Reference file

Deliverables

deliverables.md

Deliverables

Three artifacts, and all three are load-bearing. The two files are what a rep works from; the page is what makes the plan a conversation with leadership rather than an attachment nobody opens.

1. Accounts file

One row per deduplicated account:

Field Notes
rank, tier, track Track is new-logo / migrate / displace / expand / partner
name, domain The parent name, not the registered division string
vertical, firmographics Revenue, employees, HQ — blank where unknown, never zero
score, score components Ship the components, not just the total
tech signals Vendor product, each competitor, end-of-life flag
attendee count, attendee names The people physically in the room
division list The sheet_names field — every string that merged into this row
decision-maker count Populated for Tier 1 and top expansion only
why this account Written, one or two sentences
the angle to open with Written, specific to this account

The last two fields are the only ones a rep actually reads under time pressure. If they are empty on a Tier 1 row, that row is not finished.

2. Decision-makers file

Named attendees first — they will physically be there — then sourced contacts behind them. Every row carries account tier, track, persona, and the outreach angle, so the file works standalone when someone sorts it or hands one slice to one rep.

Names and titles only, unless the user explicitly asked for contact details.

3. The war-room page

A single shareable page. Sections that earn their place:

  • KPI row and a funnel — raw list rows → deduplicated accounts → resolved → in-ICP → tiered → workable leads. The drop at each step is the honest story of the list, and it preempts "why is this only 180 accounts?"
  • Tier breakdown by vertical — where the plan is concentrated.
  • Top ~12 accounts to book before the show — the only section some readers will look at.
  • An editable lead plan — conversion percentage per source × ACV → pipeline, with the inputs editable in the page. This is the section that turns a list review into a CRO conversation, because it lets the reader argue with the assumptions instead of the output.
  • A filterable, sortable account table with expandable per-account detail.
  • Named attendees and decision makers, filterable by persona.
  • Plays, messaging themes, and competitor battlecards.
  • A method tab — sources, scoring weights, coverage rates, credits spent, and what you could not get. The gaps section is what makes the rest credible.
  • A team board — owner and status per account, shared live across everyone who opens the page, so the floor team is not maintaining a private copy each. Use whatever shared-state mechanism the publishing surface offers; a page where each viewer's edits are invisible to the others is worse than a spreadsheet.

Verification pass

Run all of it before handing anything over:

  • Row counts reconcile — every deduplicated account appears in exactly one tier on exactly one track, and the funnel numbers add up to the source row count.
  • Spot-check 10 top accounts by hand against the source rows and the vendor's customers page.
  • Existing customers are on the expansion track, not mixed into new logos.
  • Every play names something specific to its vertical.
  • Every Tier 1 row has both written fields filled.
  • No credit-spending calls were made if the user said no credits, and no emails or phone numbers were collected unless asked.
  • Open the page at phone width and in dark mode. It will be read on a phone, standing up, on a show floor.

Two things to raise unprompted

Sourcing. Attendee lists are rarely public and connector data is licensed. If the deliverable will be shown to anyone outside the team holding those licenses, state plainly what came from where — and make sure the user has an answer ready for "where did you get this list?" before they need it.

Personal data. A finished plan contains hundreds of named individuals and their titles. That is normal for an internal sales asset and a real exposure in anything shared more widely. Offer to produce a masked version — initials and titles only, no names, no attendee-level detail — for external circulation. Offer it; do not wait to be asked.