Sales Capability Health Check

We don't have any pipeline management in place

We focus purely on pipeline size and individual deal values. We know our overall win rate

We have clear understanding of win ratios by customer type and monitor key activities that drive pipeline effectiveness. We regularly review aged opportunities and actively disqualify weak ones

We clearly monitor conversion ratios across each pipeline stage with proactive plans to improve them. We actively monitor pipeline gaps and manage opportunities through stages

We continuously assess best practice pipeline management and implement new approaches to improve performance

We don't track next steps in our pipeline

Some opportunities have next steps documented, but it's inconsistent across the team

Most opportunities (50–75%) have documented next steps as part of our standard process

The vast majority (75–90%) have documented next steps and we proactively manage progression

Nearly all opportunities (90%+) have documented next steps and we continuously improve our tracking approach

We have no awareness of pipeline coverage versus target

We monitor total pipeline value but don't actively manage coverage ratios

We maintain a pipeline of 2–3x target and take action when coverage drops below threshold

We maintain 3–4x pipeline coverage, segmented by stage and customer type, with proactive gap management

We dynamically manage pipeline coverage using real-time data and continuously refine our model to improve accuracy

We don't have a defined sales strategy — we pursue most opportunities that come our way

We have an informal strategy based on historical success, but it's not formally documented or consistently applied

We have a documented sales strategy with defined target segments, but execution is sometimes inconsistent

We have a clear, documented strategy with defined ICP, target segments, and criteria for which opportunities NOT to pursue. It's consistently applied

Our strategy is dynamic, continuously refined using market intelligence and performance data, with distinct approaches per segment. We are recognised as a strategic partner by our key customers

We use the same approach for all customers regardless of size, sector, or potential

Individual salespeople adapt their style informally, but there's no consistent segmentation strategy

We have defined customer segments with broadly different approaches, though some inconsistency exists

We have clearly defined segments with tailored strategies, value propositions, and resource allocation for each

Segmentation is sophisticated and dynamic, continuously refined using data. Micro-segment strategies are optimised and regularly reviewed

We have never formally reviewed our sales strategy

More than 2 years ago, or only when a significant problem forced a change

Within the last 12 months, with some structured review process

Within the last 6 months, with a structured review involving leadership and frontline insights

Strategy is reviewed on a rolling basis using real-time market data and customer feedback, with quarterly formal reviews

We don't have a defined value proposition — we describe our products and services and let customers work it out

We have an informal sense of our value but it's not documented, varies by individual, and tends to focus on features

We have a documented value proposition focused on customer outcomes, though consistency across the team varies

We have clear, segment-specific value propositions focused on customer outcomes, consistently communicated across the team

Our value propositions are stakeholder-specific, continuously validated with customers, and updated based on market feedback and competitive intelligence

No — we primarily focus on describing product features

Some team members can talk about outcomes, but most default to features

Most of our team can articulate value in outcome terms, though consistency varies

Our team consistently articulates value in customer outcome terms, with segment-specific variations

We tailor the value proposition to each stakeholder's role and continuously validate it with customers

We've never validated it with customers

We occasionally discuss it informally in customer conversations

We validate it periodically through structured feedback processes

We regularly gather feedback and adjust our value propositions accordingly

We continuously gather customer feedback and use it to review and amend our value propositions as part of our improvement process

We dictate to the customer based on internal needs and what we want to sell

We consider some customer needs, but the focus tends to be on what we're trying to achieve

We actively seek customers' views, needs and thoughts as a matter of course

All internal discussions start with the customer and their perspective. We have customer-specific sales and marketing plans

We have an almost obsessive focus on our customers, with joint business plans and customers intrinsically involved in our innovation process

We have minimal understanding of customers' businesses beyond what they buy from us

We have surface-level understanding and make some effort to understand customer needs

We actively research our customers' markets, competitors, and trends on occasion

We maintain ongoing review and research of customers' markets, trends, and relevant intelligence

We deeply understand customers' business models, hold regular customer forums, and have joint innovation initiatives

We approach customers based purely on what we need to sell them

We show some flexibility when dealing with customers, but most focus remains on internal priorities

We actively seek customers' input and adapt our approach, though we could be more systematic

We have documented customer-specific strategies and regularly gather customer intelligence to inform our approach

We operate as trusted advisers with joint business planning and innovation partnerships

We have no defined KPIs — performance is judged informally based on revenue achieved

We track basic output metrics such as revenue and number of deals, but no activity or leading indicators

We track a defined set of KPIs including both leading (activity) and lagging (outcome) metrics

We have a balanced scorecard of KPIs aligned to strategy, covering activities, pipeline health, and outcomes — reviewed regularly at team level

Our KPIs are dynamically managed, linked to strategic goals, and continuously refined based on what drives performance

We don't monitor KPIs consistently — performance is reviewed reactively when problems arise

We review KPIs monthly or less frequently, mainly to report upwards rather than drive action

KPIs are reviewed weekly in structured meetings with clear actions assigned when performance gaps are identified

Real-time dashboards are used. Leaders intervene proactively when trends suggest issues before they become problems

KPIs are embedded in daily management rhythm. Predictive analysis is used to anticipate performance gaps and optimise resource deployment

We don't review our KPIs — we've always measured the same things

KPIs are occasionally reviewed but mainly when leadership changes or major problems arise

KPIs are reviewed annually as part of business planning to ensure they remain aligned to strategy

KPIs are reviewed quarterly with input from the sales team and aligned explicitly to strategic priorities

KPIs evolve continuously as part of a broader performance management culture. New metrics are tested, validated, and adopted when they better predict outcomes