Are the key numbers healthy
What this tab is, and what it is not
A number on its own cannot be healthy or unhealthy. Health needs three things in the same glance: where it stands, what it should be, and which way it is moving. Every row here carries all three, or says plainly which one is missing. There is no score, no traffic light and no single index, because the moment a page compresses this much judgement into one colour the first person who disagrees with the threshold discredits the whole thing. Every figure is read from the same model as the forecast tab, so the two cannot disagree, and the targets at the bottom are what turn a readout into a judgement.
Our targets
How targets work
Type a number and the vital above it starts being measured against it. Targets are held per region, they save with the forecast calls, and they are carried through a rebuild, so this table is where the team's definition of healthy actually lives rather than in somebody's slide. Three carry a default because they are conventions rather than opinions; a default says so on screen so nobody mistakes it for something agreed.
FY2026, as it stands today
How this is calculated
UK and Ireland only. Two columns, and both are arithmetic you can do by hand. Forecast is the run rate plus every large deal somebody has put their hand up for. Upside is that plus the deals we are less sure of, and it includes the forecast rather than sitting on top of it. No deal is counted at a percentage, and nothing is called best case, because a number nobody believes does more harm than good.
Full year subscriptions: where each outcome comes from
Where the rest of the year lands
How this is calculated
Closed actuals to the last complete month, then forecast and upside for every month to December. The dotted line is run rate on its own, so you can see how much of each month is being carried by named deals. Click the build-up on any month to see exactly which deals make the number.
Whose number is it
How this is calculated
The same forecast, split partner by partner and month by month, so each line can be checked against that partner's own pipeline. Switch between forecast and upside. Every partner carries their own run rate, measured from their own history rather than a slice of the total; the jumps are named deals.
The pipeline, deal by deal
How this is calculated
Every open deal of 50 subscriptions or more, in close-date order, filterable by month. One decision per deal: is it in the forecast or is it upside. Nothing in between, because a percentage is a way of avoiding the question. A deal nobody has called counts in neither column. Write why in the note, because that note is what gets read out when someone asks. Where a region's book is small enough to read in one sitting the table opens on every open opportunity; the ones under the threshold are listed for completeness and carry no call, because business that size is already forecast by the run rate.
Every deal big enough to need a call, and what has been called
Where the pipeline is sitting, and what is stuck
What we actually convert
How this is calculated
Every rate here is measured over a rolling twelve months of closed won and closed lost together, ending at the data date. Rolling rather than year to date, so the window always holds the same amount of trading and the number moves when the business moves rather than when the calendar turns over. Two very different answers depending on whether you count opportunities or subscriptions, and only one of them is about revenue. The size gradient further down is the anchor the reality check sits on, so it is worth reading properly before arguing with any number above.
Every subscription decided, by deal size and by why we lost it
How the run rate is calculated
How this is calculated
The whole method, shown rather than described. Every closed-won deal under 50 subscriptions, averaged over a window of complete months. Then the same arithmetic again, partner by partner, using Account Name on the closed export. Measured, not apportioned. Nothing weighted, nothing modelled, nothing seasonal.
Does the called number stand up
How this is calculated
Counting a deal in full is a claim that it will land. This section tests the claim against what deals of that size have actually converted at over the current measurement window. It is not a second forecast and it does not change the number above. It tells you how hard the notes on those deals are working.
Created, won and lost, week by week
How this is calculated
Every week of the year, new against existing customer, with the win rate on what was decided that week and a total closing off each month. This is the view Oli asked for, and it is also what turns every probability on this page from an assumption into a measurement as the weeks accumulate.
Large deals we have lost
How this is calculated
Every lost opportunity of 50 subscriptions or more that Salesforce holds, not just this year, with the partner, the recorded reason and the last note. Read alongside the win rate table: this is the evidence behind the number, and it is the page a board will ask for once they see the conversion rate on large deals.
Recorded loss reasons
How this is calculated
Straight from the Loss Reason field, not inferred from a rep's last note, and now across the whole loss book rather than a single created-date cohort. Where a reason is missing the table says so, because a blank is a finding too.
How long a deal takes, and how long a loss takes
How this is calculated
Measured from created date to close date, wins and losses side by side, by deal size, over every deal since Created Date started being captured. These are typical figures rather than averages, because one nine-month deal drags an average and says nothing about the normal case. Typical means half take longer and half take less.
Every dial, in one place
How this is calculated
Nothing here is hard-coded. Change a value, watch the forecast move, then save so everyone is arguing about the same numbers. Where a value is measured from our own data it says so, and where it is still judgement it says that too.
What would make this forecast investor-grade
How this is calculated
The model is only as good as the fields behind it. These are the gaps that remain, in the order they hurt, with the fix beside each one.
Forecast versus actual
How this is calculated
A forecast with no scorecard is an opinion. Every time the weekly data is loaded, the standing forecast for each open month is stamped here. When the month closes the actual lands beside it and the error is calculated. Four scored quarters of this is the asset, not the model.
Save the forecast and upside calls
How this is calculated
Every call and note on this page lives inside the page itself. That is what makes it openable by anyone with the link and no login, and it is also the weakness: when the model is rebuilt from source, the new file arrives with no calls in it. This browser keeps its own permanent copy and puts them back automatically, but that copy is only on this machine. Save the file and send it over before anyone rebuilds the model. The build now refuses to run without it, so this is the step that protects the calls rather than a nice-to-have. It is also how you move your calls to another machine, or hand them to someone else.
Load this week's data
How this is calculated
Two Salesforce reports, dropped straight in as .xlsx or .csv in the format they already come out in. Column headings are matched automatically and the report's own title, filter and subtotal rows are ignored. Load both together: the closed file is what measures the win rate and what strips deals from the pipeline that have already died.
The gate: are our wins even passing through a pipeline
Why this comes first
This has to come first, because it decides whether any of the rest can be measured. A deal created and immediately marked Closed Won has one stage segment; a deal that was genuinely worked has several. That single count is the honest test, and it says what share of our wins ever passed through a pipeline at all. Where the share is high, created-to-close is measuring how quickly we hear about an order, not a sales cycle, and every cycle figure built on it is reporting reporting lag.
Closed deals logged retrospectively, by partner
Has anything actually improved
How this is calculated
The board asked whether the initiatives are working. Month-on-month and quarter-on-quarter comparison of a noisy number cannot answer that and will produce a false signal about half the time. The tool that does is a process behaviour chart: plot in time order, set a centre line from the first five points and hold it, draw natural limits at the centre plus and minus 2.66 times the average moving range. A point outside the limits, or a run under the stated rule, means the process genuinely changed. Everything inside is noise, and reacting to noise makes it worse. The signal rule is printed under the chart and is fixed for the life of it: adding tests manufactures signals.
Closed-won subscriptions, month by month
Where the pipeline is stuck, and which deals are already lost
How this is calculated
Stage across the bottom, days in the current stage up the side, one dot per open deal sized by subscriptions. The dashed line in each column is that stage's own stale threshold, and the bands behind it are drawn from our own closed history rather than from a published benchmark — no credible cycle-length benchmark exists for channel-sold B2B, and the five tables that claim one disagree with each other by up to 100% on identical deals. This form comes from flow practice rather than sales tooling. It replaces the round-robin in a pipeline review and it cannot be gamed by logging activity, because it keys on stage movement.
Every open opportunity, by stage and days in stage
A stale line per stage, not a flat sixty days
How this is calculated
The threshold is 1.5 to 2.0 times that stage's own trailing median dwell, recomputed quarterly, not one company-wide number. Our stages are nothing like each other, so a flat sixty days lets one rot while crying wolf at another. It is headlined in subscriptions and ARR and never in deal count: a count metric treats a two-camera deal and a four-hundred-camera deal as one unit each, and will report clean hygiene while a third of the forecast sits frozen. Published guidance puts late-stage stalled value under 15% of open pipeline as the number that matters, and that share is on the row below.
Per-stage thresholds, and what each one is holding
Cohorts: are the deals we create now moving better than the ones we created then
How to read this
Rows are the month an opportunity was created. Columns are how it stood 30, 60, 90 and 180 days later. You read down a column to answer "are we improving", because that compares cohorts at the same age. Reading across a row only tells you a cohort matured. Cells past a cohort's maturity are greyed rather than left blank, because a young cohort looks better than an old one purely by having had less time to lose deals, and a blank invites the reader to skip that fact rather than see it. Retrospectively logged orders are excluded: a deal won before it was created has no cohort. The board version is the bar chart above the table — one bar per creation quarter, every bar measured at day 90.
Win rate at day 90, one bar per creation quarter
The triangle: creation month against age
Stage movement, and the only view you can subtract
How to read this
Rows are the stage a deal was in, columns where it went. One matrix for this quarter, one for last, then a third showing the signed difference. This is the only representation in the space that can be subtracted — you cannot subtract two funnels or two Sankeys — and the difference matrix names exactly which transitions moved. Colour is good or bad, never the sign of the change: more deals advancing or winning is green, more sitting still, going backwards or being lost is red. Colouring by sign alone paints a fall in deals-stuck-in-Proposal red, which is exactly backwards. Quarterly, because a share needs volume behind it.
Stage to stage, this quarter and last, and the difference
Mix against rate: was that a better quarter or a different one
Why every movement is decomposed
The caution that applies to every exhibit on this tab. In a channel-only business a shift in which partner is producing changes the blended rate with no change in execution at all. A Movement tab that reports one blended figure per period will eventually tell you a partner mix shift was a performance improvement. So every period-on-period movement is split into the part that is who was selling and the part that is how well we sold.
The pipeline waterfall
How this is calculated
Opening pipeline reconciled to today through what actually happened in between. Salesforce's own Pipeline Inspection uses nine buckets. The tenth, disqualified, is missing from every vendor implementation the research found, and without it scrubbing junk pipeline reads as slippage, which is a completely different story to tell a board. Published in subscriptions and deal count side by side, because five small slips and one large slip are the same bar and completely different stories. The definition of pushed and pulled is printed under the chart and does not change.
Open subscriptions, opening balance to today
Aging as a forecast adjustment, not a hygiene complaint
Where the rates come from
Two figures from Ebsta's 2023 benchmark report — 3.2 million opportunities across 364 companies, the best-sourced dataset in the field. A deal open for twice the average cycle has a 3% chance of closing. Win rate by how far a deal has slipped runs 18% at one week, 13% at one month, 8% at three months and 3% at six months or more. The average cycle they are measured against is our own, from our own worked closed-won deals. Where both readings apply to a deal the lower is taken.