Worked Execution Examples

Three scenarios showing how the framework behaves at the edges. Each follows the skill's four-category structure (fit, readiness, discovery, disqualifier) and uses the correct pre-discovery or post-discovery verdict.

Example 1: Good fit, no readiness signal

Account: Mid-market SaaS company, 400 employees, separate marketing and sales teams, CRM in active use, multi-stakeholder buying confirmed.

Fit (all criteria evaluated from research):

• Company size: Yes (400 employees, cited from enrichment data)
• Separate functions: Yes (VP Marketing and VP Sales listed on company page)
• Complex buying: Yes (enterprise sales motion per website)
• CRM discipline: Yes (Salesforce listed in tech stack)

Readiness (observable events that might indicate status quo disruption):

• No leadership changes in the last 6 months
• No acquisitions, technology migrations, or hiring signals
• No network intelligence
• No observable evidence that the status quo is under pressure

Discovery criteria: not yet evaluated (no conversation has occurred)

Disqualifiers: not yet evaluated (no conversation has occurred)

Pre-discovery verdict: Watch

The company fits but there are no readiness signals. Nothing observable suggests the status quo has been disrupted. Without evidence that something is changing inside the company, there is no reason to believe they would act even if contacted.

Flip condition: An observable readiness signal fires — a leadership change, acquisition, or network contact surfaces relevant intelligence suggesting the status quo is under pressure.

Next action: Add to watchlist. Monitor for readiness signals. Do not pursue.

Why this matters: An agent that sees fit and outputs Investigate is inventing urgency. Fit without readiness is a Watch. The status quo is the default; only evidence of disruption justifies investigation.

Example 2: Strong readiness signal, fails fit threshold

Account: 80-person startup. New CRO hired two weeks ago per LinkedIn.

Fit (evaluated from research):

• Company size: No (80 employees — below the threshold this operator defined from their win/loss analysis as the minimum for meaningful cross-functional complexity)
• Separate functions: Unknown (small enough that roles may overlap)

Readiness (observable event):

• New CRO: Observed fact (LinkedIn profile shows start date two weeks ago)
• Hypothesis: May be reassessing the GTM system; the status quo inherited from the previous leader may not survive
• Unknown: Whether the company has enough infrastructure to diagnose

Pre-discovery verdict: Pass

The readiness signal is real, but the company fails this operator's defined fit threshold. A strong signal does not override a fit failure. The fit threshold exists precisely to prevent good signals from pulling resources toward accounts that do not meet the minimum conditions for this type of work.

Flip condition: Company grows past the fit threshold, or evidence emerges that the organizational complexity is greater than the headcount suggests.

Next action: Do not pursue. Log the signal in case the company scales.

Why this matters: An agent that sees a strong readiness signal and outputs Investigate without checking fit is chasing noise. Readiness signals on a non-fit account are not opportunities. Fit must be confirmed before readiness is evaluated.

Example 3: Good fit, strong readiness, disqualified in discovery

Account: 2,000-person manufacturing company. Post-acquisition integration in progress. New VP Marketing started 60 days ago. Multiple routes to market. CRM and marketing automation confirmed.

Fit (evaluated from research):

• Company size: Yes (2,000 employees)
• Separate functions: Yes (VP Marketing, VP Sales, Director of RevOps)
• Complex buying: Yes (multi-channel manufacturer with dealer network)
• CRM discipline: Yes (Salesforce and Marketo confirmed)

Readiness (observable events):

• Post-acquisition integration: Observed fact (press release, 8 months ago) Hypothesis: Integration may be creating GTM friction; the status quo from both legacy organizations may be colliding. Unknown: Which functions are affected, whether leadership views integration as an operational task or a system redesign opportunity.
• New VP Marketing: Observed fact (LinkedIn, started 60 days ago) Hypothesis: May have inherited a system in flux. May be in diagnostic mode. The pre-acquisition status quo may no longer apply; the new leader may be deciding what to keep, what to change, and where to invest. Unknown: Whether the new VP is questioning the system or focused on stabilization. Whether they have authority for diagnostic work.
• Supporting evidence: Two stacking readiness signals on the same account
• Evidence strength: Strong (multiple signals from independent sources, strong fit)

Pre-discovery verdict: Investigate

Fit confirmed. Two readiness signals stacking. Multiple indicators suggest the status quo may be under pressure. Worth a conversation to confirm.

Discovery call reveals (discovery criteria and disqualifiers evaluated):

• The new VP Marketing says: "We just need someone to run our email campaigns and manage our trade show leads. Our agency left and we need a replacement."
• Business problem: "Our system works fine. We just need the execution capacity." (In their own words — this is not a diagnosis problem.)
• Status quo pressure: None acknowledged. The VP does not describe friction, misalignment, or underperformance. The status quo is tolerable; they want more hands, not a different approach.
• Sponsor: "I am. I have budget for a contractor." (Budget for a contractor, not for diagnostic or strategic work.)
• Disqualifiers confirmed:
  1. Wants execution, not diagnosis (hard disqualifier)
  2. No systemic problem acknowledged (discovery criterion: No)
  3. Scope mismatch: contractor for tactical work (watch/validate flag: probed and confirmed as execution-only)

Post-discovery verdict: Pass

The readiness signals were real — the company is genuinely in flux. But the new VP Marketing has not yet experienced enough status quo friction to question the system itself. They inherited chaos and their first instinct is to stabilize with more hands, not to diagnose why the system underperforms. That is common in the first 60 days.

Flip condition: The VP Marketing discovers that the "system that works fine" is actually producing pipeline friction — common 3-6 months into a new role, after the initial stabilization phase. If they come back with different questions — "why aren't our leads converting?" rather than "can you run our campaigns?" — re-evaluate.

Next action: Pass on the current engagement. Maintain the relationship. The readiness signals suggest this account may re-emerge as a real opportunity when the new leader moves from stabilization to diagnosis.

Why this matters: Fit + readiness signals do not equal a qualified opportunity. The conversation is the qualifying event. Research identifies candidates. Discovery qualifies them. An agent that sees fit + signals and locks in Pursue without discovery evidence is skipping the step that separates real opportunities from active-looking accounts where the status quo will win.