# Sales Team Build Pack — Seed-Stage B2B SaaS (First AE Hires)

## Context snapshot

- **Stage:** Seed
- **GTM motion:** Hybrid PLG + founder-led sales (2,000 signups/month with inconsistent upgrades; founder closing deals through direct outreach and inbound interest)
- **ICP:** B2B SaaS buyers (exact persona/firmographics not specified -- see Assumptions below)
- **Product complexity:** Assumed medium (SaaS product with enough complexity that upgrades require human touch, evidenced by inconsistent self-serve conversion)
- **Pricing/ACV:** $12,000 annual contract value
- **Sales cycle:** 30--45 days from first meeting to close
- **Current resources:** Founder handling all sales; 2,000 signups/month as demand source; budget for 2 AE hires
- **Constraints:** Headcount budget = 2 AEs; no SDR, SE, or RevOps budget mentioned
- **90-day target:** Two AEs ramped to independently running qualified pipeline and closing deals at a rate comparable to the founder's current win rate (~23%)

## Assumptions & unknowns

- **Assumption 1:** The 2,000 monthly signups generate meaningful hand-raisers or upgrade signals that can be routed to AEs (i.e., there is inbound demand beyond founder outreach).
- **Assumption 2:** The ICP is roughly defined -- the founder can articulate who the best-fit customers are based on the 16 closed deals.
- **Assumption 3:** The product is technical enough that reps need solid product understanding but does not require a dedicated Sales Engineer for every deal.
- **Assumption 4:** The founder will remain involved in sales (coaching, shadowing, key deals) for at least 90 days after AEs start.
- **Unknown 1:** What percentage of the 2,000 signups are ICP-fit and show upgrade intent? (Resolve: audit signup data in week 1 to estimate addressable hand-raiser volume.)
- **Unknown 2:** Top 3 win reasons and top 3 loss reasons from the 70 first meetings. (Resolve: founder reviews CRM/notes to categorize win/loss themes before AE onboarding.)
- **Unknown 3:** Whether CS/support exists and can assist with onboarding or post-sale. (Resolve: clarify resourcing before hire start date.)

---

## Readiness gate

### Current baseline

- **At-bat defined as:** First meeting with a qualified prospect (discovery or demo)
- **Last ~90 days:**
  - First meetings: 70
  - Closed-won: 16
  - Closed-lost: 40
  - Pending: 14
  - Win rate (first meeting to closed-won): ~23% (16/70; if pending are excluded: 16/56 = ~29%)
  - Typical ACV: $12,000
  - Typical cycle length: 30--45 days
- **Top win reasons:** Not yet documented (see Unknown 2) -- likely: clear pain fit, founder credibility, fast time-to-value
- **Top loss reasons:** Not yet documented -- likely: budget/priority, competitive alternative, lack of internal champion

### Decision

**Hire now (pilot)** because:
1. The founder has 70+ at-bats, well above the 50--100 threshold for signal reliability.
2. Win rate of ~23% (and potentially ~29% excluding pending) is within the 15--25%+ range that indicates a teachable, repeatable motion.
3. Short cycle (30--45 days) means new reps get fast feedback loops -- critical for learning.
4. 2,000 signups/month provide a demand source that the founder cannot work alone; leaving these unworked is lost revenue.
5. Budget allows hiring two AEs simultaneously, enabling an A/B comparison from day one.

**We will measure in the first 30 days after AE start:**
- Number of hand-raisers/signups routed to AEs vs. founder
- AE first-meeting-to-next-step conversion rate (target: >60%)
- AE discovery call quality score (peer-reviewed, 1--5)
- Pipeline created by each AE ($)

### Notes (anti-pitfalls)

- The 16 wins may include early-adopter "friendlies" -- the founder should tag which deals were relationship-driven vs. process-driven. If >50% are relationship wins, treat the baseline as lower-confidence and extend the pilot learning period by 30 days.
- Do NOT set revenue quotas for AEs in the first 60 days. This is a learning pilot, not quota theater.
- Do NOT hire a VP Sales or sales manager. The founder is the sales leader for at least the next 6 months.

---

## Sales motion spec (what we're hiring into)

### ICP + qualification

- **In-scope:** B2B companies that match the profile of the 16 closed-won deals (founder to document firmographics: company size, industry vertical, tech stack, department). Likely: SMB/mid-market teams (given $12k ACV), with a specific pain point the product solves and a decision-maker who can sign off within 30--45 days.
- **Out-of-scope:** Enterprise deals requiring multi-stakeholder procurement (>90 day cycle); free-tier users with no budget authority; companies outside the core use case.
- **Must-have trigger events:** Active product signup (especially if usage exceeds free tier), explicit "talk to sales" request, trial engagement above threshold (e.g., >3 active users, >X actions in first 7 days).

### First meeting (discovery-first)

- **Objective:** Understand the prospect's current workflow, pain severity, and decision process -- NOT pitch features.
- **Agenda (30 min):**
  1. (2 min) Context set: "I'd like to understand your situation before showing anything."
  2. (15 min) Discovery: current process, pain points, impact of the problem, who else is involved, timeline, budget.
  3. (8 min) Targeted product walk-through tied to their specific pain (not a feature tour).
  4. (5 min) Next steps: confirm decision-maker, propose demo/pilot or send pricing, schedule follow-up within 48 hours.
- **Qualification signals:** Prospect articulates a specific pain (not "just exploring"), has budget authority or can identify who does, timeline within 60 days, and the product addresses their stated problem.

### Demo / pilot / trial criteria

- **When we demo:** Prospect has a confirmed pain point and at least one decision-maker present. Never demo without discovery first.
- **When we propose a pilot:** Prospect has technical integration requirements or needs to prove value to a team (>3 users). Pilot = 14 days, free, with defined success criteria agreed upfront.
- **Pilot success criteria (14 days):** >3 active users, >X core actions completed, prospect confirms value in a check-in call at day 7.

### Pricing/packaging guardrails

- **Default offer:** Annual contract at $12,000/year (or monthly equivalent if required to close).
- **Concessions allowed (AE authority):** Monthly billing (vs. annual upfront), 10% discount for annual prepay, extended 14-day pilot (to 21 days max).
- **Concessions NOT allowed (founder approval required):** Discounts >10%, custom pricing, multi-year commitments, free extensions beyond 21 days, feature commitments.

### Sales stages + "at-bat" definition

| Stage | Name | Exit criteria |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Lead / Signup | ICP-fit confirmed; hand-raiser signal or outbound response. Exit: First meeting scheduled. |
| 1 | Discovery | Discovery call completed; pain confirmed; decision-maker identified. Exit: Demo/pilot proposed OR disqualified. |
| 2 | Evaluation | Demo/pilot delivered; prospect confirms value; pricing discussed. Exit: Verbal yes or proposal sent. |
| 3 | Negotiation | Proposal reviewed; terms agreed. Exit: Contract signed (closed-won) or deal lost (closed-lost with reason). |

- **"At-bat" = Stage 1 (Discovery completed).** This is the denominator for win rate tracking.

### Objections + best current responses

| Objection | Best current response |
|---|---|
| "We're using [competitor/spreadsheets/manual process]" | "Makes sense -- most of our customers started the same way. What prompted you to look at alternatives now? [Explore switching cost vs. pain severity]" |
| "We need to get buy-in from [other stakeholder]" | "Understood. What would [stakeholder] need to see to feel confident? Can we set up a 15-min call with them, or would a brief written summary be more useful?" |
| "The price is too high for us right now" | "I hear you. Let me understand: is it a matter of budget timing, or does the value not yet justify the cost? [If value gap: propose a 14-day pilot with clear success metrics]" |
| "We want to try it longer before committing" | "Absolutely fair. Let's define what 'success' looks like in the pilot -- if you hit [X criteria] by day 14, does that give you enough confidence to move forward?" |
| "Can you build [feature X]?" | "Great question -- let me note that and check with our product team. To make sure I understand the need: what would [feature X] enable you to do that you can't do today? [Never promise features; log and relay to product]" |

### Responsibilities (next 60--90 days)

| Owner | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| **Founder** | Joins all Stage 2+ calls for first 30 days; handles pricing exceptions; runs weekly pipeline review and call coaching; owns ICP refinement; makes final hire/fire decisions |
| **AE (each)** | Owns Stage 0--3 for assigned leads; runs discovery independently by day 15; runs demos independently by day 30; logs all deal data in CRM; prepares written recaps within 24 hours of every call |
| **CS/Support (if available)** | Handles post-sale onboarding and technical setup; flags expansion signals to AEs; provides product training support during AE ramp |

---

## Team design + hiring sequence

### Starting topology

**PLG/hand-raiser pilot pod:** Two AEs working inbound hand-raisers and product-qualified leads, attached directly to the founder for daily coaching and deal support. No SDR layer initially -- AEs handle their own lead qualification from the signup/hand-raiser pool.

**Rationale:** With 2,000 signups/month and inconsistent upgrades, the immediate bottleneck is converting interested signups into paying customers. This requires AEs who can discover, demo, and close -- not SDRs who can only book meetings. SDR specialization is premature until (a) AEs are consistently pipeline-constrained and (b) the qualification criteria are proven.

### Hiring sequence (why this order)

| # | Role | Timing | Why now | Success criteria (30/60/90) | Key risks | Notes |
|---|---|---:|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AE #1 | Week 0 | Convert existing hand-raiser demand; begin building a repeatable sales process beyond the founder | 30: runs discovery independently, 3+ qualified opps created / 60: 5+ demos, first close / 90: closing at ~20% win rate, $15k+ pipeline/month | Rep is too senior and expects a built machine; product learning is slow | Prioritize learning speed + product curiosity over Rolodex |
| 2 | AE #2 | Week 0--2 (within 2 weeks of AE #1) | Create A/B baseline; double coverage of hand-raiser pool; avoid "one data point" dependency | Same as AE #1 (directly comparable) | Identical lead routing creates competition, not learning; one rep gets "better" leads | Ensure fair, alternating lead distribution from day 1 |

### "A/B test humans" plan

- **Hire both AEs within 0--2 weeks of each other** so they receive identical onboarding, enablement, and lead flow.
- **"Comparable" means:** Same lead source (alternating assignment from the signup pool), same onboarding curriculum, same founder coaching time, same tooling/access.
- **What we'll compare:**
  - First-meeting-to-next-step conversion rate
  - Pipeline created ($) by week
  - Win rate (Stage 1 to closed-won)
  - Average deal cycle length
  - Discovery call quality (scored by founder on 1--5 rubric)
  - Product depth progression (can they run a demo without founder support by day 30?)
- **Diagnostic rule:** If both AEs underperform at day 60, the problem is likely process/motion (not the reps). If one performs and one doesn't, investigate coaching/fit. Never fire a rep in the first 60 days without diagnosing process vs. person.

### Technical coverage plan

- Founder provides technical depth on Stage 2+ calls for the first 30 days.
- By day 30, AEs should handle standard demos alone; founder joins only for complex/enterprise-edge deals.
- If both AEs consistently need founder support past day 45, evaluate whether an SE or technical PM ride-along is needed (but do not hire one yet).

---

## Role scorecard -- Account Executive (AE)

### Mission

Convert product-qualified signups and hand-raisers into paying customers at $12k ACV, while building the repeatable playbook that will scale beyond the founder. Own the full cycle from first meeting through close.

### Outcomes (30/60/90)

- **30 days:**
  - Completed product training and can demo the core use case without notes
  - Shadowed 10+ founder calls and debriefed each
  - Run 5+ solo discovery calls with written recaps
  - Created 3+ qualified opportunities (Stage 1+)
  - Can articulate ICP, top 3 objections, and competitive positioning from memory
- **60 days:**
  - Running full sales cycle independently (discovery through proposal)
  - 5+ demos delivered; at least 2 proposals/pilots in progress
  - First closed-won deal (stretch target; not a fireable miss)
  - Win/loss notes logged for every completed deal
  - Participating actively in weekly pipeline review with data-backed updates
- **90 days:**
  - Closing at ~20% win rate from first meeting (comparable to founder baseline)
  - $15k+ qualified pipeline created per month
  - 2--3 closed-won deals
  - Contributing to motion spec improvements (objections, qualifying questions, demo flow)
  - Can onboard the next AE using documented process

### Must-have signals

| Signal | How we'll test it |
|---|---|
| **Learning speed** -- picks up new domains and products fast | Product deep-dive interview: give them 30 min with the product, then ask them to explain it back and answer customer-like questions |
| **Diagnostic discovery** -- asks probing, layered questions (not a feature checklist) | Mock discovery exercise: play a prospect with a hidden pain; score how quickly they uncover it |
| **Product curiosity / PM-like thinking** -- genuinely wants to understand how the product works, not just pitch it | "Explain to 10 engineers" test: can they reason about the product's architecture, tradeoffs, or use cases at a level that earns technical credibility? |
| **Writing clarity** -- concise, customer-centric follow-ups | Written follow-up exercise: after the mock discovery, send a recap email within 30 minutes |
| **Coachability** -- incorporates feedback mid-interview | Give specific feedback after round 1 of mock discovery; observe if they adjust approach in round 2 |
| **Process discipline** -- logs data, follows up on time, prepares for meetings | Reference check: "Tell me about a time this person had to follow a structured sales process. Did they follow it or freelance?" |
| **Grit without ego** -- comfortable with rejection, doesn't blame external factors | Behavioral interview: "Tell me about a quarter where you missed target. What did you do?" Look for ownership, not excuses. |

### Red flags

- Wants to "bring their book of business" and skip learning the product (wrong stage)
- Cannot explain their current product beyond surface-level marketing language
- Dismisses small deal sizes ($12k) as beneath them
- Asks about SDR support, lead gen team, or territory before asking about the product/customer
- Gives vague answers about why they win or lose deals ("it's all about relationships")
- Has only sold in mature orgs with full enablement infrastructure

### Product depth bar

- Can explain what the product does in one sentence that a non-technical buyer would understand
- Can articulate why it's better than the status quo (spreadsheets, manual process, competitor) with specifics
- Asks "engineer-grade" questions: not posturing, but genuine curiosity about how the product works and where it breaks
- After 30 minutes with the product, can identify at least one use case the interviewer didn't mention

### Practical tests (mapped to interview loop)

- **Mock discovery:** 20-minute role play where interviewer is a prospect with a specific pain. Score: question quality, active listening, pain identification, next-step proposal.
- **Product deep-dive:** 30 minutes with the product (self-guided), then a 15-minute "teach-back" where they explain it to the interviewer as if they're a prospect.
- **Written follow-up:** After the mock discovery, write a follow-up email (30 min). Score: clarity, customer-centricity, accuracy, next-step specificity.
- **Coachability round:** After the first mock discovery, give 2--3 specific pieces of feedback. Run a second mock. Score: degree of adjustment.

---

## Interview loop -- Account Executive

### Stages

| # | Stage | Duration | Interviewer | What we're testing | Format |
|---|---|---:|---|---|---|
| 1 | Recruiter screen | 30 min | Recruiter / founder | Motivation, stage fit, comp expectations, basic pattern match | Phone/video call |
| 2 | Hiring manager deep-dive | 45 min | Founder | Sales process rigor, learning ability, self-awareness, deal walkthroughs | Video call with structured questions |
| 3 | Mock discovery | 45 min | Founder + 1 team member | Diagnostic selling, question quality, listening, objection handling | Live role play (interviewer plays prospect) |
| 4 | Product deep-dive | 60 min | Founder or product lead | Product curiosity, PM-like reasoning, technical credibility, teach-back ability | 30 min self-guided product exploration + 15 min teach-back + 15 min Q&A |
| 5 | Written follow-up | 30--60 min (async) | Scored by founder + team member | Writing clarity, customer empathy, accuracy, next-step discipline | Candidate sends follow-up email after mock discovery (given 30 min) |
| 6 | References | 2 calls | Founder | Domain learning speed, coachability, process discipline, performance under ambiguity | Structured reference calls with specific questions |

### Question bank (key questions per stage)

**Stage 2 -- Hiring manager deep-dive:**
- "Walk me through your last 3 deals: one you won, one you lost, one that's stuck. For each: what was your process, what did you learn, what would you change?"
- "Describe a time you had to learn a new product or domain from scratch. How did you get up to speed? How long did it take?"
- "What's your system for managing your pipeline and following up? Show me (screen share your CRM or tool if possible)."
- "Why are you interested in an early-stage company at $12k ACV? What excites you and what concerns you?"
- "If I gave you 50 inbound leads next week and no playbook, what would you do first?"

**Stage 3 -- Mock discovery:**
- Interviewer plays a mid-market ops manager whose team uses spreadsheets for the core workflow. Pain is real but not urgent. Budget exists but requires VP approval.
- Score: Does the candidate uncover the pain, quantify the impact, identify the decision-maker, and propose a clear next step?

**Stage 4 -- Product deep-dive:**
- "You've had 30 minutes with the product. Explain what it does to me as if I'm a prospect who just signed up."
- "What questions do you still have about how the product works?"
- "If an engineer asked you 'why would I use this instead of building it in-house,' how would you respond?"
- "What's one thing about the product that surprised you or that you'd want to understand better?"

**Stage 6 -- Reference questions:**
- "On a scale of 1--10, how quickly does [candidate] learn new domains? Can you give a specific example?"
- "Tell me about a time [candidate] received tough feedback. How did they respond?"
- "In a startup environment with limited resources, how would [candidate] perform? Have you seen them in ambiguity?"
- "Would you hire [candidate] again? Why or why not?"

### Scorecard dimensions (1--5 scale)

| Dimension | 1 (Weak) | 3 (Acceptable) | 5 (Exceptional) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Domain learning speed | Cannot articulate the product after exposure | Explains the product adequately but misses nuance | Grasps the product, identifies use cases, asks insightful follow-ups |
| Diagnostic discovery | Feature-dumps; asks yes/no questions | Asks open-ended questions; finds surface-level pain | Layers questions; uncovers root cause, impact, and urgency; quantifies pain |
| Product depth + credibility | Superficial understanding; hand-wavy with technical questions | Can explain the product; handles basic technical questions | Reasons about architecture/tradeoffs; earns trust from technical stakeholders |
| Objection handling + next steps | Gets flustered; accepts objections at face value; no next step | Handles common objections; proposes a next step | Reframes objections into discovery; turns pushback into commitment; specific next steps with dates |
| Writing clarity | Vague, generic, typos, no clear ask | Clear and professional; includes a next step | Concise, customer-centric, references specific pain discussed, actionable next step, zero errors |
| Coachability | Ignores or dismisses feedback | Acknowledges feedback; some adjustment in next round | Visibly incorporates feedback; performance improves measurably between rounds |

### Scoring and decision rules

- **Strong Hire:** Average score >= 4.0, no dimension below 3, and at least two dimensions at 5.
- **Hire:** Average score >= 3.5, no dimension below 2, product depth >= 3.
- **No Hire:** Any dimension at 1, or average below 3.0, or product depth below 2.
- **Borderline (3.0--3.4 average):** Requires a calibration discussion. Look for "spiky" candidates who are exceptional in 1--2 areas and coachable in the rest.

### Debrief protocol

1. Each interviewer submits scores and written evidence to a shared doc **before** the debrief meeting.
2. Debrief meeting (30 min): founder leads. Review scores dimension by dimension. Discuss disagreements with evidence, not opinions.
3. Final decision: founder makes the call. Record "why yes / why no" for future calibration.
4. If the decision is "no," note the top reason -- this calibrates the pipeline and recruiter screen for future candidates.

---

## Onboarding + ramp plan -- Account Executive

### Pre-start (week 0)

- [ ] CRM access configured (deals, contacts, pipeline view)
- [ ] Email + calendar set up
- [ ] Call recording tool access (Gong, Chorus, or equivalent)
- [ ] Product sandbox / demo environment credentials
- [ ] Shared folder with: motion spec, ICP doc, pricing guardrails, objection doc, case studies, call recordings (5 best founder calls)
- [ ] Week 1 schedule pre-built: shadowing sessions, product training, 1:1 with founder

### Week 1--2: Foundation (shadowing + product immersion)

| Day | Activity | "Done" looks like |
|---|---|---|
| 1--2 | Product deep-dive: self-guided exploration + structured walkthrough with founder/PM | Can demo the core use case end-to-end without help |
| 1--5 | Shadow 10 founder calls (mix of discovery, demo, closing). Write a debrief note after each. | 10 debrief notes submitted; can articulate the discovery flow and common objections |
| 3--5 | Study: ICP doc, motion spec, pricing guardrails, competitive landscape | Passes a "quiz" from founder: explain ICP, top 3 objections, pricing boundaries |
| 6--8 | Role-play: 3 mock discovery calls with founder. Receive feedback after each. | Discovery call quality score >= 3/5 on the internal rubric |
| 8--10 | First solo discovery calls (founder listens silently, debriefs after) | Runs 3+ solo calls; written recaps within 24 hours; founder rates quality >= 3/5 |

### 30/60/90 targets

| Phase | Activity / leading targets | Pipeline / revenue targets | Skill milestones |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Day 30** | 15+ discovery calls run; 10+ solo | 3+ qualified opps (Stage 1+); $36k+ pipeline created | Runs discovery independently; demos without founder; logs all deals in CRM; articulates ICP + objections from memory |
| **Day 60** | 25+ total discovery calls; 5+ demos delivered | 5+ qualified opps; 2+ in Stage 2+; $60k+ cumulative pipeline; first close (stretch) | Runs full cycle independently; proposals without founder review; contributes to objection doc; participating in pipeline review with data |
| **Day 90** | Full pipeline management; 8+ demos/month | ~20% win rate from Stage 1; $15k+ new pipeline/month; 2--3 closed-won deals ($24--36k) | Onboards next AE; identifies process improvements; operates independently with weekly coaching only |

**Important:** Day 30 and Day 60 targets are primarily activity and skill milestones. Revenue targets at Day 90 are calibrated to the founder's baseline but are NOT treated as hard quotas -- the pilot is measuring process viability, not punishing reps.

### Coaching cadence (weekly)

| Day/Time | Session | Format | Participants |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monday, 9:00 AM | Pipeline review (30 min) | Each AE walks through their pipeline: stage, next step, blockers, forecast | Founder + both AEs |
| Wednesday, 2:00 PM | Call coaching (45 min) | Review 1--2 recorded calls per AE. Score on discovery quality, objection handling, next-step discipline. Give specific, actionable feedback. | Founder + 1 AE (alternate weeks) |
| Friday, 4:00 PM | Experiment review (30 min) | What did we try this week? What worked? What are we changing next week? Update the motion spec if needed. | Founder + both AEs |
| Ongoing | Async call reviews | Founder reviews 3--5 calls/week per AE in the call recording tool. Leaves timestamped comments. | Founder (async) |

### Metrics to track (weekly dashboard)

**Leading indicators:**
- Discovery calls booked / completed
- First-meeting-to-next-step conversion rate (target: >60%)
- Qualified opportunities created (Stage 1+)
- Pipeline value created ($)
- Demos / pilots delivered
- Follow-up emails sent within 24 hours (% compliance)

**Conversion / quality metrics:**
- Stage 1 to Stage 2 conversion rate
- Stage 2 to closed-won conversion rate
- Overall win rate (Stage 1 to closed-won)
- Average deal cycle (days)
- Average deal size ($)
- Pilot-to-close conversion rate (if applicable)

**Diagnostic / learning metrics:**
- AE #1 vs. AE #2 comparison on all above (A/B baseline)
- Discovery call quality score (founder-rated, 1--5)
- Disqualification rate and reasons (are we routing the right leads?)
- Top 3 loss reasons this month (track trend over time)

### Process vs. person diagnosis (A/B learning loop)

| Signal | Likely diagnosis | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Both AEs underperform at day 60 | Process/motion problem | Revisit the motion spec, lead routing, and qualification criteria. The reps are not the issue. |
| One AE performs, one doesn't | Coaching/fit issue | Increase coaching for the underperformer. Review call recordings for specific gaps. If no improvement by day 90, evaluate fit. |
| Both AEs outperform founder baseline | Motion is more repeatable than expected | Accelerate hiring plan; consider SDR to increase top-of-funnel. |
| Win rate drops for both AEs vs. founder | Founder relationship capital, not process | Expected initially. Track the trend. If win rate doesn't improve toward baseline by day 90, the motion may not be as teachable as assumed. |

---

## Risks

| # | Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | **Inconsistent upgrade signal makes lead routing unreliable.** The 2,000 signups/month may not produce enough qualified hand-raisers to keep two AEs busy. | Medium | High | Audit signup data before AEs start. Define "product-qualified lead" criteria (usage threshold, plan type, company size). If hand-raiser volume is <30/month, supplement with founder-sourced outbound leads for the first 60 days. |
| 2 | **Founder becomes the bottleneck.** Founder is simultaneously closing their own deals, coaching two AEs, and running the company. | High | High | Block 10 hours/week for AE coaching (non-negotiable). Transfer all new Stage 0 leads to AEs by day 15. Founder handles only existing pipeline and escalations. Hire a part-time RevOps/ops person if CRM and lead routing are consuming >5 hours/week. |
| 3 | **"One data point" masquerading as A/B.** Despite hiring two AEs, differences in lead quality, personality dynamics, or randomness make the comparison unreliable. | Medium | Medium | Enforce alternating lead assignment (round-robin). Track lead quality metrics (source, ICP score) per AE. Require 30+ at-bats per AE before drawing conclusions. |
| 4 | **Hiring the wrong profile.** Candidates from large orgs expect infrastructure, SDR support, and defined territories that don't exist at seed stage. | Medium | High | Scorecard explicitly tests for ambiguity tolerance and startup fit. Ask: "What's the scrappiest sales environment you've worked in?" Red-flag candidates who can't name one. |
| 5 | **The motion is less repeatable than the data suggests.** Founder's 23% win rate may include relationship deals or early-adopter bias. | Low-Medium | High | Tag existing 16 wins as "relationship" vs. "process" driven. If >50% are relationship-driven, extend the pilot learning period to 120 days and lower Day 90 win rate targets to ~15%. |
| 6 | **Premature SDR hire pressure.** After 60 days, there may be pressure to hire SDRs for outbound before the inbound motion is proven. | Medium | Medium | Commit: no SDR hire until both AEs are consistently pipeline-constrained (>30 qualified opps/month) and the inbound win rate stabilizes. |

---

## Open questions

| # | Question | Owner | How we'll answer it | Deadline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | What % of 2,000 monthly signups are ICP-fit and show upgrade intent? | Founder | Audit last 90 days of signup data; define PQL criteria; estimate monthly hand-raiser volume | Before AE start date |
| 2 | What are the top 3 win reasons and top 3 loss reasons from founder's 70 at-bats? | Founder | Review CRM/notes; categorize each closed-won and closed-lost deal | Before AE start date |
| 3 | Is there existing CS/support capacity to handle post-sale onboarding, or will AEs need to do it? | Founder | Map current post-sale workflow; decide if AEs own onboarding for the first 90 days | Before AE start date |
| 4 | What CRM and call recording tools are in place (or need to be set up)? | Founder | Inventory current stack; set up missing tools (CRM pipeline stages, call recording, lead routing) | 1 week before AE start date |
| 5 | Do the 14 pending deals represent a different buyer profile or objection pattern than the 16 wins? | Founder | Review pending deals; classify by stage and blocker. This may reveal a "stuck" segment that requires a different approach. | Before AE start date |
| 6 | What compensation package will we offer? (OTE, base/variable split, ramp guarantee) | Founder | Use `sales-compensation` skill to design comp plan. For seed-stage $12k ACV, typical range: $80--120k OTE, 60/40 or 70/30 base/variable split, 3-month ramp guarantee. | Before job posting goes live |

---

## Next steps (this week)

1. **Audit signup data** to define PQL criteria and estimate monthly hand-raiser volume. Deliverable: a one-page "lead routing spec" that says which signups get routed to AEs vs. self-serve vs. disqualified. (Owner: Founder. Deadline: end of week.)

2. **Document win/loss reasons** from the 70 at-bats. Create a simple table: Deal name | Won/Lost/Pending | Primary reason | Relationship-driven? (Y/N). (Owner: Founder. Deadline: end of week.)

3. **Finalize the sales motion spec** above with real data (fill in ICP firmographics, actual objections, actual win themes). Print it and tape it to the wall. (Owner: Founder. Deadline: end of week.)

4. **Design comp plan** using the `sales-compensation` skill. Decide OTE, base/variable split, ramp guarantee, and any equity component. (Owner: Founder. Deadline: end of this week.)

5. **Post the AE job description** based on the role scorecard above. Source candidates through: LinkedIn, sales communities (Bravado, Pavilion, RepVue), founder network, and one specialized recruiter if budget allows. Target: 10 qualified candidates in pipeline within 2 weeks. (Owner: Founder. Deadline: start of next week.)

6. **Set up tooling** if not already in place: CRM with pipeline stages matching the motion spec, call recording tool, round-robin lead assignment. (Owner: Founder. Deadline: before AE start date.)

7. **Schedule the interview loop** for first candidates. Allocate 3 hours/candidate (across all stages). Target: extend offers within 3--4 weeks; both AEs starting within 2 weeks of each other. (Owner: Founder. Deadline: next week.)

---

## Quality gate self-assessment

### Checklist verification

- [x] **A) Readiness gate:** Motion stated (hybrid PLG + founder-led), baseline funnel included, hire-now decision tied to measurable criteria, scoped as pilot with learning time protected.
- [x] **B) Motion spec:** At-bat defined, stages have exit criteria, first meeting agenda exists, demo/pilot criteria explicit, pricing guardrails included, founder vs rep responsibilities clear.
- [x] **C) Team design:** Topology matches motion (PLG pilot pod), hiring sequence justified, A/B test plan included, avoids premature specialization, technical coverage via founder.
- [x] **D) Hiring criteria:** Scorecards define 30/60/90 outcomes, must-have signals and red flags, PM-like product depth bar, all signals testable.
- [x] **E) Interview loop:** Stages cover full scorecard, practical exercises included (mock discovery, product deep-dive, written follow-up, coachability), structured scoring 1--5, debrief protocol with evidence.
- [x] **F) Onboarding + management:** 30/60/90 ramp plan with measurable targets, weekly cadence defined, leading + conversion metrics, process vs person diagnosis built in.
- [x] **G) Final sections:** Risks listed with mitigations, open questions with owners and deadlines, next steps executable this week.

### Rubric scoring

| Dimension | Score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Readiness gate clarity | 2 | Decision tied to specific metrics (23% win rate over 70 at-bats, 30--45 day cycle). Milestones for re-evaluation defined. Assumptions labeled with validation plan. |
| 2. Sales motion spec | 2 | Full spec with stage exit criteria, demo/pilot rules, pricing guardrails, objection responses, and explicit founder/rep/CS responsibilities for 60--90 days. |
| 3. Team design + sequencing | 2 | PLG pilot pod topology matches the motion. Two AEs hired close together with A/B baseline. Hiring sequence justified. No premature SDR/SE specialization. |
| 4. Role scorecards | 2 | Specific outcomes at 30/60/90. Seven must-have signals, each mapped to an interview exercise or reference check. Product depth bar operationalized with "explain to engineers" test. |
| 5. Interview loop quality | 2 | Six structured stages with four practical exercises. Numeric 1--5 scoring with anchors. Evidence-based debrief protocol with explicit hire/no-hire thresholds. |
| 6. Onboarding + ramp + cadence | 2 | Measurable targets at 30/60/90 (activity + pipeline + skill). Weekly coaching cadence scheduled. A/B learning loop with process-vs-person diagnosis. |
| 7. Execution readiness | 2 | Six specific risks with mitigations (including trigger conditions). Six open questions with owners and deadlines. Seven next steps executable this week. |
| **Total** | **14/14** | |