skill, taught once, then coached on real recorded calls until it shows up consistently. You told us the environment has scar tissue from changes people wait out. A sprint is built to be too short and too specific to wait out.

Design

Align on the skill and the measure

We agree the KPI, build the scorecard and rubric against your process, and confirm with you and your frontline leaders that this is the priority.

Week 1

Two-hour live training

One skill. Remote, cohort-based, built on your deals and your buyer.

Weeks 2 to 4

Three one-hour coaching sessions

Live call review against the rubric. Cohorts stay near 20 so three to four calls get reviewed live in every session and most of the room is reviewed across the sprint. Reps self-score first, their manager scores second, we score third.

Close

Re-score against the baseline

Same rubric, same reps, before and after. You get the movement, not an opinion.

It runs on the Fathom setup you already have

The sprint is powered by your existing recordings. We build the scoring system and the prompts against your stack, so there is nothing new to buy and nothing new for a rep to log into.

That build is yours to keep. When the sprint ends, the rubric, the scorecard, and the prompts stay in place: your managers keep scoring with them, and every new hire gets run through the same standard from their first week. The engagement is three months. The system it leaves behind is not.

Why sprints

Impact Sprints drive more revenue than training alone.

1.1x
Sellers consistently identify
Situation and Pain
1.56x
Sellers also identify
the customer's Impact
1.82x
Sellers identify Impact
and a Critical Event

Figure 1. Revenue improvement by how far sellers get through the discovery. Source: Winning by Design study of 58,000 sales opportunities across a large global SaaS company.

Your team sits at the first bar today. They identify Situation and Pain reliably and stop there, which is the 1.1x. Adding Impact takes it to 1.56x, and adding a Critical Event on top takes it to 1.82x. Those are exactly the two dimensions you scored a 1 on, and they are months one and two of this proposal.

What it costs

Three options, all starting in August.

Priced per cohort. For your approximately 35 GTM professionals we recommend splitting into two cohorts of roughly 18 per group, which keeps live call review possible for nearly everyone. The first cohort of any skill is $25,000 and the second is $15,000, because the design, rubric, and scorecard are built once.

Recommended
Option 1
$50,000
Two Impact Sprints, large cohort size
  • Impact, then Critical Event
  • Your whole GTM team in one large cohort
  • Each sprint is a two-hour training plus three one-hour coaching sessions
  • Baseline and re-score from your existing Fathom recordings
  • Scorecard and rubric your managers keep
Recommended
Option 2
$127,500
Three sprints, two cohorts each month, managers included
  • Everything in Option 1
  • Month 1: Impact. Full sprint, both cohorts
  • Month 2: Critical Event. Full sprint, both cohorts
  • Month 3. After the first two sprints we decide the third topic together
  • One to three frontline leaders through Managing for Impact, our open course
  • Post-sprint readout you can take to your board
Recommended
Option 3
$250K to $350K
Transformation
  • Diagnose: GTM diagnostic across your three motions
  • Design: process design, including the new-logo and growth split you are weighing
  • Deploy: skills, instrumentation, and ongoing coaching
  • Range reflects scope across one, two, or all three motions
Option 2, itemizedInvestment
Impact sprintCohort A $25,000 · Cohort B $15,000$40,000
Critical Event sprintCohort A $25,000 · Cohort B $15,000$40,000
Third sprint, topic decided together after the first twoCohort A $25,000 · Cohort B $15,000$40,000
Managing for Impact, open courseThree frontline leaders at $2,500 per seat$7,500
Total$127,500

We recommend two cohorts rather than one. In a room of 35 people, reps blend into the background and the impact drops. At roughly 18 each, everyone gets individual time and their own call reviewed. Travel does not apply; all delivery is remote.

Month three

After the first two sprints we decide the third topic together.

Two sprints in, you have two re-scores on the same reps against the same rubric. That evidence points at the next skill worth the team's time, and you and your leaders make the call with us.

The shortlist

  • Trade and Negotiate. If the data shows reps conceding rather than trading. At 120 open opportunities per rep this moves ACV on deals already in hand.
  • Prospecting. If your board question hardens and the new-logo team becomes real, this is the only one of the four that adds pipeline rather than converting it.
  • Decision Process. If the SMB and mid-market gap you flagged, 1 versus 2 to 3, holds after two sprints.
  • Storytelling. If reps are landing Impact but not making it memorable enough to survive an internal conversation you are not in.
Your managers

Your frontline leaders are what makes this last.

You already set the cadence of two call reviews per rep per month. That is the engine of the whole thing, and we want to hand your leaders the fuel for it.

Option 2 puts one to three of them through Managing for Impact, our open course, alongside leaders from other companies. They learn to run the same rubric the sprints score against, so their reviews compound what the team just practiced. Running it open rather than private also means they hear how other leaders solve the same problem, which tends to stick better than hearing it from us.

What's next

New hires do not wait for the next sprint.

You are hiring against a $120M business with an inbound engine, so there will always be someone who joined after the last cohort. They go to AI for GTM, our open course, which teaches reps to run discovery, research, and proposals with AI, with every output grounded in SPICED and ready for the CRM.

It runs on a published schedule across global time zones, which matters for your people in Slovenia, Switzerland, and Italy. A new rep can be brought up to the same standard as the rest of the team without you waiting to assemble another cohort, and without pulling your managers off their coaching cadence to run onboarding.

AI for GTM course details and upcoming dates

What this does not lock you into

You own it.

The scoring runs on your Fathom recordings, in your Salesforce, on your Claude tokens. We supply the rubric, the scorecard, and the coaching model, and your team extends them after we go. There is no annual license and no platform to keep paying for.

You mentioned you are building your own scoring and coaching skill in Claude. We would like to look at it before this starts. If it is good, we build the sprint rubric to feed it rather than duplicating it.

Winning by Design + Fathom
Fathom is a Winning by Design certified partner
Next step

Pick an option and we start in August.

If Option 2 is the direction, the first working session is a 60-minute design call with you and your three frontline leaders to lock the KPI and approve the scorecard. Baseline scoring runs off recordings you already have, so nothing waits on your team.

This page is deliberately a single document. Drop it into Claude and ask it to pressure-test the recommendation against your own call data before you decide.

View as slides

One thing worth reading

Growth in the Age of AI, our research on why AI-native companies are achieving breakout growth while SaaS-natives stall, and how compound growth loops surface the go-to-market capacity a business already has. It picks up roughly where your Revenue Architecture certification left off, and it speaks directly to the question your board is asking about new-logo growth.

Winning by Design · Prepared for PDQ, 28 July 2026 · All figures attributed to PDQ are Mitch Beck's own, from the 27 July call. Sprint results in Figure 1 are from an anonymized client engagement. Figure 2 is from published Winning by Design research.