Sales Processes
Stabilize Stage | $1-5M ARR | 10-30 headcount
Main challenge: Making growth repeatable. First hires, handoffs breaking.
Sales Processes
ICP / Personas
Stage-appropriate approach: The ICP hypothesis from Build is now validated (or invalidated). Enough data exists to know what actually works. Time to document clearly so new hires can use it.
What changes at Stabilize:
- Move from hypothesis to definition — Enough deals have closed to see patterns. Which customers succeeded? Which churned? Why?
- Document for repeatability — The ICP needs to be clear enough that a new SDR or AE can qualify leads without asking the founder.
- Start segmentation thinking — SMB may behave differently than mid-market. Start tracking, even if segments aren't formalized yet.
ICP documentation at this stage:
| Element | What to Document | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Industry/Vertical | Top 2-3 verticals with highest win rate | Focus outbound, prioritize inbound |
| Company Size | Employee/revenue ranges that work | Stop wasting time on bad-fit companies |
| Pain Signals | Observable problems (not just demographics) | Better qualification |
| Buyer Persona | Title, role, what they care about | Message to the right person |
| Anti-ICP | Who NOT to sell to | Save time, reduce churn |
What NOT to do:
- Don't keep the ICP in your head — new hires need it written
- Don't over-segment — not enough volume for complex segmentation yet
- Don't ignore churn patterns — churned customers reveal who wasn't actually ICP
Playbook reference: → Market Map (for ICP documentation framework)
Qualification
Stage-appropriate approach: Move from informal questions to a defined framework. Your reps need clear criteria to work from. But keep it simple — 5-7 criteria max.
Why formal qualification matters now:
- Founder intuition doesn't transfer — reps need explicit criteria
- More leads than can be handled — prioritization matters
- Bad-fit deals waste everyone's time and hurt morale
Stabilize stage qualification framework:
Pick a methodology and customize it. Common options:
| Framework | Best For | Keep in Mind |
|---|---|---|
| BANT | SMB, transactional | Simple but shallow — easy for new reps |
| MEDDIC | Mid-market, enterprise | More rigorous, requires training |
| SPICED | Consultative sales | Good for complex products |
Minimum qualification criteria to define:
- Problem fit — Do they have the specific pain your product solves?
- Budget — Can they pay your price? (Not "do they have budget" but "at our price point")
- Authority — Are we talking to someone who can decide or influence?
- Timeline — Is there urgency? What's driving it?
- Fit — Are they in our ICP? Would they be a good customer?
How to use qualification:
- For SDRs — Qualification is about whether to pass to AE, not about closing
- For AEs — Qualification continues in discovery, not just first call
- For pipeline hygiene — Deals that fail qualification should be disqualified, not left to rot
What NOT to do:
- Don't create a 15-point qualification checklist — nobody will use it
- Don't let reps make up their own criteria — inconsistent pipeline
- Don't qualify only on first call — qualification evolves through discovery
Playbook reference: → Sales Qualification Methodology
Sales Stage Entry/Exit
Stage-appropriate approach: Refine your stages based on real data. Add clear entry/exit criteria so reps know when to move deals. This is foundational for forecasting.
Why this matters at Stabilize:
- Pipeline reviews become real — everyone needs to know what stage means
- Forecasting starts — stage probabilities require consistent stage definitions
- Rep coaching — "Why is this in Stage 3?" needs a clear answer
Stabilize stage sales stages:
| Stage | Entry Criteria | Exit Criteria | Typical Duration |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Discovery | Meeting booked | Problem confirmed, stakeholders identified | 1-2 weeks |
| 2. Qualified | Meets qualification criteria | Champion identified, use case scoped | 1-2 weeks |
| 3. Solution | Demo completed, solution mapped | Technical validation, pricing discussed | 2-4 weeks |
| 4. Proposal | Proposal sent | Terms agreed, legal/procurement engaged | 1-3 weeks |
| 5. Commit | Verbal commitment | Contract signed | 1-2 weeks |
| 6. Closed Won/Lost | Deal done | — | — |
Stage discipline:
- Clear entry criteria — Deals shouldn't move forward without meeting criteria
- Regular stage reviews — Weekly pipeline review should validate stage accuracy
- Stage-based forecasting — Commit deals count differently than discovery deals
What NOT to do:
- Don't let reps define their own stages — forecasting accuracy suffers
- Don't have 10 stages — too granular to be useful
- Don't ignore stuck deals — deals in the same stage for 2x typical duration need attention
Playbook reference: → Sales Lifecycle
Deck and Demo Process
Stage-appropriate approach: Create a rep-ready deck and demo flow. Founder deck was custom; rep deck needs to work consistently without founder intuition.
What changes at Stabilize:
- Rep deck vs. founder deck — Reps need structure, not improvisation. Create a deck they can deliver.
- Demo script/flow — Document the flow that works. New reps should follow it.
- Objection handling — Capture and share responses to common objections.
Rep-ready demo structure:
- Opening (5 min) — Agenda, confirm goals, build rapport
- Discovery confirmation (5-10 min) — Validate understanding from earlier calls
- Problem statement (3 min) — Reflect their pain back, demonstrate understanding
- Solution overview (10-15 min) — High-level, then deep-dive on their use case
- Proof points (5 min) — Case study, demo of specific workflow, ROI
- Next steps (5 min) — Clear ask, timeline, who else needs to see this
Demo assets to create:
| Asset | Purpose | Update Cadence |
|---|---|---|
| Master deck | Standard presentation for reps | Quarterly |
| Demo environment | Clean instance with realistic data | Keep current |
| Objection doc | Common objections + responses | Ongoing as new ones emerge |
| Competitive battle cards | How to position against alternatives | As competitive landscape changes |
What NOT to do:
- Don't let every rep create their own deck — inconsistent experience
- Don't demo features without use case context — becomes a feature tour
- Don't assume reps will figure it out — document what works
Playbook reference: → Sales Enablement (for later — when you have an enablement function)
Proposal and Quote Generation
Stage-appropriate approach: Move from one-off proposals to templates. Still flexible, but structured enough that anyone can send a clean proposal.
What changes at Stabilize:
- Templates, not from-scratch — Create 1-2 proposal templates for common deal types
- Standard pricing (mostly) — Define your pricing structure, even if you flex on edge cases
- E-signature — Stop emailing PDFs and chasing signatures
Proposal structure:
| Section | What to Include | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Executive summary | Their problem, why this solution, expected outcome | Decision-maker skim |
| Proposed solution | What they get, scope of implementation | Clarity on deliverable |
| Investment | Pricing, terms, what's included | No surprises |
| Timeline | Start date, milestones, go-live | Sets expectations |
| Terms | Payment, contract length, key terms | Reduce back-and-forth |
Recommended tools:
| Tool | When to Use | Pricing |
|---|---|---|
| PandaDoc | E-sign + proposal templates | Business $49/user/mo (annual) |
| Qwilr | More visual proposals | ~$35/user/mo |
| HubSpot Quotes | If on HubSpot Sales Hub | Included in Pro |
| DocuSign | E-sign only | ~$25/user/mo |
What NOT to do:
- Don't still use Google Docs for everything — professionalism matters now
- Don't give every rep pricing authority — define what they can flex
- Don't skip e-signature — chasing signatures is a time sink
CS Handoff
Stage-appropriate approach: Formalize the handoff. CS (now a real role) needs structured context. Document what the customer bought, why, and what success looks like.
Why this matters at Stabilize:
- Founder handoffs worked because founder knew everything. Reps don't.
- CS can't succeed if they don't know what the customer was promised.
- Customer experience drops when handoffs are sloppy.
Stabilize stage handoff process:
- Sales completes handoff doc — Template with key fields (filled, not empty)
- Internal handoff call — 15-30 min between AE and CSM to walk through
- Joint kickoff — AE joins first call with customer, then transitions out
Handoff documentation (minimum):
| Field | What to Capture | Why |
|---|---|---|
| What they bought | Products, seats, pricing, contract terms | CS needs to know scope |
| Why they bought | Pain points, use cases, success criteria | Context for onboarding |
| Who's involved | Champion, decision-maker, end users | Relationship map |
| Implementation notes | Technical requirements, integrations, timeline | Smooth onboarding |
| Risk flags | Any concerns, tricky dynamics, dependencies | Proactive CS |
What NOT to do:
- Don't expect CS to "figure it out" from the CRM — they won't
- Don't skip the internal handoff call — context gets lost
- Don't let AE disappear immediately — transitional presence builds trust
Playbook reference: → Sales to CS Handoff Process
Territory Design
Stage-appropriate approach: Probably still premature. Only consider if you have 2+ reps and need to prevent overlap. Keep it simple.
When to think about territories at Stabilize:
- 2+ AEs selling to the same market
- Rep collision on accounts is happening
- Ownership assignment needed (not just conflict management)
Simple territory approaches for Stabilize:
| Approach | When It Works | Watch Out For |
|---|---|---|
| Geography | Clear regional differences, local relationships matter | Uneven market sizes |
| Named accounts | Specific target list, ABM-ish | Requires defined account list |
| Round robin | Small team, similar market | No ownership, less accountability |
| Segment (SMB/MM) | Clear ACV differences, different motions | Requires segment definition |
What NOT to do at this stage:
- Don't build complex territory models — they'll change in 6 months
- Don't hire territory ops — overkill
- Don't ignore the problem if reps are fighting over accounts — simple rules prevent conflict
Playbook reference: → Sales Territory Design (for later — when you have a team to assign territories to)
Commission Plan Design
Stage-appropriate approach: With a rep on the team, a comp plan is needed. Keep it simple. Align incentives with desired behaviors.
First rep comp plan principles:
- Simple over clever — If they can't explain it in 30 seconds, it's too complex
- Aligned with what matters — New logos? Expansion? Retention? Comp for it
- Achievable with effort — OTE should be realistic based on pipeline and win rates
Basic comp structure for Stabilize:
| Component | Typical Range | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Base | 50-70% of OTE | Higher base for new market, lower for proven territory |
| Variable | 30-50% of OTE | Commission on closed-won |
| Accelerators | 1.5-2x above quota | Reward over-performance |
| Payment timing | Monthly or quarterly | Keep cash flow manageable |
First comp plan template:
- OTE: $X (base + commission at quota)
- Quota: $Y ARR closed (realistic given pipeline)
- Commission rate: Z% of closed ARR
- Accelerator: Above quota, earn 1.5x rate
- Payment: Monthly on collected revenue
What NOT to do:
- Don't copy enterprise comp plans — too complex for this stage
- Don't set unattainable quotas — kills morale, signals distrust
- Don't change comp mid-quarter — destroys trust
- Don't comp on things that don't matter — behavior follows incentives
Ramp and claw-back guidance:
- Ramp period: 3-6 months for first AE. Reduced quota during ramp (50% month 1, 75% month 2, 100% month 3+).
- Claw-backs: Keep simple at this stage — claw back only on churns within 90 days. Complex claw-back rules create distrust.
- Draw vs. commission: Consider a draw (guaranteed minimum) during ramp, then transition to full commission structure.